Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. $113 Billion a Year,

Smellyman

Godfather. wrote:

well I guess you can't argue with numbers, but that means every Illegal immigrant would have to contribute over a million each and not get any government assistance right ? I don't remember the number of illegals in the country today.

Godfather.

are you just playing dumb.....

I hope so

mikepegg44

tonifig8 wrote:

Mike,
what about

Officer Sues Over Arizona Immigrant Law

PHOENIX—A lawyer for a Phoenix police officer told a federal court Thursday his client could be sued for racial profiling if he enforces Arizona's new immigration law. It is the first hearing in a series of legal challenges filed over the controversial crackdown which has divided law enforcement in the state and across the country.

Officer David Salgado, a 19-year veteran of the Phoenix police department, could also lose his job if he fails to enforce the new law, his attorney said.

Arizona's statute requires an officer to verify the immigration status of a person stopped for other alleged crimes, if "reasonable suspicion" exists of illegal presence in the U.S.

But the law also empowers Arizona residents to sue an officer they believe isn't enforcing the law to the fullest extent.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 24112.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't you think this will also create more division amongst the citizens of AZ- Do you think that certain racist citizens will start to abuse this authority (and hype) and start reporting Hispanic's (citizens), because of the color of there skin?
Putting more stress on the officers?

what are your thoughts?

A perfect example,

kisstheshadows1 wrote:well lets see, Ive got some illegal hispanic kids at my apartment complex that like to go around and piss on peoples doors. sound animal enough?"

don't you think idiots like this will be calling cops every time they see an "animal" (Hispanic).... :roll:

well, anyone can get sued, and I was specifically talking about the Fed challenges. This guy is sueing on the prefunctory conclusion he may or may not get sued based on how he enforces the law. The lawyer goes on to say he may lose his job if he fails to enforce the law....ah...DUH! I would hope a police officer would lose their job if they fail to enforce the law, even if they disagree with it.
I would say if this law falls due to racial profiling, we are in trouble as a country. considering the law itself talks about reasonable suspicion after lawful contact has been made, that covers about every aspect of any traffic stop now.
as far as the other dope who called hispanic kids animals, in one ear out the other. That was just a stupid thing to say and hopefully he/she feels stupid for saying it. And yes, some people will call the police on suspicion of illegal immigranst, much like they already do. But this law does not pertain to that, this law is about already having contact with the people. I just think we need to see what happens before we go all crazy and talk about how this law will do this and will do that. Lets see what it does and then move from there. This could be the biggest thing ever, or just fadeaway after we do not see the unintended consequences people are up in arms about...it is really to early to tell.

I am mmore interested in how the supreme court will decide the idea of supremacy in this issue.

mikepegg44

scb wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Most of you think that all cops are racists and must be plotting anyway they can get minorities. It is sad to me that so many of you have this horribly skewed impression of police officers.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that I fall into your "most of you" category, so I'll respond to your assertion about what we (or at least I) think: It is incorrect.

I don't think so. A lot of the challenges I have read consist of how cops will now stop anyone who is brown and question their immigration status, which just isn't the case.

scb wrote:

It doesn't matter if there are ever any cases of racial profiling that actually happen (which, I have no doubt, there will be - though they might be dismissed as anecdotal stories). What matters is that the law not only allows for it, but encourages it. (I know, they changed it to say "no racial profiling," but that is meaningless.)

this is a prime example of it right here. you say you know the law is written to ensure there is no racial profiling, yet you also say that it will happen no matter what because some how the law encourages it. This is either a gross msunderstanding of the law, or distrust of law enforcement.

_

nevermind

know1

If we made all immigration legal, then illegal immigration wouldn't cost us anything. It's a simple solution.

Chip McFlennigan

Why don't we simply pass laws that curb incentives for illegals from all nations to come into the USA until we can actually take care of the population we do have?

Stop persecuting the people who are already here and start curbing incentives for more immigrants to come here illegally.

Some ideas: no more citizenship for babies of illegals born in the USA, no more free healthcare (medicaid), equal wages for all, etc.

The sad fact is that the USA is overpopulated and cannot sustain the growth of the population at its current rates. However, to criminalize those who are here already and being productive members of society is inhumane.

