Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
"Illegal Immigrants and Crime – Assessing the Evidence"
Comments
-
I'm not gold plating their shit. Nor am I digging into methodologies. What I do take from it is that the source is reputable; they had a methodology; they were looking for a different result; and they present a range of findings. That's enough for me to include their number in my head when reading about the issue. That's it.2001400ex said:
Grundle, I'm curious on your take. They are using a mathematic formula to extrapolate the number of illegals, based on historical data. This seems to project the number based on rates known prior to 08. But every study I've seen, when the recession happened in 08, from then on, there has been roughly net zero illegal immigration. The number of immigrants leaving is offsetting the number coming in, or close to it. Which of course should change the formula.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Good stuff.Sledog said:
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimatesGrundleStiltzkin said:
Source?Sledog said:The problem is there are at least double the number of illegals in country than the figure tossed out in the media. Illegal crime is a huge problem. They are the drug trade as well.
The results, published in PLOS ONE, surprised the authors themselves. They started with the extremely conservative model and expected the results to be well below 11.3 million.
“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” says Edward Kaplan, the William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research at the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”
Jonathan Feinstein, the John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management at Yale SOM, adds, “There’s a number that everybody quotes, but when you actually dig down and say, ‘What is it based on?’ You find it’s based on one very specific survey and possibly an approach that has some difficulties. So we went in and just took a very different approach.”
The 11.3 million number is extrapolated from the Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey. “It’s been the only method used for the last three decades,” says Mohammad Fazel‐Zarandi, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management and formerly a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in operations at the Yale School of Management. That made the researchers curious—could they reproduce the number using a different methodology?
The approach in the new research was based on operational data, such as deportations and visa overstays, and demographic data, including death rates and immigration rates. “We combined these data using a demographic model that follows a very simple logic,” Kaplan says. “The population today is equal to the initial population plus everyone who came in minus everyone who went out. It’s that simple.”
While the logic is simple—tally the inflows and outflows over time—actually gathering, assessing, and inserting the data appropriately into a mathematical model isn’t at all simple. Because there is significant uncertainty, the results are presented as a range. After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean. -
Yeah I wasn't being I dick, I was curious your take. At some point I might dig further into their methodology.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I'm not gold plating their shit. Nor am I digging into methodologies. What I do take from it is that the source is reputable; they had a methodology; they were looking for a different result; and they present a range of findings. That's enough for me to include their number in my head when reading about the issue. That's it.2001400ex said:
Grundle, I'm curious on your take. They are using a mathematic formula to extrapolate the number of illegals, based on historical data. This seems to project the number based on rates known prior to 08. But every study I've seen, when the recession happened in 08, from then on, there has been roughly net zero illegal immigration. The number of immigrants leaving is offsetting the number coming in, or close to it. Which of course should change the formula.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Good stuff.Sledog said:
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimatesGrundleStiltzkin said:
Source?Sledog said:The problem is there are at least double the number of illegals in country than the figure tossed out in the media. Illegal crime is a huge problem. They are the drug trade as well.
The results, published in PLOS ONE, surprised the authors themselves. They started with the extremely conservative model and expected the results to be well below 11.3 million.
“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” says Edward Kaplan, the William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research at the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”
Jonathan Feinstein, the John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management at Yale SOM, adds, “There’s a number that everybody quotes, but when you actually dig down and say, ‘What is it based on?’ You find it’s based on one very specific survey and possibly an approach that has some difficulties. So we went in and just took a very different approach.”
The 11.3 million number is extrapolated from the Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey. “It’s been the only method used for the last three decades,” says Mohammad Fazel‐Zarandi, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management and formerly a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in operations at the Yale School of Management. That made the researchers curious—could they reproduce the number using a different methodology?
The approach in the new research was based on operational data, such as deportations and visa overstays, and demographic data, including death rates and immigration rates. “We combined these data using a demographic model that follows a very simple logic,” Kaplan says. “The population today is equal to the initial population plus everyone who came in minus everyone who went out. It’s that simple.”
While the logic is simple—tally the inflows and outflows over time—actually gathering, assessing, and inserting the data appropriately into a mathematical model isn’t at all simple. Because there is significant uncertainty, the results are presented as a range. After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean. -
Classy poast2001400ex said:
Yeah I wasn't being I dick, I was curious your take. At some point I might dig further into their methodology.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I'm not gold plating their shit. Nor am I digging into methodologies. What I do take from it is that the source is reputable; they had a methodology; they were looking for a different result; and they present a range of findings. That's enough for me to include their number in my head when reading about the issue. That's it.2001400ex said:
Grundle, I'm curious on your take. They are using a mathematic formula to extrapolate the number of illegals, based on historical data. This seems to project the number based on rates known prior to 08. But every study I've seen, when the recession happened in 08, from then on, there has been roughly net zero illegal immigration. The number of immigrants leaving is offsetting the number coming in, or close to it. Which of course should change the formula.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Good stuff.Sledog said:
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimatesGrundleStiltzkin said:
Source?Sledog said:The problem is there are at least double the number of illegals in country than the figure tossed out in the media. Illegal crime is a huge problem. They are the drug trade as well.
