What has an illegal immigrant done to deprive you of something?

[usmbguest5318]

Can't you report him to ICE? That's illegal, you know. GrampaMurked claims the same thing happens to him. Why can't you guys stop these ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS?

Nothing gets done. I think I did in about 2009.

I think you should keep trying. If they weren't getting hired, they wouldn't be here. End of story.

Yes. Fine companies $1MM for each illegal they employ. That will stop immigration dead. Why is it we can't get that passed immediately?

Do you know what the fine schedule is for employing illegals?

• How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• The Law Against Hiring or Harboring Illegal Aliens

The fact of the matter is that Marion has multiple lines of recourse against his competitor who uses illegal immigrant labor, that is if the guy does indeed do so.

True enough. But I'm talking about a strict liability statute in which there is no prosecutorial discretion. An employee on a company's payroll is illegal? One million.

That seems a rather draconian measure to me. It's what you think the law should stipulate. I understand that. TY for sharing.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Nothing gets done. I think I did in about 2009.

I think you should keep trying. If they weren't getting hired, they wouldn't be here. End of story.

Yes. Fine companies $1MM for each illegal they employ. That will stop immigration dead. Why is it we can't get that passed immediately?

Do you know what the fine schedule is for employing illegals?

• How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• The Law Against Hiring or Harboring Illegal Aliens

The fact of the matter is that Marion has multiple lines of recourse against his competitor who uses illegal immigrant labor, that is if the guy does indeed do so.

True enough. But I'm talking about a strict liability statute in which there is no prosecutorial discretion. An employee on a company's payroll is illegal? One million.

Most likely impossible to prove when he pays cash under the table.

How hard can it be? Has anyone seen the individuals involved? Has anyone observed them performing work as part of your competitor's crew? Most phones have a camera in them. Take a photo or video if it'll do that too. Then send it to ICE. From there it's just a matter of ICE subpoenaing records and "ticking and tying" the details. Contact a lawyer of your own and sue the guy in civil court too if you'd like.

 

[healthmyths]

For me the answer is "not a damn thing." D.C. has a ton of immigrants from all over the world. So do the other places where I spend a fair amount of time. I've not lost a job to an illegal immigrant. None of them have come traipsing through the neighborhood. No lost benefits, no longer lines anywhere, and I don't see that my taxes have gone up so as I'd notice because of them.

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

Can't you report him to ICE? That's illegal, you know. GrampaMurked claims the same thing happens to him. Why can't you guys stop these ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS?

Absolutely RIGHT! Those people like GrampaMurked that bitch and moan about known employers hiring illegals ARE accomplices! They know a criminal act is occurring but doing NOTHING about and at the very least HAS NO RIGHT to bitch and moan! Do something or quit complaining!
Here for those of you who KNOW employers are purposely hiring "illegals" is the way to notify ICE!
How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants

 

[usmbguest5318]

For me the answer is "not a damn thing." D.C. has a ton of immigrants from all over the world. So do the other places where I spend a fair amount of time. I've not lost a job to an illegal immigrant. None of them have come traipsing through the neighborhood. No lost benefits, no longer lines anywhere, and I don't see that my taxes have gone up so as I'd notice because of them.

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.

(If your crew care to log on and individually, great. I welcome their doing so. I'm only asking you about how an illegal immigrant has deprived you -- not any other person on the planet, well, your spouse and children I'll count, for this purpose, as part of " you" -- of something.)

They get the job done, but it's not done right...

Off Topic:
This doesn't have a thing to do with the question I asked, but don't you think the conclusion about whether the job was done right is one that your competitor's customer should make rather than one you should make?

You make a piss poor argument. The owner is a white man who works illegals. Illegals cannot run businesses with a license here.

"If my crew care to log on" Ok asshat, have all your coworkers log on and chime in.

As for the "done right" part, there are repercussions for not doing the job correctly.

In some areas they would be fined thousands of dollars.

What argument? I just asked you two questions, the first of which merely requests a clarification of your earlier statement. I didn't offer an argument.

