Will Donald Trump's Immigration Policy Kill Long-Term Economic Growth?

Updated on July 15, 2018
My Esoteric profile image

MY ESOTERIC likes to think of himself as a bit of a polymath with degrees in Statistics, Accounting, Computer Science, & Operations Research

Source

Prologue

Based on the initial comments, some readers seem confused as to what this Hub is about; they seem fixated on just one category of immigrants - immigrants who cross the border illegally. So let me be clear - this hub cares very little about immigrant status and only considers total immigrants in America.

Why? Because this Hub is about economic growth or the lack thereof. The per capita GDP in America as of 2017 is about $59,500 according to the CIA fact book. Per capita income doesn't care about immigration status, it is just a number that represents how much of America's GDP each person in America consumes. It is a measure of demand.

There are more than 48 million immigrants in America today. Do the math and that represents nearly $2.85 trillion dollars of GDP (the demand portion is around 75% of that amount). If you look strictly at undocumented immigrants, they account for about $649 billion worth of GDP.

President Trump's policies are directed at both illegal and legal immigrants. The former he wants to eradicate and the latter he wants to reduce significantly. He wants to do that by severely restrict (some estimate as much as 50%) legal immigration to the United States. While the former policy will hurt American economic growth, the latter policy will devastate it.

One of the devastated agrees - http://www.smerconish.com/author/bbrinkman/

I want to present an excerpt from Brinkman's article because it addresses an important point which I don't cover in this article. And that is all of the people supposed not working who could work:

"

Still, I can hear you say, “There are plenty of people on the sideline.” Here in Wisconsin, we have a 68 percent Workforce Participation rate. That’s 1.5 million people- why not put them to work? Unfortunately, it’s not that simple.

Look beneath the surface at the details and other problems arise. Half of the 1.5 million are 65 or older – retirees. Another 17 percent are between 55 and 64 – preparing for retirement. Subtract another 14 percent for people between 16 and 24 – we expect them to be students. All of those exclusions take the 1.5 million down to 302,000 – and that includes everyone – stay-at-home parents, the physically challenged, caretakers – who are not working in that age group.

There just aren’t enough people."

How Does Immigration Policy Link to Economic Growth?

Trust me, it does and I will explain in more detail later. But simply put, immigration policy affects population growth and population growth affects economic growth. By the end of this article, I hope you will understand this connection and the grave threat Donald Trump's anti-immigration policy poses to America's economic health.

This topic has been tackled in several other articles, each one coming at issue from different angles with varying degrees of detail. My hope is that with each iteration, a few more readers gain an understanding of the danger Trump poses and then passes that understanding on to friends. This isn't partisan bickering, it is economic truth.

Many economists have established this relationship between mid to long-term economic growth on two basic functions: 1) population growth and 2) productivity growth. In the short-term, many other factors come into play, but as time goes on, their influence diminishes greatly. In the end you are left with population and productivity. It really is that simple.

Before going there, I would like to lay some ground work about population growth, or the lack thereof.

The White Population in America

When white Europeans (and Hispanic Europeans) invaded the Americas, it was populated by Native Americans. Within 200 years, white Europeans established their dominance throughout the United States and ended up constituting 89.9% of all citizens by 1940. Population growth went through the roof, both from second generation Americans and immigrants. Save for the multitude of deep recessions and depressions between 1776 and 1940, economic growth perked along at roughly 2% per year (yes, only 2%/yr).1

Population growth during that period, which basically means white population growth, was roughly 2.37%/yr



1 If fact, from 1870 forward, it doesn't really make any difference what time from you use, you end up with a growth rate between 1.72% (2001 - 2007) and 2.55 (1995 - 2001). Other examples are 2.03% (1870 - 2007) or 2.23% (1929 - 2007) (What does this say about President Obama's so-called "terrible" rate of about 1.77% (2009 - 2016)

