# Why Shouldnt DACA Illegal Aliens Be Deported



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.

DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.

So to PROTECT the American people (always the # 1 responsibility of government) from these many long-lasting harms, shouldn't ALL illegl aliens be deported ?  Should we be puting empathy for the DACAs oer protection of the American people, in contradiction to the protecive immigration laws that our ancestors provided fr us ?  I think not.

Sure the deportations could result in family separations, but that is a problem that is caused by those who came here illegally, not th American people.  Also, recent studies are now showing that there are very few fmiy separations from deportations, wih families sticking together and all going back to the old country, together as a unit.

Some major points have been overlooked in th DACA discussions.  One is that the DACAs ar overwhelmingly Hispanic, and Hispanics tend to vote Democrat (which is why Democrats fight so fiercly for them).  So keeping them in th US has adverse political effects on Republicans.

The other points are firmly embedded in the 17 points of Harms of Immigration * which if polls are correct, show how ignorant Americans are about immigration - to support something so harmful to them.

*  Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.


----------



## Penelope (Jan 22, 2018)

Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron. 

Many GOP are pro DACA as well.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.


Problem with that answer is it only talks about _"they" _> the DACAs. It completely overlooks the AMERICAN people who are suffering the harms of immigration that THEY bring

I see it as not about "they".  I see it as about the Americans who lose jobs, the US economy that suffers $133 Billion.year loss (in remittances), the US govt that suffers major losses in tax $$$, etc, etc

And why should we be concerned about "they" ? Do we show 1/10 as much concern for the kids of American criminals ?


----------



## BrokeLoser (Jan 22, 2018)

protectionist said:


> The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> 
> DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.
> 
> ...



There’s a list a mile long to describe why illegals shouldn’t be here....I can’t come up with one reason why they should.


----------



## BlackFlag (Jan 22, 2018)

Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> 
> Many GOP are pro DACA as well.




Why do you bring up RINOs?

We could care less about them, we want all illegals deported today, round them up, put them on military transport planes, give them each a parachute and shove them out of the plane over Mexico...


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.




It's not there homes, we don't speak spanish..


----------



## BrokeLoser (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.



They’ll automatically die in Mexico....how?
One would think they’ll all be assets there...you know, with educations, civility and all.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.


Do you have the same compassion for the kids of American criminals ?  How come we never hear about them ?


----------



## TNHarley (Jan 22, 2018)

The only reasonable answer i hear to that question is nothing more than emotion.
Fuck that, deport them.
Fuck DACA


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.



What makes it 'their' homes?

Squatters rights?

Homesteading?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

bear513 said:


> We could care less about them, we want all illegals deported today, round them up, put them on military transport planes, give them each a parachute and shove them out of the plane over Mexico...


Or do like Eisenhower did in 1954 with Operation Wetback. Ship them down to south Mexico (Vera Cruz) and dump them in the shallow water.  Mexico protested fiercely.  Ike paid no attention to them.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

protectionist said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > We could care less about them, we want all illegals deported today, round them up, put them on military transport planes, give them each a parachute and shove them out of the plane over Mexico...
> ...




I never even read about that...i have heard it a few times.


----------



## BlackFlag (Jan 22, 2018)

bear513 said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.
> ...


I would never expect your ignorant ass to know any spanish


----------



## OldLady (Jan 22, 2018)

TNHarley said:


> The only reasonable answer i hear to that question is nothing more than emotion.
> Fuck that, deport them.
> Fuck DACA


Emotion is part of who we are.  It leads to our best moments, as well as our worst.
You're not going to win, you know that, right?  People do not want to be unfair.  Maybe that's "emotional," but thank God most people don't insist on functioning like a machine.


----------



## BlackFlag (Jan 22, 2018)

BrokeLoser said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.
> ...


Imagine if you got a knock on the door and oops, turns out you were brought here at age 1 illegally.  So off to El Salvador with you.  How long will you last?


----------



## BlackFlag (Jan 22, 2018)

protectionist said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.
> ...


Both of those were stupid questions.  I’ll be here if you care to try again.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

bear513 said:


> I never even read about that...i have heard it a few times.


In mainstream media, it's taboo.  They don't want us to know that a popular president presided over a mass deportation program.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> bear513 said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...




I know Spanish and Japanese...and I am just a 2nd grade drop out 

You want to troll that we give a damn about 800,000 illegals I will troll you back..I want them gone...

And I am serious along with the other 20 million or so illegals...get rid of them today.


----------



## TNHarley (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > The only reasonable answer i hear to that question is nothing more than emotion.
> ...


Emotion is a part of who we are. However, policy isnt. In the LEAST, it shouldnt be. Thats how powers fall. Do you want to fall? Turn into Venezuela? Having to shoot people because they want to kill your dog for a meal?
We didnt become the best nation in history because of "emotion" but that is damn sure how it can crumble.
Period.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

bear513 said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > bear513 said:
> ...




I want an easy job making $20 bucks an hour picking apples out in the sun, get rid of illegals I get my dream job


----------



## BrokeLoser (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> BrokeLoser said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



Aren’t people often stranded in the wild and lost at sea...many survive.
You don’t think these “ highly educated” super bright DACA kids can survive in El Salvador...REALLY?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Both of those were stupid questions.  I’ll be here if you care to try again.


Not stupid at all.  The dreamers are kids of criminals, who didn't commit crimes themselves  Millions of American kids are also kids of criminals, who didn't commit crimes themselves  And while 

Actually, it's a very interesting question, and one which I see you're not too well equipped to answer.  Now, YOU try again.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> I would never expect your ignorant ass to know any spanish


In the US, not knowing Spanish is not "ignorant"  There is no need to know Spanish here (or any language other then English)


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> Emotion is part of who we are.  It leads to our best moments, as well as our worst.
> You're not going to win, you know that, right?  People do not want to be unfair.  Maybe that's "emotional," but thank God most people don't insist on functioning like a machine.


Should we be as "fair" to Millions of American kids who are also kids of criminals, who didn't commit crimes themselves ?  I don't hear you mentioning them.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> Imagine if you got a knock on the door and oops, turns out you were brought here at age 1 illegally.  So off to El Salvador with you.  How long will you last?


Not my problem. Let the criminal parents who brought them here worry about that.


----------



## OldLady (Jan 22, 2018)

TNHarley said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Is that how Britain crumbled when Churchill refused to surrender to Germany?
He said fuck you to Germany, let them kill his soldiers by the truckload, bomb London to rubble, sink every British ship in the ocean.  And he refused to surrender like every other European country.  Do you think that didn't require "emotion?"  Hell, it was all emotion and it was the right thing to do.


----------



## OldLady (Jan 22, 2018)

protectionist said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > Emotion is part of who we are.  It leads to our best moments, as well as our worst.
> ...


How are we not "fair" to them?  Are we deporting them?  To where?


----------



## Wyatt earp (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...




He knew they couldn't do it.


----------



## BlackFlag (Jan 22, 2018)

BrokeLoser said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > BrokeLoser said:
> ...


I see you didn’t answer the question


----------



## TNHarley (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Are you really comparing Germany to illegals?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> How are we not "fair" to them?  Are we deporting them?  To where?


 I'm just saying that a big deal is being made about the fact that  the DACAs didn't commit crimes (their parents did), and Democrats are saying we should violate our own (immigration) law to cater to them (by allowing them to stay). 

 Where is the catering to the kids of American criminals ? Where is even one voice of concern ?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

All Americans should look at everything Democrats do in terms of them stacking VOTES for themselves.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 22, 2018)

BlackFlag said:


> I see you didn’t answer the question



Moot question.  It's not America's problem.  When criminals break our laws, disrespect them (and us), their next steps are THEIR problems


----------



## edthecynic (Jan 22, 2018)

protectionist said:


> DACA is an executive order that was* illegally enacted* byBarrack Obama


You know, you pathological liars keep saying that, but the truth is no court has EVER declared it so!!!!!!!
The one case brought against DACA was thrown out!


----------



## OldLady (Jan 22, 2018)

TNHarley said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > TNHarley said:
> ...


Does it sound like I am?  What I'm doing is providing you with an example of a policy based on emotion that was BIG and also GREAT.  Don't you dare start weaseling around and trying to change the subject.


----------



## TNHarley (Jan 22, 2018)

OldLady said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> > OldLady said:
> ...


Oh, i certainly wasnt doing that. I would love to expand on how comparing germany and invasion is the same as illegal aliens.


