Mediaboss Marketing

Markets are among mankinds most powerful inventions. Although they have existed in some form for several millennia, it is only in the past few centuries that we have used them to organize entire economic systems. Once we turned them loose, we unleashed a period of global growth unlike anything that had come before. They are not perfect, but they are truly remarkable and, like most economists, I am a big fan.

Prices are set and resources are allocated based on supply and demand. Innovation is encouraged and rewarded through the potential for profits on goods and services people want or need. Efficiency is mandated by the presence of or threat of entry by other producers. Competition leads to greater consumer choice and better pricing. Markets dont do everything, and there are certainly times when some type of intervention is helpful or necessary, but in general, market forces optimize resources to the benefit of all. Simply stated, markets see problems and solve problems!

What a lot of people have evidently forgotten amid all of the rhetoric of the day is that the increasing levels of immigration in recent years are simply an example of this process at work. Lets step away from all of the controversy for a moment, and look at the big picture.

As the baby boomer generation began to age, it became apparent that a labor shortage was looming. Markets go about the business of solving the problem in multiple ways after all, thats what markets do. There were massive investments in technology that substituted capital for labor or made existing labor more productive. Accommodations to keep people in the workforce also developed. Options such as flex time, job sharing and working at home are now common, and many workplaces offer day care and even parent care on site. Retirees have also been rehired on a part-time or consulting basis. In addition, companies are seeking and hiring workers from elsewhere through immigration skilled and unskilled documented and undocumented.

Immigrants are a vital part of the U.S. economy. The foreign-born population reached 43.2 million in 2015 (according to the Pew Research Center), and immigrants account for 13.4 percent of the U.S. population. That level is almost triple the share in 1970, and is only slightly below the all-time-high level of 14.8 percent immigrant which was way back in 1890. About 11 million of these immigrants are unauthorized.

The Pew Research Center estimates that in 2014, about 27 million immigrants were working in the United States, which is about 17 percent of the total workforce. Most of them are working legally, but about 8 million were undocumented. Lawful immigrants are most likely to be employed in professional, management, business or service jobs. Undocumented workers are most likely to be working in service or construction jobs.

Immigration fluctuates with the economy, particularly within the undocumented segment. During the 1990s and early 2000s when the U.S. economy was expanding, the unauthorized immigrant population was also rising. However, during the Great Recession, more people were leaving than entering, and the undocumented population decreased. Since that time, it has remained fairly stable. The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. labor force has been in the range of eight million or so for several years, which is about 5 percent of the total workforce (they make up about 10 percent of the Texas workforce).

Given that most economists feel that the United States is currently at full employment, it would clearly be difficult to maintain current growth patterns without immigrants. In the future, immigrants and their children are likely to be an increasingly crucial aspect of the workforce as the U.S. population ages and baby boomers continue to retire.

Immigrants and, in particular, the undocumented population function as a flexible part of workforce, rising and falling with economic conditions. However, the process is riddled with inefficiencies, risks, and other problems because we dont recognize it for what it is: an essential way for U.S. companies to get the workers they need. It is no different than new technology or various workplace enhancements it is the refection of the market solving a problem.

Given this phenomenon, it makes perfect sense to enact reforms that allow the market to work better, thus allowing workers to enter and exit the country as needed. The risk to all parties could be eliminated, as well as much of the social cost. The artificial barriers that are now in place do nothing but drag down our economic potential. The market saw a problem. The market found a solution. If we would allow the market to do its work better, efficiency would be optimized, with greater prosperity as a result.

Continue reading here:
PERRYMAN: Common-sense approach to immigration reform - Odessa American

As President Trump continues to vow to come down hard on illegal immigration, supporters of immigrants find themselves at odds over how much to fight for those whose criminal history is fodder for advocates of harsher and broader crackdowns.

L.A. County became an early flashpoint in the debate after officials in response to fears of mass deportations unveiled a $10-million fund to hire lawyers to defend local immigrants without legal status.

