Illegal immigrants could be granted US amnesty within 8yrs

Page 3 of 4 [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

20 Feb 2013, 2:23 am

Raptor wrote:
An illegal alien is still a criminal.
Giving them amnesty only invites more if the same.

visagrunt wrote:
No, it doesn't. What attracts more of the same are jobs. If there are no jobs to be had, there are no "pull factors." Now, the interesting question will be whether policy change will be a one-off exercise to attempt to shift the existing population, but do nothing about ongoing needs, or whether someone will actually have the presence of mind to talk about creating a visa classification for workers in unskilled jobs. The best answer might be to reopen Chapter 16 of NAFTA.

What about all of them that are criminals and generally burdensome to us?


Tyri0n wrote:
4. Most of this thread is racist and, therefore, violates WP's terms of use.

So what are you waiting for?
Go tattle on us. :P


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

20 Feb 2013, 6:05 am

Tyri0n wrote:
Raptor wrote:
An illegal alien is still a criminal.
Giving them amnesty only invites more if the same.


1. No, they are not criminals.

2. Go ahead and deport 12 million people. It's just that easy.

3. Being born on the wrong side of the border does not make one less than a person.

4. Most of this thread is racist and, therefore, violates WP's terms of use.

1. Yes they are criminals. They are called illegal aliens because they violated immigration laws.

2. It was for Eisenhower. An army deuce and a half truck showed up in the middle of the night, and the alien invaders were nowhere to be found by sunrise. It would be expensive in the short term, but we could do what we did with Cubans on rafts and put them in camps indefinitely until they can be deported or until another country takes them.

3. They are a person, but if they cross a border illegally they are a criminal.


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

20 Feb 2013, 9:34 am

John_Browning wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
Raptor wrote:
An illegal alien is still a criminal.
Giving them amnesty only invites more if the same.


1. No, they are not criminals.

2. Go ahead and deport 12 million people. It's just that easy.

3. Being born on the wrong side of the border does not make one less than a person.

4. Most of this thread is racist and, therefore, violates WP's terms of use.

1. Yes they are criminals. They are called illegal aliens because they violated immigration laws.

2. It was for Eisenhower. An army deuce and a half truck showed up in the middle of the night, and the alien invaders were nowhere to be found by sunrise. It would be expensive in the short term, but we could do what we did with Cubans on rafts and put them in camps indefinitely until they can be deported or until another country takes them.

3. They are a person, but if they cross a border illegally they are a criminal.
Hehe you forgot number 4 I clear this up though Its not about race it has nothing to do about race it has to do about people from another country entering a country without permission. Kind of like people breaking into your house and squating! Mexico is actually a multiracial nation!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

20 Feb 2013, 11:29 am

Raptor wrote:
What about all of them that are criminals and generally burdensome to us?


Nothing in the creation of a visa category for unskilled workers would diminish the ability of the United States to punish people convicted of crime.

Once you have create a legal route into the country for as many of these people as business can demonstrate that it needs, then by all means, redirect your enforcement resources to the cases that merit enforcement and removal.


_________________
--James


mikassyna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2013
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,319
Location: New York, NY

20 Feb 2013, 11:46 am

visagrunt wrote:
And let's not forget the amount of consumer spending that 12,000,000 people contribute to the economy.


Contribute to the economy? I don't know if it is necessarily a situation where anyone benefits. Someone would have to do a cost analysis of whether or not that were so, taking into account the money that DOESN'T get put back into the economy by way of (1) taxes, (2) money being sent back to their home country, (3) benefits being obtained here funded by taxpayers (medical services to ER visits, welfare, etc.), (4) paying unemployment and government benefits to CITIZENS who can't get a job because the illegals are taking the jobs, (5) other unaccounted losses due to qualified professional people who SHOULD come to this country but CAN'T because we can't afford it due to illegals already being here.

Illegal is illegal and people who come here illegally shouldn't be rewarded in getting citizenship when there are other people who actually come here LEGALLY.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

20 Feb 2013, 12:06 pm

The people illegal immigrants piss off the most aren't Americans but the imigrants that worked their asses off getting here legally chinese japanese indians europeans canadians and yes even other Mexicans and other latino nationals!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


mikassyna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2013
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,319
Location: New York, NY

20 Feb 2013, 12:44 pm

Also take into consideration that once the illegals are made into citizens, they will then like to bring their entire extended family over here as well, who will suck all our government benefits dry without putting a single penny back in.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

20 Feb 2013, 1:51 pm

mikassyna wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
And let's not forget the amount of consumer spending that 12,000,000 people contribute to the economy.


Contribute to the economy? I don't know if it is necessarily a situation where anyone benefits. Someone would have to do a cost analysis of whether or not that were so, taking into account the money that DOESN'T get put back into the economy by way of (1) taxes, (2) money being sent back to their home country, (3) benefits being obtained here funded by taxpayers (medical services to ER visits, welfare, etc.), (4) paying unemployment and government benefits to CITIZENS who can't get a job because the illegals are taking the jobs, (5) other unaccounted losses due to qualified professional people who SHOULD come to this country but CAN'T because we can't afford it due to illegals already being here.

