Shakira enters Arizona immigration fight

[jillian]

law enforcement costs money.. no doubt.... and that IS what monies should be spent on rather than wealth redistribution and entitlements for personal responsibilities

what are entitlements? education? environmental protection? social security? WIC? tell us what you'd cut. the things that I think are important or the things that YOU think are important?

If revenues need to go up... just start taxing those that are not participating in income taxation currently... but this should be taken care of by cutting unnecessary governmental spending

like military spending?

 

[boedicca]

If SS benefits had been indexed to inflation instead of wage growth, the problem would not be nearly as large.

 

[jillian]

no, it's not. if Sharkira breaks the law and comes into contact with la polcicia she will be asked for ID,, if she doesn't have it and is found to be here illegally she will be arrested for breaking the law and for being here illegally..

and what happens, bubbalah, when jose who has earned his citizenship papers has to run out at night to get meds for his wife and doesn't carry his citizenship papers?

hmmmmmmmmmm?

He is a citizen of the US? or a visitor with papers?? Citzen? He gets to go home and get them. Visitor without his papers? he broke Federal law.

so you agree that even citizens now have to show proof of citizenship in AZ?

 

[Reidlr]

We shouldn't give any illegal alien amnesty! If you are found to be here illegally, then you should be sent back to the your country of origin. Once you are back home in your country, then you may follow the laws of this great country in order to return.

assume i agree with you.... and in an ideal world i do. but do you have any idea what the cost of such an endeavor would be?

and is that a priority over other things we need to spend money on?

finally, if someone said to you that it could be done but your taxes would go up 30%, what would you do?

i think these questions are fair because, ultimately, it comes down to how expensive would it be to find and ship everyone back to country of origin?

The cost to deport every illegal immigrant would be very high; however, this would take years to accomplish and would occur in phases. Your first question begs the assumption that we would be able to have all illegal immigrants together in order to ship them back to their country of origin all at one time; when in fact, this could never happen. So to answer your first question, I don't know what the cost would be as it would be solely based on assumptions and speculation. IMHO, immigration and border security should be a priority, but then, I am in favor of a government that is represented in our Constitution and not the one we currently have before us today (before you ask, I am not aligned with the Tea Party or GOP). Our government spends money on programs that aught not exist or at the very least could exist under the control of the States; so to answer your question, yes, I do believe that immigration and border security should be one of the priorities of this country. Your third question is an estimate based on the assumption that there would be a tax increase in order for this country to deport illegal immigrants. I can not answer this question, simply for the reason that we can not know if the deportation of illegal immigrants in mass numbers would increase our taxes. I will however, play along with your assumption; please answer this question for me, as I do not know the answer: What is the highest recorded Federal Income Tax adjustment on record? I am pretty sure that never in the history of this country has the Federal Income Tax had an adjustment of 30%. If our federal tax were to be adjusted I am sure it would not be of that magnitude. So ultimatly I can answer your third qustion; and that is, I would not have issue with paying it as long as it resulted in the increased security of this Country.

 

[DiamondDave]

law enforcement costs money.. no doubt.... and that IS what monies should be spent on rather than wealth redistribution and entitlements for personal responsibilities

what are entitlements? education? environmental protection? social security? WIC? tell us what you'd cut. the things that I think are important or the things that YOU think are important?

If revenues need to go up... just start taxing those that are not participating in income taxation currently... but this should be taken care of by cutting unnecessary governmental spending

like military spending?

Yes.. cut federal education spending.. that is on the state and local governments... EPA, certain things can be cut out of there, as it has been overrun by the environazis and not just focusing on pollution reduction, prosecuting pollution crimes, etc... social security, yep, needs to be phased out.... WIC, entitlement welfare, needs out.. You want me to also start listing AGAIN the agencies in the FED that are completely unnecessary starting with 'A'?? I've done it many times before

Military spending can be cut in certain areas, but that is an area the FED is actually charged to provide... entitlements are not....

 

[Angelhair]

With ALL the problems that her native country of Colombia has had, is having, and will have, one would think Shakira would be over THERE making sure colombia stops the abuse of her own people!!! Can you read this Shakira??? Oh yes, educate yourself on how OUR system works; what OUR laws are; and especially READ the U. S. Constitutiion before you open your yap....please!

 

[Angelhair]

'like i said... krauthammer was wrong on everything for eight years. not much interested in what his *opinion* is now.'


Spoken like classic true bleeding heart li-ber-al.........yikes!

 

[Angelhair]

'You claim to be an attorney but you don't even know the laws.'

Jillian an attorney???? When donkey's fly.....if she is an attorney, I'm Mother Teresa!

 

[CMike]

Go back and read teh thread muddy.

It is replete with cons saying how they dont care about this person or this group of people.

Im sure your family loves you but you would not gain their further love by sayong you did not care about one or the other.

The problem is that some of us just think different from you.

Many of us walk the walk...not just talk the talk.

By supporting laws that harm people of color?

yeah right

You mean white people?

 

[Angelhair]

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's proposed 2011 budget would cut the border patrol by 180 agents and trim spending on a "virtual fence" along the nation's Southwest border.

Homeland security officials confirmed the proposed cuts Monday during a budget briefing for reporters. They said no border patrol agents would lose their jobs. Instead, the positions would be cut through attrition as agents retire or leave.

