Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2014, 01:27 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,380 posts, read 16,289,495 times
Reputation: 5922

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover View Post
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers (2010)

Federation for American Immigration Reform "estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion; nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84 billion at the state leave.

It does not matter what you believe this is the truth.

Plus you can have the fence built in a year, damn the studies, and or "wait and see" illness of the leftist..Build it now, You would have at least 100,000 men working, Welders, Plumbers, Electricians, Tech Support, National Guard providing security and flying in heavy equipment.

Not to mention all the veterans that will work as the Border Patrol.

It will stop a vast majority of them, that and make it harder to get a visa, when they get a visa make them put down a despot, if they over stay they will have a bounty issued for their arrest.

Their is no reason why this will not work but the unwillingness of the left, who needs to import millions of poverty stricken, collectivistic voters(both legally and illegally) who will support the same failed ideologies in order to get elect, playing the cards of race and class warfare....
1. Your link is form an organizations who's sole purpose is to reduce the number of immigrants, legal and illegal, so excuse my skepticism.

2. 52 Billion of those dollars in your study come from education at the local level. Sorry, the majority of those kids are likely citizens, and would be educated regardless of if their parents where here.

3. You did not provide a link for your photo/infograph, so i have to rely on simple googling to see the Republican plan, What they have in committee in the House, looks nothing like this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/us...atus.html?_r=0



http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...-with-the-law/

Why are you blaming "the left" when the Republican plan doesnt even do what you want it to do and they cant even get that passed among their own caucus ?????

 
Old 06-09-2014, 01:33 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,421,472 times
Reputation: 22471
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
If you really think that women have babies so they can get greater benefits I would say with certainty that you`ve never raised children. By raising children I`m not talking about taking the boy fishing or to his little league game.
It makes no sense in this day and age with so many methods of birth control and sterilization that so many women are having babies they could never afford -- except that the babies bring in all kinds of welfare handouts. And -- these women are often not doing much raising of their children. They don't prepare them for school, they don't feed them, the schools also have to do that.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 06:12 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,602 posts, read 26,210,532 times
Reputation: 12628
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
Odd, 6 Southeastern Red States, including Tn, rank amongst the worst third nationally in terms of state unemployment rates.

Yes, Texas has had good growth, but if it were a tax issue or a regional issue why have their neighbors stunk so much at job creation? Why must you CHERRYPICK just one Red State?


Blacks are more likely to be unemployed.

Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, etc have large black populations.

Red states without large black populations (Idaho, Wyoming, North Daokta, etc) don't have high unemployment rates.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 06:38 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,544 posts, read 44,242,189 times
Reputation: 13498
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
If you really think that women have babies so they can get greater benefits I would say with certainty that you`ve never raised children.
The evidence is pretty clear...

1) Nearly half of all U.S. births are paid for by Medicaid (medical care public assistance program for the poor).
Medicaid Pays For Nearly Half of All Births in the United States | publichealth.gwu.edu

2) Those who receive public assistance have a birth rate 3 times higher than those who don't. Stats and citations, here:
//www.city-data.com/forum/32045595-post217.html

3) 70% of those who are born into poverty never even make it to the middle class.
Only 30% of those born poor ever make it to the middle class

How is that sustainable going forward? What's your plan for paying to support all those additional people, 70% of which are likely to need some or several forms of public assistance for life?
 
Old 06-09-2014, 06:46 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,300 posts, read 16,984,207 times
Reputation: 17335
Dems apply the slippery slope strategy to helping the poor.

That is, they imagine the least likely outcome of their 'aid' programs far into the future and sell that as today's reality.

All their social programs take generations to be achieved and never are realized. meanwhile those they pretend to help are sacrificed for a theoretical future promise for which the dems recieve payment today..

Obama promises skyrocketing energy prices.
Obama then tells us the other day that electricity cost will drop......... in the year 2030.
Practicality is not their forte.

the 'dems' willingly sacrifice those they pretend to help in an effort to apply failed strategies in support of a failed philosophy.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 07:10 AM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,209,797 times
Reputation: 3444
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Blacks are more likely to be unemployed.

Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, etc have large black populations.

Red states without large black populations (Idaho, Wyoming, North Daokta, etc) don't have high unemployment rates.
Nice cherry picking. TN is 75% white and has a 8.4% UE rate. KY is 86% white and has a 8.7% unemployment rate. OK is 68% white and has a 5.5% UE rate.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 07:44 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,866 posts, read 46,323,098 times
Reputation: 18520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stizzel View Post
Well you sure made a strong argument. Its well known that all those tech start ups are being done in Georgia, the Carolinas, Alabama, Tennessee, you know, the epitome of red states. I mean none of those start ups are flocking to the bay area at all what so ever

Texas is a rare exception, due to the oil boom. And good for Texas for being blessed with an abundant resource in high demand creating good jobs. But outside those areas of work, many of the new jobs created were low paying or govt. employees

A lot of rural texas is cattle & corn country.
Have you seen the price of beef and corn lately?
Oil just adds to the farmers building their herds and purchasing more property.
With people flooding to Texas, there is a new home building boom, where they cannot find enough illegal aliens to build them fast enough.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 10:13 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,303,336 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The evidence is pretty clear...

