Immigration

Lerxst1992 · October 27

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Newsweek isn’t a real publication.

How trumpian and authoritarian…fake media haha.

At least there was acknowledgement Sanders did say that. Perhaps a dialogue is possible? Nah.

Your reaction to the Sander’s quote just says that you bought a lie from the right about the left wanting open borders.

Do you even realize how disingenuous your comments are? I posted a quote from Sanders.

The characterization of open borders belongs to you and Jo

Perhaps it's time for you to admit error here and make that accusation against Jo who's the one who used the phrase in question

Go Beavers · October 27

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Newsweek isn’t a real publication.

How trumpian and authoritarian…fake media haha.

At least there was acknowledgement Sanders did say that. Perhaps a dialogue is possible? Nah.

Your reaction to the Sander’s quote just says that you bought a lie from the right about the left wanting open borders.

Do you even realize how disingenuous your comments are? I posted a quote from Sanders.

The characterization of open borders belongs to you and Jo

Perhaps it's time for you to admit error here and make that accusation against Jo who's the one who used the phrase in question

You quoted him referring to not having any borders and said ‘A wokester who gets it”. What’s he getting?

Lerxst1992 · October 27

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Newsweek isn’t a real publication.

How trumpian and authoritarian…fake media haha.

At least there was acknowledgement Sanders did say that. Perhaps a dialogue is possible? Nah.

Your reaction to the Sander’s quote just says that you bought a lie from the right about the left wanting open borders.

Do you even realize how disingenuous your comments are? I posted a quote from Sanders.

The characterization of open borders belongs to you and Jo

Perhaps it's time for you to admit error here and make that accusation against Jo who's the one who used the phrase in question

You quoted him referring to not having any borders and said ‘A wokester who gets it”. What’s he getting?

That sanders said biden did a terrible job securing the Border.

Whether the problem is a secure border or Biden's refusal to deal with internal undocumented migrants the fact remains that New York City had a serious problem 2021 through 2023 which forced Biden to sign an executive order in 2024. This is how the forum here operates.. we throw memes around.. we make jokes and it's impossible to have a discussion about facts

Go Beavers · October 27

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Newsweek isn’t a real publication.

How trumpian and authoritarian…fake media haha.

At least there was acknowledgement Sanders did say that. Perhaps a dialogue is possible? Nah.

Your reaction to the Sander’s quote just says that you bought a lie from the right about the left wanting open borders.

Do you even realize how disingenuous your comments are? I posted a quote from Sanders.

The characterization of open borders belongs to you and Jo

Perhaps it's time for you to admit error here and make that accusation against Jo who's the one who used the phrase in question

You quoted him referring to not having any borders and said ‘A wokester who gets it”. What’s he getting?

That sanders said biden did a terrible job securing the Border.

Whether the problem is a secure border or Biden's refusal to deal with internal undocumented migrants the fact remains that New York City had a serious problem 2021 through 2023 which forced Biden to sign an executive order in 2024. This is how the forum here operates.. we throw memes around.. we make jokes and it's impossible to have a discussion about facts

I think nyc was dealing with a large number of asylees.

mickeyrat · October 27

According to a complaint filed in federal court after the incident, a federal agent blatantly violated an existing court order (against using excessive force on journalists and demonstrators) by pointing a gun in a veteran’s face, saying “Bang, bang” and “You’re dead, liberal.” https://trib.al/FiE0QnJ

mickeyrat · October 27

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Newsweek isn’t a real publication.

How trumpian and authoritarian…fake media haha.

At least there was acknowledgement Sanders did say that. Perhaps a dialogue is possible? Nah.

Your reaction to the Sander’s quote just says that you bought a lie from the right about the left wanting open borders.

Do you even realize how disingenuous your comments are? I posted a quote from Sanders.

The characterization of open borders belongs to you and Jo

Perhaps it's time for you to admit error here and make that accusation against Jo who's the one who used the phrase in question

You quoted him referring to not having any borders and said ‘A wokester who gets it”. What’s he getting?

That sanders said biden did a terrible job securing the Border.

Whether the problem is a secure border or Biden's refusal to deal with internal undocumented migrants the fact remains that New York City had a serious problem 2021 through 2023 which forced Biden to sign an executive order in 2024. This is how the forum here operates.. we throw memes around.. we make jokes and it's impossible to have a discussion about facts

I think nyc was dealing with a large number of asylees.

many of which were bussed in from texas and florida with no coordination or notice as I recall?