One does have to wonder whose side this man is on?????

 

[Shogun]

'You claim to be an attorney but you don't even know the laws.'

Jillian an attorney???? When donkey's fly.....if she is an attorney, I'm Mother Teresa!

well... you had better don your nun habit then...

 

[jillian]

The cost to deport every illegal immigrant would be very high; however, this would take years to accomplish and would occur in phases. Your first question begs the assumption that we would be able to have all illegal immigrants together in order to ship them back to their country of origin all at one time; when in fact, this could never happen. So to answer your first question, I don't know what the cost would be as it would be solely based on assumptions and speculation. IMHO, immigration and border security should be a priority, but then, I am in favor of a government that is represented in our Constitution and not the one we currently have before us today (before you ask, I am not aligned with the Tea Party or GOP). Our government spends money on programs that aught not exist or at the very least could exist under the control of the States; so to answer your question, yes, I do believe that immigration and border security should be one of the priorities of this country. Your third question is an estimate based on the assumption that there would be a tax increase in order for this country to deport illegal immigrants. I can not answer this question, simply for the reason that we can not know if the deportation of illegal immigrants in mass numbers would increase our taxes. I will however, play along with your assumption; please answer this question for me, as I do not know the answer: What is the highest recorded Federal Income Tax adjustment on record? I am pretty sure that never in the history of this country has the Federal Income Tax had an adjustment of 30%. If our federal tax were to be adjusted I am sure it would not be of that magnitude. So ultimatly I can answer your third qustion; and that is, I would not have issue with paying it as long as it resulted in the increased security of this Country.

honestly, i'm not really interested in discussing this issue in light of the 'constitution' as you would like to think it exists. so let's assume for purposes of this discussion that all things we have to balance will still need to be balanced.

while i understand that not all illegals would be removed at once, it is also clear that the increased law enforcements costs would be exorbitant. now, i have no problem of ending things like the 'war on drugs' and getting our troops out of iraq. that would be a huge savings. however, i believe they would still be exceeded annually by the cost to the economy of getting rid of all illegals.

as for federal income tax adjustment, according to factcheck.org:

A tax increase in 1942 boosted federal revenues by 71%, for example, as the US geared up for war after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Measured in inflation-adjusted 1992 dollars, Roosevelt's wartime increase amounted to $73 billion a year, while Clinton's increase averaged $35 billion a year (average for the first two years.)

The study said that inflation-adjusted "constant dollars" is probably only the second -best measure of the size of a tax increase. "The single best measure for most purposes is probably the revenue effect as a percentage of GDP." That's Gross Domestic Product, the way we gauge the size of the economy. Clinton's tax increase isn't the biggest by that "best" measure, either.

In the period since 1968, the study said, "the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 was the biggest increase." That was the tax increase signed by Ronald Reagan, rescinding some of the effects of his huge tax cut passed the year before.

That 1982 tax increase only slightly exceeded Clinton's in inflation-adjusted dollars ($37 billion a year vs.. $32 billion) but it was much bigger in relation to the size of the economy. The '82 increase amounted to 0.8% of GDP (average for the first two years) while Clinton's was 0.5%.

FactCheck.org: Treasury Tax Expert to Bush: Clinton's Increase WASN'T The Biggest.

as a final note, we both assume there is some type of resolve *to* get rid of illegal aliens. do you think their cheap labor would be replaced by americans? would americans pick our fruits and vegetables for the prices they do? would they take care of our kids for the same cost? (and no i did not have an illegal alien nanny for my son). so on top of the tax increases you would be called upon to pay, the cost of your goods and services would go up as well.

 

[CMike]

Fact Check is a left wing organization. Their nonsense is obviously tainted.

 

[jillian]

Fact Check is a left wing organization. Their nonsense is obviously tainted.

factcheck.org is no such thing. and dick cheney said people should use it during the bush/kerry election cycle.

you can't discount facts because they disagree with your preconceived notions.

 

[jillian]

'You claim to be an attorney but you don't even know the laws.'

Jillian an attorney???? When donkey's fly.....if she is an attorney, I'm Mother Teresa!

well... you had better don your nun habit then...

isn't it funny how it's always the really, really dumb ones who make comments like hers? lol..

 

[GHook93]

This satire piece below is exactly why you don't listen to entertainers about politics! That is how we get nutjobs like Jessica the Body Ventura as Governor of a State!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chp2u2ln8_E]YouTube - Team America F.A.G[/ame]

 

[Angelhair]

'he isn't schooling me at all. he has an opinion. and i can tell you that the law is going to be struck down.'

And I can tell YOU.....it won't. They would have to strike down the federal law also as the AZ law mirrors THAT law.

 

[jillian]

'he isn't schooling me at all. he has an opinion. and i can tell you that the law is going to be struck down.'

And I can tell YOU.....it won't. They would have to strike down the federal law also as the AZ law mirrors THAT law.

is that what glen beck told you? y'okie dokie.

 

[Angelhair]

'well... you had better don your nun habit then...'

Hmmmmmmm......well okay......if you say so.

 

[Angelhair]

'isn't it funny how it's always the really, really dumb ones who make comments like hers? lol..'

Well, not everybody can be as 'smart' as you now can we?????