Welcome to Dem Land

[Pam]

LOL. I don't necessarily disagree, but we're living in Trumplandia now. Everyday is a new day in which the bar for what is acceptable reaches a new low.

For example: Today The President of the United States altered a National Hurricane Center map with a sharpie to falsely extend the official forecast toward Alabama so the poor fragile baby didn't have to admit he tweeted information that was incorrect.

Hilariously, this is actually a violation of federal law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2074

Whoever knowingly issues or publishes any counterfeit weather forecast or warning of weather conditions falsely representing such forecast or warning to have been issued or published by the Weather Bureau, United States Signal Service, or other branch of the Government service, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ninety days, or both.

Yes, Trump's an idiot. And he will win again if the DNC insists on pushing impaired Joe Biden.

[Richard]

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1660/immigration.aspx

You notice back in 2016 the same poll had immigration as second behind the economy?

Why did they omit the illegal immigration from the 2016 poll when it was just as a hot topic as it is today.

Where are they polling?

Are they polling in California were thousands are Sleeping in the streets as a result of
or in Florida where we spend 6 billion?

If they poll outside of the states directly effected then it is common sense that somebody would feel that it does not effect them,Michigan trades potholes in favor of illegals so it does not really effect you.

Michigan only spends 850 million on the local level on illegal immigration,granted that would only fix one or two potholes but when you are talking about the states spending billions,that is a chunk of change that could be helping some Americans.

The current President,after being crystal clear about his views towards illegals,was elected,which says the Gallup poll is a bit off.

California passes a budget that includes free health care for illegals but fined the citizens that could not afford Obama care,that does not even make sense.

Pretty nice of you guys to include actual citizens in your free healthcare for all instead of just the illegals,kudos

[Shelby_]

Are they polling in California were thousands are Sleeping in the streets as a result of

So every homeless person in the state of California is illegal? Pfft.

or in Florida where we spend 6 billion

Is that from the "FAIR" study? If so, it is highly partisan and flawed. They overestimated the number of undocumented/illegals by over 1 million. They also included American born children of illegal immigrants when they factored the costs for education and non-reimbursed costs for health care. This is a significant mistake since these children are American citizens.

Another problem with that kind of study is it does not/cannot consider the long term benefits of earlier financial investment. For example, the low income preschool program Head Start costs a lot of money at face value, but exposure to the program generates long-term improvements in outcomes such as schooling attainment, earnings, and crime reduction, all of which are beneficial to society and save money in the long run.

The current President,after being crystal clear about his views towards illegals,was elected,which says the Gallup poll is a bit off.

I believe it is more likely that your logic is a bit off. You fail to recall Trump was not elected by a majority. The majority of voters rejected Trump's agenda. Additionally, as you pointed out to me, 12% of Trump voters supported Bernie Sanders during the primary. Obviously these people didn't consider the candidate's views on immigration, or much of anything when the cast their vote.

However, if you think the Gallup Poll is inaccurate, here are a few more:

http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-cont...oters_XTab.pdf

https://www.people-press.org/wp-cont...on_FINAL-1.pdf

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/partisa...cbs-news-poll/

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...gthen-the-u-s/

This [[above) is the one you might find most disturbing if you were born prior to 1965.

75% of Millennials say immigrants strengthen rather than burden the U.S. That compares with 63% of GenXers [[my generation), and 52% of Baby Boomers.

[Shelby_]

Yes, Trump's an idiot. And he will win again if the DNC insists on pushing impaired Joe Biden.

What do you mean when you say "pushing." What evidence do you have to support your conclusion?

[Richard]

So every homeless person in the state of California is illegal? Pfft.



Is that from the "FAIR" study? If so, it is highly partisan and flawed. They overestimated the number of undocumented/illegals by over 1 million. They also included American born children of illegal immigrants when they factored the costs for education and non-reimbursed costs for health care. This is a significant mistake since these children are American citizens.

Another problem with that kind of study is it does not/cannot consider the long term benefits of earlier financial investment. For example, the low income preschool program Head Start costs a lot of money at face value, but exposure to the program generates long-term improvements in outcomes such as schooling attainment, earnings, and crime reduction, all of which are beneficial to society and save money in the long run.



I believe it is more likely that your logic is a bit off. You fail to recall Trump was not elected by a majority. The majority of voters rejected Trump's agenda. Additionally, as you pointed out to me, 12% of Trump voters supported Bernie Sanders during the primary. Obviously these people didn't consider the candidate's views on immigration, or much of anything when the cast their vote.