Some activists believe that not only should the L.A. Justice Fund help all immigrants but that no one should be deported not even those convicted of violent crimes.

That position puts them at odds with others including Democratic politicians in California and many immigrants themselves who support deporting those convicted of violent and more grave crimes, which was a long-standing policy embraced by President Obama.

Those others want to focus their efforts on preventing deportations of people who simply came to the country for a better life.

I dont think theres a member of Congress Republican or Democrat who believes that if somebody commits an egregious crime, that they shouldnt be deported, said Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Los Angeles), the son of Mexican immigrants. Public safety is a very important issue to all of us.

L.A. Councilman Gil Cedillo, a key figure in the successful push to allow immigrants who are in the country illegally to get drivers licenses in California, said there are people who should lose the privilege of remaining in the U.S.

I dont want one person taken away from their family, he said. But thats different from narco-traffickers or people who are engaged in sex trafficking. And I dont know how you would try to defend that.

Cedillo argues that the Justice Fund doesnt deny anyone their due process rights. Rather, he said that because it cant subsidize the cost of legal representation for all immigrants facing deportation, leaders decided not to extend it to those who engage in universally heinous acts.

For activists like Pablo Alvarado, executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, deportation even of convicted criminals ends up sowing chaos in places with weaker criminal justice systems such as Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. And that, he said, causes more people there, including victims of crime, to flee those countries.

Ive been in El Salvador and in Honduras when the planes land with deportees, Alvarado said. Its becoming the penal colony of the United States where criminal dumping is acceptable.

Its a position with far more currency among activists than many of the immigrants they advocate for something evident during the May Day rally Monday that saw thousands of people march to downtown L.A.

While many people carried signs demanding no more deportations, immigrants interviewed expressed reluctance to be lumped in with those convicted of serious crimes. Sitting on a grassy knoll outside City Hall, Rosa Alvarez, 66, said she had no problem with immigrants in the country illegally being deported if they had extensive or serious criminal histories.

Get rid of the bad ones, I say. Deport the criminals and leave the rest of us alone, the ones who are working and dont do anything, Alvarez said.

Nearby, Christian Hernandez, 25, and his mother, Lydia Hernandez, 57, said they came to the march as a way to challenge Trumps anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Christian, a beneficiary of the Obama administrations immigration relief program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, said he and his mother have been in the U.S. since 1998 and have no criminal records. He said immigrants who commit violent crimes make people like him look bad and should be removed.

But like many immigrants and activists, Christian Hernandez said Trump has stirred racism by broadly painting immigrants in the darkest tones.

The minute he decided to say were all criminals and rapists, it was like a bucket of cold water being thrown at you, he said.

For some activists, though, simply getting rid of the bad ones is more complicated than it sounds. They point out that the Trump administration has already broadened the definition of criminal and also highlight cases of immigrants being detained and deported after minor infractions or after being caught up in raids targeting others.

Though crime in the U.S. is much lower than it was a generation ago when there were far fewer immigrants in the country illegally Trump has successfully rallied many supporters by focusing on immigrants who have committed violent crimes.

Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, believes all deportations should be suspended until the immigration system is reformed.

Were deporting people without a single penny to their name into abject poverty or homelessness, many of them back to places they havent known, she said. These people are products of our society.

Jorge Gutierrez of the L.A.-based LGBTQ group Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement, said there will likely be more pronounced disagreements over which immigrants to defend if the Trump administration hires thousands more Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and becomes more aggressive over whom it targets.

He hasnt put the whole infrastructure together, Gutierrez said of Trump. So once he does, its going to create more deportations. And in all of that, this narrative, the tension, is going to become more visible among who is pushing to protect a few and who is pushing to protect everybody.

For many conservatives, there is no debate: Everyone in the country illegally should eventually be deported, they say.

David Ray, communications director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said deportations should be prioritized with criminals at the top of the list. FAIR keeps a running list of serious crimes committed by people who lack legal status.

