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.
They don't really have open borders policies. I disagree with plenty of their programs (all government spending is socialism imo).
I actually lean libertarian - but in a practical way. If the USA had millions of acres of uninhabited and unowed land, and no welfare programs of any kinds and anyone coming here had to make it on their own but had a way to do so, yes, things would be quite different.
It was different when there was land available for homesteading -- but even there was wrong in that because that land required Indians to be pushed off it in order to offer to foreigners who wanted it.
But at least back in those days without the many welfare programs and when Americans were taxed little, many immigrants found life too hard here and ended up going back home. Not deported, they chose to return home, but today, the government programs make that unnecessary. Come here and find your education was non-existent and you lack the job skills or ability to even learn the language, realize you can never afford the kids you're having with the high housing and food costs --- not a problem. The government will make it very easy and you can stay.
Your first link points out the supposed real costs of allowing illegals to come in to the country.
Your second link points out the cost of allowing our soldiers to get a decent nights sleep.
Tell me how this makes your case in any way.
Are you saying that taxpayers should forego the safety of the military to make room for people that are a drain on our economy?
No. The CIS/FAIR estimates are by far the worst. And even in the worst case, the net cost is, in the big picture, pretty small.
Any implication that I'm saying we should do this or that is in your head. Of course, I would prefer the military weren't in Iraq at all. And it's worth noting, they'd be much safer not being there.
Quote:
I'm glad you found a link that you found suitable that blatantly points out that it is NOT beneficial to allow illegals to enter our country.
I was being charitable. I can find tons and tons of links that show illegal immigrants are a net positive. The point here is not to resolve the "what is the net cost" question, but to show that even if the WORST CASE SCENARIO is true, the cost is but a fraction of what the US spends on other things. So the "it's fleecing us" argument is bogus.
Quote:
I guess you have joined our side. I knew you would wake up.
I'm actually glad you made this little snide comment. It (along with your "you must hate the military" gambit) just shows that you have to argue in bad faith to make your points.
Apparently, he believes it’s more important to provide freebies to foreign invaders, than it is to protect our soldiers from the sweltering heat in Iraq. How sad.
Nice. Someone else who can't make their case without arguing in bad faith.
I'm not sure how spending $20 billion on air conditioning protects our soldiers more than bringing them home. But I'm open to hearing about these magical air conditioners.
Nice. Someone else who can't make their case without arguing in bad faith.
I'm not sure how spending $20 billion on air conditioning protects our soldiers more than bringing them home. But I'm open to hearing about these magical air conditioners.
No, air conditioners don’t protect them more than if they were home, but it does protect them from the 100+ degree temperatures while they’re there. Would you rather they died from heat strokes? I suppose if they were in cold temperatures, you would complain about the costs for heat. Do you also have figures on their food costs? Incredible!
Nice. Someone else who can't make their case without arguing in bad faith.
I'm not sure how spending $20 billion on air conditioning protects our soldiers more than bringing them home. But I'm open to hearing about these magical air conditioners.
The claims build to a crest on Sunday night...
They know that much of the time they are able to start with a fresh slate on Monday morning...
No. The CIS/FAIR estimates are by far the worst. And even in the worst case, the net cost is, in the big picture, pretty small.
Wait! Weren't you the one hounding me to agree that "only 1/3 of illegals on welfare handouts" weren't very many? You sure seemed pretty into the CIS estimates which I believe on the low side until I pointed out to you that 1/3 of illegals on welfare is a very sizeable amount.
No, air conditioners don’t protect them more than if they were home, but it does protect them from the 100+ degree temperatures while they’re there. Would you rather they died from heat strokes? I suppose if they were in cold temperatures, you would complain about the costs for heat. Do you also have figures on their food costs? Incredible!
Uh, yeah you´re being overly dramatic about air conditioning protecting them from heat stroke (soldiers tend to be smart enough to hydrate and use means to minimize the potential of heat injuries). I have been in that particular theatre of operations for more than a cumulative two years of my life before, and year-round. It also gets unbelievably cold in the opposite season, and typically shifts from one extreme to the other within a few weeks.
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.
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.
