• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

36 million per month on illegals

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: IGBT
..get used to it. the secular progressives say it's the only way they can gain more power and and grow government influence. This will also nullify your vote. It's already at a point of no return.

True,

The 2010 Census is going to count illegal immigrants and that will send more seats to areas where the largest population of illegal immigrants reside (mostly Southern Border states) tipping congressional scales in their favor.

False. There is no change for the 2010 census in this regard. Illegals have always been counted in EVERY 10 year census. The 14th amendment requires it.
And dispelling the next bit of FUD: Immigration Officials Say Raids Will Not Halt for 2010 Census

 
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Citrix
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Hurp a durp! why don't we look at the whole picture? Oh wait, that would involve using our brain.

Now Specop, I know you don't like reading things (as evidenced in other threads), but why don't you try for me just this once.

Posted to Web: May 01, 1994

Why are you referring to an out-of-date article anyways?

so owned it hurts.

Well I'll give you the same question I gave him. This isn't a trick question or a setup or anything, if you honestly can point to some reasons why you think that the nature of immigration today is different then the mid 90's I'd be interested to hear it.

Ok, then you'll have absolutely no problem digging up a similar article with from within the last couple years, hell, lets make it within the past 5 years.
 
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: eskimospy

Well I'll give you the same question I gave him. This isn't a trick question or a setup or anything, if you honestly can point to some reasons why you think that the nature of immigration today is different then the mid 90's I'd be interested to hear it.

Ok, then you'll have absolutely no problem digging up a similar article with from within the last couple years, hell, lets make it within the past 5 years.

Ah ha, so your answer is "I don't know how or why the dynamics have changed, but you should have to prove that they haven't anyway." Gotcha.
 
No one likes lazy people that contribute little to nothing. This problem goes way beyond illegal immigration even though I do realize that it is a big problem in itself. Just remember that most of the problems that people blame on illegal immigrants can be found just as easily amongst those born on our own soil and speak English.
 
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: eskimospy

Well I'll give you the same question I gave him. This isn't a trick question or a setup or anything, if you honestly can point to some reasons why you think that the nature of immigration today is different then the mid 90's I'd be interested to hear it.

Ok, then you'll have absolutely no problem digging up a similar article with from within the last couple years, hell, lets make it within the past 5 years.

Ah ha, so your answer is "I don't know how or why the dynamics have changed, but you should have to prove that they haven't anyway." Gotcha.

I take it you can't find anything recent then.
 
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: eskimospy

Well I'll give you the same question I gave him. This isn't a trick question or a setup or anything, if you honestly can point to some reasons why you think that the nature of immigration today is different then the mid 90's I'd be interested to hear it.

Ok, then you'll have absolutely no problem digging up a similar article with from within the last couple years, hell, lets make it within the past 5 years.

Ah ha, so your answer is "I don't know how or why the dynamics have changed, but you should have to prove that they haven't anyway." Gotcha.

I take it you can't find anything recent then.

God, google it yourself. There are entire academic journals devoted to this sort of analysis. You're just trying to create arbitrary distinctions, and it's stupid. Again, if you have some sort of reason to believe that the study is invalid because of the time frame involved, present it and I'll be more then happy to consider what you have to say. If you don't, then shut up.
 
What do you think should be done to correct this issue?

I think a temporary solution would be to hire more people to faciliate border patrolling and deportation. The increased staff might help to stem some of the unemployment issues as well (a very small percentage)
 
Alright this is what I got from the document

1. Illegal immigration doesnt affect all Americans the same. Middle and Wealthy class Americans see a benefit. Poor and uneducated a wage depression
2. On the state and local level illegal immigration doesnt pay for itself via taxation.
3. Illegal immigration does not take up a majority of local and state level govt's budgets. Estimated ~5% on avg. Border states may see 10%.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Alright this is what I got from the document

1. Illegal immigration doesnt affect all Americans the same. Middle and Wealthy class Americans see a benefit. Poor and uneducated a wage depression
2. On the state and local level illegal immigration doesnt pay for itself via taxation.
3. Illegal immigration does not take up a majority of local and state level govt's budgets. Estimated ~5% on avg. Border states may see 10%.

Right. Most things I have read however say that they provide a taxation benefit for the federal government (while being a burden on state and local ones), and that their children also provide a net taxation benefit overall. (the idea being that a lot of studies take into account the cost of educating the children of illegal immigrants but then do not take into account the money they then make in life, which is unfair.)

