Ann hits the nail on the head about amnesty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zen

How about Fast Track to citizenship via 4 years military service, or immediate deportation?

Also forgot stepped up border security. Either increase the number of Border Patrol agents, or station National Guard troops on the border. Also place surveilance equipment and obstacles.
 
Cost of Low-Income Immigrants

Perhaps some data will help.


http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/sr14.cfm will have a lot more data, charts, links, notes, etc.
...

Net Lifetime Costs

Receiving, on average, $19,588 more in immediate benefits than they pay in taxes each year, low-skill immi*grant households impose substantial long-term costs on the U.S. taxpayer. Assuming an average 60-year adult life span for heads of household,[24] the aver*age lifetime costs to the taxpayer will be nearly $1.2 million for each low-skill household, net of any taxes paid.[25]

This calculation assumes that a low-skill immigrant comes to the U.S. in his mid-twenties with a spouse and that both remain in the U.S. for an average of 60 years. Even if low-skill immigrants return home rather than remain in the U.S. permanently, thereby reducing costs, this argument merely underscores how costly low-skill immigrants are to the U.S. taxpayer. The less time these immigrants spend in the U.S., the lower the cost to the taxpayer. Moreover, most current immigration reform proposals would grant legal status to illegal immigrants, increasing their access to welfare and Social Security. These proposals would substantially increase the time that these immigrants remain in the U.S.

...

Aggregate Annual Net Fiscal Costs

In 2004, there were 4.54 million low-skill immigrant households. As shown in Chart 5, the average net fiscal deficit per household was $19,588. This means that the total annual fiscal deficit (total benefits received minus total taxes paid) for all 4.54 million low-skill immigrant households together equaled $89.1 billion (the deficit of $19,588 per household times 4.54 million households). This sum includes direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services. Over the next ten years, the net cost (benefits minus taxes) to the taxpayer of all low-skill immigrant households will approach one trillion dollars.

...

Future Retirement Costs of Low-skill Immigrants

As Chart 7 shows, low-skill immigrants at each age create a net burden on taxpayers. However, the fiscal burden becomes most severe among elderly households, where the net annual fiscal deficit soars to $32,686 per household per year. This amounts to roughly $15,000 per year for each elderly low-skill immigrant.

There are currently 8 million non-elderly adult immigrants in low-skill immigrant households.[26] Assuming nor*mal mortality rates, perhaps 7 million of these individuals will live to age 67.[27] After reaching age 67, the normal life expectancy would be approximately 18 years. With an average net cost of roughly $270,000 over 18 years, the net future retirement costs of the 7 million low-skill immi*grants would be around $1.9 trillion.

There are two important assumptions behind this calculation. First, it assumes that current low-skill immi*grants will remain in the U.S. or, at least, receive govern*ment benefits through old age.[28] Second, the calculation assumes that illegal immigrants will, over time, become entitled to government benefits. (This question is dis*cussed in the policy issues section below.) If adult illegal immigrants do not obtain entitlement to Social Security and other government benefits, then the long-term cost to taxpayers will be significantly reduced. This empha*sizes the basic point that the longer low-skill immigrants remain in the U.S., and the more access they have to gov*ernment benefits, the greater the cost to U.S. taxpayers.

...

Conclusion

...

Current immigration practices, both legal and illegal, operate like a system of trans-national welfare outreach bringing millions of fiscally dependent individuals into the U.S. This policy needs to be changed. U.S. immigration policy should encourage high-skill immigration and strictly limit low-skill immigration. In general, government pol*icy should limit immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, avoiding those who will increase poverty and impose new costs on overburdened U.S. taxpayers.

Current legislative proposals that would grant amnesty to illegal immigrants and increase future low-skill immi*gration would represent the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years. Such proposals would increase poverty in the U.S. in the short and long term and dramatically increase the burden on U.S. taxpayers.
Click to expand...


sr14_chart8-lg.jpg


Just what I, a taxpayer want: a system of transnational welfare. :barf:
 
mnrivrat

Thanks for pointing that out. My bad, I read wrong.


It's as if they're so blinded by hatred of illegals, they cant see that they're sacrificing their own principles in an attempt to come up with a solution.
Click to expand...

