South Carolina voters hit back at Graham

[Kevin]

Major plaudits for Sen. Graham for putting principle and good policy over petty politics.  While this immigration bill -- which has been disensgenously lbaled as amnesy -- isn't perfect, it's a strong first step towards recognizing the role illegal imigrants play in our economy and continuing America's place as a melting pot ofdipsare culutures.

As our population ages, we will need younger workers to fill the gaps in our workforce. Illegal immigrants  provide the labor that is essential to keep America competitive in the global marketplace. If you stop the flow of aliens into America, the companies dependent on their labor will just move their operations to Mexico or invest abroad. The fallacious argument that illegals cost Americans jobs is akin to saying tariffs save jobs.

Look at Bush's 2002-2003 steel tariff that according to Gary Hufbauer and Ben Goodrich of the Institute for International Economics saved 3,500 steel jobs, but cost steel users between 12,000 and 43,000 jobs. Similarly,  while illegal immigrants slightly decrease the wages of some American workers, they also lower the cost of goods and services, thus spurring growth in Aggregate Demand.
Incisive piece on this issue: http://www.slate.com/id/2168060

We are not talking about stoping the flow of immigrants into America we are talking about stopping the flow of people who break our laws to come here. Also under this amesty bill not only would people who apply under it be able to stay they would be able to bring their familes to this nation, This would most likely mean over a 100 million new immigrants coming to this country over 50 years, That is insanity and would cause in many parts of the United States a complete breakdown of health and educational services as we would be put under tremdous pressure to provide halth care for people who can't afford it which means much higher health care cost for native born Americans and for people who are in the country legally and who are naturalized citizens, Also you would have to intergrate these tens of millions of new people and that is going to cost big time tax dollars and much higher txes imposed on US citizens, and even then this would most likely create a very large underclass of ill educated, very poor immgrants who failed to intergrate into American society and become sucessful and would live ofo welfare handouts and resort to lives of crime and other devent activites to make it by. Not to mention all this would create and open up old wounds left over from the days of racial tension, For example racial and economic issues between African Americans and Hispanics in the South have risen in recent times. So to end this this amesty bill brings more negatives then it does positives and it with the issue of border sercurity addresed in this bill we most likely won't get it, As Senator Clarie McCaskill(D-MO) pointed out that border security was promised in 1986 and we didn't get it.       

[Kevin]

Major plaudits for Sen. Graham for putting principle and good policy over petty politics.  While this immigration bill -- which has been disensgenously lbaled as amnesy -- isn't perfect, it's a strong first step towards recognizing the role illegal imigrants play in our economy and continuing America's place as a melting pot ofdipsare culutures.

As our population ages, we will need younger workers to fill the gaps in our workforce. Illegal immigrants  provide the labor that is essential to keep America competitive in the global marketplace. If you stop the flow of aliens into America, the companies dependent on their labor will just move their operations to Mexico or invest abroad. The fallacious argument that illegals cost Americans jobs is akin to saying tariffs save jobs.

Look at Bush's 2002-2003 steel tariff that according to Gary Hufbauer and Ben Goodrich of the Institute for International Economics saved 3,500 steel jobs, but cost steel users between 12,000 and 43,000 jobs. Similarly,  while illegal immigrants slightly decrease the wages of some American workers, they also lower the cost of goods and services, thus spurring growth in Aggregate Demand.
Incisive piece on this issue: http://www.slate.com/id/2168060

We are not talking about stoping the flow of immigrants into America we are talking about stopping the flow of people who break our laws to come here. Also under this amesty bill not only would people who apply under it be able to stay they would be able to bring their familes to this nation, This would most likely mean over a 100 million new immigrants coming to this country over 50 years, That is insanity and would cause in many parts of the United States a complete breakdown of health and educational services as we would be put under tremdous pressure to provide halth care for people who can't afford it which means much higher health care cost for native born Americans and for people who are in the country legally and who are naturalized citizens, Also you would have to intergrate these tens of millions of new people and that is going to cost big time tax dollars and much higher txes imposed on US citizens, and even then this would most likely create a very large underclass of ill educated, very poor immgrants who failed to intergrate into American society and become sucessful and would live ofo welfare handouts and resort to lives of crime and other devent activites to make it by. Not to mention all this would create and open up old wounds left over from the days of racial tension, For example racial and economic issues between African Americans and Hispanics in the South have risen in recent times. So to end this this amesty bill brings more negatives then it does positives and it with the issue of border sercurity addresed in this bill we most likely won't get it, As Senator Clarie McCaskill(D-MO) pointed out that border security was promised in 1986 and we didn't get it.       

