With beliefs like that I'm glad you weren't born in Nazi Germany. Civil disobedience is an american tradition.
With beliefs like that I'm glad you weren't born in Nazi Germany. Civil disobedience is an american tradition.
Only within reason, laws have to be respected at some level in society or you have a breakdown of society. Having the odd joint is against the law in many places and that's reasonable to subvert, but to physically harm others or steal is a clear example of overstepping. Even if we go down to a purely civil matter such as not paying taxes, the law must be enforced to ensure the stability of society. What gets me is how you're unable to understand the nuance of this and have to jump to making nazi comparisons, it speaks volumes about your perception of what are otherwise complex issues.
In terms of border enforcement, civil disobedience or not, the borders need to be enforced to stop a floodgates opening type situation. As it stands, if there were only a few border jumpers it wouldn't be such an issue. Instead the number has crept up to the point where there are millions of "undocumented" (illegal) migrants residing in the states. Even what are seen as unfair laws are often in place to do as we say in Britain, prevent people from taking the piss.
Actually if the colony was quite new, despite heavily reduced numbers there would have been a good possibility that an indigenous tribe or state could destroy it especially if it was nomadic. Take for example the Mapuche who through a series of revolts over the 16th to early 19th centuries managed to destroy seven major Spanish outposts in Chile multiple times from a period from 1598 to the mid 17th centuries, halting the Spanish conquest of Araucania and the Mapuche managed to retain their independence until the mid to late 19th century when Argentina and Chile managed to conquer the Mapuche and the rest of Patagonia.
Also I think you're overestimating the role of superior European technology had in the conquest of the Americas, gunpowder weapons and horses especially during the 15th to early 17th centuries were often in short supply. Arqubuses and cavalry often made great psychological weapons at first due to their noise but over time the natives would gradually develop new tactics to deal and would get used to them, allowing the natives to easily counteract them. By around the mid 17th to 18th centuries, indigenous tribes all over the Americas were using metal tools, lots of guns and horses completely transforming their entire lifestyle and methods of warfare. The Spanish often had to rely on local infighting and tens or even hundreds of thousands of native auxilaries and sometimes an absurd amount of luck to conquer the Aztecs, the Incan Empire and other indigenous civilisations.
What speaks volumes is that you don't understand how our society works. First off the US accepts less proportional immigrants and refugees than the UK does by almost 50%, Second the US's legal immigration waitlist for most countries (and we sort it by country which means some have no waitlist) is up to 22 years preventing anyone from legally migrating no matter what the circumstances, Third immigrants in the US pay taxes and especially undocumented ones use almost no social welfare whatsoever.
There is no floodgates situation, there are not a higher number of undocumented migrants living in the US than most western countries, in fact there's far fewer.
https://immigration.procon.org/view....ourceID=005235
There's about the same as elsewhere, except that we have significantly more harmful laws:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...countries.html
Ultimately, undocumented immigrants qualify for no state aid, they work for jobs which are automatically assessed taxes because it provides the businesses which hire them plausible deniability (businesses are culpable for paying immigrants under the table) allowing them to hire immigrants with impunity. They pay billions of dollars in taxes and see none of it back.
I also think the UK accepts far, far too many migrants as is. That the USA accepts proportionally less does not necessarily make it a-okay. A country is not obligated to let anyone in.
As for your last line in bold:
In post #414:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post15622566
Refugees cost more than they provide for the USA.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...llion-annuall/
It is not a clear cut situation of immigrants being a net benefit to the country economically. It takes a lot of time for a newly arrived citizen to contribute. Many of the sources I checked out other than that posted share the same conclusion that working out the precise costs of illegal migration or immigration in general is extremely difficult. As such it is inappropriate for either of us to make sweeping assertions about the costs or benefits of migration in the USA.The National Academies found that first-generation immigrants (who were born outside of the United States) cost governments more money than the native-born population. The costs are largely taken on by state and local governments that educate the immigrants’ children.
But members of the second generation "are among the strongest economic and fiscal contributors in the U.S. population," the report said, with tax contributions greater than their parents and the native-born population.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
From your own source^. I see you're regressed into lie mode now, why debate when you can just blatantly lie about everything? This is your own source. Did you read it? Did you look at it? This is at the top of it.
Step it up mate, if this is not a simple mistake its arguing in extremely bad faith.
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fi...mmigration.pdf
Again you're asserting that migration is universally an economic benefit when the reality is more complex and difficult to measure. I'm not going to assert migrants are universally bad because that's out of line from what the evidence holds in the same way seeing it as a universal positive is.
The available estimates of the budgetary impact of unauthorizedimmigrants vary greatly in their timing andscope. Most of the studies that include both revenues andcosts for multiple programs show that state and local governmentsspend more on unauthorized immigrants thanthey collect in revenues from that population. Forexample:B Recent estimates indicate that annual costs for unauthorizedimmigrants in Colorado were between$217 million and $225 million for education, Medicaid,and corrections.42 By comparison, taxes collectedfrom unauthorized immigrants at both the state andlocal levels amounted to an estimated $159 million to$194 million annually.43B The Iowa Legislative Services Agency reported that theestimated 70,000 unauthorized immigrants in thestate paid between $45.5 million and $70.9 million instate income and sales taxes in fiscal year 2004.44 Thereport did not quantify the costs of providing specificservices to unauthorized immigrants. Rather, it estimatedan average benefit of $1,534 per state residentbased on total spending from the state’s general fundand the number of state residents (including unauthorizedimmigrants). Using that average benefit calculation,the estimated cost for providing all services tounauthorized immigrants was $107.4 million in fiscalyear 2004.In 2006, the Missouri Budget Project estimated thatunauthorized immigrants paid between $29 millionand $57 million in state income, property, and excisetaxes.45 That organization estimated that the statespent between $17.5 million and $32.6 million toprovide elementary and secondary education forbetween 5,800 and 10,833 unauthorized immigrants.Local districts incurred between $26.5 million and$49.3 million in additional costs for educationalservices.This is why I made comments about you not understanding nuance in all of this. The situation is not a black white one, but a complex one with many grey areas. For example even with the variety of data that points to conclusions in all directions, we have not even discussed social issues or integration of immigrants in a cultural sense.The New Mexico Fiscal Policy Project estimated thatthe state collects about $69 million annually in individualincome, property, and sales taxes from unauthorizedimmigrants, about $1 million to $2 millionmore annually than it spends on public elementaryand secondary education for children who are unauthorizedimmigrants
Income tax is also automatically deducted, anyone who doesn't pay it is an immediate target for ICE because it's like advertising you've hired undocumented knowingly.
