50
   

What should be done about illegal immigration?

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:15 pm
@Francis,
when I googled this bit
Quote:
total net benefit to the Social Security System will be nearly $500 billion


I found this ...

Quote:
Immigrants Are Net Contributors to Social Security and Medicare " The total net benefit (taxes paid over benefits received) to the Social Security system in today’s dollars from continuing current levels of immigration is nearly $500 billion for the 1998-2022 period and nearly $2.0 trillion through 2072.


some of the source documents are found here

http://www.caimmigrant.org/repository/?cat=7



Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:21 pm
@ebrown p,
So would people I know be offended if they were legal and were referred to as illegal. I don't refer to her as illegal. She just acknowledges that she was when she first came here. A couple of my relatives though are pretty dark and would like for everybody to be legal so they aren't so often suspected of being illegal which they aren't. And, no, they don't favor amnesty. "Illegal" simply means somebody here illegally. It does not mean anything more than that. It's just easier to use a single term instead of saying "somebody who sneaked into the country and has thus far avoided the law and deportation."
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:24 pm
@ehBeth,
My my, a pro-amnesty group would come up with numbers like that. Who would have thought? With such an overwhelming financial bonanza at state, I wonder why Canada doesn't have such a generous immigration policy as they wish for us?

Again, I'm in a business who sees this stuff first hand. The very few illegals who are on actual payrolls are not making large wages. Most are not on anybody's payroll and are paid as casual or contract labor meaning that no social security or income taxes are withheld from the workers' pay.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:35 pm
@Foxfyre,
I'm somewhat curious how Canada came into play in regard to U.S. tax statistics. Oh well, no way of knowing.

It'd certainly be good if you located and presented other government statistics if you have evidence that the numbers are incorrect. I was curious about the source document for Francis' numbers. One of the places I found them (first of several thousand hits) was at the site I linked. The research/statistics are referenced by many sites/agencies.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:40 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

My my, a pro-amnesty group would come up with numbers like that. Who would have thought?


source agency for the numbers Francis originally posted

Quote:
The National Research Council (NRC) of the USA is the working arm of the United States National Academy of Sciences and the United States National Academy of Engineering, carrying out most of the studies done in their names.


Quote:
The president of the National Academy of Sciences is the chair of both the Governing Board and Executive Committee; the president of the National Academy of Engineering is vice chair.

Its members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of its committees are chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Its reports are reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council is one of the four organizations which comprise the United States National Academies.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:45 pm
@ehBeth,
http://sites.nationalacademies.org/nrc/index.htm

Quote:
The National Research Council (NRC) functions under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), and the Institute of Medicine (IOM). The NAS, NAE, IOM, and NRC are part of a private, nonprofit institution that provides science, technology and health policy advice under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln that was originally granted to the NAS in 1863. Under this charter, the NRC was established in 1916, the NAE in 1964, and the IOM in 1970. The four organizations are collectively referred to as the National Academies.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 04:49 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

I'm somewhat curious how Canada came into play in regard to U.S. tax statistics. Oh well, no way of knowing.

It'd certainly be good if you located and presented other government statistics if you have evidence that the numbers are incorrect. I was curious about the source document for Francis' numbers. One of the places I found them (first of several thousand hits) was at the site I linked. The research/statistics are referenced by many sites/agencies.


I haven't seen the numbers cited but that $500 billion just isn't gong to fly. Why would the groups you listed have any interest in tax revenues from illegal immigrants?

And Canada got into it because Canada has far more restrictive immigration policies that we do yet I don't see you urging your own country to benefit from such great illegal immigrant benefits. Shoot, with that kind of revenues, you Canadians would need to pay almost no taxes at all. Why don't you ask for us to send you up anybody we don't want to keep?

I do hope your Mom is holding her own though ebeth and that you and your dad are holding up. Sending vibes of strength your way.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 05:01 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:
Why would the groups you listed have any interest in tax revenues from illegal immigrants?


