|
|
November 10, 2005
U.S. Education Level, Income Will Fall Even More Due to Immigration "If current trends continue, the proportion of workers with high school diplomas and college degrees will decrease and the personal income Comments
If I walk into a bar, the average net worth of the people in the bar skyrockets. But is anyone better off? Of course not (unless I'm buying, but that goes without saying). Similarly, if a dozen poor people walk into a bar, the average net worth of people in the bar goes down. But is anyone really adversely affected? What's the difference to you whether someone is poor and uneducated inside the bar or out on the street? Posted by: Bill Gates on November 10, 2005 12:54 PM One long liberal diatribe on the need to tax more and spend it on bilingual education. BS. The opportunites are there for everyone, and if they don't take advantage of it then it is their own damn fault(even Ralph agrees with that). How about using common sense and stop allowing illterate non speaking immigrants to come here. Chances are they are not the best gene pool candidates for professional vocations anyway. Highly educated immigrants will encourage their children to get a college degree wihtout us having to spend a bunch of money. As we have all said, uneducated immigrants add very little to our economy. Immigration should be reserved for those that are highly educated and offer some unique talent. Of course, this must come wiht a fool proof system to stop businesses from undercutting middle class professionals. Then americans do not have to pay more taxes to educate people that may or may not have hte ability to achieve higher education levels. Beleive it or not, not everyone is equal when it comes to intelligence. And we are not doing ourselves any favors by importing millions of people with a culture that desires manual labor jobs. Posted by: Weary Citizen on November 10, 2005 12:59 PM Yes, the United States will be on par with the third world cesspools. That is what many in the rest of world want. At least we won't be a "mecca" anymore, and maybe some of these leeches will gravitate back to where they came from. We can only hope. Posted by: Born American on November 10, 2005 01:12 PM Apparently the senators didn't notice the Greenspan speech or they just ignored it. In case you missed the tesimony here's a summary: he said immigration is bad, expensive, uneconomical, ruining our schools, and skewing our population towards uneducated unskilled mob rule. He also said it was a threat to democracy that even our Constitution may not be enough to protect us from. Unfortunately 98% of the population who heard the speech didn't understand what he said. See for yourself,Caution use of caffeine before speech is recommended Posted by: Smitty on November 10, 2005 03:22 PM In polite response to: What's the difference to you whether someone is poor and uneducated inside the bar or out on the street? Answer: Because in this country, we have to pay for their needs if they are poor, uneducated, or simply making foolish choices. I am willing to help those who have a right to "sit at this table" but I am not willing to use my tax dollars which have been set aside for aid to my own people for those who have entered illegally and who also happen to be poor and uneducated. As we have said before, it is absolutely immoral and unnatural to provide care for others and to allow our own to go without due to our "generosity". How highly would we esteem a mother who was known throughout the community for her charitable giving and needs if we were to find her own children neglected, poorly clothed and malnourished when we visited her home? I daresay very little. Why? Because we are to FIRST take care of our own, then others as we are able. Let me be clear: I give my church tithe to the Salvation Army (which I know for certain helps those who are here illegally although not purposely) instead of sending it to a church because I want to use my money to feed/clothe the poor instead of buying lush pew cushions, interior waterfalls, and paying exorbitant preacher salaries. Before the death of my friends in Mexico (who were of ripe age when they passed) died, I sent money to them. I do not mind giving MY extra and my worship offerings to the poor voluntarily, regardless of status. I DO, however, mind using taxpayer dollars set aside for our own hungry, our own hurting for those who have no right to be here and whose own country should provide for them. I repeat: How on earth can we look in the face of our own hurting children, our own disabled, our own mentally-ill and know that we allowed them to be crowded out and displaced by the "poor and illiterate" of another nation who were committing two crimes--the first being illegal entry, and the second being signing up for those things that they KNOW are for American citizens only. I guess I could sum it up by saying if the poor in the bar or outside on the street are here illegally, I DO mind if they are poor and uneducated--because I feel a moral obligation to take care of our own first. Posted by: J on November 10, 2005 04:44 PM Australia has had controlled immigration for years. Unless you have a specific profession or talent that is needed within the country they won't let you in. If you do have a talent or profession that is needed in the country the Australian would (I don't know if this is still true) assist you in getting into the country. Sounds good to me! Posted by: Sick n' Tired on November 10, 2005 05:03 PM "If I walk into a bar........" got no problem with poor people walkin into the bar as long as: 1) they are of age (have a LEGAL right to be in the bar). 2) they don't behave like a bunch of criminal scallywags. 3) i don't have to buy their damn drinks!
