86 Responses to “Loudoun County Taxpayers Paying A High Price For Illegal Immigration – In Our Schools”

1. Michael McPoland
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 7:28 am

   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.

2. Cathymac
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 8:31 am

   Letters to the Editors of all the local papers outlining this excellent synopsis help greatly. Get the information out there to the general public.

3. BLACK VELVET BRUCE LI : ESOL Funding Whammy In Loudoun
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 10:50 am

   [...] fiscal savings materialize, Loudoun County is watching ESOL funding requirements begin to dwarf spending for core educational programs. The Loudoun County School Board’s proposed fiscal year 2009 operating budget contains a massive [...]

4. G. Stone
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 1:32 pm

   Joe- Fantastic !!!! Well done !!!! Bully !!!!

   Michael and others :

   Contact ALL members of the LCBOS as well as the LCSB. Cite this article. Use it ! Don’t let it die on the vine. This is the kind of information you can make politicians and apoligists for illegals look outright foolish.

   I have alreday done so and will continue.

   This really is a great opportunity to make some hay.

   Joe, Great Job. I owe you a beer !

5. joe
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 1:38 pm

   Thanks for getting the info to the BOS, Greg. The LTE idea is a great one – might spur Hatrick to respond, or an LCSB member to chime in because you know (hope at least) some of them must have noticed the same things.

6. G. Stone
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 3:04 pm

   Joe:
   I copied ALL members of the LCSB.

7. Laura V
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 9:38 pm

   “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….

8. Joe Budzinski
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 10:15 pm

   Ah yes, “How do you know …?” The question that is supposed to stop all discussion of the phenomenon everyone can see right in front of their faces every day, and which has been quantified in countless national surveys.

   I included the word “anecdotal” because there are no official records kept – however there is plenty of reason to believe that the two large scale demographic changes being discussed: Illegals leaving Prince William, and drastic drop in ESOL enrollment, are related.

   In fact, I think the burden of proof is on you: Considering that the overwhelming likelihood is that these two trends are related, what evidence do you offer to show they are not?

   Or, are we just supposed to shut up when you ask that question?

   Regarding the actual conduct of “structured immersion” in LCPS, what I described is the range of ways it has been conducted in practice based on reports from around the country. It is important for taxpayers to know how their money is being spent.

   Since Mr. Hatrick said the major proportion of ESL enrolees live in households where Spanish is spoken at home, I think we can conclude that the Sterling-area schools represent a large share of the ESL population.

   If you have direct knowledge of what is happening in the Sterling schools, how “structured immersion” is practiced, please share it. Obviously, what is needed is factual information from recent years, especially the past two when the ESL population has apparently doubled (or at least the cost has).

   As noted in the sources I cited, “structured immersion” in practice ranges from close to actual immersion, to something much like bilingual education.

   The cost of the latter would obviously be higher because of increased printing costs and added personnel to support the “primary” language.

   If you look at the school budget document, you will see that some of the line items comprising ESL are showing stupendous increases. I think the question deserves to be answered: To what extent are these increases caused by a growing trend toward bilingual education and the associated costs this would entail?

9. G. Stone
   March 22nd, 2008 @ 11:39 pm

   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.

10. mk
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 6:59 am

    Unfortunately we in Loudoun county are now finding out what what many parts of the country have known for quite some time. “No Child Left Behind” and many of its accompanying education bills were a bad pieces of legislation with a very catchy name. Yes, there are some positive steps that the legislation makes. However, that whole legislation package also provides criteria for testing and ESL programs that are draining on local economies. If, in fact these legal or illegal populations have moved into Loudoun county and now have enrolled their children in our schools we are required by law to provide these services to them or we could risk losing federal funding and receiving other sanctions. California, nevada, Michigan, all those states have been fighting this battle against bilingual education and the effects of the new education reform legislation for quite some time. Their school systems have suffered. Interestingly, even some of the parents whose kids are in the ESL programs — th eones taught primarily in their 1st language don’t line the programs. They want their children mainstreames.

    There are 2 organizations out there that are lobbying for reform on the issues of English and immigration. The first is ProEnglish. They are trying to make English the official language of Govenrnemt in the country and they have taken up the banner on several occasions of thse types of school issues. The second is Federation for Amarican Immigration Reform. They are fighting to end amnesty of illegal immigrants and change our policies on illegal immigration. I have been in volved with both groups for over 10 years now an let me tell you, we are blesses that we are only talking about 600 displaced children from other school districts. I have SEEN school systems in So Cal that are in complete disarray. it is devastating to both the US and immigrant populations.

    Anyway, check out those 2 organizations if you want to find out what you can really do to make a difference in the long run.

