Donald Trump 2019

[triplehorn 2664]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.

[Js1 84995]

5 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.

Shut up, Stephen!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

42 minutes ago, NowThis said:

trying to catch up with the news.. is the Buzzfeed thing still legit or has it been debunked? 

Buzzfeed’s claims have not been disproven however a large shadow of doubt among public perception was cast by the government and right wing media.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33779]

Holy shit:

While 43 percent support the construction of a border wall — compared to 49 percent who oppose construction — only 7 percent of voters said that they support dedicating funding to a border wall if it was the only way to end the government shutdown.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/23/trump-government-shutdown-approval-rating-1119877

[G650 13849]

11 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL @ these Trump supporters that wanna turn on him now.  WTF did you expect, you stupid motherfuckers?  This is exactly who you supported.  He fucked over any group he could and you were fine with it, but after missing a couple paychecks, you pieces of shit decide you've had enough?  LOL  

Fuck all of you. 

Leopard Face Eating Party ftw.

[6th Street 6329]

10 hours ago, Red Five said:

Yes by all means let’s rush a manned mission to Mars so that it’s done by 2020. Nothing could go wrong there.

Easy - just throw more money at it. Problem solved 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

We should probably welcome the new anti-trumpers with open arms instead of ridiculing them.  

[Spankytoes 1735]

1 hour ago, TornACL said:

Simple minds find simple solutions to complex problems because thinking hurts. 

What part of the problem is complex? While I agree that it won't solve the problem, what about building a wall as a start is controversial? If we reduce 10,000 people annually from crossing into our borders illegally, what do you think that will net us in savings as a country? (Taxes, healthcare, uninsured motorists, etc.) It's simple economics. If I get a job that pays me $100,000 annually, my employer is not on the hook for just $100,000. They also have to subsidize my healthcare and provide other benefits such as transportation aid and retirement matching. I am also a body for functions that are sponsored or mundane activities such as holiday parties. They can reasonably assume that I will cost $30,000 above my base salary, not including any bonuses or additional funds allocated for my performance. If we use the estimate of 11,000,000 illegal immigrants currently in America, what do you think this equates to in wasted spending?

As a husband/son-in-law of legal immigrants, I've never understood the resistance to enforcing the law. Let's say that your house is burglarized and they steal your jewelry and TVs. Then the burglars take your wares to a pawn shop and cash out. But, then they donate half of their gains to a homeless shelter. Does this make burglarizing your house a good deed because the final action helped the needy? That's essentially the argument amnesty/partial amnesty folks are making. I've seen people getting angrier for people cutting in line at Starbucks than the ramifications of letting illegals remain.

[bolverk 29261]

11 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

Holy shit:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/23/trump-government-shutdown-approval-rating-1119877

According to the poll, 57 percent believe it’s likely that Russia “has compromising information“ on Trump, compared to 31 percent who don't think it's likely.

[UncleCharlie 334]

If there is no backpay, and assuming 50k salaries on average for the 800,000 furloughed gvnt workers; Trump could theoretically "pay for" the wall with 1.71 months of shutdown salary savings.

When do you think he will toss that nugget on the fire?

And yes, he's such a shitstain he will try.

[David Dennison 18487]

2 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

What part of the problem is complex? While I agree that it won't solve the problem, what about building a wall as a start is controversial? If we reduce 10,000 people annually from crossing into our borders illegally, what do you think that will net us in savings as a country? (Taxes, healthcare, uninsured motorists, etc.) It's simple economics. If I get a job that pays me $100,000 annually, my employer is not on the hook for just $100,000. They also have to subsidize my healthcare and provide other benefits such as transportation aid and retirement matching. I am also a body for functions that are sponsored or mundane activities such as holiday parties. They can reasonably assume that I will cost $30,000 above my base salary, not including any bonuses or additional funds allocated for my performance. If we use the estimate of 11,000,000 illegal immigrants currently in America, what do you think this equates to in wasted spending?

