Take the money from the Military Industrial Complex and use it for social services. We do not need to outspend the next nine nations in the world combined to keep our country safe.
We could also make the rich pay their fair share of taxes, end subsidies for oil and coal companies, and provide free education for anyone who can maintain the grades so they will get better jobs and pay more taxes.
Yeah, I know: in my dreams.
Would you look them in their eyes and tell them they are not welcome here?Hellooo Sally Struthers!
How about we worry about all the little kids in Chicago, Houston, LA and Detroit etc…
Nobody can even look them in the eye!
We can’t even fix our own problems here. We don’t need endless streams of impoverished kids who want a better life here.
Because they don’t like their own country.
What’s that doing for those countries? It just compounds the problem down there.
Instead of growing up and being responsible, starting a future in your own country and working for a better way of life there, these people just
abandon their homes and sneak across the border illegally.
There’s no refugee crisis. This problem was started by Congress’ Asylum Law that GWB signed in 2008.
It was compounded by Obama and his Dream Act laws.
Those two laws(or modifications of existing laws) just rang the Dinner Bell.
That’s why the US is currently and frantically backpedaling and rethinking policies as we speak.
This so-called “crisis” is the only happy face that illegal immigrant advocates can put on this.
It’s an easy sell. Everyone thinks it’s bad down there and crazy. Nobody knows.
You just hear it is and you believe it.
Look at Chicago. We got the same thing here. We have drug wars and gangs right here.
But someone mentions El Salvador and it’s “Oh! It’s bad down there.”
It ain’t that bad. These people just want the American Dream. That’s all.
They want to cut in line ahead of all the people who are waiting and paying for visas to come here and work or study.
It’s been going on for so long that everyone just takes it for granted now.
“I’m doing the work that ordinary Americans won’t do.”
“We are escaping violence and drug wars.”
It’s the same old song and dance!
Take the money from the Military Industrial Complex and use it for social services. We do not need to outspend the next nine nations in the world combined to keep our country safe. We could also make the rich pay their fair share of taxes, end subsidies for oil and coal companies, and provide free education for anyone who can maintain the grades so they will get better jobs and pay more taxes. Yeah, I know: in my dreams.We dream the same dream.. sigh... don't forget to tax the churches..
You have done no research into this issue. Undocumented aliens are not all migrant farmers and day laborers. Many have real jobs with a fake SSN. So taxes are taken out of their paycheck, just like everybody, put they can't file, so they never get a return.I love how you tell people they have done no research into this issue. Everything you put on here is hearsay and myth. Plus editorial news clippings from illegal immigrant advocate news sources. 1. Anybody can claim enough dependents on their W-4s so that no taxes are taken out and they actually owe the IRS at the end of the year. Thus they don't pay any taxes and actually owe the US money. 2. What makes you think that people who have had taxes deducted from their checks with a fake Social Security Card can't file for a refund? If they have a SSN, a name and an address they can file for a return. It's that simple. People with fake SSNs file for disability, tax refunds, death benefits etc all the time. They also get welfare, WIC, Food Stamps etc with false documents. It happens all the time.
You have done no research into this issue. Undocumented aliens are not all migrant farmers and day laborers. Many have real jobs with a fake SSN. So taxes are taken out of their paycheck, just like everybody, put they can't file, so they never get a return.I love how you tell people they have done no research into this issue. Everything you put on here is hearsay and myth. Plus editorial news clippings from illegal immigrant advocate news sources. 1. Anybody can claim enough dependents on their W-4s so that no taxes are taken out and they actually owe the IRS at the end of the year. Thus they don't pay any taxes and actually owe the US money. 2. What makes you think that people who have had taxes deducted from their checks with a fake Social Security Card can't file for a refund? If they have a SSN, a name and an address they can file for a return. It's that simple. People with fake SSNs file for disability, tax refunds, death benefits etc all the time. They also get welfare, WIC, Food Stamps etc with false documents. It happens all the time. 1. So what? 2. You would make a horrible "illegal".
