Our Unconstitutional Census

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Every illegal pays state taxes whenever they buy something.

:rollseye:

Which doesn't even come close to offsetting what they cost the country. So what?

That depends on who you ask, research is conflicted on the subject. Illegal immigrants contribute substantially to economic growth and to the tax base, and they tend to use services at very low levels. Generally the research tends to indicate that illegal immigration is a small net burden on our country, but certainly not to the level that you imply.

Links to actual data?

This is something good to read about it.

It deals with immigration as a whole, but specifically addresses low skilled immigrants (as illegal immigrants frequently are), and how they effect the US economically and tax wise. Long story short: Illegal immigrants are a net tax gain for the federal government and a net tax burden for local and state governments. They provide an overall economic plus to the country, but hurt low skill US workers.

Like I said, some good, some bad. Hardly what you were trying to say though.

A book? That doesn't even get into the depths of the issue, sorry, not convinced. Provide some solid facts that contradict the overwhelming volumes of information on the subject that says otherwise....please.

Your ideas about illegal immigrants having no interest in assimilating to our culture is silliness and is completely unsupported.

The hell it is, I see it everyday.

To better understand it I would suggest reading a book called 'Italians then, Mexicans now', that discusses the intergenerational assimilation of Mexican immigrants as compared to European ones from the past.

To better understand it I would suggest trying the real world. I live in one of the major areas of illegals, there is no book you can link to, or story you can conjure up that is going to change the reality I see day in, and day out . Sorry, but miniscule spending and the sales tax generated from it is not in any universe going to counteract the cost brought to bear on this countries citizens by illegal immigrants.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
It's quite amazing how possessive people get over their stolen land.

Gee, is it time for the "America is stolen from the natives Americans so everything you do is wrong" routine already? boy how time flies.

Oh no, a few hundred years ago a country invaded another country lets all hold hands and let millions of de facto criminals, turn our country into the corrupt, dilapidated, impoverished nation that they left in the first place.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Illegals pay state taxes (and stimulate the economy)

Some maybe, but someone getting paid under the table isn't paying state tax either.

so if we're going to be consistent with how the Census has been historically conducted, then I say yes: illegals should be included because they always have.

So because we've been doing something, that's a reason to continue doing it? That fails on so many levels.

The fact of the matter is that certain states are reaping the benefits of state tax due to illegals so they're already getting compensated.

Do you have any actual figures of the numbers of illegals that are somehow paying state taxes?

Yep, I have some actual figures.
1) Link to Urban Institute nonpartisan report, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the ARCO Foundation, The Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

According to the most controversial study of those discussed here, the benefits and costs of immigration to the United States in 1992 add up to a total net cost to all levels of government of $42.5 billion. This study, by Donald Huddle, was sponsored by the Carrying Capacity Network, a nonprofit group that advocates major reductions in immigration to the United States. "The Costs of Immigration" (Huddle 1993) uses estimation procedures that include a variety of errors. When these errors are corrected, the post-1970 immigrants in Huddle's study actually show a surplus of revenues over social service costs of at least $25 billion.

2) Iowa Policy Project finds that illegals in Iowa pay more in state taxes than they're taking in.

The report concludes those illegal immigrants are paying up to 62 million dollars in state taxes each year. At least half, and perhaps more, are using someone else's Social Security number at their worksite and that means they're paying federal taxes, too, according to Mike Sheehan, a former University of Iowa professor who is one of the report's authors.

"We can say it's unfortunate that they're doing it because it's illegal," he says. "On the other hand, it does provide a vehicle for making substantial tax payments into the system which, at least on the federal level, they have no hope of getting back."

Iowa Policy Project director David Osterberg says the study found illegal immigrants pay -- on average -- about 80 percent of the taxes a legal citizen pays, but they are eligible for few government services.

"We find a lot of taxes being paid by undocumented people, not very many services being available to them and when you look at them compared to legal people...we would find that they aren't really taking in the sense that many people think that's going on," Osterberg says. According to research cited in this report, between 30 and 39 percent of Iowa's "foreign born" residents are illegal immigrants.

Some more recent facts from UI's 2007 study - The Characteristics of Unauthorized Immigrants in California, Los Angeles County:

Almost all unauthorized men work, and labor force participation rates are substantially higher for unauthorized men than for legal immigrant or U.S.-born men. In California, 94 percent of unauthorized men age 18?64 were in the labor force in 2004, versus 84 percent of legal immigrants and 82 percent of native-born men. The shares were similar nationally and in Los Angeles. Unauthorized men have higher labor force participation rates than other men because they are younger and are less likely to be disabled, retired, or enrolled in higher education. These statistics show that virtually all unauthorized men come to California to work.