11. Cathymac
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 7:37 am

    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.

12. ACTivist
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 2:42 pm

    Cathymac,

    When I was growing up I lived in Texas and California for a short time. They also taught Spanish in elementary school. The reason I found out later is that we tend to introduce the languages closest to our borders. The reason we aren’t taught Canadian in schools is that they can’t find anyone qualified to teach it and the Canadians don’t want to help out.

13. ACTivist
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 2:45 pm

    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.

14. Ed Myers
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 10:49 pm

    I find several problems with this analysis.

    Schools are funded by local sales tax, and property taxes and only a teeny-tiny bit of federal money. The only people who can attend LCPS are those who live in the county and hence pay taxes. County residents pay taxes whether they are American citizens, resident aliens, or illegals. Whether your income is on or off the books you still pay local taxes. Renters pay for schools through rent payments since the owner passes the property tax cost through to the renters. All residents buy products at stores where the 5% sales tax is paid to support state and local services.

    So this statement is misleading: “Loudoun County’s legal residents are paying for the children of illegal immigrants to attend our public schools.” Everyone who lives in Loudoun County is a legal resident from a local government standpoint unless the complaint is that students living in Fairfax are sneaking over the border to attend Loudoun schools.

    Secondly, the sins of the parents should not be laid on the heads of children. Since many children of migrants are American citizens do you propose that we refuse to give a public education to children whose parents weren’t born here?

    Thirdly, the biggest complaint about immigrant communities is that they don’t speak English and don’t assimilate. ESL is about assimilation and learning English. Suddenly teaching the skills for assimilation is bad? Huh?

    Our tax base is dependent on property values. If property values decline because anti-hispanic fever drives residents to other communities (as has happened in PWC) then everyone suffers a loss in their property value. I don’t think it is worth another 10% decline in my property values caused by more foreclosures precipitated by hispanics abandoning property just because some people in Loudoun don’t like living next to people who speak Spanish and want to drive them out of our community.

    The “Rule of Law” argument against illegal migrants is downright silly. Migrant workers without proper legal documentation are like HOV violators. Someone caught using the HOV lanes without proper authorization is wrong and is punished with a fine but we don’t vilify them as criminals and confiscate their car. We know that sometimes people’s ignorance or personal circumstances cause them to fail to follow the rules so we make sure the punishment fits the crime. Illegal migration is in itself just as insignificant a civil violation as a minor traffic violation which each of us likely does daily. We tolerate a lot of traffic infractions provided it doesn’t hurt or kill others because we want to concentrate our law enforcement on crimes that really have victims. Same goes for immigration enforcement. A migrant that overstays a visa or works without a work permit simply isn’t creating any victims when our economy is at full employment.

15. Joe Budzinski
    March 23rd, 2008 @ 11:41 pm

    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.

16. jack
    March 24th, 2008 @ 6:17 am

    If the “penalty” for coming here illegally (or overstaying one’s visa) is simply a fine, and not deportation, then any moderately well-off person from another country could simply get a tourist visa and never go home, then pay the fine if they get caught. Where’s the deterrence?

    Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. There are the thousands of people who have been waiting years to immigrate legally. But our quotas are low because we are already swamped with illegal immigrants. There are the millions of workers whose jobs have been stolen — yes, stolen — by illegal immigrants, who can actually make better wages, because employers do not have to pay payroll taxes on them. There are the thousands of employers who have gone out of business because they were not competitive with employers who break the law.

17. Ed Myers
    March 24th, 2008 @ 7:50 am

    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.

18. Jack
    March 24th, 2008 @ 8:21 am

    BTW — it is my opinion that EVERY child should begin learning a foreign language in elementary school. Spanish is an easy choice, because it is very easy to find people that can teach it. (Of course, all elementary school children should learn chess too, as they are doing in Oregon now.)

19. Cathymac
    March 24th, 2008 @ 10:12 am

    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……

20. Sanity
    March 24th, 2008 @ 12:51 pm

    That’s right Cathymac. It’s ok to keep our kids ignorant as hicks because America is the only country in the world that matters!

    French is a popular foreign language taught in schools because it is the 2nd most used in international agreements. (As an example, note the Interpol warning next time you fire up your DVD player. That is, if you’re not watching NASCAR or the cooking channel.)

    Spanish is taught for the obvious reason that it is the 2nd most spoken language in the U.S. as well as Loudoun County.

    Elementary School is the best time to teach languages because kids are more receptive to learning languages than are adults.

21. Joe Budzinski
    March 24th, 2008 @ 1:07 pm

    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.

22. Cathymac
    March 24th, 2008 @ 1:09 pm

    Sanity, Needs vs Wants. I want my kids to be bilingual, trilingual, multi-cultural, the best of the best, etc, just not at the tax payers expense. 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.