Trust me on this. I were of a mind to make an argument, I'd make one. It would be a fully developed one that has premises, substantiated inferences, references, and conclusions.

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

 

[Dim Bulb]

Nothing gets done. I think I did in about 2009.

I think you should keep trying. If they weren't getting hired, they wouldn't be here. End of story.

Yes. Fine companies $1MM for each illegal they employ. That will stop immigration dead. Why is it we can't get that passed immediately?

Do you know what the fine schedule is for employing illegals?

• How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• The Law Against Hiring or Harboring Illegal Aliens

The fact of the matter is that Marion has multiple lines of recourse against his competitor who uses illegal immigrant labor, that is if the guy does indeed do so.

True enough. But I'm talking about a strict liability statute in which there is no prosecutorial discretion. An employee on a company's payroll is illegal? One million.

That seems a rather draconian measure to me. It's what you think the law should stipulate. I understand that. TY for sharing.

I just want to take a second to thank you for your civil reply. That's in short supply 'round here.ki

 

[Marion Morrison]

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.

(If your crew care to log on and individually, great. I welcome their doing so. I'm only asking you about how an illegal immigrant has deprived you -- not any other person on the planet, well, your spouse and children I'll count, for this purpose, as part of " you" -- of something.)

They get the job done, but it's not done right...

Off Topic:
This doesn't have a thing to do with the question I asked, but don't you think the conclusion about whether the job was done right is one that your competitor's customer should make rather than one you should make?

You make a piss poor argument. The owner is a white man who works illegals. Illegals cannot run businesses with a license here.

"If my crew care to log on" Ok asshat, have all your coworkers log on and chime in.

As for the "done right" part, there are repercussions for not doing the job correctly.

In some areas they would be fined thousands of dollars.

What argument? I just asked you two questions, the first of which merely requests a clarification of your earlier statement. I didn't offer an argument.

Trust me on this. I were of a mind to make an argument, I'd make one. It would be a fully developed one that has premises, substantiated inferences, references, and conclusions.

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I think you should keep trying. If they weren't getting hired, they wouldn't be here. End of story.

Yes. Fine companies $1MM for each illegal they employ. That will stop immigration dead. Why is it we can't get that passed immediately?

Do you know what the fine schedule is for employing illegals?

• How to Anonymously Report Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• Employers Hiring Undocumented Immigrants
• The Law Against Hiring or Harboring Illegal Aliens

The fact of the matter is that Marion has multiple lines of recourse against his competitor who uses illegal immigrant labor, that is if the guy does indeed do so.

True enough. But I'm talking about a strict liability statute in which there is no prosecutorial discretion. An employee on a company's payroll is illegal? One million.

That seems a rather draconian measure to me. It's what you think the law should stipulate. I understand that. TY for sharing.

I just want to take a second to thank you for your civil reply. That's in short supply 'round here.ki

You're welcome.

If I'm honest, I don't think the will or wherewithal to be civil is the problem, but the lack of civility one observes here is certainly a manifestation of the problem.

 

[usmbguest5318]

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.

(If your crew care to log on and individually, great. I welcome their doing so. I'm only asking you about how an illegal immigrant has deprived you -- not any other person on the planet, well, your spouse and children I'll count, for this purpose, as part of " you" -- of something.)

Off Topic:
This doesn't have a thing to do with the question I asked, but don't you think the conclusion about whether the job was done right is one that your competitor's customer should make rather than one you should make?

You make a piss poor argument. The owner is a white man who works illegals. Illegals cannot run businesses with a license here.

"If my crew care to log on" Ok asshat, have all your coworkers log on and chime in.

As for the "done right" part, there are repercussions for not doing the job correctly.

In some areas they would be fined thousands of dollars.

What argument? I just asked you two questions, the first of which merely requests a clarification of your earlier statement. I didn't offer an argument.

Trust me on this. I were of a mind to make an argument, I'd make one. It would be a fully developed one that has premises, substantiated inferences, references, and conclusions.