Basically almost all (9 in 10) men that come here illegally are in the work force, which you may not have known.



The final and best study yet from 2006 on immigrants in Washington, DC by the Urban Institute:

Unauthorized and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) migrants are the one group of immigrants that pay substantially lower amounts of tax. In 1999?2000, households headed by unauthorized and TPS migrants paid $13,000 in taxes, and this amounted to only 19 percent of their average household income. Unauthorized and TPS migrants had substantially lower average incomes in 1999 ($53,000 versus $78,000 for immigrant households overall). Furthermore, our tax models assume that only 55 percent of unauthorized individuals pay Social Security, Medicare, and federal, state, and local income taxes, since many of them work under the table and are paid in cash.16 Our tax models also assume that 100 percent of the unauthorized pay the other taxes we calculated, because these other taxes are not collected through employment. Nonetheless, the likelihood that many unauthorized immigrants do not pay income or payroll taxes substantially reduced their tax contributions at the federal, state, and local levels. Thus, any extension of legal work authorization?whether temporary or permanent?would give a substantial boost in tax revenue to jurisdictions across the Washington metropolitan area.

Multiply $13,000 X 195,000 (number of illegals from earlier in the report, look on page 13 - green color of the pie ) = $2,535,000,000 in total taxes paid, which would easily surpass the cost of services they received. (more on that below) Let's divide this by 2 since Head of Households can mean that other people are living at home, so $1,267,500,000.

Since the DC study didn't calculate total cost of services that the illegals received, let's look at other studies from the past. Just as a baseline, the entire state of California projected a $2.35 billion cost of illegals in 1994. (As of September 1994, California estimated that it will spend $2.35 billion on elementary and secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration for illegal aliens in fiscal year 1994-95. California officials believe that these three programs represent the state?s highest costs for illegal aliens. -GAO Report on Illegal Aliens, page 6). Adjust this number for inflation to 1999-2000 (time period for the Washington DC Study), and that inflates to $2,711,850,849.48 and add another 300 million to account for the 5 year period difference = roughly $3,000,000,000 for the entire state of California. So in 1999-2000, DC illegals almost paid $1,267,500,000 compared to roughly 3 billion for the entire state of California's cost of services (elementary/secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration), which will naturally be of a higher magnitude of DC's cost due to a much higher illegal immigration and incarceration rate. The Los Angeles study I linked above proves that LA has almost 3X the rate of illegals of DC (There are about 1 million unauthorized immigrants in the Los Angeles metropolitan area... The other metropolitan areas with very large numbers of unauthorized immigrants were Dallas (460,000), Chicago (400,000), Houston (390,000), Phoenix (350,000), Washington, D.C. (345,000).. -page vi). So it's safe to assume that if all of the illegals in LA lived in DC, the amount would easily surpass the roughly 3 billion that CA estimates as the total cost, (1.25 billion X 3 = 3.75 billion that DC illegals ALONE would pay in total taxes). Keep in mind that this is just one city alone compared to the entire state of California. 😉

These studies should help prove that there's no way illegals are consuming more than they pay in taxes: not here in DC, not in Iowa, not in California (although GAO doesn't have enough data for that region to make a determination). In conclusion, the illegals should definitely be included in Census data since they're paying that much in taxes.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Every illegal pays state taxes whenever they buy something.

:rollseye:

Which doesn't even come close to offsetting what they cost the country. So what?

That depends on who you ask, research is conflicted on the subject. Illegal immigrants contribute substantially to economic growth and to the tax base, and they tend to use services at very low levels. Generally the research tends to indicate that illegal immigration is a small net burden on our country, but certainly not to the level that you imply.

Links to actual data?

This is something good to read about it.

It deals with immigration as a whole, but specifically addresses low skilled immigrants (as illegal immigrants frequently are), and how they effect the US economically and tax wise. Long story short: Illegal immigrants are a net tax gain for the federal government and a net tax burden for local and state governments. They provide an overall economic plus to the country, but hurt low skill US workers.

Like I said, some good, some bad. Hardly what you were trying to say though.

A book? That doesn't even get into the depths of the issue, sorry, not convinced. Provide some solid facts that contradict the overwhelming volumes of information on the subject that says otherwise....please.

Your ideas about illegal immigrants having no interest in assimilating to our culture is silliness and is completely unsupported.

The hell it is, I see it everyday.

To better understand it I would suggest reading a book called 'Italians then, Mexicans now', that discusses the intergenerational assimilation of Mexican immigrants as compared to European ones from the past.