We could also make the rich pay their fair share of taxes Yeah, I know: in my dreams.I know this sounds good to everyone who is not rich but I'm afraid its really just a matter of wanting something for nothing most of the time. This tired refrain is dragged out anytime the middle class want the government to provide something but don't want to pay for it themselves or prefer not to make sacrifices some other government service in order to pay for it. Some polls have indicated that most people would consider anyone who makes $250,000 or more rich but if this is the case then its hard to argue that these people aren't paying "their fair share". People in that tax bracket are already paying 1/3 of their income to the federal government plus whatever they pay in state and local taxes. Despite what most people think, tax shelters do not really afford much protection for people in this tax bracket since the AMT usually wipes out most of their tax deductions, even the home mortgage deduction that everyone else enjoys. A few years back I researched this common claim with data from the OMB website and found that 90% of all taxes are paid by the top half of all earners and the top 10% pay 70% of all the taxes, in other words the top 10% pay 2.5 times as much as the entire rest of the country put together. The idea of "the rich" sitting on beaches in the Caribbean paying no taxes by hiding their earnings in exotic tax shelters may apply to a very small percentage of people who get most of their earnings through capital gains from stocks and other investments but it does not apply to the vast majority of people who are labelled as rich but actually work to earn their income. Most of these people are small business owners not CEO's and robber barons. We should certainly close tax loopholes where ever we can and tax capital gains at the same rate as regular earnings but dong those things is not going to bring in enough money to pay for much of anything.
Laustren you are incorrect. I have spent 24 years working in medicine and done a fair amount of work in ER's. I can tell you that undocumented workers coming to the ER without insurance is a daily occurrence even in the upper middle class area where I currently work. When I first started in practice I moonlighted in an ER in a very low income area of the city and the majority of the patients in that ER were undocumented immigrants or recent immigrants who were uninsured or insured through medicaid (which again you and I pay for).That isn't research. It is the definition of prejudice. You saw a sampling of something and you are extrapolating it to other people from a larger population defined by geography and heritage.
What you are ignoring, Mac, is that the top 10 percent control 90 percent of the money so should pay 90 percent of the taxes. Would you like to discuss offshore tax havens for corporations? How about tax breaks for fossil fuel extraction companies which are making billions of dollars in profits each quarter?
A few years back I researched this common claim with data from the OMB website and found that 90% of all taxes are paid by the top half of all earners and the top 10% pay 70% of all the taxes, in other words the top 10% pay 2.5 times as much as the entire rest of the country put together.I seriously doubt that you did your own research since you have come to a conclusion which is widely publicized by financial magazines. The stats you present here might be accurate but they are the only way to present this data that provides a narrative that sounds fair for the rich. If you honestly looked at all the data, either you came up with this deceptive narrative yourself, or you are just parroting what you've heard. You ignore wealth vs income, you ignore how much income each of the brackets you name make. The average tax burden is around 20%, but you ignore how much more of a burden that is to someone making $30,000. Simply, the low income person is left with $24,000. The $250,000/yr person, even at 30%, still has $175,000. And don't forget both people pay the same for gas and groceries. You also ignore how much more the rich person benefits from his taxes. He has roads not just for his 1982 Blazer, but for his entire fleet of trucks. His a military, not just so he can get a job mopping the deck of a carrier, but to protect his oil fields in Saudi Arabia.
What you are ignoring, Mac, is that the top 10 percent control 90 percent of the money so should pay 90 percent of the taxes. Would you like to discuss offshore tax havens for corporations? How about tax breaks for fossil fuel extraction companies which are making billions of dollars in profits each quarter?You are correct on both counts Darron but if they make 90% of the income and they are paying 90% of the taxes I don't see how anyone can say they are not paying their fair share. I agree with you about off shore tax shelters but as I was saying this is a tiny fraction of the people we are labeling as rich if we are going to consider every one with more than $250,000 in income as being rich. People making say $250,000 to $500,000/yr do not have tax shelters and fancy off shore accounts. They keep their money in the same place as the rest of society for the most part and pay more in taxes as a percentage of their income than people who are making $50,000. Its a convenient out to try and dump the cost of paying for societies needs on this group of people but the fact is that its just an excuse for everyone else not pitching in to help. Those people are already paying more than their fair share. If you want to go after the top 1/10th of 1% who are taking advantage of tax shelters and other unfair parts of the tax system as a feel good move and to make things more fair then I am fine with that but even there you are not going to come up with enough money to really pay for much of anything. When people start saying "we can solve this problem and I am willing to pay more taxes to solve it" then I think that is worth listening to but wen they say "fix this and tax the other guy to do it" it rings hollow.
