Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
hahaha. ok ok but you see? every time we discuss this topic we start diggin for some justification. So let's put it plain and simple:
- I brake a window in your house
- I stay inside hiding from you
- I start cleaning your kitchen
- You discover me, but I order you not to touch me because I am doing what you don't want to do in your own house
- You try to convince me that you don't need that extra service, but I refuse to leave and demand the right to stay there and have a bedroom for me.
- I stay there and you discover that although I'm clenaing the kitchen everyday, you are paying more at the end of the month for the extra food for me (is my right), the extra electricity (my right) extra water usage (my right)
- Finally, you decide to take me out of your own house by force, I sue you and you go to jail for hate crime.
DOES THIS SH*T MAKE ANY SENSE??
Well, bottom line, that is the situation. No more, no less. It doesn't care if illegals are 1 penny every month for citizens. The problem is WHY IN THE WORLD WE HAVE TO PAY THAT EXTRA PENNY FOR SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T WANT/HAVEN'T ASK.
cheers.
True, I wouldn't like this in my house.
But a country is not a house. A country typically has: millions of people; a legislative, executive, and judicial branch; laws to keep order, protect rights, and regulate companies; welfare spending to provide a safety net; military spending for self defence; etc. As such, the rules of a house a very different from the rules of a country. So I don't think your analogy holds.
The cost of keeping the Mexicans out might outweight the cost of just keeping them here. It might cost 1 penny a month to keep them here, but perhaps 1.5 pennies a month to keep them out. There are two types of costs -- direct costs by the government and hidden costs in higher prices. There is also the cost of strained relations with Mexico, which is one of our major trading partners.
That's why I advocated teaching them in Spanish and transitioning to English as a first language, in order to integrate them quickly. I also said that public schools should be allowed to charge extra fees for these services, or companies withold tax from illegals, in order to get them to pay into the system.
My previous post also talked about the dangers of excessive patriotism, which can blind us, just as it did before the Iraq war. Sealing the borders seems like a patriotic thing, but could it lead to disaster later on?
Many of the countries in the middle east seem consumed by too much patriotism, as is evident in vehement anti American demonstrations where they often burn US flags. As an observer, I think this level of patriotism (to their country) has made them close minded, decreased free markets and trade, plunged them further into poverty, and resulted in strong governments that don't respect individual rights. We really don't want to go that way.
Finally, my previous posts talked about socialism in general. For example, in California state returns, the top 5% of returns pay around 50% of the personal income tax. Does it bother you that money is taken from the rich to give to the poor? Suppose the illegals were kicked out without any cost, then that would save California $10 billion a year. Would that money be returned to taxpayers? Probably not. It would go towards more big government programs, for the benefit of California residents. I don't consider this to be fair.
In particular, since I own a lot of foreign stocks that pay dividends, it strikes me as unfair that California should get to take 9.3% of my dividends as state tax, and the federal government 33% of it as federal tax, but the tax is only used for the benefit of California residents and US citizens.
Ok now you are telling me that we should surrender. We should let them in and spend money trying to blend them here. No way! this is real patriotism! if it's more expensive to keep them out (wich I really doubt) I prefer that! but replacing America as we know it by a third world mentality with people that don't even have the mental ability to say good morning, NO.
What you say about patriotism in the middle east countries, that is not patriotism at all! that is hate! and they probably hate themselves too! I could be burning mexican flags and praying to allah to eat bread and that is not patriotism at all. Real patriotism is working hard for your family, your community, for your country; and the most important part of that, being prepared to eliminate any threat trying to change/destroy what you've created.
If it is too expensive to keep them out, I offer myself voluntary with a shotgun on the border, without pay and I'm positive millions of fellow Americans would do the same.
Ok now you are telling me that we should surrender. We should let them in and spend money trying to blend them here. No way! this is real patriotism! if it's more expensive to keep them out (wich I really doubt) I prefer that! but replacing America as we know it by a third world mentality with people that don't even have the mental ability to say good morning, NO.