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

Look, if you'd read my damn questions, you'd know what two things I didn't/don't understand. Too, I expressly asked you for clarification on one of them and I have yet to see it. That I didn't understand is the whole reason I asked the questions....And your response to me was that I was making a poor argument.

 

[healthmyths]

Now as far as GrampaMurked and others BITCHING about employers hiring and not doing anything about?

You can totally blame Obama!

Obama gives free pass to businesses that hire illegals
Audits, fines drop for employers

President Obama took office vowing to go after unscrupulous employers who hire illegal immigrants, but worksite audits have plunged over the last year and a half, according to a report released Tuesday by the Center for Immigration Studies, tumbling along with the rest of immigration enforcement.

Fewer owners are being arrested, and fewer fines are being collected as well, according to the report, which suggests that even as he offers amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, Mr. Obama is giving a similar free pass to ever more businesses who provide the jobs magnet that draws them.

Through the first five months of this fiscal year, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducted just 181 workplace audits and brought charges against only 27 employers,
putting it on pace for fewer than 500 audits and just 65 arrests this year.
That’s less than 15 percent of the total audits conducted in 2013.

“Employers now face very little risk in hiring illegal workers and have little incentive to abide by the law,” wrote the report author, Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the center.

Mr. Obama’s administration early on stopped the Bush administration practice of workplace raids, which rounded up illegal immigrants — and which advocacy groups deemed too traumatic for the immigrants and their families


Obama amnesty extends to businesses that hire illegals

 

[Marion Morrison]

You make a piss poor argument. The owner is a white man who works illegals. Illegals cannot run businesses with a license here.

"If my crew care to log on" Ok asshat, have all your coworkers log on and chime in.

As for the "done right" part, there are repercussions for not doing the job correctly.

In some areas they would be fined thousands of dollars.

What argument? I just asked you two questions, the first of which merely requests a clarification of your earlier statement. I didn't offer an argument.

Trust me on this. I were of a mind to make an argument, I'd make one. It would be a fully developed one that has premises, substantiated inferences, references, and conclusions.

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

Look, if you'd read my damn questions, you'd know what two things I didn't/don't understand. I expressly asked you for clarification on one of them and I have yet to see it.

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.


Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.


I bid you good day sir! Good day!

 

[usmbguest5318]

What argument? I just asked you two questions, the first of which merely requests a clarification of your earlier statement. I didn't offer an argument.

Trust me on this. I were of a mind to make an argument, I'd make one. It would be a fully developed one that has premises, substantiated inferences, references, and conclusions.

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

Look, if you'd read my damn questions, you'd know what two things I didn't/don't understand. I expressly asked you for clarification on one of them and I have yet to see it.

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.


Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.


I bid you good day sir! Good day!

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.

Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.

I only have ever in this thread asked about individuals' own experiences. I have not asked anyone to remark upon the impact of illegal immigrants on Americans in any general sense.

You wrote:

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

I replied:

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Like I said, we don't subsidize illegal and legal immigrants, THEY SUBSIDIZE US.

Think about it. Someone comes here illegally. They use a fake Social Security number. They pay Social Security taxes and will never ever get to collect any benefits. And yet they don't bitch, not one little bit. Contrast that with ignorant redneck yahoos who bitch and moan that they are subsidizing those immigrants when they really aren't, and bitch and moan about how high their taxes are and need to be cut.

Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.

Among the findings:

• In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.

Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children

You and Healthmyths have done it again. You are using the statistics for immigrant HOUSEHOLDS. That is inaccurate, dishonest, and misleading. Groups like FAIR and the Heritage foundation use those misleading statistics to perpetuate the very myth you are expounding. The education of citizen children CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. The health care of citizen children, especially infants, CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. From your very link,

A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens

Come on, of course households with children, headed by immigrants, would use welfare services at a higher rate than those headed by a native. These are the low wage workers, remember? Well, except for the doctors from India. Hell, in your study if a family with an immigrant present had a child that got free or reduced lunch, BOOM--they are on welfare. First, well the child is a legal resident CITIZEN. Second--you know how much money you can make and still get reduced lunch? With two kids it is almost fifty grand. The average household income is little more than that.