This was what I was trying to show earlier when I told people to look at the big picture. If you are poor and uneducated, illegal immigration sucks for you. If you are...well.. anyone else, it's very likely good for you.
 

Here is a 2006 article that states illegal immigrants bring in more than they take in the State of Texas. I've posted it before and will no doubt post it again.

I have lived in Texas my entire life and view immigrants as assets rather than liabilities. But reading these posts i get the feeling many on this board have a problem with Hispanics (regardless of immigration status) in that they have somehow exceeded their "quota" and there are simply too many. Mexican culture is nothing new to the Border states, hopefully it wont take long for everyone else to figure out.


Washington Post

Texas Official's Report Ignites a New Border Conflict

By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 15, 2006; A02

It is a Texas showdown, a war of words over illegal immigration at the border.

State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn fired the first shot with a recent report that, for some, says the unthinkable: Illegal immigrants not only pay their fair share in taxes, but they are also good for the economy.

"The absence of 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas . . .would have been a loss to our gross state product of $17.7 billion," Strayhorn said in a statement. Overall, the report said, illegal immigrants put about $420 million more into state coffers than they take out.

Strayhorn billed the report as the first ever by a state finance official, a crucial step forward. But for Texans who believe hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants are overrunning their state, the report is a misstep.

State Rep. Leo Berman (R-Tyler), who introduced legislation that would bar Texas from recognizing children born to illegal immigrants in American hospitals as U.S. citizens, called the report "outrageous."

Dan Stein, a spokesman for the Washington-based Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which supports measures to deter illegal immigration, ripped the report as a composite of "design flaws, assumptions and conclusions in direct contrast to our years of exhaustive studies on this issue, and to our most recent Texas report, which shows illegal aliens cost Texas taxpayers $3.7 billion annually."

In these times of tough proposals against illegal immigration in Congress and huge protest marches by illegal immigrant workers and their supporters, it is not surprising that the comptroller's report caused a stir.

An official state document that contradicts the idea that immigrants are a financial burden can carry considerable weight as Democrats take control of Congress, and as potential candidates consider their options in the 2008 presidential election.

Supporters of illegal immigrants embraced the report. John Trasviña, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said it "confirms what MALDEF and immigration experts have long known -- we all benefit from the contributions of immigrants."

The Texas study may be the first by a state, but it is hardly the first of its kind. Previous studies on the financial impact of illegal immigrants have been undertaken by a number of groups, including the nonpartisan Urban Institute and the Center for Immigration Studies.

Undocumented workers in the Washington area, according to the Urban Institute, pay a hefty share of taxes, but they contribute less than they should because many are paid off the books and do not file yearly tax forms. A report by the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors reduced immigration, said that illegal-immigrant households imposed $26 billion in costs on the federal government while paying $16 billion in taxes. This week, Immigration and Customs Enforcement authorities raided meatpacking plants in six states in search of illegal immigrants they said were using illegally obtained Social Security numbers.

Early in the year, the House tried to crack down on the immigration problem with a tough proposal that would have turned about 12 million illegal immigrants in the country into instant felons.

Opponents said they went too far, and millions of illegal immigrants and their supporters marched in Dallas, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, Phoenix and other cities.

That is the environment that Strayhorn stepped into with her report and its bold introduction: "The Comptroller's report estimates that undocumented immigrants in Texas generate more taxes and other revenue than the state spends on them."

Drawing on estimates from a report by the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington, the report said 1.4 million to 1.6 million illegal immigrants live in Texas, about 14 percent of the U.S. total.

Texas has no state income tax, so immigrants pay sales and property taxes, along with various state fees. "Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues, which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received," Strayhorn reported.

Strayhorn, an unsuccessful candidate for governor in the last election, favors a guest-worker program, prompting criticism from opponents who say her report was motivated by politics.

FAIR said the report plays down the impact of illegal immigration by not counting the children of illegal immigrants who had become U.S. citizens. In a previous report, FAIR estimated that Texas schools paid more than $1.7 billion to educate illegal immigrants and the legal children of illegal immigrants in 2003-2004.

"This report is a slap in the face to anyone with common sense," Stein said.

