Another case of Arizona's tax dollars at work...

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Greyroofoo

gives some stats of what they take out of the health and welfare system next

The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences estimates that each immigrant contributes $80,000 more in taxes over his or her lifetime than he or she receives in benefits.

[Arles]

For the cost of illegal immigration, here's the Huddle study done in Rice university back in 1996:

1996 Costs Table from the Huddle Study 1

 Programs			(billions)
 Public Education K-12		$5.85
 Public Higher Education	$0.71
 ESL and Bilingual Education	$1.22
 Food Stamps			$0.85
 AFDC				$0.50
 Housing			$0.61
 Social Security		$3.61
 Earned Income Tax Credit	$0.68
 Medicaid			$3.12
 Medicare A and B		$0.58
Criminal Justice and Corrections$0.76
Local Government		$5.00
Other Programs			$9.25

Total Costs			$32.74

Less Taxes Paid			$12.59

Net Costs of Direct Services	$20.16

Displacement Costs		$4.28

All Net Costs			$24.44

Here's another study that just looks directly at K-12 education costs by state:


The most recent estimate I could find had a total cost at around $70 billion for services/education/incarceration/welfare..., with that number offset by about $25 billion in taxes paid by illegals. So, it looks to be a net loss of a bout $45 billion - and that doesn't count the indirect cost of lost American jobs and the unemployment that can cause (est by some to be about $7-$10 billion).

[lungs]

These people are the only ones willing to work nights and weekends on our farms here in Wisconsin. They are the only people who actually get angry if they get less than 60 hours a week. The work ethic is unparalleled and I should know because I manage immigrants (probably illegal) on a daily basis.

[Arles]

I definately agree with their work ethic. I have worked with and seen legal mexican immigrants on numerous projects and feel they are the hardest workers out there. My point is let's let them have work Visas and be able to bring in their family's legally, not be forced into hiding and be able to tax them to help offset the crippling cost illegals have towards states like California, Texas and Arizona.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

The fact that unskilled laborers routinely take insane risks to enter our country (and other '1st world' nations) and take the low wage jobs that would otherwise go unfilled should be a clue.

That says how crappy their conditions are that they're willing to take said risks. You made it sound like you were referring to how our economy needs more laborers and I was wondering the basis for that.

SI

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Arles

I definately agree with their work ethic. I have worked with and seen legal mexican immigrants on numerous projects and feel they are the hardest workers out there. My point is let's let them have work Visas and be able to bring in their family's legally, not be forced into hiding and be able to tax them to help offset the crippling cost illegals have towards states like California, Texas and Arizona.

I certainly have no problem with finding a way that these people can come up here legally without it costing an arm and a leg for those coming up here with nothing. As it is right now we have one employee on a work visa and the lawyer fees for him are something that nobody else would be able to pay. Then some plans almost sound like being an indentured servant. The way some employers treat their help it will only lead to more problems.

Until something is worked out I will gladly hire workers that are suspect. Most of our employees social security cards come back as suspect.

We just had one flee back to Nicaragua after he beat up his girlfriend that is also employed by us. I had him arrested and now he has fled the country. At least his girlfriend was smart enough not to go with him.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by lungs

I certainly have no problem with finding a way that these people can come up here legally without it costing an arm and a leg for those coming up here with nothing. As it is right now we have one employee on a work visa and the lawyer fees for him are something that nobody else would be able to pay. Then some plans almost sound like being an indentured servant. The way some employers treat their help it will only lead to more problems.

Until something is worked out I will gladly hire workers that are suspect. Most of our employees social security cards come back as suspect.

We just had one flee back to Nicaragua after he beat up his girlfriend that is also employed by us. I had him arrested and now he has fled the country. At least his girlfriend was smart enough not to go with him.

Dude, you totally just broke character. You're lungs. You used to live in a trailer and shoot stuff. Now you apparently have employees? What gives?

