There are no illegal immigrants in America

[Radar]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

You know who else earns more than a general!?!?!?

Whores, drug dealers, shister religious leaders, and John Edwards.

And businessmen, engineers, architects, and yes, successful attorneys like John Edwards. All of those on your list and mine are better people than you.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

And businessmen, engineers, architects, and yes, successful attorneys like John Edwards. All of those on your list and mine are better people than you.

Wait, wait!!! "successful attorneys like John Edwards" who made millions on case law and statutes inacted by Congress!

[busterb]

uphold the Constitution when they hadn't read it or understood it...

Radar. The only thing I've got out of 161 post, is that your maybe a narrow minded sob and haven't changed a single poster's mind. Go to bed

[Radar]

Originally Posted by busterb

Radar. The only thing I've got out of 161 post, is that your maybe a narrow minded sob and haven't changed a single poster's mind. Go to bed

I didn't seek out to change anyone's mind, only to prove the truth and to show that those who claim the government has any authority over immigration are liars, and those who want to force out undocumented Mexican immigrants are racists, xenophobes, and idiots.

How open minded should I be to the wrong answer when I know my answer to be correct?

Originally Posted by Ayn Rand

"In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit."

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

How open minded should I be to the wrong answer when I know my answer to be correct?

You are delusional.

Delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis denoting a psychotic mental illness that involves holding one or more non-bizarre delusions in the absence of any other significant psychopathology (signs or symptoms of mental illness). In particular, a person with delusional disorder has never met any other criteria for schizophrenia and does not have any marked hallucinations, although tactile (touch) or olfactory (smell) hallucinations may be present if they are related to the theme of the delusion.

A person with delusional disorder can be quite functional and does not tend to show any odd or bizarre behavior except as a direct result of the delusional belief. "Despite the encapsulation of the delusional system and the relative sparing of the personality, the patient's way of life is likely to become more and more overwhelmed by the dominating effect of the abnormal beliefs". (Munro, 1999)

It is worth noting that the term paranoia was previously used in psychiatry to denote what is now called 'delusional disorder'. The modern psychiatric use of the word paranoia is subtly different but now rarely refers to this specific diagnosis.

[TheMercenary]

[TheMercenary]

More facts about the Illegal aliens and their effects on our economy:

"Impact of Mexican
Immigration on Public Coffers

So far, this report has generally concentrated on public service use by Mexican immigrants; however, this is only half of the fiscal equation. Immigrants also pay taxes to federal, state, and local governments. The CPS contains estimated federal income tax liabilities for those in the sample. These estimates are based on adjusted gross income, number of dependents, and other tax characteristics. These estimates are useful because they can provide some insight into the likely tax payments made by immigrants and natives. Because of their much lower incomes and their larger family size, Mexican immigrants pay dramatically less in federal income taxes than do natives. The March 2000 CPS indicates that in 1999, the average federal income tax payment by households headed by Mexican immigrants was $2,156, less than one third of the $7,255 average tax contribution made by native households. By design, the federal income tax system is supposed to tax those with higher income and fewer dependents at higher rates than those with lower income and more dependents. So the much lower income tax contributions of Mexican immigrants simply reflect the tax code and not some systematic attempt by Mexican immigrants to avoid paying taxes.

In 1999, 74 percent of households headed by natives had to pay at least some federal income tax, compared to only 59 percent of Mexican immigrant households. Even if one confines the analysis to legal Mexican immigrants, the gap between their tax contributions and those of natives remains large. Using the same method as before to distinguish legal and illegal Mexican immigrant households, the estimated federal income liability of households headed by legal Mexican immigrants in 1999 was $2,538. Thus, the very low tax contribution of Mexican immigrants is not simply or even mostly a function of legal status, but rather reflects their much lower incomes and larger average family size.

The much lower tax payments made by Mexican immigrants point to a fundamental problem associated with unskilled immigration that seems unavoidable. Even if Mexican Immigrants’ use of public services were roughly equal to natives, there would still be a significant drain on public coffers because their average tax payments would be much lower. While much of the fiscal concern centers on use of means-tested programs, clearly tax payments matter at least as much when evaluating the fiscal impact of Mexican immigration. Changing welfare eligibility or other efforts designed to reduce immigrant use of public services will not change the fact that Mexican immigrants pay significantly less in taxes than natives.

