I am not talking about the ones that are already here.. I am talking about the 10 million, the 20 million, the 30 million that will be here over the coming years...

Democrats made the EXACT same argument I am making when Bush proposed EXACTLY what the Democrats are pushing now..

So, what has changed??

Ah yes... The POTUS has a '-D' after his name... :D

Michale

Michale -

When you say "dumped into the labor market" -- these people are already here. They're already IN the labor market. Are you talking about the "legal labor market" or what? Plenty of them are already working, so the impacts on the labor market (as a whole) are likely going to be less than you're predicting. It's not as if millions of folks are going to show up next Tuesday, they're already here. Maybe I'm missing something...

-CW

"If you dumb this down any more, I'm gonna slug you!"
-Lt Col John Shepard, STARGATE ATLANTIS

:D

You have a group of Americans. The majority of this group fills the majority of low-income jobs within the job market. This particular group has a 25% unemployment rate in the here and now..

Now, legislation is being considered that would jam tens of millions of new workers into the job market. Of those tens of millions of new workers, the vast majority of those new workers will be vying for low-income jobs..

In short, they will be competing for those jobs with the afore mentioned group, whose unemployment rate is ALREADY at 25%..

Now, logically speaking..

What is the logical and rational result of jamming tens of millions of new workers into a segment of the job market that is already over-filled with workers??

What happens to that group, whose unemployment rate is ALREADY at 25%??

Doesn't ANY Democrat care about THOSE workers??

Oh wait.. Democrats DID "care" about those workers..

When it was political advantageous to do so...

Now that it's politically advantageous to throw those workers to the unemployment wolves??

Guess what??

That's what Democrats are doing...

"DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS COMING OUT OF MY MOUTH??"
-Jackie Chan, RUSH HOUR

:D

Now, if you see a flaw in the logic... by all means..

Point it out..

But if you latch onto a typo or a grammar lame, I shall taunt you a second time!!

Michale

Your previous comment doesn't answer the WHY...

Let me give you a few quotes as to WHY it's bad idea..

“Comprehensive Immigration reform would exert downward pressure on wages at a time when we are already losing our middle class.”

That's Dem Senator Barbara Boxer...

“to create a permanent pool of insecure and low-paid workers whom I believe will never leave the country, even though they are supposed to, according to the rules of the program. This will only continue the cycle of illegal immigration.”

So'se that....

So, Boxer is wrong and you are right??

Michale

Really?? Those 13 million PROJECTED new workers are "already here"??

Duh! Have you even bothered to read the bill you are arguing against? Here, have fun.

And your evidence to support that ludicrous time-jumping claim is...????

Uh, the dictionary definition of "fact"?

Of course you do.. Because it's a Democrat program..

But did you support this program under President Bush??

If this newly written bill had been put forth during the Bush administration I would have supported it. As it is new, there is no way I could have supported it during the Bush administration unless you would lend me that aforementioned time machine...

Do you think it's a good idea to dump millions of new low end workers into a job market that is already over-flowing with low-end workers??

Assuming your answer is "of course" then WHY do you think it's a good idea....

Second to last paragraph of my previous post answers both questions. You even quoted it. Do you even read the comments of others?

Yikes!

Amazing, iddn't it? :D

Michale

It's the EXACT same argument that Dems like Barbara Boxer and Sherrod Brown and a dozen or so OTHER Dems made when Bush proposed the same type of immigration legislation that we're facing today...

I await your claims of "Oh, that's different." :D

"Damn!! Three times!!"

:D

Michale

What possibly could be the difference as to whether it's ALL black Americans or male/female black Americans to the question put forth???

Does the 25% unemployment rate for black Americans/male black Americans matter in the question being asked??

No it does not..

The fact is, the current unemployment rate for a group that would be competing with the tens of millions of new workers is at 25%...

Now, does the fact that that group is black Americans or MALE black Americans have **ANY** bearing on the issue??

No, it does not. Not one iota..

That is the problem with debates here.. Ya'all find one minor irrelevant nit-pick and base your ENTIRE rebuttal on that ONE minor irrelevant nit-pick..

It's the 10 Billion/10 Million muslims in the world "rebuttal" all over again...

You latch onto an irrelevant "typo" and tap dance your way around the entire question..

It's a pitiful debating technique along the same lines as a grammar/spelling lame...

It also constitutes a concession.. :D

Michale

OH well, if we have to go this route.... AGAIN...

Uh, no. The "fact" is that a anti-immigration group made a projection.

Exactly!!!

And, unless you have some other facts to DISPUTE their projections (do you??) then those projections stand..

13.5% vs 25%, Pretty big typo. Which I notice was not corrected. Are we talking about African American unemployment rate or specifically African American male unemployment rate?

"These endless quibbles!!!"
-Romulan Commander, STAR TREK, The Enterprise Incident..

Ya know, I really don't have the time (nor the inclination) to address your spin, point by point..

But, since you are so devoted to spin... Here's goes..

These folks are employed and have been in the country for 10 years. This means a) they are already here and therefore not additional and currently employed. b) have been so for 10 years, which means a certain percentage have or will move beyond "low end" jobs.

Really?? Those 13 million PROJECTED new workers are "already here"??

And your evidence to support that ludicrous time-jumping claim is...????

1,337,000 are merit-based track one. This give points for education, employment experience, exceptional employment record, occupation, length of residence in the U.S., family ties in the U.S., knowledge of English language, etc. These folks are even less likely than track two to end up in "low end" jobs.

Are they "already here" too??

2,510,000 are the spouses and minor children of current green card holders. It is unclear how many of these folks will end up in "low end" jobs. The younger children will likely get an education and go straight to better jobs.