Population Replacement Yesterday - A VERY SCARY CHART

Race or Ethnic Group
FERTILITY (TFR)
GENERATIONAL REPLACEMENT
WHITE (Non-Hispanic)
1.72
Child gen. is 82% as large as Parent gen.
BLACK
1.83
Child gen. is 87% as large as Parent gen.
HISPANIC
2.09
Child gen. is 99.5% as large as Parent gen.
ASIAN
1.69
Child gen. is 80% as large as Parent gen.
NATIVE AMERICAN
1.79
Child gen. is 85% as large as Parent gen.
OVERALL US
1.82 (2016)
Child gen. is 87% as large as Parent gen.
OVERALL US
1.76 (2017)
Child gen. is 84% as large as Parent gen.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/226292/us-fertility-rates-by-race-and-ethnicity/ TABLE 1

It should be obvious from the above data that the white race is losing ground to almost everybody else, especially Hispanics. This is why people who calculate these things predict that white will become a minority race in the next three decades.

So, why is this important? Because it is white males without a college degree who 1) are very afraid of becoming a minority, 2) tend to vote conservative, 3) are Donald Trump's biggest supporters, and 4) are most susceptible to Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric.

And why is THAT so important? Because this demographic provides Trump the army he needs to push through his anti-immigrant agenda. And if they are successful, then your grandkids will suffer the economic consequences 3.


3 It is this same demographic that agrees with Trump's anti-global warming campaign which, if successful, WILL lead to a world calamity.

Here is An Even SCARIER Table -

TOTAL POPULATION (thousands)
2015
2020
2030
2040
2050
CURRENT PREDICTION USING PRE-TRUMP IMMIGRATION POLICY
321,744
333,546
355,765
373,767
388,865
PREDICTION WITH NO IMMIGRATION
321,744
328,262
338,232
341,825
340,887
 
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.newgeography.com/content/005345-america-without-immigration-2015-50 TABLE 2

GDP Growth = Population Growth + Productivity Growth

I wanted to try to plant firmly in you mind that without Donald Trump's immigration policies, population growth in America is in trouble. But with his policies, it is in serious trouble. So now we will get to why this matters a whole bunch.

Economists have long known that long-term economic growth can depend on only two factors, demand and supply.4 But try convincing the average American of this fact? Why should they believe it since everyday they see evidence to the contrary. So many other things seem to have a determinative effect on GDP growth than these two factors; factors that are hard to understand and they rarely see in an economic context in whatever information source they use.

DEMAND

But think about it. The whole purpose of any economy is to satisfy the wants and needs of the society that makes up the economy. Consequently, the size of the population must matter because a small population only produces enough demand for goods and services for a small economy. A large population, on the other hand, must create much larger demand which leads to a much larger economy. Doesn't it make sense, then, that population size determines to a large extent overall demand?

Consider now a population that doesn't change. After time, a constant population must drive a more or less constant demand. Granted, as tastes change, demand might change, but not to a substantial degree. But in the end, consumption per person will find a balance.5

It isn't a stretch then to imagine that a population that is growing will drive a growing demand. If it didn't, then each individual would be consuming less and why would that happen? Conversely, a shrinking population will drive a decline in overall demand. The bottom line, however, is that Population is the main driver of economic demand. It would make since that if the population grew by 1% then, everything else being equal, demand would grow 1% which means GDP should grow 1%.

SUPPLY

It is often true that there is more demand than suppliers can meet. But it is also true that so long as the demand is persistent and the raw materials are available, supply will catch up to meet it. During the transition, prices will adjust accordingly.5

For my purposes here I want to point out that all supply is is output of goods and services; no more, no less. Businesses receive orders for goods and services and they output those goods and services to satisfy those orders. More orders come in, more output is produced. Fewer orders, less output.

So, in our zero population growth constant demand world, shouldn't output remain more or less constant as well? One would think so. But what if demand is growing, in this case because population is growing, then what happens?

