Forget Trump, I’ve already conceded he has inflated the effect of illegal immigration on the US.
Under what basis should we evaluate illegals and whether they should be allowed to stay in the US in your opinion?
Employed, otherwise law-abiding, have citizen children, cooperates from that moment on with a structured but fair naturalization process.
To be clear, are you a Legal Immigrant?
What you are claiming, Sloth, is just not true. It’s not, and I am slowly having to reluctantly concede that you are indeed arguing primarily from emotion and not from logic. The actual data does not support your claims. Not at all.
1 Like
[quote=“therajraj, post:613, topic:215570, full:true”]
[quote=“Sloth, post:610, topic:215570, full:true”]
[quote=“therajraj, post:606, topic:215570, full:true”]
Why not just allow temporary visas to fill these needs instead of enabling illegals?
86% of illegal immigrants with children are on some form of welfare. By supporting these people staying in the US permanently, you are doing nothing but expanding the parasitical class and forcing other people to support these people. [/quote]
And the cost doesn’t even come close the native “parasitical” class collecting entitlement obligations. Absolute numbers DO matter. I’m not looking up household numbers, so for a rough sketch, let’s just go by raw population. US population= 323 million, estimated illegal immigrant population= 12 million. So 323-12 million= 311 million native/legal aliens. For simplicity sake, and to give the legal/native population the edge we’ll use the lower Natives with children percentage and ignore the higher legal immigrant percentage. So, 52.4% of 323 million is 169 million. While 86.8% of 12 million is 10 million. So roughly 6% of welfare. But, benefits for the children of illegal immigrants are largely tied to the child. So, while the income of those parents DO matter for determining the benefits awarded for the child, the parents themselves are not eligible to collect the amount/extent of benefits for themselves as native parents would. So not only roughly just 6%, but in total dollars eligible for? Now, where’s Social Security where natives are paying in less than they’re collecting? Where’s Medicare?[/quote]
I don’t understand what you’re saying here.
Yep. That cheap, undercutting labor is exactly why the Republican party is as on board the amnesty train as the Democrats are to secure their voting base. It’s an ugly, selfish monster and there is nothing, not one thing, compassionate about it.
1 Like
I’ll be back in a bit but yes I am 100% a legal alien who paid thousands of dollars to become one and respect the laws of the land and it’s customs.
1 Like
Just in case someone didn’t have the fortitude to click the link I provided:
In the United States there are 20.8 million native-borns unemployed, while there are 7.1 million illegal aliens working and employed (Center for Immigration Studies, Table 36). By looking at the numbers, if the unemployed natives replaced all the illegal workers in the workforce, 35% of the unemployed would become employed.
Except I didn’t claim Americans wouldn’t do those jobs at all. But they AREN"T filling all the jobs at the wages that ARE being paid. To claim otherwise doesn’t even make sense. If it costs an employer no more to hire legal natives, who are willing and capable to work, he would be hiring those legal natives and not even flirt with the legality of hiring illegals.
How much would a 35% increase in the labor force contribute to our native economy?
I would note that while lower than Illegal immigrants, the percentage of welfare is still significantly higher than native…
Having illegals to hire at even a nominally lower rate pushes out jobs for citizens. Many, many jobs. Just to get you on record, are you claiming you support this practice?
Cortes, you are basically arguing there is no demand to a guy living in SW Florida watching white men picking up Mexicans-central/south Americans by the pickup full for work…
I thought higher costs limits the amount of available jobs?
So you would be fully on board with deporting illegals who are:
- Unemployed
- Have ever broken the law at any point
- are childless/no citizen children
They meet one of these criteria or a combination
If they weren’t competing American native jobs out of the market, moving those citizens to take the easier path of welfare and moreover encouraging them to vote democrat??? Do you not understand this? You, of all people?
It’s 3am here, I have to get to sleep. So my further replies will not be because I’m not engaged.
Something like that, except for the childless part. They use nearly the same amount of welfare as natives, and less than…Legal immigrants.
You are free to start a thread on the merits of legal immigration, we can discuss
Right except legal and natives aren’t all criminals - illegals are by definition criminals
1 Like
If I overstay my visa by ONE DAY in Japan, I will, rightfully, be deported. And there is NOTHING wrong with this. Or is there? If there is, please let me know what the Japanese government is getting completely wrong.
How can they compete American natives out of the market being that the employer must risk the employment of illegals? Unless…The Mexican fella is willing to work for less, at a lesser cost, for more hours, with little power relative to the employer than the native fella. So yes, they are doing the Jobs that natives won’t do, because they refuse to compete at the terms the employer is offering for those jobs. Otherwise, these white folks would be picking up truckfulls of natives and forgoing any issues related to the legality of those who they are employing. And why does the higher cost of employment suddenly disappear here? It comes up with setting a minimum wage, but disappears when we’re talking about the demand for dirt cheap unskilled labor that folks around these parts turn to those spooky Mexicans for.