Posted on 12/03/2005 9:06:48 AM PST by ncountylee
Agreed, but you really don't want to go there, unless you want to argue for the incarceration of all inhabitants of the USA. The question is not "have they done something wrong by jumping the border." I argue that they have, and should PAY for it. The question is "how serious of a crime should we reckon this to be?" We allow citizens to pay a fine for speeding infractions. We don't impound their cars. We have set up a "wink wink" policy of "we will pretend you aren't here" policy. We should set up a penalty system to punish the lawbreakers who have violated US sovereignty by illegally transgressing our borders with a penalty that recognizes our own culpability in not honestly assessing our labor markets and setting appropriate immigrations quotas. This does NOT include the "throw em out and lock it down" approach which many freepers here are absolutely fixated on.
I see you are still ranting your BS with no facts to back it up, try mine:
To: chronic_loser
......They depress wages for legal immigrants and US citizens.
This is simply untrue. If it were true, the FACT that we have had millions of illegals in the country for over 10 years would have depressed wages. It has not. Wages are rising. HINT: YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST THE FREE MARKET, where people bid on services, goods, and wages. You just want to rig the system to artificially prop up wages. You may not make up imaginary scenarios where wages are declining in order to justify your immigration views. Wages are not declining, and it is simply a falsehood to claim they are.....
Yes wages are depressed. Borjas who is considered a lead expert on the subject concluded a 10% increase of immigrants reduces wages by 3 to 4%....
"Between 1980 and 2000 immigration increased the labor supply of working men by 11.0 percent. Even after accounting for the beneficial cross-effects of low-skill (high-skill) immigration on the earnings of high-skill (low-skill)workers, my analysis implies that this immigration influx reduced the wage of the average native worker by 3.2 percent. The wage impact differed dramatically across education groups with the wage falling by 8.9 percent for high school dropouts, 4.0 percent for college graduates, 2.6 percent for high school graduates,and barely changing for workers with some college." (page 1370(pdf36).
http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~GBorjas/Papers/QJE2003.pdf
......They use more "social" services than they pay for.
1) this is debatable.
2) the answer is not to clean out the illegals you you can spoon yourself more slop from the hog trough. the answer is to do away with the socialistic "social services." I personally would love to see SOMETHING bust the whole damn socialist system and force everyone to "pay as you go" system.....
They do use more social services it is not debatable:
Illegal alien households are estimated to use $2,700 a year more in services than they pay in taxes, creating a total fiscal burden of nearly $10.4 billion on the federal budget in 2002.
Among the largest federal costs: Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
IF ILLEGAL ALIENS WERE LEGALIZED AND BEGAN TO PAY TAXES AND USE SERVICES LIKE LEGAL IMMIGRANTS WITH THE SAME EDUCATION LEVELS, THE ESTIMATED ANNUAL FISCAL DEFICIT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL WOULD INCREASE FROM $2,700 PER HOUSEHOLD TO NEARLY $7,700 FOR A TOTAL FEDERAL DEFICIT OF 29 BILLION.
With nearly two-third of illegals lacking a high school diploma, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments not their legal status or their unwillingness to work.
Amnesty increases costs because illegals would still be largely unskilled, and thus their tax payments would continue to be very modest, but once legalized they would be able to access many more government services.
The fact that legal immigrants with little schooling are a fiscal drain on federal coffers does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a drain. Many legal immigrants are highly skilled.
Because many of the costs are due to their U.S.-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth, barring illegals themselves from federal programs will not significantly reduce costs.
Although they create a net drain on the federal government, the average illegal household pays more than $4,200 a year in federal taxes, for a total of nearly $16 billion.
However, they impose annual costs of more than $26.3 billion, or about $6,950 per illegal household.
About 43 percent, or $7 billion, of the federal taxes illegals pay go to Social Security and Medicare.
Employers do not see the costs associated with less-educated immigrant workers because the costs are spread out among all taxpayers.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalrelease.html
.........They are a burden on taxpayers, who are subsidizing their cheap labor for those that employ them
Yeah, and they shoot flaming monkeys out of their..... well you know. That statement is a complete non sequiter, unless you have a Marxist view of labor.........