Berman deferred to more conservative reports, such as one from the Lone Star Foundation in Austin. It says illegal immigrants drain $4.5 billion from the Texas economy, mostly in health-care costs.

"Parkland Hospital in Dallas, and the public hospital in Houston, has a 70 percent birth rate from illegal aliens," Berman said.

Trasviña of MALDEF said he hopes Strayhorn's report will compel other politicians to "reject divisive legislation" by Berman and others "aimed at forcing undocumented immigrants further into the shadows."


Link to the actual State of Texas Report if anyone is interested. Texas Comptroller Special Report - 2.7MB PDF

 
I just wish my side of the aisle got their head out of their ass on this issue.

It shouldnt be so god damned complicated.

1. Build a wall try to slow the influx to a trickle
2. Streamline the process for citizenship for all people's.

I think once you fix #2 the wall wont generally be needed. But should help law enforcement none the less for other undesireables.

But conservatives are so god damned hell bent on retribution on these people they stall any kind of reform. Which plays right into the lefts hand who prefer the status quo.

In the mean time while we dick around an underclass is being created of millions of people who arent in the system. Arent encouraged or engaged in adopting our way of life. It is amazing looking at the difference between legal and illegal hispanic household incomes. Even if every single illegal doesnt live upto the current legal household litmus test. All it can do is go up by getting them legal, paying taxes, and contributing to society. Not to mention the side effect of helping our lowest ring of native born people by decreasing the pressures on wages.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
I just wish my side of the aisle got their head out of their ass on this issue.

It shouldnt be so god damned complicated.

1. Build a wall try to slow the influx to a trickle
2. Streamline the process for citizenship for all people's.

I think once you fix #2 the wall wont generally be needed. But should help law enforcement none the less for other undesireables.

But conservatives are so god damned hell bent on retribution on these people they stall any kind of reform. Which plays right into the lefts hand who prefer the status quo.

In the mean time while we dick around an underclass is being created of millions of people who arent in the system. Arent encouraged or engaged in adopting our way of life. It is amazing looking at the difference between legal and illegal hispanic household incomes. Even if every single illegal doesnt live upto the current legal household litmus test. All it can do is go up by getting them legal, paying taxes, and contributing to society. Not to mention the side effect of helping our lowest ring of native born people by decreasing the pressures on wages.

You know...what is it that makes #2 so incredibly difficult and time consuming anyways? I mean, it's really easy just to point fingers at the government and scream "inefficient!" but I would like to know the real deal. I am not familiar with the processes that they need to take care of on the government's side of things to make an educated theory about it.
 
I dont know all of the details. But when educated well compensated people take years to gain citizenship. There is obviously something afoul in the system. If those people cant gain entrace very easily, I can see why some uneducated low skill sap will simply bypass the system and run across a border. The worst that will happen for them is they are sent back. Not like they were getting in anyways.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: IGBT
..get used to it. the secular progressives say it's the only way they can gain more power and and grow government influence. This will also nullify your vote. It's already at a point of no return.

True,

The 2010 Census is going to count illegal immigrants and that will send more seats to areas where the largest population of illegal immigrants reside (mostly Southern Border states) tipping congressional scales in their favor.

False. There is no change for the 2010 census in this regard. Illegals have always been counted in EVERY 10 year census. The 14th amendment requires it.
And dispelling the next bit of FUD: Immigration Officials Say Raids Will Not Halt for 2010 Census

..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.

 
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.
I'm curious - how does one pander to illegals? People who cannot vote?
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.
I'm curious - how does one pander to illegals? People who cannot vote?

Wait, wait! I've got this one. He's going to make an unsubstantiated claim that Democrats are engaging in elaborate voter fraud campaigns with illegal immigrants. He might go out on a limb and link to some crazy nativist site, but I don't think he will even go that far.
 
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.
I'm curious - how does one pander to illegals? People who cannot vote?

Wait, wait! I've got this one. He's going to make an unsubstantiated claim that Democrats are engaging in elaborate voter fraud campaigns with illegal immigrants. He might go out on a limb and link to some crazy nativist site, but I don't think he will even go that far.

It has nothing to do with pandering to the illegals, but it has EVERYTHING to do with pandering to the Hispanics who vote. Many Hispanics believe we should back off and let the illegals be.


For those who are immigrants to the USA...did you go through the process, pay the fees, and wait your turn?