However, if you think the Gallup Poll is inaccurate, here are a few more:

http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-cont...oters_XTab.pdf

https://www.people-press.org/wp-cont...on_FINAL-1.pdf

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/partisa...cbs-news-poll/

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...gthen-the-u-s/

This [[above) is the one you might find most disturbing if you were born prior to 1965.

75% of Millennials say immigrants strengthen rather than burden the U.S. That compares with 63% of GenXers [[my generation), and 52% of Baby Boomers.

RE: Fair

You are disputing the numbers,they are compiled from public records,provide the numbers that you are disputing as evidence.

How exactly do 75% of millennials say ILLEGAL immigrants strengthen rather then burden.

Nice try in mixing legal immigrants in with illegals to try and make a case.

The discussion was about ILLEGALS and not immigration in general.

You are referring to polls that in 2016 got every poll wrong,have they mended thier ways? Why should I believe them now?

Bottom line is facts,the facts are backed up by numbers that are advailable,you are the second person that has used the Fair study as a way to discredit what you seem to know little about.

If you want to discredit Fair then post your numbers,prove them wrong and make your party proud.

When you can differentiate between illegal immigration verses legal immigrants,maybe we can have a discussion,bring your disputing numbers plea

[Zacha341]

IMO, the issue is that many conflate their feelings/ opinion [[I did not vote for him either) about illegal immigrants/ immigration solely to Trump.

Thus, we see the protection and support given towards illegals against Trump [[as a platform position). I mean it only seems reasonable - on the surface at least!

Criticism re. illegal immigration is posited as agreement with the right [[GOP).

Too bad we're cast into these narrow slots of support vs resistance. The nation will suffer down the road as a result - unable to apprehend consequences!!

POLI-TRICKS!

...How exactly do 75% of millennials say ILLEGAL immigrants strengthen rather then burden.

[Shelby_]

You are disputing the numbers,they are compiled from public records,provide the numbers that you are disputing as evidence.

FAIR, a bias anti-immigration lobby group says there are 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country.

Dept. of Homeland Security estimates 11.4. million.

Pew estimates there are 11.3 million

Center for Migration Studies [[CMS) estimates that there are 11 million

Center for Immigration Studies [[CIS) estimates there are 11.43 million

FAIR’s estimate of the number of illegal immigrants is a million more than any other organizations, including The Center for Immigration Studies, another anti-immigration right wing lobby group.

FAIR cannot be trusted because they have an agenda. Furthermore, FAIR included in their cost estimates the nearly 4.2 million U.S. citizens who are the children of undocumented immigrants. By adding the citizen children to their undocumented population estimate of 12.5 million, FAIR actually used 16.7 million people when they produced their "study." This is manipulative and dishonest.

Below are a couple of papers explaining the MULTIPLE serious errors in FAIR's study.

FAIR's "Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration" Study Is Fatally Flawed

Statistical Hot Air: FAIR's USA Report Lacks Credibility

Bottom line is facts,the facts are backed up by numbers that are advailable,you are the second person that has used the Fair study as a way to discredit what you seem to know little about.

Exactly what do you think I know little about? Manipulating numbers to maximize a study to suit my agenda?

Nice try in mixing legal immigrants in with illegals to try and make a case. The discussion was about ILLEGALS and not immigration in general.
You are referring to polls that in 2016 got every poll wrong,have they mended thier ways? Why should I believe them now?

No Richard they are surveys, not polls. Polls use predictive analytics.

A survey is a research method used for collecting data from a pre-defined group of respondents to gain information and insights on various topics of interest.

the United States as a country does not and views them as illegals subject to deportation.

I linked four surveys to dispute the above unsupported assertion. The fifth referred to immigrants, not illegals. The purpose was for you to see that the demographic with the largest percentage of anti immigration sentiment is the older ones and their dislike isn't related to illegality.

[Zacha341]

Amid the tide of "gaffes," Joe Biden looks less electable every day

Yes, Trump's an idiot. And he will win again if the DNC insists on pushing impaired Joe Biden.

[Richard]

FAIR, a bias anti-immigration lobby group says there are 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country.

Dept. of Homeland Security estimates 11.4. million.