To better understand it I would suggest trying the real world. I live in one of the major areas of illegals, there is no book you can link to, or story you can conjure up that is going to change the reality I see day in, and day out . Sorry, but miniscule spending and the sales tax generated from it is not in any universe going to counteract the cost brought to bear on this countries citizens by illegal immigrants.

I live in San Diego, next to the busiest border crossing on the entire planet. Care to take that back? Your entire opinion is pretty much 'I dun care what those fancy books say, I know what I know!'. For all of your 'overwhelming volumes of information' and demands for sources from me, you have yet to provide a single source for what you think. Please remember to use non-partisan, non-nativist sources.

It looks like Sp33Demon did a better job of demolishing you than I did though, so maybe you should just read his post.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Illegals pay state taxes (and stimulate the economy)

Some maybe, but someone getting paid under the table isn't paying state tax either.

so if we're going to be consistent with how the Census has been historically conducted, then I say yes: illegals should be included because they always have.

So because we've been doing something, that's a reason to continue doing it? That fails on so many levels.

The fact of the matter is that certain states are reaping the benefits of state tax due to illegals so they're already getting compensated.

Do you have any actual figures of the numbers of illegals that are somehow paying state taxes?

Yep, I have some actual figures.
1) Link to Urban Institute nonpartisan report, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the ARCO Foundation, The Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

According to the most controversial study of those discussed here, the benefits and costs of immigration to the United States in 1992 add up to a total net cost to all levels of government of $42.5 billion. This study, by Donald Huddle, was sponsored by the Carrying Capacity Network, a nonprofit group that advocates major reductions in immigration to the United States. "The Costs of Immigration" (Huddle 1993) uses estimation procedures that include a variety of errors. When these errors are corrected, the post-1970 immigrants in Huddle's study actually show a surplus of revenues over social service costs of at least $25 billion.

2) Iowa Policy Project finds that illegals in Iowa pay more in state taxes than they're taking in.

The report concludes those illegal immigrants are paying up to 62 million dollars in state taxes each year. At least half, and perhaps more, are using someone else's Social Security number at their worksite and that means they're paying federal taxes, too, according to Mike Sheehan, a former University of Iowa professor who is one of the report's authors.

"We can say it's unfortunate that they're doing it because it's illegal," he says. "On the other hand, it does provide a vehicle for making substantial tax payments into the system which, at least on the federal level, they have no hope of getting back."

Iowa Policy Project director David Osterberg says the study found illegal immigrants pay -- on average -- about 80 percent of the taxes a legal citizen pays, but they are eligible for few government services.

"We find a lot of taxes being paid by undocumented people, not very many services being available to them and when you look at them compared to legal people...we would find that they aren't really taking in the sense that many people think that's going on," Osterberg says. According to research cited in this report, between 30 and 39 percent of Iowa's "foreign born" residents are illegal immigrants.

Some more recent facts from UI's 2007 study - The Characteristics of Unauthorized Immigrants in California, Los Angeles County:

Almost all unauthorized men work, and labor force participation rates are substantially higher for unauthorized men than for legal immigrant or U.S.-born men. In California, 94 percent of unauthorized men age 18?64 were in the labor force in 2004, versus 84 percent of legal immigrants and 82 percent of native-born men. The shares were similar nationally and in Los Angeles. Unauthorized men have higher labor force participation rates than other men because they are younger and are less likely to be disabled, retired, or enrolled in higher education. These statistics show that virtually all unauthorized men come to California to work.

Basically almost all (9 in 10) men that come here illegally are in the work force, which you may not have known.



The final and best study yet from 2006 on immigrants in Washington, DC by the Urban Institute:

Unauthorized and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) migrants are the one group of immigrants that pay substantially lower amounts of tax. In 1999?2000, households headed by unauthorized and TPS migrants paid $13,000 in taxes, and this amounted to only 19 percent of their average household income. Unauthorized and TPS migrants had substantially lower average incomes in 1999 ($53,000 versus $78,000 for immigrant households overall). Furthermore, our tax models assume that only 55 percent of unauthorized individuals pay Social Security, Medicare, and federal, state, and local income taxes, since many of them work under the table and are paid in cash.16 Our tax models also assume that 100 percent of the unauthorized pay the other taxes we calculated, because these other taxes are not collected through employment. Nonetheless, the likelihood that many unauthorized immigrants do not pay income or payroll taxes substantially reduced their tax contributions at the federal, state, and local levels. Thus, any extension of legal work authorization?whether temporary or permanent?would give a substantial boost in tax revenue to jurisdictions across the Washington metropolitan area.

