Should Illegal Immigrants get Welfare

[Elf Grinder 3000]

As I see it, the government doesn't do wholesale deportations, either now or under Republican administrations, for many of the very reasons cited in Loss Leaders post. I suspect that they don't know the answers to all of Loss Leaders questions. I certainly don't. So yes, please explain the details. I think that is what is being asked, and if you have practical solutions, it might help the government implement your policies.

Wrong!

Operation wetbback...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

 

[bit_pattern]

What happened during Operation ******?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Part of the problem are the conditions that they have in their home countries. A greater part is that they can find better pay and conditions in the USA.

Clearly the solution is to make the United States less appealing as a place to live and work. According to conservatives, Obama has been hard at work solving this particular problem.

...yes I can get my birth certificate in about 30 seconds.

From a jail cell? I assume that's where you'd want suspected illegals to be held until their court date.

By the way. I'm against so much cheap labor, it holds our wages down.

Kind of weird to see conservatives swap talking points between illegal immigration (low wages bad) and minimum wage increases (low wages good).

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

Clearly the solution is to make the United States less appealing as a place to live and work. According to conservatives, Obama has been hard at work solving this particular problem.




From a jail cell? I assume that's where you'd want suspected illegals to be held until their court date.




Kind of weird to see conservatives swap talking points between illegal immigration (low wages bad) and minimum wage increases (low wages good).

At the beginning of this thread

Liberals: illegals are great for this country, they are hard working and contribute

Conservatives: 85% of head of household immigrants from Mexico are on welfare. Illegals can get up to 22K from the EITC. Illegals with 2 kids in public school cost taxpayers 22K per year.

Liberals: huh, can you legally define illegals? won't all the illegals die of starvation

Conservatives: Therefore illegals are a drain on our nations resources

Liberals: yeah but can you deport all of them, how do you define illegals

Conservatives: operation wetback

Liberals: Ok we were wrong you win!

 

[Giordano]

Wrong!

Operation wetbback...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

Good looking to discover something over 60 years old. I presume that we might not call it "Operation Wetback" now, not only because of that pesky discomfort of liberals for calling people offensive names, but because immigration methods and source countries have diversified since then.

Of course, for me, your cited operation is associated with illegality and abuse, and didn't solve any of the problems we discussed (how many USA citizens and legal immigrants were sent to Mexico, and without an opportunity to present their cases in a real court?). But it did manage to deport over a million Mexican-looking, illegal alien-looking people at a time the Mexican government was willing to take them. So I gather the methods used here are fine by you?

 

[Giordano]

At the beginning of this thread

Liberals: illegals are great for this country, they are hard working and contribute

Conservatives: 85% of head of household immigrants from Mexico are on welfare. Illegals can get up to 22K from the EITC. Illegals with 2 kids in public school cost taxpayers 22K per year.

Liberals: huh, can you legally define illegals? won't all the illegals die of starvation

Conservatives: Therefore illegals are a drain on our nations resources

Liberals: yeah but can you deport all of them, how do you define illegals

Conservatives: operation wetback

Liberals: Ok we were wrong you win!

Summary: don't bother me with any facts or complexities. I won't change anything that I previously posted in response. I don't even need to explain how to achieve my goals. Liberals suck. I win!

 

[Shalamar]

At the beginning of this thread

Liberals: illegals are great for this country, they are hard working and contribute

Strawman.

Conservatives: 85% of head of household immigrants from Mexico are on welfare. Illegals can get up to 22K from the EITC. Illegals with 2 kids in public school cost taxpayers 22K per year.

Unsupported assertion.

Liberals: huh, can you legally define illegals? won't all the illegals die of starvation

Strawman.

Conservatives: Therefore illegals are a drain on our nations resources

Liberals: yeah but can you deport all of them, how do you define illegals

Strawman.

Conservatives: operation wetback

Liberals: Ok we were wrong you win!

Well, if you keep arguing with what you THINK 'liberals' should say, of course you 'win'.

If by win, you mean fail.

STOP the insults, and try to have a conversation.