As if, being the operative words. Not fact.

I see it as solving a problem that illegals are causing. Hell, it doesn't matter, the Gov't is never going to do anything about it anyway. In their eyes, there are too many votes at stake, legal or not. Might bite 'em though.
 
Tecumseh?

I gave you a 2002 study. Do you think the illegals went back to Mexico since then? Are the 2002 figurers not bad enough? Wouldn't you say that in the last 5 years the problem of illegal immigration has become more so, many times, than it was in 2002? Like exploded?

Couple of questions Tecumseh.........

Do we agree that the illegal immigrants are here illegally? I will assume we do since that's a matter of law and breaking it.

What do you propose we do to the lawbreakers?

What do you propose we do to stop more coming into this country?

What do you propose we do to solve the financial strain they are putting on this country?

It's obvious we both want what's best for this country, we just have different thoughts on what achieves that. I have given my thoughts on solving the problem. It has some tough spots, no doubt. I'm interested in hearing your proposal. How do you propose we take this problem of illegal immigration and all the negatives associated with it, from national security to financial burdens and many areas in between, and make them go away?
 
Data Consumption

Tecumseh:

I have an "answer" for you, but I would rather tell you "how" to come to an answer than "what" the answer is.

As a general rule, I would suggest that you assume every organization that produces a study to be biased, to include the gov't. I have seen lots of junk stats & science produced by .gov and granting them instant credibility is not a wise course of action. Stuff like reporting conclusions that fall within the margin of error as significant. See the second-hand smoke literature for examples of this sort of malfeasance by .gov. (FWIW, I do not now nor have I ever smoked...yuck!)

To get to the meat of a study, one needs to look at the sources of data, sample sizes, and methodology used. Questions like:
1. Are the data sources credible?
2. Are the sample sizes reasonable?
3. Are the assumptions reasonable?
4. What are the limitations (data, methodology, etc.)?

There will be assumptions and limitations on about any analysis. There are always limits of time & budget.

I grant very little credibility to studies that will not divulge data sources and methodology.

For this study, I would suggest you go to the section labeled, "Summary of Estimation Methodology." It will give a quick overview. Then, go to the end notes. They will tell you that the sources are varied: some gov't, some otherwise. Look at how the authors use the data. Are their assumptions reasonable? Are their calculations repeatable?

For example, disregarding a HCI study about "children killed by guns" just because it is written up by HCI is premature. If we look to their sources and find that they include persons in the 19-21 year age group as "children," we can perhaps dismiss their conclusions but still use the data to drill down and see just how many folks and at what ages are killed with firearms. We can compare that to other objects (the classic being 5-gal buckets) to determine relative risks.

-------

I hope that helps you to make a determination. We all must be careful and informed consumers of information.

Good luck.
 
And since all the data I have seen so far is in dispute with that statement, perhaps you could share the data and information you have to support it .

It is a human issue - the issue is wether you believe in putting america and your fellow citizens in jepordy and take their money to pay for services for illegal trespassing non-citizens. No matter their place of origin.

The BS argument that it is hateful to not give away what we and our fathers worked for to those who start life here with an illegal act, is lame at best. Trying to use the "race" card is just as lame.
Click to expand...

I have not seen a shred of evidence to the contrary - what I have seen is a lot of rhetoric and fear-mongoring - the special of the day in today's political climate.

The fact of the matter is that illegals pay a heck of a lot of taxes and few of them put in for a refund for fear of being caught and deported. It's hard to argue which illegals pay what in taxes, if an "Illegal" box was checked on their W-2s, it'd be a lot easier to round 'em up now wouldn't it? Many of the Hispanic illegals (about 80% of all illegals in the US - (70% are Mexican), btw) send money back to support their families. Truly the act of derranged criminals. :rolleyes:

Do you folks even know that these terrible illegals are breaking a civil law, not a criminal one?

You can turn a blind eye to all the good these folks do for this country, but I think it's tragic so many focus only on the negatives. Then again, America does not have a warm history of welcoming immigrants - legal or otherwise.
 
How does one pay federal income taxes when one is not in posession of a valid SocSec number?

