From: gwu@tcsi.tcs.com (George Wu)
Subject: Immigrants - The Root of All Evil
Originator: gwu@nujoizey
Organization: Teknekron Communications Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:30:31 GMT

-
     I'm reposting a recent thread in ca.general because I think it's of
interest here.  Just to point out my own personal opinion, the Subject: I
used is intended purely to grab your attention.  I myself wonder if Mr.
Berry isn't a xenophobe.  America's history shows immigrants have been
one of the major driving factors behind the development of it's economic
might.
							George



From: kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry)
Subject: Re: our school problems
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix, Sacramento, Ca.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 16:32:49 GMT

In article <BvL4JC.Gq5@well.sf.ca.us> rchao@well.sf.ca.us (Robert Chao) writes:
>
>It is my impression that California schools' financial problems are
>worse than other states' schools.
>If that is true, why?

If that is true I suspect that a primary factor is the high number
of immigrants and the continued high birthrate of those immigrants.

A dual income couple that owns home with one or two children pays
several thousand dollars per year in state taxes. U.S. born
residents are more likely to fall into this category.

Families that rent apartments or double up in housing or have a
large number of children pay far less in state income and property
taxes, and if they receive food stamps or welfare, they receive
more then they contribute. Immigrants disproportionately fall into
this category.

Assuming an annual cost of $4000 to educate a student for a year,
it costs taxpayers $288,000 to provide K-12 education for a single
family with six children. In spite of this impact, the state
provides tax deductions based on the number of children. Clearly
small families are subsidizing large families, and large families 
-- due to immigration -- are more prevalent in California.

It would be interesting if anyone has the time/resources to provide
statistics something like the following:

                                   U.S Born       Immigrant
                                   --------       ---------
Percent homeowners                      %               %
Percent receive foodstamps              %               %
Average state income tax bill      $              $
Average # of children

Average state tax bill for a family with two children versus a
family with six children.

Governor Wilson has touched on this problem but backed off due to
political pressures.
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
        Kim Berry              kberry@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US



From: pal@xanadu.wpd.sgi.com (Anil Pal)
Subject: Re: our school problems
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:07:41 GMT
Reply-To: pal@wpd.sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1992Oct4.163249.29299@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>, kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry) writes:
|> 
|> It would be interesting if anyone has the time/resources to provide
|> statistics something like the following:
|> 
|>                                    U.S Born       Immigrant
|>                                    --------       ---------
|> Percent receive foodstamps              %               %
|> Average state income tax bill      $              $

I don't have exactly those numbers, but I do have some others (Source:
Business Week, July 13, 1992 - excerpted without permission):

    Percentage of immigrants in LA county :			>30%
    Percentage of AFDC recipients in LA who are immigrants:	 16%

    Amount paid in taxes by immigrants: 	$90 billion
    Amount received in welfare by immigrants:	 $5 billion

According to Julian L. Simon, a University of Maryland economist,

    "Immigrants benefit natives through the public coffers by using
    LESS THAN THEIR FAIR SHARE OF SERVICES AND PAYING MORE THAN THEIR
    SHARE OF TAXES." (emphasis mine)

Pity the facts don't fit the theory, eh?  Oh well, I don't suppose
that'll trouble Kim too much, given that she obviously formed her
opinions before asking for the facts.

-- 
Anil A. Pal
pal@sgi.com	(415)-390-5279


From: kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry)
Subject: Re: our school problems
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix, Sacramento, Ca.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 14:51:58 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.000741.10990@odin.corp.sgi.com> pal@wpd.sgi.com writes:
>In article <1992Oct4.163249.29299@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>, kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry) writes:

>I don't have exactly those numbers, but I do have some others (Source:
>Business Week, July 13, 1992 - excerpted without permission):
>
>    Percentage of immigrants in LA county :			>30%
>    Percentage of AFDC recipients in LA who are immigrants:	 16%

The reason this statistic is flawed is that AFDC is based on
the child, and the children of immigrants are classified as
"U.S. Citizens (tm)." This is an apples and oranges comparison.

>    Amount paid in taxes by immigrants: 	$90 billion
>    Amount received in welfare by immigrants:	 $5 billion

Yes. Business Week has a vested interest in providing corporate
america with a surplus of labor, thus they failed to provide
the numbers of the control group. If U.S. citizens paid
$900 billion in taxes and received $25 billion in welfare, 
couldn't we still conclude that immigrants are a burden?

