Arizona requires you to carry your papers

[EvilMonkey]

. They earn income, they consume, they save,

I am cherry-picking here, but they EARN far less than they CONSUME in benefits and what they SAVE they send out of the country to prop up Mexico which is why that hellhole won't do anything to stop it, or THEY go broke as a country.

 

(Cue tex's response about sending my kids to be migrant veggie pickers or something, and a slight rant about businesses needing illegals, while completely ignoring that most have called for a valid, workable guest worker program to alleviate that issue, including me).

 

On a different note, you also said

There has to be a compromise somewhere between mass deportations and amnesty and until our elected leaders sit down and at least attempt to address the situation we're leaving the decisions in the hands of those whom have shown no real commitment to finding a practical solution to this mess.

Sometimes you have to slap a hysterical person in the face to get their attention. Arizona has been asking for help for years to stem the flow of illegals from the feds, and getting nothing. maybe this is just the slap in the face to say 'hey feds, wake the f*ck up, we are SERIOUS here'? Edited April 29, 2010 by Alpha Dog

[mac9001]

I am cherry-picking here, but they EARN far less than they CONSUME in benefits and what they SAVE they send out of the country to prop up Mexico which is why that hellhole won't do anything to stop it, or THEY go broke as a country.

 

(Cue tex's response about sending my kids to be migrant veggie pickers or something, and a slight rant about businesses needing illegals, while completely ignoring that most have called for a valid, workable guest worker program to alleviate that issue, including me).

 

On a different note, you also said

Sometimes you have to slap a hysterical person in the face to get their attention. Arizona has been asking for help for years to stem the flow of illegals from the feds, and getting nothing. maybe this is just the slap in the face to say 'hey feds, wake the f*ck up, we are SERIOUS here'?

 

I've seen the they cost more than they contribute argument before and it simply doesn't hold up when looking at it form a wider perspective. Illegal immigrants are far less likely to consume public resources then legal residents (which helps off-set their lower earnings). I've seen studies that claim illegal immigrants pay roughly 65-70% (which is a stat that comes up a lot in relation to illegal immigrants) of their expected tax contribution. Health, education, infrastructure spending isn't nearly as significant as revenues gathered on social security, medicare and medicate taxes. The IRS graciously accepts such tax payments from illegal immigrants and holds all that revenue in escrow accounts (worth tens of billions). For the federal government illegal immigrants are fairly profitable commodity, however, that certainly is not the case at the state level. While the federal government is pocketing billions state budgets are being burdened by costs associated with illegal immigrants.

 

But taxes are still only a small slice in a much broader picture. While their consumption may not be particularly impressive on an individual level and their savings ends up mostly as remittances to Mexico, their aggregate consumption and savings still end up being fairly significant. As i illustrated in my previous post it's easy to get caught up thinking of illegal immigrants on a individual level, but once you actually conceptualize how much money they control on an aggregate level you realize how incredibly significant they are to the economy as a whole. They've contributed billions to local economies and have created demand for additional business and housing.

 

But lets examine the situation beyond just taxes; even if on a tax basis illegal immigrants cost more then they bring in, their aggregate contribution to consumption is vital for many business. By removing illegal immigrants you could be condemning millions of Americans who depend on their consumption and savings as revenue for their business. Certainly those loses would not be evenly distrusted and many areas would probably see economic benefits, but once again and i can't stress this enough, on a aggregate level the removal of illegal immigrants would cause much more harm then good. They're simply too integrated economically to assume you can remove hundreds of thousands or even millions on the national level and not suffer severe economic instability. To put things in perspective you if you to suddenly remove just 5 million illegal immigrants at lets say an assumed per capita income level of $20,000, that's a $100 billion dollars you just pulled out of the economy, granted some of that would probably be made up by gains realized from removing 5 million illegal immigrants, but that $100 billion serves as conduit for hundreds of billions generated through connections that most of us just don't visualize. You're talking about playing a dangerous game of dominoes and you can never be certain what unforeseen consequences arise from the removal of that many individuals and money. Mass deportation can potentially lead to another financial crisis, a decade ago few people would have said poor judgment on the hands of a few mortgage lenders and brokers would eventually lead to a trillion dollar global financial crisis. Given a wide variety of options mass deportations present the greatest potential for harmful unforeseen consequences conspiring against our interests. Given the cost to simply hand out blanket amnesty would probably cost pennies on the dollar when compared to a what is basically an impractical solution in mass deportation, such as the Arizona bill contrives.

