Jackie Calmes of the Times takes her paper's endless push for immigration "reform" to an analysis of Republican plans for regime change:
Economists See Limited Gains in G.O.P. Plan
WASHINGTON — Anticipating a takeover of Congress, Republicans have assembled an economic agenda that reflects their small-government, antiregulation philosophy, but also suggests internal divisions that could hinder a united front against President Obama — much as happened in the 1990s, when a Republican-led Congress confronted President Bill Clinton.
The proposals would mainly benefit energy industries, reduce taxes and regulations for businesses generally, and continue the attack on the Affordable Care Act. It is a mix that leaves many economists, including several conservatives, underwhelmed.
Yeah, yeah - conservatives are disappointed that they aren't going big and liberals hate it because they are liberals. So whatever.
So what is the Republican goal?
With the prospect of Republicans’ winning control of the Senate and maintaining control of the House in the midterm elections, interest is rising over what they would do to address what polls show is voters’ top concern: economic growth and jobs.
Speaker John A. Boehner has been promoting a roster of 46 House-passed jobs bills that Republicans say could finally make it to Mr. Obama’s desk if voters put them in charge of the Senate for the first time in the president’s tenure. On Twitter, Mr. Boehner’s hashtag for the initiatives is #StuckInTheSenate.
Polls say "growth and jobs"; Boehner's bills say "jobs". So what does the Times say? Gosh this is suspenseful!
Missing from both Republican lists are two pillars of Mr. Obama’s agenda that many economists consider important for expanding the labor force and promoting long-run growth.
Let's move on to the other pillar of Obama's agenda, which somehow has not become part of the Republican agenda:
The other is an overhaul of immigration laws. Despite business pressure to provide a path to citizenship for the millions here illegally, and to admit more foreigners with skills, Republicans’ opposition has only hardened in this campaign. A bipartisan Senate-passed bill on immigration would increase economic growth by 3.3 percent in a decade and save $175 billion by then, the Congressional Budget Office estimated.
What else did the CBO say about the Senate bill?
CBO’s central estimates also show that average wages for the entire labor force would be 0.1 percent lower in 2023 and 0.5 percent higher in 2033 under the legislation than under current law. Average wages would be slightly lower than under current law through 2024, primarily because the amount of capital available to workers would not increase as rapidly as the number of workers and because the new workers would be less skilled and have lower wages, on average, than the labor force under current law. However, the rate of return on capital would be higher under the legislation than under current law throughout the next two decades.
So stagnant wages for workers but a better return to owners of capital - the rich get richer and the rest of us get, well, the warm glow that comes from being a responsible citizen of the world. And the thrill of sticking it to the dominant white patriarchy by letting them earn more on their ill-gotten wealth while paying workers less, pending their overthrow.
WITH ENOUGH PROGRESSIVE PROFS LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT ANSWER... Per Brookings, we learn that a 2012 study found that waving in more unskilled workers raises the wages of even the unskilled, so now we know. No more studies! And no more common sense!