As a husband/son-in-law of legal immigrants, I've never understood the resistance to enforcing the law. Let's say that your house is burglarized and they steal your jewelry and TVs. Then the burglars take your wares to a pawn shop and cash out. But, then they donate half of their gains to a homeless shelter. Does this make burglarizing your house a good deed because the final action helped the needy? That's essentially the argument amnesty/partial amnesty folks are making. I've seen people getting angrier for people cutting in line at Starbucks than the ramifications of letting illegals remain.

The wall is a racist symbol at this point. It won't make much of a difference in actually stopping illegal immigration, mainly because there will be many stretches of no wall or barrier of any kind.

 

[bad_teammate 13115]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We should probably welcome the new anti-trumpers with open arms instead of ridiculing them.  

We should go to where they live and offer them a message of economic fairness (living wage) and equality (slash the wealth and income gaps). We should go to where they live and offer their children free healthcare and a free public education.

Let's do that. We'll win.

We don't even need to mention Donald.

[bolverk 29261]

5 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

What part of the problem is complex? While I agree that it won't solve the problem, what about building a wall as a start is controversial? If we reduce 10,000 people annually from crossing into our borders illegally, what do you think that will net us in savings as a country? (Taxes, healthcare, uninsured motorists, etc.) It's simple economics. If I get a job that pays me $100,000 annually, my employer is not on the hook for just $100,000. They also have to subsidize my healthcare and provide other benefits such as transportation aid and retirement matching. I am also a body for functions that are sponsored or mundane activities such as holiday parties. They can reasonably assume that I will cost $30,000 above my base salary, not including any bonuses or additional funds allocated for my performance. If we use the estimate of 11,000,000 illegal immigrants currently in America, what do you think this equates to in wasted spending?

As a husband/son-in-law of legal immigrants, I've never understood the resistance to enforcing the law. Let's say that your house is burglarized and they steal your jewelry and TVs. Then the burglars take your wares to a pawn shop and cash out. But, then they donate half of their gains to a homeless shelter. Does this make burglarizing your house a good deed because the final action helped the needy? That's essentially the argument amnesty/partial amnesty folks are making. I've seen people getting angrier for people cutting in line at Starbucks than the ramifications of letting illegals remain.

1

No, it's not. While there is some disagreement, most non-partisan economists tend to view the contribution of illegal immigrants as a net positive to both our economy and fiscal balance.

[SameSame 1683]

On 1/21/2019 at 3:24 PM, SpiralOut said:

That reddit post has links to all the video of the situation.  It got gilded five times over.  In the larger thread there is another guy who does the same thing this dude did which also got gilded multiple times, except the dude that made that post makes it a point to say he hates Trump supporters, is a hardcore leftist, and yet that the kids didn't do anything.  You can interpret w/e you want from it I guess, but the video is all there and it completely explains the situation.  There are links to the full, unedited video if you take two seconds to look.  What more exactly do you need? 

Color me not surprised that when presented with clear evidence that the media manipulated the video clips they showed to rile the mouth-breathers up, said people in this thread doubled down on not admitting they got played.

It's obvious that a) the kids were minding their own business until some Black Israelites started saying awful shit to them b) the kids responded by laughing and doing school chants c) Native American protestors inserted themselves into the situation and also provoked the kids and acted kind of shitty to them d) kids again responded not in a hostile way but playing along and goofing off.  Are they assholes for being Trump supporters and wearing those dumbass hats?  Sure.  Did they start and/or escalate this situation and deserve to be made out to be harassing the poor, innocent Native American vet and likened to white kids harassing blacks from the civil rights era?  No.  That would be patently obvious to anyone with common sense, but we live in the hyperbolic age of Trump, so I guess not.

Fuck off aggy, take your lies down the road.

