An 8.5% official unemployment rate?

[mRx 16]

If we removed the parasitic welfare distribution system, then I doubt that anyone would give a sh!t about who was legal or illegal.

While Illegals are leeching off government services they are not leeching of welfare. The biggest problem with regards to illegals is that for every job they take, that is one less Job for an American. Sure they are not to blame for this crisis but every single job in America should be going to those who are legally permitted to work here. Especially at a time when Americans are being thrown on the streets and living in tents. Also time to get rid of the anchor baby rule, which many are exploiting.

Just the other day I saw a study which says that every $1 billion invested in the country (or billion worth of exports), equates to the creation of approximately 11,500 jobs. So the money being sent to Mexico has been a economic drain on the American economy.

The Trade Position was also interesting. When it comes to exports vs imports (per capita) the US is one of the worst performing.

EU - Ex: $3,582 Im: $3,651

Japan - Ex: $5,172 Im: $4,607

Australia- Ex: $5,527 Im: $6,709

US: Ex: $3,874 Im: $6,083 - Large trade imbalance(deficit)

Trade deficits are a politicians wetdream, but they're largely irrelevant, useless, and represent a grave misunderstanding of basic microeconomics.

This economic drain that you're so worried about, is hardly a drain at all.

If I buy $1 worth of Mexico-made products, my wallet loses $1, BUT, my goods account gains $1 worth of Mexico-made products. But, why stop at political boundaries with these so-called trade deficits?

My neighbor's son mows my lawn, and I pay him $20. But, he buys nothing from me. That must be a perpetual deficit for me, and I should be alarmed, right? But, in essence, I trade a good, $20, for another good, lawn mowing service. There is no deficit at all!

The problem with your hyped-up trade deficit model is that it doesn't treat money as a good. My neighbor's son traded a good with me. I gave him $20, (a good) and in turn he mowed my lawn (with his labor services, also a good).

This painfully simple model extends universally, because economics has no borders.

As for your other point, about the Mexicans stealing American jobs; chalk that up to inflationary policy. We're easily outcompetable when it comes to bidding our labor. The reason is simple also. Things are more expensive in the USA compared to things of comparable quality in Mexico. Trillion dollar deficits have consequences; inflation is one of them. If you're worried about the Mexicans outcompeting you for jobs, then write your congressman. An increase in population should be celebrated as there would be an increase in goods/services, which would drop aggregate prices, if that's not happening, it's because of inflation.

[peejay 327]

This recession seems like the one Japan had which resulted in stagnation for 10 yrs. I hope we dont have that, but starting to seem so.

A positive spin I can think of, is that many illegals will leave the US. How many want to stay when they can barely or at all pay bills, and nothing is left over to send home. It won't be cost beneficial anymore. Less people will overstay tourist visa's, as they probably have a better picture in their home country.

Side que: How do they count unemployment? Is it just the people that are receiving benefits? What if after 6 months, they stop receiving benefits, and still no job. Are they then excluded from the calculation?

We could only wish. Unfortunately the Dims love illegal aliens more than they love American citizens.

How else can you explain the recent reintroduction of the DREAM Act this week giving preferential treatment to illegal aliens for college tuition and (of course) Green Cards via amnesty. Thank Obama, Pelosi, and Reid for screwing the American taxpayer. And thank Senator ####### Durbin (Dirtbag) for reintroducing this pandering P.o.S. legislation once again to test the amnesty waters for the benefit of scofflaws.

This on top of guaranteeing illegal alien access to taxpayer funded stimulus jobs by purposely barring mandatory use of E-Verify. Thank Obama, Pelosi, and Reid for screwing the unemployed American worker again.

And this on top of DHS Secretary Napolitano stopping the deportation of the illegal aliens nabbed at the recent Yamato factory raid in Washington state. They have been released with work authorization. Thanks Obama, Pelosi, and Reid for screwing the unemployed American worker again...and again...and again...

................in their self serving, US citizen back stabbing quest for amnestied illegal alien votes after the coming blanket illegal alien amnesty with a guaranteed pathway to a registered Dim voter registration card.

When will the American people wake up from this nightmare and take our country back from these azzholes? Apparently Americans love getting screwed because they keep electing these self serving azzholes year in and year out. Go figure?

Agree with you 200%. I'm an immigrant myself and illegals make me sick. People who think that legal immigrants support illegals are retarded. Actually the only people who support illegals are American born US Citizens who are either aging hippies or young liberals brainwashed by socialist ideas...

Stereotypes are fun. But not very accurate.

Most of the support for legalizing illegal aliens, generally comes from family who are legal immigrants or citizens in the US, and realists who realize that any wholesale round up and deportation of illegal aliens is rather impractical.

