Trumps deportation plan would cost $100-$200 BILLION

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

NOt including the fence, that Mexico does not have the money to pay for, and would not pay for, even if they did, especially since a large % of illegals are from other countries.

"Back in 2011, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deputy director Kumar Kibble said it costs $12,500 to deport an individual undocumented immigrant.

So when you multiply that cost for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S., that comes to $137.5 billion."


Donald Trump s Deportation Plan Would Cost 100-200 Billion - NBC News

How much do taxpayers already pay in providing an estimated 11 million illegals with state drivers licenses, health care, unemployment benefits, and free school tuition?

Well, illegals don't get Obamacare on UI, but perhaps more importantly, the fence isn't keeping out the ones here. And who would do the work cheaply if they weren't here?

My understanding, Obamacare is a mandate that all must prove they have health care coverage. If you can't afford it, you fall under the conditions of the government plan. I don't recall there being an exception if it can be shown they have been able to find work in this country.

The problem with illegal immigrants and healthcare is hospitals are required to give emergency treatment to uninsured people. Obamacare actually exacerbated this because it not only excluded illegal aliens from participation, it also cut Medicaid reimbursement to hospitals. That's a double whammy for states that chose not to accept the Medicaid funds. Not only do they not get the new dollars, their old dollars took a hit.
Obamacare Bars Illegal Immigrants—and Sticks Hospitals With the Bill

Deferred status people also present problems that some states try to work through.
Obamacare: States work around Obamacare to help undocumented youth - CNN.com

Children born here are eligible for Medicaid.

The fence is a whole other story, and it might or might not prevent more immigration. My guess is so long as there are jobs, peaceful illegal immigrants will keep coming, and drug dealers will continue biz unabated. And, even if we somehow found the money to build the fence, we'd need guards, like E. Berlin and E. Germany had with their fences, albeit we only need a fence to keep people out rather than keeping them in.

Given that it costs $12K or so to deport someone, and even if we used every fed courthouse and judge to deport people, the job of 11.5million would not be possible to complete. So, I'd think rational people would just want to give some legal status to workers, prevent unneeded workers from coming here or at least competing for jobs, and deport criminals with utmost expediency.

The problem with looking the other way and granting citizenship to illegals, is that we tried it once before under President Reagan and it did absolutely nothing to solve the problem. If anything it was a government "endorsement" to encourage more illegals to come over. Sanctuary cities also share in this endorsement encouragement to allow the acceptance of more illegal immigrants. Government has been the enabler of the problem and never the problem solver. Why? It's simple, a block of future registered voters speaks louder than enforcement. I seriously, highly doubt, it's really about cost. When you listen to the rhetoric coming from Washington, it's all politics.... and looking good appeasing illegals so they will vote your party into office, is all they REALLY care about.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Trump seems to think that all you have to do is to pick Juan up off the street and drive him to Nuevo Laredo. He seems to have forgotten details, like the constitutionally required trial, and conviction, first (for which we would most likely have to pay Juan's attorney).

The federal immigration law states immigrants that are stopped and found in violation of the law are to be deported, not given a trial. They violated Federal law and INS has been given the authority under the law to deport them.

That is incorrect. I know of a case that came her via H2 visa that never reported to his sponsor. His sponsor reported him to ICE and they found him hiding in San Diego living with his brother. During processing his lawyer showed up they let hm go. That was 2010 and he still here.
One of my lawyer a patent specialist told me that if this immigration BS will go through. He might get rich.

Well 2010 I believe is when Obama was preventing deportation to promote his policy towards legalization.

 

[Boss]

Having human DNA doesn't make you a person.

Makes you a human being who should have Constitutional rights.

 

[Boss]

For a free market fanatic you sure have a funny view of what makes capitalists tick

Capitalists care about profit, and only about profit. Cheap labor means more $$$ so they hire illegal immigrants instead of american workers who they have to pay at least the minimum wage.