Why would the Academy of Science be interested in statistics? I suspect it's because numbers are its "thing". They research all kinds of weird and wonderful things, as I discovered when I poked into their current projects section

Quote:
Project Information

by Subject/Focus Area
121 - 140 of 264 result(s)

Grand Challenges for Engineering
Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress
Review of DOE's Nuclear Energy Research & Development Program
Review of Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Draft Memorandum, "21st Century Engagement, Education, and Technology Initiative"
Review of NIOSH Research Programs
Review of NIOSH Research Programs-Construction
Review of the Bureau of Reclamation's Corrosion Prevention Standards for Ductile Iron Pipe
Sustainable Underground Storage of Recoverable Water
Symposium on Avoiding Technology Surprise for Tomorrow’s Warfighter
Technology for a Quieter America
Toward Sustainable Critical Infrastructure Systems -- Framing the Challenges: A Workshop
Women in Science and Engineering: A Guide to Maximizing their Potential


~~~

thank you for thinking of my mother. We hope it can be a peaceful time for her.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 05:03 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:
yet I don't see you urging your own country to benefit from such great illegal immigrant benefits


I'm not urging anyone to do anything. I was curious about the source of the numbers.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 05:50 pm
This is a strange tangent...

You happily post articles from John Tanton groups, funded by the Pioneer fund which openly promotes eugenics.

Then you attack statistics because they are from "pro-amnesty groups".

(Amnesty vs. Eugenics.... I know which side I support.)
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 05:53 pm
@ebrown p,
Too easy e.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 05:56 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

So would people I know be offended if they were legal and were referred to as illegal.

This is neither here nor there, Fox, but would I be offended if folks assumed that, since I was Hispanic, or Asian, or African, I could be suspected of being an "illegal." Yes, I would be. I hope and don't think that is what you seemed to imply.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:27 pm
@realjohnboy,
It is more than that John Boy. Many Americans of Hispanic descent, particularly those who were immigrants themselves, or are the children of immigrants, have friends and family who are presently here illegally.

Saying they are people here illegally is one thing.
Referring to them as "illegals", as if there legal status is the only important fact about them, is another. By referring to a person by the problem they have, you take away their humanity and ignore anything good about them.

Foxfyre's "friend" was once illegal, yet was always human. The fact she came illegally evidently didn't make her a bad person (in Foxfyre's eyes).

I imagine she, like most naturalized immigrants, would be sympathetic to todays undocumented immigrants.

0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:27 pm
@ebrown p,
Gee, are you qualified to speak for illegals?
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:28 pm
@Advocate,
You apparently have no problem speaking for bigots.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:29 pm
@ehBeth,
The net benefit to SS by illegals hardly covers their cost to the country in various benefits paid to or for them, and the cost of their damage to the country.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:30 pm
@Advocate,
And the damage to the country caused by bigots?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:31 pm
@realjohnboy,
There are a lot of Hispanics in my family Johnboy, and because we are a border state with a large number of illegals, some are subject to comments, innuendo, and being flat out asked if they are legal. The two who get that the most are both born and raised red white and blue Americans. They know and I know that if illegals were rare, the issue would never come up. Its kind of like the people who legitimately earned their position and credentials but people assume that they got them via affirmative action. And yes, in both cases it is insulting.

But despite ebrown's protests I am not a fan of political correctness and prefer to call it as it is. It's okay to call a bank robber a bank robber rather than 'a person who entered and robbed a bank'. It's okay to call a jay walker a jay walker instead of 'somebody who crossed in the middle of the block'. Speeders are speeders. And illegals are illegals.

I would like to make it a whole lot easier for those who need to be here to be here legally. But I have argued extensively on this thread and elsewhere that the most humane solution for the problem is for those who are illegal to make themselves legal and that the laws of the land be respected.
ebrown p
 
  0  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:43 pm
@Foxfyre,
Quote:
But despite ebrown's protests I am not a fan of political correctness and prefer to call it as it is. It's okay to call a bank robber a bank robber rather than 'a person who entered and robbed a bank'. It's okay to call a jay walker a jay walker instead of 'somebody who crossed in the middle of the block'. Speeders are speeders. And illegals are illegals.


I am just pointing out that your "friend" might not think to kindly of this little rant. And she may have a point... when is the last time you referred to someone with the term "speeder" (assuming you know people who speed, that is).

Then again... bigots are bigots (so I guess I agree with the principle).

0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  0  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:47 pm
... by the way. Does anyone know how much money we are spending educating the children of speeders?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.2 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 08:43:42