Reid calls illegals “12 million undocumented Americans

[actsnoblemartin]

even though we disagree, I respect your opinion, and admire youre compassion.

Good for the 12 million illegals.

If they risk their lives getting here, let them stay.

Most Americans wouldn't dare take the journey that these illegals take to come here.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

in my humble opinion, we may not be able to deport 12-20 million illegals. But..
if we end all free entitlements to them, many of them will leave.

Also, we need to get rid of 90% of them atleast, because we cant afford them, especially if they become legal citizens who then become entitled to social security, when its already nearly bankrupt.

Second, if we have secure border, we can have guest workers, but only with strict enforcement, and punishing employers.

we must remember, all the people who are screwed, because they live in africa and asia, and its not so easy to walk across, the many legal immigrants basically, who dont get rewarded for doing it the wrong way, while breaking the law gets you rewarded, its a dangerous message.

 

[red states rule]

http://www.heritage.org/research/immigration/SR14.cfm


Of all adult high school dropouts, legal and illegal, in America, 49% are illegals, 25% are legal immigrants and 9% are native-born Americans.

The U.S. Government, funded by U.S. citizens, pays out an average of $30,160.00 per legal and illegal household with heads-of-households lacking a high school diploma.

The $30,160.00-average paid represents social security benefits and Medicare, police, public safety, transportation, administrative support, public education and other means-tested aid. View this in Chart 2 of The Heritage Foundation report.

"Low-skill immigrant households are larger and younger than are households headed by non-immigrant dropouts: Only 17 percent of low-skill immigrant households are elderly compared to 43 percent of households headed by non-immigrant dropouts. Because they are younger, low-skill immigrant households have more workers per household than similar non-immigrant households, but the average wage per worker is actually slightly higher in low-skill non-immi*grant households ($20,828 per worker among non-immigrants compared to $18,490 among immigrants)."
"Overall, households headed by immigrants without a high school diploma (or low-skill immigrant households) received an average of $30,160 per household in direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services in FY 2004."
"Means-tested aid came to $10,428 per household, while direct benefits (mainly Social Security and Medicare) amounted to $4,891. Education spending on behalf of these households averaged $8,462 per household, while spending on police, fire, and public safety came to $2,746 per household. Transportation added another $809, and administrative support services cost $1,195. Miscellaneous population-based services added a final $1,529."
In return for handing-out $30,000.00+ per legal and illegal household, we receive from such households, a payment average of $10,573.00 in taxes. These paid-in taxes include federal highway taxes, unemployment insurance and workers compensation taxes, federal excise taxes and customs duties, state individual income tax, STATE LOTTERY PURCHASES (an average of $714.00 per household!), corporate income tax, state and local property taxes, federal individual income taxes, state and local sales and comsumption taxes and FICA "contributions." View this in Chart 3 of The Heritage Foundation Report.

 

[red states rule]

Agreed---someone needs to tell em what to think and Hillary pretends to be so anti-illegal that they don't know which way to jump.

Russert Doesn't Connect Dots Between McCain Poll Collapse, Immigration Stance


Scanning the news this morning, you see a report on the latest presidential poll. John McCain has lost over 1/3rd of his support. What's the first thing that pops into your mind? OK, the headline here is a hint, but isn't it obvious that McCain's pro-amnesty stance has hurt him badly among Republican voters?

Well, apparently not so obvious to Tim Russert. Here's how it went on this morning's "Today."

NBC WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF TIM RUSSERT: John McCain's lost eight points since April, Matt.
TODAY CO-HOST MATT LAUER: What's wrong with his campaign?

TIM RUSSERT: Well, he's having some fund-raising problems and I think Fred Thompson's presence is starting to draw folks away.
http://newsbusters.org/node/13446

 

[Toro]

http://www.heritage.org/research/immigration/SR14.cfm


Of all adult high school dropouts, legal and illegal, in America, 49% are illegals, 25% are legal immigrants and 9% are native-born Americans.

The U.S. Government, funded by U.S. citizens, pays out an average of $30,160.00 per legal and illegal household with heads-of-households lacking a high school diploma.

The $30,160.00-average paid represents social security benefits and Medicare, police, public safety, transportation, administrative support, public education and other means-tested aid. View this in Chart 2 of The Heritage Foundation report.

