Posted by Tina
An interesting opinion was expressed in the National Sentinel about building that Wall:
according to a 2017 cost analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers $155 billion annually. If the U.S. built a stronger border wall and enforced immigration laws, then the wall would pay for itself almost immediately and begin saving the country tens of billions of dollars each year.
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schummer say that $5 Billion to build the wall is “a waste of money.” Odd, they’ve never minded spending taxpayer money on pork barrel projects. The Congressional “Pig Book” for 2017 is here. Both parties have indulged in this practice. Often the promise of money for a project is used as a way to secure a legislators vote on something else. The practice of earmarking was outlawed in 2011…but Congress Critters always find ways around laws they write.
Citizens Against Government Waste named Nancy Pelosi “2017 Porker of the Year” for her hyperboly about the affordability of Obamacare. Remember when she wagged that finger and repeated the word “affordable?” What a dim bulb. It’s anything but:
The skyrocketing cost of Obamacare has caused insurers to either drastically increase premiums or withdraw from the marketplaces altogether, including Humana and Aetna in 2017. Premium increases in 2018 will make coverage “unaffordable,” by the law’s own definition, for 54 percent of families who bought their health insurance during the 2017 open enrollment period. The cost for the most popular Obamacare plans are set to rise by 34 percent in 2018, and 70 percent of U.S. counties only offer one or two health insurance choices.
There’s no way to measure the amount of wasteful spending, both private and federal, this lousy law has incurred. So when Pelosi says the wall shouldn’t be funded because it would be a waste of taxpayer money she’s being hypocritical. The wall will pay for itself both in savings as described above and in long-term savings for patrolling costs.
Speaking of immigration maybe the French people have finally had enough. They are fed up with Macrony and the New World Odor tyrants destroying the country.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/12/paul-craig-roberts/the-camp-of-the-saints/
The letter accuses Macron of being “guilty of a denial of democracy or treason against the nation” for signing the pact without putting it to the people.
“The French state is late in coming to realize the impossibility of integrating too many people, in addition to totally different cultures, who have regrouped in the last forty years in areas that no longer submit to the laws of the Republic,” states the letter, adding that mass immigration is erasing France’s “civilizational landmarks”.
According to British MEP Janice Atkinson, the UN pact would lead to Europe being flooded with 59 million new migrants within the next 6 years.
Warning that the plan would lead to European countries having their “culture and identity crushed,” Atkinson also pointed out that the pact could lead to hate speech laws that make it illegal to use the term “illegal migrants,” replacing it instead with “irregular migrants”.
“It will be illegal not to use their prescribed language,” warned Atkinson, adding that European citizens could “say goodbye to your democracy and your way of life” if the pact is implemented.
Maybe they’re right. Maybe France can’t integrate foreigners into their society all that well.
But why on earth would you think America is so weak, especially when “integrating foreigners” is what we’ve done our entire existence?
Joe you absolutely get it.
America integrated people easily i the past because in the past people came here to become Americans. Not everyone who comes here wants that now. In fact a good many have ulterior motives to undermine America, or parts of America or to use America as abase for criminality. Those who organized the latest surge certainly did and many of those within the caravan carried their flags and sang their own national anthems. People used to come carrying little American flags…they wanted to learn the language and they appreciated the opportunity that being American would afford them…hell, American born citizens don’t all appreciate that anymore since they’ve been taught to hate America in our schools.
Tina, you’re saying the same things opponents of immigration said a century ago. They were wrong then, and you are wrong now. There is no evidence that modern immigrants are assimilating less than previous generations and plenty of evidence that they are.
In addition, the finances of our country are drained and our debt is growing. You can not take the risk of an expensive call for air migration without first showing that you will not have to resort to more taxes to meet the objectives of the pact.
“The wall will pay for itself both in savings as described above and in long-term savings for patrolling costs.”
The point above reflects the positive future of America sovereignty, however does nothing to benefit a expanded Liberal Democratic base, so as long as the Dem’s keep blocking it, it serves their goals.
America has excellent migration policies, designed to help people become productive citizenry, but it requires study and understanding of America and it’s foundation, and in doing so these same immigrants become exposed to the underbelly of the Democratic party and their self serving ambitions. That factor doesn’t benefit their voting base, so therefore they wish to maintain open borders.