To sum it up. Your study, and it is often used by others, openly admits that a "large share" of the expenses they are attributing to immigrants is, in fact, spending on the children who are American citizens. And they have constructed the criteria to such an extent than a family making the median income with three children, or just one on the way, would qualify as "dependent" on social services.

I don't decipher between legal or illegal, they are all a problem as far as I'm concerned, and if it were up to me, I would be closing off that border to anybody but perhaps a select few.

If over half of the immigrants are using some sort of welfare, WTF do we need them for? We are not gaining if you look at the entire picture, we are actually losing.

The immigrants, both legal and illegal, are NOT USING WELFARE. They are forbidden, BY LAW, from receiving any benefits outside a very select few in a couple of states. The benefits are being used by THEIR CHILDREN. The very people that will be funding my retirement. I believe an investment in their health care, their education, and even their nutritional well-being is money well spent. In fact, of all the places the government could send a dollar, sending it to this population is going to provide a better return than any other population I can think of, and that includes the wealthy.

You believe in a couple of myths that I am not buying. First, that immigrants take more than they give. Not buying it. When we take out the money spent on citizen children and add the tax money collected, just by Social Security, we come up positive.

Second, that they depress wages. Employers pay what they have to pay to get the job done. No amount of money is going to get native Americans to work in the fields. My oldest spent the summer in the fields. My youngest worked at Five Guys all year. Guess which one made more money? Now, on the other end of the spectrum, the LEGAL temporary workers program--that most certainly depresses wages. When we have open borders that depression at the top end disappears and any leverage employers had at the low end also evaporates.

Third, that sending money abroad is a problem. Truth is, anytime dollars disappear without a decline in production it is a good thing. Fewer dollars chasing the same amount of goods. Yippee

Immigrants are in all labor fields, not just agriculture. My industry is flooded with them because companies that want to pay lower wages opt for immigrants legal and illegal to do the work instead of increasing their offer to attract American workers. Yes, that lowers our pay scale.

Right now, you have foreigners that are driving around in 70,000 lbs vehicles that can't read road signs. They are terrible drivers to boot, and they are driving right next to your family van. Half of them can't even back up a trailer to the dock.

As for welfare children, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Those children will likely grow up the way they were raised like most of our poor Americans do. We already have generational welfare for Americans, so we don't need generational welfare for foreigners.

So there is no advantage of these people being here, and then there is the crime (which costs us a lot of money) to consider:

Illegal immigrants responsible for almost three-fourths of federal drug possession sentences in 2014

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

Look, if you'd read my damn questions, you'd know what two things I didn't/don't understand. I expressly asked you for clarification on one of them and I have yet to see it.

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.


Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.


I bid you good day sir! Good day!

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.

Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.

I only have ever in this thread asked about individuals' own experiences. I have not asked anyone to remark upon the impact of illegal immigrants on Americans in any general sense.

You wrote:

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

I replied:

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.​

Why don't you ask her how her life was impacted?

Sanctuary Cities Surround Area Where Illegal Aliens Allegedly Killed Woman

 

[Marion Morrison]

Easy now, don't deviate from your grand quest for data compilation and turn this to a game of "I'm smarter than you"
Nobody ever wins an intellect contest in cyber-world.

It's not that. It's that I've been accused of doing something I did not do. I didn't even want to do it.

Marion did offer a direct answer to the thread question. I thanked him for it. I've asked him to clarify it for me. I explained clearly the nature of clarification I would like to receive. Expand the quote and see for yourself.

Apparently you don't understand how "getting the job" can mean whether or not you can afford to eat steak for the night.

Look, if you'd read my damn questions, you'd know what two things I didn't/don't understand. I expressly asked you for clarification on one of them and I have yet to see it.

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.


Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.


I bid you good day sir! Good day!

I read your questions and gave a real-life example of how illegals hurt Americans economically.

Apparently you choose to ignore that and proceed to act as if I didn't provide you enough information.