The results, published in PLOS ONE, surprised the authors themselves. They started with the extremely conservative model and expected the results to be well below 11.3 million.
“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” says Edward Kaplan, the William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research at the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”
Jonathan Feinstein, the John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management at Yale SOM, adds, “There’s a number that everybody quotes, but when you actually dig down and say, ‘What is it based on?’ You find it’s based on one very specific survey and possibly an approach that has some difficulties. So we went in and just took a very different approach.”
The 11.3 million number is extrapolated from the Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey. “It’s been the only method used for the last three decades,” says Mohammad Fazel‐Zarandi, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management and formerly a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in operations at the Yale School of Management. That made the researchers curious—could they reproduce the number using a different methodology?
The approach in the new research was based on operational data, such as deportations and visa overstays, and demographic data, including death rates and immigration rates. “We combined these data using a demographic model that follows a very simple logic,” Kaplan says. “The population today is equal to the initial population plus everyone who came in minus everyone who went out. It’s that simple.”
While the logic is simple—tally the inflows and outflows over time—actually gathering, assessing, and inserting the data appropriately into a mathematical model isn’t at all simple. Because there is significant uncertainty, the results are presented as a range. After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean. -
Nebraska classy?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Classy poast2001400ex said:
Yeah I wasn't being I dick, I was curious your take. At some point I might dig further into their methodology.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I'm not gold plating their shit. Nor am I digging into methodologies. What I do take from it is that the source is reputable; they had a methodology; they were looking for a different result; and they present a range of findings. That's enough for me to include their number in my head when reading about the issue. That's it.2001400ex said:
Grundle, I'm curious on your take. They are using a mathematic formula to extrapolate the number of illegals, based on historical data. This seems to project the number based on rates known prior to 08. But every study I've seen, when the recession happened in 08, from then on, there has been roughly net zero illegal immigration. The number of immigrants leaving is offsetting the number coming in, or close to it. Which of course should change the formula.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Good stuff.Sledog said:
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimatesGrundleStiltzkin said:
Source?Sledog said:The problem is there are at least double the number of illegals in country than the figure tossed out in the media. Illegal crime is a huge problem. They are the drug trade as well.
The results, published in PLOS ONE, surprised the authors themselves. They started with the extremely conservative model and expected the results to be well below 11.3 million.
“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” says Edward Kaplan, the William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research at the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”
Jonathan Feinstein, the John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management at Yale SOM, adds, “There’s a number that everybody quotes, but when you actually dig down and say, ‘What is it based on?’ You find it’s based on one very specific survey and possibly an approach that has some difficulties. So we went in and just took a very different approach.”
The 11.3 million number is extrapolated from the Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey. “It’s been the only method used for the last three decades,” says Mohammad Fazel‐Zarandi, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management and formerly a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in operations at the Yale School of Management. That made the researchers curious—could they reproduce the number using a different methodology?
The approach in the new research was based on operational data, such as deportations and visa overstays, and demographic data, including death rates and immigration rates. “We combined these data using a demographic model that follows a very simple logic,” Kaplan says. “The population today is equal to the initial population plus everyone who came in minus everyone who went out. It’s that simple.”
While the logic is simple—tally the inflows and outflows over time—actually gathering, assessing, and inserting the data appropriately into a mathematical model isn’t at all simple. Because there is significant uncertainty, the results are presented as a range. After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean. -
This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
-
No. They are afraid if you put that question on there, illegals won't respond. Idiot.Sledog said:This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
-
Why do we want them to respond? A census is to count citizens2001400ex said:
No. They are afraid if you put that question on there, illegals won't respond. Idiot.Sledog said:This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
-
A census is to count the number of people in America.RaceBannon said:
Why do we want them to respond? A census is to count citizens2001400ex said:
No. They are afraid if you put that question on there, illegals won't respond. Idiot.Sledog said:This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
To be fair, I would like the question on there and a way to make it very clear that the government will not come after as a result of this survey. -
Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.RaceBannon said:
Why do we want them to respond? A census is to count citizens2001400ex said:
No. They are afraid if you put that question on there, illegals won't respond. Idiot.Sledog said:This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
-
Then its not a censusCirrhosisDawg said:
Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.RaceBannon said:
Why do we want them to respond? A census is to count citizens2001400ex said:
No. They are afraid if you put that question on there, illegals won't respond. Idiot.Sledog said:This is the reason they are fighting putting immigration status on the census forms. They don't want us to know the damage they have done to our nation.
