Por favor ayuda: correo electrónico a HispanicHope@Saltshaker.US
Please help: email me en Inglés o en Español.
This is the index to a series. It will become bilingual as translations are completed. Here you will find links to each article in the series, as it is posted; also links to Youtube videos of the articles, and to a free ebook to which articles will be added as they are completed and translated. (Volunteer translators, please step forward!)
“Los candidatos presidenciales ya han comenzado a llegar a Des Moines. Ellos necesitan desesperadamente educarse acerca del moustro de la burocracia de inmigración que han creado, y nadie está mejor calificado para educarlos que los inmigrantes. Esta es una introducción de una serie explicando cómo los inmigrantes pueden llevarlos a la escuela.”
Presidential candidates have already started coming to Des Moines. They will be as thick as flies at a meat market in Mexico next year. They are desperately in need of education about the immigration bureaucracy monster they have created, and no one is better qualified to educate them than immigrants. This is an introduction to a series explaining what Latinos need to know and do to get presidential candidates to come to our meetings, and listen and learn, and stop being ignorant, and stop being afraid of crazy ignorant people like Congressman Steve King, and WHO radio talk show hosts Jan Mickelson and Simon Conway.
Part One: Freedom: more fun than Soccer! Can we make it more entertaining than a Quinceañera, to meet together to strategize how to to gain liberty for immigrants and visas for relatives? Video (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 11, 2014, page 6.)
Parte Uno: Libertad: Más divertido Que el Futbol. ¿Podriamos hacer que sea más entretenido que una quinceañera, reunirse para crear una estrategia de cómo curar la ley de inmigración? Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 11, 2015, página 6.)
Part Two: The Thrill of Victory There is nothing more entertaining than seeing our enemies fall under our attack. Nothing. The promise of victory makes even the hard work an adventure. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 18, 2014, page 4.)
Parte Dos: La emoción de la victoria No hay nada más divertido que ver a nuestros enemigos caer bajo nuestro ataque. La promesa de la victoria hace dura de trabajo sea una aventura. (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 18, 2014, página 4.)
Part Three: The Economy and Undocumented Economists Every economist at the Senate hearings agreed more legal immigration would slash the deficit by a quarter trillion and grow the economy by one percent/year. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 25, 2014, last page.)
Parte Tres: La Economía y los Economistas Indocumentados Ningún economista se mostró en desacuerdo con del Dr. Holtz-Eakin que con mas de inmigrantes podrian reducir nuestro déficit nacional por más de un tercio. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 25, 2014, última página.)
Part Four: What an economist told the Senate about immigration The Undocumented Economist testified as if Dr. Holtz-Eakin, who previously was director of the CBO didn’t know what he was talking about! (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January 1, 2015, last page.)
Parte Quatro: Qué economista dijo al Senado sobre la inmigración La Economistas Indocumentados él testificó como si el Dr. Holtz-Eakin, quien previamente era director de la CBO no sabía lo que estaba hablando! Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 1, 2015, última página.)
Part Five: The path to immigration victory I want to give you a picture of what we must do, together, to completely heal immigration law. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January22,2015, page 8.)
Parte Cinco: La Ruta a la Victoria de Inmigración Quiero darle una imagen de lo que debemos hacer, juntos, para sanar completamente la ley de inmigración. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 22, 2015, página 8.)
Part Six: Republican presidential candidates invade Des Moines. Iowa’s clearest glimpse so far of what Republican presidential candidates think about immigrants was seen Saturday at the Hoyt Sherman Auditorium in Des Moines. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January 29,2015, page 9.)
Parte Seis: Los candidatos presidenciales Republicanos invaden Des Moines. La visión más clara de Iowa hasta ahora de lo que los candidatos presidenciales Republicanos piensan acerca de los inmigrantes fue visto el sábado en el Auditorio Sherman Hoyt en Des Moines. Se indica cómo hay de trabajo por hacer para sanar la ley de inmigración. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 29, 2015, página 9.)
Part Seven: Economists know immigrants don’t take citizens’ jobs Real economists emphatically dispute the claims of Undocumented Economists (who have no economics degree) that immigration hurts any part of the economy. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, Febrero 5, 2015, page 8.)