If so, do you believe it's right and fair that those from countries that are land-connected to the USA should be able to skip that process and just "walk in?"
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.
I'm curious - how does one pander to illegals? People who cannot vote?

Wait, wait! I've got this one. He's going to make an unsubstantiated claim that Democrats are engaging in elaborate voter fraud campaigns with illegal immigrants. He might go out on a limb and link to some crazy nativist site, but I don't think he will even go that far.

It has nothing to do with pandering to the illegals, but it has EVERYTHING to do with pandering to the Hispanics who vote. Many Hispanics believe we should back off and let the illegals be.


For those who are immigrants to the USA...did you go through the process, pay the fees, and wait your turn?

If so, do you believe it's right and fair that those from countries that are land-connected to the USA should be able to skip that process and just "walk in?"

I think the democrats realize that the longer these illegals stay, the more kids they'll have, and thus the more potential voters they'll have voting (D.) Not because Democrats are soft on immigration (who isn't soft on immigration?) but because their demographic is low income and poverty stricken, and the transfer payments favored by democrats play extremely well with that demographic. They're expanding their voter base by hispanicizing the US. Fortunately precedent has shown that once most hispanics rise above the poverty line, they become far more conservative, and adapt well to the American lifestyle (big house, nice cars, 2.5 kids, etc.)

Personally I'm happy to deal with Hispanics who are typically grateful to be here, hard working and friendly. Their view of life is similar to ours, and they adapt well. We could be Europe and the UK, dealing with an insidious invasion of people bent on subjugating their hosts.
 
The situation wrt illegals won't change because business loves illegals. they're the kind of employees that the guys at the top want all of us to become- compliant, hardworking, even grateful for the few scraps they get, and completely disposable, unable to organize or even file for unemployment. Better than slaves, because you're not responsible for them, at all...

The federal govt loves 'em, too, because they pay SS taxes for benefits they'll never collect...

$36M/mo? Heck, that's only ~$2.50 apiece /mo., a helluva lot cheaper than what we're spending to line the pockets of american profiteers in Iraq...
 
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Socio
Originally posted by: IGBT
..get used to it. the secular progressives say it's the only way they can gain more power and and grow government influence. This will also nullify your vote. It's already at a point of no return.

True,

The 2010 Census is going to count illegal immigrants and that will send more seats to areas where the largest population of illegal immigrants reside (mostly Southern Border states) tipping congressional scales in their favor.

False. There is no change for the 2010 census in this regard. Illegals have always been counted in EVERY 10 year census. The 14th amendment requires it.
And dispelling the next bit of FUD: Immigration Officials Say Raids Will Not Halt for 2010 Census

No, True like I said;

The 2010 Census is going to count illegal immigrants and that will send more seats to areas where the largest population of illegal immigrants reside (mostly Southern Border states) tipping congressional scales in their favor
 
Yeh, socio- so what? You act like this is some sort of a change, when it's not, at all, as Vic pointed out.

Illegals are largely under-reported in census figures, anyway- they see census takers as "The Man" and avoid 'em like the plague...

Pandering to Hispanics? Shee-it, repubs have been pandering to good ol' boys in the South for 40 years- guess that makes 'em experts, right?
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the so called "raids" are window dressing and lip stick on a pig. As soon as they are sent back they return first oppertunity. rationalizing failure doesn't change the fact that secular progressives are in the vote pandering business. And they want them to vote as many times as possible.
I'm curious - how does one pander to illegals? People who cannot vote?

Wait, wait! I've got this one. He's going to make an unsubstantiated claim that Democrats are engaging in elaborate voter fraud campaigns with illegal immigrants. He might go out on a limb and link to some crazy nativist site, but I don't think he will even go that far.

It has nothing to do with pandering to the illegals, but it has EVERYTHING to do with pandering to the Hispanics who vote. Many Hispanics believe we should back off and let the illegals be.


For those who are immigrants to the USA...did you go through the process, pay the fees, and wait your turn?

If so, do you believe it's right and fair that those from countries that are land-connected to the USA should be able to skip that process and just "walk in?"

:thumbsup:

Exactly.

I can't envisage a solution to this problem that involves any form of legalization (amnesty) that will be fair to all those waiting in queue for eons, doing everything the right way, and spending crazy amounts of money in accord with USCIS's whims.

 
Back
Top