The Evil Genius Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 (edited) Can't unsee now. Trumple shuffle. Edited June 25, 2018 by The Evil Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said: This is quite possibly the least American thing imaginable. A person seeking asylum, a legitimate request that is ultimately evaluated by a judge, having to choose between their children and a chance at asylum. so they are offering a plea deal to those that crossed illegally....this is news? it certainly isn't new Cross legally and it is not a issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 25, 2018 Author Share Posted June 25, 2018 33 minutes ago, twa said: Cross legally and it is not a issue. You keep saying this even though it's not true. Not with this Administration. Not with their goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, Burgold said: You keep saying this even though it's not true. Not with this Administration. Not with their goals. He knows that, but has to keep the gimmick up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 25, 2018 Author Share Posted June 25, 2018 19 minutes ago, spjunkies said: He knows that, but has to keep the gimmick up. or he's trying to use that old brainwashing technique. You know the one that says if you say a false thing enough it starts to sound reasonable and then it starts to sound true? Propaganda 101. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 (edited) Edited June 25, 2018 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 A large portion of America doesn’t know history 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 Somehow "Make Nuremberg Great Again" doesn't have the same ring to it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 4 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 you don't consider providing food,housing, medical care and security helping? odd they keep coming isn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 13 hours ago, B&G said: Liberals always want to do what feels right to them even if is against the law. Conservatives want the law to be obeyed. Feelers vs Thinkers. Simple, huh? I would never say always, but in many cases yes. However, as a conservative myself, I can say many of my fellow conservatives since Trump are the biggest bunch of snowflakes...more so than Bernie's Millennial minions. They take their marching orders from a narcissist who is literally unable to take any form of criticism at all and may be the second coming of Tiberius Caesar. 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 (edited) Someone asked about fiscal impact of illegal immigration into USA. Heritage foundation, in a very detailed report says this: "There are approximately 3.7 million unlawful immigrant households in the U.S. These households impose a net fiscal burden of around $54.5 billion per year." Notice the word "net" in the quote. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes. This report takes that into account and subtracts taxes paid from the gross amount. Edited June 25, 2018 by B&G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 Should I go with the blue or the tone deaf? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, B&G said: Someone asked about fiscal impact of illegal immigration into USA. Heritage foundation, in a very detailed report says this: "There are approximately 3.7 million unlawful immigrant households in the U.S. These households impose a net fiscal burden of around $54.5 billion per year." Notice the word "net" in the quote. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes. This report takes that into account and subtracts taxes paid from the gross amount. If you can quote it, you can post a link. Do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 It's from the heritage foundation. Is it even worth reading? Can't we just assume it's completely twisted the numbers and potentially just outright lying and being deceitful? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, tshile said: It's from the heritage foundation. Is it even worth reading? Can't we just assume it's completely twisted the numbers and potentially just outright lying and being deceitful? Well, of course. But it would be fun to pick it apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 48 minutes ago, B&G said: Someone asked about fiscal impact of illegal immigration into USA. Heritage foundation, in a very detailed report says this: "There are approximately 3.7 million unlawful immigrant households in the U.S. These households impose a net fiscal burden of around $54.5 billion per year." Notice the word "net" in the quote. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes. This report takes that into account and subtracts taxes paid from the gross amount. Would love to see a link and the numbers behind it. I did a post last year breaking down the numbers I could find and it seemed to be a net gain even without factoring in economic activity and federal income tax. I would also like to know if Heritage factored in losing the economic activity of 3.7 million households into their figure. That's going to be far more than $54.5 billion worth of fiscal burden imo. My post from last year http://es.redskins.com/topic/395721-the-immigration-thread-american-melting-pot-or-get-off-my-lawn/?page=84&tab=comments#comment-10883166 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 due process is actually different than what many assume https://www.prlog.org/12715426-major-media-misrepresent-trumps-no-judge-deportation-proposal.html WASHINGTON - June 24, 2018 - PRLog -- Major media outlets, including the New York Times and the Boston Globe, are mistakenly reporting that President Trump's call to deport illegal immigrants "with no judges or court cases" would deprive them of due process since many such deportations have already occurred without court challenge under several administrations.These misleading headlines seems to have been written based upon the common misunderstanding that due process always requires a trial-type proceeding with a judge, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who lectures on this topic. Due process of law, as the courts have said many times, requires only the process which is due in a particular situation, he reminds his law students.In many situations in which the Supreme Court and lower courts have held that due process clearly applies, it has gone on to say that it did not require a trial-type hearing before a judge. On the contrary, in some situations, under the Goss principle, the constitutional requirement of due process may be satisfied if the individual is simply given a brief opportunity to reply to the charges against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, twa said: due process is actually different than what many assume Is Trump talking about illegal crossers caught as they are entering or illegal immigrants already in the US? His tweet is a bit ambiguous on that point (then again, it's hard to delve into policy in a tweet :p). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, bearrock said: Is Trump talking about illegal crossers caught as they are entering or illegal immigrants already in the US? His tweet is a bit ambiguous on that point (then again, it's hard to delve into policy in a tweet :p). Especially Trump tweets expedited is used for those here under a certain time limit no matter the location. That time can be discretionary I believe, the ones in use now vary from under 6 months to two yrs I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&G Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 Heritage Foundation story link: https://www.heritage.org/immigration/report/the-fiscal-cost-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-the-us-taxpayer This is from five years ago, the number is significantly higher today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 Lulz. And, of course, when unlawful immigrants live in a community, they use roads, parks, sewers, police, and fire protection; these services must expand to cover the added population or there will be “congestion” effects that lead to a decline in service quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 A tad too busy right this minute to smack Heritage around point by point but I think this is the one thst even Rubio criticized. From wikipedia "Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration" article. Quote Heritage Foundation StudyEdit In 2013, Robert Rector and Jason Richwine of The Heritage Foundation released a study concluding that as of 2010, the "average unlawful immigrant household" had a net deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $14,387 per household.[43] Critics of the Rector-Richwine report "questioned several assumptions made by the report’s authors—everything from the amount that legalization could boost earnings for immigrants to the amount of welfare they may use."[44] The Heritage report purported to project costs over a 50-year period and assumed no changes to Social Security or Medicare, which prompted criticism that the study was overly speculative.[44] The report also counted "the cost of benefits paid to the children of those living in the U.S. illegally, even though many of those children by law are citizens."[44] The methodology and conclusions of the 2013 Heritage Foundation study were sharply criticized as flawed by, among others, Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute, Doug Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum, and Tim Kane at the Hudson Institute. Nowrasteh wrote that the Heritage report's refusal to account for GDP growth and increased economic productivity from immigration led to "a massive underestimation of the economic benefits of immigration and diminishing estimated tax revenue."[45]Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida also criticized the report.[46] 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 25, 2018 Share Posted June 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now