    Elementary school is also the best time to teach children how to read, write, and learn math. Sadly in many parts of the country we are failing children. We are lucky in Loudoun County, don’t push our luck though. Fewer learning gadgets and “specials” and a little more learning and we could be even better. Chalk and a board are a minimal cost. PE is a good idea too.

    If you want your children to learn French, or Mandarin Chinese, might I recommend Rosetta Stone. I understand it is excellent.

    PS I don’t watch NASCAR, but I can always start! Nice generalization, next you will be calling me a “typical (insert ethnic/cultural/race group) person.”

23. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 1:41 pm

    Cathymac,
    don’t you know that generalizations and racial slurs made by liberals don’t count? They are on the side of right and don’t want their children to be as ‘ignorent as hicks’, and the only way to do that is to give them every last cent they demand and three bags full on top of that.

    You see, as a memeber of the ignorant-right-wing-wretch class you are obviously deserved of personal insult because as a conservative you obviously just don’t get it. It is up to inSanity to show us the light. We should just shut up and not question our betters.

24. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 2:01 pm

    Ed,
    It is a law and order question. The 3rd and 4th gen immigrants are not violating any laws by living here. An illegal alien in order to foist their kids onto our schools must falsify several documents. Each of these falsifications is a felony. Does that make sense to you?

    Such flagrant law breaking leads to corruption of the society in general. Does this make sense to you?

    “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.”
    Marvelous, now you are playing the race card. This is not a race issue boyo, it is a law and order issue. I don’t care where the illegal alien comes from, I want them to simply abide by the rules I have to live by. There are consequences for not securing our borders, history has not been kind to those whole fail in this basic matter.

    My parents where immigrants, they came here legally. My cousin tried to slip in from Canada. Guess what, he got deported and slapped with a fine. Why would a european have to face such action by the federal government but a non-european be free from such an inconveniance? Are you sure you are not suffereing from some form of white guilt?

25. dan
    March 24th, 2008 @ 2:04 pm

    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.

26. Cathymac
    March 24th, 2008 @ 2:26 pm

    Jacob,

    Lordy! I see the light! My poor, ignorant children will be saved by Activist and his do-gooder friends, Hallelujah!

27. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 4:03 pm

    Uh Cathymac,
    Ahem, its inSanity, not Activist. I’m sure ol Act will take it in stride. Just another day and another boot print on his behind.

28. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 4:05 pm

    Dan,
    “Only a fool would believe this.”
    Mr Myers is no fool. He does not beleive this for a second. He expects yours truly to swallow this bilge hook line and sinker on dry land.

29. ACTivist
    March 24th, 2008 @ 5:26 pm

    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?

30. ACTivist
    March 24th, 2008 @ 5:34 pm

    Ed Meyers,

    You might want to send some of the foreclosure blame to the banking institutions. You see, they “pushed” affordable (ha! ha,ha,ha!) loans on the illegals as well as the greed to get their monies thru savings accounts and bank cards-no questions asked. Their ignorance and greed has led to the bank failings of today as well as the housing market stagnation and collapse. And we aren’t in a recession because we haven’t shown a second quarter of negative growth. How much garbage do YOU believe, anyway?

31. Cathymac
    March 24th, 2008 @ 6:14 pm

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

32. G. Stone
    March 24th, 2008 @ 7:08 pm

    ACTivist is our gun totting patriot, Sanity is… well….. Hmmmm… Ahhhh……you know a … ahhhh
    socialist. Ya thats it, he’s a socialist.

33. Ed Myers
    March 24th, 2008 @ 8:38 pm

    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.

34. Laura V
    March 24th, 2008 @ 9:21 pm

    For the record, I haven’t commented because my father in law passed away in El Salvador early Monday morning. He had a horrific and very painful battle with cancer that lasted a year. I would appreacite any prayers sent this way. We can all relate to the sadness of losing a parent, whether it has happended yet or not.

35. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 10:01 pm

    Laura,
    My sympathies. Go grieve in peace.

36. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 10:58 pm

    Ed M.,
    “I do not see websites devoted to saving Loudoun from litterbugs or those who don’t use turn signals.”
    Are you kidding?!? This is your idea of an argument? I will pretend this is not a joke. Littering does not lead to corruption in local government. Littering does not destroy the lively hood of the construction trades. I do not know what you do for a living, go tell an old Union Carpenter that an open border policy is good for the country. See what happens, to you. It will probably hurt, a lot. Littering does not lead to an underclass that will not assimilate, nor does littering maintain an oligarchy in Mexico. It is a law and order issue, we are a country of laws, not men. We will destroy ourselves with this policy.