Parte Sieta: Los Economistas saben que los inmigrantes no le quitan el trabajo a los ciudadanos. Los Economistas Reales enfáticamente niegan las afirmaciones de Economistas Indocumentados (que no tienen título en economía) que la inmigración perjudica a cualquier parte de la economía. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, febrero 5, 2015, página 8.)
Part Eight: Rick Perry’s Compassionate Threats. Rick Perry cares so much for refugees from “the face of evil” that he is determined to kick them back into its jaws. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, Febrero 19,2015, page 13.)
Parte Ocho: Amenazas compasivas de Rick Perry. Rick Perry se preocupa tanto por los refugiados que vienen ahuyentando de “la cara del mal” que está decidido a ponerlos de vuelta en sus mandíbulas.Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, febrero 19, 2015, página 13.)
Part Nine: Questions for Senator Grassley. Iowa’s Senator Grassley controls the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, through which all immigration legislation must pass. He invites questions. I have one. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, March,2015, page .)
Parte Nueva: Preguntas para el senador Grassley. El Senador Grassley de Iowa controla el Comité Judicial del Senado, a través del cual toda la legislación de inmigración debe pasar. Invita preguntas. Yo tengo uno. Cine(Publicado en El Enfoque, marzo, 2015, página .)
Part Ten: Governor Jindal wants “a lot” more legal immigration. Governor Bobby Jindal may be the most friendly to immigrant concerns of any presidential candidate, Republican or Democrat but I have questions.
Resources – links to articles
(Credentialed) economists agree we benefit from more immigration
A million more legal immigrants would slash the deficit by a quarter trillion and grow the economy by one percent/year. That’s what Douglas Holtz-Eakin told the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewing S744. (My article has links to the official transcript with his answer to Undocumented Economist Peter Kirsanow, a lawyer, who complained that immigrants take jobs especially from low skilled black high school dropouts.)
Immigration RAISES citizen’s wages, said Holtz-Eakin. He also explained how the CBO report of the 2007 Immigration Compromise bill did not take into account future expected revenues from stimulation of the economy, because Democrats had voted for the CBO to leave out that information.
There is a narrow range of findings of economists on the economic impact of more immigration. I don’t know a more objective survey of the consensus of economists on a subject than a survey of the range of economic studies published by economists, written by an economist. The studies show general stimulation of the economy from immigration. As for the impact on native wages, even where there is a large influx of immigration the studies hover on either side of zero. My report on that survey is at http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/economists-know-immigrants-dont-take-citizens-jobs/ The survey was published by David Roodman. He was commissioned by the Givewell charity, which is considering whether to get involved in immigration. “The scarcity of evidence for great pessimism [about the economic benefits of more legal immigration] stands as a fact.” It said the most pessimistic studies, such as those by Borjas, show citizens’ wages declining as much as 2% even from a 10% jump in immigration, while other studies show a 2% increase; in other words, considering the imprecise correlation between the samples studied and the whole economy, the result hovers around zero, because every worker is also a consumer. Part of the variation is that some studies break down, more than others, which population groups see wage competition. Most native groups benefit from immigration, whether legal or illegal, according to Cato Institute economist Alex Nowrasteh.