[lungs]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

Dude, you totally just broke character. You're lungs. You used to live in a trailer and shoot stuff. Now you apparently have employees? What gives?

who is this idiot that is getting into my account? the only employees i got are the ones who give me smokes!

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

No we are not, and the simple fact that you actually believe that demonstrates your ignornace of the issues. I think you'll be hard pressed to find that "We Are all full up" in most of our states. West Virginia? Kentucky? Wisconsin? Iowa? Alaska? Montana?

We aren't even close to Full. I doubt we are even at 10%.

I ran Night Watch Security for residence halls at West Virginia University. The job was from midnight until 4 am, wtih a few shifts staying on until 8 am. You simply had to do occaisonal rounds, and sit at the front desk. It was an excellent opportunity to get homework done, read a book, watch a movie, etc. College students are notoriously poor, and could use the nice money from Night Watch. Plus, WVU is a very American school, with less than 5% of the student body international. Yet, less than 20% of my applicant pool were American - most were international students. Many were wealthy international students who were required to work their way through college, or who wanted to work simply to work, not because they needed the money.

The simple fact is that there are many jobs that Americans do not want. We have lost our work ethic as a people. There are many jobs waiting for people to take them, even in tougher times. You could easily set up an Immigration Disribution Center that sent Immigrants to various parts of the country.

Imagine announcing to the world that we will increase our immigrant threshold tenfold if immigrants will live in areas that we select for several years after moving to the country. Come to America, we have a place for you in Milwaukee, or Boise, or Omaha.

We have an ethical obligation to allow more poeple into our borders. We set ourselves up as a beacon on a hill, as the bright light, and now we need to accept those who want to join us.


-Anxiety

OK so we have land space, great, that doesn't mean we can take on the world's refugees any longer. it requires more than a plot of land and wishful thinking that these people will turn it into something useful. you talk about getting them to live where we want them to, who is going to offer up housing in these areas? and how do you propose to keep them there when they will most likely bail out for greener pastures at the first opportunity.

I'm sorry, but this nation, its economy and its society cannot deal positively with the influx of immagrants who want to be here. It no longer has a frontier that they can "head west" into.

Modern day america needs to close its doors, period. If people can't come into the country and sustain themselves without governmental support, they shouldn't be allowed to enter. We have enough poor, welfare and other assistance families already on the books in a system that is caving in under the weight of those people. You expect it to sustain MORE?

Horseshit.

We are no longer the worlds melting pot, we simply can't afford to be a refugee dumping ground any longer. no matter what our "moral responsibility" may SEEM to be in your eyes.

Its great that you see the positive side of the international people who work for you, but frankly, thats a compeltely different situation and has NO relevence to the illegal immigrant situation.

[JPhillips]

Render: A little lesson on demographics.

If we don't continue to get a large influx of immigrants into our economy the declining work-age population will lead to dramatically smaller long-range economic growth. Our declining birthrates will not allow us to keep pace with growing economies in the Pacific over the next 50-100 years.

As for immigrants causing some sort of economic catastrophy, bullshit. We could eliminate all spending on immigrants and it wouldn't come close to balancing the budget.

[Klinglerware]

I say we should keep the status-quo. Both food production and food service is reliant on undocumented workers willing to work below minimum wage. I doubt that most Americans realize how much the cost of groceries or dining at a restaurant (even McDonald's) will rise if illegal immigration is eliminated. I doubt that the savings to the government in social services would be more than the productivity hit the economy will take if the illegals were thrown out.

Yeah, it is a little crass to come out in support of something that is clearly exploitative. But, quite frankly, pragmatically the status quo is much more palatable to me than a $10 extra value meal...

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Render: A little lesson on demographics.

If we don't continue to get a large influx of immigrants into our economy the declining work-age population will lead to dramatically smaller long-range economic growth. Our declining birthrates will not allow us to keep pace with growing economies in the Pacific over the next 50-100 years.