 

It comes down to a basic risk analysis, it's cheaper and easier to hand out amnesty after amnesty if the only other solution is increased enforcement of ineffective immigration laws.

Edited April 29, 2010 by mac9001

[Texsox]

I am cherry-picking here, but they EARN far less than they CONSUME in benefits and what they SAVE they send out of the country to prop up Mexico which is why that hellhole won't do anything to stop it, or THEY go broke as a country.

 

(Cue tex's response about sending my kids to be migrant veggie pickers or something, and a slight rant about businesses needing illegals, while completely ignoring that most have called for a valid, workable guest worker program to alleviate that issue, including me).

 

On a different note, you also said

Sometimes you have to slap a hysterical person in the face to get their attention. Arizona has been asking for help for years to stem the flow of illegals from the feds, and getting nothing. maybe this is just the slap in the face to say 'hey feds, wake the f*ck up, we are SERIOUS here'?

 

ANYONE working low paying jobs collects more in benefits than they pay in taxes. Which is why using workers that do not qualify for those benefits is so handy for the government. Also, I have not said they need illegals, they need people willing to work temporary seasonal jobs in agriculture and a few other low paying, s***ty jobs.

 

And when they are earning about a $1000 a month, just how much are they really sending back home?

 

And I have said a guest worker program is the best solution.

 

But the bottom line with this law is basically requiring CITIZENS to carry papers proving they are citizens.

[NorthSideSox72]

mac9001-

 

Thanks for joining the discussion, and diving into the economic impacts of this, which you are right, have not been fully thought out. Your posts are very interesting.

 

Also, if you want to post in the Buster, please make sure you read, acknowledge and post in the PLEASE READ thread pinned at the top of the forum.

 

Thanks!

 

[southsider2k5]

ANYONE working low paying jobs collects more in benefits than they pay in taxes. Which is why using workers that do not qualify for those benefits is so handy for the government. Also, I have not said they need illegals, they need people willing to work temporary seasonal jobs in agriculture and a few other low paying, s***ty jobs.

 

And when they are earning about a $1000 a month, just how much are they really sending back home?

 

And I have said a guest worker program is the best solution.

But the bottom line with this law is basically requiring CITIZENS to carry papers proving they are citizens.

 

After viewing what it has become OK to require citizens to do, or wanting to force them to do, in this country lately, I don't see how anyone can use the constitution as a defense any more. That document has been obliterated for all practical purposes.

[Balta1701]

After viewing what it has become OK to require citizens to do, or wanting to force them to do, in this country lately, I don't see how anyone can use the constitution as a defense any more. That document has been obliterated for all practical purposes.

[southsider2k5]

 

Yeah I know you only see the constitution as things that create new Democrats and things that are unconstitutional, but there are bigger things here. Take a macro-view of recent history and leave the party politics behind. The funny thing is that I really do believe this is a horrible law and should be unconstitutional, but then I again I don't see the world completely through the eyes of my party. To me this is as big of a intrusion on individual rights as the health care bill, gun bannings, and the Patriot Act, and other things that are bandied about.

[Balta1701]

gun bannings,

The fact that you included that when gun laws are weaker than they have been in decades...

[southsider2k5]

The fact that you included that when gun laws are weaker than they have been in decades...

 

Rich Daley and Washington DC love you.

[Balta1701]

Rich Daley and Washington DC love you.

And the Supreme Court doesn't exist. John Roberts is simply a bad dream.

[Jenksismyhero]

LOL

 

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100429/D9FCDCN00.html

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah I know you only see the constitution as things that create new Democrats and things that are unconstitutional, but there are bigger things here. Take a macro-view of recent history and leave the party politics behind. The funny thing is that I really do believe this is a horrible law and should be unconstitutional, but then I again I don't see the world completely through the eyes of my party. To me this is as big of a intrusion on individual rights as the health care bill, gun bannings, and the Patriot Act, and other things that are bandied about.

Other than the hyperbolic first sentence, I agree with this. Intrusion into our lives is intrusion into our lives. Its not OK in this law's case, nor was it OK with warrantless wiretapping, various provisions of the Patriot Act, pointless gun bans, requiring the purchase of health insurance, telling people who they can marry, etc. Neither party currently has much hold on the moral high ground of "individual rights" - they both pick and choose a few they like.

[BigSqwert]

I thought the GOP was all about upholding the constitution? Is this guy for real??

