Aside from contacting the Board of Supervisors and School Board, what other steps can we take? The numbers speak volumes and most people do not know the costs– school alone– associated with illegal migration.

Thanks for pulling this information together.

“As the Washington Examiner reported last week, Prince William County public schools reported over 600 ESL students left the system following that county’s crackdown on illegal aliens. This reduction of students would equate to a roughly $8 million reduction 8 million reduction in expenses for the school system alone. Verifed and anecdotal evidence (from the news story and what we have seen here in Loudoun) suggests many of those illegal aliens have headed north into neighboring jurisdictions.”

How do you know that those students that left were illegal immigrants?

“It should also be noted that ESL as it is practiced in Loudoun County Public Schools is conducted according to the principles of “structured immersion.” What this means is, instruction is conducted in both English and Spanish.”

In my rather extensive experience, very few of LCPS ESL teachers actually speak Spanish, and there are over twenty languages spoken by ESL students, so you are dead wrong when you state that instruction is provided in both Spanish and English. Is it also taught in Urdu, Portugese, Vietnamese, Korean, French, Mandarin, Cantonese, and on and on and on….

Laura:

Prince William County takes action against illegals and as a result 600 ESL students leave. Their departure saves the county 8 million dollars.
Within the same time frame Loudoun experiences a large influx of ESL students resulting in a massive increase in ESL spending as indicated in the 2009 budget request.

This is not tough to figure out. Prince William Counties illegal Migrants have simply continued their migration right into an adjacent safe haven, Loudoun County.

Had Loudoun county taken our advice and created an environment like Prince William county. It would be us shedding illegals into other jurisdictions foolish enough to put up the welcome sign for those who are not supposed to be here in the first place. However, due to our county governments inaction, it is us who are the suckers stuck paying the bill.

We really do hate to tell you we told you so, but we told you so. This should be of no shock to anyone paying attention to the debate surrounding illegal migration over the last several years. We predicted this outcome and sadly we were correct.

The facts laid out above are undeniable.
The tax payers of Loudoun County are now paying the price for a county government lacking the common sense and political will to act. We are the unlucky recipients of a new wave of illegals
fleeing a jurisdiction that cares enough about its legal residents to actually do something.

Lucky us.

At my children’s elementary school in Cascades Spanish is a manadatory part of their curriculum K-5. We have asked several teachers and administrators why Spanish was chosen as the one language that is taught and the general concensus is that since Spanish constitutes the overwhelming majority of ESL students, it seems only reasonable that it be implemented. Hummmmm, seemed a bit strange to me. I would venture a guess that it is an easy way to justify their ESL expenditures, coupling them with mandatory foreign language classes in elementary school. As in “let’s create a need.”

We have PTA members having complete meltdowns because we may not get “interactive white boards” (not sure how this expenditure is central to education) but never question anything else in the curriculum, like ESL and mandatory Spanish.

I’m sure there are some (Laura) that would ask “who wouldn’t want their children learning a foreign language in elementary school?” My answer is – in a perfect world with unlimited resources, foreign languages, individual teachers and olympic training would be fantastic. The reality is we are in a budget crisis and adjusting the curriculum the of entire school, perhaps countywide, to justify the needs of a minority is expensive and unneccesary.

Fantastic job, Joe. This is exactly what we need at the right time. When it is the people’s pocketbook being hit, they tend to start paying attention. I guess the BOS get another e-mail from me.

Thank you for submitting this point of view, Ed, because it is an articulate statement of the position that is often characterized as “pro-illegal” but which I do recognize as humanitarian and rational – depending on one’s assumptions.

I assume others may jump in eventually to challenge aspects of your argument.

Your argument regarding taxes is, to say the least, debatable, because one of the key aspects of the problem is single family homes converted into boarding houses or multi-family homes, as we have in Sterling. In such cases, the property tax burden is not shared equally. Renters in a boarding house can impose a larger proportional tax burden because more people are subsumed under a single property tax payment.

You seem like a reasonable person so I’m surprised I have to explain this.

Regarding your other argument about assimilation and sins of the father – that is not the point. The point is, having illegal aliens in the community results in a net cost for legal residents. If the illegals were not here, we would not have those costs.