The principal of American fairness is based on the fact that nobody is above the law, Ray said. If we fail to enforce the immigration laws, then people stop respecting them.

Early in his presidential campaign, Trump called for the deportation of all 11 million immigrants estimated to be in the country illegally. But he has also expressed sympathy for DACA recipients, often called Dreamers.

While polls have shown that most Americans are against mass deportations, a 2016 CNN/Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that 55% of Trumps strongest supporters whites without college degrees think everyone lacking legal status should be removed.

Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute a libertarian think tank based in Washington, D.C. said he understands the ethical point that groups like the National Day Laborer Organizing Network are making. But he said removing people who commit violent or property crimes is whats best for everyone in the U.S.

Part of the deal when you come to this country is youre going to abide by serious laws, he said. There needs to be serious punishment for breaking that beyond just serving time in prison.

The Trump administrations immigration guidelines significantly broaden the definition of who is considered a criminal, making nearly all immigrants in the U.S. illegally susceptible to deportation. Last month, the Department of Homeland Security unveiled a new office to help people victimized by criminal aliens.

According to a Homeland Security report from 2013, there were 1.9 million removable criminal aliens, a figure that includes immigrants here illegally, those with temporary visas and legal permanent residents. The number of immigrants with criminal records who are here illegally is unclear, though the Migration Policy Institute calculated in 2015 that it was about 820,000. The think tank estimated 690,000 of those people had felony or serious misdemeanor convictions.

California state Senate leader Kevin de Len (D-Los Angeles) has introduced a sanctuary state bill that would expand policies prohibiting state and local law enforcement agencies from using resources to investigate, interrogate, detain or arrest people for immigration enforcement purposes.

After changes to the bill, federal immigration officials would be notified when felons who have violent or serious convictions are released, and a recent amendment to the bill would require the state parole board or the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to give ICE a 60-day advance notice of the release date of inmates who have been convicted of a serious or violent felony, or those who are serving time for a nonviolent crime but have a prior conviction for violent or serious crimes.

Alvarado, of the day laborer network, said he knows that deportations will continue and that his belief that criminals should not be automatically removed is hardly shared by most immigrants. But hes undeterred.

As an immigrant, I love this city as much as I love the village where I come from, he said. Its racist to think that its not OK for rapists and murderers to do their actions here, but its OK to do them in El Salvador and Guatemala.

Nowrasteh, of the Cato Institute, said those that hold the most hard-line positions on either side of the debate over deportations are likely to be disappointed in the end.

I dont think well ever get to a point where aliens who commit serious crimes will be allowed to stay, he said, nor will we see a day where the government rounds up 12 million people and ships them out of here.

Times staff writer Ruben Vives contributed to this report.

andrea.castillo@latimes.com

@andreamcastillo

ALSO

O.C. sheriff wants to expand immigration detention

In a California farm town, the border is just a line that must be crossed every day

Feds say they didn't deport 'Dreamer,' but acknowledge error on his DACA status

Read the rest here:
Here's why some immigrant activists say not even criminals should be deported - Los Angeles Times

President Donald TrumpDonald TrumpGeorgia special election breaks spending record CNN host: Colbert went 'too far' with Trump rant Facebooks Zuckerberg has spoken with Trump numerous times on the phone: report MORE experienced some failures with his immigration policies during his first 100 days in office, but it would be a mistake to underestimate him. He has made major changes in enforcement policy.

Destruction of the Home Free Magnet.

PresidentBarack Obamafocused his immigration enforcement efforts primarily on aliens who had been convicted of serious crimes or who had been caught near the border after making an illegal entry, and he protected aliens here unlawfully who were not in a priority category.

His administrations enforcement policy memorandum required ICE officers to obtain permission from a Field Office Director before arresting a deportable alien who was not in a priority category.

This created what I call a home free magnet. Aliens wanting to enter the United States illegally knew that they would be safe from deportation once they had reached the interior of the country unless they were convicted of a serious crime. This was a powerful incentive to do whatever was necessary to enter the United States.

