By Dr. Spencer Price
Money is a powerful motivator. This can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on circumstances. Money’s motive power is a good thing when it stimulates us to get an education, put in an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay, and save for the future. On the other hand, money’s motive power can have a dark side as well, stimulating some to commit crime in an effort to obtain it.
Spencer Price
De-incentivizing illegal immigration
Illegal immigration is an example of the dark side of money’s motive power. The likely reality is that most illegal immigrants aren’t inherently criminally-oriented. The majority are decent people from austere environments who are merely seeking to live a better life by earning a decent wage – hard to fault a person for that. In fact, most illegal immigrants don’t commit criminal acts at all but, rather, work hard and live frugally. The nature of their crime, of course, rests in their illegal presence in the US along with the fact that many don’t pay income, Social Security, or unemployment taxes on their wages.
Supporters of illegal immigration yell and scream at the top of their lungs that we should ignore these crimes as they are “victimless.” That is, they suggest that illegal immigrants provide a service while harming no one. Maybe. But the truth is that, besides the fact that illegal immigration makes an open mockery of duly passed laws, illegal immigrants cost US taxpayers plenty. However, there is a better way.
As long as there is an incentive to hire illegal immigrants, they’ll keep coming. The incentive, as always of course, is money. Businesses can increase their profits by keeping costs to a minimum. One of the largest expenditures businesses encounter is employee wages. By hiring illegals, employers can minimize payroll costs thereby increasing profits – it’s very simple math. Employers and supporters of illegal immigration justify their actions/positions by suggesting that there are certain types of work that only illegal immigrants will perform. This, however, is a fallacy. Offer the right incentives, either through increased pay and/or benefits, and a person will perform most any task - it’s a basic principle of economics.
So, how then, do we go about removing the incentive to hire illegal immigrants? Easy. Offer an alternative pool of workers.
America’s county jails are filled to overflowing with young men (and a few women) incarcerated for non-violent crimes such as minor probation violations, drug possession charges, or failure to pay child support. These non-violent offenders could serve as a tremendous resource of labor that small business owners could turn to for employment. Of course, the obvious and immediate reaction from most potential employers would be that they don’t want to hire criminals. Thing is, in hiring illegal immigrants, they do exactly that – hire criminals. They just don’t see it that way, conveniently ignoring an illegal immigrant’s “illegal” status in an effort to make money off of him or her.
Consider a young male in jail for failure to pay his child support. He sits around doing nothing all day, eats three square meals a day (maybe two “hots” and a bag lunch), watches TV, maybe plays a few video games if available, has his clothes washed for him, has his medical needs met, and all at taxpayer expense. Now why shouldn’t this person be put to work earning his “keep” and making a little money to go toward his overdue child support payments? These non-violent offenders could be screened, counseled as to their duties and responsibilities on the job, and given a chance to work toward a quicker release and maybe gain a little self-esteem in the process – not to mention save taxpayers tremendous amounts of money. Potential employers could hire these men and women at reduced wages, thus eliminating the incentive to hire illegal immigrants instead. In so doing, everyone involved from the employer to the law enforcement agencies to those jailed to the American taxpayer would benefit.
The bottom line is that there is a reasonable and meaningful solution to illegal immigration just as there is to most of the problems America faces as a country. To solve these problems, America needs leaders with vision, creativity, and determination to make things better. In return, however, America must be willing to try something new, in this case, de-incentivizing illegal immigration.
To contact Spencer, read his blog or review an archive of his columns, click here.
Supporters of illegal immigration yell and scream at the top of their lungs that we should ignore these crimes as they are “victimless.” That is, they suggest that illegal immigrants provide a service while harming no one. Maybe. But the truth is that, besides the fact that illegal immigration makes an open mockery of duly passed laws, illegal immigrants cost US taxpayers plenty. However, there is a better way.
As long as there is an incentive to hire illegal immigrants, they’ll keep coming. The incentive, as always of course, is money. Businesses can increase their profits by keeping costs to a minimum. One of the largest expenditures businesses encounter is employee wages. By hiring illegals, employers can minimize payroll costs thereby increasing profits – it’s very simple math. Employers and supporters of illegal immigration justify their actions/positions by suggesting that there are certain types of work that only illegal immigrants will perform. This, however, is a fallacy. Offer the right incentives, either through increased pay and/or benefits, and a person will perform most any task - it’s a basic principle of economics.
So, how then, do we go about removing the incentive to hire illegal immigrants? Easy. Offer an alternative pool of workers.
America’s county jails are filled to overflowing with young men (and a few women) incarcerated for non-violent crimes such as minor probation violations, drug possession charges, or failure to pay child support. These non-violent offenders could serve as a tremendous resource of labor that small business owners could turn to for employment. Of course, the obvious and immediate reaction from most potential employers would be that they don’t want to hire criminals. Thing is, in hiring illegal immigrants, they do exactly that – hire criminals. They just don’t see it that way, conveniently ignoring an illegal immigrant’s “illegal” status in an effort to make money off of him or her.
Consider a young male in jail for failure to pay his child support. He sits around doing nothing all day, eats three square meals a day (maybe two “hots” and a bag lunch), watches TV, maybe plays a few video games if available, has his clothes washed for him, has his medical needs met, and all at taxpayer expense. Now why shouldn’t this person be put to work earning his “keep” and making a little money to go toward his overdue child support payments? These non-violent offenders could be screened, counseled as to their duties and responsibilities on the job, and given a chance to work toward a quicker release and maybe gain a little self-esteem in the process – not to mention save taxpayers tremendous amounts of money. Potential employers could hire these men and women at reduced wages, thus eliminating the incentive to hire illegal immigrants instead. In so doing, everyone involved from the employer to the law enforcement agencies to those jailed to the American taxpayer would benefit.
The bottom line is that there is a reasonable and meaningful solution to illegal immigration just as there is to most of the problems America faces as a country. To solve these problems, America needs leaders with vision, creativity, and determination to make things better. In return, however, America must be willing to try something new, in this case, de-incentivizing illegal immigration.
To contact Spencer, read his blog or review an archive of his columns, click here.
"The methodology for counting unauthorized immigrants relies on a lot of assumptions which call into question the accuracy of the results. Twelve million may be the most popular number cited for illegal immigrants in the U.S at present, but some estimates, like one from Bear Stearns, believe the count is actually closer to a whopping 20 million."
You think that may free up a few jobs?