My purpose with this post is to make others aware of why we have some of the costs which are at the root of the current debate over the County budget. Sure, there are other costs. But the expenses caused by illegal residents should at least be considered in the debate.

And for the record, what you say about Prince William County’s immigration enforcement efforts causing the drop in property values? I know you don’t believe that. We’ve had no immigration enforcement here in Sterling and our property values have sunk with the best of them.

If you really believe that horse-hockey about illegal workers causing no victims, please stick around. There are a number of people whose views I will convey here who would take serious issue with that nonsense. That’s why we have the Honest Business Network.

PWC foreclosures rate is higher than Loudoun and the drop in property values are higher too. Someone should connect the Rule of Law resolution to the “volcano” of foreclosures that is in the Manassas area and how the extra decline of home prices cause by the migrant exodus has made it more difficult for “legals” to refinance. Spite can be very expensive.

We don’t complain that families who live in cheaper townhomes or condos instead of mega-mansions aren’t paying their fair share of property taxes so why make that distinction about Hispanics? Every parent is a net loss to the community because 70% of the budget is school costs and very few parents in Loudoun pays $18K per year per child in local taxes. Everyone who doesn’t have a child in school is subsidizing public education because our future social security checks depend on it.

(Now I’ve regularily made the suggeston that parents should shoulder a higher percentage of the cost of non-basic educational services to make this fairer, but voters consistently disagree with me.)

We can easily see education as a benefit to all when the children are 3rd or fourth generation immigrants so why is it hard to do it for first or second generation immigrants?

When people exaggerate illegal migration as a criminal enterprise by calling it theft of services and theft of community etc., etc. they are just expressing their desire to tell others where to live (segregation) so they can live in a homogenous community. The majority of us are comfortable with a bit more diversity which is why your Sheriff candidate came in dead last in a three way race in Sterling.

Activist, What spanish speaking nation do we border in Northern VA, the people’s Republic of Md? Also, there is no “Canadian” Language – it is French Canadian and English, as far as I know. We don’t need no stinkin’ French in Elementary either.

My point is, the public schools do not need to teach any foreign language in elem school. The opportunity of the ESL Spanish speaking students is creating an avenue to justify and expand the staff and funding for Elementary school Spanish. Give them an inch……

Ed, you seem a bit obsessed with extrapolating my argument above into broader issues. If that’s the effect we have on you, well then have at it, I am glad you are entertained and inspired.

Some people, I would guess, will be able to consider the basic question of fairness this matter raises. If our local and state governments (leaving the federal aside as hopeless for the time being) did their job as PWC is doing, there would be less illegals here, which would save money.

The “volcano” of foreclosures appears isolated to those areas of LoCo and PWC where illegal immigration has spiraled out of control. Can I state that an absolute corollary exists ? No I cannot, no more so than someone can state that they are legal immigrants. But I can state that ALL the homes where are I live that are in foreclosure were formerly boarding houses.

While it is true that illegal residents pay sales tax, real and personal property taxes are the big kahuna of LoCo revenue. Mr. Myers expects us to believe that sales taxes paid at 6 cents on a dollar by illegal migrants is going to fund even a fraction of 20 million in ESL expenditures ? Only a fool would believe this.

Cathymac,

It doesn’t matter where LC is situated to our borders (did like the MD. reference), it is the U.S. as a whole. And where did this new boot print come from?

Lo siento, Sanity y Activist. I seem to be confusing you two

I apologize for suggesting what other people belive or think. What I intended to say is that I am not persuaded by those who claim that the issue is just a law and order thing. I do not see websites devoted to saving Loudoun from litterbugs or those who don’t use turn signals. No one is suggesting rush hour checkpoints to catch those who drive without immediate possession of their driver’s license. These are all infractions that rank about even with illegal immigration as a threat to an orderly civil society at least for me.

What got me questioning the whole law and order premise was when people who were crying out against amnesty for migrants turned around and supported amnesty for Virginia’s abusive drivers. They seemed to recognize that laws that might apply to them could be unjust yet seemed clueless that the same might be true of immigration laws that applied to foreigners.