----------



## peach174 (Jan 22, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> 
> Many GOP are pro DACA as well.



Yes they are, as long as they well vetted and we get rid of the ability for them to bring in relations and have a secure border.


----------



## Old Yeller (Jan 22, 2018)

Of even more concern should be any sets of Illegal "parents" "aunts uncles" "single mothers" who coyoted these teenagers up into America.  

Is the new storyline "they need to stay to care for the 31 yr old DACA baby and the pending Chain"  

Seems a mess?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 26, 2018)

edthecynic said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > DACA is an executive order that was* illegally enacted* byBarrack Obama
> ...


In response to the Jordan Commission’s report, Congress made it clear that those here without our authorization would be placed in removal proceedings. They amended into Title 8 of the US Code section 1225(b)(2)(A), which reads _“if the examining immigration officer determines that an alien seeking admission is not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted, the alien shall be detained for a [removal] proceeding under section 1229a of this title.”_

When DACA was challenged by members of an ICE public sector union in 2012, the Obama DOJ attempted to argue that “shall” in the above section actually meant “may.” Showing a respect for the English language, the judge in that case ruled that “shall” really did mean “shall” and would have struck down DACA but for jurisdictional problems.

1.  DACA expressly violated federal statutes which require the initiation of removal proceedings.

2.
DACA violated the constitutional obligation of the executive to Take Care That The Laws Are Faithfully Executed.

3.  DACA conferred amnesty and federal benefits under the false pretense of “Prosecutorial Discretion.”

4.    DACA conferred a benefit without promulgating a rule.

Here Are Four Ways In Which DACA Is Illegal


----------



## Winston (Jan 26, 2018)

I will give you 500 billion reasons not to deport the dreamers.  500 billion dollars, that is the estimated loss to GDP over ten years if we lose the dreamers.  97% of DACA recipients are either employed or in school.  Pretty sure white native Americans between the ages of 16 and 31 could not approach that number.  

They start businesses.  Eight percent of DACA recipients over 25 have started their own business, five percent of all recipients have.  Contrast that with just three percent of American citizens that start a business.  The whole Republican support of small businesses seems to ring a little hollow when contrasted with those statistics.

The estimated cost to business of replacing the DACA recipients that would be deported is 6.3 billion dollars.  6.3 billion dollars to recruit, hire, and train their replacements.

But most importantly, well the dreamers are children of immigrants.  Every single American Nobel prize winner in the fields of Economics and Science in 2016 was a child of an immigrant.  Forty percent, FORTY FLIPPING PERCENT, of the Fortune 500 companies were founded by children of immigrants.  The fact of the matter is that this country now, as always, gets it's strength, from immigrants.  Birth right citizenship is the one true example of American exceptionalism.  And without those immigrants, and the children they bear, this nation would be experiencing a negative birth rate and a rapidly aging population.  In short, an empire in decline.  Without those immigrants and their children there would be almost nobody to pay for future Social Security benefits.


----------



## edthecynic (Jan 26, 2018)

protectionist said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


thank you for confirming that the case was thrown out, and never brought back.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 26, 2018)

Winston said:


> I will give you 500 billion reasons not to deport the dreamers.  500 billion dollars, that is the estimated loss to GDP over ten years if we lose the dreamers.  97% of DACA recipients are either employed or in school.  Pretty sure white native Americans between the ages of 16 and 31 could not approach that number.
> 
> They start businesses.  Eight percent of DACA recipients over 25 have started their own business, five percent of all recipients have.  Contrast that with just three percent of American citizens that start a business.  The whole Republican support of small businesses seems to ring a little hollow when contrasted with those statistics.
> 
> ...


Lots of statements.  ZERO EVIDENCE. I will accept *exactly that much *of this post. ZERO.

Now here's a statement that I WILL present evidence for.  That immigrants cause a LOSS from our economy of $138 TRILLION over 10 years (ie, $133 Billion X 10) in remittances$$$.    $138,165,000,000 in remittances was sent from United States to other countries in 2016

Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2016

The country does NOT get its strength from immigrants.  This may have been partially true in the long past, but immigrants into the uS today represent a new 21st century form of imperialism that countries are waging against the US (top 4 > Mexico, China, India, Philipinnes)

Many advocates of high immigration argue that it fundamentally changes the nation’s age structure, and is very helpful in solving the problem of an aging society. Demographic data, however, show that immigration has only a very small impact on the problem. While immigrants do tend to arrive relatively young, and have higher fertility than natives, immigrants age just like everyone else, and the differences with natives are not large enough to fundamentally alter the nation’s age structure. The debate over immigration should focus on other areas where it actually has a significant effect.

Among this Backgrounder’s findings:


In 2000 the average age of an immigrant was 39, which is actually about four years older than the average age of a native-born American.
Even focusing on only recent immigration reveals little impact on aging. Excluding all 22 million immigrants who arrived after 1980 from the 2000 Census increases the average age in the United States by only about four months.
In 2000 66.2 percent of the population was of working-age (15 to 64). Excluding post-1980 immigrants it is 64.6 percent.
Looking at the full impact of post-1980 immigrants reveals that if they and all their U.S.-born children are not counted, the working-age share would have been 65.9 percent in 2000, almost exactly the same as the 66.20 percent when they are all included.
Immigration also does not explain the relatively high U.S. fertility rate. In 2000 the U.S. fertility rate was 2.1 children per woman, compared to 1.4 for Europe, but if all immigrants are excluded the rate would still have been 2.0.
Looking to the future, Census Bureau projections indicate that if net immigration averaged 100,000 to 200,000 annually, the working age share would be 58.7 percent in 2060, while with net immigration of roughly 900,000 to one million, it would be 59.5 percent.
Census projections are buttressed by Social Security Administration (SAA) estimates showing that, over the next 75 years, net annual legal immigration of 800,000 a year versus 350,000 would create a benefit equal to only 0.77 percent of the program’s projected expenditures.
It is not clear that even this tiny benefit exists, because SSA assumes legal immigrants will have earnings and resulting tax payments as high as natives from the moment they arrive, which is contrary to a large body of research.
Immigration in an Aging Society


----------



## protectionist (Jan 26, 2018)

edthecynic said:


> thank you for confirming that the case was thrown out, and never brought back.


Once again, > When DACA was challenged by members of an ICE public sector union in 2012, t*he Obama DOJ attempted to argue that “shall” in the above section actually meant “may.*” Showing a respect for the English language, the judge in that case ruled that “shall” really did mean “shall” and would have struck down DACA but for jurisdictional problems.  Were you of the notion that judges always make correct judgements, and never make faulty if not idiotic) ones ?


----------



## Winston (Jan 26, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > I will give you 500 billion reasons not to deport the dreamers.  500 billion dollars, that is the estimated loss to GDP over ten years if we lose the dreamers.  97% of DACA recipients are either employed or in school.  Pretty sure white native Americans between the ages of 16 and 31 could not approach that number.
> ...



Dreamers contribute to our economy

There is your "evidence".  Now, to your points.  First remittances.  Guess you haven't had an economics course.   Those dollars flowing out of the US actually benefit you and the country.  Perhaps more importantly, they can be damaging to the receiving country's economy.  It is basic economics but feel free to do your own research.  There are numerous white papers documenting both the effect of those remittances on the sending and receiving country's economy.  But here in the United States it has been shown that those foreign remittances have done more to keep inflation under control than the suppression of the interest rate by the Federal Reserve.  Think about it, it is common sense.  If those dollars remain here it is more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and the definition of inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods.  On the flip side, well in the receiving country there are now more dollars chasing the same amount of goods.  Check out Mexico, they had a sixteen year high inflation rate in December of 2017, 6.77%.