Justice Dept. releases first set of Trump-ordered data on illegal immigrant incarceration rates https://t.co/niY6PLlsNE pic.twitter.com/opyNi27MSX

President Trump destroyed this magnet with tough campaign rhetoric and his Executive Order, Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, which greatly expanded enforcement priorities. No deportable alien is safe under President Trumps enforcement policies.

This seems to have improved border security already.

In April 2017, CBP reported a sharp decline in the number of aliens apprehended along the Southwest border, and in the number of aliens who were found inadmissibleat ports of entry. In March, 16,600individuals wereapprehended or deemed inadmissible, which was a 30 percent decrease from February, and a 64 percent decrease from the same month in 2016.

Interior enforcement against all aliens who are here illegally may be a more effective deterrent than a wall would be.

This is not the first time that the importance of interior enforcement has been recognized. It was the basis for the last legalization program 30 years ago.

Expansion of Expedited Removal Proceedings.

As of the end of January 2017, the immigrant court's backlog was 542,411 cases. Even if no additional cases are filed, it would take the court two-and-a-half years to catch up with its backlog.

President Trump finessed his way around this problem by expanding the use of expedited removal proceedings with hisExecutive Order, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.

In expedited removal proceedings, which are conducted by immigration officers, an alien who lacks proper documentation or has committed fraud or a willful misrepresentation to enter the country, will be deported without a hearing before an immigration judge, unless he requests an asylum hearing.

NEW: Dems observe May Day as immigrant day of action https://t.co/ViZAVyLb8F pic.twitter.com/tdkzrg540O

Asylum hearings, which are conducted by immigration judges, are available to aliens who establish a credible fear of persecution. An asylum officer determines whether the alien has a credible fear of persecution.

The alien cannot have assistance from an attorney in these proceedings, and, because detention is mandatory, his ability to gather evidence in support of his case is severely restricted.

Moreover, Section 208(a)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) limits asylum to aliens who have been in the United States for less than a year (with some exceptions).

If the asylum officer rejects the credible fear claim, the alien can request an expedited review of his credible fear case by an immigration judge, which usually is held within 24 hours but in no case later than seven days after the adverse credible fear determination.

Federal court review is available, but it is restricted to cases in which the alien makes a sufficient claim to being a United States citizen, to havinglawful permanent residentstatus, or to having been admitted previously as a refugee or an asylee.

A federal judge recently held that asylum denials in expedited removal proceedings are not reviewable in federal court and the Supreme Court let the decision stand.

Previous administrations limited expedited removal proceedings to aliens at the border and aliens who had entered without inspection but were apprehended no more than 100 miles from the border after spending less than 14 days in the country.

The Executive Order expands expedited removal proceedings to the full extent of the law. Section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(ll)of the INA authorizes expedited removal proceedings for aliens who have been physically present in the United States for up to two years.

It is likely to be very difficult for aliens to establish physical presence of more than two years, and if they do, they will be faced with the one year deadline for asylum applications, which in many cases is the only form of relief available to an undocumented alien.

President Trump will be able to use expedited removal proceedings to deport millions of undocumented aliens without hearings before an immigration judge.

The only way to stop him is to find a way to work with him on a comprehensive immigration reform bill that meets the political needs of both parties, and time is running out.

Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an Executive Branch Immigration Law Expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

The rest is here:
On illegal immigration, Trump ends Obama's 'home free magnet' - The Hill (blog)

Across the world, the American Dream the idea that anyone who has the talent, intellect and drive can succeed no matter how humble their beginnings draws hundreds of thousands of people to the United States each year. Instilled in this notion is meritocracy, one of the core qualities that has historically distinguished this country from the Old World class-bound societies, where ones position in life was largely determined by lineage and birth.

Today, the U.S. remains a meritocracy in many respects, but not in one notable area: its immigration system. This is why PresidentDonald Trumps call for an immigration policy overhaul in favor of applicants whose skills and talents are most likely to benefit the country is so important. Such a merit-based policy would be a radical departure from the way we now select immigrants but one our nation desperately needs. We should not let history hold us back any longer.