I start with the assumption (supported by nearly every economist) that free trade is a better path to wealth than socialism and that free trade includes the free movement of labor as well as capital and goods. Immigration laws inhibit free trade. On the other hand we have many socialistic institutions (public schools, social security, for example) that fail if there are no restrictions on who can participate.

So I prefer to keep the borders as open as possible and work to replace our socialistic institutions with more market-driven ones that are more just than rounding up and sending home migrant workers with jobs. I really don’t see a difference between subcontracting work to a firm that uses [illegal] migrant workers and one that off-shores the work. Both are examples of free trade in action. In both cases someone could claim to be harmed but choosing whoever gets the job done at the lowest cost means there will be money left over to lavish charitably on those who really are victims of globalization.

Now, some math. $20M is revenue generated by 3,500 housholds earning only $50,000 per year and paying $3K in sales tax and 3K in property tax via rent. With Loudoun consisting of 100,000 housholds this is less than 4%. This is real money, but not enought to risk reducing everyone’s home values by 10% (for a net loss of $400M which is real serious money). This bigger loss of value will occur if we transform our neighborhoods into distressed communities by raising the forclosure rate by forcing hispanics to move and abandon their highly leveraged property bought at inflated prices.

Ed,

You still have not addressed my statements (comment 16) that illegal immigration is NOT a victimless crime. Do you cut in line at the grocery store and claim it is a “victimless crime”?

“I start with the assumption (supported by nearly every economist) that free trade is a better path to wealth than socialism and that free trade includes the free movement of labor as well as capital and goods.”

If we had a free labor market, your argument might have some merit. However, we have minimum wage laws, which illegal immigrants undercut, and we have payroll taxes, which are not paid on illegal workers.

Jacob, I can’t find them, but I will post once I do.

One item that I remember quite clearly, in 2005, the PEW Hispanic Center estimated the number of illegals in VA to be up to 6% of the total population. If we use this very conservative number as the estimated number of school age children of illegals in LoCo we arrive at 3000 students at an annual expenditure of $39 million per year. At todays per student expenditures, is costs just under $470 million dollars to educate this 6% from 1-12. This does not include the cost of new school construction.

Foreclosures are a problem yes, but this train wreck was coming. Simple cause was lenders financing homes for people who should not have been qualified. This is how the game was played :

Buyer submits a contract with imaginary qualifications, cash available for down payment etc.

Seller provides a subsidy of $10 to $15k, voila, buyer now has a down payment.

Buyer arranges first and second mortgages.

Settlement occurs, everybody lives happily ever after counting their cash, except for the buyer who struggles to make the monthly mortgage payments. Buyer eventually walks away, as he/she has no equity in the house.

Real estate bubbles come, and they burst, a fact of life. Like equities, those in it for the long term will be ok.

Laura:
I hope you and your family are well. The past couple of years has been a bit tough regarding the loss of family and friends to cancer. I know all to well how what you are going through.
I will have a good thought for you.

Cathymac (#22): “The best hope I have for my kids is that they don’t get saddled with the unbelievable debt and continued spending (fed, state and local) we have seen spiral out of control in the past 3 decades, coincidently since the dept of education was established. Thank you Jimmy Carter.”

I can’t help but respond to this totally ignorant statement. Suggest you review the Reagan and Bush administrations to see where the “unbelievable debt” has come from. The Dept. of Education is less than a wart on a hog’s rear compared to the $9T national debt.

Laura: My prayers go out to you.

Jack,

In a free labor market no one has to jump in line because everyone has a job–no waiting. It is socialistic economies that have lines (e.g. USSR bread lines) caused by government constructs (e.g. minimum wage, immigration quotas) that prevent the supply of labor from meeting the demand for labor at a fair price.

The fact that in a market economy people receive different wages does not mean that a crime has occurred. The fact that the US (particularily in the immigration area) is more socialistic means that we as a nation are missing an opportunity for economic growth. In a market economy there are always winners and losers but as a whole the nation and the world is wealthier with free flow of labor just as it has become wealthier with the free flow of goods.

Certainly when I’m the supplier of labor I want a monopoly so that I receive an unfairly high wage. When I’m a consumer I want just the opposite — a deal! As a country our wealth and happiness depends on balancing labor supply and demand so that we remain at full employment as we have been for the past few years. Allowing the ebb and flow of migrant workers helps us keep at lower unemployment unlike in past recessions. I want everyone to have a job and illegal migrants help, not hurt that effort because employment is not a zero sum game. A productive worker creates more jobs for others; they don’t steal another’s jobs.