Posted by: ty on November 10, 2005 07:30 PM To the Incomprable Mr. Gates... I noticed Teddy Kennedy has put on more weight...must have been the few million you slipped in his back pocket to get the huge increases in foreign worker visas passed...Failure to invest in America's citizens will ultimately end the reign of elitist corporate types like yourself... Posted by: takn on November 10, 2005 10:53 PM "Answer: Because in this country, we have to pay for their needs ...." Actually, we don't. The representatives that we elected have chosen to do so. Let's blame immigrants for what immigrants do. Let's not blame immigrants for our own idiocy. Posted by: Ralph on November 11, 2005 05:48 AM Weary Citizen, Relative to this story's issue of income decline (nominal GDP deceleration), you had said that you knew economics better than me. I don't write this for my own benefit, it is try to educate the readers and gain momentum towards action. I have since laid out the govt statistics that support my stance in the archive where you said that. As well, factually debunked Ralph's notion that illegal immigration is economically good. I urge you to go back and read the info that has been posted since you last read it: http://www.steinreport.com/archives/008633.html And I will repeat below the latest post I made on that archive page, which gives the key statistical summary. Use this data to argue successfully why we can not absorb low education immigrants.
It is time to throw the statistics at you, so we can expose your nonsense once and for all. Readers can refer to following page for a plethoria of historical statistics on US economy: http://hussmanfunds.com/html/datapage.htm
Ralph wrote: The fact remains he has hedged (shorted) against the value of the dollar with a significant % of his porfolio. He must think there is significant risk. Also in the last Berkshire roundtable notes, he talks about selecting companies that do well in inflationary periods. So his dollar-denominated strategy also expects higher inflation. He has written articles for Money magazine warning of the perils of our huge trade deficit and our NEGATIVE savings rate. Do some Google searches to educate yourself.
We also have for the 1st time in the history of this once great nation, a NEGATIVE savings rate, so that we can buy all those "better" things. Just look at the statistics: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/PSAVERT.txt See above page, in 1970 (before the gold debasement and massive monetary inflation), we had a personal savings rate of roughly 10%. In the 1990s, it declined precipitiously towards 4%, and then after turn of this century, it has headed towards 1%, and now in 2005 (since monetary inflation has increased from roughly 7% to 12%), the personal savings rate is now consistently NEGATIVE (BELOW ZERO!!!)!!! As to subjective measures, such as better food, I can tell you without a doubt, that our food is much worse. We have a serious problem with obesity in this country. You should eat my homemade southern cooking sometime, then you will know what food used to. But we can't afford food made from natural ingredients any more. Who has time to daily gather and chop the fresh herbs, produce, etc and slow cook it, mash the homemade corn mean, etc.. Instead we eat highly processed foods which have all their natural nutrients destroyed and removed. So thus our bodies need more food to get the same nutrients, and thus we are obese. I am 40 years old, and most people guess my age as a teenager, because I figured out that I should make my quality of life higher than in USA, by escaping the consumtion binge society. We are what we eat. And that is one of the truest indications of how low our standard of living is compared to what it used to be. Ralph in short, you believe all the lies put out by the govt. You believe the BS. But people know inherently that their lives have gotten faster, more materialistic, but much less happy and lower quality. More quantity or larger does not imply quality. Quality is subjective. We spend and don't save because we are not contented. We are not happy. We do not care about tomorrow. There is no other way to explain a NEGATIVE savings rate. Our standard of living is a massive addiction. It is proven in your NEGATIVE savings rate. That is a fundamental change in our society and it coincides with the massive monetary inflation, which I will detail later in this post.
And they decided to spend more than they earn. Hahaha. So much for your theory that the economy can keep going up forever. You spend more than you earn, and I guarantee your life will crash. Our economy will crash also. But we are extremely addicted, so it won't crash without first attempting govt intervention, which will mean that Bernake (quoted as saying he would "throw $ from helicopters" to avoid deflation) will accelerate monetary inflation to stimulate our spending past the point of no return. Well they are already up to 11.5% this year. I suppose when they reach 20% or so, then we will have the hyperinflation that gripped Germany before the world war (and caused the world war). Oh yes, we will get more world wars from all this massive spending addiction, because when it crashes, it going to cause major pain in China. They been building 10 lane freeways in distant provinces, building railroads up to 15,000ft to isolated Tibet, ... massive projects funded by easy money from WalMart, but projects with no underlying economic viability in a long-term competitive global economy. When the US spending addiction spigot gets turned off, the competition of the world is going to grow extremely brutal. Nature is brutal in selecting the survival of the fittest. Wars are brutal reflexes. Well it has already begun... the competition for scare resources... oil.
