IronWing
No Lifer
- Jul 20, 2001
- 68,858
- 26,651
- 136
You're one step above Oroo and Stewox in credibility, but with more expletives.>> Cites Nothing
>> Refuses facts based on.. reasons?
>> Not at all bias.
You're one step above Oroo and Stewox in credibility, but with more expletives.>> Cites Nothing
>> Refuses facts based on.. reasons?
>> Not at all bias.
And you are entirely full of shit. To the fucking power of 12 billion you complete imbecile moron. Instead of using your feelings and the natural hard-on you get every time you hear the word "immigrate", why don't you use facts instead?
#1 - You cannot cite "immigrants" as a whole. There are illegal immigrants. There are asylum seekers. There are border hoppers, There are legitimate people who APPLY for immigration. There are people who fly in on a visa and overstay. Averaging all the different immigration when you know DAMN well you are referring to ONE SPECIFIC type of immigration (border hoping) is INCREDIBLY deceptive and a complete lie. Cite some ACTUAL fucking evidence on border hoppers. But you wont.
#2 - Your statement in of itself is false. Instead of using feelings, why don't you use facts instead? FACT: 63% of Non-Citizens use government benefits programs compared to 35% of native households. https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs
You are mistaken. Immigration wasn't restricted until 1917 & more thoroughly in 1924-
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act
Except for the Chinese who were excluded in 1882.
And you are entirely full of shit. To the fucking power of 12 billion you complete imbecile moron. Instead of using your feelings and the natural hard-on you get every time you hear the word "immigrate", why don't you use facts instead?
#1 - You cannot cite "immigrants" as a whole. There are illegal immigrants. There are asylum seekers. There are border hoppers, There are legitimate people who APPLY for immigration. There are people who fly in on a visa and overstay. Averaging all the different immigration when you know DAMN well you are referring to ONE SPECIFIC type of immigration (border hoping) is INCREDIBLY deceptive and a complete lie. Cite some ACTUAL fucking evidence on border hoppers. But you wont.
#2 - Your statement in of itself is false. Instead of using feelings, why don't you use facts instead? FACT: 63% of Non-Citizens use government benefits programs compared to 35% of native households. https://cis.org/Report/63-NonCitizen-Households-Access-Welfare-Programs
Immigrants who meet the eligibility thresholds of age for the entitlement programs or poverty for the means-tested welfare programs generally have lower use rates and consume a lower dollar value relative to native-born Americans.3 The per capita cost of providing welfare to immigrants is substantially less than the per capita cost of providing welfare to native-born Americans.
I'm seeing all this shit that it's so hard to get to the US now without dying and suffering because of the Trump admin. Why doesn't Canada offer to fly all the vulnerable immigrants in?
Generally speaking the Center on Immigration Studies is a non-credible source as it is an ultra right wing, nativist think tank with a history of publishing misleading stats or outright lies. If you’re looking for stats on this from a (still conservative!) but more reputable source you can read this Cato study on how immigrants utilize welfare benefits at significantly lower rates than the native born.
https://www.cato.org/publications/i...tion-welfare-state-immigrant-native-use-rates
As to the CIS study specifically it is very misleading, almost certainly on purpose considering their history and the... uhmm.. checkered publishing history of its author. The CIS study looks at immigrant led HOUSEHOLDS, not immigrants specifically. This means that in situations where the US citizen children of an immigrant receives benefits it bizarrely counts as 'immigrants' getting benefits and not US persons. The study also does not include programs like social security or medicare despite the fact that beneficiaries of both of those programs are in the aggregate receiving vastly more money from them than they paid in.
It's a garbage study by an advocacy organization.
Maybe because it's not their problem. Maybe it's because the US has much, much greater resources to deal with it, like a population of 325M v 37M in Canada.
Trump loves your idea, I'm sure. Maybe he can bully Canada the way he's bullying Mexico, huh?
So artificially/unfairly manipulating the grouping of a voting base to serve a political party isn't Gerrymandering?When you don't know what words mean.
As to the CIS study specifically it is very misleading, almost certainly on purpose considering their history and the... uhmm.. checkered publishing history of its author. The CIS study looks at immigrant led HOUSEHOLDS, not immigrants specifically. This means that in situations where the US citizen children of an immigrant receives benefits it bizarrely counts as 'immigrants' getting benefits and not US persons.
The study also does not include programs like social security or medicare despite the fact that beneficiaries of both of those programs are in the aggregate receiving vastly more money from them than they paid in.
It's a garbage study by an advocacy organization.
Every one of your posts is like a mirror image. You're LITERALLY, hands down, the absolute dumbest person on here. Bar none. Not even Jstorm is as dumb, and that's saying a LOT! You add zilch to any discussion and the average rock has a higher IQ than you.
So the study would be saying the generations following of some immigrants would do worse on various metrics relative to natives. That's still important to know. It would be misleading to exclude it.
You still have to provide health care, so a comparison needs to be made to see what the offset is, and it's pretty significant despite them being generally younger.
The shit will hit the fan eventually with chronic untreated problems leading to exploding costs. Either that or the present will be a simple mirage because the government could potentially give them the benefits at some point anyway even allowing them to flood SSDI.
https://money.cnn.com/2018/01/04/news/economy/undocumented-immigrants-health-care/index.html
Aging undocumented immigrants pose costly health care challenge
Are you an bumbling idiot?? This isn`t Canada`s problem! These immigrants are nowhere near the Canadian border,,,,,,,duhCanada is taking in a ton of immigrants each year. I think we all know why they've been ignoring this. They rather have the cream of the crop, which is no different than some in the Trump camp.
Are you an bumbling idiot?? This isn`t Canada`s problem! These immigrants are nowhere near the Canadian border,,,,,,,duh
Neither are the immigrants Canada is welcoming. Canada has a preference for the cream of the crop. Do you deny that?
This has nothing to do with the immigration problem on our southern border!Neither are the immigrants Canada is welcoming. Canada has a preference for the cream of the crop. Do you deny that?
This has nothing to do with the immigration problem on our southern border!
Show me statistics where Canada is turning away immigrants who as you would call them are not the cream of the crop!
Y&ou try to derail threads much?
You are mistaken. Immigration wasn't restricted until 1917 & more thoroughly in 1924-
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act
Except for the Chinese who were excluded in 1882.
As usual you and the dumb stump can't follow anything. We've never had unchecked immigration in this country, which was the claim. Previously, very little of it was illegal. People arriving at Ellis Island were not just jumping over a border. Only since 2016 have we reached levels comparative to the absolute high set in 1910.You are mistaken. Immigration wasn't restricted until 1917 & more thoroughly in 1924-
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act
Except for the Chinese who were excluded in 1882.