I think our current immigration system that favors politically-connected people and nepotism to be unfair. That’s why I want to reform it rather than spend money enforcing what is a terribly unjust system. We can’t let evey migrant become a citizen but we could give them all long-term work permits conditioned on not getting into serious criminal activity.

Jacob, when I made the purposefully absurd comparison to littering you understood–it is justice we seek and not blind adherence to laws for the sake of legalism. So when people say the mantra “what part of illegal don’t you understand” and don’t address the social justice issue I suspect the mantra either covers shallow thinking or worse they recognize that they benefit from the injustice and want to hold on to their unfair advantage by covering it with the law and order fig leaf.

C: Come talk again when you learn how to write. And it’s YOU who wants to abolish the Department of Education?

If you’re talking LOCAL taxes, why mention all of the government agencies? If you’re talking LOCAL taxes why mention Jimmy Carter? If you’re talking the Department of Education, then my comment stands that it’s so tiny compared to the deficits racked up by Reagan and Bush(es) that it’s silly to even mention it. Much better to mention the irresponsible tax cuts that show near-term growth but only because we’re spending beyond our means.

I can show a lot of growth in my personal life by spending my 401(k) and hocking my credit cards up to my eyeballs. My house can get bigger, my car can get nicer. Wow! I’m successful! Of course, eventually, it’ll catch up. Sooner for me since I can’t print my own money.

Jacob and/or McCathy: Can you come up with a concrete example of when either party has reduced government spending? Even in the “conservative” Reagan years, government spending increased at a rate greater than inflation. At least the Democrats have the honesty to pay for (most of) their spending instead of leaving it for future generations and selling our country to the Chinese.

The Repubs have been an economic disaster for this country for at least 27 years. Unfortunately, the majority of the chickens have not yet roosted. When they do, look out. Of course, folks like you will blame (a) Democrats, (b) the poor, (c) the muslims, (d) the Martians, (e) anyone else that you can’t see looking in the mirror.

Amazing how you can get people to believe that Repubs are for smaller government while you spend like Paris Hilton with an unlimited credit card. One of these days, perhaps, the reasonable people (of which there are very few on this blog) will understand that the Democrats are the real economic conservatives.

Jacob – I was a bit young in the late 70’s but I do remember the Carter years, the gas lines, interest rates for cars being 13-14%, out of control inflation, mortgage crisis as in no one could afford to finance a home, dilapidated military and an inept Commander in Chief. Remember the misery index? Maybe Insanity is too young to remember or too blind to read the truth, but those were rough years for the whole country.

Jack, (#50)
As long as wages are allowed to fall (i.e. no minimum wage) no one will be out of work no matter how many people there are. The extreme case is that everyone is volunteering (working for free.) in a commune. The opposite case is the minimum wage is so high no one has any work.

I assume most illegal immigrants earn close to the minimum wage or about $25-30K per year because of long hours and multiple jobs. Put those numbers into Turbotax and do a tax return. You’ll see that if they were legal they would not pay any state or federal income tax and that the Earned Income credit would rebate them their Social Security and Medicare payments. So low-wage illegals paid in cash are not cheating on taxes because even if they were legal they wouldn’t owe any. So any discussion on cheating should focus on employers (who maybe aren’t paying FICA or Medicare for cash employees) and not the illegal immigrants. So the cost difference between illegals and legal workers is probably around 7.5% for the employer part of FICA. Very few business would risk hiring illegals for this minor savings so I suspect the reason they do hire them is because there is a shortage of legal workers and it is the only way to get the job done.

Socialism is an economic system. Don’t confuse it with communism which is a political system. Usually communistic governments prefer socialistic economies and democracies capitalistic ones. However Europe is more socialistic than we and China, although communistic, has some free market areas (e.g. Hong Kong) that are more capitalistic than the US.

