Posted on 04/02/2006 10:30:41 PM PDT by kellynla
Imagine that you came home tomorrow and found a stranger living in your home. Would you pay $148 to have him removed, or would you instead just legally adopt him and give him the run of the place to save the $148? The Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., thinks the “practical” thing to do would be adopt the “undocumented family member” that broke into your home.
At least, that is what I can extrapolate from the report they released last week purporting to document the true cost of deporting –rather than amnestying-- the 10 million illegal aliens that have smuggled themselves into our homeland over the past two decades. According to the study, which was dutifully reported by the Washington Post and others, it would cost the Federal Government $41 billion per year over the next five years to take the “draconian” step of actually enforcing our immigration laws.
Let’s pretend, for just a moment, that the ghost of the bloody Greek King Dracon is not laughing hysterically at the idea that being deported home in an air-conditioned bus is now considered “draconian.” And while we’re in fantasyland, let us also pretend that the $41 billion per year figure is even remotely accurate. The Federal Government has an annual budget of $2.34 trillion per year. Our Gross Domestic Product is a staggering $12 trillion per year. $41 billion would be just 1.7% of the Federal budget, and a miniscule 0.34% of our GDP.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
"It's true that I've never had children and very rarely had medical care, so most of the issues you mention didn't touch me."
well then I suggest you educate yourself on the problems and quit opining what you obviously don't know and apparently don't care about!
I have zero problem with the remittances to Mexico. They don't mean anything as far as I'm concerned. The US doesn't "lose" this money, it gets recirculated in many ways, besides we print so much of it it hardly matters. If the cash transfers are a manifestation of tax evasion, there are already laws against that. I do not know and don't see how I could know the character of the remissions, and it is the least meaningful detail in this whole controversy IMO. What you call their humanity is seriously diminished in my eyes, because they are so aggressive, they start out being illegal, they are jumping ahead in line of those who come here on a controlled basis, they are NOT interested in assimilating. They are all take and no give. Again, it's behavioral, not racial. They are expressly creating a foothold for more and more of them to enter the US, and, emboldened by the near-total lack of border security, begin their alleged "beneficial stay" in the US with the idea that our laws don't matter. I can't support that.
I have a lot of experience with Filipinos, and they are among the kindest, gentlest, and diligent people I have ever met. I worked with a ton of them aboard ships. Many of them worked very hard, sent home money, and were able to live very well because of the disparity in wage between what they earned aboard ship and what wages are/were at home. Good for them. They took an opportunity and returned home to benefit from it. If the Mexican workers did that, I would have far fewer objections to their presence. Of course I'm generalizing, but the Filipinos don't exhibit any of the agressive "gimme" entitlement mentality that we see in these Mexican protest marches. I don't see them treated with contempt. Seriously, I don't.
And this "gimme" thing...this is not folks who just want to make an honest living. Those immigrants, you will not see in these marches. They are busy making that honest living. The marching and the Aztlan movement et al are an aggressive and extra-legal invasion. I can't support it, no matter how natural their desire to become earners here. It's frickin nasty. There's nothing noble about wanting to feed your face. Everyone wants to do it. It's just another way of them saying, "we're here, we're belong, you can't stop us, we don't care how much police and street-cleanup overtime you have to dish out". It's big-time in your face. They already have plenty of entitlement they are very arguably not entitled to, and it's never enough. This is the sign of an agressive invasion, not a blending of cultures, not a mutually beneficial proposition. Just "get outta my way, I'm getting mine, and my kids and my relatives are gonna here and take what's rightfully theirs. You can't stop us." Who needs this? It's just inviting in competition for resources at every level. And now, because of the pandering of our politicians to their overwhelming numbers, we have to consider at great length giving them drivers licenses, in-state tuition rates, and many other benefits that should NOT be denied to bona-fide citizens. If the resources were infinite, it would be less of a big deal. But they are not.
Actually it would cost very little.
As I have posted previously, the best way for illegals to go home is by the same means that they came in the first place.
That means they would voluntarily walk or take a bus back across the border at their own expense.
How you ask?
If there is no means of making a living or any means of obtaining subsidy, then it follows that most all of them will seek to return home.
The only ones that might have a chance of continuing to subvert US law are those that have schemed from the 'anchor baby' angle. They might have a chance to stay unless the Supreme Court interprets the 14th Amendment's "jurisdiction" clause to exclude families of anchor babies from citizenship.
A policy that would compel illegals to leave would be harsh penalties on employers of illegals and strict screening of eligibility for taxpayer funded services. Other ancillary measures would be severe surcharge taxes on wire transfers to Mexico from those that can't prove legal residency status.
