Immigration is Destroying America.

[protectionist]

"“Once enacted, this proposed rule would empower these spouses to put their own education and skills to work for the country that they and their families now call home,” Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker wrote on the White House blog. “These actions promise to unleash more of the extraordinary contributions that immigrants have always made to America’s economy.”"

1. "put their own education and skills to work" - while simultaneoulsy putting millions of AMERICANS OUT OF WORK.

2. "contributions that immigrants have always made to America’s economy" - like causing it to LOSE $70 Billion/ear is SALES$$ (due to remittances) ; like causing the govt to LOSE Billions$$ in taxes (due to lower wages paid) ; like causing it to LOSE Billions more in taxes(due to welfare payouts) ;

 

[protectionist]

U.S. proposes immigration rules to help high-skilled workers | Reuters

The proposal would, for the first time, allow work permits for the spouses of H-1B workers who have begun the process of applying for a green card through their employers. Currently their spouses can move to the U.S. with them, but are prevented from working.

Senator Jeff Sessions, a Republican from Alabama and opponent of immigration reform, denounced the proposed changes. "Yet again, the administration is acting unilaterally to change immigration law in a way that hurts American workers," he said.

"This will help corporations by further flooding a slack labor market, pulling down wages. It is good news for citizens in other countries who will be hired. But for struggling Americans, it will only reduce wages, lower job opportunities, and make it harder to scrape by."

Obama Administration Proposes Work Permits for H-1B-Worker Spouses - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

He is right on. But those of us with an income should not be too worried the low wages should save us money at the store.

Seen any food prices gone down over the past few years ? I haven't.

 

[Unkotare]

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world | Cato Institute


Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world | Cato Institute


The Many Contributions of Immigrants to the American Economy


Immigration and its contribution to our economic strength - Society and Culture - AEI

 

[RKMBrown]

The more population we have above 30 Million, the more we increase THESE >>

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. ($170 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.

Here you go...

Here I go WHAT ? You showing the list of HARMS. So ? And you showed a previous post. So ? What about it ? You got a point dangling in here somewhere. Spit it out, my son. We're anxious to hear from you.

Your basis for your claim that immigration is harmful is our population is overcrowded over 30million people. Are you mentally handicapped in some way?

The very basis for your claims against our guests is your accusation that we are 10x overcrowded. That is 1000% overcrowded. That's 280 million to many people. Your basis is incorrect. But for the sake of argument lets say you are right we are 10x overcrowded. How do you propose to get us to 10% of the current population #? The only possible way I can think of is a nuclear or biologic war or some other form of mass extermination. But I'd like to hear your plans for reducing all the harm you say is being caused by 90% of our population.

 

[kaz]

The proposal would, for the first time, allow work permits for the spouses of H-1B workers who have begun the process of applying for a green card through their employers. Currently their spouses can move to the U.S. with them, but are prevented from working.

Senator Jeff Sessions, a Republican from Alabama and opponent of immigration reform, denounced the proposed changes. "Yet again, the administration is acting unilaterally to change immigration law in a way that hurts American workers," he said.

"This will help corporations by further flooding a slack labor market, pulling down wages. It is good news for citizens in other countries who will be hired. But for struggling Americans, it will only reduce wages, lower job opportunities, and make it harder to scrape by."

Obama Administration Proposes Work Permits for H-1B-Worker Spouses - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

He is right on. But those of us with an income should not be too worried the low wages should save us money at the store.

Seen any food prices gone down over the past few years ? I haven't.

Food is so cheap in this country already. Not sure what your point is.

Ironic it's the racist, xenophobic non-liberals who keep arguing with you about your fear mongering proposal to end immigration, not the loving inclusive liberals, isn't it?

 

[protectionist]

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world | Cato Institute
Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world | Cato Institute
The Many Contributions of Immigrants to the American Economy
Immigration and its contribution to our economic strength - Society and Culture - AEI

Not hard to refute this stuff.

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. ($70 Billion year). AKA the "many contributions" of immigrants to the MEXICAN ECONOMY. AKA their # 1 source of income).

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.

 

[protectionist]

Here you go...

Here I go WHAT ? You showing the list of HARMS. So ? And you showed a previous post. So ? What about it ? You got a point dangling in here somewhere. Spit it out, my son. We're anxious to hear from you.

Your basis for your claim that immigration is harmful is our population is overcrowded over 30million people. Are you mentally handicapped in some way?

The very basis for your claims against our guests is your accusation that we are 10x overcrowded. That is 1000% overcrowded. That's 280 million to many people. Your basis is incorrect. But for the sake of argument lets say you are right we are 10x overcrowded. How do you propose to get us to 10% of the current population #? The only possible way I can think of is a nuclear or biologic war or some other form of mass extermination. But I'd like to hear your plans for reducing all the harm you say is being caused by 90% of our population.