[bad_teammate 13115]

4 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

If we reduce 10,000 people annually from crossing into our borders illegally, what do you think that will net us in savings as a country? (Taxes, healthcare, uninsured motorists, etc.) It's simple economics. If I get a job that pays me $100,000 annually, my employer is not on the hook for just $100,000. They also have to subsidize my healthcare and provide other benefits such as transportation aid and retirement matching. I am also a body for functions that are sponsored or mundane activities such as holiday parties. They can reasonably assume that I will cost $30,000 above my base salary, not including any bonuses or additional funds allocated for my performance. If we use the estimate of 11,000,000 illegal immigrants currently in America, what do you think this equates to in wasted spending?

Do people who illegally immigrate into America come in and sit in a room silently being fed and clothed by the government?

Do you realize what they contribute to the economy?

Quote

As a husband/son-in-law of legal immigrants, I've never understood the resistance to enforcing the law. Let's say that your house is burglarized and they steal your jewelry and TVs. Then the burglars take your wares to a pawn shop and cash out. But, then they donate half of their gains to a homeless shelter. Does this make burglarizing your house a good deed because the final action helped the needy? That's essentially the argument amnesty/partial amnesty folks are making. I've seen people getting angrier for people cutting in line at Starbucks than the ramifications of letting illegals remain.

Maybe... maybe stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

[ChiTownDoc 21072]

17 minutes ago, G650 said:

Leopard Face Eating Party ftw.

The best is how god damn dumb they are.  

Why even admit you were cool with kids in cages, but missing 2 paychecks is where you draw the line?  What in the actual fuck is going on?

[Spankytoes 1735]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The wall is a racist symbol at this point. It won't make much of a difference in actually stopping illegal immigration, mainly because there will be many stretches of no wall or barrier of any kind.

 

It's a racist symbol...why? Is no one is advocating for a wall to the north because Canada is predominately white or because the borders are much more secure? You don't try to stem a problem to be polite, culturally sensitive or PC. The vast majority of illegals are from Mexico and Central America that enter through the US-Mexican border. It would only be racist if this wasn't a looming issue. 

[G650 13849]

Just now, ChiTownDoc said:

The best is how god damn dumb they are.  

Why even admit you were cool with kids in cages, but missing 2 paychecks is where you draw the line?  What in the actual fuck is going on?

It's some alternate universe man. I don't know. My brain starts to melt everytime I try and figure out what the hell they are thinking.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

1 minute ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Why even admit you were cool with kids in cages, but missing 2 paychecks is where you draw the line?  What in the actual fuck is going on?

Pretty sure the “Don’t be a Sucker” video covers this phenomenon 

[bolverk 29261]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

It's a racist symbol...why? Is no one is advocating for a wall to the north because Canada is predominately white or because the borders are much more secure? You don't try to stem a problem to be polite, culturally sensitive or PC. The vast majority of illegals are from Mexico and Central America that enter through the US-Mexican border. It would only be racist if this wasn't a looming issue. 

Again, you're wrong. Most illegals come here on overstayed visas - not crossing the border.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/686056668/for-seventh-consecutive-year-visa-overstays-exceeded-illegal-border-crossings

[David Dennison 18487]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

It's a racist symbol...why? Is no one is advocating for a wall to the north because Canada is predominately white or because the borders are much more secure? You don't try to stem a problem to be polite, culturally sensitive or PC. The vast majority of illegals are from Mexico and Central America that enter through the US-Mexican border. It would only be racist if this wasn't a looming issue. 

Most illegals do not enter through the southern border. Most are visa overstays.

[GSU&UT 1798]

2 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

It's a racist symbol...why? Is no one is advocating for a wall to the north because Canada is predominately white or because the borders are much more secure? You don't try to stem a problem to be polite, culturally sensitive or PC. The vast majority of illegals are from Mexico and Central America that enter through the US-Mexican border. It would only be racist if this wasn't a looming issue. 

Ask yourself, why are these knuckle-draggers not screaming about overstayed visa holders who would be actually taking skilled jobs that people actually want? Seriously, it's completely disingenuous to not see this wall and immigration debate as anything but racist at this point.