While the above analysis provides some insight into the impact of Mexican immigrants on tax receipts at the federal level, it does not show the total fiscal impact of Mexican immigration. Over the last decade, a number of studies have attempted to estimate the total fiscal impact (tax payments minus services used) of immigrants on the United States at the federal, state, and local levels.

The most comprehensive research on this subject was done by the National Research Council (NRC), which is part of the National Academy of Sciences. The study, conducted in 1997, found that more-educated immigrants tend to have higher earnings, lower rates of public service use, and as a result pay more in taxes than they use in services. In contrast, the NRC found that because of their lower incomes and resulting lower tax payments coupled with their heavy use of public services, less-educated immigrants use significantly more in services than they pay in taxes. The NRC estimates indicated that the average immigrant without a high school education imposes a net fiscal burden on public coffers of $89,000 during the course of his or her lifetime. The average immigrant with only a high school education creates a lifetime fiscal burden of $31,000. In contrast, the average immigrant with more than a high school education was found to have a positive fiscal impact of $105,000 in his or her lifetime. The NAS further estimated that the total combined fiscal impact of the average immigrant (all educational categories included) was a negative $3,000. Thus, when all immigrants are examined they are found to have a modest negative impact on public coffers. These figures are only for the original immigrant, they do not include public services used or taxes paid by their U.S.-born descendants.

Using the fiscal analysis developed by the NRC, it is possible to roughly estimate the fiscal effect of adult Mexican immigrants on the United States. Applying the NRC’s estimates by educational attainment and age is possible because the NRC’s research is based on the same data as this study — the March Current Population Survey.28 Using the estimates developed by the NRC and based on the educational attainment and age of newly arrived adult Mexican immigrants in 2000, we find that the lifetime fiscal burden created by the average adult Mexican immigrant is $50,300.29 It should be pointed out that these figures were based on 1996 dollars. Adjusted for inflation, the fiscal burden would be $55,200 in 2000.

Since a very large share of Mexican immigrants have little formal education, the fiscal burden they create seems unavoidable. The modern American labor market offers very limited opportunities for the unskilled — immigrant or native. It therefore should come as no surprise that they use a great deal more in public services than they pay in taxes during the course of their lives. While consistent with previous research as well as common sense, the large fiscal deficit created by Mexican immigration should sound a cautionary note to those who argue that there is no harm in allowing large numbers of unskilled workers from Mexico into the country. Even if employers wish to have access to unskilled immigrant labor, the cost to taxpayers indicates that for the nation this may not be wise. Mexican immigration becomes, in effect, a subsidy for employers of unskilled labor, with taxpayers providing services such as education, health insurance and medical care, and income-transfer programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit to workers who, because of their low incomes, pay nowhere near enough in taxes to cover their consumption of services."

http://www.illegalaliens.us/economics.htm

[TheMercenary]

More on the negative effects of illegal aliens on our economy...

An excerpt follows:

"Business interests however are short-term. Easy immediate access to labour will always be preferred to the costs of training and capital investment for the longer term. In the nature of economic cycles, yesterday’s essential labour can often become, as the defunct factories and mills of Europe have shown, today’s unemployed. Employers who demanded immigrant labour are not held to account for this or required to contribute to subsequent costs of their unemployed former workers. Few things are more permanent that temporary worker from a poor country. If business were made responsible for the lifetime costs of their migrant labour in the same way as they must now deal with the lifetime environmental costs of their products, perhaps enthusiasm for labour migration might be moderated and make way for longer-term investment in capital-intensive restructuring."

Continues:
http://www.populationenvironmentrese...nmigration.pdf

[TheMercenary]

Mass Immigration Cost American Taxpayers $69 Billion Net and 2 Million Jobs
Study by Dr. Donald Huddle Reports Legal Immigration of over 1 Million Per Year Accounts for over 62% of Costs
State Costs to Taxpayers are Also Soaring (1996 Net Costs % up from 1992):

California: $28 billion up 35%

New York: $14 billion up 29%

Texas: $7 billion up 37%

Florida: $6 billion up 77%

The first study of the net cost of immigration to American taxpayers in 1997 conducted by Dr. Donald Huddle, Professor Emeritus of Economics at Rice University, found that:

The nearly 26 million legal and illegal immigrants settling in the United States since 1970 cost taxpayers a net $69 billion in 1997 alone, in excess of taxes those immigrants paid. This represents a cost of $260 in additional taxes paid by each U.S. resident or $1,030 in additional taxes paid by each family of four. This cost is a substantial increase over the net immigration costs of $65 billion ins 1996, $51 billion ins 1994, $44 billion in 1993, and $43 billion in 1992.