Although this policy would evoke hundreds of stories of repressive harshness, the solution is clear. For those Americans that 'feel' something must be done to help these illegals, they can do it the legal way by sponsoring illegals and agreeing to provide for their welfare from their own pockets. Government would bar any taxpayer funded social and human service to sponsored illegals for a period of time say ten years or until the sponsored persons have paid into the system long enough to have earned benefits.
Furthermore illegals that become sponsored would attain a legal status so long as their sponsors could provide for their welfare. Illegals could work but only in deference to American citizens or legal permanent residents.
Sponsors would agree to pay for returning their illegal ward whenever such ward requested or whenever the sponsor requested termination of the sponsorship. In any event the sponsorship would be null and void and not subject to later reactivation.
I would be happy with just deporting the ones arrested.
We have existing immigration laws - THE MORONS IN WASHINGTON NEED TO ENFORCE THEM!
and just think of all the American perverts, drug and porno pushers we could incarcerate by deporting the incarcerated illegals!!!
well we all know the cost up until now...
NINE BILLION A YEAR IN CA ALONE!
while GWB, RINOld and the rest of the overwhelming majority of the GOP sits on their hands!!!
If W took the advise of the crazies on this thread the Repubs would never win another election ...ever.
ZERO... heavily fine employers and property managers for renting to them, and real estate, title, and mortage agents in dealing/selling to/with illegals..
It would cost ZERO dollars, maybe be a source of revenue..
Quite simple really.. Also pay bountys for anyone finding the perps out of the fines..
The illegals would slink back to where they came.. THEN we could re-assess the legals.. make them prove that they are legal.. No doubt many legals are not..
That would be, if the whole illegal thing was not a ploy, a gambit by the globalists in Congress and the White House.. it is you know.. The illegal alien problem is ON PURPOSE..
But when he was Governor, he came out strongly against California's Proposition 187, which would have cut off free government services to illegals, saying it would "never happen in Texas." That was right after he became Governor.
Also, he did nothing about border control of his own State.
He's never, in fact, changed his position on that. Words are cheap, and one would have to ignore facts to think otherwise. The voters were deceived all right, but only by themselves.
Sometimes, I just can't help but think our Government is stuck on stupid......
great idea! "for the price of a daily coffee, you can fund a deportation".
And we could have things like, "We will donate 10 cents of every purchase to deport an illegal alien." Or gift cards, "I have donated _____ dollars to help deport an illegal alien in your name!"
Question: What would the service sector (Hospitals, Schools, etc.) save with these people deported?
"What would the service sector (Hospitals, Schools, etc.) save with these people deported?"
I couldn't tell you but I do know that it's costing CA alone NINE BILLION A YEAR and NM, TX & AZ another SIX BILLION A YEAR ALONE to allow the illegals to stay here.
And in L.A. alone, NINE HOSPITALS HAVE CLOSED in the past year because they couldn't afford to continue to give FREE MEDICAL CARE to all the illegals who showed up.
And ONE THIRD of all the students in L.A. UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT cannot even speak English!
And ONE THIRD OF ALL INCARCERATED IN AMERICA ARE ILLEGALS!
Imagine all the AMERICAN perverts we could lock up if we deported all the incarcerated illegals...of course we'd have to secure the borders first so they wouldn't return.
It seems that is would be worth the cost of deportation to allow the American people to have community hospitals and schools that teach classes in English instead of some other language. The language classes should be an elective to those students that matriculate in the education process. As you pointed out the services and courts are being impacted in a big way.
As I said, these protests are ominous. They are the one thing that I've seen that has the potential of changing my viewpoint.
See, my real issue is that I don't like seeing naked hostility on either side. I feel very uncomfortable when I hear people blasting illegals. But of course when I see illegals blasting us, that makes me feel just as uncomfortable.
The attitude I have right now, "A curse on all your houses! I'm going to the Philippines where people are just super-nice to me!" is probably not going to be helpful to either party :-).
They're not all take and no give - they are hard workers. Work gets done. That's the "give" part and surely that's a good thing. What is it you want them to give, exactly, other than their labor? What else do they have to give?
Now, I think your answer might be some degree of loyalty to the country in which they work. It seems reasonable to say that as a condition for staying here, people should at least not actively attack our country.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but even if we eliminated all illegals from the world tomorrow, we would still have plenty of Mexicans and others who were citizens but not truly assimilated. I'm sure many of those people marched in those protests. What could we do with them?
Is the problem perhaps not really a bureaucratic piece of paper, but rather the fact that our society no longer encourages assimilation?
I think that if you looked at this problem - which in my opinion is overwhelmingly created by ivory tower multicultural types - you'd come closer to solving the illegals dilemma.
Maybe the illegals are not valuing citizenship and assimilation because we say, from our own actions, that we don't either.
D
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.