• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

We see people stacked like wood frequently

The issue is the tragedy, NOT your "creative interpretation" of right and wrong.

Well. what do you think we should do to prevent these types of tragedies in the future? Maybe we can find some common ground?
A reformed process and additional (adequate) staffing would clear the backlog of the Immigration Service. An examination and possible expansion of the list of nations from which we accept political prisoners is needed. A review of current law is in order and certainly amnesty needs to be an option on the table - not a global answer, but an option. That would be my answer if I thought you were serious about your inquiry, but since I know that isn't the case, I'll just say :rolleyes: .

I think the USCIS needs those reformed processes as you say. Their computer system is woefully inadequate. One hand knows little or nothing about the other hand. I don't think they need anymore staff since they work slower than DMV employees.

I agree on political refugees.

Amnesty. Don't want it but I realize it's going to have to happen. Unfortunately.

:techman:
 
I'm all for legal immigration. However, we need to build a wall to stop this stuff, for our protection and theirs.

As for the topic, I'm unpersuaded that a wall would help stop this kind of thing. These people are driven to do this by desperation; while a physical barrier would cut down on the total number of people who sneak through, it seems like those who do would have to--and be willing to--take greater risks to get past. They'd probably hurt themselves more.

I also think the Wall Solution is impractical. It also just doesn't seem like the American thing to do.
I think the most practical approach might involve some strategic walling, increase the number of border patrol agents by a factor of 10, and to more vigorously go after those that hire them. (Not necessarily with new legistlation, but to support what is already there)
 
Building a wall seems rather Soviet to me. And pathetic. I've no doubt that other countries would laugh at us and we've only just been gaining their respect once again.
 
Well. what do you think we should do to prevent these types of tragedies in the future? Maybe we can find some common ground?
A reformed process and additional (adequate) staffing would clear the backlog of the Immigration Service. An examination and possible expansion of the list of nations from which we accept political prisoners is needed. A review of current law is in order and certainly amnesty needs to be an option on the table - not a global answer, but an option. That would be my answer if I thought you were serious about your inquiry, but since I know that isn't the case, I'll just say :rolleyes: .

I think the USCIS needs those reformed processes as you say. Their computer system is woefully inadequate. One hand knows little or nothing about the other hand. I don't think they need anymore staff since they work slower than DMV employees.

I agree on political refugees.

Amnesty. Don't want it but I realize it's going to have to happen. Unfortunately.

:techman:

I think political refugees should always be a priority. When all hell breaks loose in a neighboring country, we should be willing to help those fleeing the danger.

J.
 
They also contribute significantly more to the federal government in taxes than they use.

Link?

DO IMMIGRANTS COST THE GOVERNMENT MORE THAN THEY CONTRIBUTE IN TAXES?

Research into this subject reveals a consensus: over time, immigrants and their descendants collectively provide more to the federal government in taxes than they receive in benefits. For example, a report by the National Academy of Sciences found that a typical immigrant and his or her descendants will pay an estimated $80,000 (in 1996 dollars) more in taxes than they will receive in combined local, state, and federal benefits over their lifetimes. [8]

Perhaps the myth that immigrants are costly to American taxpayers stems from the fact that, at the state and local level, immigrants use more in services than they pay in local taxes (this is true for the vast majority of native citizens as well). The National Academy of Sciences study found that the average immigrant imposes a net lifetime fiscal cost on state and local governments of $25,000, attributable to their use of schools, roads, and so on. Those with very low levels of education and skill cost states and localities the most, particularly in health care outlays for emergency room and other hospital services. However, most of the taxes that immigrants pay, including Social Security contributions, go to the federal government, and these payments are well in excess of federal benefits received. [9] On balance, immigrants pay substantially more than they receive from all levels of government combined. [10]

Of particular importance is the value of immigration to the future financial strength of the Social Security and Medicare systems. In the absence of immigration, the U.S. workforce is projected to grow very slowly—much more slowly than the size of the retired population as the Baby Boom generation reaches its golden years. Because immigrants add to the supply of younger workers who contribute payroll taxes that finance the Social Security and Medicare system, they are an important reason why forecasts show that the programs will be able to pay benefits in full until 2042 for Social Security and 2019 for Medicare’s hospital insurance program. [11] The projections of Social Security’s trustees show that higher levels of immigration in the future will improve the long-term financial condition of Social Security, while lower levels will have the opposite effect. The higher fertility levels of immigrants also slows the rate at which the average age of the overall population will rise, keeping more people on the contribution side of the equation.

