DACA and the dreamers

[Foo]

What is it called when you take something you are not entitled to?

Is leaving a dollar for a $30 dinner considered paying for dinner?

[zombie]

i said they're thieves, same as you did.

[Foo]

i said they're thieves, same as you did.

Don't celebrate it, zombie. Sad situation.

[showa58taro]

the more i read / hear about daca, the more it seems like a good thing. it's pretty strict on who it covers and the like. people who only know this country as their home, who may only speak english, who don't have a criminal record, who want to succeed in america. it is not given to everyone. i don't know why it was always going to implode, like tigg said.

but maybe i'm only getting this from left bias sources. tell me specifically why it's a problem, and who it harms? tell me why it's a good thing to end?

It harms you. It harms me. It harms every legal American citizen.

Some issues:

1. It is unconstitutional. The same laws failed to pass congress, so the president just unilaterally decided to implement a law that is at odds with immigration law.

2. It rewards illegal behavior. You will point to the children, but lets look at the parents. Are you willing to deport the parents who brought a minor here illegally while keeping the minor here?

3. It is an insult to everyone who goes about immigration the right way. My fiance and I are paying a lot of money, proving our case, and taking a lot of time to do things the right way. I am on my second successful business, she is a dentist, yet we have to prove she will not be a burden on society. Is it fair they just walk across the border and receives benefits a citizen here receives?

4. They are thieves. Yes, thieves. Do you know how much it costs society to educate a child? And yes, they are taking your job. Every person who is under employed on unemployed is denied an opportunity when someone is here working illegally.

5. It doesn't matter what a non-citizen WANTS. They are not entitled to it. Do through the proper process and ASK to be here.

6. Look to the name and the law. How does "deferred action" resolve anything? When the "deferred action" results in a deportation, how badly have you hurt them by giving them false hope.

1. False. It is literally just prioritization, which is a prerogative available to the Lresident.

2. False. That's not the primary motivator for anyone.

3. False. Nobody is stopping Mrs. Foo because Dreamers are dentists. The issue is your arse-backwards view on immigration, not those who got brought as kids.

4. False. Studies repeatedly show that illegals end up being contributors as they can't get benefits, but they contribute economically.

5. True. This is not an entitlement, it's an act of compassion that recognizes the fact that these kids have had no choice in the situation they are in, and that they are model citizens and Americans.

6. True. Congress and the Senate should've done the right thing in 2001 when it came up the first time. And each of the subsequent times. It's such an obvious easy choice.

[Tiggnutz]

Democrats want to help these young people and so do most republicans so instead of crying and screaming write a law and get it it passed. I'm sure those effected would rather just not live out their lives in immigrant limbo where Obama left them.

[zombie]

i said they're thieves, same as you did.

Don't celebrate it, zombie. Sad situation.

his base is the one celebrating this. i'm not his base.

[showa58taro]

Not going to lie, between first revoking it, then guaranteeing safety for 6 months, and suggesting he'll reinstate DACA if congress fails (as they always do) to act, and then going out and doing a deal with Pelosi and Schumer to fund the government, and then saying in an interview that he wants to work more with the Democrats, I'm wondering if things are either A) totally insane, B) finally bipartisan, or C) Trump has finally become the liberal Democratic guy he used to be, having gotten sick of the ineffective Republicans.

Either way, bonkers situation.

[Foo]

i said they're thieves, same as you did.

Don't celebrate it, zombie. Sad situation.

his base is the one celebrating this. i'm not his base.

Pronouns pal!

[zombie]

u'm sorry. did i misgender the donald?

[Jigsaw]

the more i read / hear about daca, the more it seems like a good thing. it's pretty strict on who it covers and the like. people who only know this country as their home, who may only speak english, who don't have a criminal record, who want to succeed in america. it is not given to everyone. i don't know why it was always going to implode, like tigg said.

but maybe i'm only getting this from left bias sources. tell me specifically why it's a problem, and who it harms? tell me why it's a good thing to end?