Pew estimates there are 11.3 million

Center for Migration Studies [[CMS) estimates that there are 11 million

Center for Immigration Studies [[CIS) estimates there are 11.43 million

FAIR’s estimate of the number of illegal immigrants is a million more than any other organizations, including The Center for Immigration Studies, another anti-immigration right wing lobby group.

FAIR cannot be trusted because they have an agenda. Furthermore, FAIR included in their cost estimates the nearly 4.2 million U.S. citizens who are the children of undocumented immigrants. By adding the citizen children to their undocumented population estimate of 12.5 million, FAIR actually used 16.7 million people when they produced their "study." This is manipulative and dishonest.

Below are a couple of papers explaining the MULTIPLE serious errors in FAIR's study.

FAIR's "Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration" Study Is Fatally Flawed

Statistical Hot Air: FAIR's USA Report Lacks Credibility




Exactly what do you think I know little about? Manipulating numbers to maximize a study to suit my agenda?



No Richard they are surveys, not polls. Polls use predictive analytics.

A survey is a research method used for collecting data from a pre-defined group of respondents to gain information and insights on various topics of interest.



I linked four surveys to dispute the above unsupported assertion. The fifth referred to immigrants, not illegals. The purpose was for you to see that the demographic with the largest percentage of anti immigration sentiment is the older ones and their dislike isn't related to illegality.

The discussion was the cost of illegals,why are you going off in 20 different directions.

If you dispute the figures that revolve around the cost of illegals you really need to compile them and show me that the numbers are incorrect.

They are public record so you should have no issue disputing them.

Unless you feel that states and cities are reporting false information in thier public records,then that would be another level of investigation.

It is not that complicated.

[Shelby_]

No, it isn't complicated. Understanding the difference between a poll and a survey isn't complicated either. Clicking a link and reading isn't complicated. Yet some people cannot manage to do it. Go figure!

[oladub]

FAIR, a bias anti-immigration lobby group says there are 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country.

Dept. of Homeland Security estimates 11.4. million.

Pew estimates there are 11.3 million

Center for Migration Studies [[CMS) estimates that there are 11 million

Center for Immigration Studies [[CIS) estimates there are 11.43 million

FAIR’s estimate of the number of illegal immigrants is a million more than any other organizations, including The Center for Immigration Studies, another anti-immigration right wing lobby group.

FAIR cannot be trusted because they have an agenda. Furthermore, FAIR included in their cost estimates the nearly 4.2 million U.S. citizens who are the children of undocumented immigrants. By adding the citizen children to their undocumented population estimate of 12.5 million, FAIR actually used 16.7 million people when they produced their "study." This is manipulative and dishonest.

Below are a couple of papers explaining the MULTIPLE serious errors in FAIR's study.

FAIR's "Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration" Study Is Fatally Flawed

Statistical Hot Air: FAIR's USA Report Lacks Credibility




Exactly what do you think I know little about? Manipulating numbers to maximize a study to suit my agenda?



No Richard they are surveys, not polls. Polls use predictive analytics.

A survey is a research method used for collecting data from a pre-defined group of respondents to gain information and insights on various topics of interest.



I linked four surveys to dispute the above unsupported assertion. The fifth referred to immigrants, not illegals. The purpose was for you to see that the demographic with the largest percentage of anti immigration sentiment is the older ones and their dislike isn't related to illegality.

What does the Census Bureau say about how many illegal non-citizens are here? Just teasing. I realize that California would lose some representation in Congress if that question were asked and that places like Michigan and Colorado would get to represent Americans instead.

It's curious that although about 90,000 illegal non-citizens are slithering into our country illegally monthly and an additional 40% of illegal non-citizens residing here are people who come here legally and overstay their visas, the official guesstimates always remain at about 11.4M.

FAIR is correct to include the cost of anchor babies. If a couple had stayed home and had their children in their own countries, they wouldn't be costing U.S. taxpayers anything. If, instead, they sneak into the U.S. and have children here, our present interpretation of of the 14th. Amendment deems those children U.S. citizens and those children are given all the benefits of every other citizen and it becomes harder to get rid of their parents. Your understanding of costs is as muddled as your Orwellian use of "immigrants". The purpose of Newspeak, according to Orwell, was to make it impossible for people to think.