But you are completely wrong. Corporatists want to use the leverage of government to give themselves advantage over other free market capitalists. These are NOT free market capitalists. A true free market capitalist has no interest in diminishing the income of his consumers... it defeats his entire purpose of existing. He wants you to have lots of money in your pocket to buy his stuff. A free market capitalist cannot survive if everyone is poor. The demand for his product or service declines with less expendable income. A corporatist, on the other hand, makes money through exploitation and manipulation, made possible by 'owning' politicians.

I am a free market capitalist. I have owned numerous businesses over the years and one thing has been consistent in my businesses... I paid my employees well and had exceptional people working for me. I never minded paying a little higher than industry standard because my people were worth it. It made my business more profitable. Could I have gotten away with paying them less? I suppose, but it would have resulted in disgruntled employees who weren't happy with their pay. I found that my business did much better with happy employees who enjoyed working for me and were satisfied with their pay.

You're both wrong. And both idiots.

No. I am right, they are wrong... YOUR an idiot.

See how that worked?

 

[Boss]

Good idea, raise the minimum wage.

And eliminate more jobs. Brilliant.

 

[SwimExpert]

See how that worked?

Poorly.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Having human DNA doesn't make you a person.

Makes you a human being who should have Constitutional rights.

Nope, not even close. Human DNA is as common as dirt, and about as worthy.

 

[OKTexas]

Since the Supreme Court has ruled against you, more than 100 years ago, now what?

You clearly have a trouble with comprehension. The only persons born in the US who would not be considered citizens, by virtue of their birth would be. "foreigners, alien, WHO BELONG TO THE FAMILIES OF AMBASSADORS OR FOREIGN MINISTERS..." Only foreigners who are the children of ambassadors or foreign ministers here on official duty would not be considered to be natural born citizens.

Evidently you don't understand english composition, when terms are separated by a comma they stand alone. What is it you didn't understand when he said: And "jurisdiction" did not mean simply subject to the laws of the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of its courts. Rather, "jurisdiction" meant exclusive "allegiance" to the United States."

I understand better than you. So do the numerous judges who have held that those born here are citizens.

Right, some leftist judge knows better than the guy who wrote it. Does it hurt to be that gullible?

More than one guy wrote it. Many contributed to it. Its meaning was then debated. Are you suggesting that the Courts are bound by what one person construed it to mean? Sheer idiocy. Of course, what he wrote above is consistent with what the Courts have held; unless born to an ambassador or his wife or a member of his family who are here as diplomats and therefore "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the laws of the United States, a person born here is a citizen upon birth. So, if you want to apply the Amendment consistent with the intent of one of its drafters, then the Court have been getting it right all of this time.

More than one concurred with the definition, in fact American Indians were excluded under the 14th because they owed allegiance to their tribal nations. That didn't change until the 1920's when congress made them US citizens, by law, what makes illegals any different?

 

[Boss]

Having human DNA doesn't make you a person.

Makes you a human being who should have Constitutional rights.

Nope, not even close. Human DNA is as common as dirt, and about as worthy.

Sorry, but the only thing with human DNA is a human being. You are science illiterate.

 

[HUGGY]

Trumps deportation plan would cost $100-$200 BILLION

Nobody said crazy is cheap.

 

[bripat9643]

Trumps deportation plan would cost $100-$200 BILLION

Nobody said crazy is cheap.

Illegal aliens cost $130 billion each year. Trump's plan is a bargain.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You clearly have a trouble with comprehension. The only persons born in the US who would not be considered citizens, by virtue of their birth would be. "foreigners, alien, WHO BELONG TO THE FAMILIES OF AMBASSADORS OR FOREIGN MINISTERS..." Only foreigners who are the children of ambassadors or foreign ministers here on official duty would not be considered to be natural born citizens.

Evidently you don't understand english composition, when terms are separated by a comma they stand alone. What is it you didn't understand when he said: And "jurisdiction" did not mean simply subject to the laws of the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of its courts. Rather, "jurisdiction" meant exclusive "allegiance" to the United States."

I understand better than you. So do the numerous judges who have held that those born here are citizens.

Right, some leftist judge knows better than the guy who wrote it. Does it hurt to be that gullible?