For the last half century, America has maintained an immigration policy that can only be described as codified nepotism. Of the approximately 1 million new immigrants who are legally admitted to the United States each year via green cards, about 60 percent enter for no other reason than that they have a relative in most cases a recently settled immigrant living in this country. Only about 15 percent of immigrants are admitted because of their skills, while the remainder are admitted on humanitarian grounds.

Under our current immigration system, admission as a family member is not limited to the traditional nuclear family. We allot immigration benefits to parents, adult children and siblings. All of these extended relatives and their spouses, in turn, are eventually eligible to invite their own extended family members to come live in the United States.Its a nepotistic system that contains the seeds of its own growth.

Fred Prouser / Reuters

This family-based process means that every time we admit someone as an immigrant the line for future immigration gets longer, not shorter. This results in endless chains of relatives, long and frustrating backlogs and no objective assessment of the individual merits of the majority of the people who are let in.

In addition to a skills deficit, our family chain migration system also means that we often end up with those who need more support from our economy rather than those who would help boost it. In 2012, more than half of immigrant-headed households in the United States relied on at least one welfare program, compared with 30 percent of households headed by a native-born citizen, according to a report based on data from the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Put simply, our current immigration system fails to serve any identifiable national or public interests. And this isnt the first time its flaws have been brought to our attention.

In the 1990s, a bipartisan blue-ribbon commission chaired by civil rights icon and former Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-Texas), came to precisely that conclusion and offered a framework for true immigration reform. The Jordan Commissions recommendations for a merit-based immigration policy were widely endorsed, including by then-President Bill Clinton. Theywere revived by Donald Trump.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress in February, Trump called for a merit-based immigration policy. It is time for Congress to respond to his call and the demands of the American people and implement a merit-based immigration system. Here are some broad objectives such a reform should take into account:

Paul J. Richards/Getty Images

All prospective immigrants to the U.S. should be evaluated based on objective criteria. These include education, job skills and English proficiency. Admission should be granted to those who are most likely to be net contributors to our economy, complement our existing labor force and successfully assimilate into the mainstream of American society. The criteria for admission must also be fluid, understanding that the needs of the country and our economy change over time.

A merit-based immigration policy should not discriminate for or against applicants based on race, religion or national origin. All applicants, regardless of background, should have an equal opportunity to apply for admission to the U.S. based on what they have to offer this country, rather than on having a relative here.

The United States should not apologize for pursuing immigration policies that are mutually beneficial to those who seek to come here and to the American people. Like all public policies, the primary stakeholders in U.S. immigration policy are the American people. Merit-based immigration maximizes the likelihood that people we admit will be self-sufficient and minimizes the possibility that their presences here will undermine the interests of American workers and taxpayers.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

We are a nation of immigrants, is not a policy. We must understand and honor our history, but in no other area of public policy do we do things just because its the way we did them in the past. A 21st century nation should not be bound to a 19th century immigration policy.

In an economy that increasingly demands an educated and skilled labor force, 28 percent of all working-age adult immigrants in the United States, according to the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation, possess a high school diploma or less. This is particularly troublesome as the U.S. figures out how to deal with automation.

A report by Forrester Research, a business and technology research and advisory firm, estimated that automation will create about 15 million new jobs, but wipe out close to 25 million a net loss of about 10 million jobs. In addition to training existing workers in this country to fill the 15 million jobs projected to be created, we need to evaluate carefully whether our immigration policy is admitting people who are equipped to do the jobs that are likely to be created, or whether our policy is adding to the pool of workers whose skills qualify them for the 25 million jobs that are likely to disappear.

If we continue down our current path, the result will likely be an increase in competition for the 15 million jobs that are left and an increase in the number of people in this country who are unemployed. Bottom line: we need to act fast to diversify our ranks.

