Quote:
Originally Posted by coordi
The fact of the matter is this: Illegal immigration is, at worst, a net neutral. The limited data we have proves that.
.
In the EU the data is quite clear and it's a huge drag on the economy, at least the asylum seekers part (in good part because of our rules and our constitutions).
I can believe that illegal immigration in aggregate in the USA could be approx a net neutral fiscally and/or for the economy. But it comes with an added problem (which doesn't exist in the EU) , which is the children of those illegal immigrants will be citizens, and those will be expensive for the country.
For example they are almost all immediatly allowed to access medicaid.
Plyler v Doe forces states to pay for the education of illegal immigrant minors (we are talking foreign born here).
Illegal immigrants are also less educated than legal immigrants (main reason they are illegal is they can't enter the country normally you know).
Back to the EU, just for reference because i suppose you don't know how it works here (and why should you, you are not paying for it), there are some differences among countries but roughly the idea is that the constitution interpretation is such that citizen provisions apply to illegal aliens. Including healthcare and welfare in general. At least in Italy that's certainly the case. We can't even deport someone if he is sick (this includes any chronicity) and the receiving country doesn't have free healthcare at western levels of care. Yes that means that once a diabetic person from a thirld world country enters Italy, he is allowed to stay indefinitly and we have to pay for it.
Something like 60% of syrian refugees, 40% from somalia/ethiopia, are on welfare, 3-5 years after being allowed refugee status, in Germany.
The fact that european countries sorely need immigrant workers with skillsets in many sectors of the economy doesn't mean that the people arriving here on boat, staying on welfare (because of international law) as asylum seekers until they get an answer, which they then appeal (this takes years) if negative, are anything clsoe to be positive contributors to society.
They are just gaming a system of rules we stupidly self-imposed on us, making our problems worse.
And the worst effect of all this is that the population becomes intolerant of the *actual good immigrants we desperately need*, because when train stations and central plazas are full of asylum seekers without nothing to do who increase petty criminality rates, it's easy to make the mistake "brown people" in general are bad for our societies (they aren't, but current events make it easier for that bias to prevail).
So because of our unwillingness to forcefully fight against illegal immigration, especially the "boat people" one, we actually end up jeopardizing any chance of reforming legal immigration to the better (for ex making it much easier for anyone who is good at any job we need to fill to come and stay and be treated like one of us), and of creating the conditions for those useful, indispensable legal immigrants to become fully fledged citizens.
Supporting illegal immigration is the best way to help actually racist politicians , at least in the EU