Population grows slowly so therefore the demand resulting from it will also grow slowly. It follows then that supply will grow slowly to keep up with demand. So where does 'Productivity' come in? Well, all productivity is output per labor hour and the question becomes what happens with productivity when population either grows, declines, or remains constant?


4 There is a long running debate about which is more important, demand or supply. Generally, liberal economists think "demand" drives "supply" while conservative economists make the case that "supply" drives "demand". Personally, I go with the former belief.

5 On the supply-side, there is a theory (to which I don't subscribe) that says "If you build it, they will come" (ironically, it is based on Says' Law). In other words, under this theory, supply, not population, drives demand. This is a view held by many conservatives.

Productivity in America

TIME PERIOD
PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH (%/yr)
 
1899 - 1929
2.15
 
1974 - 1990
1.37
 
1991 - 1995
1.53
 
1996 - 1999
2.57
 
2000 - 2005
2.99
 
2006 - 2010
2.04
 
2011 - 2016
.59
 
2017 - 2018
1.04
 
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/files/crafts.pdf AND https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet TABLE 3

PRODUCTIVITY

Let's start with the definition of productivity used by the Bureau of Labor Standards (BLS) since that is one factor in our formula. It is:

"Productivity is a measure of economic efficiency which shows how effectively economic inputs are converted into output."

As with everything in life, there are many ways to figure out an answer to "what is our productivity". To keep things simple, I will use the one BLS uses when reporting national productivity, which is "Labor Productivity". It is calculated by dividing the Value of All Goods and Services by the total Labor Hours used in producing those outputs.6 For example:

Example 1: Assume the value of output for Company ABC in 2016 was $1 million. Further assume the total productive hours (not counting leave and other things) is 10,000 hours. So Labor Productivity for 2016 would be $100 per labor hour.

Example 2: Assume the value of output for Company ABC in 2017 was $1.1 million. Further assume the total productive hours (not counting leave and other things) is the same 10,000 hours. So Labor Productivity for 2017 would be $101 per labor hour.

The reason I offered two examples is to get to the actual number we use, the Rate of Growth of Productivity. So, in our example, productivity growth would be 1.0 ((101-100)/100). This number is equivalent to those you see in Chart 3. What it means in the long term and everything else being equal, GDP would grow at about 1% annually so long as productivity did as well. But we haven't gotten to why yet.

WHY

Think about it. What is economic growth? It is the change in the value of output from on period to the next. What is productivity growth but the change in the value of output per unit of input from one period to the next.7

The link should be obvious. Since the productivity output is a large subset of the economic output then by inspection, if productivity changes, so most GDP; and in the same direction, barring some really strange happenings in the "other" 25% of GDP.

Consequently, a 1% increase in productivity (which is another way of saying 'supply'), everything else being equal, will drive a 1% increase in GDP.

6 In terms of GDP, the national output measured here represents about 75% of total GDP. The remaining 25% is not amenable to measuring productivity.

7 Keep in mind that productivity output is not quite the same as GDP (output). But it does encompass about 75% of GDP.

Putting It Together

Economists say that ΔGDP = ΔPopulation Growth + ΔProductivity Growth (where Δ means 'a change in'). This roughly equivalent to saying ΔGDP = Δ in Demand + Δ in Supply.

But remember, I caveated everything with "everything else being equal". We all know that is never true. There are many other factors like weather and politics that impact GDP in unpredictable ways. What is common, however, with all of these other inputs into changes in GDP is that they are transitory, they die out in the mid to long-term. On the other hand, the effect of Population and Productivity do not go away; and changes in these factors are long lasting.

Therefore, when we look at the empirical data it appears very messy. I could normalize the data to make the relationship between GDP, Population, and Productivity cleaner and more obvious, but I won't. So let's look at the results using 20-year time increments.


