The issue regarding what type of person is entitled to preferential treatment in America is undoubtedly a complex and deeply controversial one. In economic terms, the “harm” being dealt to certain groups in the population cannot be fully understood without also examining the distribution of money from the welfare state. The very existence of a welfare state is an attractive proposition for immigrants, as most low-income foreigners looks towards the United States and see that no matter what, they will be compensated for food and shelter at the very least. If they decide to venture to America and reap the welfare however, it directly takes away the potential benefits for existing American citizens. Borjas argues that not only do immigrants take away benefits from natives, but they also use welfare much more on average than citizens born in the United States (Borjas 1777). In addition to taking a monetary hit from accepting immigrants, the acceptance of foreigners into the country also has potential to take away jobs and dilute existing American culture.
Of course there is another side to this argument with equal relevance and validity. Immigrants wanting to enter the country would likely have a strong work ethic and be willing to take lower paying, labor intensive jobs. The addition of culture and diversification of a population also brings many strengths and opportunities to a country. An argument can also be made that the impoverished existing American citizens may just be deadweight and not offer much to society. The immigrants receiving welfare might be more beneficial in comparison to where it would be going if it just went to the existing American poor. This becomes tricky, however, when topics like immigrants skillsets and levels of immigration are brought up and found to be generally lower than native populations (Borjas 181). The statistics often cloud the theoretical arguments that people try and construct, further concealing any one distinct truth about the matter. This claim could also be countered, however, with an argument that foreign immigrants are not more educated due to a lack of schooling opportunities compared to native United States citizens. This may be true, but does not change the fact that on average, immigrants on average have lower education levels than American citizens. Whether an immigrant has a better work ethic or not, it would be difficult for a high end employer to view the two on a level playing field.
Regardless of individual stance on this issue, it is clear that there can be no one definitive answer. From an economic and more objective standpoint, immigration poses an issue. More low-income and impoverished people entering the United States will ultimately drain the pool of American welfare, driving taxes up, and potentially even further harming the economy. For the benefit of the country strictly economically, the negative effects of immigration might outweigh the positives. A cultured country has many benefits, but when it starts effecting the economic health and stability of a nation, a line in the sand needs to be drawn. Overall, despite the upsides of immigration, the needs of native American citizens should be prioritized. While immigrants may work harder or be more willing to take low-wage jobs, a country that turns its back on its own citizens to offer foreigners aid is not much of a country at all.
11 replies on “Short Essay #5”
I really enjoyed your short essay, as you do a great job of providing general information on the topic as well as bringing in your own opinion and analysis. Additionally, your argument and ideas were clear, as you use good examples from Borjas’ writing as well as your own thoughts. Another strong aspect of your essay was that it was very well organized as you discuss both sides of the argument. More specifically, you mention some of the negative aspects to American citizens in the first paragraph and some of the beneficial aspects to American society in the second paragraph. Furthermore, this allowed your short essay to flow nicely and make it easy to understand for the reader. Also, the final paragraph did a good job concluding your essay, as I really enjoyed and agree with your final sentence.
I think you did a very good job of organizing you essay and presenting it in a clear effective way. You purposefully bring up both sides of the argument on immigration to allow the reader to build their own argument as they read further into you piece. I think you should more directly state your point of view in your essay more towards the beginning. It is very clear where you stand on the topic once you get to your last paragraph but in your thesis you seem to not stand strongly with your position allowing it to be argued more. Also, it as been shown that immigrants do benefit our economy in the long run. They take the jobs that no one else wants and put money back into the economy if they stay in America. The reason that it is not bluntly shown is because they are making money to send home to their families. If we opened our immigration system up to allowing their families to come into the country there would be no need for money to leave the country. This would further our economic growth more drastically. They do benefit our economy because they take jobs that need to be done in order to run a productive society and in return support the jobs higher up in the workforce. For instance, if we didn’t have people to do hard labor jobs, then blue collar workers would have to take time off their job to fill in these gaps. Since these gaps are filled blue collar workers have more time to work at their jobs becoming more efficient and in return make more money to grow the economy.
