U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2011, 11:45 AM
 
Location: California
29,610 posts, read 31,914,576 times
Reputation: 24737

Advertisements

Quote:
Amazingly, ladder technology has made it to Mexico
Thank you for
that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2011, 12:10 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 16,853,526 times
Reputation: 7619
A few rolls of electrified concertina barbed wire on top of an electrified fence would work wonders

Just think of a bug zapper on steroids.......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2011, 01:54 PM
 
89 posts, read 39,370 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
A few rolls of electrified concertina barbed wire on top of an electrified fence would work wonders

Just think of a bug zapper on steroids.......
Man, I mean, I know we have some people in this thread who are shocked, SHOCKED that they have ladders in Mexico, but yes, some of those ladders are made out of wood instead of metal. They also have rubber gloves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2011, 06:05 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,131 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by huddledmasses View Post
Oh Liquid Reigns here to continue to deny things. I did read it. Quit trying to wiggle out of your mishap. He states that even after this effect of the GDP on wages there is a benefit. He then states that letting in more immigrants legally will further benefit our country. I can post the author's quote from the press release for the study supposedly gotten from a progressive blog if you wish.

The small fiscal burden is .07% as you just stated again. Now, I'm going to bold the part of the author's statement that is referring to that .07%. OK?

Now, you will probably make some claim like he is referring to the .07% GDP in the first sentence and not what I bolded right? Who cares! He still says there is a benefit after all these things are accounted for.

The press release then goes on to make these statements regarding changing our immigration policy to better respond to our employers needs and points out why Americans aren't doing these jobs as much as in the past:
Like I said, you didn't read the report, you are using the "press release" to fumble your claim. Even the Iowa Immigration Education Coalition http://thisisdiversity.com/articles/...rized-workers/ agrees with me. Just a note for you, the -.07% isn't wages nor is it the loss to us workers. It is the total of the States losses (-.1%) minus the wage loss of the (+.03%) which makes a negative overall impact of (-.07%). READ THE REPORT:
Quote:
An enforcement-only strategy that did not facilitate legal labor inflows but which sought to cut low-skilled immigration drastically would hurt these industries. While business gains from having access to low-skilled foreign workers, the aggregate productivity bonus to the US economy is small. Also modest is the fiscal cost of illegal immigration. Because the net impact of illegal immigration on the US economy does not appear to be very large, one would be hard pressed to justify a substantial increase in spending on border and interior enforcement, at least in terms of its economic return.
Your confusion is in your phrase you so cling to for which it merely discusses the loss of wages:[quote]Applying standard economic methods, the surplus from illegal immigration, or the net gain to US workers and employers exclusive of any labor income paid to the unauthorized immigrants themselves, is approximately 0.03 percent of US GDP.[quote]Section II, sub 3.
Quote:
Based on the profile of immigrant households in the US Current Population Survey, households headed by an unauthorized immigrant appear to generate a short-run net fiscal cost of approximately 0.1 percent of US GDP. 24 Adding the small positive immigration surplus to the small negative net fiscal impact, the total short-run change in US national income from illegal immigration is -0.07 percent of GDP. While the value is negative, indicating illegal immigration on net lowers US national income.

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 07-08-2011 at 06:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2011, 10:19 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Back on-topic, the example of a man climbing the fence was caught...

The response, however much was paid to do it, worked...

If you want to talk of a loss of a dollar amount, compare the U.S. expense to what this guy had invested in the venture...
Imagine the U.S. expense if there wasn't any kind of fence at all? The entire population of Mexico's northern states would be filling our food stamp offices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2011, 11:00 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Imagine the U.S. expense if there wasn't any kind of fence at all? The entire population of Mexico's northern states would be filling our food stamp offices.
Where are "our food stamp offices"?...

And exactly how are they going to do that if they don't qualify?...

Wait a minute, you haven't told me what a "Shopping Visa" is either...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 12:34 AM
 
1,150 posts, read 991,058 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEHMarten View Post
You're not listing the only options. The other option, instead of spending hundreds of billions on fencing and militarizing our border, is to let people in with inspection, and with permission. Then we don't need the border security, they'll all pay their taxes, and they'll all be legal.
The problem with that is not many can pass inspection. Inspection includes the immigrant having a sponsor to guarantee they won't be a burden on taxpayers. They must also have no communicable disease, and have no criminal record. We do have people waiting to immigrate the right way, but the illegal aliens want to jump to the head of the line, instead of waiting their turn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 12:56 AM
 
1,150 posts, read 991,058 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockmadinejad View Post
And yet you guys are like, SUPER SURE that the number is between - what is it? 12 and 20 million? 12 and 30 million?

But then studies come out saying the number is slowing down and suddenly these academics with their fancy numbers and methods are just grasping at straws, you just KNOW the numbers are high in your gut. Why figure out the numbers when we can FEEL that there are tons of illegals coming over?
We can go by past experience. For years the government told us there were approximately 12,000,000 illegal aliens in this country, although I believe they've recently lowered the count to 11,000,000. In 1986 we were told there were approximately 1,000,000. However, in 1986 the applications for amnesty turned out to be close to 3,000,000. Thus we're inclined to suspect somewhat more than government figures indicate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 11:36 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayarcy View Post
We can go by past experience. For years the government told us there were approximately 12,000,000 illegal aliens in this country, although I believe they've recently lowered the count to 11,000,000. In 1986 we were told there were approximately 1,000,000. However, in 1986 the applications for amnesty turned out to be close to 3,000,000. Thus we're inclined to suspect somewhat more than government figures indicate.
Yes - remember how in 1986, it was supposed to about 300,000 illegals they decided needed amnesty. What a farce that ended up being.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2011, 09:27 AM
 
Location: San Diego
32,799 posts, read 30,044,409 times
Reputation: 17688
If the border had the San Diego fence we wouldn't be reading about countless apprehensions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top