Mexico Inflation Rate | 1974-2018 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

But now, to your study from the Center for Immigration Studies.  That is just it, studies from the CIS are consistently debunked by academics, think tanks, and immigration research organizations.  They are known for extremist nativist views and are suspected of being little more than an offshoot of white supremacist groups like the KKK.  I would advise you not to produce such bullshit in a serious debate.  For instance,


*In 2000 the average age of an immigrant was 39, which is actually about four years older than the average age of a native-born American.*
*Even focusing on only recent immigration reveals little impact on aging. Excluding all 22 million immigrants who arrived after 1980 from the 2000 Census increases the average age in the United States by only about four months.*
I suppose you believe those two statements support your position.  Ironically, they do not.  The first statements informs you that the average immigrant is actually older than the average native.  So when remove those "older" people from the census numbers the average age increases by four months. WTF. And a 39 year old immigrant that arrived in 1980 was 59 in 2000, and he was REMOVED from the numbers.  It is not the immigrants that are keeping the average age down, it is their children, as shown here,

*This growth has been driven entirely by the increasing numbers of babies born to immigrant women. In 2014, immigrant women accounted for about 901,000 U.S. births, which marked a threefold increase from 1970 when immigrant women accounted for about 274,000 births. Meanwhile, the annual number of births to U.S.-born women dropped by 11% during that same time period, from 3.46 million in 1970 to 3.10 million in 2014*

Births Outside of Marriage Decline for Immigrant Women

Did you get that?  US birth increases was ENTIRELY driven by immigrants.  The impact can be seen here,

Immigrants Are Keeping America Young — And The Economy Growing


----------



## protectionist (Jan 27, 2018)

Winston said:


> Dreamers contribute to our economy
> 
> There is your "evidence".  Now, to your points.  First remittances.  Guess you haven't had an economics course.   Those dollars flowing out of the US actually benefit you and the country.  Perhaps more importantly, they can be damaging to the receiving country's economy.  It is basic economics but feel free to do your own research.  There are numerous white papers documenting both the effect of those remittances on the sending and receiving country's economy.  But here in the United States it has been shown that those foreign remittances have done more to keep inflation under control than the suppression of the interest rate by the Federal Reserve.  Think about it, it is common sense.  If those dollars remain here it is more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and the definition of inflation is too many dollars chasing too few goods.  On the flip side, well in the receiving country there are now more dollars chasing the same amount of goods.  Check out Mexico, they had a sixteen year high inflation rate in December of 2017, 6.77%.
> 
> ...


Your link source is simply BUNK.   Of course DACAs don't contribute to our economy. We get LESS tax $$ from them same as any other illegal aliens becasue, as I said (some people have to be told twice) >>

1. Many illegals work *off the books* (zero tax $ paid)

2.  Illegals work for* lower wages *than Americans (less tax $ paid)

3.  Immigrants (legal & illegal extract 138 TRILLION over 10 years OUT OF OUR ECONOMY ie, $133 Billion X 10) in *remittances$$$.*

Strike 1....Strike 2.....Strike 3

Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2016

The fallacy of immigrationists is that they claim that low wage immigrants "contribute" by working and paying taxes.  The part they leave out is that this work is in REPLACEMENT OF American workers who would have higher wages, pay MORE tax, and don't work off the books.

To say illegals "contribute" is like saying I will contribute to the ASPCA with my contribution of $70, INSTEAD OF YOUR CONTRIBUTION of $100.   Conclusion:  LOSS of $30 for the ASPCA.


----------



## Winston (Jan 27, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > Dreamers contribute to our economy
> ...



I can see Economics is not your strong suit.  You seem hung up on those remittances, but ask yourself, what happens if all that money is kept here? The work for those dollars has already been done.  No extra goods will be produced.  Additional dollars chasing the same amount of goods, what happens?

Working off the books.  Do you really think citizens don't work off the books given the opportunity?  I know I have.  I know my sister lived in New York City and worked off the books for seven years.  It is called the shadow economy and it is estimated to be TWO TRILLION DOLLARS a year.  Do you really want to make the claim that it is all immigrants?

Trillions Earned Under Table As More Work Off Radar

But now to your first two claims.  It is an interesting thing, some states have a large immigrant population and some states hardly have any.  That provides a great opportunity to study the impact of those immigrants on wages and productivity.  Here is what they found,

* First, immigrants do not crowd-out employment of (or hours worked by) natives; they add to total employment and reduce the share of highly educated workers, because of their larger share of low-skilled relative to native workers. Second, immigrants increase total factor productivity. These productivity gains may arise because of the more efficient allocation of skills to tasks, as immigrants are allocated to manual-intensive jobs, promoting competition and pushing natives to perform communication-intensive tasks more efficiently. Indeed, a measure of task-specialization of native workers induced by immigrants explains half to two thirds of the positive effect on productivity.

Third, Peri finds that inflows of immigrants decrease capital intensity and the skill-bias of production technologies. The decrease in capital intensity comes from an increase in total factor productivity; the capital-to-labor ratio remains unchanged because investment rises coincident with the inflow of immigrants. The reduction in the skill-intensity of production occurs as immigrants influence the choice of production techniques toward those that more efficiently use less educated workers and are less capital intensive.

Finally, Peri finds that for less educated natives, higher immigration has very little effect on wages, while for highly educated natives, the wage effect of higher immigration is positive. In summary, he finds that a one percent increase in employment in a US state, attributable only to immigration, is associated with a 0.4 to 0.5 percent increase in income per worker in that state.

http://www.nber.org/digest/mar10/w15507.html*

Now, I don't have a lot of confidence that you understand the above quote.  Later tonight I will be happy to explain what it means and provide examples.  But for the moment I believe you can understand the last bit, a one percent increase in immigration results in an almost half a percent increase in wages PER WORKER.  They don't decrease wages, they actually increase them, mostly due to increases in productivity.

And I can tell you something.  Some of the jobs they do few, if any citizens, are going to do them at any wage.  My son spent two summers doing field work.  He and his friend were the only non-Hispanic people on the crews.  And it was easy to get the "job".  You just showed up at a field before the sun came up and worked your ass off till the sun went down.  He got paid cash, and he and his friend made more money those summers than any of their fellow high school students.  So why didn't more of them show up?

And he benefited more than just his income.  It taught him about hard work, it taught him about respecting those immigrants, and most of all, well it taught him about discipline.  That is why he is now 22, living in his own home in a upper class neighborhood and making more money than the average Harvard graduate.  He will be the first to tell you that it is in no small part due to those summers in the fields.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 27, 2018)

Winston said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...


What happens is $138 Billion/year stays INSIDE the US, and is spent in American stores (AKA the economy), instead of being wired out of the country, extracted out of the US economy, and spent in foreign country stores, thereby reinserted into THEIR economies.

So what is happening is essentially, international burglary, or in other words "imperialism", 21st century style ($ 24.3 Billion/yr to Mexico alone - the Vikings would be envious)   And what is happening is US businesses being deprived of all those sales$$$, and US employees being deprived of all the benefits$$ that would go to them from all those sales,

On a smaller scale, it's like having your neighbor come over to your house, and remove your belongings (TV, stereo, computer, etc) every month for years, and reinsert it all into HIS house. Get it ?

So if you're OK with this scenario, I'll be that neighbor and remove your stuff, and take it to my house.  Cool with you ? (so it would seem)

PS -  as for working off the books, liberals are outrageous intelligence insulters. Don't talk stupid. We all know illegals work off the books at a far higher rate (1000 to 1 perhaps ?) than Americans, because Americans don't have the burden of being discovered by ICE.  Give us a break!


----------



## toobfreak (Jan 27, 2018)

protectionist said:


> *Why Shouldnt DACA Illegal Aliens Be Deported *




We have dealt with illegals for so long now that we have become numb to and comfortable with the idea of an entire population of criminals, many of which are hostile to our country (La Rasa, et al which sees the USA as theirs to be repatriated).  These are criminals plain and simple, even if they are not all bad people doing overt harm.  A speeder is breaking the law as well, even if they are a high-ranking judge.  PLEASE do not try to blow that smoke that they are an asset to our country.

ALL illegal aliens are criminal trespassing invaders and must GO unless they have a visa or some such thing giving them legal right to be here.  DACA, born in this country to an illegal?  Sorry, boo hoo---- get in line, get a visa, apply for citizenship------  we don't need you if you cannot abide by the law.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 27, 2018)

ijust spent 15 minute on a post that disappeared.  I don't have my mouse with me. Cant function like this, will repost it later.Damn


----------



## protectionist (Jan 27, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> We have dealt with illegals for so long now that we have become numb to and comfortable with the idea of an entire population of criminals, many of which are hostile to our country (La Rasa, et al which sees the USA as theirs to be repatriated).  These are criminals plain and simple, even if they are not all bad people doing overt harm.  A speeder is breaking the law as well, even if they are a high-ranking judge.  PLEASE do not try to blow that smoke that they are an asset to our country.
> 
> ALL illegal aliens are criminal trespassing invaders and must GO unless they have a visa or some such thing giving them legal right to be here.  DACA, born in this country to an illegal?  Sorry, boo hoo---- get in line, get a visa, apply for citizenship------  we don't need you if you cannot abide by the law.