I know of no one who considers Fairfax in economic peril because workers send money home to Loudoun to be spent. Money, goods and services easily move from one region to another. So the 10% of an illegal’s income that is going to Mexico comes back as purchases of American goods and services (e.g. hollywood movies, music,etc.) Or, in the worse case Mexicans hold on to the dollars (like China) and essentially gives us a loan at 0% interest.

The hypothetical $10/hr worker replaced by a $5 illegal immigrant is a swiss cheese of holes. If a worker is only outputting $5 worth of labor and demanding $10 in wages then he is stealing $5 per hour from society. (This is the auto labor unions of the 80’s.) A company concerned about the efficient allocation of resources will either outsource that work and fire the employee or go out of business and be replaced with a better run company. Eventually employees who cheat lose their jobs one way or another unless the government steps in (socialism again) and uses immigration quotas or import duties as a protectionist wall to allow the worker to keep stealing from society. You don’t have sympathy for migrants who you falsely accuse of stealing but seem sympathetic to the ones who are actually stealing. Why?

Your analogy may have been based on the faulty assumption that illegal workers are cheating $5/hour on taxes which I debunk 4 paragraphs up. I’m sure lazy employees love to blame immigrants for the lost of a cushy job. But employees that keep current in skills and work hard are worth a big premium (maybe even double) over any immigrant (illegal or otherwise) because they have language and cultural understandings that make them more productive and less prone to mistakes than foreigners in the same job.

Fairness comes by matching worker productivity to income through a free market system. A socialistic stucture (immigration law) that contains immigrant quotas is rule-based but unfair. (It is really strange to hear protectionist rhetoric coming from economic conservatives. That used to be a sign that someone was a liberal Democrat. Did Americans play ideological musical chairs without telling me?)

Jacob demanded (#51) that I answer his question. Hopefully I have, again, already.

However, I suggest you not use Jesus to support immigration restriction and a rule of law argument because it doesn’t work. His parents broke the law and migrated to Egypt to save him from Herod’s infantcide. During his ministry he frequently crossed boundaries (e.g. into Samaria) to work. The render to Ceasear quote is more a reminder of separation of church and state than support for the righteousnous of all government laws. (My suggestion: Read Romans 8 because it has better quotes to fit your side of the argument.)

And know in advance this is my rebuttal: “The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the LORD your God.” Lev 19:34.

ACT,

You can rag on Carter and Sanity all you want, but there is no denying the outrageous amounts of tax payer money the GOP has spent.

In this regard, there seems to be little distinction between the GOP and the Dems. This is the primary reason my Republican Party membership card is rotting in the LoCo landfill, and I am now an independent.

Jacob, sorry, it’s Romans 13 that is your strongest biblical arguement:

“Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; vs4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil.
Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”

I think this needs to be tempered with the stories (e.g. of Daniel and others) who honored God by defying government authority that sought to displace God by having citizens worship government. The extreme of Romans 13 is idolatry. Government, although ordained of God, is not the moral authority of God. We start assuming laws are moral but must keep checking whether they really are moral.

I don’t understand your reference to history not being kind to countries that do not control their border. Are you saying that the US would have been much better had the hords of immigrants from Europe and Asia during the past 250 years stayed home?

Land is the critical resource in an agrarian economy. In an industrial economy it is natural resources. In a knowledge economy it is people. Do you want us to go back to an agrarian economy which views migrants as threats to the food supply or forward to a information age where migrant people are gifts of knowledge and experience.

The US is in a transition from industrial to a knowledge economy. In Loudoun we have already replaced the farms with AOL and Janelia. I start with the view that migrant people are a gift and not a threat. I am open to concerns about the little rule of law things such as residential overcrowding but we are far apart in viewpoint if you are thinking that we are better off if people and their innovations and knowledge growth occur somewhere else.

Jacob – I wish I could blame my dog’s bad breath on the Republicans, or Insanity for that matter. He is sitting by me right now and it is simply awful.

Dan, I feel your pain, I make no excuses for the Republican spenders. It is one of the reason the Republicans lost in the mid-term elections, and the current fight within the party needs to happen. Our conservative principles have been compromised by party leaders and I don’t think there is a conservative on this board that would argue on their behalf.

Jack,

re: interest free loans:
look up “seigniorage.” I don’t think it’s in Smith. When lots of countries hold one country’s currency in reserve, that country has some leverage powers.

