Immigration reform could spark a $1.4 trillion boom
A study finds that granting citizenship to undocumented workers would increase pay, tax revenue and overall spending.
Adding 203,000 new jobs, $184 billion in tax revenue and $1.4 trillion to the nation's overall economy seems like a pretty good idea for a country clawing its way out of an economic downturn.
Would Americans still think it's a good idea if that boom required granting undocumented immigrants immediate citizenship? The answer might be less than unanimous, but the folks at the Center For American Progress say it's an idea worth considering sooner rather than later.
Five years after gaining citizenship, undocumented workers would make 25.1% more annually, according to a study obtained by The Huffington Post. That raise will "ripple through the economy" as immigrants use their income to buy goods and pay taxes.
The plan, as with nearly any mention of immigration reform in the U.S., has drawn its fair share of criticism. In his book "Immigration Wars: Forging An American Solution," former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush insists that the economic benefits of a path to citizenship are outweighed by the potential damage to the "integrity of our immigration system."
The junior senator from Bush's state, Republican Marco Rubio, flat-out disagrees and has joined Arizona Sen. John McCain in calling for a clear and immediate path to citizenship for undocumented workers. They wouldn't be the first or even the most high-profile Republicans to make that call, either.
In 1986, Ronald Reagan made immigration a priority of his presidency by instituting the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which National Public Radio recently spotlighted for granting amnesty and, eventually, citizenship to undocumented workers who had been in the country since 1982.
How did that work out? Ask the Department of Labor, which reports that immigrants granted citizenship under Reagan's plan got a 15.1% bump in pay immediately afterward.
But what if Americans just aren't ready for such a sweeping change in immigration policy? Then they're going to have to wait a whole lot longer for a payout while they make up their minds. The Center For American Progress study showed that delaying the citizenship process could put off benefits for both workers and the greater economy by a decade or more.
All those guesser polls, estimates, need to realistic. Their domestics (cleaning, gardening and ect.) are not full time and able to collect unemployment, welfare and any other benefits. Throw in the seasonal jobs and other low paying jogs as well. If they think that employers are automatically are going to pay benefits and taxes, think again. Huffington post "ripple" is in effect NOW: the immigrants are buying goods. The other joke is the 25.1%. The average full time employee works 2000 hours a year and if he makes $10 an hour or $20,000 a year in wages. The end of the first year he would get a realistic raise between 1 and 3%, I'll use 3%. In 5 years they will earn $3185.49 which is about 16%, not 25%. In my opinion the economy probably will allow less than 3% per year in raises.
Why do we sit and watch the soothe Sayers spin their tales about utopia when the economy is going to hell in a basket: they want us dumbed down and doing well with it.
Good Grief, financial advice from the Huffington Post and The Center for American Progress. Two of the few remaining bastions of Marxist economic theory that remain after the fall of the Soviet Union. The Communist Chinese gave up on this type of stupidity years ago, and we've been embracing it. No wonder the Chinese economy will eclipse us within two years.
ok let's do the math increase tax revenue by $184 billion this means the 203,000 new jobs are going to pay at 15 percent tax rate $6,042,692 a year wages per person.
And only add $1.2 trillion to the national GDP not the $1.4 trillion as the article stated.
PLEASE FIND ME ONE OF THESE NEW JOBS
DATA PROVIDERS
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Quotes are real-time for NASDAQ, NYSE and AMEX. See delay times for other exchanges.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Thomson Reuters (click for restrictions). Real-time quotes provided by BATS Exchange. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Interactive Data Real-Time Services. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by SIX Financial Information.
Japanese stock price data provided by Nomura Research Institute Ltd.; quotes delayed 20 minutes. Canadian fund data provided by CANNEX Financial Exchanges Ltd.
RECENT POSTS
While incompetent bosses like Michael Scott and Andy Bernard typically can’t survive in the workplace, office romances are a very real part of corporate culture.
- Southwest Airlines turns less legroom into $773M
- 'American Idol' gets sorry ratings for season finale
- Powerball's wacky sense of humor
- Millions of Facebook's users are actually pets
- Can crowd funding rescue the LA Times?
- Domino's debuts a DVD that smells like pizza
- Average US retirement age climbs to 61
- McDonald's aims to slim down its 145-item menu
- Bathroom reading goes digital with iPad TP stand
MARKET UPDATE
[BRIEFING.COM] The S&P 500 ended this week with a bang, roaring to a new all-time high on the back of stronger-than-expected economic data, influential leadership, and an ongoing appreciation for the Fed's monetary policy support.
The bullish bias was evident in premarket action as the S&P futures pointed to a higher start without the benefit of any definitive news catalyst. Stocks indeed benefited from a blast of buying interest at the opening bell on this ... More
More Market News
TOP STOCKS
All hail the bull market, which ended the week with a big rally. But it also is starting to look a little like 1987, which suffered an epic blow-out.
MSN MONEY'S
- Shared
- Commented
- Viewed