Also, if the illegals are paying taxes, why are healthcare facilities in areas where there are large number of illegal immigrants near financial insolvency? Why are the school systems in the area about broke?
 
How does one pay federal income taxes when one is not in posession of a valid SocSec number?
Click to expand...

Because the (usually crooked) employer takes the I9 with a fake (or stolen, borrowed) SS number and withholds FICA, etc, as normal.

The problem at health care facilities isn't a tax problem, it's that the law requires emergency care to be given regardless of immediate payment, and the illegals stiff the hospitals on the bills.
 
Zen

How about Fast Track to citizenship via 4 years military service, or immediate deportation?
Click to expand...

As a former soldier myself (Army Infantry) I just can't see using military service as a means for citizenship. People that choose to serve in the military should do so for patriotic reasons not as a means to get a citizenship. And, just as an aside, I also disagree with people serving just to get their education paid for. I do think that illegals should be deported and should get in line behind those that want to come here legally. I'm sorry, but that is just my opinion.
 
Illegal Infiltration

My daughter married a Dane.

Tall, skinny, healthy, well-educated, perfect-English-speaking, in short: exactly the kind of immigrant we want here. He turned down a job with the patent office in Munich to marry her and come live here.

It required his leaving the country (and she went with him) for two and a half years and wading through waist-deep red tape (in addition to the sponsoring paperwork I personally had to fill out), and jumping through hoops where the consulate in London kept flubbing its end of things, before he was granted permanent resident status.

And the only reason it went that quickly was that they stayed on top of it relentlessly.

They're back now, and both working and playing by the rules.

Having lived through that process, I have nothing but disdain for the thieves who steal their way into this country, commit twelve (12) times the crimes of those who live here legally, refuse to assimilate, moreover want to impose a culture on us, and demand special rights and benefits.

Screw that.

You want to try that crap in any of the countries I visited in Europe. You get caught, you get jailed, then deported on your own nickle (or "financed" by the State Department -- still, your nickle).

I do not, personally, know of another country where this is permitted. We're surrounded by idiots who insist we must allow uncontrolled entry by the most impoverished and diseased demographic, while we meticulously filter entry by educated, able-bodied and certifiably healthy, English-speaking, assimilating immigrants who want to be here for all the right reasons, who want to be American, who patiently play be the rules.

I have not one scintilla of sympathy for a lawbreaker who insists he must have special access (that I don't have) and special immunities (that I don't have) while enjoying the fruits of the labors of my forefathers.

That is just the smelliest fertilizer-precursor there is.

My family played by the rules.

It cost us thousands.

Don't give me that crap about how we "owe" access/entry/service to thieves and scofflaws.

Quit handing out free money. It's not "free" in any case: it was stolen from me.

Close the border. Catch them. Send them home.

And quit lying to me about it.
 
Nothing Liberals hate worse than a conservative Ivy league educated female...cute, sassy and tells it like it is.
Click to expand...

Granted, liberals hate all those things. But what they hate even more is the truth. (the "tells it like it is" part).

Ann is sarcastic and irreverent. She's anything but politically correct. But this time - like most of the time - she's on the money.
 
Tecumseh wrote: I actually agree with you on taking away the incentives for coming to US soil. However what are the incentives? I would argue freedom is the number one incentive. So you would lock them up ?

Got any statistics to show that illegals get welfare? Everyone is able to get healthcare when they go into the ER as the doctors have a codified oath they have to follow. If your trying to say that the illegals get no other welfare benifits then I think you are dead wrong - even if you would not be, do you think the cost of ER visits by illegals isn't a valid point ?

Why wouldn'y we need bi-lingual teachers or non-English printed stuff? English is not the national language. It is the defacto language. So I would argue that until English is made into the national language that you should have equal oppurtunities to non-English speakers.So we should have to do this for ALL other languages as well according to you ? German, French, Chinese, etc ! Boy, that's a lot of teachers to hire, and a lot of reading through how to put my bicycle together in 40 + languages.

You would round up people for protesting something you disagree with and for voicing their beliefs? I am sure that is constitutional. Why not tell people that they cannot practice their religion or own certain firearms because you disapprove of them?I think you misread that - I said IF YOU wanted to - I believe I gave better alternatives than the round-up solution

Sorry Guy, It is clear we seem to be on opposing ends of this issue.
 