It harms you. It harms me. It harms every legal American citizen.

Some issues:

1. It is unconstitutional. The same laws failed to pass congress, so the president just unilaterally decided to implement a law that is at odds with immigration law.

2. It rewards illegal behavior. You will point to the children, but lets look at the parents. Are you willing to deport the parents who brought a minor here illegally while keeping the minor here?

3. It is an insult to everyone who goes about immigration the right way. My fiance and I are paying a lot of money, proving our case, and taking a lot of time to do things the right way. I am on my second successful business, she is a dentist, yet we have to prove she will not be a burden on society. Is it fair they just walk across the border and receives benefits a citizen here receives?

4. They are thieves. Yes, thieves. Do you know how much it costs society to educate a child? And yes, they are taking your job. Every person who is under employed on unemployed is denied an opportunity when someone is here working illegally.

5. It doesn't matter what a non-citizen WANTS. They are not entitled to it. Do through the proper process and ASK to be here.

6. Look to the name and the law. How does "deferred action" resolve anything? When the "deferred action" results in a deportation, how badly have you hurt them by giving them false hope.

1. False. It is literally just prioritization, which is a prerogative available to the Lresident.

2. False. That's not the primary motivator for anyone.

3. False. Nobody is stopping Mrs. Foo because Dreamers are dentists. The issue is your arse-backwards view on immigration, not those who got brought as kids.

4. False. Studies repeatedly show that illegals end up being contributors as they can't get benefits, but they contribute economically.

5. True. This is not an entitlement, it's an act of compassion that recognizes the fact that these kids have had no choice in the situation they are in, and that they are model citizens and Americans.

6. True. Congress and the Senate should've done the right thing in 2001 when it came up the first time. And each of the subsequent times. It's such an obvious easy choice.

This may surprise no one, but I agree with every one of Seb's points.

[Foo]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

[showa58taro]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

[Foo]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

The "long term overarching conclusion" is really the equivalent of "you know, we are really better off that our car was stolen, because we worked hard to replace it, got better jobs, ultimately a nicer car, etc.". It is one of those lies that no longer be really believes, including those perpetuating it, and the reason Dems lost credibility and thus most control of government.

We know the facts. Illegals come here with very little. They use our schools, ERs, hospitals, and social services, then they get jobs where they pay no taxes and drive around with no insurance. They compete with our unemployed and underemployed for starter level jobs where they will accept less than the law allows.

Literally no one on their right mind views their presence as s contribution.

[showa58taro]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

The "long term overarching conclusion" is really the equivalent of "you know, we are really better off that our car was stolen, because we worked hard to replace it, got better jobs, ultimately a nicer car, etc.". It is one of those lies that no longer be really believes, including those perpetuating it, and the reason Dems lost credibility and thus most control of government.

We know the facts. Illegals come here with very little. They use our schools, ERs, hospitals, and social services, then they get jobs where they pay no taxes and drive around with no insurance. They compete with our unemployed and underemployed for starter level jobs where they will accept less than the law allows.

Literally no one on their right mind views their presence as s contribution.

There's a lot to look at here. Literal tax dollar contributed against tax dollar consumed, the cost tends to be higher than the contribution itself for the key metrics you're looking at but not at a significant/excessive costs. Colorado spent 217M on illegals vs an estimated revenue of 197M. So yeah, some money, but not a lot in it. Texas by contrast estimates it earned 424M MORE than it spent on illegal immigrants. Others have similar figures emerging. The costs aren't as high as your scaremongering and the input is higher than your scaremongering. There's also cases to be made about the levels of services used which suggests a disproportionate low subscription to the services you worry about.

The only thing people "in their right mind" need to get is that it's a complex picture with interesting arguments on both sides, which you are skipping in full with your near satirical take on immigration.

[Foo]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

The "long term overarching conclusion" is really the equivalent of "you know, we are really better off that our car was stolen, because we worked hard to replace it, got better jobs, ultimately a nicer car, etc.". It is one of those lies that no longer be really believes, including those perpetuating it, and the reason Dems lost credibility and thus most control of government.