Halifax2TheMax · October 28

mickeyrat said:

According to a complaint filed in federal court after the incident, a federal agent blatantly violated an existing court order (against using excessive force on journalists and demonstrators) by pointing a gun in a veteran’s face, saying “Bang, bang” and “You’re dead, liberal.” https://trib.al/FiE0QnJ

* The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

Because they “can” and “do”.

tempo_n_groove · October 28

Bentleyspop said:

josevolution said:

No one here ever said open borders are good the only thing I’ve always said is we need immigration reforms but since this administration can barely run the government I’d say that’ll it never happen!

A. No one has ever called for "open borders."
B. There haven't been "open borders" in decades.
C. The only people who ever mention "open borders" are...wait for it...retRUmplican politicians and the brainwashed maga cultists.

Didn't Bernie just say that without using that very word?

Go Beavers · October 28

tempo_n_groove said:

Bentleyspop said:

josevolution said:

No one here ever said open borders are good the only thing I’ve always said is we need immigration reforms but since this administration can barely run the government I’d say that’ll it never happen!

A. No one has ever called for "open borders."
B. There haven't been "open borders" in decades.
C. The only people who ever mention "open borders" are...wait for it...retRUmplican politicians and the brainwashed maga cultists.

Didn't Bernie just say that without using that very word?

Is your question suggesting no one on the left can question Sanders?

tempo_n_groove · October 28

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Bentleyspop said:

josevolution said:

No one here ever said open borders are good the only thing I’ve always said is we need immigration reforms but since this administration can barely run the government I’d say that’ll it never happen!

A. No one has ever called for "open borders."
B. There haven't been "open borders" in decades.
C. The only people who ever mention "open borders" are...wait for it...retRUmplican politicians and the brainwashed maga cultists.

Didn't Bernie just say that without using that very word?

Is your question suggesting no one on the left can question Sanders?

Nope, that Sanders basically called the border open since it was not secure.

Tim Simmons · October 28

Something I haven't seen is there data available that demonstrates that the country was getting worse because of illegal immigration and refugees?

And I'm not being argumentative here. I'm genuinely asking if there were studies that showed things were worse for Americans because of looser border standards.

My suspicion is that it was more vibes based because of right wing media driving messaging riding the coattails of a general relaxed border policy, but I'd love to see data to the contrary.

tempo_n_groove · October 28

Tim Simmons said:

Something I haven't seen is there data available that demonstrates that the country was getting worse because of illegal immigration and refugees?

And I'm not being argumentative here. I'm genuinely asking if there were studies that showed things were worse for Americans because of looser border standards.

My suspicion is that it was more vibes based because of right wing media driving messaging riding the coattails of a general relaxed border policy, but I'd love to see data to the contrary.

Fair point actually.

Someone posted an article how it boosts the economy. Which I wouldn't argue as being true.

There hasn't been any real data that proves crime has gone up because of the increase of illegal/migrant, asylum seekers.

Factors that aren't put in are the growth in school class sizes, extra resources to teach those kids or lack of resources, lack of taxes being paid by their families, loss of income spent in US for sending money back home, cost of housing/feeding, loss of medical bills not being paid.

mace1229 · October 28

tempo_n_groove said:

Tim Simmons said:

Something I haven't seen is there data available that demonstrates that the country was getting worse because of illegal immigration and refugees?

And I'm not being argumentative here. I'm genuinely asking if there were studies that showed things were worse for Americans because of looser border standards.

My suspicion is that it was more vibes based because of right wing media driving messaging riding the coattails of a general relaxed border policy, but I'd love to see data to the contrary.

Fair point actually.

Someone posted an article how it boosts the economy. Which I wouldn't argue as being true.

There hasn't been any real data that proves crime has gone up because of the increase of illegal/migrant, asylum seekers.

Factors that aren't put in are the growth in school class sizes, extra resources to teach those kids or lack of resources, lack of taxes being paid by their families, loss of income spent in US for sending money back home, cost of housing/feeding, loss of medical bills not being paid.

I've talked about that last part before. The amount of resources we spend on language learners is pretty high. Now, not all illegal immigrants are language learners, and not all language learners are illegal immigrants. But it is safe to assume the percentage of illegal immigrants who are language learners is much higher.

shadowcast · October 28

Tim Simmons · October 28

Either way, being IN America or being AN American, its a net positive for America.

josevolution · October 28

shadowcast said:

South Americans are American! Not just North Americans are American!

Tim Simmons · October 28

tempo_n_groove said:

Tim Simmons said:

Something I haven't seen is there data available that demonstrates that the country was getting worse because of illegal immigration and refugees?

And I'm not being argumentative here. I'm genuinely asking if there were studies that showed things were worse for Americans because of looser border standards.