Hahaha. There you go again, showing you are completely ignorant of macro economics. I read on your blog that you are an accountant. Obviously macro economics is a different science. Let's compare the the historical expansion of the monetary supply (M3) and nominal GDP: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/M3SL.txt Since Jan 1959 to Sept 2005, the M3 has increased, 9976 / 289 = 34.5 (3450%), and nominal GDP increased, 12590 / 495 = 25.4 (2540%). Thus we can see that the value of the dollar relative to economic production (i.e. the standard of our living) has decreased by, (34.5 - 25.4) / 25.4 = 35%. Since 1959, the central bank has stolen 35% of our hard-earned wealth, or 0.65% per year compounded. But it gets much worse if you make same calculation for more recent periods, which shows that the problem is accelerating: 1971 forward: 0.97% per year compounded Note the 2005 figure was derived from 11.5% annualized rate of M3 expansion through Oct 2005 (from other more up-to-date data source) and annualizing the nominal GDP data is 6.5%. So what does this mean? It means that irregardless of how you measure price inflation (which is a lagging effect of monetary inflation), the govt (via central bank) this year 2005, has put it's hand in each of our pockets and take 4.68% of our money, by lowering the value of the money by increasing the supply of money by 4.68% more than the economic growth. And this has been going on every year since 2000 at a 2.9% compounded rate, whilst deposit interest rates during that time were less than 2.9%, thus it is no surpise that consumers decided to spend their money as fast as they can. We are not stupid. We inherently know the govt is devaluing our $, so we don't want to hold $. And we can see the problem of monetary inflation has been increasing over the decades, and it shows no sign of decelerating. Whereas, all signals point to increased acceleration, because if they decelerated it, then global economy would crash. So instead, they will keep accelerating it, until it can not sustain itself any longer, then it will crash even more brutally. Ralph would probably prefer to use the govt's estimate of "real" GDP: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/GFDEBTN.txt The problem is that estimate is based on the price inflation estimated by the govt. Not only is price inflation a lagging effect of monetary inflation, more importantly, the govt excludes most important things from core inflation, such as energy, housing, medical, etc.. So it is meaningless estimate. Also the govt uses lies such as "hedonistic pricing" to say that a newer expensive computer is not inflation, because it has a faster CPU. It is all BS. The only factual comparison is the one I did above, which compares the supply of dollars (M3) to the nominal GDP. If Ralph studied economics in college, he will know this true, if Ralph even went to college.
The numbers don't lie. You Ralph are either ignorant of the numbers, or you are trying to lie to the readers. Ralph you are not going to win a debate against me. You will realize that now or eventually. I am too well informed. You are apparently clueless. Do you dare challenge me to bring out more statistics to debase your propoganda BS? Go ahead. Posted by: Shelby Moore on November 11, 2005 11:10 AM First of all, KUDOS to J for eloquently addressing the need to focus on struggling Americans. There are 5 billion people living at or below Mexico's standard of living. How foolish is it to open the flood gates to all these people when we cannot care for our own poor? The per capita drop in income in California only tells half the story. This income drop is not paired to the rise in the costs of housing (astronomical in CA), energy, food, and health care -- which is fine if you don't eat, have a home, need medical care, or drive a car. California is well on the road to become a state that reflects the living conditions of Mexico in every way starting with a super-wealthy highly-educated ruling class and a massive unskilled nearly illiterate impoverished underclass. The speed with which this is happening is reflected in the demographic shift cited in the article: "The center, based in San Jose, attributed California's situation in part to the diversity of its work force, which was 71 percent white in 1980 and is projected to be 39 percent white in 2020." While I don't personally care about the proportion of 'whites' in CA, this statistic demonstrates the huge rate of influx from immigration and the high birth rate of Latinos. If Americans don't wake up soon, then we will find that we have duplicated Latin America's dysfunctional societies in CA, TX, FL, AZ, and NM. IMPORTING MASSIVE HORDES OF EXPLOITABLE LABOR CREATES A FAUSTIAN BARGAIN THAT WILL COST US MORE THAN WE EVER IMAGINED.