See above for facts not flame shooting monkeys.
.........Rewarding lawbreakers with an amnesty, is that the American way?
No. I have never proposed amnesty. I propose a fine, just like I don't propose seizing your vehicle when you break the speed limit. You pay a FINE. I have proposed a $10,000 fee, a clean bill of health, a presentation of 3 years of filed tax forms, a proof that no serious crimes have been committed while here, and proof of continual employment. On that condition, we give you a yearly renewable visa. That is not "amnesty" and it is a despicable lie to claim that it is........
LOL of course it is amnesty you are rewarding their illegal behavior. What about the millions who are waiting to enter legally, you are pushing these people ahead of those who obeyed the law, thus a reward!
.....Why is crime so prevalent among this group?
good question:
1) for the same reason that it is less than one third what it is among US citizens...... who are black. Are you advocating revoking their citizenship?......
No I am not advocating revoking citizenship, I am advocating keeping illegal aliens out of this country so they commit their crimes in their homeland.
.......2) one serious reason is the nature of the idiotic choice I originally referenced. The REAL security problem we have with Latinos is that choice #3 has made it possible (nay, PROBABLE) that a career criminal can go al norte and establish a completely new identity. Rapists, Murderers, Thieves, all can come in with the good people because we have no border controls. ON THAT I am in complete agreement with the Freepers. We need to control our border. My difference is on HOW we do so......
ok so your not totally OBL, you want to fine them and make more money off them?
............You spout freedom and free markets, so tell me how many illegals is enough?
The question is stupid and unfair. We are talking about what to do with the illegals we have. My proposal is to offer them a path that would bring them "above ground" and reduce the incentive for others to sneak in, not to simply allow "more illegals." However, since you ask an idiot question, I will give you an idiot answer. It is "zero.".....
It is not a stupid question and why is it unfair? By offering an amnesty we will be encouraging millions more to enter illegally just as happened after the 1986 amnesty which is how we got into this mess in the first place. How do you propose to reduce the incentive to sneak in by granting amnesty? Are you going to give 20 million more temporary guest worker visas? What is your plan for those that are not here YET?
....You have the same chicken little scenario arguments that people spouted against the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Germans and virtually every other people group that has come here, some of which have had GREATER percentages of immigrants compared to the citizen population than the current wave. They were all going to crush our wage structure and reduce our working class to poverty......
No there is a big difference, we controlled the amount of legal immigration, and at times they did depress wages.
......Are you so special or so skilled that we shouldn't let a few million people in to compete with your skills(whatever they are)?
Sure. Let em in. It is called "competition" and it lets the best rise to the top......
So you do want to let as many people in as want to come here, before you answered Zero. Make up your mind.
......the only people I see support illegals are those profiting from them or liberal bleeding hearts who don't have a clue.
you have neither one here......
Both?
148 posted on 12/01/2005 12:22:29 PM PST by rolling_stone
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1531590/posts?page=148#148
Can you sue a county hospital? Yes , legally, you can send them elsewhere for treatment, but most doctors working in private hospitals aren't going to take on that liability.
I'm not sure this is better. All that's going to happen now is that Bush is going to bring in the illegals, and the Dems are going to register them. The Democrats just have a Republican President doing their dirty work this time around.
Work to change the law, rather than advocate for selective enforcement based upon "social reasons."
As if those jobs were never held by Americans. Has it entered your brain that its that or Clichy-sous-Bois ?
As long as we don't get stuck with McCain/Kennedy...
Of course. Why else would they keep insurance?
Bush is going to bring them in? The illegals are here now.
They can't of course register to vote if they are not citizens. This is not a citizenship amnesty.
Oh yeah, I forgot. Duke Hospital (a private hospital about 6 blocks from here) has exactly the same policy. Sorry I forgot that in the first post.
Always is. Demand all or nothing and you get nothing every time.
