By the numbers. By Terry Mejdrich

Terry Mejdrich <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 8:59AM By the numbers, by Terry Mejdrich A statistical study confirms a moderately ‘messy’ house and somewhat chaotic surroundings “can boost creativity by encouraging a departure from conventional thinking and fostering new ideas”, while obsessive attention to order promotes conventional, dogmatic, and rigid thinking. On the other hand creative people may be less concerned with what their house looks like and more concerned with creating and exploring new ideas, and a messy house may be merely a byproduct of a certain way of ordering priorities. Whatever the reason, I now have a legitimate excuse for not scrubbing the floors every day or obsessing over dog hairs on the couch. Statistics never was a captivating subject with people clamoring to get into those types of studies, but it is the basis of nearly every major enterprise. Insurance, marketing, politics, weather prediction, the Stock Market, grain futures, health research, crime numbers and tendencies, and just about everything else has a statistical component and if you like data collecting and seeing what the numbers have to say, then go for it because it is an area of study always in need of dedicated people. And as long as statistical data is collected by a reputable agency, it can provide valuable pieces of information that help frame both economic and social viewpoints and policy. A question with statistics, of course, is has the data for a particular subject been deliberately manipulated and falsified in order to reach a false conclusion in order to promote a partisan social, economic, or political agenda? For decades the tobacco industry provided data (their own) indicating smoking didn’t pose a health risk, and that the high percent of smokers dying from lung cancer and heart disease was just a ‘coincidence’ not supported by scientific proof. Even now with conclusive statistical evidence and medical proof, about one out of five U.S. adults (46 million people) still use some form of tobacco. So we see that being presented with the facts doesn’t automatically lead to acceptance of facts or a change in thinking. Denial is a powerful force to be overcome. Going sideways here for a minute to about the Cato Institute, one of the respected ‘think tanks’ in the U.S. though not without controversy, which is most often described as a libertarian or market-oriented conservative institution. In more colloquial political terms, it fits in more closely with independent rather than strictly republican or democratic politics. It supports fiscally conservative policies, peace rather than conflict, less government, less foreign involvement, less taxes but also is socially minded showing support for women’s rights, the LGBTQ+ community, and other minority causes. It supports marriage equality across genders and individual liberty yet opposed the Affordable Care Act, preferring a market-based approach to solving social problems. It’s announcements and recommendations, then, tend toward the conservative side of the social/political spectrum. Cato recently took on the task of analyzing the impact of the immigrant population, both documented and undocumented, in the U.S. This follows narrower studies in Texas, which Cato expanded into a thirty-year nation wide analysis, probably one of the most extensive studies ever undertaken about immigration. It was not connected to nor did it rely upon the current or any former presidential administration’s policies. What were the results? Before we get into that, we can mention the Texas study, which drew data from 2018. The undocumented immigrant criminal conviction rate was 782 per 100,000. By comparison the criminal conviction amongst native-born citizens was 1,422 per 100,000 indicating undocumented immigrants committed about 50% less crimes than native-born citizens. The percentages for Texas were similar to the nationwide averages. The new more extensive study covers the years 1994-2023. Its focus was primarily the net fiscal effect, that is what economic impact has the immigrant population, documented and undocumented, had on government provided social services (supported by taxpayers’ dollars) and theeconomy in general? The study set out to see if the Trump White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller was correct when he said, “immigrants have already sucked us dry.” What the Cato study found based on data beginning from 1994 (when immigrant data collection began) was immigrants have in every year since used government social service benefits extensively, but in every year their fiscal impact through taxes paid, contribution to the economy, and other inputs exceeded the government expenditures by a wide margin and reached the highest level of positive impact in 2023. The Cato study found that when government social service payments are subtracted from immigrant taxes paid and the other benefits they provide, the immigrant population’s positive contribution to the U.S. economy lowered U.S. deficits by $14.5 trillion over the three-decade period. In simple terms and quoting the Cato study: “Every year since 1994 immigrants [documented and undocumented], have paid more in taxes than they received in benefits from federal, state, and local governments.” Further, according the Cato study, immigrants on average get fewer government benefits than nativeborn and so generate more income per person for the government. On average, they put in more hours for less pay, retire older, and do not get government tax supported pensions. (For further reading Google Cato Immigrant Study.) Inductive reasoning is the tendency to reach conclusions, often tainted by personal bias, by assuming all of a certain set of similar things or people can be characterized by the characteristics or actions of just one or a few. Though occasionally true, it is a common and almost instinctive error in reasoning. A woman rejects you. Therefore in your mind all women become suspect. And if there is a certain set of people wanting to vilify all woman, your prejudge makes convincing you a lot easier. So all woman, even the ones that you’ve never met, become vilified. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it. But the Cato study confirms that’s the same false logic some apply to the immigrant population.

If you want to get his weekly blog just contact him via email