Ray From Cleveland
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2015
- 97,215
- 37,438
- 2,290
Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.
Among the findings:
Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children
- In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.
You and Healthmyths have done it again. You are using the statistics for immigrant HOUSEHOLDS. That is inaccurate, dishonest, and misleading. Groups like FAIR and the Heritage foundation use those misleading statistics to perpetuate the very myth you are expounding. The education of citizen children CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. The health care of citizen children, especially infants, CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. From your very link,
A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens
Come on, of course households with children, headed by immigrants, would use welfare services at a higher rate than those headed by a native. These are the low wage workers, remember? Well, except for the doctors from India. Hell, in your study if a family with an immigrant present had a child that got free or reduced lunch, BOOM--they are on welfare. First, well the child is a legal resident CITIZEN. Second--you know how much money you can make and still get reduced lunch? With two kids it is almost fifty grand. The average household income is little more than that.
To sum it up. Your study, and it is often used by others, openly admits that a "large share" of the expenses they are attributing to immigrants is, in fact, spending on the children who are American citizens. And they have constructed the criteria to such an extent than a family making the median income with three children, or just one on the way, would qualify as "dependent" on social services.
I don't decipher between legal or illegal, they are all a problem as far as I'm concerned, and if it were up to me, I would be closing off that border to anybody but perhaps a select few.
If over half of the immigrants are using some sort of welfare, WTF do we need them for? We are not gaining if you look at the entire picture, we are actually losing.
The immigrants, both legal and illegal, are NOT USING WELFARE. They are forbidden, BY LAW, from receiving any benefits outside a very select few in a couple of states. The benefits are being used by THEIR CHILDREN. The very people that will be funding my retirement. I believe an investment in their health care, their education, and even their nutritional well-being is money well spent. In fact, of all the places the government could send a dollar, sending it to this population is going to provide a better return than any other population I can think of, and that includes the wealthy.
You believe in a couple of myths that I am not buying. First, that immigrants take more than they give. Not buying it. When we take out the money spent on citizen children and add the tax money collected, just by Social Security, we come up positive.
Second, that they depress wages. Employers pay what they have to pay to get the job done. No amount of money is going to get native Americans to work in the fields. My oldest spent the summer in the fields. My youngest worked at Five Guys all year. Guess which one made more money? Now, on the other end of the spectrum, the LEGAL temporary workers program--that most certainly depresses wages. When we have open borders that depression at the top end disappears and any leverage employers had at the low end also evaporates.
Third, that sending money abroad is a problem. Truth is, anytime dollars disappear without a decline in production it is a good thing. Fewer dollars chasing the same amount of goods. Yippee
Immigrants are in all labor fields, not just agriculture. My industry is flooded with them because companies that want to pay lower wages opt for immigrants legal and illegal to do the work instead of increasing their offer to attract American workers. Yes, that lowers our pay scale.
Right now, you have foreigners that are driving around in 70,000 lbs vehicles that can't read road signs. They are terrible drivers to boot, and they are driving right next to your family van. Half of them can't even back up a trailer to the dock.
As for welfare children, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Those children will likely grow up the way they were raised like most of our poor Americans do. We already have generational welfare for Americans, so we don't need generational welfare for foreigners.
So there is no advantage of these people being here, and then there is the crime (which costs us a lot of money) to consider:
Illegal immigrants responsible for almost three-fourths of federal drug possession sentences in 2014
Sorry about the truck drivers. I used to be a meat cutter. You have to grow and adapt. And I am not concerned with drug charges, they should be legal too.
Here is the key factor to remember,
Given current immigration trends and birth rates, virtually all (93%) of the growth of the nation’s working-age population between now and 2050 will be accounted for by immigrants and their U.S.-born children, according to a population projection by the Pew Research Center
Second-Generation Americans
Like it not, those immigrants ARE this nation's future. You can embrace it, or you can be ran over by it. If you want to fight it, then you have to have more kids than they do. I am pretty sure I have done more on that front than anyone else posting in this thread.
There are other ways of fighting such as electing people like Trump who promised us actions on the matter. While I can't prove anything, I believe his immigration stance is what put him over the top not only with the other 14 contenders for the Republican nomination, but over Hillary and the Democrats for the presidency as well.
I also believe because of this, other politicians will follow; at least those who really want the job.