Multiply $13,000 X 195,000 (number of illegals from earlier in the report, look on page 13 - green color of the pie ) = $2,535,000,000 in total taxes paid, which would easily surpass the cost of services they received. (more on that below)

Since the DC study didn't calculate total cost of services that the illegals received, let's look at other studies from the past. Just as a baseline, the entire state of California projected a $2.35 billion cost of illegals in 1994. (As of September 1994, California estimated that it will spend $2.35 billion on elementary and secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration for illegal aliens in fiscal year 1994-95. California officials believe that these three programs represent the state?s highest costs for illegal aliens. -GAO report, 1994). Adjust this number for inflation to 1999-2000 (time period for the Washington DC Study), and that inflates to $2,711,850,849.48. So in 1999-2000, DC illegals almost paid as much as the entire state of California's cost of services (elementary/secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration), which will undoubtedly be of a higher magnitude of DC's cost due to a much higher illegal immigration and incarceration rate.

These studies should help prove that there's no way illegals are consuming more than they pay in taxes: not here in DC, not in Iowa, not in California (although GAO doesn't have enough data for that region to make a determination). In conclusion, the illegals should definitely be included in Census data since they're paying that much in taxes.

Yea but that does not count how many anchor babies that are LEGAL that consume much w/o an ounce of giving back.
Not to mention field workers are a huge segment of the laborers and they get paid in cash... do you think they pay up?
Also it is widely known that illegals claim 5-7 people so that they pay less in taxes across the board. They work the system. And they are good at it!

Plus in recent testimony of District Attorney John M. Morganelli before the House Subcommittee on immigration, Border, Security and Claims he stated:

In addition, violent crime and drug distribution and possession is also prevalent among illegal aliens. Over 25% of today's federal prison population are illegal aliens. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens."

or how about In 1980, our Federal and state facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens but at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities at a cost of about $6.8 billion per year.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: EXman

Yea but that does not count how many anchor babies that are LEGAL that consume much w/o an ounce of giving back.
Not to mention field workers are a huge segment of the laborers and they get paid in cash... do you think they pay up?
Also it is widely known that illegals claim 5-7 people so that they pay less in taxes across the board. They work the system. And they are good at it!

Plus in recent testimony of District Attorney John M. Morganelli before the House Subcommittee on immigration, Border, Security and Claims he stated:

In addition, violent crime and drug distribution and possession is also prevalent among illegal aliens. Over 25% of today's federal prison population are illegal aliens. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens."

or how about In 1980, our Federal and state facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens but at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities at a cost of about $6.8 billion per year.

Nothing you wrote refuted him in any way. Why on earth would you say that anchor babies consume without giving back? Every kid consumes without giving back until they are 18. Unless you can show some evidence that these people get up and leave the US to work somewhere else when they become of working age, your point is incoherent.

It looks like you just cut and pasted some nativist statistics to respond to a well reasoned and well supported argument.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: EXman
Yea but that does not count how many anchor babies that are LEGAL that consume much w/o an ounce of giving back.
Not to mention field workers are a huge segment of the laborers and they get paid in cash... do you think they pay up?
Also it is widely known that illegals claim 5-7 people so that they pay less in taxes across the board. They work the system. And they are good at it!

Plus in recent testimony of District Attorney John M. Morganelli before the House Subcommittee on immigration, Border, Security and Claims he stated:

In addition, violent crime and drug distribution and possession is also prevalent among illegal aliens. Over 25% of today's federal prison population are illegal aliens. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens."

or how about In 1980, our Federal and state facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens but at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities at a cost of about $6.8 billion per year.

Ok, I adjusted my post accordingly and ran new numbers by dividing head of household in half for DC illegals in 1999-2000, which is fair IMO. I will have to do more research into just how they tabulated the 195,000 illegals for that 2006 study (going to email the author). However, I think it's safe to hypothesize that 1/2 of the illegals are working, especially since 94% of male illegals in LA worked. All in all, according to these studies and the numbers ($13,000 in taxes per illegal paid), I don't see how illegals (at least in DC Metro area) aren't paying their share.

So in 1999-2000, DC illegals almost paid $1,267,500,000 compared to roughly 3 billion for the entire state of California's cost of services (elementary/secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration), which will naturally be of a higher magnitude of DC's cost due to a much higher illegal immigration and incarceration rate. The Los Angeles study I linked above proves that LA has almost 3X the rate of illegals of DC (There are about 1 million unauthorized immigrants in the Los Angeles metropolitan area... The other metropolitan areas with very large numbers of unauthorized immigrants were Dallas (460,000), Chicago (400,000), Houston (390,000), Phoenix (350,000), Washington, D.C. (345,000).. -page vi). So it's safe to assume that if all of the illegals in LA lived in DC, the amount would easily surpass the roughly 3 billion that CA estimates as the total cost, (1.25 billion X 3 = 3.75 billion that DC illegals ALONE would pay in total taxes). Keep in mind that this is just one city alone compared to the entire state of California. 😉

Regarding your incarceration statistic, that's already factored into California's total illegal alien cost estimate.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Yep, I have some actual figures.
1) Link to Urban Institute nonpartisan report, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the ARCO Foundation, The Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

Unfortunately that study includes legal immigrants and it waters down the statistics. The issue isn't immigrants, the issue is illegal immigrants.

