Birthright Citizenship

[carlitos]

Babies cost money.

Year|Population|GDP Per Capita
1960| 179m |$3000
1970| 203m |$5246
1980| 226m | $12600
1990| 249m |$23954
2000| 281m |$36500
2010| 308m |$48375

In this discussion, I had assumed we were speaking of the welfare of the country vis a vis policy, not looking at the individual family level. Can you please help me understand how babies cost the country money? In what sense?

ETA - I see that our economic growth far exceeds our population growth in recent decades. We get population from 2 sources - immigration and births net of deaths. If babies cost the economy money, that means that the immigrants are delivering more than 100% of our economic growth?

 

[Belz...]

Actually the actions required following the death of a close relative can cost a lot of money.

The solution is to let them rot on the fields of Falkirk.

 

[LSSBB]

Pew Research

Thanks, I see it has been declining since the recession, although I would expect that to increase as the job market tightens and the U.S. becomes a more attractive migration target.

 

[Steve]

The solution is to let them rot on the fields of Falkirk.

Well yeah, but shipping them all the way to Falkirk isn't cheap either. Now there's a park down the road that has a rather large open field......

 

[LSSBB]

45% pay no federal income tax. But of course there is state taxes, property taxes, sales tax...

Citation there, also. I've seen reports that show illegal immigrants get their pay withheld by employers, and wiki references a 2007 report showing 50-75% pay taxes, and your number (55% pay) is at the low end of the range.

 

[Belz...]

Well yeah, but shipping them all the way to Falkirk isn't cheap either. Now there's a park down the road that has a rather large open field......

I'm sure if you send enough of them at once, Amazon will do it free of shipping charges.

 

[lobosrul5]

Citation there, also. I've seen reports that show illegal immigrants get their pay withheld by employers, and wiki references a 2007 report showing 50-75% pay taxes, and your number (55% pay) is at the low end of the range.

There are really 3 scenarios for that:

1) Cash under the table. No withholdings.
2) Employee has falsified or stolen identity, then yes there are withholdings.
3) Employer knows the employee is illegal and withholds payroll taxes, but pockets them.

Pretty hard to say which happens the most.

 

[Hellbound]

There are really 3 scenarios for that:

1) Cash under the table. No withholdings.
2) Employee has falsified or stolen identity, then yes there are withholdings.
3) Employer knows the employee is illegal and withholds payroll taxes, but pockets them.

Pretty hard to say which happens the most.

I agree. And the common thread on all of those scenarios is that this is a problem with the employers, not the immigrants.

Yet no one is arguing for more enforcement against the ones actually causing the problem.

 

[Bob001]

There are really 3 scenarios for that:

1) Cash under the table. No withholdings.
2) Employee has falsified or stolen identity, then yes there are withholdings.
3) Employer knows the employee is illegal and withholds payroll taxes, but pockets them.
Pretty hard to say which happens the most.

That would be tax fraud under federal law and theft under local law, and other crimes as well. The IRS doesn't ask whether your employees are legal; if they work for you, you have to pay their payroll taxes. How many employers do you think are trying to pull that?

 

[carlitos]

There are really 3 scenarios for that:

1) Cash under the table. No withholdings.
2) Employee has falsified or stolen identity, then yes there are withholdings.
3) Employer knows the employee is illegal and withholds payroll taxes, but pockets them.

Pretty hard to say which happens the most.

2.1) Illegal employees list a high number of dependents to lower the withholding rate. Note they still get stuck with their half of SS and FICA.

 

[ponderingturtle]

That would be tax fraud under federal law and theft under local law, and other crimes as well. The IRS doesn't ask whether your employees are legal; if they work for you, you have to pay their payroll taxes. How many employers do you think are trying to pull that?

Yea failing to do withholdings is the fastest way to federal prison for tax evasion.

 

[xjx388]

I think the rule of so applies here. Many posters have provided arguments that go far beyond your bullet points below. You don't seem too interested in engaging those points.



These aren't honest representations of the arguments presented.



To the extent we're talking about jus soli in the abstract, we can leave current US politics out. As soon as you want the discussion to be about what the US should do at this point in history, you can't ignore the current cultural and political landscape.

Your post here seems to suggest that you want to discuss what the US should do here and now. You use the words "we can't change" to frame the discussion around the US choice moving forward, but ignore the actual cultural and political landscape. That's a very specific interest that I'm not sure there's much use in discussing and clearly no interest outside yours. It's sort of like "If you ignore calories fat and salt, can I eat nothing but big macs?" Maybe, but it's not a very interesting question and has little to do with whether you should eat nothing but big macs in the real world where they do have fat, calories and salt.

As many in this thread have already said, if the US were a different place with a different history and political reality, abolishing jus soli or never having had it might well make sense. Given the actual situation it does not.