[yoladu 4063]

2 hours ago, HenryJames said:

 

it's a goddamn political slogan that got us in this trouble in the first place. Way to double down.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

6 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

What part of the problem is complex? While I agree that it won't solve the problem, what about building a wall as a start is controversial? If we reduce 10,000 people annually from crossing into our borders illegally, what do you think that will net us in savings as a country? (Taxes, healthcare, uninsured motorists, etc.) It's simple economics. If I get a job that pays me $100,000 annually, my employer is not on the hook for just $100,000. They also have to subsidize my healthcare and provide other benefits such as transportation aid and retirement matching. I am also a body for functions that are sponsored or mundane activities such as holiday parties. They can reasonably assume that I will cost $30,000 above my base salary, not including any bonuses or additional funds allocated for my performance. If we use the estimate of 11,000,000 illegal immigrants currently in America, what do you think this equates to in wasted spending?

 As a husband/son-in-law of legal immigrants, I've never understood the resistance to enforcing the law. Let's say that your house is burglarized and they steal your jewelry and TVs. Then the burglars take your wares to a pawn shop and cash out. But, then they donate half of their gains to a homeless shelter. Does this make burglarizing your house a good deed because the final action helped the needy? That's essentially the argument amnesty/partial amnesty folks are making. I've seen people getting angrier for people cutting in line at Starbucks than the ramifications of letting illegals remain.

It's absolutely complex.  IT'S THOUSANDS OF MILES LONG.  No one has looked at any of the relevant issues.

What is the effect of reducing the workforce by 100,000 low-wage people a year?  We don't know.  Wait, did I say 100,000?  Because we have no idea what the number is.

What is the cost of taking 450 family ranches from their owners?  We don't know.  (Caveat, I just made up the number 450 because no one has bothered to look into the actual issue.)

What alternatives would people seeking to come in take?  What percent would actually be prevented from entering?  Have we balanced that against the cost?  Hold on.  Aren't there already physical barriers in high population areas?  So we are only talking about preventing people from entering that are just driving over cactus and mesas 100 miles from Precidio?  How many people is that -- 100 a year?

How much reduction in drug importation would happen?  It seems to me that when there is demand for the product -- and we are certainly not doing anything about demand -- "nature . . . finds a way" /jeff goldblum

What would be the reduction in crime?  What would be the reduction in nurses, teachers, house builders, nannies?

 

It's what absolutely wears me out about this.  If Trump came out and said "Look, we've talked to the NSA, CIA, etc., and they say there is a 20% chance of significant terrorist threat across our border in the next 5 years.  We've talked to economists and balanced the reduced sales tax revenues, work force, lower wages against free medical care etc.  We've talked to environmentalists about the inability of animals to roam, water runoff issues, and they are fine with it.  We've made 3 state task forces to deal with the individual property owners" blah blah blah, I might be on board.  But it is the Republican's insistence that knowledge is for NERDS, we don't need to think about anything, that makes me reflexively against it.

[Spankytoes 1735]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do people who illegally immigrate into America come in and sit in a room silently being fed and clothed by the government?

Do you realize what they contribute to the economy?

Maybe... maybe stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

I can rattle off a ton of net positives for defrauding Chase bank. It's still illegal. That's not a valid argument. Is their contribution to the economy greater than or less than the cost of subsidizing their ability to live in our economy tax-free? If I understand you correctly, you are advocating that paying $2 more for a tomato is a greater strain than increased taxes to cover those that pay none?

I'm not embarrassed. Are you?

[elguapo 4577]

6 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

It's a racist symbol...why? Is no one is advocating for a wall to the north because Canada is predominately white or because the borders are much more secure? You don't try to stem a problem to be polite, culturally sensitive or PC. The vast majority of illegals are from Mexico and Central America that enter through the US-Mexican border. It would only be racist if this wasn't a looming issue. 