As for immigrants causing some sort of economic catastrophy, bullshit. We could eliminate all spending on immigrants and it wouldn't come close to balancing the budget.

Your first point is somewhat debatable as differing rates of growth of productivity are highly speculative and subject to radical change, but your second point does a nice job of refuting an ignorant intolerant jackass. ^5

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Your first point is somewhat debatable as differing rates of growth of productivity are highly speculative and subject to radical change, but your second point does a nice job of refuting an ignorant intolerant jackass. ^5

First off his comments do nothing whatsoever to refute my statements. I said nothing about the economy as a whole I stated that the welfare program is on its ass and will fail completely if something isn't done to alleviate the ILLEGAL strain being put on it by these persons. note the big 3 syllable word there ILLEGAL. They don't have any rights in this situation, they don't belong here and should not be given any ability to stay here because of this.

You don't know me, you have no basis for making a statement on my ignorance OR my tolerance. What I don't tend to tolerate is pathetic attempts as making yourself look better by calling people names.

You've proven yourself to be an argumentative child in other threads and you're continuing to do so here. You may not LIKE my opinion, but unlike myself you seem to be unable to TOLERATE my opinion being stated.

I have not anywhere said that we cannot have workers brought in to handles those jobs, but they MUST be handled in a legal fashion. We also NEED to stop allowing the "born on this soil" bullshit from creating insta-citizens. I'm sorry if this hurts the feelings of all those diving across the borders right now, but its going to be better off in the long run.

If you can't enter the country in a LEGAL and controlled fashion, you don't deserve to be a ciizen or resident of this nation.

That is all.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Render: A little lesson on demographics.

If we don't continue to get a large influx of immigrants into our economy the declining work-age population will lead to dramatically smaller long-range economic growth. Our declining birthrates will not allow us to keep pace with growing economies in the Pacific over the next 50-100 years.

As for immigrants causing some sort of economic catastrophy, bullshit. We could eliminate all spending on immigrants and it wouldn't come close to balancing the budget.

Your comment on birthrates is more horseshit, the birthrate was (last time I saw it) climbing from an all time low during the late 80's.

If you'd bother to actually READ what was posted you'll notice I never mentioned the economy as a whole I spoke specifically about the welfare system and the fact that when you add up all those COSTS that illegals are imparting upon it and the health care system you could improve the living contditions of a large percentage of our own actual CITIZENRY with the ungodly amount of funds these people steal from our pockets.

I don't give a flying horses ass about the balanced budget, what I care about is the fact that these people are not here LEGALY and have no right to our federal and state subsidies for the poor and needy.

We can't feed our OWN children and homeless, why the fuck should we be supporting Mexico's or any other nations???

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by RendeR

We can't feed our OWN children and homeless, why the fuck should we be supporting Mexico's or any other nations???

How much would it cost to completely close the border, compared to what illegal immigrants cost the government?

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

How much would it cost to completely close the border, compared to what illegal immigrants cost the government?

Long term? FAR less. The illegal immagrant situation is ongoing and would cost more and more as time goes on, the costs might be high to seal a border, but once done, the cost to maintain drops to a far lower level.


You are also not taking into account that any funding for such a closure would come from a military budget, not a welfare and human services budget. You might calling it stealing from peter to pay paul, but again, long term its a plus for our poor and homeless because they'll reap the benefits of higher fuding levels available to our own ACTUAL citizens.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Long term? FAR less. The illegal immagrant situation is ongoing and would cost more and more as time goes on, the costs might be high to seal a border, but once done, the cost to maintain drops to a far lower level.

So...you have no idea how much it would cost?

Right now we spend $6.7 billion a year on border patrol, and right now we only effectively guard a 50 mile long area of the border. The border is 2,000 miles long. It seems like that would be a lot of money to me.

[JPhillips]

Render: I see your horseshit and raise an Aha asswipe!