I just did a Google search for FAIR. Google has it pretty well hidden. There is a pro immigration page using FAIR but this is the real FAIR - https://www.fairus.org/issues/illegal-immigration

[Richard]

No, it isn't complicated. Understanding the difference between a poll and a survey isn't complicated either. Clicking a link and reading isn't complicated. Yet some people cannot manage to do it. Go figure!

So in other words,Richard I dispute the numbers that you provided for the cost of ILLEGAL immigration paid by the taxpayers.

Other then saying they are fake I,have zero to back up my claim,but I can continue to divert the topic into other irrelevant directions so I do not have to answer the topic.

Go figure!

[Shelby_]

It's curious that although about 90,000 illegal non-citizens are slithering into our country illegally monthly and an additional 40% of illegal non-citizens residing here are people who come here legally and overstay their visas, the official guesstimates always remain at about 11.4M.

Not quite.Through July, CPB detained 760,370 trying to enter without authorization. Divided by 8 that averages out to a little over 95,000 per month. Those 95,000+ are detained and eventually deported, not absorbed into the population.

Sorry to disappoint, but there's nothing curious about the numbers. The illegal immigrant population of the United States peaked in 2007, when it was at 12.2 million. It has been steadily declining since.

FAIR is correct to include the cost of anchor babies. If a couple had stayed home and had their children in their own countries, they wouldn't be costing U.S. taxpayers anything. If, instead, they sneak into the U.S. and have children here, our present interpretation of of the 14th. Amendment deems those children U.S. citizens and those children are given all the benefits of every other citizen and it becomes harder to get rid of their parents. Your understanding of costs is as muddled as your Orwellian use of "immigrants". The purpose of Newspeak, according to Orwell, was to make it impossible for people to think.

Population growth in America is at an 80 year low. Birthrates are down. How wise is it to try to "get rid" of people we can't replace?

Whether you think something should be a certain way doesn't matter. A "study" should deal in facts. FAIR's report is riddled with bias and methodological errors.

For example: FAIR counts the benefits consumed by the American born children of illegal immigrants. However, FAIR does not consider or credit the taxes these American citizens will eventually pay. Counting the benefits consumed but ignoring the tax revenue is a flawed static model that artificially skews the final result.

I just did a Google search for FAIR. Google has it pretty well hidden. There is a pro immigration page using FAIR but this is the real FAIR - https://www.fairus.org/issues/illegal-immigration

Google is hiding results eh? "Paranoia, paranoia, everyone's coming to get me.

Search again.The top result for FAIR is probably Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting. Search Fair Immigration. It will be the first result.

[Shelby_]

So in other words,Richard I dispute the numbers that you provided for the cost of ILLEGAL immigration paid by the taxpayers.

Other then saying they are fake I,have zero to back up my claim,but I can continue to divert the topic into other irrelevant directions so I do not have to answer the topic.

Go figure!

I've provided you with more than enough data to discredit FAIR's bogus study. If you won't read it, or cannot comprehend it, there is nothing I can do. Frankly I think you're too controlled by partisanship, generalizations, and assumptions to think objectively.

[Zacha341]

In the meantime:

California appeals court overturns conviction in Kate Steinle death
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...death-n1048551

[[2017)The verdict in the Kate Steinle murder trial was shocking but fair. Jurors put facts over politics.

https://www.latimes.com/local/abcari...202-story.html

Shooting of Kate Steinle - Wikipedia

[jcole]

If you search F.a.i.r., the anti immigration site is 9th in the list, following the definition of fair, the state fair and a couple other fairs in my community. I hardly would call that "hidden"

[Richard]

I've provided you with more than enough data to discredit FAIR's bogus study. If you won't read it, or cannot comprehend it, there is nothing I can do. Frankly I think you're too controlled by partisanship, generalizations, and assumptions to think objectively.

Actually you have posted diversions and continue to obsess with discredit Fair.

Who did the study is irrelevant and nobody has produced the numbers to dispute Fair including yourself.

No matter who or what or how many illegals there are there is a cost born to the taxpayer.

California,Texas and Florida have never disputed the costs,your own state has never disputed the costs,do you think maybe it is because they know they cannot change the financials around in order to suit an agenda like yourself?

But here you are talking about partisanship,generalizations,and assumptions.

You say you work in a hospital,everybody that comes through the door is registered,if they do not have the means to pay the cost is split between the hospital,city,state and federal government.

If the hospital does not register then they do not get paid,so when it comes to medical care and like anything else everybody wants to get paid.

