@tiamat63 said:

With how often homeless vets are used as a crutch by both parties, you would think there wouldn't be homeless vets anymore....    oh, wait.  

I would imagine the bulk of homeless people are mentally ill. Not too much politicians can do about that. (Beyond wringing their hands and bitching.)

WSS

@calfoxwc said:

With how often homeless vets are used as a crutch by both parties, you would think there wouldn't be homeless vets anymore....    oh, wait.  

@mld-woody said:

A quick Google shows that the Center for Immigration Studies may not be the most unbiased source...

But yes, that's what I was talking about. 

I'm probably not going to dig into their data to see how legitimate it is. Though it looks like it's just looking at government cost vs benefit. You really should include private sector benefit in that too. But if that think tank has an agenda to push, I see why they didn't. 

Why would I include the private sector?  I, as an average citizen, am not forced by the private sector to subsidize their existence.  The private sector doesn't pay for:  the medical bills they ignore often times and how that effects pricing, the education system they put their kids in that they haven't contributed that much too, the detention centers some of them will inevitably wind up in, the roads they use for free, etc.  I'm not even mentioning entitlements because I don't have to to make this point. But let's just put that aside for argument sake.  We'll assume that CIS.org is a hate group and the biased, highly unreasonable, overtly liberal SPLC isn't full of sh!t for once.  So throw that out.  To be clear I'm distinguishing a difference between latinos and illegal latinos.  THERE IS NO BEEF WITH LATINOS.

1.  So exploitation is now acceptable because private business owners make more money and you save a nickel on every tomato?  And if it is, should I now tally up the subsidies that go to the more expensive unskilled, legal laborers they are replacing?  What site will show me those stats Woody?  (Believe it or not, once upon a time, in this very same galaxy, white, black, and legal latinos alike used to make money picking up garbage, making hamburgers, and landscaping yards.  Those markets were doing just fine, as they always have.)

2.  So how does the average liberal reconcile their demands for a higher minimum wage, if illegal immigration is so important to the private sector?  I mean do you not include them in the conversation on minimum wage?  Because that would be racist if you didn't, right?  Seems to me that would negate any net gains you might be receiving for them being here at the moment.  So which is more important to you?

3.  It's blatantly obvious to even you, the vast majority of these folks will be replaced by automation real soon.  (I'd post a link, but I'm sure it will have an agenda you don't like, so fvck it.)  They will be a huge burden at that point.  So what then?  Deportation?  No, too racist for you.  Hmmm, I guess more subsidies from you, I, and the 1%.  Great plan.

The only arguments to be made is how much money do they save me retail and business owner profits.  That's it.  There is no other one to be made for new illegal arrivals.  Second generation and so on come with more upside, but thats not one person in the caravan or the daily individual crossers.  NOT ONE.  

I'm not even trying to sh!t on these people.  If the legal process passes them through, then welcome to America.  But let's be honest and use a little common sense, they're here and circumnavigated the process because in general they are too undereducated ,or worse, to survive in their own hand built third world country.  A startling amount of these folks can't even operate a computer mouse to fill out the paperwork required to come here legally.   A fair amount of them cant read or write their own language.  And I don't care to hear they are escaping a corrupt government when I can go into another thread and see you guys claiming this government as the most corrupt ever.  Play that card somewhere else, please.

There is an entire list of things I can post that doesn't apply to every illegal immigrant, but leads to a net negative to society.  Housing violations to sanitation to age of sexual consent to you name it, it's a long list of issues that don't directly effect GDP.  Since you will certainly ask for cost and quantification, which would be difficult for even an expert, I'll just leave it be. 

What I will say is there is a subculture in the ILLEGAL community that do not care about conforming to basic American norms and oddly enough despise them.  They prove it everyday.  Those are the people most of all that don't belong here and one would hope the process, that is mostly circumnavigated, was designed to weed out.  To you this group is insignificant, while I likely have a more thorough experience with them simply based off geography. 

For instance, if you get in a wreck with one of these guys, you better hope the wheels fall off their car or they won't stay very long.  Then again they probably won't have insurance anyway since they don't care for our laws, so good luck with that.  They won't even bat an eyelash at what they have done. Well, I take that back, since I'm probably the only person it's ever happened to.  Twice.  I'm sure it has helped my personal economic situation, I just don't have the intelligence to recognize all the money I've saved on tomatoes throughout the years.

I'd much rather next time you post a more credible data set than mine, if you find it an issue, than a sloppy counterpoint about your specific distaste for my particular source.  It's just more relevant. Unless, I suppose, it's the best you can do.

But yes, that's what I was talking about. 