Kbheiner7 Wrote:
I have not seen a shred of evidence to the contrary - what I have seen is a lot of rhetoric and fear-mongoring - the special of the day in today's political climate.
Click to expand...

From reading the rest of your post I think you may have taken my post out of context. The evidence I was looking for is the proof that somehow illegals are good for this country !

I keep hearing things like they take jobs nobody else wants, and that they add to out tax base by paying taxes, and all the other arguments from those who support their activity, but I haven't seen one supporting study or document that backs up those claims.

What I see is attempts to dis-credit the studies that indicate they are a huge burden , but not a single study that puts them in a positive position . Not one to even argue about . No facts from any source indicating a positive effect coming from illegal trespass.
 
How does one pay federal income taxes when one is not in posession of a valid SocSec number?

Also, if the illegals are paying taxes, why are healthcare facilities in areas where there are large number of illegal immigrants near financial insolvency? Why are the school systems in the area about broke?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of many healthcare institutions on the brink of financial ruin. To the contrary, the local companies are making a ton of dough - and we have a large Hispanic demographic. Most publicly held healthcare companies are doing pretty well, at least judging by the healthcare funds in my 401k. :)

I would argue that a lot of school systems perform poorly because they are run poorly by top-heavy, government bureaucracies. Think about the numbers for a minute. By most extimates, there are 11-12 million illegals in the US - that's 4% of the total population. While I will not deny that these folks might cause some burden on the system, to claim that they are breaking it is just silly. The gigantic, inefficient governemt that we all gripe about in other threads here on THR are more to blame for subpar schools and healthcare. Trying to blame these significant problems on 4% of the population is pure folly.

It is estimated that 7-8 million illegal immigrants pay taxes. Yes, many employers merely look the other way when hiring illiegals. Others, like the company I work for, require a valid SS# which is not too tough for folks to buy on the street for $50-100.

A local undercover news story (KSL 5 TV) just did that on the streets of Salt Lake City - some for as low as $35. These are not just fake SS cards mind you, these numbers check out with the SSA. Again, a poor performing government agency, no doubt.

I'm not trying to stir the pot here, but I think many people have mistakenly bought the anti-immigration rhetoric. Yes, there are problems related to illegal immigration, but they are truly dwarfed by more serious problems.
 
What I Can't See Won't Kill Me

kbheiner:

I am not aware of many healthcare institutions on the brink of financial ruin.
Click to expand...

I am reminded of Pauline Kael's remark after the 1968 presidential election, “I don’t know anyone who voted for Nixon.”

Since you claim no knowledge about hospitals closing due to illegal alien non-paying patients, google "closed hospital illegal alien" and inform yourself.

Just because you are ignorant of something, does not mean it is not reality. Microorganisms existed before germ theory. They didn't need us to believe in them to do their thing.

Until you have the opportunity to see it first-hand, try imagining 70% of the births in your public hospitals to uninsured illegal aliens. Think about what that means for taxpayers, especially in poorer counties.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/parkland.asp

While you're at it, gawk at the following post that shows some of what illegal aliens cost their communities:
http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2148467&postcount=26

You can also scroll UP and read the link I gave for Tecumseh's edification
http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3427534&postcount=77

BTW, your profile says you are from Utah. You might want to take a gander at Utah's demographic composition relative to the border states that are taking it in the face. Utah is about as homogeneous as Minnesota, a state where the big "ethnic tension" is between the decedents of Swedes & Norwegians.
Utah: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49000.html
Minnesota: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/27000.html

IOW, your experience might not reflect the norm for America or the norm for the border states.
 
I'm not trying to stir the pot here, but I think many people have mistakenly bought the anti-immigration rhetoric. Yes, there are problems related to illegal immigration, but they are truly dwarfed by more serious problems.
Click to expand...

I've not bought into any rhetoric. My position is simple, if you're in this country illegally, I don't want you here. Period. I don't give a tinker's damn about any "contributions" made by illegals, nor do I give a rat's *ss about the "suffering" that may be experienced by the families by deporting illegals and implementing measures that would make illegal immigration less attractive.