That creates a paper trail that is hard to dispute.

Once again,you have zero argument against the cost of illegals that is carried by the taxpayer without you providing your disputed numbers.

They are not a closely guarded secret.

[Richard]

In the meantime:

California appeals court overturns conviction in Kate Steinle death
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...death-n1048551

[[2017)The verdict in the Kate Steinle murder trial was shocking but fair. Jurors put facts over politics.

https://www.latimes.com/local/abcari...202-story.html

Shooting of Kate Steinle - Wikipedia

In typical California mentality,we decided to hand felons over for deportation but not support border enforcement so they can just keep coming back.

Like the 5 times this guy already did.

The grainy video shows a group huddled around what appears to be the weapon,they did not pick it up but this guy choose to instead of notifying the authorities.

The safety would have had to been manually set to off,one in the chamber and a finger to pull the trigger.

[Shelby_]

Once again,you have zero argument against the cost of illegals that is carried by the taxpayer without you providing your disputed numbers.

They are not a closely guarded secret.

How is it you don't get this? I don't have to provide numbers disputing FAIR's. It's more than enough to show they used bad methodology.

[Richard]

How is it you don't get this? I don't have to provide numbers disputing FAIR's. It's more than enough to show they used bad methodology.

You are the one that is not getting it,call the state of California and tell them they are providing false budget reports to the public,or are you scared?



OTHER PROGRAMS
• Immigration Services—The Budget includes a total of $65 million ongoing General Fund to support qualified nonprofit organizations that provide a broad array of legal services and remedies related to immigration status for individuals and families. Of this amount, the Budget allows for up to $5 million General Fund, on a one-time basis, to be available for the provision of legal services to unaccompanied undocumented minors and Temporary Protected Status beneficiaries. Additionally, the Budget includes $25 million one-time General Fund for the Rapid Response Program to support entities that provide critical assistance/services to immigrants during emergent situations when federal funding is not available.


Read the the budget and if you still do not get it call Vivek Viseanathan who is the chief budget deputy director at 916-445-9862 and have them explain it to you.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/FullBudgetSummary.pdf


It is just like you guys in the left cried about Trumps tax changes of 2017 and how it was only designed for the rich,you guys ate that up like candy.

Seems like in all of the outcry the state of California actually agreed with the plan in private but made sure to be vocal opposition in the press.

EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT
The Budget significantly expands Earned Income Tax Credit [[EITC) beginning in tax year 2019. The Budget more than doubles the existing credit from $400 million to $1 billion. The expanded program extends credits to 1 million more households, reaching 3 million households in total.
The expanded California EITC does the following:
• Provides a $1,000 credit for every family that otherwise qualifies for the credit and has at least one child under the age of 6.
• Increases the maximum eligible earned income to $30,000 so that those working up to full-time at the 2022 minimum wage of $15 per hour will be eligible for the credit.
• Phases out more gradually, providing a more substantial credit for many eligible families.



FEDERAL TAX CONFORMITY
To pay for the entire cost of the newly expanded EITC and to reduce taxes on small businesses, the Budget conforms or partially conforms to a number of federal tax provisions that were enacted at the end of 2017 as part of the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

The state is conforming to these provisions because they are good policy or eliminate unnecessary administrative burdens to both taxpayers and the Franchise Tax

114 CALIFORNIA STATE BUDGET — 2019-20


STATEWIDE ISSUES AND VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS
Board. While some provisions increase revenues and others decrease revenues, in total these conformity provisions are expected to increase revenues by $200 million in 2018-19, $1.5 billion in 2019-20, and then about $1.2 billion annually on an ongoing basis.


Seems like Trumps tax plan was all about helping the lower income.

Your only methodology is parroting what you are told to say,kinda like repeating sending kids to thier death and then trying to justify it when it was a blatant lie,even after you knew it was false you kept on.

But yet your standard reply is everybody that supports Trump or even facts if they do not meet your narrative is wrong.

[Richard]

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is seeking expert advice on how to defeat the remaining 2020 Democratic presidential nominees and, according to NBC News, she’s turned to failed 2016 nominee Hillary Clinton for advice.

https://conservativefighters.org/new...ocratic-field/

[Shelby_]

Are you serious? What the hell does the above have to do with FAIR and their flawed study? I am not disputing that illegal immigration costs money. I'm disputing the validity of the FAIR study. Try to stay on topic.