Few things are more idiotic than liberals trying to claim illegal aliens are good for our economy (while they're stripping it of $138 Billion/year)  and that doesn't even include tens of Billions$$ more we lose from their anchor baby racket and welfare losses we incur (us paying their [Mexico et al] poverty bills)


----------



## TheParser (Jan 27, 2018)

DACA people should NOT be deported because:

1. It WOULD be cruel to force them to return to their impoverished and violent homelands. Many of them are de facto Americans, i.e., they have been here so long that they think like Americans.

2. This is 2018 and the United States of America.  People will simply not tolerate rounding up 800,000 or more young people to be deported.  There would be civil disobedience on the part of many DACA people and on the part of some authorities who are ordered to assist in their deportation.

The bottom line: They will NEVER be deported because *it is NOT practical or politically feasible*.

President Trump realizes that, and he will eventually agree to  some face-saving solution for both Democrats and Republicans.

The DACA people and their supporters are just engaged in theater.  They know that we know that they are not going anywhere.


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 27, 2018)

protectionist said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > We have dealt with illegals for so long now that we have become numb to and comfortable with the idea of an entire population of criminals, many of which are hostile to our country (La Rasa, et al which sees the USA as theirs to be repatriated).  These are criminals plain and simple, even if they are not all bad people doing overt harm.  A speeder is breaking the law as well, even if they are a high-ranking judge.  PLEASE do not try to blow that smoke that they are an asset to our country.
> ...



There are fewer than 1 million DACA so they won't have any impact on our society.
Minors can't be held legally responsible for the actions of their parents so they are NOT criminals.
No DACA for any felons or dead beats.  That leaves the vast majority of DACA as law-abiding and useful citizens.  They have earned the right to stay if they have been in this country X number of years.  Don't know what X should be, maybe 5 years?


----------



## Tresha91203 (Jan 27, 2018)

Winston said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Winston said:
> ...



That money will be used to pay the TRUE cost of American workers making a living wage. Prices will go up before inflation.

Do you really believe that the US needs an exploited underclass to survive?


----------



## toobfreak (Jan 27, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> There are fewer than 1 million DACA so they won't have any impact on our society.



ONE MILLION people no impact?   How many people did it take to bring down the World Trade Center and kill 2000 people -----  Seven?




> Minors can't be held legally responsible for the actions of their parents so they are NOT criminals.



Whether they walked in on their own, was thrown over the fence or was illegally born here, they are still illegal aliens.  





> They have earned the right to stay if they have been in this country X number of years.



Try sneaking into N. Korea, Russia or a lot of other countries illegally and hiding out for a few years then exclaiming:  "I've earned the right to be here!"


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 27, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > There are fewer than 1 million DACA so they won't have any impact on our society.
> ...


Try sneaking into N. Korea, Russia or a lot of other countries illegally and hiding out for a few years then exclaiming:  "I've earned the right to be here!"[/QUOTE]
One million in a country of 300 million.  I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US.




toobfreak said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > There are fewer than 1 million DACA so they won't have any impact on our society.
> ...


Is that your measure of a great nation?  It certainly isn't mine.


----------



## toobfreak (Jan 27, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> One million in a country of 300 million.




Right.  Already over 320 million and RAPIDLY CLIMBING at an exponential rate in a county that was already crowded enough and full when it only had 200 million in it.  Why don't you invite some more in, Jackass!  Where is all that concern for environment and resources you have any other time?


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 27, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > One million in a country of 300 million.
> ...


Wrong and wrong.  The population of theUnited States would be shrinking if not for immigration.   I'm a city type so as far as I'm concerned there's plenty of room here.




alang1216 said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > alang1216 said:
> ...





toobfreak said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > There are fewer than 1 million DACA so they won't have any impact on our society.
> ...


Is that your measure of a great nation?  It certainly isn't mine.[/QUOTE]


Sent from my SM-T820 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app


----------



## Winston (Jan 27, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Yes, yes--Hell Yeah, you have it explained perfectly  The money goes out of our "economy" and in to theirs.  But it's just the money.  It has another component.  The WORK.  The work stays here.  It has already been done.  We get the work, they get the "money".  

You think that is a bad thing?  Seriously?  OK, then look at it in another way.  We get the PRODUCTIVITY, they get the increase in money supply.

I mean you understand that the Federal Reserve just cranking out the dollars is not a good thing, right?  More dollars, same amount of goods, or works, or resources.  Whatever, it don't make a shit.  Well then why can't you understand the taking out dollars, "poof", disappearing them in to some far off foreign land, while at the same time creating more "work", or goods, or resources here is an awesome thing.

Damn, like Japan printing a boatload of counterfeit money and dropping it in the US economy.  Damn near the same thing as the money immigrants "bomb" the countries where their families are.  It was considered an act of war back then, now you act like those receiving countries are winning the lottery.

Now, here is how that whole immigrant workers increasing pay works.  Let's say you are a bricklayer.  Your employer hires an immigrant worker to haul the bricks and make the cement.  You used to haul the bricks and make the cement.  He makes less than you.  Now you have more time to lay bricks.  Your employer get's paid by the brick.  Now he can pay you more, pay the immigrant, and still profit from the increased, wait for it, PRODUCTIVITY.  You did get that, "profit more", right?

No matter how you try to spin it.  No matter how much your bias draws you to the conclusion that immigrants cost the US, you are wrong.  It is hard to find an economist that would support your position.  And history doesn't support it either.  When immigration increases productivity, and wages, increase along with that increase.  It has been proven time and time again.  And perhaps more importantly, when we restrict immigration too aggressively, our economy tanks as productivity declines and creativity and ingenuity drop.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 27, 2018)

protectionist said:


> The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> 
> DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.
> 
> ...


Perhaps we are suffering from compassion overload. Illegal aliens are pushing this issue to the point of being excessive to the point I don't care anymore.


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 28, 2018)

MaryL said:


> Perhaps we are suffering from compassion overload. Illegal aliens are pushing this issue to the point of being excessive to the point I don't care anymore.


Or perhaps some people are using immigration fears to separate the electorate into opposing camps?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US.


NOW you have >>

*TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1325

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien*

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

toobfreak said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > One million in a country of 300 million.
> ...



*Harms of Immigration

1.* Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

17. Influx of terrorists (ex. ISIS with "Syrian refugees")


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> Wrong and wrong.  The population of the United States would be shrinking if not for immigration.   I'm a city type so as far as I'm concerned there's plenty of room here.



As a geographer and planner, I correct you.  The optimum population of the USA, relative to resource base is about 30 million.  We passed that mark in 1860.

Had we stayed at that population, then like Canada (with a pop about 30 million), we would have been EXporting oil, and making lots of money from it, instead of running up a huge debt & deficits. 

Instead, for decades, we have been IMporting 2/3 of our oil.  # 1 supplier ? >> Canada


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> 
> DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.
> 
> ...


Red herrings are a right wing specialty.  

First, create a problem with your socialism on a national basis, and then claim we need more socialism on a national basis.

Immigration is not tourism.  We would have more tourism with a simpler visa program.


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US.
> ...


I think our laws recognize that a one-year old is not capable of criminal behavior.


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong and wrong.  The population of the United States would be shrinking if not for immigration.   I'm a city type so as far as I'm concerned there's plenty of room here.
> ...


Then you're not a very good geographer or planner.  There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

Winston said:


> Yes, yes--Hell Yeah, you have it explained perfectly  The money goes out of our "economy" and in to theirs.  But it's just the money.  It has another component.  The WORK.  The work stays here.  It has already been done.  We get the work, they get the "money".
> 
> You think that is a bad thing?  Seriously?  OK, then look at it in another way.  We get the PRODUCTIVITY, they get the increase in money supply.
> 
> ...



YOU are the spinner, and YOU are wrong.  Too may words. Too little logic.  

Aliens taking money out of the US (rather than Americans spending it here) DEPRIVES US businesses of $138 Billion/year in sales$$$$, and US employees being deprived of all the benefits$$ that would go to them from all those sales.  It weakens our economy by just that much.  No amount of wordy posts can change that.
This is not a debateable issue.

On a smaller scale, it's like having your neighbor come over to your house, and remove your belongings (TV, stereo, computer, etc) every month for years, and reinsert it all into HIS house. Get it ?


So if you're OK with this scenario, I'll be that neighbor and remove your stuff, and take it to my house. Cool with you ? (so it would seem)  I could use another TV set.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> Then you're not a very good geographer or planner.  There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.


You could take my Geography class if you like (City University of New York) Only problem is, you'll flunk it.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> I think our laws recognize that a one-year old is not capable of criminal behavior.