"Low-skill immigrant households are larger and younger than are households headed by non-immigrant dropouts: Only 17 percent of low-skill immigrant households are elderly compared to 43 percent of households headed by non-immigrant dropouts. Because they are younger, low-skill immigrant households have more workers per household than similar non-immigrant households, but the average wage per worker is actually slightly higher in low-skill non-immi*grant households ($20,828 per worker among non-immigrants compared to $18,490 among immigrants)."
"Overall, households headed by immigrants without a high school diploma (or low-skill immigrant households) received an average of $30,160 per household in direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services in FY 2004."
"Means-tested aid came to $10,428 per household, while direct benefits (mainly Social Security and Medicare) amounted to $4,891. Education spending on behalf of these households averaged $8,462 per household, while spending on police, fire, and public safety came to $2,746 per household. Transportation added another $809, and administrative support services cost $1,195. Miscellaneous population-based services added a final $1,529."
In return for handing-out $30,000.00+ per legal and illegal household, we receive from such households, a payment average of $10,573.00 in taxes. These paid-in taxes include federal highway taxes, unemployment insurance and workers compensation taxes, federal excise taxes and customs duties, state individual income tax, STATE LOTTERY PURCHASES (an average of $714.00 per household!), corporate income tax, state and local property taxes, federal individual income taxes, state and local sales and comsumption taxes and FICA "contributions." View this in Chart 3 of The Heritage Foundation Report.

This is what my post from the Wall Street Journal was contradicting.

Most economists who have studied immigration have concluded that immigration - legal and illegal - has been a boon to America.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

This is what my post from the Wall Street Journal was contradicting.

Most economists who have studied immigration have concluded that immigration - legal and illegal - has been a boon to America.

So what?

It's not a "boon" to America when

1. our laws are ignored by incoming foreigners
2. becoming a U.S. citizen is being demeaned/ignored
3. our social/medical programs/services are being destroyed
4. our borders are wide open to terrorists, criminals, disease, etc.
5. you have to press 1 for English
6. our schools are having big problems
7. our American culture is being destroyed; assimilation is too little
8. basically any foreigner can come to America and vote in our elections
9. buckets of our money is being exported to Mexico
10. the illegal aliens have an alliegience to Mexico, not the U.S.
etc.

Are you willing to sacrifice and destroy our country just because of some cheap labor and some economic "boon"?

 

[actsnoblemartin]

Ive gotta agree with screaming eagle here.

So what?

It's not a "boon" to America when

1. our laws are ignored by incoming foreigners
2. becoming a U.S. citizen is being demeaned/ignored
3. our social/medical programs/services are being destroyed
4. our borders are wide open to terrorists, criminals, disease, etc.
5. you have to press 1 for English
6. our schools are having big problems
7. our American culture is being destroyed; assimilation is too little
8. basically any foreigner can come to America and vote in our elections
9. buckets of our money is being exported to Mexico
10. the illegal aliens have an alliegience to Mexico, not the U.S.
etc.

Are you willing to sacrifice and destroy our country just because of some cheap labor and some economic "boon"?

 

[hjmick]

One of the problems we face with illegal immigration and, in some instances, lega immigration is the lack of assimilation. This can and will lead to the Balkanization of this country, creating more problems the the government is prepared to cope with. You can see small examples of this in Britain today with the Muslim community. With alarming frequency Muslim communities are doling out justice based on their laws, their beliefs. In some intances I believe this practice is even being indirectly accepted by British authorities for fear of causing problems. Just this week a Muslim immigrant and some of his friends were convicted in Britain for the "honor killing" of his daughter.

I am not opposed to legal immigration to this country, but I believe there needs to be some amount of assimilation to our culture and an ability to speak and comprehend English is a must. I would not dream of moving to a country that didn't speak English and not learn the language.

The idea that so many people come to this country and the first thing they do is break our law regarding entry to the U.S. and our elected officials want to reward them with what amounts to amnesty is galling. They violate our sovereignty and get a pass?

 

[red states rule]

even though we disagree, I respect your opinion, and admire youre compassion.

Libs are very compassionate with your tax dollars

 

[red states rule]

This is what my post from the Wall Street Journal was contradicting.

Most economists who have studied immigration have concluded that immigration - legal and illegal - has been a boon to America.

WSJ is wrong on this issue

Illegals are bleeding us all dry

Illegals are a huge drain on our resources

 

[Toro]

WSJ is wrong on this issue

Illegals are bleeding us all dry

Illegals are a huge drain on our resources

Most economists disagree.

I'll believe the economists since that is their area of expertise.

Science > ideology.

 

[red states rule]

Most economists disagree.

I'll believe the economists since that is their area of expertise.

Science > ideology.

Except when they say the US economy is doing well

How much a tax increase do you think it will take to pay the tab the illegals are running up?

 

[red states rule]

But who's really being cynical when it comes to illegal immigration?

The government?

Of course.

It has caved to pressure groups for over a quarter-century. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 ensured neither reform nor control. Instead, the law simply resulted in millions entering the United States through blanket amnesty and de facto open borders.

In many cities, current municipal laws bar police officers from turning arrested illegal aliens over to immigration officials. So why should the public believe that the proposed new law, with hundreds of pages of rules and regulations, would trump local obstructionism or effect any real change?

