Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
How Donald Trump Will End Illegal Immigration
With last night’s victory, it’s now even clearer that Donald Trump is the GOP frontrunner. As someone who’s been on-the-record as refusing to support him since October, I find this deeply disheartening. As if the rest of it weren’t enough, his comments blaming George W. Bush for 9/11 and claiming that Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq should have sunk him.
I’ve no doubt, however, that Trump will meaningfully deliver on his key promise to reduce illegal immigration. Sure, building a big, beautiful wall will help, as will continuing to beef-up the Border Patrol, but these supply-side tactics can only do so much. As with drugs, part of the solution has to address the demand for the contraband. In the case of immigration, that means asking why millions of people — particularly those from Latin America — are trying to break into our country.
The answer, I think, is simple: Our country is objectively better than those they come from. We have a higher standard of living, far greater opportunity and liberty, safer streets, better schools, and enjoy the blessings of a deeper and more vibrant culture. As Trump himself might put it, America’s great. That’s why people are willing to leave everything behind and undertake the physical and legal risks of crossing the border. It’s worth it to them.
A while back, I suggested — and still maintain — that the best solution is to encourage social and economic prosperity in these countries. That is, do what we can to make Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and the rest of Latin America places worth building a life in. There are limits to what we can do about this, but there’s a lot more we could do, and at moderate cost. Much of it can be done privately, and should.
Trump, however, presents another option that I confess I had not considered: Rather than encourage Latin American growth, we could always make America less attractive. We’ve actually seen this happen already under President Obama, whose anti-growth policies have almost certainly contributed to the reduction in rates of illegal immigration under his watch.
How would Trump do this? To find out, just ask him about any other policy issue, give him a few minutes to get the latest conspiracy theories out of his system, and take notes. You’ll soon have a list that includes single-payer health care, a trade war with China, and ruining what little remains of the Founders’ vision of divided government. Wait a little longer and you’ll probably get something about how wonderful it is to force people to sell their homes to big business.
Would Clinton and Sanders be even more effective at reducing illegal immigration this way? Probably, though the increased goodies they promise in the short term will somewhat counterbalance it. With Trump, though, we’ll have that shiny wall to show for it.
Published in Economics, Immigration
Hah! I read the title and thought “by tanking our economy so nobody wants to come here?” Great minds and all that…
But why did you have to put that picture up on the main feed? I puked in my mouth a little, and so I’m going to have to avoid the main feed for at least a day, now, until it gets pushed down below the screen.
[I didn’t even know duplicate posting was possible!]
Beautiful.
I am as disheartened as you Tom, and I agree on your immigration approach.
Indeed it is far easier to tank our economy and culture than it would be to help Latin America get richer faster. The alliance for progress and subsequent programs were good jobs programs for development economists and aid workers, but not much else. Obama has followed similar programs here but stagnation just doesn’t cut it. We need to study our big city ghettos more closely to see what really works to keep migration away. These places are where progressives have really concentrated their efforts and there is much to learn. People just leave and don’t come back and they don’t even need walls or border patrols.
You know a great way to do that? Remove farm subsidies and tariffss on foreign crops allowing Central and South America to access the American market.
But that remains politically unpopular for reasons of “national security.”
The fact of the matter is unless or until the Western Hemisphere enters a common market, which they are understandably reluctant to do, and even after that there is little hope of improving their economic circumstances unless the political and social cultures that led to the rise of Peron, Kirchner, Pinochet, Morales, Chavez, Maduro, Castro, Burnham and others to gain control of their countries changes dramatically.
1. You’re right. 2. It’s really dumbfounding how stupid that comment was. Rubio deserves any and all derision he can get on the matter.
Hey but we will be winning then! We will have all the money! No more exporting valuable money for cheap goods that we don’t need anyway! USA, USA, USA, USA….Greatness!
Don’t worry. The American people seem to want to add the name “Trump”, to the list of Western Hemisphere dictatorial failures. Soon we will have more in common with our southern brothers, and sisters than ever.
Amen! Solve this problem and illegal immigration will disappear. I’ve been saying this around these parts for years.