Illegal immigration is largely an economic problem and is best addressed with a solution that takes into account the economic incentives for immigrating illegally. With the current economic situation in the US, fewer have been trying to enter, and many have actually been going home on their own.

Unfortunately stereotypes are very often based on some form of the truth.

Actually I believe the current path being executed by the current administration in regard to illegal immigration has very little to do with realism or real solutions and a whole lot to do with self serving opportunism. Action speaks louder than words. These people are a lot more interested in pursuing political hedgemony than they are with solving entrenched and institutionalized illegal immigration in the USA. Their self serving policies should not be at the expense of the constituents they claim to champion (i.e.: the American worker). Unfortunately it obviously is.

Not personally being affiliated or favorable to one political party or another...I calls 'em like I see 'em. In the case of their non-solution to illegal immigration, the Dims are more interested in selfish political gain than the best interests of the American workers they claim to champion.

In other words...these people are two faced depending on who they are speaking to. Action speaks louder than words. Don't listen to what these people say...look at what they are actually doing. You will see that these people are not the friend and champion of the American worker they claim to be. Not that the Repubs are either, but...

Edited April 4, 2009 by peejay

[Heracles 417]

Trade deficits are a politicians wetdream, but they're largely irrelevant, useless, and represent a grave misunderstanding of basic microeconomics.

This economic drain that you're so worried about, is hardly a drain at all.

If I buy $1 worth of Mexico-made products, my wallet loses $1, BUT, my goods account gains $1 worth of Mexico-made products. But, why stop at political boundaries with these so-called trade deficits?

My neighbor's son mows my lawn, and I pay him $20. But, he buys nothing from me. That must be a perpetual deficit for me, and I should be alarmed, right? But, in essence, I trade a good, $20, for another good, lawn mowing service. There is no deficit at all!

The problem with your hyped-up trade deficit model is that it doesn't treat money as a good. My neighbor's son traded a good with me. I gave him $20, (a good) and in turn he mowed my lawn (with his labor services, also a good).

This painfully simple model extends universally, because economics has no borders.

As for your other point, about the Mexicans stealing American jobs; chalk that up to inflationary policy. We're easily outcompetable when it comes to bidding our labor. The reason is simple also. Things are more expensive in the USA compared to things of comparable quality in Mexico. Trillion dollar deficits have consequences; inflation is one of them. If you're worried about the Mexicans outcompeting you for jobs, then write your congressman. An increase in population should be celebrated as there would be an increase in goods/services, which would drop aggregate prices, if that's not happening, it's because of inflation.

How are trade deficits a misunderstanding? We are buying more goods than we export and produce. Fact is we used up wasted the majority of our resources. Exporting is also essential for a country and its growth. The other thing you need to factor is that the only reason we have been able to import so much is because the countries we are buying goods from are providing us with the credit. The reality is that the US no longer has any money. Its not as if we are using our surplus cash to purchase goods. its not as if the millions living in poverty in ghettos in Appalachia are providing the money.

While your example is a good example it is not 100% correct. You pay him the $20 to mow your law. He mows your lawn and receives the $20. He in turn either invests (positive) or being a kid spends it watching a movie. The theaters pay their employees, rent, the studios etc. The employee uses it to buy a starbucks coffee and so on. You obviously know that is how in essence (trade) works. Eventually that $20 will benefit you. Now if he was to mow your law and then send the $20 to China. This does nothing for the local economy. Effectively breaking the economic greenhouse cycle of money. And that is just $20 worth. Now think of it on a multi $1,000,000,000 dollar level.

Mexicans are not stealing Americans job. Illegal Immigrants are stealing Americans job. We trade with Mexico as they trade with us. Nothing wrong with that.

You are 110% pro free / open market right and you don't see agree that any government intervention is necessary. What if every single corporation decided to ship all job overseas to cheap and now smarter markets. Should we just sit back and do nothing while the free-market 'works itself out'. Rubbish and wrong. It is our government's duty and sure as hell should be to devise policies / programs and spend the appropriate money to ensure our industries and people are the best and most efficient in the world. Same way the Japanese government initially used protectionism and their own money to build the Japanese auto industry. Now one of the most powerful in the world, surpassing both Europe and America.

When you have people crapping on about smaller government and being against government intervention (stimulation) then you have a group of people who quite frankly don't know what they are talking about. Not a single country in this world who is doing well is using the model of no government intervention. For example, American companies are saying we need more H1 visa in order to bring in and hire more skilled individuals. Yes even in this environment. To the contrary, the Australian government has proposed that by 2020 50% of Australians will hold a bachelors degree. There is the difference. One is looking at the cheaper (shareholder oriented) solution, which is solely beneficial to corporation. The latter is looking out for their own people, for the long term. Does this mean they are against immigrants. No, what it shows as John McCain put it, "Country First". Country over short-sided quarterly returns for shareholders. What it means for the shareholders is instead of having $10 billion to divide amongst yourself, you now have $9 billion and the other $1 billion is used to stimulate the country that gives them the safety and opportunity to earn the $9 billion the the first place.