Ask me to have my crew log in individually, that was you, right? Silliness personified.

I only have ever in this thread asked about individuals' own experiences. I have not asked anyone to remark upon the impact of illegal immigrants on Americans in any general sense.

You wrote:

The video is fun and all, but I have lost about 8 contracts over a period of 10 years to this guy that has a crew of illegals because he underbids me by a bit each time. He can do that because he pays them $7 an hour. They get the job done, but it's not done right, and it takes food directly off my and my crew's table.

I replied:

TY for your reply.

Just so I'm clear...

• Are you saying the owner of the crew is an illegal immigrant and he is the person who deprived you of something?

It's not clear to me whom you think is the person(s) who deprived you of food.​

It's a figure of speech. One apparently you've never heard.

It's goes like this: If I don't get the job,the people that work with me can't work, therefore there is no money for food.


After reading some of your other posts I realize that you are being an intentionally obtuse asshat that has probably never worked a day in his life. A pox upon you!

 

[Winston]

Like I said, we don't subsidize illegal and legal immigrants, THEY SUBSIDIZE US.

Think about it. Someone comes here illegally. They use a fake Social Security number. They pay Social Security taxes and will never ever get to collect any benefits. And yet they don't bitch, not one little bit. Contrast that with ignorant redneck yahoos who bitch and moan that they are subsidizing those immigrants when they really aren't, and bitch and moan about how high their taxes are and need to be cut.

Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.

Among the findings:

• In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.

Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children

You and Healthmyths have done it again. You are using the statistics for immigrant HOUSEHOLDS. That is inaccurate, dishonest, and misleading. Groups like FAIR and the Heritage foundation use those misleading statistics to perpetuate the very myth you are expounding. The education of citizen children CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. The health care of citizen children, especially infants, CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. From your very link,

A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens

Come on, of course households with children, headed by immigrants, would use welfare services at a higher rate than those headed by a native. These are the low wage workers, remember? Well, except for the doctors from India. Hell, in your study if a family with an immigrant present had a child that got free or reduced lunch, BOOM--they are on welfare. First, well the child is a legal resident CITIZEN. Second--you know how much money you can make and still get reduced lunch? With two kids it is almost fifty grand. The average household income is little more than that.

To sum it up. Your study, and it is often used by others, openly admits that a "large share" of the expenses they are attributing to immigrants is, in fact, spending on the children who are American citizens. And they have constructed the criteria to such an extent than a family making the median income with three children, or just one on the way, would qualify as "dependent" on social services.

I don't decipher between legal or illegal, they are all a problem as far as I'm concerned, and if it were up to me, I would be closing off that border to anybody but perhaps a select few.

If over half of the immigrants are using some sort of welfare, WTF do we need them for? We are not gaining if you look at the entire picture, we are actually losing.

The immigrants, both legal and illegal, are NOT USING WELFARE. They are forbidden, BY LAW, from receiving any benefits outside a very select few in a couple of states. The benefits are being used by THEIR CHILDREN. The very people that will be funding my retirement. I believe an investment in their health care, their education, and even their nutritional well-being is money well spent. In fact, of all the places the government could send a dollar, sending it to this population is going to provide a better return than any other population I can think of, and that includes the wealthy.

You believe in a couple of myths that I am not buying. First, that immigrants take more than they give. Not buying it. When we take out the money spent on citizen children and add the tax money collected, just by Social Security, we come up positive.

Second, that they depress wages. Employers pay what they have to pay to get the job done. No amount of money is going to get native Americans to work in the fields. My oldest spent the summer in the fields. My youngest worked at Five Guys all year. Guess which one made more money? Now, on the other end of the spectrum, the LEGAL temporary workers program--that most certainly depresses wages. When we have open borders that depression at the top end disappears and any leverage employers had at the low end also evaporates.