The Armenian Issuehttp://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930
GTA 6 Thread
https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?819300-GTA-6-Reveal-Trailer
"We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."
They pay taxes, but they also reaps in tons of benefits, in the name of their children, and they usually have a lot of children. According to articles I gleamed over, taxes they pay ranged from 11 to 22 billion/year, but the benefit their children receive ( welfare, education and medical ) from both Federal and State range from 11 to 80 billion/year.
As posted above with evidence to support in my post conveniently ignored, first gen immigrants cost more than they pay in while 2nd gen are usually strong contributors.
Well you cant get the greater beneficial 2nd gen immigrants without the 1st generational wave of immigrants
But lets face it ,generally most people who object to immigrants arriving at their country are perhaps not looking though tons of facts to justify whether they are "beneficial" to there society , but object on simple grounds of not wanting "different" people into their communities , due to their colour or their religion . A lot of people who have lived in a society without change for generations , do not wish to see change , particularly of newcomers to their community , and as such, I fear such people are not "racists" but rather people in fear of change of new things and people.
I also think that we are starting to veer off topic to the main subject, which is about children separation and immigration , which is a issue that many countries are having to face in this day and age. Immigration is always going to happen , particularly to successful states, and such a thing cannot really be stopped , only limited and has happened to our people [humanity] throughout history , as seen even in the ancient roman empire days.
I do hope that America , which is suffering from a form of xenophobia , particularly in areas of central America , which haven't seen much change in decades ,for they have been fed particularly fear mongering news , [particularly from the right] exaggerating matters and stirring the issue for there own benefit [political power] and also economic issues . Such a stirring of this most toxic of pots , can have serious side effects , as people cling to these toxic issues, bringing them out in there day to day lives . My hope is that America which has always been the most innovative of countries , can adapt to immigration in a way , that perhaps most of there people can be happy with ,rather than shutting borders[looking backwards] whilst looking at ways to improve there economical status . This is perhaps only alternative to such issues , and the alternative is the hardening of views, of attitudes , and such views , will inevitably lead to conflict , between rural and urban populations.
Last edited by paladinbob123; July 23, 2018 at 07:42 AM.
"War is the continuation of politics by other means." - Carl von Clausewitz
I don't usually argue CBO because most of the time their rough estimates are solid but they performed pretty bad estimates, you can read your quotes why and if it doesn't stand out to you then lol. For example, taking benefits averaged per person and estimating cost based on number of estimated undocumented immigrants. benefits are not used homogenously, that's a stupid method.
Here's a real study:
https://www.nber.org/papers/w23498
Total taxes paid by immigrants in 2017 was between 13-21 billion depending on how you estimate it which is approximately 8-15% of their total income, and another 13 billion in social security taxes. By contrast total taxes paid by the wealthiest 1% was just 5.4% of their income.
Furthermore about 500 billion in economic activity is generated by the undocumented immigrants per year:
https://www.nber.org/papers/w22102
In fact you see a 1.15% GDP growth for every million immigrants taken in by the US
https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/gdp
Also, as far as your response earlier about me "lying", let's review, germany for example took 1.4 million for their 65 million population in 2014, they have almost 0 illegal immigration. That's proportionally 6-8x more immigrants than the US takes.
Russia on the other hand takes in about 1.5 million in the same year, for their 145 million population, they have an 8-12% illegal immigration rate and they want more immigrants (Russian economic theory states more immigrants = more money which has proven true). The US by contrast takes almost no legal migrants, we have a relatively nominal level of illegal migration and that is entirely based on some of the harshest immigration laws in the world.
I believe the population of Germany is closer to 80 million.Also, as far as your response earlier about me "lying", let's review, germany for example took 1.4 million for their 65 million population in 2014, they have almost 0 illegal immigration. That's proportionally 6-8x more immigrants than the US takes.
You have a fifth of all the worlds legal migrants.The US by contrast takes almost no legal migrants, we have a relatively nominal level of illegal migration and that is entirely based on some of the harshest immigration laws in the world.
The US takes a million a year since 2000, of that approximately 600,000 are those currently already here who have changed their status limiting it to 400,000. I'm not sure what your point is about legal migrants.
Well you seem to be trying to say that America doesn’t take in that many/enough migrants per year. In 2017, by contrast, the US had a larger net migration rate than both Russia and Germany combined.
https://www.indexmundi.com/germany/n...tion_rate.html
https://www.indexmundi.com/russia/ne...tion_rate.html
https://www.indexmundi.com/united_st...tion_rate.html
I'd question some of those statistics:
https://knoema.com/atlas/Germany/top...migration-rate
https://knoema.com/atlas/United-Stat...migration-rate
The US rate seems right but for Germany which indicates germany had 123,000 migrants last year which is ridiculous. They had about 435,000 migrants.
Last edited by Elfdude; July 23, 2018 at 02:48 PM.