Birthrates may be climbing from the eighties, but they still are lower than the replacement rate needed for boomers. As the boomers retire we will have to have outside workers(immigrants) fill in some of the gaps. That's just fact and whether or not you like it we will need immigration if we intend to maintain anything like the growth rates of the past hundred years.

Your assumption that illegals are a big reason why we still have hungry children and homelessness is misguided. Those are policy choices. We have for at least two decades been cutting money for the poor. Illegal immigration has far less to do with the problem than does policy choices. You can argue whether those choices and valid, but to say the problem is illegal immigration is ridiculous.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by RendeR

We can't feed our OWN children and homeless, why the fuck should we be supporting Mexico's or any other nations???

There's an awfully big difference between can't and don't.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

No we are not, and the simple fact that you actually believe that demonstrates your ignornace of the issues. I think you'll be hard pressed to find that "We Are all full up" in most of our states. West Virginia? Kentucky? Wisconsin? Iowa? Alaska? Montana?

We aren't even close to Full. I doubt we are even at 10%.

I'll jump in on RendeR's side on one key point: if you honestly think we can fit 2.5 BILLION people in this country, you're smoking something. Take one look at China or India and the problems they're having with population at half this number.

I think this country is already getting crowded, and we'll be lucky to double our population to 500 million or so without causing SERIOUS consequences. We're the world's breadbasket producing a significant chunk of the world's food supply, and we're already losing farmland with our current population.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Render: I see your horseshit and raise an Aha asswipe!

Birthrates may be climbing from the eighties, but they still are lower than the replacement rate needed for boomers. As the boomers retire we will have to have outside workers(immigrants) fill in some of the gaps. That's just fact and whether or not you like it we will need immigration if we intend to maintain anything like the growth rates of the past hundred years.

Your assumption that illegals are a big reason why we still have hungry children and homelessness is misguided. Those are policy choices. We have for at least two decades been cutting money for the poor. Illegal immigration has far less to do with the problem than does policy choices. You can argue whether those choices and valid, but to say the problem is illegal immigration is ridiculous.

I'm not saying its the sole problem, not at all, but I am saying that OUR citizens should be the ones recieving OUR free handouts, not every other nations refugees.

Perhaps you're also not getting my implied point: We SHOULDN'T have a growth rate as high as the past 100 years. its gotta slow down and the boomers dying off is a perfectly good opportunity for that.

As G said above, we don't WANT to end up supporting 2 billion people in this country we don't NEED to support even twice our number in this country and finding a way to eliminate the ILLEGAL entry into the nation is a big way to make this happen.

Now stop for a second and please realize I am not saying we stop immigration ENTIRELY, I simply want the flow of ILLEGAL immagrants to stop, people using the proper channels and policies to become citizens are more than welcome to continue doing so. The problem is Mexicans, chinese, koreans, and others generally either can't or WON'T follow our policies for properly entering and remaining in the country and this is what I say MUST end.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

There's an awfully big difference between can't and don't.

I agree with you completely, however that doesn't negate the fact that OUR citizens should come first. yes, its a selfish statement but damnit, at some point you gotta pony up and support your own first. If our people are all comfy cozy and we have services available, THEN we can look at bailing out millions of people the rest of the world left behind.

[RendeR]

Can I EMPHASIZE anything ANY more?


I just read all my posts and realized I DO that A LOT.

Sorry if it bugs people, just a habit I GUESS. :P

[st.cronin]

Render, if your point is that all immigration should be LEGAL I have already agreed that should be the case. Your initial argument was not a law and order argument, though, but rather an economic one. It's disingenuous to insist that your argument is NOT economic in nature but restricted to the health of the 'welfare' system.

Anyway, my feelings are that legal immigration should be expanded and encouraged to the point where illegal immigration is not a problem.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Render, if your point is that all immigration should be LEGAL I have already agreed that should be the case. Your initial argument was not a law and order argument, though, but rather an economic one. It's disingenuous to insist that your argument is NOT economic in nature but restricted to the health of the 'welfare' system.