>According to Julian L. Simon, a University of Maryland economist,
>
>    "Immigrants benefit natives through the public coffers by using
>    LESS THAN THEIR FAIR SHARE OF SERVICES AND PAYING MORE THAN THEIR
>    SHARE OF TAXES." (emphasis mine)

Julian L. Simon also believes that there is no limit to the
carrying capacity of the Earth, and that the if we simply continue
until we have 10 or 20 billion people in the world there will
be enough "smart" people to solve our problems. In short, I
think Simon's reasoning is warped. Does he consider education a
service? How about national defense? What about farm laborers
who pay basically $0 into public coffers, but receive millions
in Medi-Cal benefits at taxpayer expense each month?

>Pity the facts don't fit the theory, eh?  Oh well, I don't suppose
>that'll trouble Kim too much, given that she obviously formed her
>opinions before asking for the facts.

Hardly. I have studied the issue extensively over the past 
several years. My conclusion: Much of California's current
A
economic and environmental problems are due to population
growth and immigration over the past 20 years.

>-- 
>Anil A. Pal
>pal@sgi.com	(415)-390-5279

(Mr.) Kim Berry
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
        Kim Berry              kberry@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US



From: pal@xanadu.wpd.sgi.com (Anil Pal)
Subject: Re: our school problems
Reply-To: pal@wpd.sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 18:37:40 GMT

First, my apologies for mis-identifying Mr. Berry's gender in my previous post.

In article <1992Oct5.145158.14896@sactoh0.sac.ca.us>, kberry@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Kim A. Berry) writes:
|> 
|> Yes. Business Week has a vested interest in providing corporate
|> america with a surplus of labor, thus they failed to provide
|> the numbers of the control group. If U.S. citizens paid
|> $900 billion in taxes and received $25 billion in welfare, 
|> couldn't we still conclude that immigrants are a burden?

If we don't have statistics, can we make them up to support our point?
But to answer your hypothetical, no we couldn't make that conclusion.
You would have to take into account the totality of government spending
that goes to immigrants, and compare that against the $90 billion to
determine whether they are a net drain or boost.  Considering that
Social Security and Medicare comprise a huge proportion of the federal
budget, and go primarily to non-immigrants, I think you'd be
hard-pressed to make such a case.

|> think Simon's reasoning is warped. Does he consider education a
|> service? How about national defense?

As I mentioned above, what about Social Security and Medicare?  How
about interest on the deficit?

I think of education as an investment.  The dollars spent on educating
a child are repaid handsomely when that child becomes a productive,
tax-paying member of society.  And without those productive youngsters,
there isn't going to be any way to sustain your standard of living when
you retire.

|> What about farm laborers
|> who pay basically $0 into public coffers, but receive millions
|> in Medi-Cal benefits at taxpayer expense each month?

I strongly disapprove of the whole migrant-labor business.  It is
barely distinguishable from slave labor.  Agribusiness can only get
away with this because the laborers are *not* immigrants, and so have
essentially no rights.  The *real* beneficiaries of this system are not
the porr laborers, but the agribusiness interests and the local
consumers of the produce.  To grudge the laborers the relatively
trivial medical aid they receive for being sprayed with pesticides
seems a trifle churlish.  It would probably be fairer to include the
cost of the medical benefits in the price of the produce, but then it
would also make sense to charge agribusiness a fair price for their
water as well - the problem here is government subsidization of
agribusiness, not giveaways to immigrants.

|> Hardly. I have studied the issue extensively over the past 
|> several years.

Extensively enough to find a scapegoat, but apparently not extensively
enough to have any statistics available, other than the hypothetical
numbers you toss around.

|> My conclusion: Much of California's current
|> economic and environmental problems are due to population
|> growth and immigration over the past 20 years.

Certainly population growth has greatly changed California.  Some of
this change is for the better (economic boom), some is for the worse
(environmental degradation).  Some of it (real estate boom) is thought
be a positive, but really amounts to a transfer of wealth from current
residents to ex-residents (for example, a large part of my salary goes
towards paying off a mortgage, the proceeds of which support a couple
retired in Arizona).

On balance, you may feel that the overall change has been for the
worse.  I disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion.

What I object to most strenuously, is when you single out immigrants
from the other sources of population growth in California (migrants
from other states, for example), and blame them exclusively (or
primarily) for all the ills, without crediting them for any of the
improvements.  That scares me tremendously, because it leads to (in
fact has already led to) hate-mongering, racism, and discrimination.
From there, it is but a small step towards pogroms and ethnic
purification.  When societies in economic depression refuse to look at
their failings critically, and instead look for convenient scapegoats,
it is time to watch out.  It happened in Germany in the 30's, and I
fear it may happen again.

-- 
Dr. (Mr.) Anil A. Pal
pal@sgi.com	(415)-390-5279


-- 
----
George J Wu, Software Engineer         | gwu@tcs.com or uunet!tcs!gwu
Teknekron Communications Systems, Inc. | (510) 649-3700
2121 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA, 94704  | Never be the first to believe . . .