Also, if you don't think illegal immigration is a "big problem", go back 400-500years and ask my ancestors. If they had to do it all over again, I'm sure that Jamestown,and every other white (English, French, Spanish) settlement in the New World would have been raized within months of being established. They were short-sighted, ignorant, and didn't recognize the threat to their existence until it was too late.
 
Last edited:
I've not bought into any rhetoric. My position is simple, if you're in this country illegally, I don't want you here. Period.
Click to expand...
I still generally feel that way. I'd be happy to see twice as much immigration as there is today, as long as it's all legal; entering illegally isn't an auspicious start to a law-abiding residency.

Still, most of the "problems" linked to illegal immigration today are actually the fault of the welfare state. My objection to illegals on welfare isn't the illegals; it's the welfare.

--Len.
 
Not that it matters . . .

. . . but . . .

Has anyone else here ever actually BEEN an illegal alien?

Anyone?

Ahh.

Well.

The year is 1981. My visa has expired. I am in Southern England. I have a four-year-old daughter. I have no money. I have just finished several years of volunteer work on the continent.

So, it's January, I'm unemployed and broke, and technically homeless. With a four-year-old daughter.

I have a skill I can sell, but I can't legally work.

The British Home Office has no sense of humor. If I'm discovered working with no visa, life gets interesting.

Assets: I have a very passable accent. After some years in country, I talk like a native. I have a skillset that businesses need (I'm an experienced international telex operator). I have some acquaintances in London. I have a strong will to overcome anything set before me -- an attitude that nothing is really a problem.

I go to London with my last twenty Pounds. I look up someone I know and secure a place to stay. I find someone else willing, on the word of this acquaintance, to lend me cash. I start looking for someplace that needs what I do.

Over the next ninety days, I learn the proper combination of truths, half-truths, and outright lies that will get me in the door. I eventually obtain a job with an foreign-owned export/import company who are willing to forego the embarrassing questions in return for my commitment to learning computers and helping them computerize their comms system.

Over the next several months, I learn computer programming, select the hardware they'll need, and write the application that does what they require. During this period, the lion's share of my income is stored rather than spent.

By the spring of the following year (1982), I have accrued enough cash to pay my way home, avoiding an encounter with either the Home Office or the State Department.

We fly back to the states.

My daughter and I arrive back home with enough cash in hand to live for three months while I find another job.

During this adventure we never once spent a night on the street or went hungry. During this adventure I had one objective: get home without involving either government.

Mission accomplished.

Oh, and I picked up a new career in the process.

(Epilogue: The following year (1983) one of the companies I worked with over there decided they liked my work, and went through the months of red tape to get me a real visa and plane ticket and a car and lodgings, and flew me back to help them write a version of my comms software for an obscure (Osborne) personal computer. That trip was lots more fun. It's way more fun to be legal.)​

So I've seen both sides of this issue, with my own son in-law jumping through hoops, and my own time as an illegal alien "undocumented" worker.

You know what?

Just do it right.

No, my situation wasn't "identical" to that of a man sneaking into this country and lying and hiding and stealing in order to stay. But I can tell you I know the point of view, know the exposure.

And I still say, "just do it right."

I've tried on the shoes. I shed them as fast as I could.

Don't break the rules and then pretend you were right to do so.

Just. Do it. Right.
 
I'm not sure if I agree with military service for citizenship.

On one hand I admire someone willing to go to battle and earn a right to become a citizen. I actually did some time with some guys that were doing this and they were great soldiers.
On the other hand I'd worry about substandard soldiers that didn't care about anything except citizenship, or speak proper english (ie Puerto Rico National Guard that needed an interpreter for all briefings).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Ann Coulter on mental health checks
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Don Gwinn
D
C
  • Locked
Our voting system, if not broken, is really bent...
Replies
13
Views
537
Kaylee
K
C
  • Locked
U.K. "Amnesty will help save pets"
Replies
1
Views
724
Leatherneck
L
C
  • Locked
U.K. "Gun amnesty a success - police"
Replies
0
Views
294
cuchulainn
C
2
  • Locked
Amnesty International : U. S. "terrifyngly repressive nation"
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
Malone LaVeigh
M
Back
Top