Replies

Higher profits means higher rates of taxation for the employers. Sorry but the Anti Business Big Govt Socialists class warfare rhetoric being pushed by the Anti Illegals are nonsense.

Stick to the security aspects, the morality aspect or the Cost of immigration to Govt aspect. All the Anti Illegals buy themselves with these Leftist propaganda claims is scorn from fiscal Conservatives.

Economically the claims being made about illegals are pure manufactured BS. Wages are significantly up. Unemployment is at 4.7%. Illegals slow how fast unskilled wages go up, they have not decreased them. Making these sorts of fraudulent Labor Unions paid for propganda claims HURTS the cause. The case can be made on facts, there is nothing to be gained from these manufactured data claims.

Basing the argument on phony data damages the credibility of all the people on the Anti Illegals side. Since I know the claims made here are untrue, I have to wonder how much else being presented by the Anti Illegals spokespeople like Lou Dobbs is manufactured Socialist propaganda pretending to be "fact".

"Unemployment is at 4.7%"

More BS.

As I pointed out to you on another thread recently...once a person gets his last unemployment check...per orders of GWB..he statistically vanishes off the radar screen.

A quote directly from you on post #73 in this thread

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1616779/posts?q=1&&page=51

"Using manufactured statistic to lie is still a lie. "

It's OK for you to use manufactured statistics but evidently no one else here on FR can?

Is this like some "protectionist" method you use?

What happened to the "free trade" of legitimate facts?

lol

Sorry but the Anti Business Big Govt Socialists class warfare rhetoric being pushed by the Anti Illegals are nonsense.

So it's anti business to restrict the flow of slave labor? You could then argue then that Abraham Lincoln was an "anti business bit govt socialist class warrior".

Economically the claims being made about illegals are pure manufactured BS.

The WSJ is the the most prominent proponent of open borders. Yes, this was a contributed piece, but the WSJ has barely published any anti-illegal pieces. Are you stating the conclusions are invalid? On what basis, that you don't like them?