The illegal alien Mexicans I see here in the Bay Area are overall no less friendly that the citizens and legal immigrants. That's probably because in a big city, people aren't too friendly anyways. Anyway, the reason to spend money to integrate them is that it is impractical to keep them out (see below about costs), so might as well spend money to integrate them. We can and should levy additional fees/taxes to make up part of the cost, because people should always pay for the communities they live in. This business of prodiving free education to people who don't pay taxes is ridiculous. Some statistics say that they remit around $5 billion a year to Mexico, so they can afford to pay taxes (though certainly it should be less than $5 billion). It is possible that forcing the illegals to pay taxes might discourage them from coming here.
The costs are both financial to to our civil liberties. When they were talking of building the border, the administration estimated it at around $2 billion. But I think it would be a lot more, just as the war was a lot more. Just lookup how much it costs to build a long road, then multiply it by the length of the border. Then there's the cost of electricity to maintain the fence, cameras and other technology, people to man it, etc etc. But the cost to our civil liberties is also there. There would be greater government and police powers, in order to allow them to catch people crossing the border illegally. This would affect all of us, and our country was originally built on the idea of limited government. You might say that the greater government powers are localized to the small area close to the border, but the administration said the same of the prison at Guantanamo, namely that the 8th amendment ("cruel and unusual punishment") only applies on US soil, but many fine judges think that it applies everywhere where the US goes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglecall
What you say about patriotism in the middle east countries, that is not patriotism at all! that is hate! and they probably hate themselves too! I could be burning mexican flags and praying to allah to eat bread and that is not patriotism at all. Real patriotism is working hard for your family, your community, for your country; and the most important part of that, being prepared to eliminate any threat trying to change/destroy what you've created.
A good point overall.
However, from the point of the view of many in the middle eastern countries, especially those who commit heinous crimes again US and allied soldiers and citizens too, they are in their point of view defending their culture and what they've built. They see the US and capitalism as a threat. I think they're wrong because capitalism and limited government has been far better in raising people's happiness and standard of living.
Anyway, the concept of doing anything to protect what you've created is a bit close minded as life is constant flux, always about change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglecall
If it is too expensive to keep them out, I offer myself voluntary with a shotgun on the border, without pay and I'm positive millions of fellow Americans would do the same.
Probably not. In principle, many may say they wan't to do this, but won't actually because it costs too much. Imagine the loss of salary. Also, it's probably not a good idea to take a shotgun because if in a state of panic (like if there's a confrontation between the person crossing illegally and the person with the shotgun) you accidentally shoot someone, you'd been in trouble with the law and your conscience.
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,476,965 times
Reputation: 382
I just want to make a statement to clarify the big "lie". I worked in the restaurant business for 27 years in California and immigrants like illegal immigrants were paid the same as an American worker. Most of the immigrant and illegal immigrants claimed far more dependents then they had, paying little if any taxes. They knew they could get away with it because the IRS seems to only go after Americans.
I just want to make a statement to clarify the big "lie". I worked in the restaurant business for 27 years in California and immigrants like illegal immigrants were paid the same as an American worker. Most of the immigrant and illegal immigrants claimed far more dependents then they had, paying little if any taxes. They knew they could get away with it because the IRS seems to only go after Americans.
This is difficult for me to understand. Wouldn't the restaurants have to withhold money for SS and Medicare contributions, including the matching funds from the employer? Wouldn't this necessitate a SS number to link to for the employment? Assuming these to be true, wouldn't the employer still be required to issue a W-2 to the employee, and report the earnings to IRS?
If this is accurate, how could IRS split out who was illegal and who isn't? Doesn't it just come down to filing your tax returns, and doing them in a timely manner?
But a country is not a house. A country typically has: millions of people; a legislative, executive, and judicial branch; laws to keep order, protect rights, and regulate companies; welfare spending to provide a safety net; military spending for self defence; etc. As such, the rules of a house a very different from the rules of a country. So I don't think your analogy holds.
The cost of keeping the Mexicans out might outweight the cost of just keeping them here. It might cost 1 penny a month to keep them here, but perhaps 1.5 pennies a month to keep them out. There are two types of costs -- direct costs by the government and hidden costs in higher prices. There is also the cost of strained relations with Mexico, which is one of our major trading partners.
That's why I advocated teaching them in Spanish and transitioning to English as a first language, in order to integrate them quickly. I also said that public schools should be allowed to charge extra fees for these services, or companies withold tax from illegals, in order to get them to pay into the system.
