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.
This is something that rarely ever gets dwelled on. Our economy is based on the circulation of money & capital. There is no way around that. When spend a $1 in a store, that store is spending $.80 of that $1 in the economy to keep their store running. And their vendors spend $.80 of that $1 to keep their business running. On and on and on, throw in a few loans, and that's how our economy sustains itself and grows.
Now, remove 11M consumers from the economy, each of whom is responsible for helping to circulate $100s - $1,000s/month. What exactly are Conservatives expecting to happen?
The answer is a crash unlike anything we've ever seen, no hyperbole. You would see the immediate collapse of casual dining, agriculture, and housing industries to START with. Then the next big domino to fall would be all the local establishments that these immigrants support with their earnings -- Walmarts/CVS/Walgreens, supermarkets, real estate rentals, etc.
Then comes the same free fall we witnessed during the 08 housing crash because the economy could not keep up w/ the lack of money being circulated.
There's no question that kicking out 11M consumers would be an economic catastrophe. The only question is would Conservatives look around at the ashes of the economy, own it, and say "This is fine."
So which "Kick them all out/no-amnesty/America for Americans" voters on here will admit that they are okay with that outcome and would own it as the result of their philosophy?
Another confused lib. I guess we could take the $100 billion in savings and "save" the economy.
Having to not shell out $100 billion in federal dollars to support a dependent class of citizens with no skills, little education, who do not speak English would be, in contrast to what you think, an economic boom.
If what you think is correct, why doesn't every nation import 10-20 million unskilled, uneducated dependents to "stimulate" thier ecomony? Oh wait......................... Europe has been doing that. See the wonderful "benefits" there?
Ask your city council to bring in 100,000 unemployed illegals for an "economic stimulus" plan. If nothing else, you would get a good laugh.
Where is that public assistance money going? Into the cash register of the local vendors. How do those local vendors pay wages and buy their supplies to resell? With money in their cash register. Do banks have separate tracking systems for public assistance dollars? Do vendors only take payment that didn't come from public assistance purchases?
So tell me, does a local store with $5,000 to spend from money collected from people on public assistance benefit the economy more or less than a store w/o that $5,000?
The liberal mind never ceases to amaze me. Always focused on the side who is "getting" and ignoring the cost to those who are being taken from.
Where do you think that public assistance money is coming from? Your argument is that the $5000 collected from people on public assistance goes into the economy same as any self-supporting person. But what about the $5000 TAKEN from other people - via taxes - to give to the welfare recipients? That's $5,000 less.
I'll simplify for you: Welfare recipient gets $10 of food stamp money to spend at the grocery. But that $10 has been collected, $1 each from 10 self-supporting people, in order to provide it! So they have a total of $10 LESS to spend (be it at the grocery or wherever). It's a zero-sum game.
Now with illegals, they are costing American taxpayers over $100 billion BEYOND what they pay in sales tax or whatever. It's expensive to educate and feed their children, and when you factor in the free stuff they get for their anchor babies, it's even worse.
Removing 20 million illegals (or however many.....we don't know because liberals won't let us ask on the census) who cause a net drain to the economy will help the economy.
You need a different argument if you want to sell that having millions of scofflaws in the country, costing us a fortune, is a benefit to law-abiding Americans.
Another confused lib. I guess we could take the $100 billion in savings and "save" the economy.
Having to not shell out $100 billion in federal dollars to support a dependent class of citizens with no skills, little education, who do not speak English would be, in contrast to what you think, an economic boom.
If what you think is correct, why doesn't every nation import 10-20 million unskilled, uneducated dependents to "stimulate" thier ecomony? Oh wait......................... Europe has been doing that. See the wonderful "benefits" there?
Ask your city council to bring in 100,000 unemployed illegals for an "economic stimulus" plan. If nothing else, you would get a good laugh.
Hey! You just gave me a better idea. Let's have 20 million Americans quit their jobs tomorrow. Let's stimulate the economy with more unemployed people!
Another confused lib. I guess we could take the $100 billion in savings and "save" the economy.
Having to not shell out $100 billion in federal dollars to support a dependent class of citizens with no skills, little education, who do not speak English would be, in contrast to what you think, an economic boom.
If what you think is correct, why doesn't every nation import 10-20 million unskilled, uneducated dependents to "stimulate" thier ecomony? Oh wait......................... Europe has been doing that. See the wonderful "benefits" there?
Ask your city council to bring in 100,000 unemployed illegals for an "economic stimulus" plan. If nothing else, you would get a good laugh.
I don't understand what you just wrote b/c it's talking about something I didn't say.