You can source all the globalist/biased immigration impact studies you want, but I've witnessed first hand the impact of illegal immigration. I've lived in two well known ski resort communities in Colorado for over 15 years. I've witnessed illegals taking jobs that Americans won't do, like construction jobs. < /sarcasm > I've been inside two-bedroom apartments where they've built make-shift walls and bunkbeds to house 4 illegals in one bedroom in order to afford the jobs we won't do, like construction jobs < / sarcasm >. Would that have a depressing effect on wages for Americans? Do you care?
A nurse friend (who immigrated legally from Czech Republic and didn't speak a word of english, but now, is fluent) told me that the local hospital birthed 75 illegal's babies that year (about 7 years ago) and we picked up the tab. Would that have an economic impact on legal American residents? A burden perhaps? An impact on the hospital services available for Americans? Do you care?
Nevermind the countless stories of uninsured illegals' car accidents. The prevalence of spanish in our schools. Heck, our church services were even conducted half and half in english/spanish.
You're damn right, I don't want anymore Mexican immigration. I want skilled immigrants. I want immigrants who appreciate America, who want to become American and are good for America.
Americans don't owe Mexicans a job. They don't have the cojones to fight for economic justice in their own country and that is our fault? They accept sneaking into our country for work as a way of life and resent America for it? Is that the kind of people you want influencing our culture?
Your rant exposes your self-loathing hatred of your own coutnrymen and you think you're winning the hearts and minds of those who want our borders enforced? Just because conservatives opposed the welfare state all along doesn't mean we're mean spirited when we are equally upset to see Mexicans coming here to exploit the system.
What you fail to recognize is that globalist Republicans bring the illegals here to exploit them for their labor and the socialist Democrats exploit them with their socialist programs for votes. The end result: We lose our standard of living on the way to losing our republican form of government. Thanks for your help.
HMM. Any law suits yet against either? It will be interesting to watch what happens.
That is why it was the first thing he pushed after reelection. I was stunned. An immediate loss of the political capital he claimed to have.
The American people do not consider enforcing their laws or the sovereignty of their country to be an unreasonable position. The American people do not wish to import wholesale the violence, poverty, corruption, and lawlessness of Latin America. I know you want a Latin American style social order (and a nation owned by a handful of rich families living behind fortified walls is pure libertarianism/feudalism) but the rest of the American people do not.
Merging America into Latin America is the most fundamental principle of the Bush dynasty.
Borjas who is considered a lead expert on the subject concluded a 10% increase of immigrants reduces wages by 3 to 4%....
"Between 1980 and 2000 immigration increased the labor supply of working men by 11.0 percent. Even after accounting for the beneficial cross-effects of low-skill (high-skill) immigration on the earnings of high-skill (low-skill)workers, my analysis implies that this immigration influx reduced the wage of the average native worker by 3.2 percent. The wage impact differed dramatically across education groups with the wage falling by 8.9 percent for high school dropouts, 4.0 percent for college graduates, 2.6 percent for high school graduates,and barely changing for workers with some college." (page 1370(pdf36).
http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~GBorjas/Papers/QJE2003.pdf
I had noted the Borjas stuff. I pulled down all the bureau of labor stats I just referenced this morning to look at. One of several problems with all this is the way you play with "real" wages. Leftist economists play with all types of numbers (not accusing Borjas of anything, just giving an example) to "prove" that "real" wages have been declining for years. The problem is that we can't decide how much money we "really" have because 1) the amount of money in circulation keeps increasing 2) the fractional reserve system the fed uses allows 1st DooDip bank in Oshkawashkie Minnesota to "generate" moneys into the system by "lending" on a fractional system. (see Gary North's little tract on HONEST MONEY). You can do all kinds of monkey business wiht "real wages" because no one has a damn clue as to how much "real" money is out there. All we can accurately measure is the amount of stipulated income people are receiving. If you want to compare that against some chart of core inflation, then we are still talking about an honest analysis. Anything else is like astrology, you can make the tables say anything you like.
I have a more full response coming in my special STFU file, but that will have to do for now on real wages.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.