My previous post also talked about the dangers of excessive patriotism, which can blind us, just as it did before the Iraq war. Sealing the borders seems like a patriotic thing, but could it lead to disaster later on?
Many of the countries in the middle east seem consumed by too much patriotism, as is evident in vehement anti American demonstrations where they often burn US flags. As an observer, I think this level of patriotism (to their country) has made them close minded, decreased free markets and trade, plunged them further into poverty, and resulted in strong governments that don't respect individual rights. We really don't want to go that way.
Finally, my previous posts talked about socialism in general. For example, in California state returns, the top 5% of returns pay around 50% of the personal income tax. Does it bother you that money is taken from the rich to give to the poor? Suppose the illegals were kicked out without any cost, then that would save California $10 billion a year. Would that money be returned to taxpayers? Probably not. It would go towards more big government programs, for the benefit of California residents. I don't consider this to be fair.
In particular, since I own a lot of foreign stocks that pay dividends, it strikes me as unfair that California should get to take 9.3% of my dividends as state tax, and the federal government 33% of it as federal tax, but the tax is only used for the benefit of California residents and US citizens.
I don't post in this forum ever, but there's some parts of this post that don't make sense.
Many states in the US in the past have endorsed bilingual education. In recent years, many, especially on the east coast, now focus on english immersion. Frankly, bilingual education just wasn't effective. The end result was generations not able to communicate well enough in english to be productive members of society. Now, with federal NCLB legislation and standards enforcement, there's no margin for error. The change in many states has been effective.
As for the Middle East, I don't view it as misguided patriotism. It's religious fanaticism. Part of the reason for failure with attacking Iraq to eradicate terrorists is that they are not loyal to any one country. The rules of war have changed. And, many of those countries you allude to do are not democracies, a major difference.
Given the current state of the financial crisis in California, I think the extra $10 billion would be a god-send. The point is they shouldn't have to spend that money due to failed federal immigration policies, or lack thereof. Give the taxpayers some credit - they know where their money goes. I think people will vote with their pocketbooks when given the chance.
And what is wrong with paying taxes to this country on foreign stocks? I play capital gains taxes on them too, like every other American. What is the rationale that it should be different because it is a foreign stock?
This is difficult for me to understand. Wouldn't the restaurants have to withhold money for SS and Medicare contributions, including the matching funds from the employer? Wouldn't this necessitate a SS number to link to for the employment? Assuming these to be true, wouldn't the employer still be required to issue a W-2 to the employee, and report the earnings to IRS?
If this is accurate, how could IRS split out who was illegal and who isn't? Doesn't it just come down to filing your tax returns, and doing them in a timely manner?
Invasion USA:
United States immigration and State Department officials fear that their newly developed, high-tech visas are being sold on the Mexican black market. The US government hoped the newly designed visas would help in curtailing rampant illegal immigration at the Mexican border, but investigators believe many of them are being bought or rented by Mexicans seeking illegal entry into the US.
Well over 11,000 of these Laser Visas, issued to Mexicans for legitimate travel into the United States were reported stolen or "lost" in just two border cities. Government officials claim this is a 15 percent jump from previous figures.
Mexicans call these visa cards "Micas," which allow bearers to cross into the US without other supporting documents. The card also allows them to travel up to 25 miles inside California or Texas and they may remain in the US up to 30 days.
Recently, seven illegal aliens from Mexico were arrested for allegedly operating a fraudulent document ring in Chicago's "Little Village" area. The organized crime enterprise generated approximately $2.5 million a year.
Found inside the residence was equipment used for making fake government documents, including: five high-speed computers, printers, ID card printers, scanners, laminating pouches, foil strips with security features, dozens of counterfeit identification cards, and other document-making paraphernalia. The estimated value of the seized items is approximately $10,000; the street value of the software is believed to be about $100,000.
Law enforcement commanders throughout the US believe that there are similar operations being conducted by Mexican organized crime cells. The Castorena crime family, a Mexican organized crime family that has controlled the majority of the fraudulent document manufacturing and sales trade in the US over the past 10 years, is believed to be trafficking in these new high-tech visas. Some even believe they are attempting to duplicate these cards.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
general response