No. but we are capable of recognizing that kids who break laws (with or without intent), aren't the same as kids who don't. (as you tried to say in Post # 56) >>  Your words >>  _" I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US."_


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Red herrings are a right wing specialty.
> 
> First, create a problem with your socialism on a national basis, and then claim we need more socialism on a national basis.
> 
> Immigration is not tourism.  We would have more tourism with a simpler visa program.


Right wing is not promoting "socialism" - you can go back to sleep now. Dreams work better that way.


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > Then you're not a very good geographer or planner.  There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.
> ...


I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something.  I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Red herrings are a right wing specialty.
> ...


Applied capitalism, all the way, right wingers!


----------



## Winston (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, yes--Hell Yeah, you have it explained perfectly  The money goes out of our "economy" and in to theirs.  But it's just the money.  It has another component.  The WORK.  The work stays here.  It has already been done.  We get the work, they get the "money".
> ...



Your argument is stupid.  You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE.  It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders.  Who does that, outside the sellers?  My wife spends way too much money with wish.com.  She sends it to China.  Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day.  Do you complain about that?  And of course there is tourism.  I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country.  And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries.  Do you complain about that?  

And your analogy is stupid too.  No goods are being sent abroad, just dollars.  And as I have pointed out, that is a GOOD THING.  It means less dollars here competing for the same amount of goods.  It as if you were buying a car, negotiated a good price, and then some immigrant comes along and offers the dealer more.  How would you feel about that?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

Winston said:


> Your argument is stupid.  You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE.  It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders.  Who does that, outside the sellers?  My wife spends way too much money with wish.com.  She sends it to China.  Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day.  Do you complain about that?  And of course there is tourism.  I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country.  And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries.  Do you complain about that?
> 
> And your analogy is stupid too.  No goods are being sent abroad, just dollars.  And as I have pointed out, that is a GOOD THING.  It means less dollars here competing for the same amount of goods.  It as if you were buying a car, negotiated a good price, and then some immigrant comes along and offers the dealer more.  How would you feel about that?


I'm wasting my time talking to an imbecile like you. * Remittances$$* have nothing to do with auction bidding.  Do you think you're going to come in here and snow people ? You're an ass. You have no idea what I'm talking about.

Yes, of course I complain about money being sent to China. And Mexico, And India, etc. >> Remittances. 21st century imperialism.   So America being pillaged for its wealth is a good thing for America, huh ?  And I suppose you'd think 10th century Brits were ecstatic about being plundered by Vikings, and having their wealth taken from them. Is there a doctor in the house ?  I mean really.

And my offer to pillage your house (TV, computer, stereo, DVD player, etc) is still open.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something.  I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.


Technology or no technology, population scenarios scarcely have changed over 160+ years.  I notice you failed to answer my point about Canada population vs US population, and Canada oil exports and our US imports of them, which continued for decades, (during many changes of technology).  Nice try, but you're flunking grandly.


----------



## Winston (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is stupid.  You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE.  It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders.  Who does that, outside the sellers?  My wife spends way too much money with wish.com.  She sends it to China.  Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day.  Do you complain about that?  And of course there is tourism.  I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country.  And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries.  Do you complain about that?
> ...



Pull your head out of your ass and learn something.

Opinion: Why remittances are good for America - CNN


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> > alang1216 said:
> ...





protectionist said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something.  I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.
> ...


If you are what you say you are you'd know it is under-developed economies that export raw materials to the 1st world economies that utilize them.  On the other hand, as frac'ing technology improves, the US is becoming an exporter of energy.

Did the US become stronger or weaker during the 19th and 20th centuries when our population expanded dramatically?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

Winston said:


> Pull your head out of your ass and learn something.
> 
> Opinion: Why remittances are good for America - CNN


CNN.  HA HA HA.

When do I get to remove all that stuff from your house (with your blessing) ?


----------



## protectionist (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> If you are what you say you are you'd know it is under-developed economies that export raw materials to the 1st world economies that utilize them.  On the other hand, as frac'ing technology improves, the US is becoming an exporter of energy.
> 
> Did the US become stronger or weaker during the 19th and 20th centuries when our population expanded dramatically?


Canada, with their *small population*, has been the # 1 supplier (by a wide margin) of oil to the US, and its *large population*, for decades.  You haven't addressed this...and you won't.  


*Harms of Immigration

1.* Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($138 Billion/year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

17. Influx of terrorists (ex. ISIS with "Syrian refugees")


----------



## alang1216 (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Canada, with their *small population*, has been the # 1 supplier (by a wide margin) of oil to the US, and its *large population*, for decades.  You haven't addressed this...and you won't.


You make this sound like it is a bad thing and is somehow connected to population size.  Explain why this is bad and why size matters then I'll address it.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > If you are what you say you are you'd know it is under-developed economies that export raw materials to the 1st world economies that utilize them.  On the other hand, as frac'ing technology improves, the US is becoming an exporter of energy.
> ...


income disparity does that regardless of legal status; only the right wing, never gets it.


----------



## Winston (Jan 29, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Winston said:
> 
> 
> > Pull your head out of your ass and learn something.
> ...



What a dumbass.  The CNN article was an op-ed that clearly explained what I have been saying and what your racism blocks you from seeing.  Hell, it is common sense.  The remittances are dollars flowing out of the country without the loss of goods.  That means less dollars chasing the same amount of goods.  As the op-ed explained, it is like getting free labor for the host country because the cost of that labor is not countered with the loss of goods.  The proper analogy is not you breaking in to my house and taking goods.  It is you breaking in to my house and washing my clothes, cleaning my bathrooms, and cooking my breakfast before you leave.  I get the labor and I don't lose any goods.

And I notice you have mentioned Canada in this thread.  Canada actually has a much higher rate of foreign remittances per capita than the United States.  Foreign workers and immigrants send out a massive 24 billion dollars per year.  And follows is an econometric study of German foreign remittances which concludes,

*An increase in remittances results in a higher share of exports, an improvement of the trade balance and an increase in GDP.*
*
http://www.norface-migration.org/publ_uploads/NDP_21_12.pdf
*
In economic terms, those remittances reflect a reverse Dutch disease effect on the host country.  That is what stimulates the increase in exports and GDP.  And it is the well documented Dutch disease effect that actually harms the economy of the receiving country by spurring inflation, increasing the value of their currency making exports more expensive, and stifling innovation while encouraging dependency.


----------



## Winston (Jan 29, 2018)

alang1216 said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Canada, with their *small population*, has been the # 1 supplier (by a wide margin) of oil to the US, and its *large population*, for decades.  You haven't addressed this...and you won't.
> ...



I got this.  It is the exact opposite of what remittances do for the US economy.

The Canadian dollar, oil and 'Canada's Dutch Disease'


----------



## Flash (Jan 29, 2018)

The best way to get the Democrats to support deporting the DACA scum is to get the DACAs to start voting Republican.  Then the Democrats would get them out fast.

The Democrats don't give a shit about people, only power so they can make America a socialist shithole.  DACAs give them a few more votes in the future so that is why the filthy Democrats want them to stay..

However, Democrats will never agree to an end to chain migration to get the DACAs because they know there are more numbers in chain migration.

Democrats are scumbags that need to import welfare queens in order to maintain a voting base.  They will go with whatever brings in the greatest number of future Moon Bat voters.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 30, 2018)

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, so Labor can make their own capital decisions instead of having to depend on Government.


----------



## charwin95 (Jan 30, 2018)

Flash said:


> The best way to get the Democrats to support deporting the DACA scum is to get the DACAs to start voting Republican.  Then the Democrats would get them out fast.
> 
> The Democrats don't give a shit about people, only power so they can make America a socialist shithole.  DACAs give them a few more votes in the future so that is why the filthy Democrats want them to stay..
> 
> ...



You may want to do some minor research there Rambo.
1. Obama’s DACA program is only to save them from deportation. No pathway to legal immigration or US citizenships. No chain immigration.  

Trumpy offered US citizenship to 1.8 millions DACA members. Happy? 

2. Chain migration is not limited to Mexico.

3. All illegals are not welfare dependent. They have jobs. 

4. About 72% of Americans support DACA. 

5. You said ........ Democrats import illegals to maintain voting base. If that is true then Trump is not the president.

5. Lastly to all these tough guys here...........  Let say we if deport them both DACA’s and other illegals. Who will do their low skilled paying jobs? WHO? Right now the economy is booming with low unemployment......... Are you going to quit your job and take these jobs? Are you going to give up your welfare checks and start working? 

Now tell me where I’m wrong.