Posted by: Cynthia on November 12, 2005 10:18 AM From Lou Dobbs 11/11 transcript, CBO confirms that immigrants depress wages: DOBBS: A new report from the Congressional Budget Office reveals the profound impact of illegal immigration on our nation's economy and work force. The CBO report finds one in every seven workers in this country born in another country. And they are responsible, according to the CBO report, for depressing wages over the entire economy. Ten years ago, one in 10 workers was foreign born. This report finds most foreign born workers in this country are low-paid workers from Mexico and Central America. The CBO says those workers are the biggest factor in the drop in wage growth in this country. There are shocking charges tonight that more than a dozen motel owners in Arizona have been turning their rooms into safe houses for illegal aliens. Immigration and custom officials charging 13 motel operators and owners with sheltering illegal aliens smuggled across the border from Mexico. ICE officials say smugglers paid those motel owners to turn the rooms into so-called stash houses for newly arrived illegal aliens. The United States is now looking to seize these businesses as part of this ongoing investigation into human smuggling all across our nation's broken border with Mexico. That brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. Should owners of business establishments that house illegal aliens face stiff fines? Yes or no? Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com. We'll have the results later here in the broadcast. Our nation's illegal alien crisis is taking a terrible toll on American communities along the Mexican border. Residents there say their quality of life is being destroyed by illegal aliens flooding to their streets and turning once safe neighborhoods into danger zones. Lisa Sylvester reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Last year the border patrol apprehended more than a million illegal aliens, but millions more went undetected. Violent crime along the border has increased with the spike in human smuggling. The coyotes, as they are known, create a culture of lawlessness, according to New Mexico Representative Steven Pearce. REP. STEVE PEARCE (R), NEW MEXICO: Mistakes have become so high for smugglers that they find out who the sheriffs are and who the deputies are and they tell them simply, "If you get in our way, we're going to kill you first and then we're going to kill your families." SYLVESTER: Lawmakers from border states shared other concerns: the drain on resources. Southwest border hospitals provided more than $800 million in uncompensated care. Jails and courts are overwhelmed, schools overcrowded. And the steady flow of OTM's, illegal aliens from countries other than Mexico, raises national security alarms. Unlike illegal Mexicans, who are sent back across the border, OTM's are given a court date, which 90 percent of them never show up for. REP. HENRY BONILLA (R), TEXAS: The culture now is pathetic, Mr. Chairman, with the fact that these OTM's now, the culture of message is out there that they come across the border looking for the border patrol agents. They don't even run from them anymore. SYLVESTER: Another major worry, the loss of jobs and lowering of wages. REP. DARRELL ISSA (R), CALIFORNIA: We have to recognize that we are doing no favors for all of our citizens, all the people who vote for us, all the people who pay taxes, all the people who play by the rules to get here if we do not protect them from simply having their job taken by the next person willing to work for less. SYLVESTER: More lawmakers are tuning into their constituents who have long complained about illegal immigration, but so far real action has been slow in coming. (END VIDEOTAPE) SYLVESTER: One measure signed into law, the Real I.D. Act, set the deadline of 2008 for states to ensure that driver's licenses are being issued only to people who are in the country legally. But it's been a slow process. DHS is working with the National Association of Governors and other groups to come up with those standards. And nine states have to change their laws so they explicitly require legal presence as a condition for a driver's license -- Lou. DOBBS: What a novel concept. Thank you very much, Lisa Sylvester from Washington. Posted by: Cynthia on November 12, 2005 04:31 PM From the Washington Times, Nov. 6: "Immigration, poverty linked" (excerpt) A recent report released by the Pew Hispanic Research Center showed that Hispanics, who constitute more than half of immigrants entering the U.S. today, accounted for a 68 percent share in the growth of the nation's "poverty population" between 1990 and 2000. Posted by: Cynthia on November 12, 2005 05:37 PM Oh, “Bill Gates”, thank you for gracing our humble blog with your wonderful presence and profound insights! To show my gratitude I am going to send a personal Thank-You note to you! No, I am not going to send e-mail because I know you have an entire department at Microsoft which reads your e-mail and I am concerned that my note might be filtered out as spam. Instead I am going to send it USPS to your HOME address which is located at: 1835 73rd Ave NE, Medina, WA 98039 (on the east shore of Lake Washington). I obtained this information from the following websites: http://papertoys.com/gates.htm http://www.zpub.com/un/bill/ecology.html Isn’t the information age wonderful, "Bill"? I promise to be polite and not write anything nasty. However, others