Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 1:50 pm

Zeets2 » Yesterday, 1:38 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 1:38 pm

Where does your article say ANYTHING about the obvious increased number of job openings for legal American workers?
What are YOU reading that no one else is?

And why can't you explain your apparent belief that it DOES NOT mean that there are 668,000 jobs that now need to be filled by employers?

Because it isn't "obvious", in fact it isn't - at all.

The study estimated that between 51,000 and 297,000 of the lost jobs would have been held by American-born workers, as businesses that rely partly on immigrant workers scaled back operations for everyone, including US-born employees.


In the 86 cities that saw the sharpest rise in ICE arrests, they found roughly 13 lost jobs associated with each excess arrest. Industries that traditionally employ a large share of undocumented migrants, like construction, saw the biggest impact. But employment in sectors like arts and entertainment, where few immigrants work, also fell sharply. The authors said that’s because businesses cut staff as people stop going out when ICE raids dominate the news.

“Enforcement at this scale and speed — visible, shocking, designed to produce fear beyond the directly targeted population — destroys jobs, disrupts businesses that Americans own and run, and depresses the local economies in which Americans live and work,” Marcela Escobari, Ian Seyal and Paul Beach wrote in the report.
 

 

BV… you just proved my point.The study literally says the job losses were localized ripple effects in 86 metro areas — not national totals.The 51,000–297,000 number is the estimate of how many of those localized lost jobs were held by U.S.-born workers. That’s not a national job‑loss figure. That’s not a national economic report. And it sure as hell isn’t comparable to nationwide job creation. You’re mixing up a regional impact study with national employment data.