Comparing Theory and Practice

TIME PERIOD
POPULATION GROWTH %
PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH %
GDP GROWTH %
POP % + PROD %
1790 - 1810
3.06
 
4..85
 
1810 - 1830
2.87
 
3.68
 
1830 - 1850
2.95
 
4.03
 
1850 - 1870
2.54
 
3.69
 
1870 - 1890
2.45
 
5.62
 
1890 - 1910
1.91
1.62
2.57
3.53
1910 - 1930
1.45
1.51
2.66
2.96
1930 - 1950
1.35
2.63
4.20
3.98
1950 - 1970
1.40
2.52
3.64
3.92
1970 - 1990
.96
1.81
3.19
2.77
1990 - 2010
.88
2.39
2.59
3.27
2010 - 1st Q 2018
.76
.61
2.09
1.57
 
 
MEAN
2.99
3.14
TABLE 4

Table 4 displays the results of ΔGDP = ΔPopulation Growth + ΔProductivity Growth and compares it with actual change in GDP.8 As you can see they are close (but no cigar). Some calculated GDPs are higher than actual GDP and other are lower. At the bottom of the table I included the means (averages) of the series of percentages above it. In the first case, the actual average GDP growth for the seven periods we have productivity data is 2.99%. On the other hand, average calculated GDP change is 3.14%.

The question some of you should have is "since 2.99 isn't 3.14, are they really close enough to matter?" It could be that they aren't effectively equal to each other and that our formula fails. Well, there is a statistical test for this to test what is called a "null hypothesis". This null hypothesis is that the two means are equal (or conversely, the difference between the two sample means is zero). So is it?

As it turns out, at a 95% confidence level, the two means are equal; meaning the two samples (the actual and calculated GDP growth) come from the same population. This, in turn, means ΔGDP = ΔPopulation Growth + ΔProductivity Growth is correct.

8 I haven't been able to find productivity data for years prior to 1890.

Circling Back to Immigration

You might think I have strayed far afield from where we started talking about Donald Trump's immigration policy.

It should be clear by now that President Trump is conducting an all out assault on all immigrants in America or wanting to come here; whether legal or illegal or in need of refuge. As I mentioned in a footnote, estimates of his policy proposals would result in a 50% decrease in immigration into America. Millions more are losing their legal status and are subject to deportation.

Already, population growth is a dismal 0.76 to 0.88% per year. It has been on a steady decline (save for the baby boom which ended in the 1970s. Today, the ONLY thing keeping population growth staying positive is immigration to America. And now you know that if Trump is successful, the date where America will start losing population will be greatly advanced.

As we have seen, a negative population growth will decrease demand which MUST decrease GDP. Negative economic growth can be delayed for a little bit with dramatically increased productivity. But even that can't last for long.

The real bottom line is America needs to wake up to the reality of how Trump's policies will kill economic growth. Not for this generation, but for every succeeding generation thereafter.

Do You Think Trump's Immigration Policy Will ...

See results

Will Trump's Immigration Policy ...

See results

© 2018 My Esoteric

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      13 days ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Doris, I understand your concern and I remember those lessons as well. But what is happening is the developed world, including Russia, is on the losing end of population growth. Even China has brought its huge population explosion under control (although their methods are very problematic).

      It is an unfortunate fact of life that in order to just maintain the status quo, a nation has to continue growing. The alternative is an economic collapse, sort of like not continuing to fill a balloon that has a small leak. The same thing will happen to America if it doesn't maintain a positive growth demographic. A decline in standard of living is the inevitable result of letting population stagnate or decline.

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      13 days ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Read - and I said this was Trump's proposed policies and people much smarter than you or I, including right-wing foundations, say that his policies could cut immigration by half.

      You can chose to believe it and work to stop it from happening, or not believe it at your own peril.

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      Doris James-MizBejabbers 

      13 days ago

      ME: Thanks for clarifying in a prologue, but I still have concern for this constant competitive economic growth as being detrimental to the environment and the country, like a candle that eventually burns itself out. However, I get your point of the hub. I won't argue with that. I think there might in the future be a point where negative population growth would stifle the economy. However, I was a child in the 1950s and I remember studying in a 3rd. grade health class that overpopulation would eventually come to a point of such stress that "the rats would start eating the rats" as in some experiments that were conducted with rat overpopulation. But I concede that is not the point of the hub.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      13 days ago from Orange County California

      Brad - to put to rest your paranoia that most undocumented immigrants are rapists, terrorists, drug runners, sex traffickers, and other sorts of criminals let me offer this.