And, again, your evidence to support this "likely" is what, exactly???

So, to sum up, your entire rebuttal of the "facts" is time-travel, a bunch of "likelys" and some phantom immigrants that are ready made high end workers, fresh from the Easy-Bake Oven....

And you provide absolutely NO EVIDENCE whatsoever to support ANYTHING you have posted...

Now personally I do think immigration is good for the country and has been through it's entire history. I don't see this suddenly changing. Having looked at this program, I think I support it.

Of course you do.. Because it's a Democrat program..

But did you support this program under President Bush??

Of course you didn't... Because it was from President Bush..

Just like you claim that the domestic spying is NOT a "Right v Left" issue under Obama, but it's a hysterical "war crime" under President Bush..

This is why it's impossible to have a discussion with facts..

Because I bring all the facts and you bring a bunch of maybes, likelys and possibilities.. But I have to admire the time-jump angle. That was pretty kewl..

For the record, the TEN MILLION number are the illegals that are already here.. The 13 Million are the projections for future immigrants..

Now....

Let's go with a simple and concise question...

I'll donate $50 to YOUR charity if you can answer it with zero equivocation...

Do you think it's a good idea to dump millions of new low end workers into a job market that is already over-flowing with low-end workers??

Assuming your answer is "of course" then WHY do you think it's a good idea....

Michale

Uh, no. The "fact" is that a anti-immigration group made a projection. The projection it's self is, by the definition of the word fact, not a fact but a projection. Unless of course you have a time machine, went in to the future a decade, then came back with verification of the numbers...

Once again, a minor typo, nothing more..

You simply don't LIKE the facts so you spin and nit-pick...

13.5% vs 25%, Pretty big typo. Which I notice was not corrected. Are we talking about African American unemployment rate or specifically African American male unemployment rate?

A few posts down (yes, I am in guideline territory here) you mention the 25% figure without defining it. This is what I would call a pseudo fact. Massaging the numbers to make them bigger without defining them. Can I counter by slicing out a part of the population that has an unemployment rate below the current overall unemployment rate?

You simply don't LIKE the facts so you spin and nit-pick...

So far you have posted a single fact and that was evidently accidental as it had to be pointed out to you.

Now lets look at your numbers:

33 Million new low-end workers into a field that already has an over-abundance of low-end workers??

Not according to the numbers you posted.

13,364,000 are merit-based track two. These folks are employed and have been in the country for 10 years. This means a) they are already here and therefore not additional and currently employed. b) have been so for 10 years, which means a certain percentage have or will move beyond "low end" jobs.

1,337,000 are merit-based track one. This give points for education, employment experience, exceptional employment record, occupation, length of residence in the U.S., family ties in the U.S., knowledge of English language, etc. These folks are even less likely than track two to end up in "low end" jobs.

2,510,000 are the spouses and minor children of current green card holders. It is unclear how many of these folks will end up in "low end" jobs. The younger children will likely get an education and go straight to better jobs.

So your numbers are not only not facts but have also been proven to not support your assertion that all the immigrants are all new to the labor pool and will all end up in low end jobs.

Now personally I do think immigration is good for the country and has been through it's entire history. I don't see this suddenly changing. Having looked at this program, I think I support it.

Any chance your next argument will actually contain facts?

:D

Michale

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/cchmielenski/may-3-2013/33-million-green-cards-10-years-heres-how.html

Here's the breakdown if you don't want to click on links..

10,647,000 -- green cards currently being issued in all categories per decade

+676,000 -- others

Michale

Let's say, for the sake of the discussion, that the 33 million new immigrants being dumped into the job market is accurate..

The number could be 10 million, the number could be 100 million..

But since there is evidence to back up the 33 million, let's use that number..

Do you think it's good idea to dump ANY number of new workers into the low-end job market when that market is already over-saturated with workers??

Do you think it's a good idea to dump millions of new workers into a job market when the unemployment rate for other minorities in that exact same jobs market is as high as 25%??

Does that make any kind of sense to do that??

Michale

Let me demonstrate the lack of facts here..

See, that's your problem, Bashi..

I post facts and you base your LACK of facts statement solely and completely on the simple premise that you don't know..

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/10-Year_LPR_Numbers.pdf

Current unemployment rate for African Americans is 13.5% as per the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate for African American males is 25% but that is not what you wrote...

Once again, a minor typo, nothing more..

Let's face it..

You simply don't LIKE the facts so you spin and nit-pick...

Why don't you address the point being made rather than respond with minor grammar-lame-esque responses??

33 Million new low-end workers into a field that already has an over-abundance of low-end workers??

How can that be a good thing??

Valid points, possibly but I'm not seeing any "facts" here...

Oh, yer seeing them all right..

You just don't like what they say so you spin and nit-pick rather than address the points that they make... :D

Michale

Where did the 33 million come from? NumbersUSA or an independent source? Doesn't sound like a "fact" to me. More like an biased projection.

If the 33 million immigrants are competing with "other minorities" are all 33 million immigrants minorities? Are all low wage or are some H1B1? The verbiage is vague. Not much "fact" here either

Current unemployment rate for African Americans is 13.5% as per the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate for African American males is 25% but that is not what you wrote...

Valid points, possibly but I'm not seeing any "facts" here...

And what *I* would have responded with is what about the fact that, over the next decade, 33 million new workers will be dumped into the jobs market, competing with other minorities for low-end, low wage jobs.

Unemployment for black Americans is over 25%!!

Do you think adding 33 MILLION new low end workers is going to help that??

That column will have to wait until next week, I suppose.

Then I spose I'll have to keep my powder dry.. :D

Michale