1) Nearly half of all U.S. births are paid for by Medicaid (medical care public assistance program for the poor).
Medicaid Pays For Nearly Half of All Births in the United States | publichealth.gwu.edu

2) Those who receive public assistance have a birth rate 3 times higher than those who don't. Stats and citations, here:
//www.city-data.com/forum/32045595-post217.html

3) 70% of those who are born into poverty never even make it to the middle class.
Only 30% of those born poor ever make it to the middle class

How is that sustainable going forward? What's your plan for paying to support all those additional people, 70% of which are likely to need some or several forms of public assistance for life?

??? Stop calling it that and explain why millions of poor Americans don't qualify for Medicaid.

??? What happened to all that upward mobility conservatives crow about?
 
Old 06-09-2014, 10:24 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,773 posts, read 18,294,212 times
Reputation: 12001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Oh yes while many Blue States look good on paper the trend is reversing. Yes, there are many companies based in California and New Jersey but these were founded when these states were less fiscally liberal. No major companies are being founded in California or NJ. Most of the new job growth is in Red States like Texas and North Carolina with low taxes, few regulations, and right to work laws. Many companies have relocated to Texas from California. New Jersey and California are seeing zero job growth and now just want to raise more taxes to get more revenue, which will drive more people away.
One more thing about Southern states for jobs, low wages. No pesky unions to deal with.

The South is just a stepping stone for those companies trying to get out from under having to pay a decent wage. Next stop Far East.

A lot of companies that locate in the blue states is because of the greater number of higher educated workers.

Locate North and West for designers and engineers, locate South for cheap wages.
 
Old 06-09-2014, 10:42 AM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,368,134 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
A joke that's been going around Facebook says "Obama so loved the poor that he created millions more".

The Democrats only answer to poverty in America is more government handouts, Medicaid, more unemployment benefits, Obamacare, expanding Medicaid etc. All these things do is foster a culture of dependency and entitlement, and simply make poverty more comfortable. But these policies never get anyone ahead. In particular, more generous unemployment benefits are a disincentive for the recipient to look for work more aggressively.
That is an illogical strawman argument. Where has a democrat ever said that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
The answer to poverty is creating jobs so those who want to can work their way out of poverty. This can be done by creating a business friendly conducive to job growth. Democrat policies like high taxes and overregulation are hostile to businesses.
Yes, the answer to poverty is creating jobs. That is why the Republican war on welfare has been an utter failure. When Republicans reformed Welfare under Clinton's Administration, poverty decreased only slightly (due to booming economy). Welfare reform has nothing to do with poverty, because most people in poverty are working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Some of y'all also wonder why people in "Red States" often vote Republicans despite poverty in these states. I'm going to try to explain as a current resident of West Virginia who grew up in Louisiana and also lived in liberal Maryland for a long time. WV and LA have higher poverty rates, but the majority of West Virginians and Louisianans are still middle class or blue collar and DO NOT depend on welfare. Yet because of the poor people around, we see welfare being abused all the time. I challenge you to stand behind someone in line at the supermarket waiting forever while they can 5 different WIC cards and EBT things. Then outside you see them getting into a brand new SUV. I challenge you to experience this like I have and not be Republican. I personally know people who cheat the system and it disgusts me. I think unemployment benefits and workers comp are already too generous. WC is also very subject to fraud and dishonesty. I've heard that up to half of workers comp claims are at least partially phony or exaggerated.
So because a few people cheat the system, we should disband the system? It helps far more people than the cheaters. You proved my point magically. WV and LA have higher poverty rates and vote against improving their situation. Just brilliant.

Ideology should not supercede rational thinking. Unfortunately, this is what happens in conservative lala land.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Democrat policies like the war on coal and the EPA regulations have put many people out of work in West Virginia and contributed to many social problems here. West Virginia is actually a Democrat state since the state house is controlled by Democrats, and the governor is a Democrat. WV is only Republican when it comes to presidential elections, and only since 2000 when Al Gore proved hostile to coal, which is the main industry in West Virginia and employs more people than any other. Entire families and communities depend on coal yet the liberal elite want to shut down our mines and attack our industry through these carbon emissions laws for power plants. By the way when electric rates skyrocket, its poor families that will be more affected than the liberal elite. Our governor appeased Obama by expanding Medicaid and accepting Obamacare. The poorest counties in WV are the most Democrat ones. Democrat control has done nothing to help this state except get people accustomed to welfare checks and government freebies.
Expanding Medicaid only helps the state. Please tell us how Medicaid hurts poor people. Don't worry I'll wait.

EPA regulations are not up for debate. This is not China. I don't want to wear masks outside just to grow the economy a bit more. People should learn some real skills (like sustainable technology, computers, or skilled manufacturing) and not depend on pillaging the environment to make a profit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Living in liberal Maryland has also made me more conservative. I am the son of LEGAL immigrants and my taxes and tuition were increased so illegal aliens can benefit. Welfare abuse is the order of the day in Baltimore and PG County.
Maryland has a higher standard of living then most states in this country. Maryland has the wealthiest counties in the USA near DC. Maryland is such a bad place to be! (Don't worry, NYC, California, Chicago, Seattle, DC.. they are all liberal hellholes too. Terrible economies... )
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.


Closed Thread


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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top