[Richard]

Are you serious? What the hell does the above have to do with FAIR and their flawed study? I am not disputing that illegal immigration costs money. I'm disputing the validity of the FAIR study. Try to stay on topic.

Exactly,try staying on topic,which was the cost born to the taxpayer for illegal immigration,you were the one going off on fair and posting links about legal immigrants and who supports them and whatever else you can throw in there.

Who cares about FAIR,who incidentally has many MDs,PHDs and EDQs on thier board,so I would take thier knowledge over some random person on the internet trying to dispute thier findings but yet unable to provide the proof.

Once again the topic was relating to the cost of illegals.

Pretty Simple subject.

[oladub]

Are you serious? What the hell does the above have to do with FAIR and their flawed study? I am not disputing that illegal immigration costs money. I'm disputing the validity of the FAIR study. Try to stay on topic.

Not quite.Through July, CPB detained 760,370 trying to enter without authorization. Divided by 8 that averages out to a little over 95,000 per month. Those 95,000+ are detained and eventually deported, not absorbed into the population.

Sorry to disappoint, but there's nothing curious about the numbers. The illegal immigrant population of the United States peaked in 2007, when it was at 12.2 million. It has been steadily declining since.

In May, 144,000 were apprehended at the border. But even the 95,000/month that you used are just the ones caught. Only a record 55,000 are in custody. The rest are let loose waiting for trial. Many simply disappear. The government is not sending back 95,000 of this group a month. This group doesn't include the 40% of illegal non-citizens who come here legally and overstay their visas. Nor does it include the ICE estimated 46% of illegal border crossers who evade ICE and are not included in your 95,000/month estimate. Neither your nor I know how many illegal non-citizens are in the U.S. because the Democratic Party won't let the Census count them. To imagine that the number of illegal aliens residing tin the U.S. is stagnant even though all these people keep pouring in seems ignorant and irresponsible.

Population growth in America is at an 80 year low. Birthrates are down. How wise is it to try to "get rid" of people we can't replace?

Our national standard of living has been declining since 1978. Higher educational and housing prices reflect this. So do stagnant wages. The American class has to work harder and longer to have fewer children.

The Census Bureau predicts that "Between 2014 and 2060, the U.S. population is projected to increase from 319 million to 417 million, reaching 400 million in 2051."

That's a predicted 90M population increase in 32 years. 90M extra people will require paving, additional resource and agricultural exploitation and will increase sprawl and home prices. I'm surprised greens would advocate these things.

Much of this huge increase is driven by legal and other immigration. Although you have problems differentiating legal and illegal immigration, 77% of immigrants here are legal and one out of five living here is foreign born. We would still be growing without your illegal non-citizens being here.
j

Whether you think something should be a certain way doesn't matter. A "study" should deal in facts. FAIR's report is riddled with bias and methodological errors.

For example: FAIR counts the benefits consumed by the American born children of illegal immigrants. However, FAIR does not consider or credit the taxes these American citizens will eventually pay. Counting the benefits consumed but ignoring the tax revenue is a flawed static model that artificially skews the final result.

Then why doesn't the Democratic Party allow the Census Bureau to ask relevant questions?

FAIR is correct to include anchor baby costs. Illegal non-citizens who have their children here create costs to our taxpayers that would not exist if they had stayed home and had their children there. I already estimated that the grade 1-12 costs of illegal aliens totaled about $60T/year. They pay nowhere near that in taxes. The cost of taking Americans' jobs and driving down wages, lower wage scales and more unemployment compensation and welfare for Americans should also be factored into the taxpayer costs of subsidizing illegal non-citizens for their profiting employers.



1. The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers

[Pam]

What do you mean when you say "pushing." What evidence do you have to support your conclusion?

Maybe I should have said "propping up". Here's an example:

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...tion-about-joe

The man quickly identified himself as a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee. He didn’t need to tell me that he was hopping mad.Ken Martin was angry that my colleagues and I were handing out a flier—providing some inconvenient facts about Joe Biden—to delegates and activists as they entered the New Hampshire Democratic Party convention on Saturday. The headline, next to Biden’s picture, quoted a statement he made last year: “I don’t think 500 billionaires are the reason why we're in trouble.”While not flattering to the current frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, the carefully documented RootsAction flier offered information that news coverage has rarely mentioned—and that party activists as well as voters overall should know.