[8] National Research Council, The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration, ed. James P. Smith and Barry Edmonston (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 1997), p. 337.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees, “Status of the Social and Medicare Programs,” March 2004, available online at
www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/trsummary.html.
http://www.immigrationline.org/publications.asp?pubid=491
____________________________________________________

Illegal immigrants contribute to the economy whenever they pay sales tax and, indirectly through rent payments, real estate taxes.

Also, those who use false Social Security numbers pay taxes into the system they don't get back, since people here illegally aren't eligible to receive Social Security payments. In 2003 alone, the government received Social Security taxes on $57.8 billion from wage reports that couldn't be matched to the person filing.

Illegal immigrants are excluded from most federal and state entitlements such as subsidized housing or food stamps, and a 2007 congressional report found they appear to contribute more than they use in services. But the money they contribute often goes to federal and state coffers, while many services they benefit from, such as health and law enforcement, come out of local government budgets.

Laura Wides-Munoz, Miami / Jacques Billeaud, Phoenix / Suzanne Gamboa, Washington - Associated Press Writers
http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=74&subsectionID=589&articleID=58322
____________________________________________________

The fact that illegal immigrants pay taxes at all will come as news to many Americans. A stunning two-thirds of illegal immigrants pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes. Yet, nativists like Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., have popularized the notion that illegal aliens are a colossal drain on the nation's hospitals, schools and welfare programs — consuming services that they don't pay for.

In reality, the 1996 welfare reform bill disqualified illegal immigrants from nearly all means-tested government programs including food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization. The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education.

But, immigrants aren't flocking to the United States to mooch off the government. According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households, exactly as intended. And another vital thing happened in 1996: the Internal Revenue Service began issuing identification numbers to enable illegal immigrants who don't have Social Security numbers to file taxes.

One might have imagined that those fearing deportation or confronting the prospect of paying for their safety net through their own meager wages would take a pass on the IRS' scheme. Not so. Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers. No doubt they hope that this will one day help them acquire legal status — a plaintive expression of their desire to play by the rules and come out of the shadows.

What's more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks. Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they'll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers — that the Social Security administration stashes in the "earnings suspense file" — added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus. The file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year.

Beyond federal taxes, all illegals automatically pay state sales taxes that contribute toward the upkeep of public facilities such as roads that they use, and property taxes through their rent that contribute toward the schooling of their children. The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families, most of whom are illegal — are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume.

Shikha Dalmia is a senior analyst at Reason Foundation, a free-market think tank.
http://reason.org/news/show/122411.html

I grant those in authority positions the respect the position calls for. Until they foul it up, that is.

Then we have no dispute on that issue, because I agree.

My wife is an immigrant and comes from a less than affluent upbringing. Know what I've found? Money does not make someone happy. Being born an American is not a guarantee of anything. You can be the poorest person in the world and be among the happiest.
Certainly, money is no guarantee of happiness, and living in the US is no guarantee of affluence. But that's not really the point, is it? Money offers greater opportunities to provide for your family's health, safety, welfare, and prospects for the future though education and other factors. And living in the US offers greater opportunities in those areas than say, living in Mexico or Haiti, wouldn't you agree?

That Americans wouldn't take labor jobs is preposterous.
Will they take them for low pay, long hours, and little to no benefits?

HOW MUCH DO IMMIGRANTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL ECONOMY?