My suspicion is that it was more vibes based because of right wing media driving messaging riding the coattails of a general relaxed border policy, but I'd love to see data to the contrary.

Factors that aren't put in are the growth in school class sizes, extra resources to teach those kids or lack of resources, lack of taxes being paid by their families, loss of income spent in US for sending money back home, cost of housing/feeding, loss of medical bills not being paid.

While there are no doubt costs incurred. A 2023 CATO study concluded that while there are more costs incurred for younger immigrants at a state level (education specifically), federally and over the longer term, there is a net benefit from immigrants to the the economy of the US.

Historically, the fiscal impact of different population subgroups differs by characteristics other than nativity, namely age and education. Demographic groups whose population is concentrated in younger ages are a larger burden on state/local government finances, mostly because of K–12 education spending. Populations with a larger elderly population are a comparatively larger burden on federal finances because of old-age health care and retirement benefits. Education is highly correlated with taxable income and lower welfare program usage. The patterns from different cost scenarios that treat public goods differently are similar under both the Cato Model and the Updated Model, with the most positive ratios for immigrant groups appearing under marginal cost scenarios and the lowest ratios under average cost scenarios.

Our net fiscal impact projections are different under the Cato Model compared with the Updated Model due to the inclusion of capital income, as recommended by Michael Clemens. Under the Updated Model, the total and federal net fiscal impact of immigrants is generally higher relative to natives for the young and less educated and lower relative to natives for the elderly and more highly educated. The state/local net fiscal impacts are generally lower for immigrants of all education and age groups due to the different tax and spending structures on that level of government. State/local governments bear most education costs and typically do not recoup those costs later in a person’s life through higher tax revenue, but the federal government does. The younger age distribution of immigrants and higher number of children per immigrant household help to explain that fiscal cost discrepancy. Federal benefits favor the elderly, so immigrants who are primarily working age receive fewer of those benefits. Immigrants are also less eligible than natives are for several federal means-tested welfare programs.

Go Beavers · October 28

shadowcast said:

What’s the difference?

Tim Simmons · October 28

Othering

tempo_n_groove · October 28

Tim Simmons said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Tim Simmons said:

Something I haven't seen is there data available that demonstrates that the country was getting worse because of illegal immigration and refugees?

And I'm not being argumentative here. I'm genuinely asking if there were studies that showed things were worse for Americans because of looser border standards.

My suspicion is that it was more vibes based because of right wing media driving messaging riding the coattails of a general relaxed border policy, but I'd love to see data to the contrary.

Factors that aren't put in are the growth in school class sizes, extra resources to teach those kids or lack of resources, lack of taxes being paid by their families, loss of income spent in US for sending money back home, cost of housing/feeding, loss of medical bills not being paid.

While there are no doubt costs incurred. A 2023 CATO study concluded that while there are more costs incurred for younger immigrants at a state level (education specifically), federally and over the longer term, there is a net benefit from immigrants to the the economy of the US.

Historically, the fiscal impact of different population subgroups differs by characteristics other than nativity, namely age and education. Demographic groups whose population is concentrated in younger ages are a larger burden on state/local government finances, mostly because of K–12 education spending. Populations with a larger elderly population are a comparatively larger burden on federal finances because of old-age health care and retirement benefits. Education is highly correlated with taxable income and lower welfare program usage. The patterns from different cost scenarios that treat public goods differently are similar under both the Cato Model and the Updated Model, with the most positive ratios for immigrant groups appearing under marginal cost scenarios and the lowest ratios under average cost scenarios.
Our net fiscal impact projections are different under the Cato Model compared with the Updated Model due to the inclusion of capital income, as recommended by Michael Clemens. Under the Updated Model, the total and federal net fiscal impact of immigrants is generally higher relative to natives for the young and less educated and lower relative to natives for the elderly and more highly educated. The state/local net fiscal impacts are generally lower for immigrants of all education and age groups due to the different tax and spending structures on that level of government. State/local governments bear most education costs and typically do not recoup those costs later in a person’s life through higher tax revenue, but the federal government does. The younger age distribution of immigrants and higher number of children per immigrant household help to explain that fiscal cost discrepancy. Federal benefits favor the elderly, so immigrants who are primarily working age receive fewer of those benefits. Immigrants are also less eligible than natives are for several federal means-tested welfare programs.

I remember reading this before and questioned it then. It takes a certain parameter to make it work, it actually says that in the paper. It's definitely flawed.

Looking at all that data there is some CRAZY findings. It is a lot to take in.

Give it a once over, it'll take a while. It does have some amazing amount of info in it though.

Immigration

Comments

Categories