Illegal is illegal and people who come here illegally shouldn't be rewarded in getting citizenship when there are other people who actually come here LEGALLY.


Can you not read? I wrote, "consumer spending." Let me repeat that, "consumer spending." Do you understand what that is? That is the purchase of goods and services by individuals within the domestic economy. 12,000,000 people need a lot of groceries. They have to pay rent on a lot of homes. Even on a very conservative estimate that undocumented workers' households spend only half the national average (and frankly, we have no reason to believe that the discount should be anywhere near this large), that still amounts to a substantial amount of economic activity.

As for your other aspects, bear in mind that tax DOES get put back into the economy. That's what government does--it collects money, and then it pays salaries to its own employees, provides direct transfers to eligible individuals, and procures goods and services of its own. Other than foreign spending (for example, US embassies abroad) every penny that government collects turns around and goes into the economy.

Remittances are an import drain, to be sure. But it's important to put that number in perspective. If remittances from the USA to Latin America total some $60 billion, that would represent a gross figure of $5,000 per undocument alien. However, you need to do some discounting, first, because some of those remittances are payments by American individuals to make purchases in Mexico (most often of real estate, but money laundering is also a significant element). When compared with consumer spending by undocumented aliens, remittances are a much smaller piece of the economic pie. It's also important to understand where that money goes once it reaches Latin America. Most of it finds its way back to the United States in the form of export sales. Foreign remittances introduce US dollars into the economies of these countries. Once they have been sold for local currency, the money supply then has US dollars with which to undertake import of US goods and services. If those remittances stopped, the price of US imports would escalate, and the United States would then be under increased price pressure.

As for publicly funded benefits, the only ones that I will concede there are education and emergency health services. I think you will be very hard pressed to demonstrate that consumption of public services by undocumented aliens exceeds tax remittances paid by undocumented workers. They payment of benefits to unemployed Americans is, of course, a relevant phenomenon, but only if you can demonstrate that in the absence of undocumented workers that those same jobs would still be available, and that US residents would actually take those up. Given the disparity of wages and working conditions, I do not think that you can make more than an intuitive case that these jobs would, in fact, be substantively transferrable to domestic workers.

The simple reality is that the domestic US economy is filling a need with these workers. The marketplace has spoken, and Congress has buried its head in the sand for decades, refusing to acknowledge the economic role played by this category of foreign workers. While there is no argument that their presence and their employment is outside the ambit of the law, there is an argument to be made that the law has failed to keep pace with the market. While that doesn't invalidate the law or justify their presence or their employment it does mitigate the moralistic argument.


_________________
--James


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

20 Feb 2013, 2:04 pm

Jacoby wrote:
This "leak" is just pandering to Hispanic voters and nothing more. It has 0 chance of becoming law.

Deportation for 12 million or however many people is unrealistic but people that enter the country illegally should not be given citizenship.

End the drug war, secure the border by bringing our troops home, don't provide services for illegals, end automatic birthright citizenship for those born by non-citizen parents that enter the country illegally. That would just put us on par with pretty much every other country on earth, what do you think would happen if you enter a place like Japan illegally?


Isn't the regulation of migration contrary to Libertarian dogma?

Fifteenth Amendment wrote:
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.


Why not just throw out the whole damned Constitution while you're at it?



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

20 Feb 2013, 2:20 pm

AspieOtaku wrote:
Hehe you forgot number 4 I clear this up though Its not about race it has nothing to do about race it has to do about people from another country entering a country without permission. Kind of like people breaking into your house and squating! Mexico is actually a multiracial nation!

It was 3am here and I forgot that one. This thread is not only about Mexico.


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


ianorlin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 756

20 Feb 2013, 2:26 pm

We can mitigate the effects of population gain by subsidizing birth control for those already here. Also the emergency room benefits would cost less if undocumented workers would buy insurance.Also since all of these people pay payroll taxes stop deporting my social security.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

20 Feb 2013, 2:32 pm

Howbout annex all of Mexico clean out the corruption and make them naturalized citizens problem solved!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


daydreamer84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,001
Location: My own little world

20 Feb 2013, 2:35 pm

John_Browning wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
Raptor wrote:
An illegal alien is still a criminal.
Giving them amnesty only invites more if the same.


1. No, they are not criminals.

2. Go ahead and deport 12 million people. It's just that easy.

3. Being born on the wrong side of the border does not make one less than a person.

4. Most of this thread is racist and, therefore, violates WP's terms of use.


1. Yes they are criminals. They are called illegal aliens because they violated immigration laws.
.

3. They are a person, but if they cross a border illegally they are a criminal.


This and no it's not racist to be against illegal immigration because as someone else said (I don't know how to post multiple quotes srry) illegal immigrant is not a racial group.



