Immigration in America dates back to wanderers from Northeast Asia about 20,000 years ago. Currently, immigration including new arrivals and their children accounts for an increase of about 1.5 million more people a year, which represents more than half of the total U.S. population growth. Today the debate of immigration in the United States is seemly never ending. There are many reasons that explain why people are boiling over the issue of illegal immigration. Many of the claims in my two articles states that illegal immigration threatens jobs and lower wages. In the articles, there are many ways in which economists convey their ideas to deal with the issue of immigration's effect on the job market.
Some of their ideas include deporting all illegal immigrants back to their native countries, making immigrants pay for penalties, and building a computerized electric fence that would indicate where the immigrants would cross the border. Both of the articles express concerns about this debate and presents many ideas on possible solutions to this issue. However, many of the articles lack evidence, objections, and rebuttal to their reasonability of the debate. Another very important element that most articles lack is giving the appropriate reasons as to why their claim or statement is sufficient.
One example of an article that lack evidence, objections, and rebuttal to its claims is an article written by an unknown journalist at the Wharton School of Finance on a Cornell University professor, Professor Briggs - who opposes to illegal immigration. In this article, The Immigration Debate: Its Impact on Workers, Wages, and Employers, Professor Briggs speaks about sending messages to illegal workers through their employers by "clamping" the employers down who hired them so that a clear message is sent to the workers that illegal immigration is not to be tolerated. His claim is that "illegal workers exert downward pressure on wages and reduce job opportunity for low-skilled citizens." As mentioned earlier, this article lacks objection, evidence, and rebuttal. This professor failed to mention the effects of immigrant workers on wages and working conditions in other parts of the world. He also failed to explain why illegal immigrants force down wages by simply responding "that's how the market works." The author and the professor clearly failed to provide any justifiable reason or evidence as to how the market works.
A further example of another University professor with plenty of bold statements but not enough evidence and not willing to take in hand other ideas is Bernard Anderson, professor in Wharton's management department. Professor Anderson on the hand supports the topic of immigration. In the same article provided by the Wharton School of Finance, Professor Anderson claims that "illegal immigrants work hard, do not come to the United States to receive welfare, and should be allowed to remain in the U.S. after paying penalties." He then later on states that "while illegal workers do have some effect on wages and displace some American workers, their impact is far less dangerous than what professor Briggs assert.
" He agreed with Professor Brigg's statement that illegal workers do force down wages however Professor Anderson failed to explain why the U.S. economy needs such low-skill immigrant laborers to do such kinds of work. It is clearly a political question at this point. If we want to benefit low-skill American workers, we must reduce the amount of illegal immigration and the opposite would be done if we want to benefit immigrants in the United States.
The second article is written by Thomas Lifson called The Neglected Truths of the Immigration Debate. In this article, he states very good claims in which "Poor and unskilled immigrants are expensive for the rest of society." He then followed to provide good evidence that the "net cost for just ten million illegal immigrants at $2.6 trillion, and more if the number is 12 million or higher.
" However he failed to mention any kind of objection or rebuttals in this article. This article is mainly a one sided fact source that clearly opposes to the topic of immigration. It acknowledged other options that may possibly be solutions to solving the issues of immigration but failed to provide reasons for his claims. As this topic of immigration is heating up, it is important to know the reasons behind claims. It is also important to know why America does not have as generous a welfare system as Scandinavia and a few other European countries.
One example of an article that lack evidence, objections, and rebuttal to its claims is an article written by an unknown journalist at the Wharton School of Finance on a Cornell University professor, Professor Briggs - who opposes to illegal immigration. In this article, The Immigration Debate: Its Impact on Workers, Wages, and Employers, Professor Briggs speaks about sending messages to illegal workers through their employers by "clamping" the employers down who hired them so that a clear message is sent to the workers that illegal immigration is not to be tolerated. His claim is that "illegal workers exert downward pressure on wages and reduce job opportunity for low-skilled citizens." As mentioned earlier, this article lacks objection, evidence, and rebuttal. This professor failed to mention the effects of immigrant workers on wages and working conditions in other parts of the world. He also failed to explain why illegal immigrants force down wages by simply responding "that's how the market works." The author and the professor clearly failed to provide any justifiable reason or evidence as to how the market works.
A further example of another University professor with plenty of bold statements but not enough evidence and not willing to take in hand other ideas is Bernard Anderson, professor in Wharton's management department. Professor Anderson on the hand supports the topic of immigration. In the same article provided by the Wharton School of Finance, Professor Anderson claims that "illegal immigrants work hard, do not come to the United States to receive welfare, and should be allowed to remain in the U.S. after paying penalties." He then later on states that "while illegal workers do have some effect on wages and displace some American workers, their impact is far less dangerous than what professor Briggs assert.
" He agreed with Professor Brigg's statement that illegal workers do force down wages however Professor Anderson failed to explain why the U.S. economy needs such low-skill immigrant laborers to do such kinds of work. It is clearly a political question at this point. If we want to benefit low-skill American workers, we must reduce the amount of illegal immigration and the opposite would be done if we want to benefit immigrants in the United States.
The second article is written by Thomas Lifson called The Neglected Truths of the Immigration Debate. In this article, he states very good claims in which "Poor and unskilled immigrants are expensive for the rest of society." He then followed to provide good evidence that the "net cost for just ten million illegal immigrants at $2.6 trillion, and more if the number is 12 million or higher.
" However he failed to mention any kind of objection or rebuttals in this article. This article is mainly a one sided fact source that clearly opposes to the topic of immigration. It acknowledged other options that may possibly be solutions to solving the issues of immigration but failed to provide reasons for his claims. As this topic of immigration is heating up, it is important to know the reasons behind claims. It is also important to know why America does not have as generous a welfare system as Scandinavia and a few other European countries.