    “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.”
    Not even close.The penalty must fit the crime. $2000 for speeding? The penalty for entering a country illegally has always been deportation at best. Imprisonment or worse in more draconian societies. Your risible “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.”
    is another personal attack on those you disagree with. That can go both ways.

    “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.”
    Gee I always thought tariffs inhibit free trade. Keep in mind there is a second consideration here, any country that loses control of its borders suffers economically. As for your allegation that “Immigration laws inhibit free trade.” Patent nonsense. If our legal immigration policy creates a labor shortage then you begin to have a point, but the laws themselves do not impact free trade. It is the number of legal visas issued that is the heart of the matter. If we allow enough legal immigrants then the issue becomes neutral w.r.t. free trade, as it should be.

    “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.”
    You are offering a false choice, it is not socialism or open borders. It is knowing who is in the country, or not. No one is advocating turning off the flow of immigrants into the country, we advocate closing off ILLEGAL avenues into our economy. Such black market activity is actually antithetical to a free and open market.

    “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.”
    read:
    http://www.novatownhall.com/blog/2006/08/our_borders_are_an_open_highwa.php

    to see the link between an underground economy and the drag on the economy.

    $20M is the tip of the iceberg. For each 400 illegal alien student we have to open another elementary school. That costs us $20M to build and the follow on operating costs. 400 students cost us $4.8M per year. Are you going to tell me that the illegals are paying $12K per year in sales tax? Please do try.

    Your figure has each illegal paying $6K in taxes, which is bloated beyond belief. If an illegal is paid $50K he is sending a huge chunk home to another country. See link to article above. Also, what makes you think that an illegal is making $50K a year, or is living in a house all by his lonesome. Typical illegal flop house has 10 to 20 in the same address. Care to rework your math with that in mind?

    Good luck. Read the link.

37. jacob
    March 24th, 2008 @ 11:02 pm

    Dan,
    What where those awesome links you provided regarding the cost of teaching the illegals in the school system? It appears Mr Myers could use some help with the basic research. Please lend a hand.

38. Joe Budzinski
    March 25th, 2008 @ 2:26 am

    Very sorry to hear that, Laura. My thoughts and prayers are with you, your husband and the whole family. Yes, it is a sad thing to lose a parent and especially to have to see them suffer like that.

39. Jack
    March 25th, 2008 @ 7:27 am

    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.

40. Cathymac
    March 25th, 2008 @ 10:48 am

    Laura, I am sorry to hear about your FIL and I will keep your family in my prayers. My FIL lost his 6 year battle to cancer almost 2 years ago and it was horrible to see him suffer. Please know he is now painfree and in a better place, it sounds simple and trite, but it was of great comfort to us.

41. dan
    March 25th, 2008 @ 11:06 am

    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.

42. AntiBVBL.net
    March 25th, 2008 @ 11:48 am

    What about our double digit losses in the housing market coupled with an INCREASE in real estate tax? An article in the DC Examiner says PWC has experienced twice the loss of Loudoun. Not sure what that translates into but for sure it’s greater than 8 million ’savings’ for ESL classes.

43. jacob
    March 25th, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

    antibvbl.net
    “What about our double digit losses in the housing market coupled with an INCREASE in real estate tax?”
    Are you drawing a link between the housing market and the enforcement of federal law in PWC? Where did the biggest losses in home value occur in PWC? If you know, I would appreciate your sharing of the info.

44. Laura V
    March 25th, 2008 @ 12:36 pm

    Thanks sincerely for all the kind thoughts.

45. G. Stone
    March 25th, 2008 @ 3:16 pm

    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.

46. Loudoun Conservative
    March 25th, 2008 @ 6:37 pm

    Sorry to hear about your father-in-law, Laura. I’ll pray God’s comfort for you and your loved ones in your time of loss.

47. Sanity
    March 25th, 2008 @ 8:30 pm

    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.

48. dan
    March 25th, 2008 @ 9:36 pm

    “What about our double digit losses in the housing market ”

    Housing prices go up and down just like equities. If you haven’t noticed, they too are down. If you bought within the last couple of years and your goal is near term profit, you’re hosed. This housing price drop was cast in stone 5 years ago. Bubbles eventually burst, everyone knows this. If you are in it for the longer term you will be fine. Don’t know about you, but if I sold my house today i would still walk away with a 200% return on my investment.

    “coupled with an INCREASE in real estate tax?”

    Can you spell Loudoun County Public Schools ? Can’t teach without spending 6 million on interactive smart boards you know. Like a chalk board is not interactive ?

49. Ed Myers
    March 25th, 2008 @ 10:07 pm

    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.