Third, that sending money abroad is a problem. Truth is, anytime dollars disappear without a decline in production it is a good thing. Fewer dollars chasing the same amount of goods. Yippee

Immigrants are in all labor fields, not just agriculture. My industry is flooded with them because companies that want to pay lower wages opt for immigrants legal and illegal to do the work instead of increasing their offer to attract American workers. Yes, that lowers our pay scale.

Right now, you have foreigners that are driving around in 70,000 lbs vehicles that can't read road signs. They are terrible drivers to boot, and they are driving right next to your family van. Half of them can't even back up a trailer to the dock.

As for welfare children, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Those children will likely grow up the way they were raised like most of our poor Americans do. We already have generational welfare for Americans, so we don't need generational welfare for foreigners.

So there is no advantage of these people being here, and then there is the crime (which costs us a lot of money) to consider:

Illegal immigrants responsible for almost three-fourths of federal drug possession sentences in 2014

Sorry about the truck drivers. I used to be a meat cutter. You have to grow and adapt. And I am not concerned with drug charges, they should be legal too.

Here is the key factor to remember,

Given current immigration trends and birth rates, virtually all (93%) of the growth of the nation’s working-age population between now and 2050 will be accounted for by immigrants and their U.S.-born children, according to a population projection by the Pew Research Center

Second-Generation Americans

Like it not, those immigrants ARE this nation's future. You can embrace it, or you can be ran over by it. If you want to fight it, then you have to have more kids than they do. I am pretty sure I have done more on that front than anyone else posting in this thread.

 

[SavannahMann]

I can't believe this thread is still ongoing. First the standard that OP has set is asinine. When I am called to Jury Duty the standard isn't what has the accused done to me personally. We don't decide things based strictly upon the individual harm, but upon the needs of the collective.

I believe in legalizing marijuana. But by the standard of the OP I guess I shouldn't, because it won't benefit me personally. I am allergic to Marijuana and since I personally will not benefit or suffer either way then I should have no opinion.

If I sit in judgement of a bank robber, by the standards of the OP I should find the defendant not guilty because it wasn't my bank that he robbed.

But all of these things do affect us collectively. Illegal Immigrants affect us collectively. The illegal immigrant in order to get the paperwork needed for a job has to commit felony identity theft. Even if it is not my identity that is stolen, the protections for the rest of us cost money. Further the need to determine the truth cost money. IRS and Social Security have to spend time and money to determine which job the victim actually worked. The victim also has to spend time and money to set the record straight.

Illegal Immigrants also increase the risk and incidence of disease. Many diseases that are eradicated here run rampant in the second and third world nations.

U.S. – Mexico Cross-Border Health | Gateway to Health Communication | CDC


So while I personally haven't gotten sick, we collectively are at greater risk.

Poliomyelitis

We as a society often take action on issues that do not affect us personally. The risk to the Oroville Dam in California does not affect me personally, but it is an issue for all of us that needs to be addressed.

 

[jasonnfree]

Thirteen years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.

Among the findings:

• In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for native households with children.

Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children

You and Healthmyths have done it again. You are using the statistics for immigrant HOUSEHOLDS. That is inaccurate, dishonest, and misleading. Groups like FAIR and the Heritage foundation use those misleading statistics to perpetuate the very myth you are expounding. The education of citizen children CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. The health care of citizen children, especially infants, CANNOT BE COUNTED. That spending is for CITIZENS, it is not for illegal immigrants. From your very link,

A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are American citizens

Come on, of course households with children, headed by immigrants, would use welfare services at a higher rate than those headed by a native. These are the low wage workers, remember? Well, except for the doctors from India. Hell, in your study if a family with an immigrant present had a child that got free or reduced lunch, BOOM--they are on welfare. First, well the child is a legal resident CITIZEN. Second--you know how much money you can make and still get reduced lunch? With two kids it is almost fifty grand. The average household income is little more than that.

To sum it up. Your study, and it is often used by others, openly admits that a "large share" of the expenses they are attributing to immigrants is, in fact, spending on the children who are American citizens. And they have constructed the criteria to such an extent than a family making the median income with three children, or just one on the way, would qualify as "dependent" on social services.