2) Iowa Policy Project finds that illegals in Iowa pay more in state taxes than they're taking in.

The report concludes those illegal immigrants are paying up to 62 million dollars in state taxes each year. At least half, and perhaps more, are using someone else's Social Security number at their worksite and that means they're paying federal taxes, too, according to Mike Sheehan, a former University of Iowa professor who is one of the report's authors.

"We can say it's unfortunate that they're doing it because it's illegal," he says. "On the other hand, it does provide a vehicle for making substantial tax payments into the system which, at least on the federal level, they have no hope of getting back."

Iowa Policy Project director David Osterberg says the study found illegal immigrants pay -- on average -- about 80 percent of the taxes a legal citizen pays, but they are eligible for few government services.

"We find a lot of taxes being paid by undocumented people, not very many services being available to them and when you look at them compared to legal people...we would find that they aren't really taking in the sense that many people think that's going on," Osterberg says. According to research cited in this report, between 30 and 39 percent of Iowa's "foreign born" residents are illegal immigrants.

Iowa? Not exactly the mecca of illegal immigration, and regardless there's no link to this study with facts, or statistics to look through.

Some more recent facts from UI's 2007 study - The Characteristics of Unauthorized Immigrants in California, Los Angeles County:

Almost all unauthorized men work, and labor force participation rates are substantially higher for unauthorized men than for legal immigrant or U.S.-born men. In California, 94 percent of unauthorized men age 18?64 were in the labor force in 2004, versus 84 percent of legal immigrants and 82 percent of native-born men. The shares were similar nationally and in Los Angeles. Unauthorized men have higher labor force participation rates than other men because they are younger and are less likely to be disabled, retired, or enrolled in higher education. These statistics show that virtually all unauthorized men come to California to work.

Basically almost all (9 in 10) men that come here illegally are in the work force, which you may not have known.

I did know that, well, maybe not an exact figure, which this is just an estimation anyway, which is kind of one of my points that in a time when our economy is faultering we need jobs for Americans, even "the ones Americans don't want to do". If people truely need work, the jobs will get done.

The final and best study yet from 2006 on immigrants in Washington, DC by the Urban Institute:

Unauthorized and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) migrants are the one group of immigrants that pay substantially lower amounts of tax. In 1999?2000, households headed by unauthorized and TPS migrants paid $13,000 in taxes, and this amounted to only 19 percent of their average household income. Unauthorized and TPS migrants had substantially lower average incomes in 1999 ($53,000 versus $78,000 for immigrant households overall). Furthermore, our tax models assume that only 55 percent of unauthorized individuals pay Social Security, Medicare, and federal, state, and local income taxes, since many of them work under the table and are paid in cash.16 Our tax models also assume that 100 percent of the unauthorized pay the other taxes we calculated, because these other taxes are not collected through employment. Nonetheless, the likelihood that many unauthorized immigrants do not pay income or payroll taxes substantially reduced their tax contributions at the federal, state, and local levels. Thus, any extension of legal work authorization?whether temporary or permanent?would give a substantial boost in tax revenue to jurisdictions across the Washington metropolitan area.

Multiply $13,000 X 195,000 (number of illegals from earlier in the report, look on page 13 - green color of the pie ) = $2,535,000,000 in total taxes paid, which would easily surpass the cost of services they received. (more on that below)

Since the DC study didn't calculate total cost of services that the illegals received, let's look at other studies from the past. Just as a baseline, the entire state of California projected a $2.35 billion cost of illegals in 1994. (As of September 1994, California estimated that it will spend $2.35 billion on elementary and secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration for illegal aliens in fiscal year 1994-95. California officials believe that these three programs represent the state?s highest costs for illegal aliens. -GAO report, 1994). Adjust this number for inflation to 1999-2000 (time period for the Washington DC Study), and that inflates to $2,711,850,849.48. So in 1999-2000, DC illegals almost paid as much as the entire state of California's cost of services (elementary/secondary education, Medicaid, and adult incarceration), which will undoubtedly be of a higher magnitude of DC's cost due to a much higher illegal immigration and incarceration rate.

These studies should help prove that there's no way illegals are consuming more than they pay in taxes: not here in DC, not in Iowa, not in California (although GAO doesn't have enough data for that region to make a determination). In conclusion, the illegals should definitely be included in Census data since they're paying that much in taxes.