Kevin, you do realize that many illegals pay taxes and that their employers pay double payroll taxes for them (12.4% for Social Security, when I last checked), so these workers are essentially providing solvency for the broken entitlement system. I seem to remember Bush circa 2005 lamenting the decline of the worker to retiree ratio as part of his ill-fated effort to privatize Social Security. If we send these workers back home, we'll lose those precious tax dollars and we'll likely be forced to make further cuts in this program.

Still many aren't and even with this the long term negatives of having a large illegal immigrant which refuses to intergrate into American soicety is a recipe for soical-economic disaster. Also considering that most illegal immigrants barely make enough income to put into the system means we aren't gaining much in the long run.   

[Kevin]

Major plaudits for Sen. Graham for putting principle and good policy over petty politics.  While this immigration bill -- which has been disensgenously lbaled as amnesy -- isn't perfect, it's a strong first step towards recognizing the role illegal imigrants play in our economy and continuing America's place as a melting pot ofdipsare culutures.

As our population ages, we will need younger workers to fill the gaps in our workforce. Illegal immigrants  provide the labor that is essential to keep America competitive in the global marketplace. If you stop the flow of aliens into America, the companies dependent on their labor will just move their operations to Mexico or invest abroad. The fallacious argument that illegals cost Americans jobs is akin to saying tariffs save jobs.

Look at Bush's 2002-2003 steel tariff that according to Gary Hufbauer and Ben Goodrich of the Institute for International Economics saved 3,500 steel jobs, but cost steel users between 12,000 and 43,000 jobs. Similarly,  while illegal immigrants slightly decrease the wages of some American workers, they also lower the cost of goods and services, thus spurring growth in Aggregate Demand.
Incisive piece on this issue: http://www.slate.com/id/2168060

We are not talking about stoping the flow of immigrants into America we are talking about stopping the flow of people who break our laws to come here. Also under this amesty bill not only would people who apply under it be able to stay they would be able to bring their familes to this nation, This would most likely mean over a 100 million new immigrants coming to this country over 50 years, That is insanity and would cause in many parts of the United States a complete breakdown of health and educational services as we would be put under tremdous pressure to provide halth care for people who can't afford it which means much higher health care cost for native born Americans and for people who are in the country legally and who are naturalized citizens, Also you would have to intergrate these tens of millions of new people and that is going to cost big time tax dollars and much higher txes imposed on US citizens, and even then this would most likely create a very large underclass of ill educated, very poor immgrants who failed to intergrate into American society and become sucessful and would live ofo welfare handouts and resort to lives of crime and other devent activites to make it by. Not to mention all this would create and open up old wounds left over from the days of racial tension, For example racial and economic issues between African Americans and Hispanics in the South have risen in recent times. So to end this this amesty bill brings more negatives then it does positives and it with the issue of border sercurity addresed in this bill we most likely won't get it, As Senator Clarie McCaskill(D-MO) pointed out that border security was promised in 1986 and we didn't get it.       

Kevin, you do realize that many illegals pay taxes and that their employers pay double payroll taxes for them (12.4% for Social Security, when I last checked), so these workers are essentially providing solvency for the broken entitlement system. I seem to remember Bush circa 2005 lamenting the decline of the worker to retiree ratio as part of his ill-fated effort to privatize Social Security. If we send these workers back home, we'll lose those precious tax dollars and we'll likely be forced to make further cuts in this program.

Still many aren't and even with this the long term negatives of having a large illegal immigrant which refuses to intergrate into American soicety is a recipe for soical-economic disaster. Also considering that most illegal immigrants barely make enough income to put into the system means we aren't gaining much in the long run.   

I agree, the influx of Germans, Irish, Italians, Poles and Jews really created  a "soical-economic disaster." History is littered with misguided indiviuals who have sought to slow the inevitable tide of immigration. Just look at the anti-immigration Know-Nothing Party, which was composed of bigots who hated Catholics, Jews, and the Irish.

The great thinkers of the 20th Century, people like Einstein, emigrated to America.  They rightly viewed our country as a tolerant nation free of religious bigotry and government repression of free speech.  Blocking the exits for immigrants from Mexico who seek a better life and are willing to work for it, is xenophobic and immoral.

There's a reason most economists tacitly support illegal immigration -- because it helps the consumer and the supplier.  The economic justification for stopping the illegals doesn't exist, because rational thinkers realize the cutting off a cheap pool of labor hurts companies and consumers.

The only reason to oppose amnesty is veiled racism. If these were pale faced Canadians sneaking over the border, many of these same Americans riled up about Mexicans would likely be silent.  With the middle class facing rising inequality (Gini Index for U.S is now .47; Mexico is .52), the dark skinned immigrants from Mexico serve as a tempting scapegoat.  Ask yourself, what other rich country has such a long contiguous border with a poor nation? The rationale for their arrival is understandable, the services they provide are necessary, and granting them amnesty is the first step in the right direction towards ensuring America remains a beacon of hope for all of the world.