Over 62% of the net national cost of immigration in 1996, $40.6 billion, was attributable to legal and legalized (amnesty) immigrants. Illegal immigration generates about 38%, $24 billion of the total net cost. Legal immigration levels are over one million per year, and rising.

During 1996, approximately 2.3 million predominantly low-skill American workers were displaced from their jobs due to the continued heavy influx of immigrant workers since 1970. Taxpayers paid more than $15.2 billion in public assistance for those displaced workers in 1996, including Medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), unemployment compensation, and food stamps.

A net deficit of $8.5 billion dollars to the Social Security system in 1996 is attributable to the economic impact of the foreign-born population. Continued mass immigration threatens the solvency of the Social Security system.

Net cumulative costs for the 1998-2007 decade are projected to reach $932 billion, an average of $93.2 billion per year, even with recent changes in welfare and immigration policies and a prosperous economy, if current mass immigration trends are allowed to continue.

Breakdown for 1997 Costs of Legal Immigration
Public Schools (Primary, Secondary, Higher, etc) $22.5 billion

Bilingual Education, ESOL, ESL Education $ 3.3 billion

Medicaid $12.8 billion

AFDC (for legal and illegal immigrant's offspring) $ 2.4 billion

Social Security $24.8 billion

Supplemental Security Income $ 2.9 billion

Housing Assistance $ 2.6 billion

Criminal Justice $ 2.6 billion

Jobs Lost by Americans $10.8 billion

Other Programs $51.4 billion

1997 Total Costs for LEGAL Immigration: $136 billion

Add 1997 total costs for illegal immigration of $41 billion and subtract an estimated $108 billion in taxes paid by all immigrants (legal and illegal) in 1997 to obtain the overall net figure of $69 billion charged to you, and other American taxpayers.

Other key facts regarding immigration are:

1.) If current immigration trends continue, the current U.S. population of

274 million will nearly double to over 500,000,000 by 2050. (The U.S. was 135 million at the end of WWII.)

2.) Harvard Professor George Borjas demonstrated that mass immigration costs American workers $133 billion per year in wage depression and job loss.

3.) The prestigious National Research Council found at the state and local levels (which bear most of the burden for K-12 education) the net fiscal burden of the average immigrant-headed household (i.e., after subtracting state and local taxes the household paid) was:

$1,484 per immigrant-headed household in New Jersey (in the 1989-1990 fiscal year); and $3,463 in California (in 1994-1995)(p. 276-277)

Why should we continue to allow our own working poor, homeless, and unemployed to continue to suffer from the job loss, wage depression, and other burdens imposed by mass immigration?

http://www.carryingcapacity.org/huddlenr.html

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Radar

There was really nothing to respond to. My thread isn't about whether or not government SHOULD have the power to make immigration laws.

I'm stating the FACT that it DOES NOT have any Constitutional authority to create or enforce them right now.

Right, so you didn't want to discuss it? You just went in with your view and wanted to shove it down everyone else's throat? You just want people to acknowledge that your way of thinking is right?

My question was, what if your way is right? What then?

If you don't want to answer that question, then it proves my first statement because you're not interested in discussing anything other than your point of view which you've made clear you're not going to change.

So, if we work on the assumption that you're correct what then? Do you have a response? Have you thought beyond your own views at all?

[TheMercenary]

Post your citation please so we can examine where it comes from and where they gather their facts from. Thanks.

[Radar]

Why should I? So you can attack the source?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Radar

Why should I? So you can attack the source?

Of course. You hold yourself up on these forums to be a "Constitutional Scholar". Anyone who has attended advanced education beyond a 4 year degree and been involved in research knows that not a single research project or thesis can be presented without citations which must be scrutinized by fellow members of the educational community. All I am asking is for you to present your citations so they may be examined in detail as to their source and factual basis. Pretty simple and standard request in the realm of debate.

[Aliantha]

It's from here

Possibly biased

[busterb]

How open minded should I be to the wrong answer when I know my answer to be correct?

NUff said. Time to put this to bed, and just not for tonight!