I don't decipher between legal or illegal, they are all a problem as far as I'm concerned, and if it were up to me, I would be closing off that border to anybody but perhaps a select few.

If over half of the immigrants are using some sort of welfare, WTF do we need them for? We are not gaining if you look at the entire picture, we are actually losing.

The immigrants, both legal and illegal, are NOT USING WELFARE. They are forbidden, BY LAW, from receiving any benefits outside a very select few in a couple of states. The benefits are being used by THEIR CHILDREN. The very people that will be funding my retirement. I believe an investment in their health care, their education, and even their nutritional well-being is money well spent. In fact, of all the places the government could send a dollar, sending it to this population is going to provide a better return than any other population I can think of, and that includes the wealthy.

You believe in a couple of myths that I am not buying. First, that immigrants take more than they give. Not buying it. When we take out the money spent on citizen children and add the tax money collected, just by Social Security, we come up positive.

Second, that they depress wages. Employers pay what they have to pay to get the job done. No amount of money is going to get native Americans to work in the fields. My oldest spent the summer in the fields. My youngest worked at Five Guys all year. Guess which one made more money? Now, on the other end of the spectrum, the LEGAL temporary workers program--that most certainly depresses wages. When we have open borders that depression at the top end disappears and any leverage employers had at the low end also evaporates.

Third, that sending money abroad is a problem. Truth is, anytime dollars disappear without a decline in production it is a good thing. Fewer dollars chasing the same amount of goods. Yippee

Immigrants are in all labor fields, not just agriculture. My industry is flooded with them because companies that want to pay lower wages opt for immigrants legal and illegal to do the work instead of increasing their offer to attract American workers. Yes, that lowers our pay scale.

Right now, you have foreigners that are driving around in 70,000 lbs vehicles that can't read road signs. They are terrible drivers to boot, and they are driving right next to your family van. Half of them can't even back up a trailer to the dock.

As for welfare children, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Those children will likely grow up the way they were raised like most of our poor Americans do. We already have generational welfare for Americans, so we don't need generational welfare for foreigners.

So there is no advantage of these people being here, and then there is the crime (which costs us a lot of money) to consider:

Illegal immigrants responsible for almost three-fourths of federal drug possession sentences in 2014

Sorry about the truck drivers. I used to be a meat cutter. You have to grow and adapt. And I am not concerned with drug charges, they should be legal too.

Here is the key factor to remember,

Given current immigration trends and birth rates, virtually all (93%) of the growth of the nation’s working-age population between now and 2050 will be accounted for by immigrants and their U.S.-born children, according to a population projection by the Pew Research Center

Second-Generation Americans

Like it not, those immigrants ARE this nation's future. You can embrace it, or you can be ran over by it. If you want to fight it, then you have to have more kids than they do. I am pretty sure I have done more on that front than anyone else posting in this thread.

If we need more people in this country, why can't we be a little choosy about who comes here? Illegal immigration has certainly raised my health care costs. Our emergency rooms are where illegals go for health services, and they are many time unable to pay, which raises costs for the rest of us. I somewhat accept all the illegals since I can't do anything about it anyway, and I don't think it's practical to send them all back. Still, embrace this invasion like you say to do? I don't think so.

 

[jasonnfree]

For me the answer is "not a damn thing." D.C. has a ton of immigrants from all over the world. So do the other places where I spend a fair amount of time. I've not lost a job to an illegal immigrant. None of them have come traipsing through the neighborhood. No lost benefits, no longer lines anywhere, and I don't see that my taxes have gone up so as I'd notice because of them.

Answer to Title Question --- The quality of education in my daughters' public schools in California. One of the big reasons FlaCal is now FlaCalTenn. No way a school can focus on academic excellence when they insist on teaching HS Chemistry in 3 different languages. If Cali were Smart (and they're not) they mighta coulda accommodated immigrant children by insisting on English Immersion and cultural integration -- but alas -- they're mostly good hearted, oblivious leftists.