When people start saying "we can solve this problem and I am willing to pay more taxes to solve it" then I think that is worth listening to but wen they say "fix this and tax the other guy to do it" it rings hollow.I'm not asking other people to give me anything. Making the über rich pay their fair share of taxes is only part of my plan. I led with vastly downsizing the military industrial complex. We can save trillions over a decade by cutting back on our killing machines.
When people start saying "we can solve this problem and I am willing to pay more taxes to solve it" then I think that is worth listening to but wen they say "fix this and tax the other guy to do it" it rings hollow.You write long posts that don't say much. What do you think is broken? Law enforcement? I agree, and when bankers break laws, they can destroy the economy of the entire world. Let's tax them more, regulate them better and not "print" money for them when they do that. Welfare? I agree, let's not subsidize WalMart by allowing them to keep wages so low and hours short so 15% of their employees are using food stamps. Jobs going overseas? I agree, let's not give tax breaks to corporations for going global. The list goes on...
When people start saying "we can solve this problem and I am willing to pay more taxes to solve it" then I think that is worth listening to but wen they say "fix this and tax the other guy to do it" it rings hollow.I'm not asking other people to give me anything. Making the über rich pay their fair share of taxes is only part of my plan. I led with vastly downsizing the military industrial complex. We can save trillions over a decade by cutting back on our killing machines. I dont disagree with a lot of that but when people ask for a solution to a societal problem but don't ask anything of themselves ( and I am not necessarily referring to you here but to society in general) then its hard to take what they are saying very seriously
When people start saying "we can solve this problem and I am willing to pay more taxes to solve it" then I think that is worth listening to but wen they say "fix this and tax the other guy to do it" it rings hollow.You write long posts that don't say much. What do you think is broken? Law enforcement? I agree, and when bankers break laws, they can destroy the economy of the entire world. Let's tax them more, regulate them better and not "print" money for them when they do that. Welfare? I agree, let's not subsidize WalMart by allowing them to keep wages so low and hours short so 15% of their employees are using food stamps. Jobs going overseas? I agree, let's not give tax breaks to corporations for going global. The list goes on... I am sorry if 2 or 3 short paragraphs tax your ability to concentrate but not everything can be said in a 140 character twitter bite. You're perfectly welcome to skip my posts if you don't understand them. Is that short enough for you?
I am sorry if 2 or 3 short paragraphs tax your ability to concentrate but not everything can be said in a 140 character twitter bite. You're perfectly welcome to skip my posts if you don't understand them. Is that short enough for you?I didn't say they were too long for me to understand, I said they lack substance. Would you like me to write a longer post explaining the difference?
Laustren you are incorrect. I have spent 24 years working in medicine and done a fair amount of work in ER's. I can tell you that undocumented workers coming to the ER without insurance is a daily occurrence even in the upper middle class area where I currently work. When I first started in practice I moonlighted in an ER in a very low income area of the city and the majority of the patients in that ER were undocumented immigrants or recent immigrants who were uninsured or insured through medicaid (which again you and I pay for).That isn't research. It is the definition of prejudice. You saw a sampling of something and you are extrapolating it to other people from a larger population defined by geography and heritage. Its not prejudice at all. I saw a very large sample of people entering an emergency room over several years. The majority of the uninsured and medicaid insured were immigrants from South and Central America. Yes I used a large sample to make a generalization about a larger group. That is not prejudiced its a rational extrapolation. Based on my observations I came to the conclusion that many new immigrants access the health care system in such a way as to cause tax paying and insured individuals to pay for their care. Short of doing a national census, every study you have ever read does exactly the same thing. We are always using samples to extrapolate and make conclusions about larger groups. I am not claiming that my "Study" was scientific. Its just an observation but your argument that extrapolating about larger groups from smaller samples is prejudiced is flawed. There can certainly be statistical errors and bias in every study and certainly in my own observations but the techniques itself is not prejudiced, its a scientifically and statistically valid method for developing theories about large groups. Its unclear from your post what point you are trying to make. It seems you posted a question to which you had already decided upon an answer and now your goal is merely to argue with everyone who opposes you without making any clear points or backing them up with any cogent arguments. You are the one who makes posts with no substance. Congratulations on at least making them short.