 

[logger]

Clearly the solution is to make the United States less appealing as a place to live and work. According to conservatives, Obama has been hard at work solving this particular problem.

Agreed, liberal policies will do that.

From a jail cell? I assume that's where you'd want suspected illegals to be held until their court date.

Yes in a jail cell, they broke the law, they are also very much a flight risk, no?

How about when people get their birth certificate, the tax payer will pay for a private mail box where they can store it for life? Lordy.

Or how about people take personal responsibility for their lives. Why do you liberals insist on wiping everyone's rear end.

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

Summary: don't bother me with any facts or complexities. I won't change anything that I previously posted in response. I don't even need to explain how to achieve my goals. Liberals suck. I win!

There were no facts in this response

85% of head of household immigrant from mexico are on welfare
http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Illegals can get the EITC
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-receive-earned-income-tax-credit_841496.html

Illegals with 3 kids cost on average 36,000 in public education costs
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html

Poor immigrants cost the states on medicaid fees
http://www.cis.org/medicaid-costs


WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS?

 

[Shalamar]

Agreed, liberal policies will do that.

One party conservative rule will fix that. Then everything will be perfect. Right?

Yes in a jail cell, they broke the law, they are also very much a flight risk, no?

How about when people get their birth certificate, the tax payer will pay for a private mail box where they can store it for life? Lordy.

Or how about people take personal responsibility for their lives. Why do you liberals insist on wiping everyone's rear end.

That is not what was asked. If you were thrown in a jail cell under suspicion of being an illegal, would you be able to provide your birth certificate, or other proof of citizenship?

Carrying around certain ID's.. Birth certificate, Green care, Social Security number at all times is risky.

 

[Giordano]

Yes in a jail cell, they broke the law, they are also very much a flight risk, no?

How about when people get their birth certificate, the tax payer will pay for a private mail box where they can store it for life? Lordy.

Or how about people take personal responsibility for their lives. Why do you liberals insist on wiping everyone's rear end.

I thought a birth certificate wasn't enough. Weren't you advocating that simple birth in the USA would not confer citizenship? But even if that was someone else in this thread, then you appear to advocate that we would all have to carry around our birth certificate least we be accused of being an illegal immigrant. Or a much more difficult to forge national ID card that describes our citizenship or legal resident status (remember credit card information is stolen and misused all the time already. In fact, I think that forging birth certificates is already a means that illegal immigrants use to establish an fake identity in the USA).

Sort of an internal passport to pull out so we can get out of jail if arrested on suspicion. Actually, ID papers are okay by me, but I just want to be certain that is what you are advocating.

I am not certain why this relates right now to a personal responsibility issue vs. the "liberal nanny state" I presume you disfavor, but if you are advocating a national ID that everyone must always carry on one's person at all times, then it would certainly be a personal responsibility to carry it. No one else can carry it for you- unless it is a case of identity theft. Hang on to it even if someone tries to steal it!

 

[Giordano]

There were no facts in this response

85% of head of household immigrant from mexico are on welfare
http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Illegals can get the EITC
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-receive-earned-income-tax-credit_841496.html

Illegals with 3 kids cost on average 36,000 in public education costs
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html

Poor immigrants cost the states on medicaid fees
http://www.cis.org/medicaid-costs


WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS?

Read my posts if you want to find the questions that I asked you. I never disputed any of your "facts" because "facts" are not so easy to determine here (we are talking about a largely hidden illegal population from who it is difficult to obtain accurate data). I've decided it is not particularly useful to try a citation war, with me citing my sources and you citing yours. In fact, I am willing to state that all illegal aliens are criminals because, duh, they are illegally here.

Instead, I presented some of the obvious complexities and asked what solutions you (or others here) might have to undisputed problems (like how would you identify an illegal alien versus a legal one or a citizen if you wanted to arrest and deport them). I am not taking a position in asking these questions, but I don't see how one can begin to deport illegal aliens rather than legal citizens as you propose if you can't tell them apart. Or without making police raids on businesses and housing.