----------



## charwin95 (Jan 30, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.
> ...



1. Here is the problem with that. Most or all of of these people are seeking better lives not crimes. DACA cannot bring in relatives to US. And they contribute a large part of the booming economy. 

2. $133 billions remittance. I’m sure you are an international expert of money foreign exchange, international trades and banking.
So my questions to you is...... What do you think they will do with their US dollars once it reach Mexico or other countries?
Are they going to keep in under their pillows as a souvenirs? Or make it a tortilla? 
Why do you think it’s a US lose and loss of American jobs? 
What made you think that deporting illegals will stop these remittances?


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Jan 30, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Flash said:
> 
> 
> > The best way to get the Democrats to support deporting the DACA scum is to get the DACAs to start voting Republican.  Then the Democrats would get them out fast.
> ...


1) DACA doesn't protect them from deportation. They are in deportation hearings that have been prolonged, therefor they are paroled in place and allowed to apply for work authorization while they wait for their final hearing. They can be deported at any time for any reason.

2) OK

3) Not all illegals have jobs, a good many of households headed by illegals are receiving some sort of welfare.

4) So

5) You misunderstood what he said, try again.

6) Who will do their jobs? SMFH Citizens/LPR's/visa holders/mechanization....Those on welfare should get off their ass and get a job, welfare should be limited to a short period of time, not for life.

There, I told you where you were wrong.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Jan 30, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


1) DACA doesn't contribute much of anything to the economy, they simply fill jobs that could be held by an actual legal worker. 

2) Removal of illegals will lower remittances to foreign countries.


----------



## Penelope (Jan 31, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



So they don't rent, hold jobs, pay taxes, and pay sales tax.  Wonder what the home builders in TXwill do without illegals aliens that work for peanuts and put in 12 hour days.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 31, 2018)

Assuming everyone comes over for citizenship instead of tourism, is a fallacy of false Cause and false standing.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Jan 31, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


They drive up the cost of rent, they pay user taxes and sales taxes, any payroll taxes they have with held they receive back when they file their tax forms, they are eligible for medicare and SS. 

Home builders using illegal labor should be put out of business. Do you really think those builders then charge you less for that house?


----------



## Hellbilly (Jan 31, 2018)

protectionist said:


> The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> 
> DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.
> 
> ...


How about....




Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



1. That is not true. They pay taxes and contribute to the success of the economy especially here in Ca. Again you are trying to minimizing the importance of these workers. They have teachers, engineers, nurses etc etc. Look at the economy and unemployment rate. Currently its hard to find workers. I might hire some H1. 

2. This is way off from what I was talking about.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Flash said:
> ...



1. Incorrect. DACA program only save them from deportation. No pathways legal immigration. Do your homework.
2. 
3. I never said ALL. 
4. That means you are the minority. Even GOPs support the program.
5. No I did not. 
6. Incorrect. There are jobs available right now but where are they?
Agree on welfare...... but in reality if these lazy people will give up their welfare and get a job. They probably spend more on babysitters than what they make. 

Not a single one of your post prove me wrong. Try again.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. Explain why they drive up cost of rents.

2. The problem with ( AGAIN ) that is they cannot find enough workers. Some of these people in Texas that need to rebuild their houses have a waiting period like 3 months to 8 months. 
If I understand you correct they should just wait till american citizens or legal immigrants come forward and do the job? 
If that is you ....... are you going to look around for legal workers? Explain yourself. 

You are so way off.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


1) They pay user tax and pay roll deductions, so what, that isn't a contribution any different than any other worker or person here. The success of the economy is subjective, beyond them having a job and purchasing product, there is no actual contribution. Good for you hiring H1's, good luck getting one in the next few years as the applications are all maxed out.

2) They would better their families social status. SHRUG


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


DACA does not protect/save them from deportation. I have done my homework, may be you should try doing some. SMFH They are in deportation proceedings that are deferred, that doesn't save them from deportation as they can be deported for any immigration infraction. They were simply at the bottom of the removal ladder under Obama.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


1) Supply and demand. More people looking to rent drives up the costs for the limited amount of homes for rent. That's basic economics. SMFH

2) So what. Illegals do not have the right to work here and if a company is knowingly hiring and using illegals they should be out of business.

When I hire a person I use the required I-9 form and then use E-verify, if the worker comes back as eligible to work then I usually hire him/her. I have no problem finding legal workers.

Where is it you think I am way off? SMFH


----------



## edthecynic (Feb 1, 2018)

protectionist said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> > thank you for confirming that the case was thrown out, and never brought back.
> ...


IOW, the case was thrown out and not brought up again in the proper jurisdiction, which would have been easy to do if they were so sure "shall" meant "shall."
BUT THEY DIDN'T, obviously because they were sure they would lose, which is why they brought it up in a court where they they knew they lacked standing in the first place!!!!!


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. Do you expect anything different from them as far as paying taxes? 
In my experience and knowledge of labor force.... YES they play a major role to the booming economy. It’s not subjective it’s the reality and you are just in denial.
We have about 2+ millions illegals here probably a lot higher than that. Do you think they just sit there and play ding dong? 
If I follow you Aldo disagree with the 2+ millions illegals we have here in Ca. 

2. You did not answer my question about remittance.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. Meaning business is good. So if you own a rental property. Is that bad. Rental will go up no matter how you look at it. 

2. So what? You did not answer my question. Because of your hatred you just let these home owners stay in apartment or hotels because you hate  these people? 
If you are one of these home owners. Are you just going to look for legal immigrants? At least 3 to 8 months waiting period? Answer these questions if you don’t mind. 

3. That is not true in most of cases. You see all these signs posted all over. Hiring apply inside. 

1, 2, 3 you are way off.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


1) If they are doing nothing more that what any employed person is doing, what are they contributing? They play a major role in a booming economy? SMFH 
Go take a basic economics class. If we have 2M illegals in CA and they are working using faked/forged/stolen documents then what are they contributing? The only people benefiting are themselves and their employer. 

2) Sure I did, you simply didn't like the answer. Remittances are sent and lifts their family back home into a higher social status. Illegals here are nothing more than economic refugees.


----------



## Wyatt earp (Feb 1, 2018)

Billyboom said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> ...




And what country did they have retardo?


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 1, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> 
> Many GOP are pro DACA as well.


On Jimmy Kimmel last night they had 4 Trump supporters and a DACA on.  The woman had a baby and she had lived here since she was a baby herself.  She's engaged to a guy serving in the military.

They need a fast track for people like her.  There will be exceptions.  But the others have to go.  Just like their parents picked up and moved to this country, they can pick up and move back.  Then apply to become a citizen.  But again they need to streamline the process for DACA's.  At least some of them.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


Depends on who you are, if you own the rental then yes it benefits you for the time, until they move out and you have to deal with the damages they caused to the property. If you are a renter then it makes it harder on you, higher rent may require you to work a second job, or to cut on many other things you need or want. Its about perspective.

2) Projecting your ignorance I see. SMFH If I was one of those homeowners I would be looking for a reputable company to do the work, my insurance would be paying for my stay at a hotel or whatever.

3) Like I said, if a person knowingly hires an illegal they should be put out of business. All employers are required to have on the employees file the I-9 form and info is sent into the proper Federal Employment Agency which verifies the information and if found to be ineligible will send out a No-Match letter to which the employee has to prove their eligibility. Many companies are using E-verify now. I guarantee if you are found with an illegal on your payroll you would rid yourself of that employee rather quickly, if you don't then you are up for being put out of business.


----------



## Hellbilly (Feb 1, 2018)

bear513 said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



This one. 

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. So what. Again you avoided my questions. 
You don’t need to take economic class. Most or all illegals take forge paper works. That doesn’t mean they are not contributing to the economy. You are telling me that 2+ millions illegals just sit there and play ding dong? 
Again if you are working YOU i mean YOU ........ who is benefiting? You and your employer. Isn’t it? What’s your point? Are you expecting any different? 

2 Wrong again. You did not answer my questions.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. The topic is DACA. These people had regular jobs that are assimilated,  imbedded both economically and socially. Lots of them don’t even speak Spanish. You generalize and assumed that all these people are bad people. Again these kids have engineers, nurses, pharmacists, teachers etc etc. I have not met a DACA doctors. So you are wrong again. 

2. My Ignorance? OKAY HERE WE GO AGAIN. JUST want to remind you that you started this attack. 
My ignorance really? Dude you are basing your dumb ignorant opinions from your HATRED. You are so way off from reality.  I love be it when assholes like you go off the track and start attacking. Meaning you are running out of ammunition again. 
STAY WITH THE TOPIC. 