50. Jack
    March 26th, 2008 @ 6:57 am

    “In a free labor market no one has to jump in line because everyone has a job–no waiting.”

    That is utter nonsense. Go read The Wealth of Nations. When the labor pool expands faster than the number of jobs, whether through immigration, economic problems, or high birth rates, people go without jobs and wages fall.

    “The fact that in a market economy people receive different wages does not mean that a crime has occurred.”

    Of course not, but if employers are paying immigrants less than minimum wage, a crime is occurring. If employers are not paying payroll taxes on employees because the employees are illegal, a crime is occurring.

    “fact that the US (particularly in the immigration area) is more socialistic…”

    Please explain that. Socialist countries don’t allow people OUT, e.g., China, CCCP, Cuba, etc.

    “Allowing the ebb and flow of migrant workers helps us keep at lower unemployment unlike in past recessions.”

    That is only true IF they leave when there is a recession. There is no evidence that that is happening. They just lower their monetary demands below what legal workers can ask.

    “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.”

    More nonsense. An unskilled worker can only produce his own wages, plus a little profit for his boss. The illegals send some of that home, so it is lost from our economy. So if they send home 10% of their income, and ALL the rest goes back into the economy, 10 illegals could only buy goods that will employ 9 other workers, and a job for a native worker is lost.

    Now, when a worker who was earning $10 per hour is fired and replaced by an illegal for $5 per hour, try telling him the illegal didn’t steal his job.

    “We can’t let every migrant become a citizen but we could give them all long-term work permits conditioned on not getting into serious criminal activity.”

    And how is that fair to those who have been waiting in line and who have played by the rules? How is that fair to those who are not fortunate enough to live on our continent?

51. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 8:21 am

    Ed Myer.
    “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.”
    1. What part of give unto Ceaser don’t you get? Or are you above the law? There is nothing inherently immoral with immigrations laws. Nor is their anything inherently socialist about them. Tell me, is the prerogative of a nation to control its own borders a valid one? In short, until the law is changed we are called to obey it.

    2. When illegal aliens create a black market economy it corrupts the society at large. The link between black market economies corruption and the ensuing poverty has been demonstrated. I provided you a link to an earlier article that discussed this, did you read it? Do you feel that increased public corruption and a lowering of wages is a good thing, because that is the outcome of the policy you are supporting.

    3. Agreed, the absurdity of your comment requires no further comment.

    “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.”

    Getting personal again? The only shallow thinking I see is your knee jerk response that those who oppose an illegal alien based black market economy are somehow both racist and benefiting from their labor.

    Until you become God, please refrain from judging the intentions of others. As a mere human you and everyone else is singularly bad at this. Such mind reading historically has lead to war and murder. I see the socialists and liberals continuously engaged in this, are you a socialist or a liberal?

    You never answered my earlier question regarding the impact upon the honest tradesmen who have lost their jobs. Do you prefer to prattle on self righteously or are you capable of addressing a question?

52. G. Stone
    March 26th, 2008 @ 8:41 am

    Sanity :
    So do I hear you joining those of who want to CUT federal spending ? If so, welcome aboard.
    Let us start by doing away with the Dept of Education. You with me ?
    From there I have a nice list of agencies that can go bye-bye based on the fact that they are a complete waste and or unconstitutional. You with me ? lets start cutting NOW!!!

53. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 9:33 am

    Greg,
    What a totally ignorant statement. One does not reduce the federal debt by cutting spending, reducing the number of agencies. That is bad for the eocnomy. The federal government wisely directs our money into useful endevors, like teaching children how to cloth a cucumber with a condome, or, buying airline tickets but not putting anyone in the seats.

    Cutting spending will lead to the cutting of taxes which we know since the econmoy is linear, and their is NO synergy to speak of what so ever, will lead to the rich getting richer. The rich are inherently evil, and will not grow the size of their companies and hire anymore people, nor will they spend the extra money in any meaningful way like the government can.

    I am still waiting to get a job from a poor person. Can you help?

54. Cathymac
    March 26th, 2008 @ 12:31 pm

    Sanity – You LOVE the word ignorant, I see you use it frequently. Please self reflect, or at least re-read posts so that you don’t continue to make an ass out of yourself.

    Where in my original stmt do I blame only Jimmy Carter on all of our debt? It reads :

    “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.”

    Notice the word SINCE. I won’t debate the Reagan Administration with you, but it did grow the economy exponentially, cut taxes dramatically, rebuild our decimated Armed Forces AND fight and win the cold war, but that is for another day.

    I make no excuses (but for the war, another debate) for any administration on spending in the last 15 years – pick your poison – Clinton or Bush. If you want to make some kind of arguement that the Democrats are stalwarts of spending cuts, I am going to have to excuse myself till I stop laughing.