If you think that these are somehow fake problems invented by liberals, then I remind you as an example that my friend was nearly deported from Texas to Mexico because, being a third generation Italian-American, he had dark skin.

But I can't find where you addressed any of these specific problems. I have found instead several examples of where you have declared, "I win!" Fine by me.

 

[Brian-M]

85% of head of household immigrant from mexico are on welfare
http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

*Looks at article*

85% of families headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) from Mexico who has been resident for 15-16 years and has at least one child under 18 received some form of welfare benefit (such as reduced school lunch prices) in 2009.
http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

FTFY.

Not as pithy, but more accurate.

But let's not just restrict it to that 15-16 year residency range:

Households with children with the highest welfare use rates are those headed by immigrants from the Dominican Republic (82 percent), Mexico and Guatemala (75 percent), and Ecuador (70 percent).

Or, if you wanted to provide a non-misleading figure, you could just have quoted from the first bullet-point in the article:

In 2009 (based on data collected in 2010), 57 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal and illegal) with children (under 18) used at least one welfare program

If you don't include only households with children, welfare use drops to 37%.

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

*
If you don't include only households with children, welfare use drops to 37%.

That's why I said head of household

Also notice that immigrants from the UK are on welfare 7% of the time

We should be letting more immigrants in from the UK

 

[Giordano]

We should be letting more immigrants in from the UK

Do you know that many of them talk funny? And IMHO don't have nearly the same quality endogenous cuisine as do Central and South Americans.

 

[Minoosh]

There were no facts in this response

85% of head of household immigrant from mexico are on welfare
http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Nothing I can find on that link supports the headline you put on it.

ETA: I see others have addressed this. I don't know why you play so fast and loose with your claims; it does not help credibility.

Also notice that immigrants from the UK are on welfare 7% of the time

They are on welfare 7 percent of the time? Or, 7 percent used welfare programs sometime during the year? But then it really does not make sense to ask you for clarification. If English isn't your first language, you are doing a pretty good job. If English is your first language - oy vey iz mir!

 

[Minoosh]

Per "Weekly Standard" link:

A recent Homeland Security Committee hearing on immigration revealed an alarming consequence of President Obama’s executive amnesty—that illegal immigrants with deferred status may be able to receive the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Moreover, this person, who is here in the U.S. unlawfully, could be able to file an amended tax return for up to the last three tax years, possibly receiving upwards of $24,000 in tax credits.

If "this person" - the article takes an inexplicable swing from plural to singular - has received "executive amnesty," then he or she is not in the U.S. "unlawfully." He or she is here legally under deferred deportation status.

So the headline "Illegals Can Get the EITC" is inaccurate, and also states as fact something the article couches in conditional terms.

Why do you feel the need to overreach? Is this some sly way of debunking your own claims?

 

[Minoosh]

Elf's headline:

Poor immigrants cost the state on medicaid fees

Article:

Illegal aliens remain ineligible for Medicaid beyond emergency services. However, this could change if they are legalized.

This has got to be some kind of performance art. Make something up, then link to an article that doesn't support your claim.

ETA:
ELf:

That's why I said head of household

But you omitted the qualifier, "with at least one child."

It's almost like you are deliberately distorting facts!

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

Elf's headline:

Poor immigrants cost the state on medicaid fees

Article:


This has got to be some kind of performance art. Make something up, then link to an article that doesn't support your claim.

Apparently medicaid is being used by hospitals to pay for illegals medical care

http://kaiserhealthnews.org/news/medicaid-illegal-immigrant-emergency-care/

 

[Elf Grinder 3000]

Per "Weekly Standard" link:



If "this person" - the article takes an inexplicable swing from plural to singular - has received "executive amnesty," then he or she is not in the U.S. "unlawfully." He or she is here legally under deferred deportation status.

So the headline "Illegals Can Get the EITC" is inaccurate, and also states as fact something the article couches in conditional terms.

Why do you feel the need to overreach? Is this some sly way of debunking your own claims?

Obama is refusing the execute the law

But the law is the law and you are incorrect yet again