I never said anything about blocking immigrants from Central America and elsewhere from coming into the United States, I want to see immigrants come to this country, However I wan to see them do it legally, and I wan them ti intergrate and contribute to our culture, I would be hypocrite to be zenophobic since I can trace my famile's heritage to non-English speaking nations.

[Kevin]

Major plaudits for Sen. Graham for putting principle and good policy over petty politics.  While this immigration bill -- which has been disensgenously lbaled as amnesy -- isn't perfect, it's a strong first step towards recognizing the role illegal imigrants play in our economy and continuing America's place as a melting pot ofdipsare culutures.

As our population ages, we will need younger workers to fill the gaps in our workforce. Illegal immigrants  provide the labor that is essential to keep America competitive in the global marketplace. If you stop the flow of aliens into America, the companies dependent on their labor will just move their operations to Mexico or invest abroad. The fallacious argument that illegals cost Americans jobs is akin to saying tariffs save jobs.

Look at Bush's 2002-2003 steel tariff that according to Gary Hufbauer and Ben Goodrich of the Institute for International Economics saved 3,500 steel jobs, but cost steel users between 12,000 and 43,000 jobs. Similarly,  while illegal immigrants slightly decrease the wages of some American workers, they also lower the cost of goods and services, thus spurring growth in Aggregate Demand.
Incisive piece on this issue: http://www.slate.com/id/2168060

We are not talking about stoping the flow of immigrants into America we are talking about stopping the flow of people who break our laws to come here. Also under this amesty bill not only would people who apply under it be able to stay they would be able to bring their familes to this nation, This would most likely mean over a 100 million new immigrants coming to this country over 50 years, That is insanity and would cause in many parts of the United States a complete breakdown of health and educational services as we would be put under tremdous pressure to provide halth care for people who can't afford it which means much higher health care cost for native born Americans and for people who are in the country legally and who are naturalized citizens, Also you would have to intergrate these tens of millions of new people and that is going to cost big time tax dollars and much higher txes imposed on US citizens, and even then this would most likely create a very large underclass of ill educated, very poor immgrants who failed to intergrate into American society and become sucessful and would live ofo welfare handouts and resort to lives of crime and other devent activites to make it by. Not to mention all this would create and open up old wounds left over from the days of racial tension, For example racial and economic issues between African Americans and Hispanics in the South have risen in recent times. So to end this this amesty bill brings more negatives then it does positives and it with the issue of border sercurity addresed in this bill we most likely won't get it, As Senator Clarie McCaskill(D-MO) pointed out that border security was promised in 1986 and we didn't get it.       

Kevin, you do realize that many illegals pay taxes and that their employers pay double payroll taxes for them (12.4% for Social Security, when I last checked), so these workers are essentially providing solvency for the broken entitlement system. I seem to remember Bush circa 2005 lamenting the decline of the worker to retiree ratio as part of his ill-fated effort to privatize Social Security. If we send these workers back home, we'll lose those precious tax dollars and we'll likely be forced to make further cuts in this program.

Still many aren't and even with this the long term negatives of having a large illegal immigrant which refuses to intergrate into American soicety is a recipe for soical-economic disaster. Also considering that most illegal immigrants barely make enough income to put into the system means we aren't gaining much in the long run.   

I agree, the influx of Germans, Irish, Italians, Poles and Jews really created  a "soical-economic disaster." History is littered with misguided indiviuals who have sought to slow the inevitable tide of immigration. Just look at the anti-immigration Know-Nothing Party, which was composed of bigots who hated Catholics, Jews, and the Irish.

The great thinkers of the 20th Century, people like Einstein, emigrated to America.  They rightly viewed our country as a tolerant nation free of religious bigotry and government repression of free speech.  Blocking the exits for immigrants from Mexico who seek a better life and are willing to work for it, is xenophobic and immoral.

There's a reason most economists tacitly support illegal immigration -- because it helps the consumer and the supplier.  The economic justification for stopping the illegals doesn't exist, because rational thinkers realize the cutting off a cheap pool of labor hurts companies and consumers.

The only reason to oppose amnesty is veiled racism. If these were pale faced Canadians sneaking over the border, many of these same Americans riled up about Mexicans would likely be silent.  With the middle class facing rising inequality (Gini Index for U.S is now .47; Mexico is .52), the dark skinned immigrants from Mexico serve as a tempting scapegoat.  Ask yourself, what other rich country has such a long contiguous border with a poor nation? The rationale for their arrival is understandable, the services they provide are necessary, and granting them amnesty is the first step in the right direction towards ensuring America remains a beacon of hope for all of the world.