A November/December 2003 report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas states:

The pace of recent U.S. economic growth would have been impossible without immigration. Since 1990, immigrants have contributed to job growth in three main ways: They fill an increasing share of jobs overall, they take jobs in labor-scarce regions, and they fill the types of jobs that native workers often shun. The foreign-born make up only 11.3 percent of the U.S. population and 14 percent of the labor force. But amazingly, the flow of foreign-born is so large that immigrants currently account for a larger share of labor force growth than natives. [See Figure 2.] [16]




Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, “U.S. Immigration and Economic Growth: Putting Policy on Hold,” Southwest Economy Issue 6, November/December 2003, available online at www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2003/swe0306a.html (derived from data from the U.S. Census Bureau).

Because about a third of immigrants have not finished high school, as compared with 13 percent of native workers, they disproportionately fill low-skill, blue-collar jobs. [17] Figure 3 shows the portion of employment growth in each job category attributed to foreign-born workers from 1996 to 2000. Immigrants accounted for as much as half the growth in categories such as administrative support and services. The more than sixfold increase in the laborer category means that as immigrants entered these occupations, native workers exited. [18]



Source: Abraham T. Mosisa, “The Role of Foreign-born Workers in the U.S. Economy," Monthly Labor Review, May 2002, pp. 4–14

Forecasts by the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimate that between 2000 and 2010, more than 33 million new job openings that require only little or moderate training will be created in the United States (see Table 1). That constitutes 58 percent of all projected new jobs over that period. Most of that work is in restaurants, construction, retail, trucking, hospital care, and other areas where immigrants already established themselves. [19] In manual labor jobs, about 1.1 million new lower-skilled immigrants have become employed since 1994 as the native-born population attracted to such jobs has declined from 9 million to 7.6 million. [20] Moreover, a study by the National Association of Manufacturers and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu concluded that immigration will be the primary source for filling anticipated shortages in skilled labor over the next twenty years. [21]



[16] Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, “U.S. Immigration and Economic Growth: Putting Policy on Hold,” Southwest Economy Issue 6, November available online at www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2003/swe0306a.html.
[17] Ibid
[18] Ibid
[19] Daniel E. Hecker, “Occupational Employment Projections to 2010,” Monthly Labor Review, November 2001.
[20] “Summary of Findings,” The American Workplace: Building America’s Workforce for the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: Employment Policy Foundation, 2001).
[21] The National Association of Manufacturers, the Manufacturing Institute, and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, “Keeping America Competitive: How a Talent Shortage Threatens U.S. Manufacturing,” New York, N.Y., April 21, 200., p. iii.


And most illegal aliens I've known are sending their money home instead of investing it here. I've known plenty. Please provide your evidence that IA's pay more in taxes than the cost in services. And they've stolen any legitimate social security #'s they do submit.
It's in the links I provided for Gertch above.

What a waste of a good topic this attack pack mentality creates.

What contribution to the topic does this comment make? If there's a specific issue you'd like to address or if you'd like to defend his position, by all means do so.
It's a huge contribution, if people would realize we can have productive conversations here.
Seems to me you're skirting the rules against political discussion here and for some reason, it's tolerated. Illegal immigration is a hot-button political issue and should be discussed in the proper forum. Your view, whether you want to admit it, is a political expression.

No one reads the stickies. :(

There has been plenty of productive discussion in this thread, Gertch (even TLS agreed), and it's perfectly acceptable to discuss these "hot-button political issues" in Miscellaneous again, RR, so let's try to stop focusing on the other posters and instead deal with the issues at hand, please.

vaderluke.jpg
 
And regarding whoever it was that simply dismissed the argument of our immigration into Native land as justifiable because it was not illegal, that's a patently ridiculous thing to say. First, because such laws weren't invented until the ancestors of most of us here came into this land; second, because laws/statutes as currently defined only have the teeth of their enforcement - and the Native people couldn't have resisted the Europeans even if they wanted to. Or in other words, see Worcester v. Georgia.

If you are talking about me, I was being sarcastic to highlight the absurdity of that position ;)
 
I'm just glad we're not talking about a truly controversial topic...like fat people.

Thank Heavens for that.
 