I am sorry if 2 or 3 short paragraphs tax your ability to concentrate but not everything can be said in a 140 character twitter bite. You're perfectly welcome to skip my posts if you don't understand them. Is that short enough for you?I didn't say they were too long for me to understand Clearly they are because you don't
Its unclear from your post what point you are trying to make. It seems you posted a question to which you had already decided upon an answer and now your goal is merely to argue with everyone who opposes you without making any clear points or backing them up with any cogent arguments. You are the one who makes posts with no substance. Congratulations on at least making them short.I haven’t “decided on an answer", I’ve studied the topic and have an opinion. I use facts to support it. I could be wrong, but I’m not going to listen to bad data supporting a non-argument. I provided a link and no one addressed it, other than to comment on the source, not the data. Why should I bother trying to educate further? You are speaking out of two sides of your mouth, “I am not claiming that my “Study" was scientific. Its just an observation but your argument that extrapolating about larger groups from smaller samples is prejudiced is flawed." Or, more likely, you don’t understand how to collect data scientifically. You also haven’t mentioned any financial data, an important part of your argument. You just assume it. Also, did you have access to these people’s personal data? Are you assuming their status, or did you actually know it? Wouldn’t that be illegal for you to be looking at that information? I made another post listing specific problems and how I would address them. You just generalize about “people" who say “fix this and tax them". What people? Fix what? Tax whom? How can I have a substantive conversation with you if you are being so vague?
I haven’t “decided on an answer", I’ve studied the topic and have an opinion. I use facts to support it.And yet you start off your post with this comment: "I’ll admit I haven’t followed the immigration issue. Everyone calls it a big problem. What exactly is the problem with thousands of people from South America entering the US? And don’t say “it’s illegal". I want to know what the real problem is. " You played a little bait and switch pretending to have an open mind and then coming on with a strong preformed opinion. You say you want to know why unregulated (illegal) immigration is bad but when we try to discuss reasons you don't want to hear them. You want to believe its all about prejudice but its not that simple. I have already pointed out that there are negative economic and social consequences for the country but you prefer to pretend they don't exist.
You are speaking out of two sides of your mouth, “I am not claiming that my “Study" was scientific. Its just an observation but your argument that extrapolating about larger groups from smaller samples is prejudiced is flawed." Or, more likely, you don’t understand how to collect data scientifically. You also haven’t mentioned any financial data, an important part of your argument. You just assume it. Also, did you have access to these people’s personal data? Are you assuming their status, or did you actually know it? Wouldn’t that be illegal for you to be looking at that information?Their financial data is not really relevant here. What I said is that these people were recent immigrants which I knew because this is a standard part of the social history taken during a medical history and their insurance status ( uninsured, medicaid, private insurance etc) is also a part of their record. As the attending physician taking care of them there was absolutely nothing illegal about looking at that information. Its on the intake sheet on the front of the chart and can be critical to their care. We need to know what sort of illnesses they may have been exposed to and what social supports they may or may not have available to them when they are discharged among other things, so this information is pertinent to their care.
I provided a link and no one addressed it, other than to comment on the source, not the data. Why should I bother trying to educate further?The Bill Moyers link does not really contain much information. It merely compares us to other countries who allow refugees in. So whats the point? Other countries are more humane than us? They are less prejudiced? They care more about the down trodden? You can't seriously believe that. The U.S. has for decades given out more humanitarian aid than any other country. When the 2004 Tsunami devastated the far east what country sent more personal donations than ay other. I am not trying to wave the flag here but don't try to imply that Americans are not generous to others outside our borders. And prejudice is a human trait not an American one. Look at the sectarian strife around the world. If you want to help the people who want to come into the country you need to work on laws that allow more people to come in more easily. Implying that this is all do to prejudice and selfishness won't get you anywhere. You need to explain why more people should be allowed in and how you would screen them to make sure the criminals are kept out and how you are going to prevent a negative economic impact or prove that there isn't one if you think you can. I don't have to convince the American people that there is one. They already believe that. You need to convince them there isnt one.
I made another post listing specific problems and how I would address them. You just generalize about “people" who say “fix this and tax them". What people? Fix what? Tax whom? How can I have a substantive conversation with you if you are being so vague?Please provide the post link here because I have not seen it. You seem to have missed the fact that my post regarding “fix this and tax them" as you say was in reference to Darrons post where he suggested that we find money to deal with the immigrant issue but the suggested methods of financing it did not include increasing taxes on the general public. He suggested we could get the money through several sources that were reasonable but there was no mention of increasing the tax rate on the average joe. My comment was simply that any solution that recommends sacrifices from others but does not include a sacrifice by the people proposing it doesn't will have a hard time claiming the moral high ground. It just rings self serving and hollow. There you go. That was along post. I don't do one liners