We know the facts. Illegals come here with very little. They use our schools, ERs, hospitals, and social services, then they get jobs where they pay no taxes and drive around with no insurance. They compete with our unemployed and underemployed for starter level jobs where they will accept less than the law allows.

Literally no one on their right mind views their presence as s contribution.

There's a lot to look at here. Literal tax dollar contributed against tax dollar consumed, the cost tends to be higher than the contribution itself for the key metrics you're looking at but not at a significant/excessive costs. Colorado spent 217M on illegals vs an estimated revenue of 197M. So yeah, some money, but not a lot in it. Texas by contrast estimates it earned 424M MORE than it spent on illegal immigrants. Others have similar figures emerging. The costs aren't as high as your scaremongering and the input is higher than your scaremongering. There's also cases to be made about the levels of services used which suggests a disproportionate low subscription to the services you worry about.

The only thing people "in their right mind" need to get is that it's a complex picture with interesting arguments on both sides, which you are skipping in full with your near satirical take on immigration.

But there is not an interesting argument on both sides. The liberal side is simply lying and anyone with the ability to simply observe realizes this. The liberal numbers rely on a lot of undercounting expenses and overcounting income.

Liberals begin with a premise and then try to bend the numbers to prove the premise. Again, just based on education spending alone we know that any claims are not true. Now take a moment to consider they are taking jobs where they do not pay taxes at a high rate, it costs more to educate them than average because English is not their first language.

If the economy worked the way liberals suggest, we would not even be in debt, but would have such a massive surplus we would be wiping our asses with $100 bills, because someone can consume a lot of resources, pay in just a little labor, and that is a net positive.

They run the same scam with welfare. Act like that giving someone $1,000 a month to lay around is magically creating $3,000 because they pay tax on cigs and booze.

[showa58taro]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

The "long term overarching conclusion" is really the equivalent of "you know, we are really better off that our car was stolen, because we worked hard to replace it, got better jobs, ultimately a nicer car, etc.". It is one of those lies that no longer be really believes, including those perpetuating it, and the reason Dems lost credibility and thus most control of government.

We know the facts. Illegals come here with very little. They use our schools, ERs, hospitals, and social services, then they get jobs where they pay no taxes and drive around with no insurance. They compete with our unemployed and underemployed for starter level jobs where they will accept less than the law allows.

Literally no one on their right mind views their presence as s contribution.

There's a lot to look at here. Literal tax dollar contributed against tax dollar consumed, the cost tends to be higher than the contribution itself for the key metrics you're looking at but not at a significant/excessive costs. Colorado spent 217M on illegals vs an estimated revenue of 197M. So yeah, some money, but not a lot in it. Texas by contrast estimates it earned 424M MORE than it spent on illegal immigrants. Others have similar figures emerging. The costs aren't as high as your scaremongering and the input is higher than your scaremongering. There's also cases to be made about the levels of services used which suggests a disproportionate low subscription to the services you worry about.

The only thing people "in their right mind" need to get is that it's a complex picture with interesting arguments on both sides, which you are skipping in full with your near satirical take on immigration.

But there is not an interesting argument on both sides. The liberal side is simply lying and anyone with the ability to simply observe realizes this. The liberal numbers rely on a lot of undercounting expenses and overcounting income.

Liberals begin with a premise and then try to bend the numbers to prove the premise. Again, just based on education spending alone we know that any claims are not true. Now take a moment to consider they are taking jobs where they do not pay taxes at a high rate, it costs more to educate them than average because English is not their first language.

If the economy worked the way liberals suggest, we would not even be in debt, but would have such a massive surplus we would be wiping our asses with $100 bills, because someone can consume a lot of resources, pay in just a little labor, and that is a net positive.

They run the same scam with welfare. Act like that giving someone $1,000 a month to lay around is magically creating $3,000 because they pay tax on cigs and booze.