I never said anything about blocking immigrants from Central America and elsewhere from coming into the United States, I want to see immigrants come to this country, However I wan to see them do it legally, and I wan them ti intergrate and contribute to our culture, I would be hypocrite to be zenophobic since I can trace my famile's heritage to non-English speaking nations.

Many of these people don't have the same options for immigration that your or my family enjoyed. "Coyotes" bilk thousands out of the poor Mexicans that are desperate for a better future. If you eased the citizenship process, these workers could come here legally.

I'm saying why don't we invest in improving the immigration process making it more effcent. Also we need to encourage investment in Latin America to create economic oppertunity there. 

[Kevin]

Major plaudits for Sen. Graham for putting principle and good policy over petty politics.  While this immigration bill -- which has been disensgenously lbaled as amnesy -- isn't perfect, it's a strong first step towards recognizing the role illegal imigrants play in our economy and continuing America's place as a melting pot ofdipsare culutures.

As our population ages, we will need younger workers to fill the gaps in our workforce. Illegal immigrants  provide the labor that is essential to keep America competitive in the global marketplace. If you stop the flow of aliens into America, the companies dependent on their labor will just move their operations to Mexico or invest abroad. The fallacious argument that illegals cost Americans jobs is akin to saying tariffs save jobs.

Look at Bush's 2002-2003 steel tariff that according to Gary Hufbauer and Ben Goodrich of the Institute for International Economics saved 3,500 steel jobs, but cost steel users between 12,000 and 43,000 jobs. Similarly,  while illegal immigrants slightly decrease the wages of some American workers, they also lower the cost of goods and services, thus spurring growth in Aggregate Demand.
Incisive piece on this issue: http://www.slate.com/id/2168060

Mark,

You are absolutely and totally wrong.

Graham has no principles, he's just a sociopath and may be doing drugs.

Have you seen some of his antics of late?

His vicious attack on Obama was just one of his many loony antics.

So, Carl, what's you beef with illegals? Are you worried about the negative pressure they put on wages? Are you worried that they don't assimilate as quickly as other immigrant groups? Are you worried that you, an American, may have to live in a bilingual society (oh, the horror!)? I'm not going to accuse you of racism because you're much too intelligent and worldly to fall to that level.  So what drives your support of the nativist postion?

I'm a student of economics and I believe that these people are an essential part of our workforce. Should we shut the border to satisfy radical fringe groups like the Minutemen? Why?

Unless you support unloading billions of American dollars to rebuild dilapidated infrastructure in rural Mexico, thus enticing American companies to move south, how can you solve this problem?

In Spanish, there's a term, "querer es poder,"  which rougly means "where there is a will, there is a way.' Build a fence, they'll find holes. Build an electric fence, they'll find other ways.

Also you got it all wrong by what I mean by soical-economic disaster, I'm implying the current Hispanic population in this nation's refusal to intergrate into American society, While other recent immigrant groups such as Indian, Various Middle Eastern immigrant groups,Along with Asian and African immigrant groups are in the process of doing that and have begun to flourish and thrive in the US soically and economically as well.   

[Kevin]

A Jim Webb type Democrat or a Harold Ford type one could give Graham a run for his money.

[Kevin]

A Jim Webb type Democrat or a Harold Ford type one could give Graham a run for his money.

I know what you mean by Harold Ford type but I just want to put out there, that the candidate would have a better chance if they were white.

I'm refering to a moderate to conservative Democrat, If you look at it also a Harold Ford type Democrat is more conservative then a Jim Webb type of Democrat, Also Harold Ford only lost because he responded in a poor and  immuture manner to that ad and Bob Corker's attacks.

[Kevin]

A Jim Webb type Democrat or a Harold Ford type one could give Graham a run for his money.

I know what you mean by Harold Ford type but I just want to put out there, that the candidate would have a better chance if they were white.

I'm refering to a moderate to conservative Democrat, If you look at it also a Harold Ford type Democrat is more conservative then a Jim Webb type of Democrat, Also Harold Ford only lost because he responded in a poor and  immuture manner to that ad and Bob Corker's attacks.

I know what you mean pertaining to Ford. Jim Webb is essentially a liberal with a gun. He's not what I'd describe as moderate either. Would you agree with that?

He is liberal,However he is the type of liberal who can relate to rural people and that helped him in some parts of Virginia other then NOVA. He also seems pretty effective so I think he we eventully get the same type of respect that John Warner has gotten from Virginians over the years.