Overall I think that you did a great job including both sides of the argument. By doing this, you are able to acknowledge the pros and cons of immigration and compare them to each other, which makes your conclusion much stronger. I also feel that you effectively incorporated Borjas’ ideas throughout your essay in order to solidify your argument. However, I think that the essay itself could be organized more effectively. It might be beneficial to place your claim in the first paragraph instead of the end. When first reading through it, I was a bit lost as to where it was going. I think it would also be helpful to begin your essay by somehow stating or alluding to the topic and question at hand. If you include your claim there I believe the problem would be solved. Additionally, in your second paragraph you begin by claiming that the other side of the argument is equally relevant and valid. I think that for the purpose of your concluding argument, you should rephrase this statement considering that you do not assert this at the end. Other than these few thoughts, I think that this essay was especially well thought out and I enjoyed reading it.
I think this essay was very well constructed and helped to show both sides of the argument for immigration. In terms of the economic losses and benefits to the community it is clear that immigration has a far reaching impact. I think your essay did a really good job at explaining these economic effects and was very well organized in a way that made your argument clear and concise.
I think this essay does a good job highlighting both sides of the debate that Borjas presents in his book. You also do a good job of presenting the hard facts of this situation that people often want to skirt around in political dialogue. I think you handle these topics very maturely and put them into the right place within a presenation of the positions and evidence from Borjas. I think if you put any direct quotes in quotation marks instead of just using the parenthetical citation, it would be helpful to readers to know when Borjas’ words start and finish.
Your essay is certainly strong and convincing. I liked how you wrote upon the different sides of the argument and gave reasons as to why one side can be seen to be more compelling over the other. For me, what really drew this essay home for me and made me consider my positon on this topic was your conclusion. The final sentence of your essay, “while immigrants may work harder or be more willing to take low-wage jobs, a country that turns its back on its own citizens to offer foreigners aid is not much of a country at all,” made me think and consider what defines a country; morally and legally. This is a really good way to end your essay as it provides thinking of a different but related topic and one that wasn’t brought up before.
I find that you did a great job examining both sides of the argument in this short essay. You used strong evidence from the novel as you frequently used Borjas’s ideals to support your points, although it would have been beneficial to provide direct quotations. This would make the essay much stronger. You did a great job in the introduction and conclusion as you were able to compare and contrast the pros and cons of immigration, as there is no clear answer that benefits everyone. This made your argument clear and easier to read. Your sentence, “The issue regarding what type of person is entitled to preferential treatment in America is undoubtedly a complex and deeply controversial one,” opened the paper to this controversial aspect. Although your thesis could have been made more clear in the introductory paragraph to provide a roadmap for the reader and introduce exactly what you were are proving and arguing.
This essay is very eloquent and it uses strong evidence to support the argument that immigration specifically harms the economy and the stability of the nation. You realize that there isn’t a general answer to this question but there are specific ones, and I like how you dialed in on one. But what if the immigrants weren’t all low-income and impoverished people? Immigrants are from many different countries and bring many different things to the table, so would those who are anything more than impoverished with these different ideas and capabilities change your argument if they were entering and maybe not so much “self-selected”? Those are just some opposing questions to think about, but it’s clearly arguable since immigration is self selected. But, I do like how you started arguing, mentioned the opposing side in a particular perspective and then drove home your point.
I think your essay is very well written. You did a good job using Borjas’ ideas to help formulate your own opinion on the topic of mass immigration. I thought a very strong point you made was in your conclusion when you talked about how if immigrants begin to take too much from the welfare pool, which could be likely, American citizens will begin losing benefits from the welfare system. You then went on to say how American citizens should be prioritized when it comes to this which is very true. One thing you could have considered when writing the points about immigrants generally being low skilled is immigrants coming from different countries bringing different skillsets.
This short essay is very well written with a clear argument and strong structure. I liked your use of direct evidence from Borjas’s book. I agree that it is very difficult to take a clear stance on this issue. I like how you clearly separate the different ways in which immigration is beneficial and harmful to the United States.
I agree with much of what you say with your essay. You do a great job of making your argument clear while also presenting both sides. I think it is very good you clearly display the facts of the matter and not just what benefits “your side”. This is a very good, whole look at this topic and I think your essay is well organized.