[Heracles 417]

Actually I believe the current path being executed by the current administration in regard to illegal immigration has very little to do with realism or real solutions and a whole lot to do with self serving opportunism. Action speaks louder than words. These people are a lot more interested in pursuing political hedgemony than they are with solving entrenched and institutionalized illegal immigration in the USA. Their self serving policies should not be at the expense of the constituents they claim to champion (i.e.: the American worker). Unfortunately it obviously is.

Not personally being affiliated or favorable to one political party or another...I calls 'em like I see 'em. In the case of their non-solution to illegal immigration, the Dims are more interested in selfish political gain than the best interests of the American workers they claim to champion.

In other words...these people are two faced depending on who they are speaking to. Action speaks louder than words. Don't listen to what these people say...look at what they are actually doing. You will see that these people are not the friend and champion of the American worker they claim to be. Not that the Repubs are either, but...

Your right. The unions and lefties back in AUS kick and scream about illegal immigrants. They will actually stop a project if someone is an illegal immigrant. Whereas here you don't hear anything. Too bust blaming CEOs. Therefore either the unions are dumb or they are stupid. Because illegal immigrants have a direct affect on their industry. Not as if a illegal immigrant is going to take my job. Whereas, what do blue collar workers do when they are fired? If the illegal immigrants did not have any of their jobs they could easily get a job in another area. If a business / contractor etc was not able to pay under the table, they would also receive a fair pay for their work. For obvious reasons that is not an option anymore. You have American blue collar workers living in tents while a good portion of the construction workers around here are illegals.

Edited April 4, 2009 by Constellation

[Ban Hammer 13,465]

While your example is a good example it is not 100% correct. You pay him the $20 to mow your law. He mows your lawn and receives the $20. He in turn either invests (positive) or being a kid spends it watching a movie. The theaters pay their employees, rent, the studios etc. The employee uses it to buy a starbucks coffee and so on. You obviously know that is how in essence (trade) works. Eventually that $20 will benefit you. Now if he was to mow your law and then send the $20 to China. This does nothing for the local economy. Effectively breaking the economic greenhouse cycle of money. And that is just $20 worth. Now think of it on a multi $1,000,000,000 dollar level.

spot on.

[mRx 16]

How are trade deficits a misunderstanding? We are buying more goods than we export and produce.

Again, you are failing to see that money is a good. That's where the misunderstanding is rooted.

Fact is we used up wasted the majority of our resources. Exporting is also essential for a country and its growth. The other thing you need to factor is that the only reason we have been able to import so much is because the countries we are buying goods from are providing us with the credit. The reality is that the US no longer has any money. Its not as if we are using our surplus cash to purchase goods. its not as if the millions living in poverty in ghettos in Appalachia are providing the money.

In order to see the forest, you must first see the trees. Translated: in order to comprehend the economy as a whole, you must first see the individual transactions that combine to make up the whole. This is where microeconomic comprehension comes into play.

I don't deny that economic policy in this country is slowly bankrupting us as country, but Americans are still working; They're still producing; and they're still trading. I have a job, and you have a job. So are we not producing a good?

It's folly to assume that there is no money in America. If Americans are purchasing things on credit, then they have an obligation to pay back the creditor, which ultimately would require them to produce. Production exists, and still is a vital component of the economy.

We also still have plenty of resources. We export more corn than any country in the world, twice as much as China! We export certain products requiring immense technical knowledge, like aircraft. We export the image of a strong and stable economy, which has encouraged the Chinese to invest, or import their US dollars in.

Trade is important for countries, and over which political boundaries the trade flows is irrelevant.

While your example is a good example it is not 100% correct. You pay him the $20 to mow your law. He mows your lawn and receives the $20. He in turn either invests (positive) or being a kid spends it watching a movie. The theaters pay their employees, rent, the studios etc. The employee uses it to buy a starbucks coffee and so on. You obviously know that is how in essence (trade) works. Eventually that $20 will benefit you. Now if he was to mow your law and then send the $20 to China. This does nothing for the local economy. Effectively breaking the economic greenhouse cycle of money. And that is just $20 worth. Now think of it on a multi $1,000,000,000 dollar level.

Again, you're failing to see money as a good, or a widely accepted good as a medium of exchange. If the boy decides to send that $20 to China, (which chances are, he will; on a toy) he will be receiving a good, the toy, in return for the good of his own, the $20. Should he be forced to spend that $20 on a toy made in the USA? If the toy is made and sold in the USA, then I assume all the higher order processes of production must be made in the USA as well? The paint must be made in the USA, the rubber must be somehow made in the USA (don't know how, because rubber trees are not indigenous to the USA), and the steel used to produce the screws must be made in the USA from steel mined in the USA (which US Steel mines 5X less than the foreign ArcelorMittal company). Not to mention all the production equipment, which must be made in the USA, using resources from only the USA. With all these America, First provisions, I imagine this toy would cost about $2,000 just to produce!