Anyway, my feelings are that legal immigration should be expanded and encouraged to the point where illegal immigration is not a problem.

It is perfectly acceptable to argue the case for the welfare system, if you disagree and believe you have to focus bigger, go you, you'd make a great politician, they don't worry about the detail either they just fuck up things on a grande scale.

Immagration should NOT be expanded that is not the way to eliminate the illegal entries at all, it simply makes it easier for those who would otherwise have come across the border illegally to begin with.

I don't profess to have the perfect tidy answer here, but what I do know is that we have to do something to stop the free flowing drain on our poor and destitute's lifeline system.

Again I consider the details, not the grande scheme, sorry, I dislike the "bottom line" theory.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by RendeR

It is perfectly acceptable to argue the case for the welfare system, if you disagree and believe you have to focus bigger, go you, you'd make a great politician, they don't worry about the detail either they just fuck up things on a grande scale.

Immagration should NOT be expanded that is not the way to eliminate the illegal entries at all, it simply makes it easier for those who would otherwise have come across the border illegally to begin with.

I don't profess to have the perfect tidy answer here, but what I do know is that we have to do something to stop the free flowing drain on our poor and destitute's lifeline system.

Again I consider the details, not the grande scheme, sorry, I dislike the "bottom line" theory.

Immigrants pay in $80,000 more in taxes than they take out with services over the course of their lifetime, so it is hard to make the case that all immigrants are a drain on the economy. Now, I don't know what the numbers are for illegals, but they are most certainly lower. It stands to reason then that making them legal would make them contribute closer to $80k. So the welfare argument against illegal immigration is a good one, but not as a rationale to stop immigration or to keep immigration from rising.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Immigrants pay in $80,000 more in taxes than they take out with services over the course of their lifetime, so it is hard to make the case that all immigrants are a drain on the economy. Now, I don't know what the numbers are for illegals, but they are most certainly lower. It stands to reason then that making them legal would make them contribute closer to $80k. So the welfare argument against illegal immigration is a good one, but not as a rationale to stop immigration or to keep immigration from rising.

I'm still trying to figure out where this number comes from. They aren't going to be paying income taxes or social security since they're illegal so no paperwork. Same with, say, vehicle registration or property taxes (so if they send their kids to school then it's a net minus) or any other local tax- too much of a paper trail. The only place I could see them contributing would be through sales tax and there's no way they're paying $80K in sales tax as that would be roughly $1M in income throughout their life.

SI

[Arles]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Immigrants pay in $80,000 more in taxes than they take out with services over the course of their lifetime, so it is hard to make the case that all immigrants are a drain on the economy. Now, I don't know what the numbers are for illegals, but they are most certainly lower. It stands to reason then that making them legal would make them contribute closer to $80k. So the welfare argument against illegal immigration is a good one, but not as a rationale to stop immigration or to keep immigration from rising.

I'm not sure where you are getting these numbers. Look at the study I posted earlier in the thread and you will see illegal immigration costs our country a net of around $35-$40 billion a year. The US must educate the children of illegals, provide health care to them in emergencies, incarcerate them when they break the law, provide welfare benefits to many and provide other civil services to them and their children.

It is a tough problem to solve, but I think we should be able to find a manner with which we can let in a certain number legally to fulfill the labor needs without having businesses resort to illegals.

[JPhillips]

Arles: One point. Businesses aren't resorting to illegals, they are choosing to use illegal workers because its cheaper. A business that hires illegals has less payroll taxes to pay to the government, lower wages and less expenses concerning safety and helth of those workers. As long as businesses are willing to put their bottom line over the law the illegals will have jobs. You can't stop the supply if the demand remains high.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Arles: One point. Businesses aren't resorting to illegals, they are choosing to use illegal workers because its cheaper. A business that hires illegals has less payroll taxes to pay to the government, lower wages and less expenses concerning safety and helth of those workers. As long as businesses are willing to put their bottom line over the law the illegals will have jobs. You can't stop the supply if the demand remains high.