The illegal immigrants who commit violent crimes, however, I feel should be deported, as it is not worth it for us to pay taxes to keep them in our legal system.

Chip McFlennigan

know1 wrote:

If we made all immigration legal, then illegal immigration wouldn't cost us anything. It's a simple solution.

Immigration is legal, under the proper circumstances. The problem is, there are many poor people from other countries that want to start families but simply cannot afford to do so, so they cross the border into the USA illegally as sort of a quick fix. I can't say I blame them, but unfortunately, it is becoming a hefty burden on a country already plagued by recession and corruption.

_

mikepegg44 wrote:

scb wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Most of you think that all cops are racists and must be plotting anyway they can get minorities. It is sad to me that so many of you have this horribly skewed impression of police officers.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that I fall into your "most of you" category, so I'll respond to your assertion about what we (or at least I) think: It is incorrect.

I don't think so. A lot of the challenges I have read consist of how cops will now stop anyone who is brown and question their immigration status, which just isn't the case.

scb wrote:

It doesn't matter if there are ever any cases of racial profiling that actually happen (which, I have no doubt, there will be - though they might be dismissed as anecdotal stories). What matters is that the law not only allows for it, but encourages it. (I know, they changed it to say "no racial profiling," but that is meaningless.)

this is a prime example of it right here. you say you know the law is written to ensure there is no racial profiling, yet you also say that it will happen no matter what because some how the law encourages it. This is either a gross msunderstanding of the law, or distrust of law enforcement.

Do you deny that there are SOME law enforcement officers who have a problem with Hispanic people? Even 1% is 1% too much. That doesn't mean I distrust the other 99% of law enforcement. It seems like you are trying to suggest that anyone who acknowledges that racial profiling or police harassment exist thinks that "all cops are racists and must be plotting anyway they can get minorities," which is absolutely not what we think.

I don't have a gross misunderstanding of the law; I have read it backwards and forwards. I think it was written in a way that encourages racial profiling. Then, when there was public outcry, they threw in a line that says "no racial profiling," not to change the spirit of the law, but just to cover their asses legally.

unsung

blackredyellow wrote:

that is $11,300 per person.. not a terribly high number.

So it would be cheaper to buy them a one way plane ticket back to their home country? I'd offer a ticket plus $5000 to those that self deport and agree not to come back illegally again. Win-win.

mikepegg44

scb wrote:

Do you deny that there are SOME law enforcement officers who have a problem with Hispanic people? Even 1% is 1% too much. That doesn't mean I distrust the other 99% of law enforcement. It seems like you are trying to suggest that anyone who acknowledges that racial profiling or police harassment exist thinks that "all cops are racists and must be plotting anyway they can get minorities," which is absolutely not what we think.

I don't have a gross misunderstanding of the law; I have read it backwards and forwards. I think it was written in a way that encourages racial profiling. Then, when there was public outcry, they threw in a line that says "no racial profiling," not to change the spirit of the law, but just to cover their asses legally.

Well, it cannot be both ways, either it says racial profiling is acceptable or it doesn't...either it makes racial profiling acceptable or it doesn't. It isn't the acknowledging of racial profiling or harassment, it is the idea that if there are a few cops who for whatever reason are dinks. it isn't the majority, and the ones who do take advantage will be punished according to precinct and department policy. Not arresting criminals because someone a thousand miles away abused their power seems silly and stupid. This law isn't debating whether or not someone here without permission of the government is a criminal, that much is already proven for the time being, so why should we not be able punish them?
That isn't to say that all those who support this measure are against immigration, far from it. I don't care who or how many people want to come here, just as long as they come in the front door.
it is nice to know that you don't think all cops are racist pricks, so why don't we see what happens with this law in practice before we get up in arms about it, before we attack them for racially profiling

Chip McFlennigan

I dunno about cops, but I do know, for a FACT, that all paid Firefighters are a waste of our tax dollars and are also criminals.

Just sayin'.

Boxes&Books

unsung wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

that is $11,300 per person.. not a terribly high number.

So it would be cheaper to buy them a one way plane ticket back to their home country? I'd offer a ticket plus $5000 to those that self deport and agree not to come back illegally again. Win-win.