Well… I really don’t care about illegal immigration because it’s illegal; frankly, I can’t pretend to have that much respect for “the law” qua “the law.” I don’t understand how any lawyer possibly could.
But if we create the right set of incentives, we would end problematic immigration, which is far more important. If people come over here to embrace our ideals, let them come in droves. But we need to make those ideals clear.
I agree that we would all be better off without the sugar program. I disagree violently with the libertarian-minded unilateral disarmers who ignore what Rubio is saying there; you eliminate such support programs with enforceable agreements. In other words, negotiate terms and institute SAFTA.
One of the worst things you can do as a company or a country is leave yourself completely dependent for strategic materials on less than reliable sources. At one point in the Gulf War, we had allowed foreign sourcing for critical integrated circuits used in JDAMS, and were actually subject to a trade embargo led by countries that opposed our position in the Middle East and tried to use that leverage to control our foreign policy.
And we actually need to have a conversation about the subject of jobs in the rural areas of the US. Discussion of this tends to be very limited (e.g., focus on only sugar and extend the terms nationally or internationally) and tactical. I recommend that we get Tim Pawlenty to lead this- he governed Minnesota, including the sugar beets areas, and dealt with outstate areas that had to cope with serious employment problems.
Agreed. And to channel Mike H a little, this shouldn’t be too hard, considering how good our culture is. It does require ditching a lot of PC asininity, but that’s usually a good idea anyway.
I think that trump is not concerned with supply side economics at all to be honest. After all trade presumes production in number that goes beyond personal demand. Trade only occurs when two parties supply more than they themselves need of goods/services. You must produce before you consume from another.
As a matter of fact what you noticed in those (most) Latin American nations is that they have drastically altered/distorted economies because of government intervention (somewhat in the same vein as trump’s) which has thrown their means of production (supply) completely hay wire. Cuba is one great example of regulating to the point of poverty (as is Venezuela), the deregulation of Brazil has resulted in drastically superior yield in their agricultural output is a great example of the free market.
I agree with your solution though. Reforms towards stabilizing the Latin American nations and liberalizing their markets would do unbelievable miracles to bettering their nations and their citizenry. They too deserve the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I am not sure how we solve that problem, thought AM has some good insights.
Actually any administration can decrease immigration by just taking a stand that illegal immigrants will not be tolerated and will not find succor here. Instead we have a policy that illegal immigration is not only tolerated but encouraged. That entire areas are publicized as illegal immigrant sanctuaries where they can do no wrong and where government policies favor the illegal over the legal.
As for making our economy tank. Seems to me that the Republicans and Democrats have done a good job of crashing it already. The best they have been able to do is put together a low growth economy designed to favor their cronies in big cities with major government presence and let the rest of the country fare for themselves. Even this current slow growth economy looks like it is about to crash which they will blame on Trump or anybody but their elitist selves.
But we are solving this problem by sending American jobs and industry to Mexico and other countries. America middle class gets poorer, foreign citizens get richer, elites make money. So from the elites point of view it is a Win-Win-Win.
As a Rubio guy, I couldn’t agree more; makes me want to throw cold water on him & tell him to wake up.
First generation immigrants tend to be concerned with constantly working to make as much money as possible to improve their (and their families) quality of life. This takes a lot of effort when navigating the culture isn’t second nature. They essentially start at the bottom, even if their natural abilities are much higher. When I meet these people, I feel ashamed for how lazy I am in comparison. Second generation immigrants tend to be almost completely integrated. (which unfortunately also means regression to the mean American work ethic) Swamping is practically impossible unless you assume extreamly slow integration over several generations, which isn’t evident.
Why not make hiring an illegal illegal and send employers to jail when they do it? Wouldn’t that deal directly with demand?
Yes, why isn’t this the answer? Presumably, employers have more to lose than the immigrants themselves; why aren’t we talking about sticking it to the guys who hire illegals? Even if…that includes the Republican frontrunner?
Oh yeah, I forgot….
