Time misleads us in this
Time misleads us in this article about the America's Army action figures:
A dwindling number of volunteers? I thought that bore out substantiation, since the only things I've heard about recruiting lately had to do with law school inanity. So I headed over to the DoD press release:
So far, he's hit the economic issue right on the head - illegal immigrants, being outside the law, are willing to work for subminimum wages - especially if they can get paid under the table. Of course, he ignores the presence of illegal immigrants using forged documentation to find work in legitimate businesses. Of course, Kuttner tips his hand a few paragraphs down:
Ahh, gotta love that. Smacks of the same defense being used by Mearsheimer and Walt. Disagree with us, and you must be a bad person. If you're on the right side of the aisle, you are either pro-illegal immigration, or anti-immigration. Nope, nothing in the middle here. But going back to his column, Kuttner now proves Sam Clemens' rule about the use of statistics:
Let's start with his sample selection. His two sample points are median income, and middle fifth mean. If we're discussing the effect illegal immigrants have on our economy, shouldn't we be looking at bottom fifth effects? The BLS asserts that, as of February 2006, there are some 143 million employed members of the civilian population. If, as a worst case effect, the supposed 11 million illegal immigrants are all employed, the depressive effects of their presence in the labor pool would have to affect at least 45 million other workers to even touch the second statistic, or 60 million to touch the first.
It's also interesting to look at the two time windows Kuttner uses. The first, 1999-2004, takes us from the peak of the tech bubble to the nadir following the recession. Yup, the economy sucked then, Kuttner. The second data point, 1991-2002, takes us to the peak of the tech bubble, which is also an interesting selection.
So based on two data points, carefully crafted, what does Kuttner assert?
So just to summarize: because there was a recession to years ago, illegal immigrants have not had any impact on our economy, and if we adopted France's model, then everything would be better!
Faced by a dwindling number of volunteers, the U.S. military is adding a new recruitment tactic: aiming young. Real Heroes, a line of Army-authorized toy soldiers modeled on Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, is expected in stores this June, selling for $12.99 each.
A dwindling number of volunteers? I thought that bore out substantiation, since the only things I've heard about recruiting lately had to do with law school inanity. So I headed over to the DoD press release:
WASHINGTON, March 10, 2006 icy, most experts agree that wide-open immigration slightly depresses wages, especially among unskilled workers. But the main reason for static wages has more do with policies made in the United States.
Immigrants, coming from destitution at home, will work for less than American wages. And, if they are here illegally, they can't defend themselves against subminimum wages and working conditions otherwise against the law.
So far, he's hit the economic issue right on the head - illegal immigrants, being outside the law, are willing to work for subminimum wages - especially if they can get paid under the table. Of course, he ignores the presence of illegal immigrants using forged documentation to find work in legitimate businesses. Of course, Kuttner tips his hand a few paragraphs down:
The Republican Party is now split between business groups who want cheap workers and jingoists who are just plain anti-immigrant. The nativist wing of the GOP plays both to the national security and economic fears of ordinary Americans.
Ahh, gotta love that. Smacks of the same defense being used by Mearsheimer and Walt. Disagree with us, and you must be a bad person. If you're on the right side of the aisle, you are either pro-illegal immigration, or anti-immigration. Nope, nothing in the middle here. But going back to his column, Kuttner now proves Sam Clemens' rule about the use of statistics:
Census data show median household income fell 3.8 percent or $1,700, from 1999 to 2004....
According to economist Bernstein, whose study covers the years 1991-2002, households in the middle fifth of the economy increased their incomes (not adjusted for inflation) by 41 percent. Inflation during that period, as measured by the government's Consumer Price Index, went up 33 percent. That implies real living standards rose by a not very impressive 8 percent during more than a decade.
But hold on. During the same period, housing, healthcare, education, and child care went up 46 percent, or more than incomes.
Let's start with his sample selection. His two sample points are median income, and middle fifth mean. If we're discussing the effect illegal immigrants have on our economy, shouldn't we be looking at bottom fifth effects? The BLS asserts that, as of February 2006, there are some 143 million employed members of the civilian population. If, as a worst case effect, the supposed 11 million illegal immigrants are all employed, the depressive effects of their presence in the labor pool would have to affect at least 45 million other workers to even touch the second statistic, or 60 million to touch the first.
It's also interesting to look at the two time windows Kuttner uses. The first, 1999-2004, takes us from the peak of the tech bubble to the nadir following the recession. Yup, the economy sucked then, Kuttner. The second data point, 1991-2002, takes us to the peak of the tech bubble, which is also an interesting selection.
So based on two data points, carefully crafted, what does Kuttner assert?
Don't blame it on immigrants. Blame it on the people running the government, who have made sure that the lion's share of the productivity gains go to the richest 1 percent of Americans. With different tax, labor, health, and housing policies, native-born workers and immigrants alike could get a fairer share of our productive economy.
So just to summarize: because there was a recession to years ago, illegal immigrants have not had any impact on our economy, and if we adopted France's model, then everything would be better!