But, let's say he "buys America" and goes for the movie. That movie must also follow the same ridiculous guidelines as to enable the maximum benefit to the American populace. The movie must be filmed in the USA using American actors only; the props must all be derived from American resources by utilizing American manpower; the seats in the theater must be constructed from American trees, and American cotton turned into American cushions in American factories. By now, that $20 wouldn't even be a fraction of the cost of a matinee ticket.

Oh, and this hypothetical $20 dollars that the theater employee in turn uses to buy a Starbucks better be brewed using only American coffee beans, grown and processed in America, and packaged using American plastics. (Starbucks pays less than $2 per pound for coffee currently; imagine if they had to pay over $10 per pound for an American grown bean!)

So, should the boy be forced to spend his money on something that would benefit only America? Surely, you must see by now that such an arrangement would be incredibly unwise, unsustainable, and would bring us back to the Stone Age.

Mexicans are not stealing Americans job. Illegal Immigrants are stealing Americans job. We trade with Mexico as they trade with us. Nothing wrong with that.

So what economic effect does one's legal status have? Absolutely none.

You are 110% pro free / open market right and you don't see agree that any government intervention is necessary. What if every single corporation decided to ship all job overseas to cheap and now smarter markets. Should we just sit back and do nothing while the free-market 'works itself out'. Rubbish and wrong. It is our government's duty and sure as hell should be to devise policies / programs and spend the appropriate money to ensure our industries and people are the best and most efficient in the world. Same way the Japanese government initially used protectionism and their own money to build the Japanese auto industry. Now one of the most powerful in the world, surpassing both Europe and America.

The notion that all jobs will be shipped overseas is outrageous and illogical. There are costs associated with shipping a job overseas. There are direct costs, and possibly (as Dell realized) indirect costs. If it's still more profitable for a job to be sent overseas, then it will be, and AFAIK there is no American Job Protectionist diatribe campaign, or any legislation prohibiting such business decisions. The fact is, businesses still operate and have US based manpower, not because of a swelling love of America, but because it's cheaper. It's that simple. But what is causing these goods and services to be chased overseas? Massive inflation; the road your beloved intervening government is taking, is rooting us out, economically.

As for Japan, their protectionist campaign may have helped their auto industry. But, this is only the seen. The unseen is the Japanese industries not recieving subsidies and low-interest government loans. They are the manufacturers who see the bidding up of steel and other resources. They are the Japanese who wanted a European or American car, but such choice was made unaffordable to them.

The Japanese auto industry grew NOT because of market forces, but because of government force. But, don't forget the unseen.

I'd also argue that in this case, correlation doesn't imply causation. Auto markets weren't huge in the 50's, and I doubt many Japanese people owned cars. So while I have shown how the government's favoritism hurt the unseen, we can't accurately predict that the Japanese auto industry wouldn't have become so well known without such subsidies.

Look at their heavy protectionism on rice. It's no wonder the Japanese pay something like 6X the world average for rice.

If anything, the Japanese auto industry owes it's popularity to free-trade, not protectionism, as we purchase more Hondas and Toyotas than their own domestic citizens!

When you have people crapping on about smaller government and being against government intervention (stimulation) then you have a group of people who quite frankly don't know what they are talking about. Not a single country in this world who is doing well is using the model of no government intervention. For example, American companies are saying we need more H1 visa in order to bring in and hire more skilled individuals. Yes even in this environment. To the contrary, the Australian government has proposed that by 2020 50% of Australians will hold a bachelors degree. There is the difference. One is looking at the cheaper (shareholder oriented) solution, which is solely beneficial to corporation. The latter is looking out for their own people, for the long term. Does this mean they are against immigrants. No, what it shows as John McCain put it, "Country First". Country over short-sided quarterly returns for shareholders. What it means for the shareholders is instead of having $10 billion to divide amongst yourself, you now have $9 billion and the other $1 billion is used to stimulate the country that gives them the safety and opportunity to earn the $9 billion the the first place.

How are perpetual recessions, depressions, downturns, and economic turmoils considered stimulation? Frankly, I don't think I'm the one who doesn't know what they're talking about. Give me just one example of how government intervention in the market created a good, without forcibly taking it from somewhere else. It's impossible. Taxation, tarriffs and quotas, product prohibition, minimum wage laws, all benefit certain individuals or groups at the expense of others. BY, I highly suggest reading this. 159 years later, it still holds true.