All of these studies are estimations, and estimations that can be slanted one way, or another depending on the data used.

Here's another take on the Huddle Study;

The Huddle Study
Because the number of illegal aliens can only be estimated, similarly the fiscal cost (government budget outlays) for those aliens can only be estimated. Dr. Donald Huddle, a Rice University economics professor, published a systematic analysis of those costs as of 1996 (see table below). The study also estimated the tax payments of those same aliens.

At that time, the illegal alien population was estimated to be about five million persons. The estimated fiscal cost of those illegal aliens to the federal, state and local governments was about $33 billion. This impact was partially offset by an estimated $12.6 billion in taxes paid to the federal, state and local governments, resulting in a net cost to the American taxpayer of about $20 billion every year. This estimate did not include indirect costs that result from unemployment payments to Americans who lost their jobs to illegal aliens willing to work for lower wages. Nor did it include lost tax collections from those American workers who became unemployed. The study estimated those indirect costs from illegal immigration at an additional $4.3 billion annually.

None of the posted studies include the collateral damage, of crime, gangs, accidents, etc...

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I live in San Diego, next to the busiest border crossing on the entire planet. Care to take that back? Your entire opinion is pretty much 'I dun care what those fancy books say, I know what I know!'. For all of your 'overwhelming volumes of information' and demands for sources from me, you have yet to provide a single source for what you think. Please remember to use non-partisan, non-nativist sources.

It looks like Sp33Demon did a better job of demolishing you than I did though, so maybe you should just read his post.

Riding others coattails with nothing of your own? Don't worry, I didn't expect any less.

http://www.fairus.org/site/Pag...rationissuecentersf134

http://www.borderfirereport.ne...on-in-pennsylvania.php

http://article.nationalreview....VmYWE4MTAxNTZlOWJkNDk=

This next one isn't directly aimed at illegal immigration, but low skilled workers, which is the bulk of illegal immigration.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/sr12.cfm

http://www.reuters.com/article...3-Apr-2009+PRN20090413

http://www.usillegalaliens.com/

Try to remember it's the message, not the messenger.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: EXman

Yea but that does not count how many anchor babies that are LEGAL that consume much w/o an ounce of giving back.
Not to mention field workers are a huge segment of the laborers and they get paid in cash... do you think they pay up?
Also it is widely known that illegals claim 5-7 people so that they pay less in taxes across the board. They work the system. And they are good at it!

Plus in recent testimony of District Attorney John M. Morganelli before the House Subcommittee on immigration, Border, Security and Claims he stated:

In addition, violent crime and drug distribution and possession is also prevalent among illegal aliens. Over 25% of today's federal prison population are illegal aliens. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens."

or how about In 1980, our Federal and state facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens but at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in U.S. correctional facilities at a cost of about $6.8 billion per year.

Nothing you wrote refuted him in any way. Why on earth would you say that anchor babies consume without giving back? Every kid consumes without giving back until they are 18. Unless you can show some evidence that these people get up and leave the US to work somewhere else when they become of working age, your point is incoherent.

It looks like you just cut and pasted some nativist statistics to respond to a well reasoned and well supported argument.

LoL! love your post! I really think you have any idea of what I'm saying. Let me try harder...
Why do you think illegals have babies here? btw they are Free (in cost) to have here. The illegals start to legally use their anchor babies government aid to live on. Have you been to a local government assistance office lately? What do you find there? Go down see what you find and then tell me why those numbers are a good representation.

I have been there,and well the Kids in the office are all legal Americans. But Many and some days Most of the people over the age of 15yo are illegals leeching off thier anchor babies. Will these kids get factored in as a cost of illegals? Of course not. All that $ going to legal kids WILL NOT BE FACTORED.

Regardless of any numbers/ polls go down and look where and to whom the $ is going? Look who is in control on the consumption of our public aid.

Is that more clear?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: eskimospy

I live in San Diego, next to the busiest border crossing on the entire planet. Care to take that back? Your entire opinion is pretty much 'I dun care what those fancy books say, I know what I know!'. For all of your 'overwhelming volumes of information' and demands for sources from me, you have yet to provide a single source for what you think. Please remember to use non-partisan, non-nativist sources.

It looks like Sp33Demon did a better job of demolishing you than I did though, so maybe you should just read his post.