That seems hateful.....Why would you be willing to do that? What is about illegal immigrants that you hate so much? When that other guy called Hispanic's animals .... you didn't say anything, you just questioned how someone should report a black person to the police......
You must be like that Tea Party guy who was throwing money at a sick man because he needed heathcare! I'll have to find the video ..... that's a disturbing comment.... no wonder i don't respect your opinion....

_

scb wrote:

unsung wrote:

If you had read the law, maybe you have but missed this part, it states that they are to ask for ID when a crime has been committed. No where does it say that people are going to be stopped simply because of their skin color.

No, that's not what it says. It says:

Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 11, chapter 7, Article 8, B. wrote:

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Correction: I was looking at the old version of the bill when I posted the quote above. The new version so longer says "any lawful contact". The new version now says "any lawful stop, detention, or arrest". It is still not, however, limited to when a crime has been committed.

_

mikepegg44 wrote:

scb wrote:

Do you deny that there are SOME law enforcement officers who have a problem with Hispanic people? Even 1% is 1% too much. That doesn't mean I distrust the other 99% of law enforcement. It seems like you are trying to suggest that anyone who acknowledges that racial profiling or police harassment exist thinks that "all cops are racists and must be plotting anyway they can get minorities," which is absolutely not what we think.

I don't have a gross misunderstanding of the law; I have read it backwards and forwards. I think it was written in a way that encourages racial profiling. Then, when there was public outcry, they threw in a line that says "no racial profiling," not to change the spirit of the law, but just to cover their asses legally.

Well, it cannot be both ways, either it says racial profiling is acceptable or it doesn't...either it makes racial profiling acceptable or it doesn't. It isn't the acknowledging of racial profiling or harassment, it is the idea that if there are a few cops who for whatever reason are dinks. it isn't the majority, and the ones who do take advantage will be punished according to precinct and department policy. Not arresting criminals because someone a thousand miles away abused their power seems silly and stupid. This law isn't debating whether or not someone here without permission of the government is a criminal, that much is already proven for the time being, so why should we not be able punish them?
That isn't to say that all those who support this measure are against immigration, far from it. I don't care who or how many people want to come here, just as long as they come in the front door.
it is nice to know that you don't think all cops are racist pricks, so why don't we see what happens with this law in practice before we get up in arms about it, before we attack them for racially profiling

Well I guess you just have more faith in our system than I do. I prefer to not give the government even more power to fuck over the citizens than they already have. And as long as proof of citizenship is only required of people who seem suspect, then this law cannot be applied equally across all populations.

I'm not talking at all about immigration, by the way.

_

johnny america wrote:

I dunno about cops, but I do know, for a FACT, that all paid Firefighters are a waste of our tax dollars and are also criminals.

Just sayin'.

Fucking socialists.

OutOfBreath

Godfather. wrote:

well I guess you can't argue with numbers, but that means every Illegal immigrant would have to contribute over a million each and not get any government assistance right ? I don't remember the number of illegals in the country today.

Godfather.

Ehm, no.
As blackredyellow said, it's 11.300$ pr head, and that is because they get assistance in various ways. Wouldn't be a cost if they weren't collecting benefits.

The TPG report shows a loss to the economy of at least 800 billion if they were all booted out, and that is assuming that the labour market adjusts quickly and flawlessly to fill the gap. And TPG is using a fairly low estimate of illegals at 8 million. In that equation, 113 billion is nothing. Note that you have to take into account not only their tax payments, but the effect of them spending their paychecks into the economy when assessing their worth, not to mention the added value from their labour that is (taxable) profit for the business owners.

So if it's about the money, I think this immigration makes you more prosperous if anything. If you're gonna start counting, you have to count both credit and debit sides in the books...

Peace
Dan

Boxes&Books

OutOfBreath wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

well I guess you can't argue with numbers, but that means every Illegal immigrant would have to contribute over a million each and not get any government assistance right ? I don't remember the number of illegals in the country today.

Godfather.

Ehm, no.
As blackredyellow said, it's 11.300$ pr head, and that is because they get assistance in various ways. Wouldn't be a cost if they weren't collecting benefits.