We could talk about fat illegal immigrants who smuggle smaller illegal immigrants in condoms they swallowed before crossing the border.

That's like twice the controversy.
 
It's too bad these people died. I understand their desire to live in a better country. But instead of choosing an illegal action perhaps they would have been better off trying to make their own country a better place to live. At least if their lives were to be sacrificed then it would have been for a better future for their country.

Emphasis mine.

I'm sure the Native Americans wished Europeans thought that way. Those pesky Pilgrims...why didn't they just stay in England and make their country better.

What was illegal about Europeans coming to the new continent?

Actually, I'm more responding to your idea that people should stay in their own country and make that a better place to live.

I'm sure the Native Americans would love to have said that to those who came over, those who felt that it was impossible to make their country "a better place"
 
At least it appears none of our people were involved in this accident. This time.

Wow. I don't know what to say.
I had missed that little gem. That's a really, really ugly comment.

It wasn't meant to disparage those that were involved. Their deaths are very sad and very regrettable. I just think it's good that they didn't take innocent people with them.

**And I'll respond to your long previous post after when I have more time.**
 
They also contribute significantly more to the federal government in taxes than they use.

Link?

DO IMMIGRANTS COST THE GOVERNMENT MORE THAN THEY CONTRIBUTE IN TAXES?

First time I've seen the site and there is a ton of info there. I'll be reading for a bit I think.

Hopefully it'll cover occurrences such as here in Mass where we wrongfully provide public housing, schooling and welfare for those here illegally.

I agree with Misfit that the immigration laws need to be overhauled. I know a couple of legal immigrants that after several years are still having to pay the fees and jumping through hoops.




Obligatory - NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooo!
 
The only thing I have to add at this time is a thank you to Locutus for, as always, providing a well-researched reply to the usual right-wing, anti-immigrant canard of "immigrants get more in social services than they pay in taxes" usually spouted by those on the hysterical side of this issue. Thanks again, man! -- RR
 
Anyone else need a cigarette?

Some of the referenced links talk about immigrants, some about illegal immigrants. Much of the information here and I've searched for is old, partisan and circularly referential. For example they talk about the 1996 law that forbade illegal aliens from getting welfare and food stamps. That was only from Federal programs. States in financial trouble such as California and Mass are providing housing and other assistance to people in the country illegally.

As a minor side issue this is interesting. However, the larger issue following the law and providing security to the citizens of the country is paramount. At least Obama is doing one good thing that Bush couldn't do; he's making illegal aliens leave willingly.
 
So if all these things are true, then it is left up to the interpretation of the human, or perhaps the human guided by the Holy Spirit, to determine when the law of the land contradicts the law of God, and to determine when those in authority lose the respect their position calls for. Please tell us how what the illegal immigrants are doing is a violation of God's law. Not human law, God's law. Otherwise, it is entirely possible that your interpretation is wrong, and theirs right, about whether this authority should be respected.

Considering the current US immigration policy, that seems to be the most effective way to actually provide for their families - families that they have made sacred vows of blood and water to.

I appreciate your extremely well thought out post. Thanks very much for being so even-handed.

In my opinion(and I understand others may disagree with me) breaking governmental law in this case would not be justified (Romans 1). We are only supposed to do so when governmental law contradicts God's Law (Acts 5).

You're welcome, but I wish you'd better answered my questions.

You say that we are only supposed to break governmental law when governmental law contradicts God's Law. What would you say to someone who believes that in this case, US Immigration laws are contradicting God's Law? Or put another way, why do you think that in this case, breaking governmental law would not be justified? And you can't simply say "because we must obey the law of the land" because that's a circle that avoids the question, not answers it.

Also, you had expressed dismay that many immigrants are sending money home to their families, but from one point of view that seems to be the most effective way to actually provide for their families that they've had to leave behind - families that they have made sacred vows of blood and water to.

If you are talking about me, I was being sarcastic to highlight the absurdity of that position ;)

Sorry if I mistook you Ping, not sure who I was responding to, but sarcasm is always good. :bolian:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top