Had the bill passed, could we really have expected that the first impoverished alien unable to pay the fee or fine under its provisions would have been sent summarily home? More likely, he would have appeared on the 6 o'clock news as a victim of American mean-spiritedness and racism - and thereby instead won a reprieve or an outright apology.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/06/who_is_illiberal_on_immigratio.html

 

[Toro]

Except when they say the US economy is doing well

How much a tax increase do you think it will take to pay the tab the illegals are running up?

They're not running it up. That's the point.

Science > ideology.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

They're not running it up. That's the point.

Science > ideology.

Your WSJ article merrily talks about the "actuarial balance" of immigrants meaning that over the LIFETIME of illegal immigrants working in the U.S. they wind up paying more into the system over their LIFETIMES than they take out. Whoopee-do. This does not address the many, many problems that the incoming illegals are causing NOW. And the ongoing incoming problem just keeps getting worse. The current 20 million illegals is expected to triple in a few short years.

And this WSJ article is our politicians nifty answer to the Social Security mess? (which btw they created) And so we're also supposed to buy into the notion of "lower cost of production" and "complementary skills"?

So we get the benefits of illegal immigrant income taxes over time…OK...but in the meantime you think our country should be destroyed in the process of obtaining those new income taxes? It seems to me that the breaking point (in many ways, but especially breaking down the middle class and our American way of life) is going to be reached far sooner than the expected "actuarial balance".

Reality > Political Science

 

[Shogun]

Laughing Native American > Ironic Xenophbia


the Constitution doesnt garentee that America will maintain a white waspy european traditional majority any more than it garenteed that people will always sport wigs and the kings engrish...

democracy, as a political system, will work just as well for a latino majority in America as it has for the gringos scared to death to be treated as a minority by the same minorities they treat like shit.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Laughing Native American > Ironic Xenophbia


the Constitution doesnt garentee that America will maintain a white waspy european traditional majority any more than it garenteed that people will always sport wigs and the kings engrish...

democracy, as a political system, will work just as well for a latino majority in America as it has for the gringos scared to death to be treated as a minority by the same minorities they treat like shit.

As Michelle Malkin pointed out to Geraldo Rivera yesterday on Fox/O'Reilly, this issue is not about race.

 

[Eightball]

Laughing Native American > Ironic Xenophbia


the Constitution doesnt garentee that America will maintain a white waspy european traditional majority any more than it garenteed that people will always sport wigs and the kings engrish...

democracy, as a political system, will work just as well for a latino majority in America as it has for the gringos scared to death to be treated as a minority by the same minorities they treat like shit.

How about this non-Waspy, potential-future majority follow the laws of the country they so badly want to come to, and not demand to be recognized and given amnesty for breaking that "wonderful" country's laws to gain entrance?

It reminds me of the "Paris Hilton" syndrome in some ways. I break the law, now give me a "break". "I deserve it.".........??????

Why should a certain group of a certain ethnicity, be given special or softened rules of entry to this "wonderful" land of opportunity, over a person from the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Asia.....etc.?

This, "Now that I'm here, make or allow me to become legal!", is a blatant changing or challenging of the sovereignty laws that made this nation what it is.

In fact, quotas were a standard immigration rule/law with this nation. I.E. So many were allowed per year from various nations, "legally". Mexico has poured-in well over their quota, and even expects us to bend or break our sovereign laws to ease their lack of border control.

You can bring up Vietnam's exodus of immigrants right after the fall of South Vietnam, but that whole scenario was a result of our direct, physical contact and intervention with that country militarily/politically, and we did commit to a humanitarian effort to support and give refuge to those in Vietnam that had supported us militarily and politically.

How can we apply that to Mexico? Last time I remember America troops interveneing in Mexico's sovereignty, was back around the turn of the 20th century when we chased some border-hopping Mexican bank robbers into their home land. I believe that even General Pershing was involved in that. By the way those bank robbers were robbing Texas banks......in the U.S..

Mexico's government, is not supportive of a middle-class economy. They'd rather look the other way, and pretend that all is well, and allow their bottom class sneek over the border via highly paid criminals/slave movers, called "Coyotes".

This has also encouraged or permitted the possibility of foreign nationals of other nations that harbor terrorist to utilize the Mexican illegal highway of immigration with little or no problem.

It has been documented that Middle Easterners are entering Mexico via Central America, and are utilizing, highly paid, and armed "Coyotes" to transport them illegally into the U.S..

Without violating some of the sensitive ones on the board that are P.C. hyperactive, most of these Middle Easterners can blend in with the Mexican illegals, and just keep their collective mouths shut, or know a couple words of Spanish to pass as Mexican nationals.