Unfortunately, the damage is already long been done, and is increasing geometrically, as the graphs I presented previously show. There probably is no way to get the US back to 30 million. It's something that had to have been done over the centuries, like Canada did, with their point system, which has kept their population to near 30 million, which is why they sell us oil, instead of us selling oil to them.

 

[protectionist]

He is right on. But those of us with an income should not be too worried the low wages should save us money at the store.

Seen any food prices gone down over the past few years ? I haven't.

Food is so cheap in this country already. Not sure what your point is.

Ironic it's the racist, xenophobic non-liberals who keep arguing with you about your fear mongering proposal to end immigration, not the loving inclusive liberals, isn't it?

YOU KNOW what my point is.

"Loving inclusive liberals", huh ? HA HA HA HA!!!!

Oh, well I have to praise you for giving me a good laugh there. Yeah, very "loving" those liberals are. And HERE'S what they love >>

1. Businesses wanting cheap labor to reduce costs & boost profits.

2. Churches wanting parishoners to fill their empty pews.

3. Unions wanting members to replace their declining memberships.

4. Spanish media NEEDING Spanish-only speakers.

5. Ethnocentrist organizations wanting immigrants to multiply their race, for racist reasons (ex. La Raza- "the race")

6. Democrats seek VOTES (and get them).

7. Terrorists come in to enact terrorism (ex. the 9-11 hijackers came in on visas)

8. Anchor baby parents who become LEGALLY entitled to welfare benefits by having the pregnant woman give birth on the American side of the border. And then help themselves to a lifetime of benefits (more immigrants are receiving welfare benefits than native-born Americans).

9. Mexico - remittances$$$ from the USA are their second largest source of income (second only to their oil exports) Mexico also benefits immensely by dumping their poor people on the US, as we then stupidly pay their poverty bill for them. Other countries also benefit from remittances and poverty dumping.

10. Mexico's Reconquista of the American southwest. I take the Mexican govt at it's word when it says that is exactly its plan.

 

[Unkotare]

The Contributions of Immigrants and Their Children to the American Workforce and Jobs of the Future | Center for American Progress

 

[RKMBrown]

Here I go WHAT ? You showing the list of HARMS. So ? And you showed a previous post. So ? What about it ? You got a point dangling in here somewhere. Spit it out, my son. We're anxious to hear from you.

Your basis for your claim that immigration is harmful is our population is overcrowded over 30million people. Are you mentally handicapped in some way?

The very basis for your claims against our guests is your accusation that we are 10x overcrowded. That is 1000% overcrowded. That's 280 million to many people. Your basis is incorrect. But for the sake of argument lets say you are right we are 10x overcrowded. How do you propose to get us to 10% of the current population #? The only possible way I can think of is a nuclear or biologic war or some other form of mass extermination. But I'd like to hear your plans for reducing all the harm you say is being caused by 90% of our population.

Unfortunately, the damage is already long been done, and is increasing geometrically, as the graphs I presented previously show. There probably is no way to get the US back to 30 million. It's something that had to have been done over the centuries, like Canada did, with their point system, which has kept their population to near 30 million, which is why they sell us oil, instead of us selling oil to them.

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

 

[protectionist]

The Contributions of Immigrants and Their Children to the American Workforce and Jobs of the Future | Center for American Progress

Remittance $$$ lost. ($70 Billion year). AKA The Contributions of Immigrants and Their Children to the MEXICAN ECONOMY. AKA their # 1 source of income).

 

[protectionist]

Your basis for your claim that immigration is harmful is our population is overcrowded over 30million people. Are you mentally handicapped in some way?

The very basis for your claims against our guests is your accusation that we are 10x overcrowded. That is 1000% overcrowded. That's 280 million to many people. Your basis is incorrect. But for the sake of argument lets say you are right we are 10x overcrowded. How do you propose to get us to 10% of the current population #? The only possible way I can think of is a nuclear or biologic war or some other form of mass extermination. But I'd like to hear your plans for reducing all the harm you say is being caused by 90% of our population.

Unfortunately, the damage is already long been done, and is increasing geometrically, as the graphs I presented previously show. There probably is no way to get the US back to 30 million. It's something that had to have been done over the centuries, like Canada did, with their point system, which has kept their population to near 30 million, which is why they sell us oil, instead of us selling oil to them.

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical. The population change was near linear from 1950-1970. Since then, ZOOM. Like a rocket going up.

 

[RKMBrown]

Unfortunately, the damage is already long been done, and is increasing geometrically, as the graphs I presented previously show. There probably is no way to get the US back to 30 million. It's something that had to have been done over the centuries, like Canada did, with their point system, which has kept their population to near 30 million, which is why they sell us oil, instead of us selling oil to them.