It is all interconnected Eddie. Don't stop at the border wall. Think it through.
If one is worried about the deportation of illegals and its effect on
the economy one can also look at the housing crisis bred right here at home
permeated by the abundance of cheap and willing labor at the expense of the hard
working middle class wanting to but never being able to own their own home.
Last edited by Mr.Retired; 04-09-2019 at 05:57 AM..
I don't understand what you just wrote b/c it's talking about something I didn't say.
Quick Rich Real Estate Entrepreneurs would not be so quick to flip homes at a rabid pace if they had to pay union wages
instead of cash only to undocumented labor. It would be considered non profitable and these greed junkies would move
onto something else allowing the market to become stable again. Remove cheap labor....remove the drive for money....remove the greed!
The man who has made millions at the cost of his conscience is a failure.
Last edited by Mr.Retired; 04-09-2019 at 06:00 AM..
This is something that rarely ever gets dwelled on. Our economy is based on the circulation of money & capital. There is no way around that. When spend a $1 in a store, that store is spending $.80 of that $1 in the economy to keep their store running. And their vendors spend $.80 of that $1 to keep their business running. On and on and on, throw in a few loans, and that's how our economy sustains itself and grows.
Now, remove 11M consumers from the economy, each of whom is responsible for helping to circulate $100s - $1,000s/month. What exactly are Conservatives expecting to happen?
The answer is a crash unlike anything we've ever seen, no hyperbole. You would see the immediate collapse of casual dining, agriculture, and housing industries to START with. Then the next big domino to fall would be all the local establishments that these immigrants support with their earnings -- Walmarts/CVS/Walgreens, supermarkets, real estate rentals, etc.
Then comes the same free fall we witnessed during the 08 housing crash because the economy could not keep up w/ the lack of money being circulated.
There's no question that kicking out 11M consumers would be an economic catastrophe. The only question is would Conservatives look around at the ashes of the economy, own it, and say "This is fine."
So which "Kick them all out/no-amnesty/America for Americans" voters on here will admit that they are okay with that outcome and would own it as the result of their philosophy?
I thought you guys are against employers hiring illegals???? They shouldn't have any money to spend then.
The liberal mind never ceases to amaze me. Always focused on the side who is "getting" and ignoring the cost to those who are being taken from.
Where do you think that public assistance money is coming from? Your argument is that the $5000 collected from people on public assistance goes into the economy same as any self-supporting person. But what about the $5000 TAKEN from other people - via taxes - to give to the welfare recipients? That's $5,000 less.
I'll simplify for you: Welfare recipient gets $10 of food stamp money to spend at the grocery. But that $10 has been collected, $1 each from 10 self-supporting people, in order to provide it! So they have a total of $10 LESS to spend (be it at the grocery or wherever). It's a zero-sum game.
Now with illegals, they are costing American taxpayers over $100 billion BEYOND what they pay in sales tax or whatever. It's expensive to educate and feed their children, and when you factor in the free stuff they get for their anchor babies, it's even worse.
Removing 20 million illegals (or however many.....we don't know because liberals won't let us ask on the census) who cause a net drain to the economy will help the economy.
You need a different argument if you want to sell that having millions of scofflaws in the country, costing us a fortune, is a benefit to law-abiding Americans.
First, your math is wrong. We pay out in welfare more than we take. The $1 in tax is technically paid out as more than $1 in economic activity.
And even ignoring welfare, which is still money spent in the economy, illegals take jobs that Americans don't want to work, which expands the economy. Every time there's a shortage of laborers for agricultural work, farmers can never replace them with locals. It's empirical evidence that you Cons refuse to acknowledge. It's happened time and time again, abs yout still act like all it takes is a little wage increase to fill the job (;-|).
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobdreamz
I wonder what is the fascination with punishing illegals yet don't hear a peep about punishing the Employers who hire them in the first place?
They wouldn't be here if there weren't jobs for them but that part of the equation gets brushed aside.
Why doesn't Trump ever talk about punishing & arresting these employers who are criminals under our laws?
Why doesn't he ever talk about E-verify?
Just vilify brown people instead and paint them as the major problem.
Guess who makes campaign contributions? You'll rarely go wrong following the $$$.
The OP assumes that there will be an economic collapse. maybe there would be, but the conservatives are not to blame for allowing the system to become dependent upon illegals. The left owns at least as much credit for that.
Illegals need to be dealt with, and by dealt with I don't mean rewarded for breaking our laws.
Agreed, it’s bizzare to think legal conservative Americans would be to blame (save for companies who hire them) for illegal immigrants breaking the laws
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.