    Regardless, we are talking about LOCAL taxes here, which I cited above with Fed and State. I vote for abolishment of the Department of Education and a dozen more Federal agencies, but on the local level we have a different story.

    Nice try InSanity.

55. Sanity
    March 26th, 2008 @ 2:32 pm

    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.

56. Cathymac
    March 26th, 2008 @ 2:54 pm

    Sanity: I don’t want to come talk to you, but thanks for the smug and uninviting invitation.

    I mentiond COMBINED taxes and the reluctance to saddle my children with debt from all levels. You seem to miss key words like “since” and terms that require thought like “fed, state and local (combined).” Please get your eyes checked.

    Jimmy Carter is just the weenbag that started the whole education mess down the bureacratic spiral it is languishing in today. Trickle down the spending to the state and local level and you have one huge price tag and nothing to show for it.

    I never defended the Bushes, but I will include Clinton in the overspenders club. That you can’t be intellectually honest and do the same is very telling.

    Thanks for the laugh of the day “Democrats are the real economic conservatives.” Wow.

57. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 5:09 pm

    Sanity,
    “Can you come up with a concrete example of when either party has reduced government spending?”
    Good question, Not in the past 70 years. Before that the government budget did go through periods of actual reduction in spending both in total dollars and inflation adjusted dollars.

    Reagan wanted to, he ran on it, but he also wanted to rebuild the military. There was this issue of the Soviets. I remember the old saying “the President’s budget is DOA” upon arrival at the house of representatives. In order to get his military spending he had to make deals with Tip O’Neil, and O’Neil wanted domestic spending.

    Gramm-Rudman was the last gasp of the budget hawks. Its been a non stop fiasco for as long as I can remember.

58. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 5:12 pm

    inSanity,
    “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.”
    Still acting like a jerk I see. The Democrats controled the congress until 94. The Democrats had the presidency for 8 years. The Democrats before 94 controlled the congress for forty years. But it is all the Republicans fault. You are an idiot.

59. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 5:17 pm

    Insanity,
    the big budget drivers are social security, medicare, medicaid, all of which are going to go bankrupt starting in 10 years. The Democrats want to extend medicare to all of us and nationaise the health industry. This is helpful in your eyse i am sure. Spending under Clinton inhis last 4 years of office was over grew 11% per year. I know to you the country was Nirvana under Clinton despite the Newt gingrich led congress, but did the eocnomy grow 11% per year?
    If the answer is no then ask who wrote the budget that got passed?

60. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 5:21 pm

    Insanity,
    One more thing, before Reagon we had Carter, I assume that you can tell me what a rip roaring success the economy was under Carter, right? You can tell me about the low inflation? You can tell me how we were winning the cold war. You can tell me about how boldly we dealt with Iranians. And then in comparison to that you can tell me how Reagon turned it into a disater, despite 96 straight MONTHs of economic growth.

61. Cathymac
    March 26th, 2008 @ 5:48 pm

    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.

62. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 7:37 pm

    Cathymac,
    Insanity would not know the truth if it bit his behind. As a member of the socialist wannabe party a.k.a. the Democrat party he is only capable of blaming the Republican for everything from global warming, to 9/11 to bad breath.

    If we all could just get as smart as him we too could blame all the countries problems on one half of the body politic. All it requires is a willful suspension of disbelief.

63. ed myers
    March 26th, 2008 @ 9:04 pm

    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.

64. ACTivist
    March 26th, 2008 @ 9:19 pm

    Sanity?

    You talk about the GOP and how it spends out of control. I got a question for you. Who squandered all that money when Carter sold the Panama Canal? He did what? Gave it away? And we got what in return? Nothing? But you say he can paint? WOW!!!!!

    Let’s try this again. You’re an idiot…..I mean a real economic conservative.

65. dan
    March 26th, 2008 @ 10:58 pm

    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.

66. jacob
    March 26th, 2008 @ 11:34 pm

    Ed Myers,
    “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.”
    Well said, but we are generous, to a fault. Look at how others were treated for wandering in uninvited from a historical standpoint and you will see we have been incredibly generous. To the point that we are engaged foolhardiness, for in many ways more generous to the stranger than to ourselves.

    Anything taken to the extreme leads to insanity, misery and death, go to Proverbs 25:16, or 22:3.

    I repeat, history is not kind to countries that do not control their borders. God is sovereign in all things, as it is written ‘there is nothing new under the sun, to expect a different outcome now would be to test Him.