Riding others coattails with nothing of your own? Don't worry, I didn't expect any less.

http://www.fairus.org/site/Pag...rationissuecentersf134

http://www.borderfirereport.ne...on-in-pennsylvania.php

http://article.nationalreview....VmYWE4MTAxNTZlOWJkNDk=

This next one isn't directly aimed at illegal immigration, but low skilled workers, which is the bulk of illegal immigration.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/sr12.cfm

http://www.reuters.com/article...3-Apr-2009+PRN20090413

http://www.usillegalaliens.com/

Try to remember it's the message, not the messenger.

Wow did you fail at providing respectable, nonpartisan sources. FAIR (nativist group), borderfirereport.com (nativist website), National Review (right wing publication), The Heritage Foundation (right wing think tank), A Reuters article reporting on a FAIR study, usillegalaliens.com (need I say more?) You couldn't even provide ONE objective source.

The validity of a message both requires a plausible message and a credible messenger. If we're going to play that game I'll just cover you with articles, studies, and analysis from pro-hispanic and pro-immigration groups. They would be every bit as biased and unsound as yours, just in the opposite direction. Then we could both shriek like idiots about how the other person was wrong.

Or, we could look at actual objective, academic research into the topic and try to argue using real facts that aren't manipulated for an agenda.

I'll ignore your ridiculous schoolyard taunts and hope that you grow up enough to have an adult discussion about this.

 

[xj0hnx]

Like I said the message, not the messenger. Yours is a typical deflection, and I hope you stick to your statement of ignoring me.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx
Like I said the message, not the messenger. Yours is a typical deflection, and I hope you stick to your statement of ignoring me.

That would only be a 'typical deflection' to a person who is completely unused to rational and adult debate. Information from non-credible sources is never allowed. How can you not know this?

Also, you should read posts more carefully before replying. I said that I would ignore your schoolyard taunts, not ignore you. I'm hoping you will grow up enough to actually think about this subject rationally.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx
All of these studies are estimations, and estimations that can be slanted one way, or another depending on the data used.

Here's another take on the Huddle Study;

The Huddle Study
Because the number of illegal aliens can only be estimated, similarly the fiscal cost (government budget outlays) for those aliens can only be estimated. Dr. Donald Huddle, a Rice University economics professor, published a systematic analysis of those costs as of 1996 (see table below). The study also estimated the tax payments of those same aliens.

At that time, the illegal alien population was estimated to be about five million persons. The estimated fiscal cost of those illegal aliens to the federal, state and local governments was about $33 billion. This impact was partially offset by an estimated $12.6 billion in taxes paid to the federal, state and local governments, resulting in a net cost to the American taxpayer of about $20 billion every year. This estimate did not include indirect costs that result from unemployment payments to Americans who lost their jobs to illegal aliens willing to work for lower wages. Nor did it include lost tax collections from those American workers who became unemployed. The study estimated those indirect costs from illegal immigration at an additional $4.3 billion annually.

None of the posted studies include the collateral damage, of crime, gangs, accidents, etc...

1) After looking over it again, you're right... it's watered down with legal immigrant statistics and not just strictly "illegal". However, Huddle has already been discredited by Snopes for his earlier study so I would take his (biased) studies with a grain of salt: At the Bottom since it won't let me copy it.

2)Link to the actual numbers for the Iowa Policy Project.

3) The cost of incarceration was already included. Crime, gangs, and accidents are: a) most likely to be committed by an illegal off the books or unemployed and b) most likely to lead to incarceration. Anyone can commit a crime, in fact the highest demographic is black men: "One in nine black men ages 20 to 34 is behind bars." Do they pay taxes too? A criminal is a criminal, they transcend all race and citizenship statuses and everyone pays for it.

None of my numbers are slanted, you can ignore them if you want. These are statistics derived by nonpartisan organizations, especially California's total illegal alien cost in 1994: If anything, they would want to pump that total cost number up as high as they could because they wanted the Feds to help them. That number is accurate, if not even inflated by them to try to get federal funding.

The only number I changed was the 1994 CA total cost of illegals from 2.4billion to 2.7 (inflation) + 300 million (rounds neatly to 3 billion) over 5 years. Even if you inflated the number by a billion over those 5 years (or 37%) to 3.7 billion inflation adjusted, which is unlikely, it's still not believable b/c DC illegals made roughly 1.3 billion alone. LA is three time the size of DC. Granted, DC illegals may make more but it can't be that much. Factor in LA (3 times the illegals in DC), San Fran, San Diego, Anaheim, San Jose, Sacremento, and all of the other large cities in California and it would have to be higher than 3 billion, or even 3.7 billion. It would have to be, any person with logic that has read the nonpartisan studies above would come to the same exact conclusion. And for the record, I personally don't even like illegal immigrants, I think our borders should be secured more but this makes me a little more tolerant towards them than I was yesterday.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: xj0hnx
All of these studies are estimations, and estimations that can be slanted one way, or another depending on the data used.