whose lives have been made a living hell by your globalist profiteering agenda (which includes the H-1B Visa program as well as your support for CAFTA) may not be so polite when they write to you. Posted by: Steph on November 14, 2005 08:55 AM I stand by the fact that we in this country do, indeed, wind up paying for the choices that others make, including the choice to remain uneducated and illiterate. It really makes no difference whether those we elected chose to put us in this bondage or not--we are in it. This is the reality we must now deal with and face. I have spent many long hours in education observing the special programs being created for these who are stampeding across the border illegally. It is our experience here in Texas that if a child enters school before the age of puberty and can not speak English and speaks only Spanish, he/she is usually undocumented as are his/her parents. These special programs--crafted and put in place by "those we elected"--drain and divert dollars from our own children in need. No matter how you look at it, this diverting of funds hurts OUR children, period. In the end, it doesn't really matter whether or not these here illegally MEANT to cause this diverting of funds or whether our "elected officials" did it--the fact is: it is occurring and hurting our own. Like every parent has said, "I don't care WHO started it--it stops now!" The "who" no longer matters. We just need to stop it. Posted by: J on November 14, 2005 01:56 PM And one more and very important thing to consider: We must absolutely get beyond this ridiculous assumption that these illegals are somehow not responsible for their own actions. To say that they do what they do only because "our government allows it" or because "our elected officials" somehow enabled them to do it reduces them to the level of children or the mentally-disabled. They are not "wards of the state"--they are adults with full use (for the most part) of their faculties and are fully able to tell right from wrong. I know--I have walked and worked among them. To excuse someone's behavior as being a natural result of the lack of vigilance of some other party or as a natural result of their desire for to "improve their lives" would result in complete chaos for society. It doesn't work before God, it doesn't work before the law, and it doesn't work before the rest of mankind. They know they are breaking the law by entering. They are, therefore, willful lawbreakers. They are to be held accountable. Are their lives bad where they are? Perhaps, but we do not excuse drug addicts desperate for money for their next dose (lawbreakers) to steal from others to "improve their lives". We do not excuse the poor for stealing clothing. They may have "reasons" for what they do but these are not to be confused with "excuses". They also know that when they take advantage of government programs meant for citizens that they are unfairly taking what is not meant for them. I hear them urging each other on to lie about this thing or that thing when I am in the public hospital waiting room with my sister. They are quite aware of what they are doing and quite aware that it is wrong. To act as if they are somehow compelled by forces beyond their control and comprehension to act and break the law reduces them to the level of the mentally retarded or to that of animals--of which they are neither. They are the ones who are ultimately and primarily responsible for all that they do. Each individual makes these decisions in countless ways daily. It is a sad fact that so many of them have shown themselves to be people of dishonor and deceit. Whatever the circumstances may be, no one but they themselves made the decision to do the wrong thing. They are the ones who to be held accountable and no one else. Posted by: J on November 14, 2005 05:21 PM Does anyone know when or how it was passed into law that our schools have to give an education to illegal alien children? This is an issue I have a hard time understanding. The don't pay into the system so why are they allowed to attend our schools when it has such a negative effect on our own children. When will this foolish liberal feel good crap stop. When do our children come first? With the resounces this country has we should be #1 in education but we're not. Time for government to wake up. If there is a time when I do have kids they will go to a private school for the simple fact they are not forced to accept illegal alien children as they do not accept federal funding. Posted by: Brian on November 14, 2005 05:48 PM A voucher system for education, would allow people to vote with their $ (vouchers) and move their kids to schools without non-english speaking children. Overnight, this would bankrupt the schools teaching bi-lingual programs. Support conservative Republicans for vouchers. There are bad side effects, but the good effects outweigh the bad. Give parents the power of individual choice. Posted by: Shelby Moore on November 15, 2005 01:52 PM |
of Americans will decline over the next 15 years. Substantial increases in those segments of America’s young population with the lowest level of education [read immigrants], combined with the coming retirement of the baby boomers-the most highly educated generation in U.S. history-are projected to lead to a drop in the average level of education of the U.S. workforce over the next two decades, unless states do a better job of raising the educational level of all racial/ethnic groups," says the