      B!:

      Another serving of ME bullshit.

      -------------------------------------

      Studies show that 7% of illegal immigrants have misdemeanors or felony records. That may seem a lot until you compare it to the average American where 8% have just Felony convictions. Add in misdemeanors and the number skyrockets.

      B1:

      What studies, I looked the government "statistics" not a left wing study.

      This is also the trouble with your use of statistics. Percentages are ambiguous, and vague and meaningless to make any valid points. And while those number are highly inaccurate, even if they were true, do you really think that criminals of any kind are caught, convicted and sent to prison 100%. It is one of your misleading faux facts displaying your statistics.

      ----------------------------

      What percent of people who crossed the southern border illegally are terrorists? ZERO percent,

      B1:

      There you go again, using your emotion instead of any facts. How many terrorists are you willing to allow? It took only 19 terrorist on 911 to successfully embarrass and attack our country. Trillions of dollars over decades and they didn't fire a single defense shot. And now you are saying that zero and once again it should be zero period.

      ---------------------------------

      It seems your ire is directed in the wrong place. Instead of worrying about illegals trying to escape death and prostitution,

      B:

      If they want to do that then they must go through the legal immigration process. Before you go off on another name calling tirade, consider that the estimates of illegals in the US is anywhere from 12 to 20 million. Are you saying that all of them or substantially many of them are escaping death and prostitution. What about the child trafficking that crosses our borders? And the people that are brought over for prostitution purposes.

      Why don't you think about helping the Americans that are homeless, and don't give me any statistics, I see them personally here in Ca. And what about all the people in this country that are whacked out on drugs that came across the border via the drug cartel. They also dabble in crime to protect their products, they are child traffickers, and suppliers of prostitutes, and do some gun running. But according to you they all come through legal ports of entry. While some do try to get through them, it is much easier to just walk across the open border.

      ------------------------------

      you would be better served to rail at home-grown terrorists and felons who pose an order of magnitude bigger problem, don't you think?

      B:

      I think we have to worry about you and those like you that care more about strangers than their own country, and Americans. The reason that we have had any or many terrorists attacks in the country lately is because of democrats and anti Trumpers like you. Why should they do anything, when you et al are doing it for them. You are accomplishing their same goal of weakening the country by weakening the government. Allowing any one and everyone into the country without vetting them is stupid. Remember that distraction in government is a weakness. Whether it weakens the economy as it did in 2006-2008 when the entire congress was campaigning for the 2008 election. No one in the government say the economic collapse, and they were caught like deer in the headlights.

      They didn't have a plan, and after two congresses and two presidents threw $1.5 trillion dollars at it, the economy survived but not the victims. The corporations that caused the economic failure were bailed out, and the heads of these companies even used their bailout money to give themselves 7 figure bonuses. It took more than the republicans to bring down the economy. It involved both parties, both congresses and government agencies like Freddie and Fannie. In addition, it couldn't have happened without the FRB keeping the interested rate low and stable. Otherwise the variable and negative amortization loans would have started to collapse before the economy.

      I think you and your like minded people are the enemy of this country. Don't tell me about your service to this country. It may or may not have been a good thing. But looking at your articles now is not a help to the country, or the people. And neither is putting illegals above the country and the people something to be proud of as an American.

      Thank you for your service to our military, but no thank you to what you are doing today. If you don't believe in president Trump, you should as an American respect the office of the president. Which you don't by your numerous examples.

      When the president of the US cannot do anything right from his performance, to his suggestions, to even what he is thinking aloud, then you need to look at yourself and others like you to see the real problem.