Here's another take on the Huddle Study;

The Huddle Study
Because the number of illegal aliens can only be estimated, similarly the fiscal cost (government budget outlays) for those aliens can only be estimated. Dr. Donald Huddle, a Rice University economics professor, published a systematic analysis of those costs as of 1996 (see table below). The study also estimated the tax payments of those same aliens.

At that time, the illegal alien population was estimated to be about five million persons. The estimated fiscal cost of those illegal aliens to the federal, state and local governments was about $33 billion. This impact was partially offset by an estimated $12.6 billion in taxes paid to the federal, state and local governments, resulting in a net cost to the American taxpayer of about $20 billion every year. This estimate did not include indirect costs that result from unemployment payments to Americans who lost their jobs to illegal aliens willing to work for lower wages. Nor did it include lost tax collections from those American workers who became unemployed. The study estimated those indirect costs from illegal immigration at an additional $4.3 billion annually.

None of the posted studies include the collateral damage, of crime, gangs, accidents, etc...

1) After looking over it again, you're right... it's watered down with legal immigrant statistics and not just strictly "illegal". However, Huddle has already been discredited by Snopes for his earlier study so I would take his (biased) studies with a grain of salt: At the Bottom since it won't let me copy it.

Problem is that everything that is "discredited" isn't replaced by actual numbers, only other estimations, which could also be wrong.

2)Link to the actual numbers for the Iowa Policy Project.

Thank you.

3) The cost of incarceration was already included. Crime, gangs, and accidents are: a) most likely to be committed by an illegal off the books or unemployed and b) most likely to lead to incarceration. Anyone can commit a crime, in fact the highest demographic is black men: "One in nine black men ages 20 to 34 is behind bars." Do they pay taxes too? A criminal is a criminal, they transcend all race and citizenship statuses and everyone pays for it.

I don't think anyone is claiming there's crime only because of illegals, but that incarceration, and all the cost that go with it, but financial, and social are yet another burden borne by the citizens of America.

None of my numbers are slanted, you can ignore them if you want. These are statistics derived by nonpartisan organizations, especially California's total illegal alien cost in 1994: If anything, they would want to pump that total cost number up as high as they could because they wanted the Feds to help them. That number is accurate, if not even inflated by them to try to get federal funding.

The only number I changed was the 1994 CA total cost of illegals from 2.4billion to 2.7 (inflation) and 300 million in 5 years. Even if you inflated the number by a billion in 5 years (or 37%) to 3.7 billion, which is unlikely, it's still not believable.

You don't find it strange that DC illegals in 1999-2000 paid over roughly 40% of the state of California's total cost of illegals? Granted, DC illegals may make more but it can't be that much. Factor in LA (3 times the illegals in DC), San Fran, San Diego, Anaheim, San Jose, Sacremento, and all of the other large cities in California and it would have to be higher than 3 billion. It would have to be, any person with logic that has read the nonpartisan studies above would come to the same exact conclusion.

Not ignoring it, but there is something wrong with the numbers...

Unauthorized and TPS migrants had substantially lower average incomes in 1999 ($53,000 versus $78,000 for immigrant households overall).

When in 1999 the Median American household income was only $41,994, looks like some of the numbers are in fact fishy.

And for the record, I personally don't even like illegal immigrants, I think our borders should be secured more but this makes me a little more tolerant towards them than I was yesterday.

Glad to hear it.

 

[ZeGermans]

I'm looking forward to crazy right wingers refusing to take the census so redistricting is even more hilarious

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: xj0hnx
Like I said the message, not the messenger. Yours is a typical deflection, and I hope you stick to your statement of ignoring me.

That would only be a 'typical deflection' to a person who is completely unused to rational and adult debate. Information from non-credible sources is never allowed. How can you not know this?

Also, you should read posts more carefully before replying. I said that I would ignore your schoolyard taunts, not ignore you. I'm hoping you will grow up enough to actually think about this subject rationally.

Your ad hominem is so boring.

 

[LunarRay]

I think it is instructive to consider just what is the incremental cost to the US or California as it applies to Illegal resident folks.

You really don't need a source biased one way or another but just use some common sense.

Now remember, I'm speaking to incremental cost...

On the other side of the coin is the demand they provide for goods and perhaps services. The taxes they pay and the possibility they'll never draw down on the SS they also pay. I presume that if they some how avoid I8 filing they will pay taxes but even if they work for cash they spend...

I'm sure in some places and the legally residing folks there can point to issues regarding the activities of Illegals that I can't way up in Solana Beach, Ca.. where I've not seen too many folks who didn't actually live here... anyhow, I'm not sure life exists east of 101 anyhow..