Basically, it’s like this: say you and I are stuck on a desert island (yay!), and there’s nothing on the island but a mint (maybe there’s a gold nugget in the mint to back up the currency it produces), which happens to be on my side of the island. Now let’s say I use the mint to crank out $200. being a communist, I would give you $100 and keep $100. We’re even, our holdings each represent 50% of the island’s wealth.

Now let’s say after some time passes, Don the Beachcomber shows up and decides there’s a market a tiki bar. So he asks us if we’d like to invest in his venture. Since investment opportunities are limited, we’d both take him up on the offer. As it stands, we could each invest an equal amount, and own an equal share in the bar. But because some time has passed since our arrival, I’ve grown older and am no longer into equality, so I decide I want to own a larger share than you. I can print another $100 and keep it. Now, I have 66% of the island’s wealth, and you only control 33%. I’ve effectively taken a loan from you without asking!

Once the dividends from the bar pay out, I can remove the extra $100 from circulation to prevent too much inflation, and thereby “repay” the “loan,” but I’d still have a larger share of the tiki bar!!

it is. and because so many countries hold dollars in reserve, we have some insulation in that when the dollar goes down, other currencies go down with it. It’s all relative only trouble is the weaker the dollar gets the more it will push countries to start switching to the euro as their reserve currency. once that happens, that insulation, and our seignioriage privileges, will be diminished or gone. It wouldn’t be the end of the world, but those are some nice perks of controlling the world’s reserve currency.

Puffalump,

First, you missed what Ed was saying, so I will repeat it:

“[In] the worse (sic) case Mexicans hold on to the dollars (like China) and essentially gives us a loan at 0% interest.”

How is it the entity holding the money is giving us a loan? It’s completely backward.

Now, what has that got to do with Seigniorage? China and Mexico are not issuing dollars.

You are also showing your ignorance again. Smith does, in fact, discuss seigniorage in The Wealth of Nations, specifically in Book IV, Chapter VI, and mentions it elsewhere. I again encourage anyone who has any interest in economics or politics to read and digest The Wealth of Nations.

Your example is further flawed in that you assume that the wealth of a nation consists of its money. Money is only a medium of exchange. If there is nothing to exchange, money is meaningless. However, the lack of money does not mean lack of wealth. If you had all the money (or even gold) on the island, but I had all the arable land and livestock, I submit that I would be far wealthier than you.

Money is nothing more than a myth agreed upon. When the people stop believing the myth, then we get hyperinflation.

I was calling you ignorant for claiming that Smith did not discuss seigniorage in the Wealth of Nations. A simple Google search would have disabused you of that notion, but you were too lazy.

No, I simple do not understand how another country’s holding our currency translates into an interest-free loan to us. But the next time you want to buy a house or a car, I will be happy to give you such an interest-free loan. Just send me the money.

You are confusing seigniorage with control of the money supply. Seigniorage is the difference between the cost of making the money (printing or minting) and its nominal value. If it costs 90 cents to print a bill, then a dollar bill get the government 10 cents in seigniorage, while a $100 bill gets $99.10.

The control of the money supply is the ability to print so much money that fixed-rate bonds held by other countries actually lose value because the inflation rate becomes higher than the yield on the bond. This is known as an “inflation tax.” Here is a good paper explaining the difference.

There is no indication that the United States is pursuing such a policy, so your entire argument is invalid.

You didn’t bother to read the paper, did you?

Wikipedia notwithstanding, seigniorage and the inflation tax, “the reduction in the real value of the stock of base money due to inflation,” are not the same thing. Seignorage is not time dependent. It is the one-time difference between the cost to print the notes or mint the coins, and the face value of those notes and coins. (Negative seignorage occurs when the notes and coins are retired.)

The inflation tax, however, is time dependent — the longer a security is held, the more it is affected by inflation. Bidders factor expected inflation into their calculations when they purchase government bonds. If a nation pursues a policy of printing its way out of debt, bidders lower their bids for that nation’s bonds accordingly.

Again, there is no evidence that the United States is pursuing such a policy, so it cannot be argued that nations holding dollar-denominated securities are giving us an interest free loan. The loans carry the real interest which is the difference between the nominal yield of the bonds and our inflation rate.