      Trump is the first real president that we have had in over thirty years. Instead of thanking him, you and others have jumped on his coat tails becoming a lead weight to try and stop him from performing his job. To that goal you have failed and you will continue to fail because you are the enemy of the people and the country. The rest of us know that.

      BTW what your table on GDP growth shows to me is the support for my contention that the US went into a continual decline from the 1970s. And 2008 economic crash didn't really recover to the pre crash economy.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      13 days ago from Orange County California

      me

      "Brad, I will go one round with you.

      B - "This is a lie, president Trump has been focusing on illegal aliens and not immigrants per se." ME - Then you aren't following the news. His policies, if implemented, are estimated to reduce legal immigration by 50%.

      B1: You are going to go one round, really, how thoughtful:(

      He is "focusing" on Convicted Illegal Alien Felons, and gangs like MS13. How do you support CA's sanctuary for these criminals?

      If you are talking about his Merit system reducing immigration, that is a good thing. BTW, you think that rewarding people for crashing the border into the country is a good thing. It is still against the immigration law, and unfair to all the immigrants around the world that go through the legal immigration process. They are line cutters, and you want them rewarded, apparently you don't care about the law and fairness.

      --------------------------

      B - "It is illegal period." ME - Every time you speed or fudge your taxes and turn yourself in, then I will take your faux concern for "illegality" seriously. Until then ...

      B1:

      When do these illegals turn themselves in, and the IRS not the ICE is responsible for those crimes.

      This was a really poor comparison. Illegal is illegal and we don't reward people that get caught cheating on their taxes.

      -------------------------------

      B - "It is not the quantity of immigration, it is the quality of immigration. If they have legal status, why would that change?" ME - you apparently missed the whole point of the piece. It is the "quantity" that is the issue and not the "quality".

      B1:

      No, I got the point of the article, and I disagree with it, and said Trump's plan is better than your desire to populate the country with low or unskilled labor. We live in a technology world and it is those jobs that we have so many unfilled openings.

      Do you think that the legal immigrants that do the same jobs as those crossing the border are not losing out to this cheaper illegal labor.

      ----------------------------------------

      B - "This isn't the 20th century, and the type of people that come in illegally are criminals, terrorists, and low skilled workers. Automation increases every year, and we had little manufacturing in the US until Trump brought it back." ME - Again, you didn't comprehend the point of the hub and you are factually incorrect about what comprises the vast majority of illegals crossing the border. If you have facts to back your statement up ... present them, otherwise don't lie.

      B:

      I know better than you who is coming across the border illegally and what are their skills sets. Again, your article doesn't make any valid points. While Trumps merit system will bring in immigrants through legal immigration system. It gets rid of the quota system, and replaces it with an intelligent system based on what they can do for the country, and that they want to become Americans rather than just use it as a surrogate of their native country.

      --------------------------------------

      B - "There you go again confusing your statistics and their predictions as facts. They are just opinions and educated guesses at best. Where were all these statistical analysis in 2006, 2007 and 2008?" ME - and there YOU go again displaying your lack of comprehension about statistics

      B1:

      And yet, you just huff and puff your socialism defending it with statistics. Once again, you try to bully this point. I already told you how I use statistics where it is not an opinion like statistics based on people and environment which you can't control. But a manufacturing process is uniform, and it can be controlled and unlike your statistics is can be beneficial in saving money, and increasing product quality. What does your statistics do?

      --------------------------

      B - "Where is our economy negative. The GDP is double that of the Obama years." ME - actually it is not, but if you think otherwise, present your data.

      B1: What do you think the GDP is today? And what do you think that the GDP was during Obama?

      You said it was not double? Why did you say that?

      This is my original comment

      Negative economic growth can be delayed for a little bit with dramatically increased productivity. But even that can't last for long.

      B:

      Where is our economy negative. The GDP is double that of the Obama years.

      -------------------------- You didn't answer the Negative?

      ME - your final point was off-topic so I will leave it unanswered."

