Welcome To Topix Too Forum

Here's what you linked, a National Review piece

What Does the National Academies’ Immigration Report Really Say?
By GEORGE J. BORJAS
September 22, 2016 11:30 PM (Take note of date)

You linked a contributor at the National Review using 20 year old data to explain a current problem.

Who falls for sht like that? Borjas is an expert on the subject, certainly he didn't need to cherry pick
data to make his point.

First graph in your link

It turns out, however, that the newer immigrants are not assimilating quite as rapidly as earlier waves. Here’s the table from the report that documents the slowdown of assimilation:

(Table wouldn't link)
 
This table reports the percent difference in wages between specific immigrant waves and natives at different points in time. The data obviously show a lot of wage growth for immigrants who arrived in the 1960s and 1970s, but far less for immigrants who arrived in the 1980s and 1990s.

In this piece the author also considers generational costs for  illegal immigrants. What? The 2nd and  3rd generation would not be illegal as they were born here.

That whole piece is simply fun with numbers.

Thing is that your link's author Borjas is an expert on the subject but the problem is that he written so many books/articles on the subject with so much data that he's constantly being cherry picked by the like of Fred Eibel and other rightwhack hustlers who are clearly in that game for the buck$.

Borjas wrote that the Marielitos drove down the average wage in the Miami area by over 5% and that data became gospel, across the board for all illegal immigrants and sticks to this day.

In 1980, 125,000 brokeazz illiterate Cuban's,  nearly half of them criminals were dumped in South FLA__duh__what would anyone expect to happen?  It was a one time event which perhaps still has a negative affect in certain sections of Miami, but is has exactly zero to do with illegal Mexicans or Hondurans harvesting vegetables in the Midwest or installing roofs in my county or yours.

Update: Buttigieg is still the only candidate I will spend my vote on.

I know he's polling less than the big three that I won't even consider. But if he would be more assertive and maybe hire a Tailor or Stylist (whatever you call the person(s) who dresses; chooses the haircuts and puts on the makeup of public figure's) I believe his numbers would soar.
There's a lot to be said for 'a sharp dressed man', look to our past Presidents for validation of that.

And no, there's not a queer bone in my body it's more that I don't care.
For me it's about the Core Values of America and her future, he seems to get it a whole lot better than any of the other contenders.       

My God, just listen to what All of the others are offering and the current Dems in power are doing - nothing but useless talk.
It's politics, I know but My God. What a joke.
 

I thought Amy did really well.

Back to Mayor Pete......

I watched the Democratic Debate last night and some of the spin afterwards. I've gotta say, this guy impressed me more than all the other candidates combined. I don't know whether he'll win the nomination or not but I sure hope he's on the ticket.

I thought Amy did really well.