Good points, Harold!
FAIR is a biased, anti-immigrant group that does not take into account the economic benefits of migration. There is literally no reason any objective person should trust its numbers.
According to the radical left wing. Big woop!
Now say they’ve “been discredited” so we can all laugh a little harder.
Still stuck in that hall monitor phase eh, Chris?
Ah, so their analysis does take into account the economic benefits of migration?
Go ahead and point me to where they do that, please.
Or you could just admit I am entirely right about their flawed methodology, or at the very least, that you don’t know or care what their methodology is because they’re telling you something you want to hear.
I do not know anything about FAIR, but to attack the messenger and declare a victory with an unsupported (and whooly false) declaration of “the economic benefits” of migration (i.e. ILLEGAL immigration) while at the same time effectively asserting that anyone who does not question FAIR’s numbers is not an “objective person” is, quite frankly, the usual boilerplate progressive bull**** from Chris.
Chris, you see, is an “objective person.” His object is to personally attack and attempt to marginalize anyone or any group that does not march in lock-step to the progressive ideal of an open border. The guy is a Goebbels at heart. I hope the Jews never piss him off.
As such, I am inspired to give a fair hearing to FAIR and f*** you Chris.
Nothing ever changes on the progressive side of the spectrum. Chris is the same ridiculous, laughable ***hole he has always been. There is plenty of valid, extensive and in-depth statistical evidence that the economic burdens of illegal, uncontrolled immigration are serious and have far outweighed any benefit. It has been reasonably argued that the burden of rampant, uncontrolled illegal immigration on our health, education and welfare institutions at large far outweighs any benefit and the influx of cheap labor is helping to destroy the American middle class and make America’s poor poorer. (Not to mention the ecological damage done to large areas of the Southwest by decades of hordes of illegal immigrants .the fragile landscape)
Some day I may take the time to address these issues in these pages, but no one should EVER ever expect anything from Chris except dogmatic progressive propaganda and personal attack. The guy is a half-baked tool.
“It has been reasonably argued that the burden of rampant, uncontrolled illegal immigration on our health, education and welfare institutions at large far outweighs any benefit and the influx of cheap labor is helping to destroy the American middle class and make America’s poor poorer.”
This is such bull. 1) We don’t have rampant, uncontrolled, etc. 2) Benefit? … well, the Trump Corp makes no complaints. 3) And if you want to address the issue of Trump Corp’s predilection for cheap labor, you will have to take that up with Trump Corp.
Sucker.
I do not know anything about FAIR
Well, that’s weird. Jack and Tina link to them frequently, and I have pointed out their flawed methodology and bias dozens of times over the years. I find it hard to believe you’ve missed this every single time.
Objective people can look at my rhetorical style in comparison to yours and see who is truly more objective. For example, in your last comment, you compared me to a Nazi, described groups of immigrants as “hordes,” and used plenty of other ridiculous ad homs as well, all while pretending to be offended that someone would “attack the messenger”–as if you never do that, and weren’t literally doing that while simultaneously decrying it.
And you think this makes you look “objective.”
Cute.
The guy is a Goebbels at heart. I hope the Jews never piss him off.
I mean, you say this while defending a group that was literally founded by an anti-Semitic white nationalist, and exists solely to demonize and fearmonger about minority groups using misleading statistics and propaganda. Amazing.
There is plenty of valid, extensive and in-depth statistical evidence that the economic burdens of illegal, uncontrolled immigration are serious and have far outweighed any benefit.
Link to them, please.
Chris that’s the problem though John Tanton was never a anti-semitic white nationalist he just knew that when you change the ethnicity of a country that could lead to a destabilized nation or culture.
Furthermore if you have other stats to dispute these claims please link them instead of just calling this founder racist.
When you call someone racist you try to undermine what they have originally produced or researched without actually studying the research in and of itself.
Yes everyone has an underlying bias reason to do studies in the first place but that doesn’t mean that study is false.
“There’s no way to measure the amount of wasteful spending, both private and federal, this lousy law has incurred.”
Only you would call universal healthcare access “wasteful spending”.