Let's be honest. "Dreamers" = illegals

You are picking and choosing which subset class of all immigrants fit your narrative. Nice try Salon.

 

Damn, apparently not everyone on this thread is on the same page. We've got arguments over the use of words, arguments over trying to make Mike look like and idiot, arguments over a report on legal and illegal immigrants use of social services that seems to only be about illegal immigrants, what else?
I'm cornfused.

 

A strong case can be made for public assistance to new legal immigrants and refugees (moral, ethical, and economic). Get them started on the right path(s) to being contributing American residents (some food and housing support, language and work skills, taxes, driving, etc.). When you expand that generous welcome package to the 20 million (or whatever number it actually is) illegal immigrants, and have no requirements to get back off these programs, you're courting disaster...

 

Oh. . .there’s multiple answers there – just because you need to be spoon fed the information in order to grasp them is more a reflection on your laziness than mine.

As others have pointed out – taking facts in totality and letting them shape your narrative usually leads to dramatically different conclusions than starting out with a narrative and then finding facts to fit it. It’s painfully obvious which philosophy you favor in the majority of your postings. You also appear to refuse to see the drawbacks of it (the ease in which adding additional facts leads to the unravelling of that narrative for example) which is not only ignorant (which can be addressed) – but willfully so (still can be addressed, but people usually have to care a lot to even attempt to do so).

Personally, I take a more “Economic Darwinism” point of view when I encounter it – I really don’t give a shit if you’re willfully ignorant or just ignorant. Either will do. Because in the real world most decisions (and personal autonomy) are made by dollars – and having a population of ignorant (willful or not) people as competition for those dollars is an inherent advantage for those less ignorant.

If you can’t even get out of your own way to understand that you’re voluntarily handicapping yourself with your limited thought process – immigrants (legal or not) are the least of your concerns.

 

Why? Does the dollars invested in our own people net such a great payoff that we should import more?

Plenty of legal immigrants contribute on day one and are awesome. The rest can stay home IMO.

 

I said "can be made", not that I have time to do that at work today Note, I'm including refugees. Maybe they should be in a completely different class, but this dungeon often doesn't distinguish or allow for much grey area, so I lumped them in with other legals.

Sure, we could change immigration policies to be such that every legal immigrant must be contributing from day 1. Lots of worthy folks, who might clear all the legal hurdles, but still need some assistance when first arriving...

 

Why would you want to bring in people who need a bump start and may or may not perform? That does not seem very clever...

 

I know there was zero chance of our family moving to the US if I had not been employed by an American company already and we would have had 30 days to vacate had I lost that job. We lived under those rules for 9 years until the Green Card paperwork came through and I was contributing a shit ton of money to the economy in both taxes and purchasing.

 

I would 100% agree on refugees but we have expanded that definition to be super wide. South American gang activity etc. vs people fleeing an catastrophic event. Even then I question it as let those more local take folks in rather than flying them around the world to a totally foriegn culture.

 

Good catch. Mike finally showed what he meant by "nearly all". It was for Middle Eastern refugees -- largely from Syria no doubt. When this country makes an explicit act of humanitarianism, it usually carries a cost of support.

The data (and analysis I referenced) indeed do show that in aggregate, immigrants contribute mightily to the economic engine of the U.S. (thanks Crash!), and that low-income illegal immigrants actually use less welfare than homegrown analogs. This should be fixable, but as Acree has pointed out, winners and losers are in play, so stalemate rules.

 

Speeding isn't bordering on an act of war.

 

Wouldn't the illegals use less in order to not throw up any flags and get deported?

 

It really shouldn't matter how much welfare illegals use as compared to others. They are illegal.
Once again libs demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the real issue.
The US has an established process and procedure for immigration.
The US allows more immigrants in each year than all other countries combined.
Do it legally according to the laws established or stay out. It's this simple.
If you break the law, you get arrested and deported. Period.
And stop trying to redefine what illegals are.

 

My wife came to the US when she was 6 years old. She and her family came from Italy in 1960 where they had been living in a refugee camp for 15 years following all the changes made resulting from WWII. (Her father was a loudmouth anti communist and escaped from Yugoslavia two steps ahead of the communist police) Their family was accepted into the US under the sponsorship of a Catholic priest in Fort Worth Texas. The Priest had secured employment and a place to live before they arrived. Her Dad went to his new job the second day after arrival.

That was the way it was done at that time. If someone was accepted into the US they had to have a firm place to land and had to be willing to contribute to their new home country. I was not aware that the immigrant requirements had changed. Have they? Today it seems that if you can crawl over the border then you're good to go.

By the way; My father-in-law came here with 4 children and a wife, bought a house and a car, all on $75 bucks per week. Three more children were born after they arrived. The man and his wife sure did know how to stretch a buck.

 

Both my parents are legal immigrants (naturalized US citizens) and the street I lived on in high school had eight houses on the court. Four out of the eight were owned by legal immigrants: 1 were my parents, 1 was the Chief Science and Tec Officer of one of the world’s largest Pharma companies at the time (he also did some crazy shit with consulting the govt on bioterrorism threats), 1 was a Cardio Thoracic surgeon with a Dentist wife (they were legal immigrants twice over because they were “Mexican”. . .but only because their Russian and Polish Jewish parents were denied entry to the US after fleeing the Nazis) and 1 was another Physician. The lovely blond lady sitting next to me as I type this is also an immigrant who’s a Molecular Bio-Physicist that does Cancer Research and was first published at 24. None of them immigrated to the US with those levels of productivity already established, let alone even remotely guaranteed. All started with nothing and the paths that lead them to their end results were anything but linear.

Between my mom and the CSO, you were talking about billions of dollars of economic output (yearly) with tens of thousands of jobs potentially impacted from their performance (not to mention the creation of new jobs as a result of their performance as well as the educating and training of their successors and other “talent” that was identified). With the doctors, you’re talking about skill sets that include cracking somebody’s chest and repairing arteries so they can live (all the doctors taught at teaching institutions on top of their own private practices). That’s just their professional contributions. There’s personal ones as well. Then there’s the skill sets they’re passing along to their children (and the family members that may follow) that continue the trend and increase those zeros and societal impacts exponentially. . .

Above are just 7 people you’d tell to stay home based upon your criteria written. Their economic and societal contributions speak for themselves. You seem to be basing your immigration policy on the assumption that those contributions can quantified and determined in their teens and twenties (even thirties). If that’s the case – invest heavily in the market because those kind of clairvoyance skills should see you well rewarded.

I know many more who fall into similar categories and have similar stories of starting in this country with nothing. Based on what they eventually became, I would put them up against 99% of the native born in terms of economic contributions to this country.

 

Read the report. Its fairly well-spelled out.

Its more complicated than that. Illegals are ineligible for lots of welfare programs, and it varies by state. That said, the CIS analysis did everything by head of household summary, and that complicates the interpretation a lot (just think re: DACA -- illegal parent and 3 14th amendment children-citizens).

 

I wonder if the country south of us was filled with Irishmen or German people you'd have the same opinion. Sounds like you're constant moving around as a kid had one major long term effect of you being an asshole.

Just observation off course and there is no technical diagnosis of being as such.

 

Oh he's an asshole. We know our own.