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical.

I'm gonna guess you don't know what geometric means.

 

[Unkotare]

http://archive.sba.gov/advo/research/rs334tot.pdf


Immigrants are 30% more likely than non-immigrants to start a business. In case anyone forgot, businesses are those things that create jobs and grow the economy.

 

[RKMBrown]

Unfortunately, the damage is already long been done, and is increasing geometrically, as the graphs I presented previously show. There probably is no way to get the US back to 30 million. It's something that had to have been done over the centuries, like Canada did, with their point system, which has kept their population to near 30 million, which is why they sell us oil, instead of us selling oil to them.

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical. The population change was near linear from 1950-1970. Since then, ZOOM. Like a rocket going up.

Yes or no you can see it is not geometric after 2000 by your chart. To be geometric it would have had to be around 50million in 2008, not 35million.

 

[protectionist]

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical.

I'm gonna guess you don't know what geometric means.

As usual, you guess wrong. Geometric, as I'm using the word, is like "exponential", which in mathematics, refers to powers (squared, cubed, etc). In this case, it is growth as shown by a J curve (I'm guessing you don't know what that means), whereby the growth itself is increasingly growing (as in the case of foreign born population in the US (as shown in the bar graph), and therefore the line graphically appears like the letter J. So it doesn't even help when we draw you a picture, huh ?

If the growth was not geometric, or exponential, and it wasn't increasingly growing over time, and it growth was uniform, over time, that would be know as "arithmetic". Hey, who am I ? Your tutor ?

 

[protectionist]

http://archive.sba.gov/advo/research/rs334tot.pdf


Immigrants are 30% more likely than non-immigrants to start a business. In case anyone forgot, businesses are those things that create jobs and grow the economy.

Should we count how many times in this thread I said I support immigrants who bring capital, with which to open businesses, and create jobs, for AMERICANS ? I guess it's at least 5 times (probably more)

 

[RKMBrown]

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical.

I'm gonna guess you don't know what geometric means.

As usual, you guess wrong. Geometric, as I'm using the word, is like "exponential", which in mathematics, refers to powers (squared, cubed, etc). In this case, it is growth as shown by a J curve (I'm guessing you don't know what that means), whereby the growth itself is increasingly growing (as in the case of foreign born population in the US (as shown in the bar graph), and therefore the line graphically appears like the letter J. So it doesn't even help when we draw you a picture, huh ?

If the growth was not geometric, or exponential, and it wasn't increasingly growing over time, and it growth was uniform, over time, that would be know as "arithmetic". Hey, who am I ? Your tutor ?

I'm a math major.

Yes or no you can see it is not geometric after 2000 by your chart. To be geometric it would have had to be around 50million in 2008, not 35million. By your chart it was only increasing seemingly exponentially if you put blinders on between 1970-2000. All the rest of your chart shows it not having an exponential curve. Quite the opposite.

 

[protectionist]

No, it's not geometric. It was geometric through 1930, went linear,then there was the baby boom, then it went linear again and has remained linear ever since. Your nutz if you think we would have the GDP we have today with 1/10th the population. With the population number your are promoting, we would all be speaking Spanish or German right now.

Geometric , just like I said. And this J curve is damn near right-angle vertical. The population change was near linear from 1950-1970. Since then, ZOOM. Like a rocket going up.

Yes or no you can see it is not geometric after 2000 by your chart. To be geometric it would have had to be around 50million in 2008, not 35million.

Are you trying to break records for stupidity in this forum ? The chart shows that from 1900 1970, the growth of foreign born in America, was pretty steady (and it even DROPPED from 1940 to 1970), and then from 1970 to now, it has jumped up like a basketball player doing a stuff shot. What does it take to get an admission out of you.? Good grief, man! Get real!

 

[protectionist]

I'm gonna guess you don't know what geometric means.

As usual, you guess wrong. Geometric, as I'm using the word, is like "exponential", which in mathematics, refers to powers (squared, cubed, etc). In this case, it is growth as shown by a J curve (I'm guessing you don't know what that means), whereby the growth itself is increasingly growing (as in the case of foreign born population in the US (as shown in the bar graph), and therefore the line graphically appears like the letter J. So it doesn't even help when we draw you a picture, huh ?

If the growth was not geometric, or exponential, and it wasn't increasingly growing over time, and it growth was uniform, over time, that would be know as "arithmetic". Hey, who am I ? Your tutor ?

I'm a math major.

Yes or no you can see it is not geometric after 2000 by your chart. To be geometric it would have had to be around 50million in 2008, not 35million. By your chart it was only increasing seemingly exponentially if you put blinders on between 1970-2000. All the rest of your chart shows it not having an exponential curve. Quite the opposite.

Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole, and read my Post # 1579.