The GOP donor class would rise up in arms at the thought of being punished for hiring cheap illegal immigrant labor. That’s why the GOP establishment has ruthlessly crushed any attempt to establish such a system.
Aside from the sarcasm, Trump’s solution is not to degrade America. Trump does not understand his role in the problem.
We all tolerate illegal immigration because we don’t want to slaughter and clean shrimp, chickens, and cows for Trump restaurants or work in 100 degrees digging or mowing Trump golf courses. We don’t want to drive trucks around full of decaying dead road kill scraped off the highways in front of Trump developments to dump into a hopper at the waste protein processing plant. Installing fiberglass insulation or drywall in Trump casinos is nasty, dull work.
This is not that complicated. Most illegals are not working for IBM or Apple. They are not members of the Medellin drug cartel or working for Sinaloa. They work in tiny, marginal, and often Hispanic run businesses who are run by legals and who serve as contractors or subcontractors for Donald Trump.
This is why new laws are unlikely to make a difference. If there is unpleasant work that pays $7-8 an hour, illegal aliens will find a way to get here and get minimal employment through a friend or relative – wall or no wall.
They live 12-15 to a townhouse apartment built for 3 where one may be “legal”. They stand in the rain to be hired off street corners when the work runs out. They return to Mexico or wherever about once every one or two years for around a week. But, when they hear the US government is cracking down at the border, they do not go home. Which means they are more likely to stay here longer and less likely to ever go home, temporarily or permanently.
They are often hired by the children of those who got amnesty from Reagan who set up painting, window cleaning, home fix-it, or landscaping businesses. These small employers don’t worry about the law because they are too small and almost impossible to police. Most illegals, when they come, do not intend to stay. They gradually work and earn their way into our economy – they have little choice. As some form families, they enroll in schools and show up at hospital emergency rooms. But most of this takes time and a some form of lasting, steady income however meager.
Sorry Tom, they are not coming for the freedom or other political nonsense. They don’t care about our standard of living or the Statue of Liberty. They are often poorly educated – nearly illiterate in Spanish. If they can get a check from the state without facing deportation, they will grab it. Why not?
The “legal” children of prior illegals who were granted amnesty often mistreat the new illegals – as cheap labor to be exploited or expended. The illegals have few economic options wherever they are coming from and here they can lay brick or stone or frame houses for the tiny Hispanic contractors who build homes or get small contracts for bigger companies. If you see a medium sized road construction project, the wood forms and framing for the concrete is often being constructed by some illegals working for a small subcontractor working for another contractor. Look at the hard hats.
When home building or subcontracting work in a poultry plant dries up – the illegals have to go home or go back to standing in line on the corner. Which is what happened in 2009-2014 on the corners of America. They stand and wait until many wind up unable to pay their way back home. They simply go to ground. Some men find a house cleaner female to live with or depend upon friends, family here legally or illegally, or upon day work when work is scarce.
Fact is, we all benefit from lower prices for unskilled labor. This is also true of cheap imports sold at Walmart or cheap replacement parts for our Chevy’s. Trump will take of that with a trade war.
Few American citizens with any education or talent lose their jobs to illegal aliens. It does happen – but not often and usually at the bottom. But, the real problem does not affect the average Ricochet writer in the near term because illegals only undermine the wage structure to some extent at the bottom, not for people who have computers and post on websites. The real problem is illegals contribute to massive social problems for poor American citizens in Fishtown – many of whom just drop out or never get started. And, the illegals if allowed to stay or if given a pathway to citizenship are likely to change the political demographics in favor of Democrats. This was not always the case – but the extremely low educated illegals who have entered the country in the past few years are impacting our wage, education and social welfare curves long term. This is the hidden cost of cheap wages.
So “No,” Trump has no plan. Deport and reimport is a a fool’s trick. Which is pretty much what Trump is selling on every front. Fortunately, Trump supporters don’t care.
Do you mean people like Donald J. Trump: http://ricochet.com/donald-trump-is-a-massive-hypocrite-pt-42/
If illegals threatened high-income Americans’ jobs, they’d take a different attitude.
Best ad of the whole campaign, so far.