Telekon
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

20 Feb 2013, 2:42 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Well the aggregate household spending (HFCE) in the US is just over $10 trillion, or $29,822 per capita. So let's be conservative, and suggest that the per capital spend for undocumented aliens is roughly $15,000 per capita--about half of the national average. That would put consumer spending at $180 billion dollars, somewhat over 1% of GDP. Remember, too, that at low household income levels, a higher percentage of household spending goes to necessities of life: food, clothing and shelter. This is spending that disappears when the household disappears.


It only disappears if you assume that supply and demand are independent of one another. Consumer spending is a consequence and not a cause of economic prosperity. People can only demand what they produce, or help others to produce. If there is presently a demand for the services illegals provide, the demand would still exist if the illegals went home. IOW, if they are able to consume $180 billion of goods and services, then someone else is able to demand $180 billion of their services. Their wealth is a product of someone else's wealth. So your claim that $180 billion of spending would disappear if illegals left the country is sophistry. It is true, but only trivially so.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

20 Feb 2013, 3:51 pm

Telekon wrote:
It only disappears if you assume that supply and demand are independent of one another. Consumer spending is a consequence and not a cause of economic prosperity. People can only demand what they produce, or help others to produce. If there is presently a demand for the services illegals provide, the demand would still exist if the illegals went home. IOW, if they are able to consume $180 billion of goods and services, then someone else is able to demand $180 billion of their services. Their wealth is a product of someone else's wealth. So your claim that $180 billion of spending would disappear if illegals left the country is sophistry. It is true, but only trivially so.


You seem to be confusing "consumer confidence" with "consumer spending."

Since consumer spending is over 70% of the United States' GDP, you wind up in a very circular argument if you pretend that consumer spending is a consequence of economic prosperity. In the United States, consumer spending is driven far more by monetary policy than it is by economic indicators. If the money supply is easy, consumers spend. When consumers spend, the economy grows. Tighten up the money supply, and the economy shrinks, because consumer spending falls.

And your argument fails to allow for consumption. There is economic activity where the end user is the end of the line, economically. Once you have bought food to feed yourself, there is no further economic activity. Take 12,000,000 consumers out of the demand for groceries, and what happens? The remaining people aren't going to eat the surplus food, now are they? How many fewer jobs would there be in agriculture, transportation, wholesaling, distribution and retailing as a result of a 3.5% decline in the US population?

As for the supply and demand for services, I don't disagree that demand would continue to exist. The question is, could that demand be filled at a price that would allow the services and goods produced to remain competitive?


_________________
--James


Telekon
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

20 Feb 2013, 5:32 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Telekon wrote:
It only disappears if you assume that supply and demand are independent of one another. Consumer spending is a consequence and not a cause of economic prosperity. People can only demand what they produce, or help others to produce. If there is presently a demand for the services illegals provide, the demand would still exist if the illegals went home. IOW, if they are able to consume $180 billion of goods and services, then someone else is able to demand $180 billion of their services. Their wealth is a product of someone else's wealth. So your claim that $180 billion of spending would disappear if illegals left the country is sophistry. It is true, but only trivially so.


You seem to be confusing "consumer confidence" with "consumer spending."

Since consumer spending is over 70% of the United States' GDP, you wind up in a very circular argument if you pretend that consumer spending is a consequence of economic prosperity. In the United States, consumer spending is driven far more by monetary policy than it is by economic indicators. If the money supply is easy, consumers spend. When consumers spend, the economy grows. Tighten up the money supply, and the economy shrinks, because consumer spending falls.

And your argument fails to allow for consumption. There is economic activity where the end user is the end of the line, economically. Once you have bought food to feed yourself, there is no further economic activity. Take 12,000,000 consumers out of the demand for groceries, and what happens? The remaining people aren't going to eat the surplus food, now are they? How many fewer jobs would there be in agriculture, transportation, wholesaling, distribution and retailing as a result of a 3.5% decline in the US population?

As for the supply and demand for services, I don't disagree that demand would continue to exist. The question is, could that demand be filled at a price that would allow the services and goods produced to remain competitive?


Yes, some of that spending is inflationary because it is bolstered by artificial credit. But consumer spending is ultimately grounded on value added production. If it all it took to stimulate consumption were expansions in the money supply, then Zimbabwe should have been the economic locomotive of Africa.

If illegal aliens are able to demand $180 billion of goods and services, then someone else is able to demand $180 billion of their services. That wealth would be directed toward other productive activities if all illegals went home. If people are no longer able to demand the services of illegal aliens, then they'll demand them from other parties willing to provide the services. Those parties may not demand the same composition of goods and services as illegal aliens.

Fewer jobs doesn't necessarily result in a loss of economic production. In fact, I would argue that illegal immigrant labor has stagnated agricultural production by forestalling investment in labor saving capital equipment. The invention of the bulldozer resulted in fewer (but more productive) jobs. Enough of Malthusian economics.