 

"Would you support deportation of natural-born American citizens that are the children of illegal aliens," Hunter was asked. "I would have to, yes," Hunter said. "... We simply cannot afford what we're doing right now," he said. "... It takes more than just walking across the border to become an American citizen. It's what's in our souls. ..."

 

Hunter made his comments at a "tea party" rally in the San Diego County city of Ramona over the weekend.

 

via

 

As a reminder (from the 14th Amendment):

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[southsider2k5]

And the Supreme Court doesn't exist. John Roberts is simply a bad dream.

 

The point is, just like this law, people are going to pass crap, in the name of appeasing their party faithful. Sometimes the Supreme Court has gotten it right, but not always. Most people are going to follow in lock-step with their party in defending this stuff, no matter what. Besides we are only another Obama appointment away from all of this stuff getting taken out again anyway, and we can really get to destroying individual rights.

[NorthSideSox72]

I thought the GOP was all about upholding the constitution? Is this guy for real??

 

 

 

via

 

As a reminder (from the 14th Amendment):

This bill has been very good at showing us the difference between old school individual freedom Republicans, and the angry, hateful social conservatives. We're seeing a number of GOP'ers standing up and saying that certain aspects of this law go too far. But then you get people like Hunter, Palin, etc., that are showing their true colors.

 

[BigSqwert]

This bill has been very good at showing us the difference between old school individual freedom Republicans, and the angry, hateful social conservatives. We're seeing a number of GOP'ers standing up and saying that certain aspects of this law go too far. But then you get people like Hunter, Palin, etc., that are showing their true colors.

 

[T]en years ago this month, Republicans were pitching an absolute fit about allowing Elian Gonzalez to go back to Cuba, demanding he be made an American citizen because… his mother almost walked across the border. Ten years later, they want to kick out Hispanic citizens because… their mothers walked across the border.

 

via

[southsider2k5]

via

 

That is a terrible analogy. The problem was sending him back to an oppressive communist government. Did Castro take over Mexico?

[NorthSideSox72]

That is a terrible analogy. The problem was sending him back to an oppressive communist government. Did Castro take over Mexico?

No, but some people do seem to believe that a communist took over the US.

 

[StrangeSox]

That is a terrible analogy. The problem was sending him back to an oppressive communist government. Did Castro take over Mexico?

So we're still cool with Cuban refugees, then?

[southsider2k5]

So we're still cool with Cuban refugees, then?

 

That's up to you it sounds like. I was just correctly a falsehood.

[Middle Buffalo]

That is a terrible analogy. The problem was sending him back to an oppressive communist government. Did Castro take over Mexico?

If the U.S. has such a problem with communism, why do we do so much business with China?

 

Pretty good article about why Obama shouldn't get involved in the immigration issue. Funny that McCain has changed his tune so drastically in an election year. http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/2010042...10_bushwasright

[Jenksismyhero]

via

 

Is your tactic with arguments to make politicians/political parties look like fools? Cuz you know, I think if you polled people here, 99.9% would agree that all politicians and parties are assbackwards dumb. They're ALWAYS inconsistent. I'm sure if I had the extra time/energy I could throw out all sorts of inconsistent things Obama has said over the years to "prove" how retarded he must be. But it adds nothing to the debate.

 

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

If the U.S. has such a problem with communism, why do we do so much business with China?

 

Pretty good article about why Obama shouldn't get involved in the immigration issue. Funny that McCain has changed his tune so drastically in an election year. http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/2010042...10_bushwasright

 

So where is the part about a kid fleeing China and a family trying to keep them hear to keep them out of the grasps of the government?

[Middle Buffalo]

So where is the part about a kid fleeing China and a family trying to keep them hear to keep them out of the grasps of the government?

We're not allowed to travel to Cuba, import items from Cuba, etc. But we can go to China and do business with China. Both are communist countries. Why the difference?

 

People (kids and adults) flee Mexico daily because of the oppressive government and poverty in that country. They come to the U.S. seeking refuge and opportunity. But we want to turn them away.

[southsider2k5]

We're not allowed to travel to Cuba, import items from Cuba, etc. But we can go to China and do business with China. Both are communist countries. Why the difference?

 

People (kids and adults) flee Mexico daily because of the oppressive government and poverty in that country. They come to the U.S. seeking refuge and opportunity. But we want to turn them away.

 

Are you really telling me the governments in Mexico and Cuba are similar?