I'm probably not going to dig into their data to see how legitimate it is. Though it looks like it's just looking at government cost vs benefit. You really should include private sector benefit in that too. But if that think tank has an agenda to push, I see why they didn't. 

That has to be what your talking about.  Are you upset I said we've wasted money on them or just trolling?  You want a link, no problem.  I'll even use a Woody approved source so everyone's pants stay dry.  Enjoy.   Here's a sneak peek though.

https://cis.org/Report/Deportation-vs-Cost-Letting-Illegal-Immigrants-Stay

The findings of this analysis show that the average cost of a deportation is much smaller than the net fiscal drain created by the average illegal immigrant. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported the average deportation cost as $10,854 in FY 2016. In FY 2012, ICE removed 71 percent more aliens with a similar budget, creating an average inflation-adjusted cost of $5,915. This compares to an average lifetime net fiscal drain (taxes paid minus services used) of $65,292 for each illegal immigrant, excluding their descendants. This net figure is based on fiscal estimates of immigrants by education level from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS).¹ The total fiscal drain for the entire illegal population is estimated at $746.3 billion. Of course, simply because deportation is much less costly than allowing illegal immigrants to stay does not settle the policy questions surrounding illegal immigration as there are many factors to consider.

Deportation costs:

• In April of this year, ICE reported that the average cost of a deportation, also referred to as a removal, was $10,854 in FY 2016, including apprehension, detention, and processing.
• Partly due to policies adopted in the second term of the Obama administration, ICE removed nearly 170,000 fewer aliens in 2016 than in 2012, even though it actually spent 8 percent more in 2016 in inflation-adjusted dollars. The removal of so many more illegal immigrants in FY 2012 means that the average cost per removal in that year was $5,915, adjusted for inflation.
• If the average cost of a deportation was what it had been in FY 2012, then the larger enforcement budget in FY 2016 would have allowed for 200,000 more removals without spending additional money.

Costs of illegal immigrants:

• Researchers agree that illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have modest levels of education — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education. There is also agreement that immigrants with this level of education are a significant net fiscal drain, creating more in costs for government than they pay in taxes.
• The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants based on their educational attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their children.²
• Based on this estimate, there is a total lifetime fiscal drain of $746.3 billion. This assumes 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country based on the U.S. government's most recent estimate.
• The fiscal cost created by illegal immigrants of $746.3 billion compares to total a cost of deportation of $124.1 billion, assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using FY 2012 deportation costs.

Important caveats about these estimates:

• The NAS projects future fiscal impacts. A significant share of the current illegal population are not recent arrivals, so some of the net burden they create has already been incurred. We estimate that one-fifth ($13,058) of the average fiscal deficit the current population of illegal immigrants creates has already been incurred by taxpayers.
• The above cost estimates are only for the original illegal immigrant, and exclude descendants. Using the NAS net cost estimates for the descendants adds $16,998 to the net fiscal drain.
• ICE's estimate for deportation costs does not include the costs of the immigration courts run by the Department of Justice. Dividing the court's budget in 2016 by the number deportations adds $1,749 to the average cost of a removal and $770 to the 2012 cost, in 2016 dollars.
• To create its long-term fiscal estimates, the NAS uses the concept of "net present value" (NPV), which is commonly used by economists. This approach has the effect of reducing the size of the net fiscal drain that unskilled immigrants create because costs or benefits years from now are valued less relative to more immediate costs. If the NPV concept is not used, the actual net lifetime fiscal cost of illegal immigrants is likely $120,000 to $130,000 per illegal alien, or between $1.4 and $1.5 trillion for the entire illegal alien population, excluding descendants.

@mld-woody said:

Hey, he's just making claims about migrants without sources like you did yesterday. 

What did I accuse them of boss?

@htownbrown said:

Link?

Hey, he's just making claims about migrants without sources like you did yesterday. 

@clevfan4life said:

Then they were paid to.say it. Prob same as they were paid to.come in the first place. 

Link?

@clevfan4life said:

Then they were paid to.say it. Prob same as they were paid to.come in the first place. 

By leftwingnuts.

@clevfan4life said:

Oh this is such horseshit. If they even did this, which is dubious, they were positively put up to it by "special interests" that have a narrative to.weave about migrants. They prob already got a couple thousand and now they'll go home

They said it:

https://www.newsweek.com/migrant-caravan-let-us-or-give-each-us-50000-turn-around-and-go-home-1255043

asswhole indigent sombeitches. Maybe my laser stun phaser jobbie

needs to be implemented soon.

https://www.salon.com/2017/12/29/about-that-stolen-election-in-honduras_partner/