Steven Camarota would let the U.S. economy decline in order to save jobs for high school dropouts. Camarota is the (most listened to restrictionist researcher in Washington, according to his bio. Relying on economist Borjas, Camarota supposes cutting immigration will make high school dropouts more employable, so he wants to do that even though all other categories of citizen workers either benefit or at least are not measurably affected by more immigration. http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/let-the-u-s-tank-to-save-jobs-for-dropouts/ Borjas’ estimate of an 8.9% drop for dropout wages is “the most pessimistic estimation in the scholarly literature” according to Cato economist Alex Nowrasteh, http://www.cato.org/blog/immigrants-did-not-take-job, and economist Patrick Oakford found http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2007/03/borjas_wages_an.html where Borjas’ own labor textbook concedes that it is the “short run” impact of new immigration that is an 8.2% hit for dropouts (not 9.0%), and the long term impact is 4.8%, while other worker categories gain. Remember, that is “the most pessimistic estimate in the scholarly literature”. Nowrasteh’s characterization is supported by glancing through the Roodman study, previous paragraph. Roodman charts the results of dozens of studies, and Borjas’ studies are consistently the most pessimistic. Roodman explains “short run” and “long run”, which brings up another point:
Job competition: temporary, soon reverses, hits immigrants hardest. The Roodman study, 2nd paragraph above, says the temporary job competition from the latest wave of immigrants occurs only to the extent their immigration was more than expected, and lasts only until capital (facilities, tools, etc.) can be made ready to put the increased supply of workers to work. After capital has caught up with the new worker supply, all categories of native born workers benefit. The impact on any one group is minimized by allowing the full range of skill levels to immigrate. But even a huge unexpected surge of immigration, like 10%, produces only a 2% temporary hit for the population as a whole, by the most pessimistic estimation.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-08-25/who-cares-what-economists-say-about-immigration statement that economists agree but people don’t care
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/29/us-usa-economyimmigration-idUSBRE90S06R20130129 Economists agree immigration creates jobs, lowers prices, drives innovation. 40% of scientists are immigrants. The most pessimistic view is that there will be only “incremental benefits” from legalizing illegals because most of their benefits to us “are already recorded”. [A very pessimistic way of acknowledging that the benefits of illegal immigration are about equal to the benefits of legal immigration.]
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/left-and-right-agree-immigrants-don-t-take-american-jobs-20130322 That immigrants take the jobs of American-born citizens is “something that virtually no learned person believes in,” according to several studies summarized and linked in this article. Immigrants increase opportunities and incomes for natives, and legal status for undocumented workers could create 121,000 jobs, which would increase to 203,000 by giving them citizenship. High skilled immigrants start businesses that hire citizens, and low skilled immigrants make their native counterparts more productive, stimulating investment. While some “could face increased competition”, the net impact is positive for natives. (And the Roodman study, linked above, points out that job competition (1) hits the most recent previous wave of immigrants hardest; (2) it is only temporary, until capital can catch up to provide equipment, etc to put the new workers to work; (3) it is erased to the extent the immigration can be predicted, which is an argument for cutting the red tape that turns hiring into a crap shoot in which dice take years to roll; and (4) after capital catches up, the impact turns positive for everyone.)
http://www.scpr.org/news/2013/02/21/36042/3-ways-economists-would-transform-u-s-immigration/ Alex Nowrasteh, a self-described libertarian at the Cato Institute, says we should almost everybody in.”My dream setup would be a system where only criminals, suspected terrorists, and those with serious communicable diseases like drug-resistant tuberculosis are barred from coming to the United States to live and work,” Nowrasteh says. Open borders were the law of the land for almost 100 years of American history, he points out. He says between 50 and 100 million people might move to the U.S. if we re-instated those rules now. He says that’s fine. Compared to Europe, the U.S. is a big, empty country.
http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/immigration-policy-proceeds-facts-believe-reviewing-evidence-together-isnt-fun-attacking-alleged-motives/ HOW all secondary questions ride on economic impact
The Direct Relationship between Population Size and Technology Growth: the only limit to our technology is the size of our population, and its freedom and safety
“Why capitalism is awesome” http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/policy-report/2013/7/cprv35n4-1.pdf illustrates several inventions that have kept each of the following common products coming to us over the decades: pencils, pins, crayons, pizza, and book shelves. When we think “innovation” we usually think of spectacular new products that our grandparents never imagined. What is obvious from this presentation but not articulated is the army of workers of all skill levels needed to not just invent these improvements, but to retool for their production.
http://www.ehow.com/how_4576908_how-long-does-video-game.html gives a brief glimpse into the army of workers needed to develop a silly video game. Multiply this by all the new products coming “on line” (a term unknown to our grandparents) this year that our parents could not have foreseen, to grasp how dependent our technological growth is on the largest “brain pool” of free, safe citizens possible. It is a glimpse of the manpower needed not just to create new technology, but to test it, manufacture it, market it, and distribute it, which requires the whole range of education and skill levels.
http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/safe-act-expensive-boondoggle/ Update on E-verify problems.