Even more than no loss, it would be an immense gain. Welfare for blacks has consumed so much resources that we could have a continent spanning utopia had it been spent on literally anything else.
Both groups are locusts, a plague on the human species.
Welfare for blacks is so huge and with no return that they are literally an economic "net loss" demographic. The only one as far as I've been made aware.
They are the only ones that have traditionally been. That does not mean that we cannot find other slices of groups that are unproductive from the perspective of taxation.
But traditionally migrants came here to ... make money. And you do that by having a job. So it makes total sense that they would initially be lower users of welfare. As they get integrated, you predict welfare usage rates will approach that of whites and who knows exceed. It's a thing that's in flux constantly.
My argument for a while has been that given massive wealth inequality, every taxpayer except the top X% with X being pretty low is a net loss, strictly. If you did tax everyone the same rate, the richest would easily be paying the most taxes. Even at the lower rates they manage, the richest few still pay a large portion of the taxes. That makes everyone else's tax contribution look below average. But that doesn't mean that the burden of taxation is or isn't properly distributed.
Two groups that "if they disappeared from my country tomorrow" it would be no loss.
Even more than no loss, it would be an immense gain. Welfare for blacks has consumed so much resources that we could have a continent spanning utopia had it been spent on literally anything else.
Both groups are locusts, a plague on the human species.
Welfare for blacks is so huge and with no return that they are literally an economic "net loss" demographic. The only one as far as I've been made aware.
Hispanics are also a net loss.
They are the only ones that have traditionally been. That does not mean that we cannot find other slices of groups that are unproductive from the perspective of taxation.
But traditionally migrants came here to ... make money. And you do that by having a job. So it makes total sense that they would initially be lower users of welfare. As they get integrated, you predict welfare usage rates will approach that of whites and who knows exceed. It's a thing that's in flux constantly.
My argument for a while has been that given massive wealth inequality, every taxpayer except the top X% with X being pretty low is a net loss, strictly. If you did tax everyone the same rate, the richest would easily be paying the most taxes. Even at the lower rates they manage, the richest few still pay a large portion of the taxes. That makes everyone else's tax contribution look below average. But that doesn't mean that the burden of taxation is or isn't properly distributed.