    As for the applicability of Romans 8, if you are trying to stuff “If God is for us, who can be against us?” into my mouth then you should be ashamed for immigration is not a spiritual but an earthly matter. I recommend you read Joshua 5:13-14 on who is with God and whether God is ‘with’ anyone.

    As a return to giving Caesar his due look to Prov 10:9, bending the law is a hazardous route.

67. ed myers
    March 27th, 2008 @ 5:39 am

    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.

68. Jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 6:55 am

    “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.”

    Not much of a historian, are you? There was unemployment long before there was a minimum wage, and there are many countries now without minimum wage and with high unemployment. Please go read The Wealth of Nations.

    “The extreme case is that everyone is volunteering (working for free) in a commune.”

    That assumes they have land to farm. Labor cannot produce anything without something to work ON, which Smith calls “stock.”

    “The opposite case is the minimum wage is so high no one has any work.”

    Like unions — they negotiated themselves right out of work.

    “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…”

    I never said they were. I said the EMPLOYERS were. Please pay attention. Even if what you say about the tax rebates is correct, the EMPLOYERS’ contributions are not refunded. There are other payroll taxes as well (unemployment, for instance).

    “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.)”

    Right — that’s why we have a trade deficit with Mexico.

    “Or, in the worse case Mexicans hold on to the dollars (like China) and essentially gives us a loan at 0% interest.”

    WHAT!? Fine. I’ll give YOU a loan at 0% interest. Let me know when I can pick up the money.

    The fact is that when the labor pool increases, wages decrease. So when we have an influx of illegal immigrants, wages go down. Since they are here illegally, it is perfectly understandable that people that lose their jobs to illegals feel that they have had their jobs stolen.

    Now, what law did Joseph and Mary break when they went to Egypt? Did Egypt have immigration laws? Did Samaria?

69. Cathymac
    March 27th, 2008 @ 7:06 am

    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.

70. jacob
    March 27th, 2008 @ 7:51 am

    Cathymac,
    “He is sitting by me right now and it is simply awful.”
    Ok, I could read this as inSanity is sitting right by you, possibly with bad breath, and it is simply awful. Which I would not doubt, or, it’s the dog. I will assume it’s the dog.

71. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 10:17 am

    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!!

72. jacob
    March 27th, 2008 @ 10:31 am

    Marshmallow,
    Looking at you example and applying it to an actual economy this looks as if during the printing stage we would experience what Bernake is doing to us now which is monetary devaluation. and when the monetary supply is dried up we would see it increase in value. This is the game the Fed has been playing with the money supply for years now, is it not?

73. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 11:02 am

    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.

74. Cathymac
    March 27th, 2008 @ 11:35 am

    Jacob – It is the dog! Badly needed laugh on that one!

75. Jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 12:17 pm

    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.

76. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 2:37 pm

    Jack, you’re ability to shift from referencing chapter and verse of the Bible to book and chapter of Smith is intriguing, I’ll admit. but you don’t need to try to poke holes in my example. I was just trying to illustrate a concept that plays a role in international economics and monetary policy. I’ll accept that it’s an over simplified example, but economic models always are. That example deals specifically with monetary issues, ceteris paribus …

    It doesn’t seem like you understand. That’s fine, but I don’t really appreciate your calling me ignorant on account of your own misunderstanding. You don’t need to be defensive. Please understand that this isn’t coming from some neo-Marxist critique of global capitalism. It’s a well understood component of economic theory when it comes to reserve currency/monetary policy/global economics/etc. I’d explain it again but i think I did a pretty good job the first time, so maybe you should re read that post or do some more research on the idea yourself.

    ok, I can’t help it: in essence, whoever controls the supply of dollars (the US) controls the value of the dollar. (instead of “controls the value” maybe I should say, “controls a powerful lever for influencing the value…”) When the US prints more dollars, the value of each individual dollar is diminished. ok? Similarly, maybe you’ve heard of Debeers having some stockpiles of diamonds that they wont release onto the market because they don’t want to devalue diamonds; by controlling the supply, they control the price.

    when we print more money and keep it in the bank, we are effectively extracting value from other countries that hold dollars in reserve, and giving it to ourselves. We aren’t literally taking money from Mexico or China (or any other country that holds dollars in reserve), but we are temporarily undermining the value of their holdings in order to temporarily increase the value of our own. This is, in essence, an interest free loan. Is that any clearer?

77. Jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 2:45 pm

    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.

78. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 3:07 pm

    how rude!

    It would only work if you’re keeping puft bucks in your bank account. If you were, I could simply print more money until I had enough to buy a house, but the value the money in your bank account would decrease as a consequence.

    think of everyone’s $ holdings as slices of a pie, and then think about how the US can control the size of it’s own slice. If it decides to increase the size of it’s own slice (by printing more $), every other slice would have to get smaller.

    this “interest free loan” from seigniorage privilege doesn’t mean a literal transfer of cash, it’s just a way that the supplier of $ can increase it’s own slice of the pie at the expense of everyone else who is holding that currency.

79. Jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 3:26 pm

    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.

80. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 3:57 pm

    Holy Cow, Jack, come on! Why are you insisting on disproving me? I’m not making it up, I’m not even making an argument (although apparently you want to argue). This is part of the equation when determining economic policy. I’m just trying to help you understand it. Ask Ben Bernanke, he’ll tell you the same thing.

    You’re saying that if it costs .1 to print, then seigniorage from printing a $ is .9 but that .9 depends on how many $ exist. If there were only 1 $ in the world, it would be worth a zillion pounds sterling, or something, or a tillion pork bellies, or whatever. If there were $2 in the world, each one would be worth 1/2 a trillion pork bellies, etc. It isn’t about how many pennies are in a $, it’s about purchasing power.

    the abstract of the paper you referenced says, “In this paper I analyse four different but related concepts, each of which highlights some aspect of the way in which the state acquires command over real resources through its ability to issue fiat money. They are (1) seigniorage (the change in the monetary base)…”

    exactly! Thank you paper that jack references for helping me try to explain this concept to him, but I don’t think it worked! lol

    next, try the wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage

81. Jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

    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.

82. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
    March 27th, 2008 @ 6:24 pm

    oh Jack, give it up. I said, I’m not making an argument. I’m just explaining an idea. Thought maybe you could benefit from a better understanding of monetary policy, but I forgot that you already know everything.

    I think the deal might be that you are referring to the strict classical definition of the term, and I’m talking about a more contemporary use of it, as in the privilege of…

    I didn’t have access to the article you referenced, could only see the abstract. Look, if you want to insist you’re right, I don’t really care. But if you’re really researching the issue, and NOT to find anything about the link between seigniorage and interest free loans, you’d have to be trying pretty hard. I don’t want to psychoanalyze, but it certainly is an intriguing phenomenon…

    anyway, since I am indefatigable in my efforts to spread knowledge throughout the land, let me offer you this bit from a paper prepared for the European Parliament Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs by a professor at the London School of Business:

    “Moreover, the creator of international money is the only true international lender of last resort, and that confers power in the international economy. Think of the key role of the US Treasury alongside the IMF in the Mexican
    crisis, the Asian crisis, and Brazil. Where was Europe, except to help pay the bills (see Coeuré and Pisani-Ferry, 2000)? On the strictly economic side, the issuer of the international currency benefits from seigniorage. Conventional estimates indicate that 50 to 60% of the total
    US outstanding dollar notes are held abroad. The underground economy – the Russian mafia, longer-established organized crime, drug dealers – accounts for a lot of these currency holdings. Foreign holders of cash dollars give the US Treasury an interest-free loan. The flow of this international seigniorage to the United States is around 0.1% of GDP per year.”

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/comparl/econ/pdf/emu/speeches/20001123/portes/default_en.pdf

83. jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 8:47 pm

    I think I understand what you are getting at, puffalump. Let me try to explain it back to you, and see if I am correct:

    1) U.S. prints a $20 bill, making, let us say, $19.90 in seignorage. (I don’t know what that number really is.)

    2) Jose sends said bill to his Tia Maria in El Salvadore.

    3) Bill circulates in El Salvadore until nearly destroyed — about a year. (Bills do not have long lives.)

    4) Bill is exchanged at Banco del Salvadore and returned to the United States, where it is exchanged for a new one.

    5) Old bill is destroyed, at a cost of another 10 cents, thus destroying $20.

    So, for 10 cents (the cost of producing the replacement $20 bill), the government got use of the $20 for a year. That loan is “interest free,” because it matters not whether that bill is exchanged one, two, or twelve years after it was issued.

84. jack
    March 27th, 2008 @ 9:23 pm

    BTW, here is another good paper on the subject. It does go into the conflated (and thus confusing) definition. I prefer the classical definition, as distinct from the “inflation tax.”

85. PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY BUDGET BATTLES « Citizen Tom
    March 28th, 2008 @ 6:35 am

    [...] Loudoun County Taxpayers Paying A High Price For Illegal … — Meanwhile novatownhall blog considers the cost of ESL. [...]

86. AP English an alternative to English As A Second Language | novatownhall blog
    May 8th, 2008 @ 6:44 pm

    [...] Loudoun County Public Schools is released, and we get to find out exactly how much Loudoun’s mushrooming ESL boondoggle currently costs, there will begin some public sentiment to revisit the [...]

Leave a Reply