You avoided my question based from real life but a your rebuttal is so fucking way off from the reality.
If legal immigrants workers are available..... Don’t you think they could have than that? Where are they? Because they have shortages of workers dude. 
Reputable company. Correct if you are in your area but if the area was hit by catastrophe like Harvey. That is fucking different. 
Insurance pay their hotel. True......  but staying in a hotel that long is not like  taking a vacation. Im hoping you understand the difference. 

3. I heard you. But what is your point? Again because of your hatred. Are you just going to sit there till your brothers rescue you after several months? ICE are near by why not start arresting everyone. See what happened. 

You can keep sticking your E Beri Beri fy however you want but if you apply that kind of restrictions to rebuilt a community like Houston......... You are part of the problem. 

I have 2 employees supporting Houston territory. One of them is safe but the other ones house was totally demolished. They did  got him a hotel but it’s very far from his kids school and his wife job. There was no hotels closer because most are occupied. 
Harvey hit Houston Aug. 17/17. 
They started working on his house Jan. 8, 2018 they gave him temporary COO ( certificate of occupancy) Jan. 29. 
And consider himself lucky compared to others. There are lots of them that are in that predicament.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


1) Just because they are working doesn't mean they are contributing. If one is working the only ones benefiting are the employee and the employer. SMFH

2) SMFH What is it you think remittances do?


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


1) They all speak their parents tongue, just like you speak Portuguese and English. I didn't generalize nor assume anything, you simply like putting words in peoples comments that aren't there. Claiming I am wrong is hilarious, especially when I'm not. Like I said, it's all about perspective. This is a discussion, if it were a debate you would be standing there looking stupid. 

2) SMFH Please go take a English Comprehension class. You keep claiming I have hatred for these people, I have family that are these people. I believe they need to go back home and apply to re-enter, something they never did to begin with. Your questions haven't been avoided, they have all been answered.

3) There you go again, projecting your ignorance saying I hate these people. SMFH

Why would I sit there for months waiting on my brother? I grew up with family doing construction, why wouldn't I start doing some repairs myself? 

So you are claiming Houston wouldn't be rebuilt without illegals doing the work? LMFAO So you promote breaking federal employee regulations to hire illegals because people in Houston need to have their houses fixed right away. SMFH


----------



## MarathonMike (Feb 1, 2018)

Both the extreme Left position and the extreme Right positions on the 'Dreamers' are flawed. Mass deportation benefits no one and will incur enormous costs and burdens to our Federal ICE and border agents. This is the best jobs economy we have had in decades. There are millions of jobs going unfilled right now so I don't buy the "They're taking our jobs" line. 

The extreme Left position that all Dreamers are the same and must be fast tracked to voter hood immediately is dangerous and wrong. The criminals and freeloaders need to be deported ASAP. For the rest of them, Donald Trump's proposal is the best option IMO in that it requires 12 years so they don't get the express lane citizenship ahead of all those who did it legally.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. So. What are you trying to tell me? 

2. I ask you questions about remittances FIRST. You avoided it.


----------



## Dale Smith (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...



If I may interject here, Charwin...but are you unaware of what remittances are and how they are a huge source of income for O'Mexico and at our expense? Illegals work under the table, collect benefits (usually after squirting out an anchor baby) and send excess funds back to their home countries while driving down wages of those here legally.........get in the game, Charwin. Knowledge is power.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


I haven't avoided anything, go back and read through the discussion. SMFH


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. Wrong again. They ALL speak parents tongue. YOU are ignorant. 
Yes I am am shoving words in your mouth because your opinion is based from hatred and ignorance dude. Hopefully that thick skull will understand the real problem 
Just because you keep talking tough doesn’t mean you know what you are talking about. 
Looking stupid when your opinion is just plain hatred so fucking way off from reality.
My English really I love this. I just kick your ass again. You are now running out of ammunition. 

2. Go back and re enter?  This just shows how stupid you are. Why? They are already here. Why not just apply here? That is about 10 years. If they go back to their original country leaving their families, jobs and properties. No that is not acceptable. We have shortages of nurses and teachers right now. Generally shortages of workers all over. Are you going to give up your gardening job then suddenly tomorrow you become an RN? Tough guy like you don’t know shit. Again this just shows your ignorance. 

3. Dude all what you are telling is so far off from reality. 
Rebuilding Houston. Without those illegals working there right now with massive jobs. Rebuilding will take a lot longer. The waiting list right now are creating a tremendous stress to thousands of families. And here you are giving me your ignorant opinion. Right now if I live there or the whole Houston trying to get back to their feet.... You can FUCK the FEDERAL LAW and YOU . 

Why would you sit there waiting for your brothers? Let me rephrase that. Because what you want is hire only American citizens or legal immigrants to come help you rebuild your house in Houston. I’m talking if you live Houston. Stupid. 

You are going to do the job your self? Really? So you are going to leave your gardening job suddenly become a carpenter. Maybe. So those people that has regular jobs stop working then start rebuilding their houses without a fucking experience. That’s dumb. 

Keep trying you might impress your self.


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


YAWN


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 1, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



Go back. Me? You have not answer anything about remittance.  Do you want me to point it out to you where you started?


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


YAWN


----------



## deanrd (Feb 1, 2018)

protectionist said:


> The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> 
> DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action.  In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults.  In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.
> 
> ...


We need educated workers.

Republicans don't go to school.  They think it's bad for America.
Even if they did, most aren't bright enough to screw in a lightbulb.

And cultural erosion?  Like playing in pigsh!t?







This is why  we need vaccines.

Overcrowding in schools? Oh please.  Republicans think become a teen is graduation.  The longer you go, the fewer white wingers.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Feb 1, 2018)

deanrd said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> ...





deanrd said:


> Even if they did, most aren't bright enough to screw in a lightbulb.



it ain't that they're not bright enough to screw in a light bulb, dean...

it's that they aren't afraid of the dark, and know there's better things around to screw.


(unlike boys like you)


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 1, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...


Goto post #90 and see that your remittance question was answered. 

Then go take an English Comprehension class to learn how to speak coherently. Now piss off you fucking moron.


----------



## danielpalos (Feb 2, 2018)

deanrd said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.
> ...


It is what happens when you lose the bet and your first mate gets to practice her leadership skills on you.


----------



## Yousaidwhat (Feb 2, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> 
> Many GOP are pro DACA as well.


Boo fucking hoo hoo hoo.

They are illegal and do not deserve "rights!"

They are here.

Bring them out of the shadows.

Deport the felons and criminals.

No citizenship unless you've served at least 4 years in the military and apply.

Apply and stand at the end of the line.

No voting rights.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 2, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Liquid Reigns said:
> 
> 
> > charwin95 said:
> ...



Trust me I’m enjoying this.


----------



## ThisIsMe (Feb 2, 2018)

I say pass enact daca,  after the border is secure, so this doesn't continue to happen.

Why fight a losing battle (you do know that the anti daca people cannot possibly win this fight, right?) 

I agree with daca, for people who have been here since a very young age. They don't know any other way of life but American, and you can't really blame them for their parents actions. 

Secure the border, daca kids and their parents stay, everyone else goes back, and pass a law that states that this will only ever happen 1 time, after this, it's automatic deportation for everyone not here legally. Short of this, the flow of illegals will continually indefinitely.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 2, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



1. Read my post #127.

2. Too much red wine during flight.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 2, 2018)

Liquid Reigns said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Liquid Reigns said:
> ...



Is this all you’ve got? I understand it hurts. 

I gave you a chance to explain your ignorance about remittance. Where is it? 

Next time before you butt in make sure you know what you are talking about. Okay Moron? 

I just LOOOVE brutalizing your ass.
Don’t you think you have enough?


----------



## Liquid Reigns (Feb 2, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> What made you think that deporting illegals will stop these remittances?





Liquid Reigns said:


> Removal of illegals will lower remittances to foreign countries.


What about my answer is it you don't understand?

Did I claim the remittances would stop? NO
Did I say remittances would be lowered? Well YES I DID

So where you dropped on your head as a child or were you simply just born a fuknmoron. SMFH


----------



## protectionist (Feb 5, 2018)

Billyboom said:


> How about....View attachment 174249


At least you're honest about your RACISM.


----------



## protectionist (Feb 5, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> 1. That is not true. They pay taxes and contribute to the success of the economy especially here in Ca. Again you are trying to minimizing the importance of these workers. They have teachers, engineers, nurses etc etc. Look at the economy and unemployment rate. Currently its hard to find workers. I might hire some H1.
> 
> .