Fuck off racist POS

[GSU&UT 1798]

I mean there's no question there isn't a recession around the corner if this continues right?

 

[Spankytoes 1735]

4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Again, you're wrong. Most illegals come here on overstayed visas - not crossing the border.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/686056668/for-seventh-consecutive-year-visa-overstays-exceeded-illegal-border-crossings

1. What data are we using to track illegal border crossings to substantiate the argument? We can track an overstayed visa.

2. If true, what's the controversy with building a wall? If we further reduce the number of illegal border crossings...how is that a bad thing again?

[bolverk 29261]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

I can rattle off a ton of net positives for defrauding Chase bank. It's still illegal. That's not a valid argument. Is their contribution to the economy greater than or less than the cost of subsidizing their ability to live in our economy tax-free? If I understand you correctly, you are advocating that paying $2 more for a tomato is a greater strain than increased taxes to cover those that pay none?

I'm not embarrassed. Are you?

 

Most economists: "Yes, they contribute more than they take. Also, they are not living here tax-free as they pay both sales and property taxes."

[happyfunball 481]

Quote

The Tariff Act of 1930 (codified at 19 U.S.C. ch. 4), commonly known as the Smoot–Hawley Tariff or Hawley–Smoot Tariff,[1] was an Act implementing protectionist trade policies sponsored by Senator Reed Smoot and Representative Willis C. Hawley and was signed into law on June 17, 1930. The act raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods.[2]

The tariffs (this does not include duty-free imports – see Tariff levels below) under the act were the second-highest in the United States in 100 years, exceeded by a small margin by the Tariff of 1828.[3] The Act and following retaliatory tariffs by America's trading partners were major factors of the reduction of American exports and imports by more than half during the Depression.[4] Although economists disagree by how much, the consensus view among economists and economic historians is that "The passage of the Smoot–Hawley Tariff exacerbated the Great Depression."[5]

Wiki

[6th Street 6329]

2 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I mean there's no question there isn't a recession around the corner if this continues right?

 

Fart of the Deal

[GSU&UT 1798]

Just now, bolverk said:

Most economists: "Yes, they contribute more than they take. Also, they are not living here tax-free as they pay both sales and property taxes."

Here's a libertarian wonk going on Tucker fucking Carlson and making this point,

 

[Queen Bitch 1692]

If you’re fine putting a wall through Big Bend, kill yourself.

[JohnnyRage 1617]

8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

No, it's not. While there is some disagreement, most non-partisan economists tend to view the contribution of illegal immigrants as a net positive to both our economy and fiscal balance.

Taxes, Rents, Spending, production...

Just imagine alone the housing crisis if we kicked out all illegals and their families.

And to claim building a wall is not complicated - funding, logistics, property ownership, water access, wildlife, etc...when a wall isn’t going to make much of a dent on anything.

 

While I enjoy low prices, I support reform because Labor deserve to be justly compensated and a shadow labor force cannot rise up.

[Spankytoes 1735]

6 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Ask yourself, why are these knuckle-draggers not screaming about overstayed visa holders who would be actually taking skilled jobs that people actually want? Seriously, it's completely disingenuous to not see this wall and immigration debate as anything but racist at this point.

You mean other than the House Bill? https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/643

That's not newsworthy enough because it doesn't progress a racist agenda to stoke the flames.

[Steamboat1874 4028]

5 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

I can rattle off a ton of net positives for defrauding Chase bank. It's still illegal. That's not a valid argument. Is their contribution to the economy greater than or less than the cost of subsidizing their ability to live in our economy tax-free? If I understand you correctly, you are advocating that paying $2 more for a tomato is a greater strain than increased taxes to cover those that pay none?

I'm not embarrassed. Are you?

Where are you getting your "tax free" information?

I ask because that is absolute bullshit. You think illegals are exempt from paying sales tax?

Free Healthcare ?