Unless you've got numbers to back your assertion up it's just you being a negative Nancy. You can call it inflating figures but yours sound inflated too. The other way. What I pointed out were actual studies by state governments (Republican lead) that showed the opposite of what you suggested.

[Foo]

How does this lie that immigrants are somehow net contributors continue to perpetuate?

It costs $10,000 a year just for basic public education for each one. So a k-12 education alone is $130k in benefits. Then states that have free or reduced tuition, scholarships, etc. You must be hitting the crack pipe pretty hard if you believe the average illegal immigrant is working in jobs that pay enough income taxes to offset that, ignoring the fact that most work jobs under the table.

Also, again, they are taking net jobs from American citizens. So even if they are contributing something in taxes, they are still taking in the process.

That's not what facts suggest. just saying, over the long term the overarching conclusion is that there is a net contribution by immigrants on the overall baseline and that any shortages tend to be offset elsewhere either in the form of indirect economic impacts or that the impact is already negligible.

The "long term overarching conclusion" is really the equivalent of "you know, we are really better off that our car was stolen, because we worked hard to replace it, got better jobs, ultimately a nicer car, etc.". It is one of those lies that no longer be really believes, including those perpetuating it, and the reason Dems lost credibility and thus most control of government.

We know the facts. Illegals come here with very little. They use our schools, ERs, hospitals, and social services, then they get jobs where they pay no taxes and drive around with no insurance. They compete with our unemployed and underemployed for starter level jobs where they will accept less than the law allows.

Literally no one on their right mind views their presence as s contribution.

There's a lot to look at here. Literal tax dollar contributed against tax dollar consumed, the cost tends to be higher than the contribution itself for the key metrics you're looking at but not at a significant/excessive costs. Colorado spent 217M on illegals vs an estimated revenue of 197M. So yeah, some money, but not a lot in it. Texas by contrast estimates it earned 424M MORE than it spent on illegal immigrants. Others have similar figures emerging. The costs aren't as high as your scaremongering and the input is higher than your scaremongering. There's also cases to be made about the levels of services used which suggests a disproportionate low subscription to the services you worry about.

The only thing people "in their right mind" need to get is that it's a complex picture with interesting arguments on both sides, which you are skipping in full with your near satirical take on immigration.

But there is not an interesting argument on both sides. The liberal side is simply lying and anyone with the ability to simply observe realizes this. The liberal numbers rely on a lot of undercounting expenses and overcounting income.

Liberals begin with a premise and then try to bend the numbers to prove the premise. Again, just based on education spending alone we know that any claims are not true. Now take a moment to consider they are taking jobs where they do not pay taxes at a high rate, it costs more to educate them than average because English is not their first language.

If the economy worked the way liberals suggest, we would not even be in debt, but would have such a massive surplus we would be wiping our asses with $100 bills, because someone can consume a lot of resources, pay in just a little labor, and that is a net positive.

They run the same scam with welfare. Act like that giving someone $1,000 a month to lay around is magically creating $3,000 because they pay tax on cigs and booze.

Unless you've got numbers to back your assertion up it's just you being a negative Nancy. You can call it inflating figures but yours sound inflated too. The other way. What I pointed out were actual studies by state governments (Republican lead) that showed the opposite of what you suggested.

To be fair, I am not the one trying to claim criminals are a net positive.

[showa58taro]

Guess since you feel you're right there's no need for facts or anything. Good enough.

[Foo]

Guess since you feel you're right there's no need for facts or anything. Good enough.

You don't think there are just as many "facts" that show illegals to be an enormous drain on society? It is why you should look at them all and then use your own eyes and experience to draw conclusions.

[showa58taro]

Guess since you feel you're right there's no need for facts or anything. Good enough.

You don't think there are just as many "facts" that show illegals to be an enormous drain on society? It is why you should look at them all and then use your own eyes and experience to draw conclusions.

So far I've seen more credible sources account for facts that prove my point, whereas I've seen mainly fearmongwring and hypotheticals that back up yours. That's all I'm saying.