More than one guy wrote it. Many contributed to it. Its meaning was then debated. Are you suggesting that the Courts are bound by what one person construed it to mean? Sheer idiocy. Of course, what he wrote above is consistent with what the Courts have held; unless born to an ambassador or his wife or a member of his family who are here as diplomats and therefore "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the laws of the United States, a person born here is a citizen upon birth. So, if you want to apply the Amendment consistent with the intent of one of its drafters, then the Court have been getting it right all of this time.

More than one concurred with the definition, in fact American Indians were excluded under the 14th because they owed allegiance to their tribal nations. That didn't change until the 1920's when congress made them US citizens, by law, what makes illegals any different?

You would think if congress had to make the Indians legal by law under the 14th they would have to do the same thing with anchor baby's...

 

[EatMorChikin]

Trump seems to think that all you have to do is to pick Juan up off the street and drive him to Nuevo Laredo. He seems to have forgotten details, like the constitutionally required trial, and conviction, first (for which we would most likely have to pay Juan's attorney).

The constitution is only for We The people.

 

[EatMorChikin]

Evidently you don't understand english composition, when terms are separated by a comma they stand alone. What is it you didn't understand when he said: And "jurisdiction" did not mean simply subject to the laws of the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of its courts. Rather, "jurisdiction" meant exclusive "allegiance" to the United States."

I understand better than you. So do the numerous judges who have held that those born here are citizens.

Right, some leftist judge knows better than the guy who wrote it. Does it hurt to be that gullible?

More than one guy wrote it. Many contributed to it. Its meaning was then debated. Are you suggesting that the Courts are bound by what one person construed it to mean? Sheer idiocy. Of course, what he wrote above is consistent with what the Courts have held; unless born to an ambassador or his wife or a member of his family who are here as diplomats and therefore "not subject to the jurisdiction" of the laws of the United States, a person born here is a citizen upon birth. So, if you want to apply the Amendment consistent with the intent of one of its drafters, then the Court have been getting it right all of this time.

More than one concurred with the definition, in fact American Indians were excluded under the 14th because they owed allegiance to their tribal nations. That didn't change until the 1920's when congress made them US citizens, by law, what makes illegals any different?

You would think if congress had to make the Indians legal by law under the 14th they would have to do the same thing with anchor baby's...

That is not why that article was written. It was written around the time of the Emancipation Proclamation. And it was to protect former slaves. Not illegals trying to circumvent our laws.

 

[HUGGY]

Trumps deportation plan would cost $100-$200 BILLION

Nobody said crazy is cheap.

Illegal aliens cost $130 billion each year. Trump's plan is a bargain.

I sure feel sorry for the kid and his parents of that disgusting avie you use.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Having human DNA doesn't make you a person.

Makes you a human being who should have Constitutional rights.

Nope, not even close. Human DNA is as common as dirt, and about as worthy.

Sorry, but the only thing with human DNA is a human being. You are science illiterate.

DNA does not a person make. Don't go with science or nature, neither support your extremist views...

 

[bripat9643]

Trumps deportation plan would cost $100-$200 BILLION

Nobody said crazy is cheap.

Illegal aliens cost $130 billion each year. Trump's plan is a bargain.

I sure feel sorry for the kid and his parents of that disgusting avie you use.

You don't give a crap.

Who do you think you're fooling.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Good idea, raise the minimum wage.

And eliminate more jobs. Brilliant.

To promote a higher minimum wage OVER the need to encourage and develop a highly skilled workforce that's more competitive globally, doesn't sound like a success story to build as strong nation on .... more like a defeated one.

 

[SwimExpert]

Having human DNA doesn't make you a person.

Makes you a human being who should have Constitutional rights.

Nope, not even close. Human DNA is as common as dirt, and about as worthy.

Sorry, but the only thing with human DNA is a human being. You are science illiterate.

I have a friend who recently had her tonsils removed. I bet if you did a test you'd find human DNA in those things. Her tonsils aren't human beings.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Trump seems to think that all you have to do is to pick Juan up off the street and drive him to Nuevo Laredo. He seems to have forgotten details, like the constitutionally required trial, and conviction, first (for which we would most likely have to pay Juan's attorney).

The constitution is only for We The people.

The Constitution applies to everyone on American soil. look it up for yourself.