I don't believe that one either.

Try again.

[GSU&UT 1798]

Just now, Spankytoes said:

You mean other than the House Bill? https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/643

That's not newsworthy enough because it doesn't progress a racist agenda to stoke the flames.

You are being intentionally disingenuous, I am not talking about congressmen introducing one of likely many bills, I am talking about Trump and his room-temperature IQ followers that are screaming about a wall. These people simply do not understand how immigration works and who is likely impacting them much much more than very poor mexican and central americans that would take jobs that Americans literally won't work for.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-economy-farm-workers-taxes/

 

Quote

In 2017 research conducted by the Cornell Farmworker Program, 30 New York dairy farmers told us they turned to undocumented workers because they were unable to find and keep reliable U.S. citizens to do the jobs. That's in part because farm work can be physically demanding, dirty and socially denigrated work. More importantly, it is one the most dangerous occupations in the U.S.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23355]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

You mean other than the House Bill? https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/643

That's not newsworthy enough because it doesn't progress a racist agenda to stoke the flames.

Looks like that bill went nowhere with the quickness and was really just a “hey, this means it’s not about brown people.”  

[bolverk 29261]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

1. What data are we using to track illegal border crossings to substantiate the argument? We can track an overstayed visa.

2. If true, what's the controversy with building a wall? If we further reduce the number of illegal border crossings...how is that a bad thing again?

The cost of building the wall is a stupid investment. That's why it's a "bad thing."

Quote

 

ATLANTA — As President Trump digs in on the shutdown and insists “we have to build the wall,” three economists are trying to warn him that the benefits from a wall along the southern border do not outweigh the costs.

The economists found that for every 19 cents the government has spent building walls or fences on the border, the economy has declined and low-income U.S. workers have gained only a cent of extra income. Adding more walls, as Trump wants, appears unlikely to change the poor return on investment.

The U.S. border with Mexico is about 2,000 miles long, and a third of it (700 miles) has a wall or fence. Economists Treb Allen of Dartmouth College and Cauê Dobbin and Melanie Morten of Stanford University modeled what would happen if Trump were able to cover two-thirds of the border (1,300 miles) with some sort of wall.

Their conclusion? It would hurt the U.S. economy because there would be fewer workers and lower output. It would also have a tiny impact on illegal immigration, and U.S. workers wouldn’t be better off.

“Our research shows that building a wall was an ineffective way of reducing migration,” Allen said after presenting the new research paper this weekend at the American Economic Association conference. “It was expensive to build, and it harmed U.S. workers.”

Expanding the wall would reduce the number of Mexican workers in the United States by 144,000 — about 1 percent — the economists found after extensive modeling and data analysis.

Trump has proposed spending at least $5 billion — about $15 per American — to extend the wall at the U.S.-Mexico border. The economists found that the incomes of low-skilled workers without college degrees would increase by only 58 cents a year, far less than the cost per American to build the wall. Incomes of higher-skilled workers would fall by $7.60.

“This is a bad investment,” Allen said.

 

 

More:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/01/08/three-economists-ran-numbers-trumps-border-wall-they-find-its-bad-investment/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2dc1a7e33f68

[Spankytoes 1735]

2 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Where are you getting your "tax free" information?

I ask because that is absolute bullshit. You think illegals are exempt from paying sales tax?

Free Healthcare ?

I don't believe that one either.

Try again.

Right, because spending $0.16 extra on goods is the same as 23% of your annual income. You got me.

Yes, free healthcare from county hospitals that don't require payment from the destitute. For example, Parkland in Dallas.

[Js1 84995]

Killing the US economy to own the libs.

[Queen Bitch 1692]

It’s the willful ignorance from the Trumpkins that’s so tough to witness. Good for y’all for trying, I guess.

[GSU&UT 1798]

1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

Right, because spending $0.16 extra on goods is the same as 23% of your annual income. You got me.