      B1

      What is that topic again?

      ---------

    • Readmikenow profile image

      Readmikenow 

      13 days ago

      "It is similarly hard to fathom why the current White House immigration proposal calls for cuts in legal immigration approaching 50 percent. Macroeconomic Advisers estimates that such a cut would have a drastic impact on our economy, reducing the rate of U.S. economic growth by about 12.5 percent from currently projected levels." This is not really proof but an "estimate" and the reduction is not part of policy but only a "proposal." So, we'll see how it goes in the future.

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      13 days ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Sure, just google it.

      In this case it is Macroeconomic Trends and libertarian Cato institute.

      http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/387884-amer...

    • Readmikenow profile image

      Readmikenow 

      13 days ago

      "estimates of his policy proposals would result in a 50% decrease in immigration into America." Source? I don't see a link to a study, article or any other type of information.

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      13 days ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Brad - to put to rest your paranoia that most undocumented immigrants are rapists, terrorists, drug runners, sex traffickers, and other sorts of criminals let me offer this.

      Studies show that 7% of illegal immigrants have misdemeanors or felony records. That may seem a lot until you compare it to the average American where 8% have just Felony convictions. Add in misdemeanors and the number skyrockets.

      What percent of people who crossed the southern border illegally are terrorists? ZERO percent,

      It seems your ire is directed in the wrong place. Instead of worrying about illegals trying to escape death and prostitution, you would be better served to rail at home-grown terrorists and felons who pose an order of magnitude bigger problem, don't you think?

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      13 days ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Doris - I added a prologue to make more clear the subject of this hub.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      TSAD 

      2 weeks ago from https:// www.consumeraffairs.com/ online/ hubpages. html

      Mike, your observation is just the tip of the iceberg of what is wrong with ME’s comprehension of anything. Well said.

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      2 weeks ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      ReadMikeNow - See my answers to Brad

      Doris - The hub has nothing to do with illegal vs legal. Instead, it is ALL about the total numbers entering or leaving the country.

      Under Trump's current policy, population growth will go negative and take down the economy with it. Also, a stable economy must lead to a no growth economy unless, at least for a little while, productivity keeps growing. But even then, the economy will stop growing because no matter how much output is produced, if the demand isn't there, it won't be bought.

    • My Esoteric profile imageAUTHOR

      My Esoteric 

      2 weeks ago from Keystone Heights, FL

      Brad, I will go one round with you.

      B - "This is a lie, president Trump has been focusing on illegal aliens and not immigrants per se." ME - Then you aren't following the news. His policies, if implemented, are estimated to reduce legal immigration by 50%.

      B - "It is illegal period." ME - Every time you speed or fudge your taxes and turn yourself in, then I will take your faux concern for "illegality" seriously. Until then ...

      B - "It is not the quantity of immigration, it is the quality of immigration. If they have legal status, why would that change?" ME - you apparently missed the whole point of the piece. It is the "quantity" that is the issue and not the "quality".

      B - "This isn't the 20th century, and the type of people that come in illegally are criminals, terrorists, and low skilled workers. Automation increases every year, and we had little manufacturing in the US until Trump brought it back." ME - Again, you didn't comprehend the point of the hub and you are factually incorrect about what comprises the vast majority of illegals crossing the border. If you have facts to back your statement up ... present them, otherwise don't lie.

      B - "There you go again confusing your statistics and their predictions as facts. They are just opinions and educated guesses at best. Where were all these statistical analysis in 2006, 2007 and 2008?" ME - and there YOU go again displaying your lack of comprehension about statistics

      B - "Where is our economy negative. The GDP is double that of the Obama years." ME - actually it is not, but if you think otherwise, present your data.

      ME - your final point was off-topic so I will leave it unanswered.

