My debate with a former-DHS Secretary
Is mass deportation "necessary"?
On February 11, I debated former-acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf at Yale University’s William F. Buckley Institute. The resolution: “Mass deportation is necessary.” My response: as necessary as shooting money into space.
A nice theoretical discussion devoid of the scale issue.
Recently, because of a giant flood of economic migration, perhaps 20 million or so, a much larger percentage of illegal aliens live on various subsidies and govt spending programs than our native American population.
As a result, it’s like govt spending, except we have ten million people spending excessive govt money instead of one big spending bill.
The underlying economy is inorganic and detached from traditional cause and effect. In this dynamic when you deport the illegals, we are reducing the govt spending. Less govt spending actually tames inflation and lowers housing costs at a greater rate than the upward pressure on wages.
Removing the ‘free govt money” from the economy, creates less upward price pressure. Additionally, deporting the govt spender reinstalls a more authentic supply and demand economy, because the current demand is skewed by all the ‘free money’ subsidy spending.
In the past, this was not evident. That’s because we have an unprecedented number of illegal aliens spending govt money without any economic productivity. Those subsidies, extra non-productive money in the economy, creates upward price pressure. Take the money away and prices drop.
It’s the same issue we have always had with supplemental food assistance programs, and entirely the reason why Barack Obama exploded the number of people eligible for food stamps and SNAP benefits.
This is also why Big Ag and big corporate food conglomerates always lobby for increases in food subsidy programs. It enables them to charge more money and make bigger profits.
Think of it like shopping in a grocery store. Perhaps 50% of the customers pay for their purchases with wages, 50% of the customers pay with govt subsidy. Everyone from the field to the store can charge more money. The retailer can charge more for the products because half of the customers are essentially disconnected from feeling any impact.
Take away or lower the ‘free money’ subsidy, and food prices start to return to a more traditional supply/demand scenario.
Take the “free money” illegal aliens out of the spending economy and you increase the percentage of authentic, actually productive money earned from wages being spent.
Now, to be fair, there is a point at which the price pressure from the rate of spending drops below the upward pressure from the rate of wage growth. Once that apex is crossed, the wage growth can naturally drive inflation; However, due to the scale of spending by illegal aliens, we are a long way from the point at which that happens.
Right now, my best guess is we can likely remove 10 to 15 million subsidized illegal alien spenders, before we reach the point where upward worker wage pressure starts to exceed the downward price pressure created by removing ‘free money’ spending.
And yes, we are in uncharted territory. Traditional economic references don’t work. This is one reason why current economic polices are defying all the traditional economic analysis. Tariffs do not increase consumer prices; at scale they decrease producer margins. Deportation doesn’t drive inflation; at scale removal actually lowers prices.
Thank you, David Bier, for your stellar arguments. (Also for your testimony before the joint committee hearing.)
Hearing people, including Mr. Nowrasteh, say such things as 'I don't want to have to wait until an immigrant commits a violent crime to detain or deport them' is prepunishment and a fucking joke. It's a penal code of guilty until proven innocent. As if we could predict crime and prove that acting on it is accurate and justified, let alone starting this whole endeavor from a place of basic human dignity instead of fear.
There is a lot one can say, though my intention is not to comment a novella - I simply must point out that the honest reason for this debate dragging on is stubborn refusal to address changing the laws that allow restricting the number of immigrants who have the option to go through the process of becoming legal citizens in the first place. This root issue is repeatedly denied as such by Mr. Nowrasteh and it is grossly disingenuous. Indiscriminate quota caps have nothing to do with national safety, such an arbitrary rule only betrays the insecurity of the individuals who support it. I hope they find the courage and awareness to face their own internal demons instead of labeling and demeaning large swathes of complete strangers to everyone's detriment.
Your words on this topic, Bier, are phenomenal and greatly appreciated.
Sidenote: When an entire state clearly doesn't want this type of [violent] enforcement, its continued presence is the terrorism. ICE is a racist institution, and I thank all that is good in the world for kind, brave people like the Minnesota nice standing against it.