Yes, free healthcare from county hospitals that don't require payment from the destitute. For example, Parkland in Dallas.

The free healthcare myth where these illegals are somehow simultaneously doing nothing but mooching off our system at hospitals all the time while stealing all the jobs. How likely is it, most especially right now, that illegal immigrants show up to hospitals given that the number one thing on their mind is to not get deported? Seriously, think about it. I worked with a nurse at the American Cancer Society's call center when I lived in Austin who worked at free-clinics that helped serve undocumented people. She herself was latina, spoke spanish, and yet really struggled to get people to come in for basic vital healthcare  because so many undocumented workers are paranoid about having their citizenship status questioned by any sort of authority.

[wildcat09 29146]

20 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Again, you're wrong. Most illegals come here on overstayed visas - not crossing the border.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/686056668/for-seventh-consecutive-year-visa-overstays-exceeded-illegal-border-crossings

Yeah, yeah, but we know he's talking about those dirty brown illegal immigrants, not the ones from non-shithole countries.

[bolverk 29261]

6 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Right, because spending $0.16 extra on goods is the same as 23% of your annual income. You got me.

Yes, free healthcare from county hospitals that don't require payment from the destitute. For example, Parkland in Dallas.

Your assumptions are deeply flawed, and you have been proven wrong. Please, reassess your opinions about illegal immigration in general and this stupid wall in particular.

[happyfunball 481]

6 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Right, because spending $0.16 extra on goods is the same as 23% of your annual income. You got me.

Yes, free healthcare from county hospitals that don't require payment from the destitute. For example, Parkland in Dallas.

Given that most migrants that the wall would supposedly stop are going to take jobs that make under $30K a year, there is no way their income tax would approach that level. If anything, they would receive a federal tax refund. Due to their status, they are less likely to file so again subsidizing the system on a net basis. 

[Spankytoes 1735]

2 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

You are being intentionally disingenuous, I am not talking about congressmen introducing one of likely many bills, I am talking about Trump and his room-temperature IQ followers that are screaming about a wall. These people simply do not understand how immigration works and who is likely impacting them much much more than very poor mexican and central americans that would take jobs that Americans literally won't work for.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/illegal-immigrants-us-jobs-economy-farm-workers-taxes/

 

 

If we are parsing things down, I suppose you could group that into racism, albeit with a factual basis. The number of crimes committed by people with an expired visa vs. those that crossed the border illegally may trend there. Could we also not say that it's based on money rather than race? The expired visa klans tend to have white collar jobs, which are taxed, or are student paying tuition. Wouldn't a black guy from Ghana also be a target for this racism or are we assuming that this group is vastly white, and therefore, immune from prejudice? You know how easy foreigners have it here regardless of their status or race from "True Patriots".

Is it that Americans literally won't work for these jobs or employers that found a cheaper alternative. Like manufacturing in China instead of the US, for example?

[SameSame 1683]

15 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

1. What data are we using to track illegal border crossings to substantiate the argument? We can track an overstayed visa.

2. If true, what's the controversy with building a wall? If we further reduce the number of illegal border crossings...how is that a bad thing again?

Your dear leader is a mentally ill pathological liar.   Nothing he says should be trusted.  He is fucked in the head.  

Anything that has ever worked for him is just shit thrown against the wall that happened to stick.   Any argument from him about anything is a non-starter.

[Spankytoes 1735]

3 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Your assumptions are deeply flawed, and you have been proven wrong. Please, reassess your opinions about illegal immigration in general and this stupid wall in particular.

Because someone wrote an article taking data, which can manipulated to defend or defeat any argument, told you so? If I post a counterpoint, using the same data, are you now wrong?

Cool

[David Dennison 18487]

22 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

1. What data are we using to track illegal border crossings to substantiate the argument? We can track an overstayed visa.

2. If true, what's the controversy with building a wall? If we further reduce the number of illegal border crossings...how is that a bad thing again?

It's not going to reduce the number of border crossings.