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.
Actually "loyal" Americans don't need to do anything of the sort. The only argument they need is that they are here illegally. The negative impacts are just a part of being here illegally in the first place.
Edwin Rubenstein misrepresents EITC year after year, all while claiming to be an "Economist". Details about EITC being out-of-reach to illegal immigrants, or a cap on the number of children that can be claimed (two, until last year, when it was raised to three) somehow gets forgotten about being mentioned by him every time. Now it looks like Dave Gibson has joined the same bandwagon.
Is there any review at all before a "news" article is posted here? It doesn't even appear to be checking for duplicate or moderator-closed topics is happening. Once something is refuted there is still a mope-fest about unrelated events put in the thread.
Case in point, the root concept here is that there is a group (it is based on ITINs, so not necessarily all illegal aliens) paying taxes with ITINs. Some of them get to lawfully claim a Child Tax Credit. A narrower subset is lawfully able to claim Additional Child Tax Credit.
When they receive a portion of those taxes back with the Additional Child Tax Credit, there is supposed to be kicking and screaming, without considering the vastly larger amounts of taxes paid by those with ITINs?...
Can we start a thread of "We dont Want THIER Taxs!!!"?...*
At least it wouldn't be a duplicate topic...
* knowing that it will degenerate into the standard fare anyway...
Edwin Rubenstein misrepresents EITC year after year, all while claiming to be an "Economist". Details about EITC being out-of-reach to illegal immigrants, or a cap on the number of children that can be claimed (two, until last year, when it was raised to three) somehow gets forgotten about being mentioned by him every time. Now it looks like Dave Gibson has joined the same bandwagon.
Is there any review at all before a "news" article is posted here? It doesn't even appear to be checking for duplicate or moderator-closed topics is happening. Once something is refuted there is still a mope-fest about unrelated events put in the thread.
Case in point, the root concept here is that there is a group (it is based on ITINs, so not necessarily all illegal aliens) paying taxes with ITINs. Some of them get to lawfully claim a Child Tax Credit. A narrower subset is lawfully able to claim Additional Child Tax Credit.
When they receive a portion of those taxes back with the Additional Child Tax Credit, there is supposed to be kicking and screaming, without considering the vastly larger amounts of taxes paid by those with ITINs?...
Can we start a thread of "We dont Want THIER Taxs!!!"?...*
At least it wouldn't be a duplicate topic...
* knowing that it will degenerate into the standard fare anyway...
I personally wish both the pro and anti side would just argue from the rule of law perspective because that is the bottom line anyway. I doubt that any pro-illegal would be willing to do that however because they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
I personally wish both the pro and anti side would just argue from the rule of law perspective because that is the bottom line anyway. I doubt that any pro-illegal would be willing to do that however because they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
On this particular topic?:
People using ITINs to file taxes can lawfully claim Additional Child Tax Credit if they qualify...
How do people think remittances to Mexico can be way up? Doesn't anyone wonder how illegals can come over here and take the very lowest paying jobs, have much larger numbers of children than Americans have, and still have hundreds of dollars to send out of the country, billions of dollars every month?
Americans are hurting, no job creation in August but Obama and his administration are doing all they can to entice illegals to move on over.
No one moves to an area with over 9% unemployment rates from an area with 5% or so unemployment if they are really wanting jobs. It's the government handouts more than anything that attract.
How do people think remittances to Mexico can be way up? Doesn't anyone wonder how illegals can come over here and take the very lowest paying jobs, have much larger numbers of children than Americans have, and still have hundreds of dollars to send out of the country, billions of dollars every month?...
Again, with ¨billions¨ per ¨month¨ as remittance amounts...
So if the restrictions are dropped, all the negative impacts disappear too!
That's like saying if you would only open your gates and the doors to your home to all the homeless bums and let them move into your home to eat your food and crowd into the rooms of your home that all the negative impacts disappear.
But you guys, ya see, those arguments apply equally to all poor people. We'd DEFINITELY be better off if there were just straight up less of them.
So right now you're pretending that your concern is their level of education etc. etc. etc. But the argument will, without fail, carry on like so:
Us: "If they are legalized they will no longer be illegal."
You: "But they are poor and uneducated."
Us: "So are the poor people here, do you have a problem with them?"
You: "They have a right to be here."
Us: "But if we legalized illegals, they'd have a right to be here, too."
You: "I SAID THEY ARE ****ING POOR!!!!1"
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.