Donald Trump and Ted Cruz say they’d deport all of the 11.3 million or so undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. They don’t say how they would pull off this forced human exodus. But new research shows that executing on this promise would require at least $400 billion in new federal spending and reduce U.S. GDP by about $1 trillion.

A study released this month by the American Action Forum, a free-market think tank led by economist Doug Holtz-Eakin, walks through the process of evicting 11 million people over two years, a time frame Mr. Trump has floated. The report assumes that about 20% of those here illegally would leave voluntarily once the roundups begin. But that still leaves about nine million to find and deport.

This can’t be done with the snap of one’s fingers. In practice and under the law it requires four steps: finding and apprehending individuals, detaining them while they await due process, moving them through the courts, and then transporting them to their home countries.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can now remove at most 400,000 undocumented immigrants a year, most of whom are turned over to the feds by local police after, say, a traffic stop. Ramping up that goal to millions would require 90,000 federal agents, up from today’s 4,000, the study finds. That number would be even higher if the feds conduct most of the raids instead of relying on local law enforcement that lacks the resources for mass sweeps.

After the roundups, where would the arrested millions await their hearings? The feds currently operate about 250 detention facilities with 34,000 beds, and a mere 58 immigration courts. The average detention time is 28.7 days. To keep that same detention time, the report says a two-year deportation plan would require some 348,831 beds, as well as more than 1,300 courts and about 30,000 more federal attorneys. The effort would be a full-employment act for lawyers, and no doubt the House Freedom Caucus would be overjoyed to pay for all of those new federal employees.

Then there’s the task of sending migrants back to their native countries. Only about half of the 11.3 million hail from nearby Mexico, so the U.S. would have to fly millions to Central America, Asia and elsewhere. The report found that the effort would demand the departure, on average, of 84 buses and 47 chartered flights every day for two years. Is the Trump 757 available?

The most important cost, however, would be the blow to the economy from disrupting such a huge chunk of the American workforce. About eight million undocumented immigrants are employed in some way, and the report estimates that deporting them all in two years would shrink the U.S. labor force by 6.4%. That’s a lot of suddenly unfilled jobs. The report estimates that GDP would shrink by 5.7%, not far from the 6.3% decline from the 2008 recession. The new Administration would certainly be off to a rip-roaring start.

Defenders of deportation say state and local governments would save tens of millions on social services for illegals, but that would pale next to the economic and human costs. All of this suggests that deportation would be one more campaign promise that fails once it hits the, er, wall of reality.

To deport all 11.3 million illegal immigrants, it'd cost:
>$400 billion in additional spending
Reduce GDP by ~$1 trillion
Reduce labor force by 6.4%

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on March 27, 2016, 01:58:32 PM

It's crazy that Apple doesn't sell the iPod Classic anymore.

Or anything similar with storage space above 32GB. I cannot comprehend why they discontinued them.

Yeah, can't find an iPod Classic for anything less than $400.

he's not unbeatable, wtf? in this particular movie maybe that argument has some merit but there are tons of examples throughout history of batman's vulnerability.

Quote from: Azumarill on March 25, 2016, 04:53:49 PM

clearly dont understand batman or precedent for conflicts like this in other media.

It is a dumb idea because there isn't a single scenario where Batman could feasibly beat Superman in a fair fight. There aren't many, or any canon (iirc) fights where Batman actually defeats Superman.

The technology to produce genetically engineered (GE) plants is celebrating its 30th anniversary and one of the major achievements has been the development of GE crops. The safety of GE crops is crucial for their adoption and has been the object of intense research work often ignored in the public debate. We have reviewed the scientific literature on GE crop safety during the last 10 years, built a classified and manageable list of scientific papers, and analyzed the distribution and composition of the published literature. We selected original research papers, reviews, relevant opinions and reports addressing all the major issues that emerged in the debate on GE crops, trying to catch the scientific consensus that has matured since GE plants became widely cultivated worldwide. The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of GE crops; however, the debate is still intense. An improvement in the efficacy of scientific communication could have a significant impact on the future of agricultural GE. Our collection of scientific records is available to researchers, communicators and teachers at all levels to help create an informed, balanced public perception on the important issue of GE use in agriculture.

In the EU, the regulatory burdens for GE crop approval are extremely heavy (Kalaitzandonakes et al., 2007), de facto excluding the public sector and minor crops from the development of GE technology. As a result, the number of experimental releases of GE crops is rapidly decreasing (Löchte, 2012) and even large companies are abandoning GE (Dixelius et al., 2012; Laursen, 2012). This scenario is the result of the interaction of complex sociological and psychological factors, risk/benefit ratios, political aspects and an unbalanced scientific communication.
All these factors have to be considered globally and taken into account in a constructive debate on whether the GE crops represent a strategic resource for the future. An improvement in the efficacy of the scientific communication to stakeholders, as clearly demonstrated in the case of the recent case of GE wheat field trials in the UK (Löchte, 2012), could have a significant impact on the future of agricultural GE.
We believe that genetic engineering and GE crops should be considered important options in the efforts toward sustainable agricultural production. Our collection of scientific records is available to researchers, communicators and teachers at all levels to help create an informed and balanced public perception on the hot issue of GE use in agriculture.