The Washington Post via Getty Images

The United States is now a nation of about 320 million people. At current levels of legal and illegal immigration, our population is projected to reach about 438 million by 2050.Immigration-driven population growth of this magnitude is ecologically and socially unsustainable and serves no national interest. The Jordan Commission recommended that admissions be capped at 550,000 a year, while others, including my organization, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, support lower levels.

Family-based immigration should be limited to nuclear families. People who choose to immigrate to the United States are making the decision to live apart from their extended families. There should be no reasonable expectation on the part of people who immigrate to the U.S. that our laws will guarantee them the right to have their entire extended families join them here. Moreover, in an age of modern communications and relatively affordable travel, extended family connections can be maintained without chain migration.

Yuri Gripas / Reuters

As we are all painfully aware, very little gets done in Washington just because it serves the best interests of the American people. The narrow entrenched political and economic interests that are benefiting from the current immigration policies will not give up without a fight. But a large part of the reason why Donald Trump is president is because the American public wants him to disrupt the status quo.

Left to its own devices, the congressional leadership will do little to reform our immigration policies, even though they are widely acknowledged to be a failure. Affecting real change will require the president to put pressure on Congress by making the appeal for a merit-based immigration policy directly to the voters who put him in office.

Trump has demonstrated his ability to shake up the system in his unlikely rise to the Oval Office. Now, he must use those same skills to fulfill the promises he made to transform our immigration policy into one that serves the best interests of the nation.

Original post:
Trump Is Right: America Needs A Merit-Based Immigration Policy - Huffington Post

Fox News host Tucker Carlson began his show Tuesday by debating with an illegal immigrant on the issues of immigration reform and Mondays violent May Day protests and it went about as well as could be expected.

Speaking withjournalist Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant from the Philippines, Carlson wanted to know why the American political left so readily embraces violence.

But instead of answering the question, Vargas immediately pushed back over Carlsons word choice.

I dont know if weve talked to all of those people protesting and asked them if all of them arefrom the left, Vargas said using air quotes. How do you know that? Did you talk to all of those people?

Those shouting left-wing slogans are left-wing, Carlson shot back. Almost all of the political violence in the past five months has been perpetrated by the left in the name of fighting against fascism.

Well first of all, I really take offense to the very simplistic left and right way youre framing this. It suits your viewers and Fox News, but it doesnt suit reality, Vargas replied.

Carlson explained that in the U.S.right now its only a subset of the left that uses violence as a means to obtain and advocate their political goals.

Im merely saying: Where are people who agree with these folks standing up and saying, Youre not allowed to block traffic. You cant break things, you cant set fires? Carlson asked. Its pretty simple.

Vargas, however, didnt answer the question and began to steer the debate toward immigration.

What I can tell you is that for many of us this issue is, not just political, its personal, Vargas said. Were talking about millions of people who are related to undocumented immigrants that you call criminal every day.

I, as a person, am not illegal, he explained.

Carlson explained that when someone says illegal immigrant, theyre not deeming the immigrant as a bad person, just simply stating that the immigrants status is in violation of the law.

He then pressed Vargas over whether or not he believes Americans should have a say in immigration policy, given that people born in the U.S. see their country changing and becoming really chaotic.

Your argument appears to be that they have noright to have a say in who comes here, Carlson said. Youre here illegally, and youre basically saying: I dare you to do something about it.

Carlson went on to statethat he doesnt believe illegal immigrants should have a say in American immigration policy given their legal status.But Vargas again took issue with Carlsons words.

Im not from Mars, he said, noting his disagreementwith Carlsons use ofthe words illegal and alien to describe illegal immigrants.

Toward the end of the interview, Carlson pressed Vargas for nearly two minutes over how many immigrants the U.S. should allow in each year. But Vargas failed to give Carlson a real answer citing a lack of time.

Ill give you eight minutes next time to tell me the number, Carlson said before ending the interview.

Follow this link:
Watch: Fireworks explode when Tucker Carlson debates an illegal immigrant over immigration reform - TheBlaze.com