The Quote below: More Misinformation from the Media
“During four years in office, President Donald Trump reduced immigration admissions in every way that American law makes possible without congressional approval — cutting refugee numbers, [and] deporting law-abiding members of American citizens’ families. . . .
“As the US government now grapples with a backlog of asylum-seekers and immigrants at the southern border, a team of economists, demographers and I modeled what America would be like if those earlier policies were to continue hereafter. Commissioned by the bipartisan immigration advocacy group FWD.us, our independent research used the most recent US Census and economic data to project the outcomes of a variety of different policy scenarios — one that cuts immigration to zero as Trump effectively did in 2020; one that cuts immigration admissions in half; one that extends recent levels; one that increases recent levels by 50 percent; and one that doubles recent levels.
“The general trend in our modeling is clear: the more immigrants, the merrier. . . .
“So when immigration admissions are cut to zero, our population ages faster and shrinks. And because the US relies heavily on immigrant labor and innovation, when admissions are cut to zero, Social Security quickly becomes insolvent and our productivity stagnates.
“Perhaps more importantly though, we find that even recent levels of legal immigration – the “approximately 1 million” people per year that the US has traditionally granted permanent residence over the last few decades — are not enough for the country to maintain historic rates of productivity. It is only through increased immigration that the United States can achieve a sustainable working-age population, economic growth and a solvent Social Security system. . . .
“Welcoming newcomers is as pro-America as it gets.” – What America Would Look Like with Zero Immigration, Justin Gest, CNN, 4/19/21. [Link]]
Fact Check of Above Quote: This writer gets it wrong from the very beginning when he states that the U.S. deports “law abiding” people. No, the U.S. deports illegal aliens. Like many immigration advocates, Gest seems to have trouble distinguishing between illegal residents and citizens.
He makes much of a study that he and other economists did which maintains that the U.S. is in dire need of more immigrants. But what other conclusion would it come to, given that it was “commissioned” by FWD.us. Founded by billionaire Mark Zuckerberg and other corporate big-money people, its mission is disseminating pro-immigration propaganda. When assessing its material, it useful to recall the old saying “He who pays the piper calls the tune.” Cheap labor advocates get what they commission.
In any case, the real life experience of mass immigration should have to say about its consequences than ivory tower studies. Specifically, if immigration is so enriching, why is America today less economically vibrant today than it was before our current wave of mass immigration began? During that interval, which started in 1965, our wages have stagnated, and our middle class has shrunk. This trend is most acute in California, the state with the highest percentage and number of immigrants. Far from being enriched, the once Golden State is overcrowded and dysfunctional with an economic profile that resembles Third World countries, a few rich at the top and lots of poor at the bottom. In terms of costs of living, California has the nation’s highest poverty level.
Immigration, is not having a significant impact on our age structure. Consequently, immigration will not save Social Security. Also we don’t need it to meet future workforce needs. In scarcely more than a decade nearly 40 percent of jobs in the U.S. now done by people may be automated. Another argument against immigration as a means to revitalize the economy is that immigrants vote Democrat by a margin of two-to one. That means more socialistic controls on the economy. As one example, Democrat-run California has one of the worst climates for business in the country.
Gest maintains that welcoming newcomers is “pro-American as it gets.” Like most immigration advocates, he doesn’t seem to think that any number of immigrants could be excessive, i.e., harmful to America. Vested interests seeking cheap labor and cheap votes are the only people who are merry about the prospect of more immigration.