How anybody can be so dumb as to fall for the ruse that illegal aliens _"contribute to the success of the economy"_  ?   

You bonehead.  They are imperialist invaders akin to medieval Vikings. Are you still (February 2018) not aware that the alien invasion of America is 21st century imperialism, with $138 Billion/year being TAKEN OUT OF THE US ECONOMY ? (and reinserted into the aliens' countries economies) ($28 Billion/yr to Mexico alone)

They contribute to the success of the economy all right.  You just have the wrong economy, that's all. They contribute big to Mexico's economy, China, India, Phillipines, etc. click the link to see the complete list of international burglars, pillaging our US economy.

Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2016


----------



## protectionist (Feb 5, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> $133 billions remittance. I’m sure you are an international expert of money foreign exchange, international trades and banking.
> So my questions to you is...... What do you think they will do with their US dollars once it reach Mexico or other countries?
> Are they going to keep in under their pillows as a souvenirs? Or make it a tortilla?
> Why do you think it’s a US lose and loss of American jobs?
> What made you think that deporting illegals will stop these remittances?


Wow. It's hard to believe you're serious. Are you really this ignorant ?  OK, here;s the answers to your amazing questions.

What they will do with their US dollars, once they reach Mexico or other countries, is they will SPEND those US $$ THERE, thereby going into THEIR economies.  Like if someone took money out of your house, and reinserted it into their house.  Get it ?
 It's a loss for the US, because if the foreigners were not here, in the jobs they're in, there wouldn't (couldn't) be remittances $$$ leaving the US. Instead, with Americans in the jobs the foreigners are now in, the Americans would spend their wages HERE, in American stores (AKA "the economy")  Got it now ?  

PS - I made a mistake on the numbers.  The updated one is $138 Billion/year ($28 Billion to Mexico alone)

Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2016

Vicente Fox Says Remittances Largest Source Of Revenue Since 2003, Gloats At Getting Illegals And Matricula Consular Into US : Diggers Realm


----------



## Hellbilly (Feb 5, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> > How about....View attachment 174249
> ...


Mine is justified.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## AyeCantSeeYou (Feb 5, 2018)

*Stick to the subject. If you can't do that, stay out!*


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 5, 2018)

Yousaidwhat said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> ...



Agree on deporting all felons and both legal and illegals immigrants that committed crimes. 

They were brought here by their parents here when they were young. 
They don’t know any where else to live and survive except here in US. Lots of them are now adults, have their own  families and have regular jobs like RNs, teachers, engineers etc etc etc. Paying taxes like you. Contributing to the society and economy.
That said....... Why not just continue the program without any of these conditions attached?? 

Currently we have shortages of workers all over. So if we deport these people  are you going to change you career and become an RN? I’m just being realistic here. 

DACA is not a pathway to legal immigration but Trump is offering US citizenship’s to 1.8 millions DACA members.


----------



## Yousaidwhat (Feb 6, 2018)

charwin95 said:


> Yousaidwhat said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


I'm not for giving them automatic citizenship. An opportunity, yes.

Giving them "amnesty" is an invitation for illegals to continuously migrate here, expecting to granted citizenship. 

I'd prefer to see an end to illegals crossing the border by ending any future chance of citizenship for illegals.


----------



## charwin95 (Feb 6, 2018)

Yousaidwhat said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> > Yousaidwhat said:
> ...



1. Agree. 

2. Agree. But these people are already here. DACA program is only to save them from deportation no path 
way to legal immigration. Since they are contributing and totally imbedded both economically and society in our system. We can just leave them alone and live a normal life. 

3. Agree. We are working on it. Border crossing is only a trickle now compared from 2014.


----------



## jillian (Feb 7, 2018)

WillHaftawaite said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sending the dreamers away from their homes to die is cruel, even by GOP standards.
> ...



no 

An Estimated 123,000 ‘Dreamers’ Own Homes and Pay $380M in Property Taxes - Zillow Research


----------



## Hugo Furst (Feb 7, 2018)

jillian said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



That's nice.

Homesteading, or squatting?


----------



## jillian (Feb 7, 2018)

WillHaftawaite said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...



your reading comprehension off today, wills?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Feb 7, 2018)

jillian said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



Not as far off as yours seems to be.

DACA=illegally in country.

Non citizens


----------



## protectionist (Feb 8, 2018)

Billyboom said:


> Mine is justified.


 No it isn't. So your racism is justified, as long as it;s against white people, huh ? You filthy racist pig.  You're as bad as Dylan Roof, only with a computer, instead of a gun.


----------



## Hellbilly (Feb 8, 2018)

protectionist said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> > Mine is justified.
> ...


In 60 years of living I've never been hurt by a person of color. Just white people.
Fact.
I don't hate white people. I choose my white friends very carefully.
Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## Clementine (Feb 8, 2018)

Penelope said:


> Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> 
> Many GOP are pro DACA as well.




That is true in some cases but many have lied about coming here as children and many do not speak English or have any respect for this country.


----------



## Clementine (Feb 8, 2018)

Why won't the left discuss the problems with some countries, like Mexico?     The left loses their minds when someone calls some countries shitholes yet they act like it's a horrible punishment to send illegal aliens back to their home countries.    What gives?


----------



## PredFan (Feb 8, 2018)

I have sympathy for the so-called DACA kids, within reason of course. I'd like to vet them before we give them a path. But yeah, truly, some of them didn't come here on their own volition. besides, it's a bargaining chip in negotiations. We need that wall. Get the wall, increase security, come down hard on people who hire illegals, do that and we can absorb the DACA people.


----------



## PredFan (Feb 8, 2018)

Clementine said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Because this is the country they know and they work and go to school and help support the economy.  You are confusing illegal immigration with DACA. Trump rescinded DACA.  Heartless moron.
> ...



I am for DACA but we need to vet them.


----------



## Clementine (Feb 8, 2018)

PredFan said:


> I have sympathy for the so-called DACA kids, within reason of course. I'd like to vet them before we give them a path. But yeah, truly, some of them didn't come here on their own volition. besides, it's a bargaining chip in negotiations. We need that wall. Get the wall, increase security, come down hard on people who hire illegals, do that and we can absorb the DACA people.




Exactly.    Whenever there is talk of amnesty, more illegals flood in.    How can we can a handle on things unless we shut the spigot off?


----------



## PredFan (Feb 8, 2018)

Clementine said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > I have sympathy for the so-called DACA kids, within reason of course. I'd like to vet them before we give them a path. But yeah, truly, some of them didn't come here on their own volition. besides, it's a bargaining chip in negotiations. We need that wall. Get the wall, increase security, come down hard on people who hire illegals, do that and we can absorb the DACA people.
> ...



I'm hoping in the end, that is what Trump will do. He's the only one who can.


----------



## Clementine (Feb 8, 2018)

PredFan said:


> Clementine said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...




One guy who worked in immigration came forth to say that he believed at least half of the 800,000 who were given work permits had lied.    No one is checking and they are going by the applications that people filled out.    If they don't vet them, may as well not even bother with applications. 

I feel sorry for some people.    There are those who just want to work and we can always use more tax payers.     But, we have a right to know who is who.    The government has a duty to uphold our laws and put the safety and well-being of Americans first.

We need tight border security and we need to take time to vet people.    Anyone who committed a violent crime should be out and it should mean something when they do get deported.   Right now it's easy for them to turn around and come right back.    Many have been deported numerous times and it's futile without a real border.


----------



## PredFan (Feb 8, 2018)

Clementine said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Clementine said:
> ...



Just because they aren't vetting them now doesn't mean they cannot. I'm sure that just the fact that we were to start the program of aggressively vetting them would make a great many of them too afraid to try, even if we didn't actually do it.


----------



## danielpalos (Feb 9, 2018)

Clementine said:


> Why won't the left discuss the problems with some countries, like Mexico?     The left loses their minds when someone calls some countries shitholes yet they act like it's a horrible punishment to send illegal aliens back to their home countries.    What gives?


What problems?  

It is our, war on drugs.


----------



## danielpalos (Feb 9, 2018)

Clementine said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > I have sympathy for the so-called DACA kids, within reason of course. I'd like to vet them before we give them a path. But yeah, truly, some of them didn't come here on their own volition. besides, it's a bargaining chip in negotiations. We need that wall. Get the wall, increase security, come down hard on people who hire illegals, do that and we can absorb the DACA people.
> ...


We have a Commerce Clause in our Constitution.  The right wing doesn't seem to like, applied capitalism.  They prefer socialism on a national basis.


----------

