Remittances, payments sent to other countries by immigrants here in the United States, amount to roughly $150 billion annually and account for roughly 20% of the total income of immigrants. Here’s my question.
Should remittances be included in the total cost of immigrants to the United States? If not, why not? They provide little value to the U. S. economy. Basically, they’re just removing money from it. To date I’ve never seen any accounting of the cost of immigration that takes remittances into account.
Good question. I have no idea.
One thought I’ve had for a while that sounds good in theory (but probably isn’t – I don’t really know to be honest), is to put a small tax on capital leaving the US while removing all tax on capital entering the US.
Divide 150 billion by the 120 million citizens of Mexico, and you get about $1200 per capita, per annum. (Yes, I know there are other countries.) Mexico’s nominal GDP per capita is about ten grand. If one were to subtract those remittances would it not have a dramatically negative impact on Mexico’s society? Would we not almost certainly see even more illegal immigration? More drug smuggling? Less stability?
Mexico’s relationship to the US is that of battered spouse to abuser. We stole half their country, we’ve used them as a source of low-cost labor when it suited us, and then blamed them and denigrated them, and now we’re threatening them.
There’s a clever sketch from David Mitchell and Robert Webb, two Nazis coming slowly to the realization that, “We’re the baddies.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU In the relationship of the US to Mexico, we are the baddies.
The amount for Mexico alone is about $25 billion per year. You know what would help Mexico even more? Fixing its dysfunctional politics, economy, and society. As long as the U. S. functions as a safety value for Mexico, that will never happen.
I’m not suggesting stopping the sending of remittances to Mexico
(or those sent to the 2nd or 3rd largest receivers of remittances, China and India). I’m suggesting
1. Recalculating U. S. GDP
2. Re-evaluating the costs of immigration
Dumb. When I hire a Latino to work for me, the last thing I think of is whom he’s sending a part of his wages to. None of my business. And no business of our gummint either.
I that were not the case, I’d be limited to hiring gringoes and (Darwin forbid!) union workers who have no idea what it means to “work like a Mexican” as we say in Texas.
In fact, I would be less likely to hire an Amerikan who spends part of his salary on his kids, because, after all, in Amerika we need Mexican workers and not kids, which are a big drain on our public finances.
the U. S. functions as a safety value for Mexico
Schuler appears to ignore the history of the McCarthy era, when Mexico served as a refuge for many persecuted Amerikans. Next he will attack Canada, which served as a refuge for many persecuted Amerikans during the Vietnam War of “national defense.”
Trump was right when he offered O’Reilly his theory about Amerika’s great sins.
“We stole half their country, we’ve used them as a source of low-cost labor when it suited us, and then blamed them and denigrated them, and now we’re threatening them.”
Your great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather stole his neighbors wife, clunked him over the head with his club then speared him, moved into his cave and then confiscated the saber toothed tiger he had cooking on the fire. Stole his bearskin coat to boot. You need to find that neighbors descendants and make reparations.