Has anyone saw the projections? Can you post it here?
Paul Ryan is right....legitimate, REAL Americans better get to baby making.
The writing is on the wall...it won't be long before Mexico chooses our POTUS.
The anchor baby, while potent politically, is a largely a mythical idea. The claim is that women come to the US to have babies:
- which serve as an anchor to prevent deportation of the family
- sponsor parents and siblings
- help illegal-immigrant parents access taxpayer-financed public education and/or social services through their citizen children
Let's look at each one of the above myths:
Being the parent of a U.S. citizen child almost never forms the core of a successful defense in an immigration court. In short, if the undocumented parent of a U.S.-born child is caught in the United States, he or she legally faces the very same risk of deportation as any other immigrant.
Second, Children sponsoring parents to attain legal residency involves such a long game that it's not a practical immigration strategy. If and when a U.S. citizen reaches the age of 21, he or she can then sponsor a parent to obtain a visa and green card and eventually enter the United States legally. However, the parents can not be illegally living in the US.
Lastly, access to taxpayer sponsored services is another hot button. However, the facts are that the law limits the benefits to the children themselves, not the parents. So looking at the family as a whole the benefits in the US are about the same as they are back home.
The fact is none of the anchor baby claims are of any real significance and are used to divert attention from the real immigration problems, poor control of the boarder, employers hiring illegals, an inadequate visa tracking system, and immigration laws that help illegals stay in the country and encourage illegal entry.
The myth of the ‘anchor baby’ deportation defense
Oh boy...the myth about the myth...some retard fabricated this theory and all the fools were fooled...haha
Let me break this down for:
The average Beaner family here in Mexifornia looks like this:
Fernando and Guadalupe have 4-6 children born in the U.S. all attending public schools. Carlos works for $10 dollars an hour CASH and averages 50 hours per week, Carlos grosses $500 per week in income.
Guadalupe is a stay at home mother.
The cost to attend a public school in CA is $10,600 per year per child. The cost of child birth in CA is $10,000. Fernando and Guadalupe get housing assistance, EBT, welfare, health coverage...etc etc all compliments of hard working real American taxpayers. I won't list all the other direct and indirect expenses related to Fernando's family as it would be retarded and a waste of time.
Do your own math and PLEASE explain to me how Fernando and Guadalupe aren't incentivized to drop anchors here?
Let me know if you need to to post images of how poor beaners in Mexico live versus how poor beaners in the US live....I would be happy to teach you more.