On the BRIGHT side, what the Hispanic immigrant community did to FIX UP the dumpy parts of town was wonderful. Created venues and restaurants and better LOOKING streets and storefronts.

I've seen the same thing here in Calif. It's a little hard for kids to learn English by immersion if most of their classmates and friends at home speak only Spanish, and the t.v. is on the Spanish channels. Still, its not all that bad, and Hispanics seem to assimilate ok, and most end up eventually speaking passable English.

 

[flacaltenn]

For me the answer is "not a damn thing." D.C. has a ton of immigrants from all over the world. So do the other places where I spend a fair amount of time. I've not lost a job to an illegal immigrant. None of them have come traipsing through the neighborhood. No lost benefits, no longer lines anywhere, and I don't see that my taxes have gone up so as I'd notice because of them.

Answer to Title Question --- The quality of education in my daughters' public schools in California. One of the big reasons FlaCal is now FlaCalTenn. No way a school can focus on academic excellence when they insist on teaching HS Chemistry in 3 different languages. If Cali were Smart (and they're not) they mighta coulda accommodated immigrant children by insisting on English Immersion and cultural integration -- but alas -- they're mostly good hearted, oblivious leftists.

On the BRIGHT side, what the Hispanic immigrant community did to FIX UP the dumpy parts of town was wonderful. Created venues and restaurants and better LOOKING streets and storefronts.

I've seen the same thing here in Calif. It's a little hard for kids to learn English by immersion if most of their classmates and friends at home speak only Spanish, and the t.v. is on the Spanish channels. Still, its not all that bad, and Hispanics seem to assimilate ok, and most end up eventually speaking passable English.

There is no issue with ESL programs. They should be entensive, available and LIMITED in time and duration. But what happened there in Cali was that Teacher's unions discovered they could virtually DOUBLE the staffing if ESL was an ONGOING feature of K-12. There is NO EXCUSE to be teaching AP or higher level materials in MULTIPLE languages. Doesn't happen at the Universities. Wouldn't NEED to happen if the ESL programs had the goal to make kids FLUENT in English in a short time.

I watched some of my Duped Cali friends enroll their Anglo kids in "Chinese immersion" special schools. A FEEL good kind of thing that I wouldn't want to deprive them of. But if it actually works that WELL for English speaking/living kids --- it should work "that well" for Spanish kids..

 

[BrokeLoser]

I can't believe this thread is still ongoing. First the standard that OP has set is asinine. When I am called to Jury Duty the standard isn't what has the accused done to me personally. We don't decide things based strictly upon the individual harm, but upon the needs of the collective.

I believe in legalizing marijuana. But by the standard of the OP I guess I shouldn't, because it won't benefit me personally. I am allergic to Marijuana and since I personally will not benefit or suffer either way then I should have no opinion.

If I sit in judgement of a bank robber, by the standards of the OP I should find the defendant not guilty because it wasn't my bank that he robbed.

But all of these things do affect us collectively. Illegal Immigrants affect us collectively. The illegal immigrant in order to get the paperwork needed for a job has to commit felony identity theft. Even if it is not my identity that is stolen, the protections for the rest of us cost money. Further the need to determine the truth cost money. IRS and Social Security have to spend time and money to determine which job the victim actually worked. The victim also has to spend time and money to set the record straight.

Illegal Immigrants also increase the risk and incidence of disease. Many diseases that are eradicated here run rampant in the second and third world nations.

U.S. – Mexico Cross-Border Health | Gateway to Health Communication | CDC


So while I personally haven't gotten sick, we collectively are at greater risk.

Poliomyelitis

We as a society often take action on issues that do not affect us personally. The risk to the Oroville Dam in California does not affect me personally, but it is an issue for all of us that needs to be addressed.

We've all just played along with the OP and laughed while reading the clever word play. The motive was clear right from the beginning. In the spirit of total transparency I called him out on it just to let him know he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. He busted his ass trying to steer and compartmentalize the topic...
Haha...He played the weird I'm a college professor seeking real world data bullshit role. I give him an A+ for effort. He stuck with his story all the way through.