The TPG report shows a loss to the economy of at least 800 billion if they were all booted out, and that is assuming that the labour market adjusts quickly and flawlessly to fill the gap. And TPG is using a fairly low estimate of illegals at 8 million. In that equation, 113 billion is nothing. Note that you have to take into account not only their tax payments, but the effect of them spending their paychecks into the economy when assessing their worth, not to mention the added value from their labour that is (taxable) profit for the business owners.

So if it's about the money, I think this immigration makes you more prosperous if anything. If you're gonna start counting, you have to count both credit and debit sides in the books...

Peace
Dan

Excellent points.... Where is Pf.. the guy that promised me a bootleg if my taxes don't go up... by the way how is that going to work?
If my taxes go up, and I'm not in the top bracket, I'll buy you a bootleg! How's that?

I would like to hear your responses to Dan's comments...

Godfather.

Smellyman wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

well I guess you can't argue with numbers, but that means every Illegal immigrant would have to contribute over a million each and not get any government assistance right ? I don't remember the number of illegals in the country today.

Godfather.

are you just playing dumb.....

I hope so

that wasen't very nice smellyman I think you just hurt my last little bit of feelings...
thats it lets round up all the ilegals and and give them a life sentence down in the tip of baja and smellyman you can be the jailer....wait they might hurt you for being there illegally and harass you or worse yet racially profile you....NOOOOOOOOO

Godfather.

Godfather.

tonifig8 wrote:

OutOfBreath wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

well I guess you can't argue with numbers, but that means every Illegal immigrant would have to contribute over a million each and not get any government assistance right ? I don't remember the number of illegals in the country today.

Godfather.

Ehm, no.
As blackredyellow said, it's 11.300$ pr head, and that is because they get assistance in various ways. Wouldn't be a cost if they weren't collecting benefits.

The TPG report shows a loss to the economy of at least 800 billion if they were all booted out, and that is assuming that the labour market adjusts quickly and flawlessly to fill the gap. And TPG is using a fairly low estimate of illegals at 8 million. In that equation, 113 billion is nothing. Note that you have to take into account not only their tax payments, but the effect of them spending their paychecks into the economy when assessing their worth, not to mention the added value from their labour that is (taxable) profit for the business owners.

So if it's about the money, I think this immigration makes you more prosperous if anything. If you're gonna start counting, you have to count both credit and debit sides in the books...

Peace
Dan

Excellent points.... Where is Pf.. the guy that promised me a bootleg if my taxes don't go up... by the way how is that going to work?
If my taxes go up, and I'm not in the top bracket, I'll buy you a bootleg! How's that?

I would like to hear your responses to Dan's comments...

did you figure in the amount of money they send home and how many of them pay taxes ? and how many pay rent...the canyons and hillside and riverbeds are full of these people that must pay their rent to the city for use of the areas they squat on right ? and what about medical bills that will never be paid unless of corse the tax payer picks up the tab as we always do, as I said I don't think the loss to gain is worth it and besides THEY ARE HERE ILLEGALLY , what do you think mexico would do if 8 to 10 million americans did the same thing to mexico ? what would the other 97% of this bord say then.

Godfather.

_

Godfather. wrote:

did you figure in the amount of money they send home and how many of them pay taxes ? and how many pay rent...the canyons and hillside and riverbeds are full of these people that must pay their rent to the city for use of the areas they squat on right ? and what about medical bills that will never be paid unless of corse the tax payer picks up the tab as we always do, as I said I don't think the loss to gain is worth it and besides THEY ARE HERE ILLEGALLY , what do you think mexico would do if 8 to 10 million americans did the same thing to mexico ? what would the other 97% of this bord say then.

Godfather.

I didn't read this particular study, but I would bet that it did figure in the amount of money undocumented immigrants send home and how many of them pay taxes. And I'd also bet that the vast majority of them pay rent or mortgages or share a home with someone who does. I'm sure there are squatters like you're talking about, but I have never seen a single one of them here. The people here live in homes. Also, many people do pay their medical bills. In fact, I would think undocumented immigrants pay more into the healthcare system than citizens in the same income bracket, since poor citizens qualify for Medicaid and therefore don't pay anything. Some people (citizens, documented immigrants, & undocumented immigrants) don't pay and the government has to eat the cost with taxes, but undocumented immigrants pay into the tax system. And the U.S. has already taken over Mexico in far worse ways than Mexicans have taken over the U.S.