You can by tightening security on the border and impacting the ability of illegals to enter the US.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Arles

I'm not sure where you are getting these numbers.

The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.

Originally Posted by Arles

Look at the study I posted earlier in the thread and you will see illegal immigration costs our country a net of around $35-$40 billion a year.

Like I said, the data I cited is for all immigrants and I'm sure illegals are lower. But the study you cited does not take lifetime costs into consideration. Consider a child in first grade. He costs the government $X dollars per year to educate while paying nothing into the system. At 18 he graduates, becomes a citizen, and pays $X+Y dollars per year in taxes for 40+ years. He is most likely to be a net gain for the government over the course of his lifetime, but that is not reflected in the $35-40 billion yearly loss that your study contends.

In any case, my study goes to show that immigration in regards to economic costs to the government is a good thing and not a drain, so that argument (that it costs the government so much) might be valid as a criticism against illegal immigration but not immigration as a whole.

[JPhillips]

Arles: Not in any cost efficent manner. It isn't going to happen because the people who pay for political campaigns don't want it to change. Ain't no way Wal-Mart or Tysons is going to agree to a smaller low-cost work force.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Like I said, the data I cited is for all immigrants and I'm sure illegals are lower.

OK, gotcha. I want to be clear that I am very much in favor of making legal immigration easier in the US.

But the study you cited does not take lifetime costs into consideration. Consider a child in first grade. He costs the government $X dollars per year to educate while paying nothing into the system. At 18 he graduates, becomes a citizen, and pays $X+Y dollars per year in taxes for 40+ years. He is most likely to be a net gain for the government over the course of his lifetime, but that is not reflected in the $35-40 billion yearly loss that your study contends.

That's a pretty big reach as it takes 18-24 years of him (and his parents) leaching on the system for the US to see any tax revenue. Plus, there are numerous yong children and parents trying to come over legally and would pay taxes that entire time.

In any case, my study goes to show that immigration in regards to economic costs to the government is a good thing and not a drain, so that argument (that it costs the government so much) might be valid as a criticism against illegal immigration but not immigration as a whole.

If you group all immigration together, you may be right. But that's like putting Microsoft and Enron together and saying "as a whole both companies aren't that bad from a revenue standpoint". Illegal immigration is a hugh drain on our country's resources and does not give back the benefits for that drain. Legal immigration, on the other hand, is very good for our economy and something that should continune to be championed and streamlined.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Arles: Not in any cost efficent manner. It isn't going to happen because the people who pay for political campaigns don't want it to change. Ain't no way Wal-Mart or Tysons is going to agree to a smaller low-cost work force.

I certainly agree that there are numerous businesses and groups that would oppose restricting illegal immigration - but that doesn't mean people should stop trying.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Arles

OK, gotcha. I want to be clear that I am very much in favor of making legal immigration easier in the US.

I think we are in agreement here, I'm not a fan of illegal immigration but I do think that legal immigration is both necessary and beneficial to the country.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Like I said, the data I cited is for all immigrants and I'm sure illegals are lower. But the study you cited does not take lifetime costs into consideration. Consider a child in first grade. He costs the government $X dollars per year to educate while paying nothing into the system. At 18 he graduates, becomes a citizen, and pays $X+Y dollars per year in taxes for 40+ years. He is most likely to be a net gain for the government over the course of his lifetime, but that is not reflected in the $35-40 billion yearly loss that your study contends.

My bad. I completely missed that distinction. Still, I'm with Arles that I think it's a big leap to think that illegals come even close to adding to the system monetarily. That just tells me that legal immigrants contribute much more than $80K so, yeah, we should expand legal immigration but illegals should not be given a free ride.

SI