    • MizBejabbers profile image

      Doris James-MizBejabbers 

      2 weeks ago

      Interesting figures, but I have to agree with the Trumpers on this one that he is focusing on the illegal aliens. I'm no Trump supporter, but I can't support Hillary's open-border policy. So far it has been claimed that the illegals are only doing jobs that citizens refuse. However, on TV I recently saw a man who was a naturalized citizen via LEGAL emigration complaining that the illegals were taking the jobs of his profession (construction) and those of other naturalized citizens like him.

      There are dangers in an ever-growing population. Another thing we have to think of is maybe a stabilized population would be good for the country because we have been warned for years of the dangers of overpopulation. Perhaps we should look at the well-being of our population and environment and not put first satiating the greed of corporations and the technology hungry.

    • Readmikenow profile image

      Readmikenow 

      2 weeks ago

      It is painfully obvious you can't or don't comprehend the difference between "legal" and "Illegal" immigration. Until that concept comes clear, what you write on the subject just illustrates you lack of understanding of the issue.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      2 weeks ago from Orange County California

      ME

      Circling Back to Immigration

      You might think I have strayed far afield from where we started talking about Donald Trump's immigration policy.

      B:

      That is an understatement.

      -----------------------------------

      It should be clear by now that President Trump is conducting an all out assault on all immigrants in America or wanting to come here;

      B:

      This is a lie, president Trump has been focusing on illegal aliens and not immigrants per se.

      He also wants to change the quota system to the merit system, and that will bring in more immigrants that have the skills needed for the 21st century.

      ------------------

      whether legal or illegal or in need of refuge

      B:

      It is illegal period. That is why he wants the wall. But the wall isn't there solely for immigration. It is for the Terrorists, Criminals, Illegal Drugs, Gun Running, Child Trafficking and others. And these don't come in through the port of entries. They come across the porous open border.

      ----------------------

      . As I mentioned in a footnote, estimates of his policy proposals would result in a 50% decrease in immigration into America. Millions more are losing their legal status and are subject to deportation.

      B:

      It is not the quantity of immigration, it is the quality of immigration. If they have legal status, why would that change?

      -------------------------------------------------------

      Already, population growth is a dismal 0.76 to 0.88% per year. It has been on a steady decline (save for the baby boom which ended in the 1970s. Today, the ONLY thing keeping population growth staying positive is immigration to America. And now you know that if Trump is successful, the date where America will start losing population will be greatly advanced.

      B:

      This isn't the 20th century, and the type of people that come in illegally are criminals, terrorists, and low skilled workers. Automation increases every year, and we had little manufacturing in the US until Trump brought it back.

      ---------------------------

      As we have seen, a negative population growth will decrease demand which MUST decrease GDP.

      B:

      There you go again confusing your statistics and their predictions as facts. They are just opinions and educated guesses at best. Where were all these statistical analysis in 2006, 2007 and 2008?

      --------------------------------------

      Negative economic growth can be delayed for a little bit with dramatically increased productivity. But even that can't last for long.

      B:

      Where is our economy negative. The GDP is double that of the Obama years.

      --------------------------

      The real bottom line is America needs to wake up to the reality of how Trump's policies will kill economic growth. Not for this generation, but for every succeeding generation thereafter.

      B:

      The wakeup call is for the democrats to either help the country and helping president Trump or get out of the way.

      What have the democrats done for the past 50 years that improved the economy and the GDP that wasn't tied to a war, a bubble or just anything that wasn't followed by a dramatic downside. We are finally back to the 1950s domestic production of oil to not be adversely affected by OPEC or any other oil bearing country.

      The trade imbalances imposed or allowed to happen under Obama have been reversed, and now we have a level playing field. The Paris Accord was a bad deal for America. We are out of it now. It would have meant the US not to not increase any of our carbon output, while paying for third world countries to produce more and more carbon. They would then be selling us products we are no longer allowed to produce.

      This didn't happen under Obama or GW Bush, but it is happening under president Trump.

      Try again, and enough with your statenomics.

      Didn't you learn from your very wrong statistical analysis about HRC?

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, soapboxie.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://soapboxie.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)