What more would you actually like to argue about that?

Well, not to answer for Joe . . .

I'm not sure I understand this "if the US were a different place with a different history and political reality," argument. It certainly hasn't stopped Congress from proposing and even passing laws that break from our history and political reality.

Secondly, we can certainly talk about how to move forward without the "But Trump is dumb if he thinks he can EO it away!" arguments. That's what the other thread is for, which I have avoided because I'm not interested in arguing about Trump or what he thinks. I'm interested in moving towards reforming immigration. And you are right, we do need to discuss the current environment, but I'm confident we can do that without invoking the "But Trump . . ." crap.

Finally, I think it's entirely fair to characterize many of the arguments here as "Ending birthright citizenship is motivated by racism." I don't think asking questions like "What color are the babies," moves us forward at all. I am certainly not motivated by racism, being descended from people who came over from Mexico and having brown skin.

 

[lobosrul5]

That would be tax fraud under federal law and theft under local law, and other crimes as well. The IRS doesn't ask whether your employees are legal; if they work for you, you have to pay their payroll taxes. How many employers do you think are trying to pull that?

Large ones, probably none. But I actually had a job where my employer did that (< 10 employees). None of my income was reported to the IRS or social security administration even though he withheld it.

 

[eeyore1954]

Citation there, also. I've seen reports that show illegal immigrants get their pay withheld by employers, and wiki references a 2007 report showing 50-75% pay taxes, and your number (55% pay) is at the low end of the range.

I wasn't referring to illegal immigrant I was referring to what percentage of the US pays federal income tax.

I am sure some illegal immigrants do have taxes withheld but every one I have knowledge of their job circumstance gets paid off the books.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I wasn't referring to illegal immigrant I was referring to what percentage of the US pays federal income tax.

I am sure some illegal immigrants do have taxes withheld but every one I have knowledge of their job circumstance gets paid off the books.

SSA estimates 1.8 million illegal immigrants are contributing to social security.

 

[eeyore1954]

That would be tax fraud under federal law and theft under local law, and other crimes as well. The IRS doesn't ask whether your employees are legal; if they work for you, you have to pay their payroll taxes. How many employers do you think are trying to pull that?

Some do just as some people withhold sales tax and with no intention of remitting it all to the state.
From my experience it is more often a case of cash flow problems that get out of hand rather than toward illegal aliens. People are short the money one quarter or whenever the taxes are do they think I will catch up next time but if the business doesn't turn around they never do.

 

[eeyore1954]

SSA estimates 1.8 million illegal immigrants are contributing to social security.

Higher than I would have thought.

 

[casebro]

SSA estimates 1.8 million illegal immigrants are contributing to social security.

Is that why neither party wants to enforce the immigration laws that are already on the books?

$10/hr, 2,000 hours per year, 13% to SS, times 1.8M, = $468 million dollars into SS, and few of them stick around to collect any pensions.

The Dems say the Republican employers want the cheap labor, the Repubs say the Dems want new librul voters. But those are both BS. There are plenty of Dem employers, ans not all illegals vote. So what is the real reason to not enforce immigration laws by both parties? Merely because both parties are actaully mad e up of politicians who need controversy- "Keep the voters scared so they'll vote for me to lead them to safety"?

I live in California where brown people are now the majority. With such a rapid influx that the society has changed to be more like Mexico than the good old USA. Which is what legal quotas were written to prevent. I guess pretty soon they will stop coming, once California is just like living in Mexico- Drug cartels and socialism, corrupt judicial system.

 

[LSSBB]

Is that why neither party wants to enforce the immigration laws that are already on the books?

$10/hr, 2,000 hours per year, 13% to SS, times 1.8M, = $468 million dollars into SS, and few of them stick around to collect any pensions.

The Dems say the Republican employers want the cheap labor, the Repubs say the Dems want new librul voters. But those are both BS. There are plenty of Dem employers, ans not all illegals vote. So what is the real reason to not enforce immigration laws by both parties? Merely because both parties are actaully mad e up of politicians who need controversy- "Keep the voters scared so they'll vote for me to lead them to safety"?

I live in California where brown people are now the majority. With such a rapid influx that the society has changed to be more like Mexico than the good old USA. Which is what legal quotas were written to prevent. I guess pretty soon they will stop coming, once California is just like living in Mexico- Drug cartels and socialism, corrupt judicial system.

You don't like seeing more brown people?

What evidence do you have that these "brown people" in general would like to institute "Drug cartels and socialism, corrupt judicial system"? And anecdotes or sporadic police reports don't count for a general population.

 

[Bob001]

.... not all illegals vote. .....

If you think any illegals register and vote, it's up to your side to prove it. Why would they expose themselves to federal and state felony charges just to vote when they go to such lengths to avoid all other official attention?

This is all part of the "voter fraud" fantasy.