The U.S. border patrol has been finding evidences of non-Mexican nationals entering this way for some time. Of course the U.S. border folks are under strict P.C. orders to keep "mum" about this dangerous situation. We must not upset our resident ethnic Middle Eastern populous or voters.
*****
Also, what is forgotten here is the motivation of those that jump the border illegally, versus the last great immigrations of the late 19th and early 20th century. The present folks are doing this strictly for economic reasons as well as many for flight from Mexican prosecution too. They aren't medicall screened to protect the U.S. populous from new strains of T.B. and or other U.S. erradicated diseases.

This was not the majority case for the earlier immigrations. Folks were coming for freedom of speech, freedom of opportunity, possibilities for their progeny, political freedoms, etc.. They also followed or respected the laws of the U.S. in coming here, too.

The most recent ones come first of all enmass illegally, flaunting the very host country by violating it's laws.
They also entered enmass........."illegally".
*****
Tell me why amnesty to a people or group that flaunts the laws of the host nation should be allowed? Should we be forced to forgive and forget and just plain open the flood gates and have a porous border?

I don't care if my next Prez is dark skinned, or ethnically non European.........I just don't care. I just hope that he/ or she will uphold the laws of this country and protect it's sovereignty to the "max".

Also, I'm tired of you liberals throwing in the "Waspy" comments, when you don't have a sound argument or rebuttal to stand on. When cornered with a legitimate rebuttal, call out the "race card" or the "ethnicity" card. It's so typical to do the name calling or character asassinations stuff. WASP, Means White Anglo Saxon Protestant, last time I recall. Is that a sin?[/U] Shall we now differentiate all of our country's ethnic backgrounds into little clache's........? How about BSIC or Brown Spanish Indian Catholic, for our Mexican American citizens?

It's folks that like who utilize the WASP stuff that really cause or encourage class or ethnic hatred and envy. Karl Marx and Lenin played on that "card" back in 1917 in Russia. There are the have's and the have nots. The haves must give up and give to the have nots.........It's humanitarian. Never mind that most of the have's actually worked and calloused their hands to become have's. They need to fork it up. It's the Christian thing to do.......right?

We also know that even in that system (communism/socialism), the ones that administrate that type of society are the ones eating Caviar still, and have their Summer homes on the Black Sea.

Mexico has one royally screwed-up governmental system that plays to a land owning aristocracy, who abhors a middle class Mexico. Is the U.S. supposed to turn it's head, and let Mexico's internal problems destroy our economic system, because we are required to be sympathetic to the plight of their citizens?

I'd say that we as a country have the clout to force Mexico to change to a certain extent.

Vincente' Fox and his regime is culpable, not us. Maybe some immigration quotas need to be re-adjusted for our neighbor to the South, but quotas that don't involve turning a blind eye to violations of our sovereignty as a nation.

Our country can't afford to care for all the world's hurting, and unfortunate. It's impossible.

We are the most giving and helping country in the world although, and I'm proud of that as a U.S. citizen.

Ironically, I picture our country being on the receiving end of a massive Christian missionary influx from other nations some day, to help us find our original biblical roots, and become the once strong, ethical, nation it once was.

We are really hurting ethically, and are basically being "hamstrung" by P.C., New York lawyers, and "What, Me Worry?" attitude of our citizens. It will sneek up and bite us in the A**.

 

[Shogun]

As Michelle Malkin pointed out to Geraldo Rivera yesterday on Fox/O'Reilly, this issue is not about race.

no, it's about culture.


I bet you don't sport the ole wig look these days do you? Is that a travesty of a lost tradition or is that indicative of times that are always a changin'?

You might as well say that the Westward Expansion wasnt about race either... but look at the impact of the cultures in the way of said expansion. Similarly, the Constitution doesn't say that the US will remain a bastion of waspy cucasian european culture anymore than it said that we will always wear wigs and pantaloons.

My advice is to mend as many fences as you can and pray that you are not, later, treated how the majority, now, treats their minorities. It's just a matter of time before the naturalized latino populations use the same Democracy found in the Constitution in the same fashion that whites have been pummeling everyone with... Being white or living according to your opinion on tradition is not a prerequisite for Constitutional protection.


true fact.

 

[Shogun]

blah blah blah

NEWSFLASH!

Vicente Fox is not the president of mexico anymore.


good grief.


Hey, don't sweat it dude.... Im sure we will save a nice reservation for you out in the desert somewhere where you can remember the glory days of your culture as it shrinks into a fragile impotent joke of what it once was....


you might have to walk to get there, though... maybe we can name yours the "trail of waspy christian RAGE"


ps... considering the religion of the MAJORITY of latinos it highly doubt if your orwelian muslim majority nightmare will ever cause foreign christians to do missionary work in the US...


so, xmas is safe.. but we might have to make cinco de mayo a national federal holiday too.....