|
hostileuniverse
Stranger



Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
royque1980 said:
Quote:
qman said:
You're to caught up in the current day legalities and polices, all of that can be changed overnight. Once the general public and political will (Trump) is behind it like today, it becomes quite easy to accomplish.
I wish ANY politician had the power that you are attributing to Trump. I hope you are right and wrong as well, because I don't agree with this particular policy. But I really am not pulling your leg when I say it is difficult. It is not a "today" thing that can be changed either overnight or often over decades.
Certainly can't be changed overnight, that for sure. But the journey of a thousand miles starts with a single footstep, sure wish those dirtbags in Washington would fucking DO something, they were not elected to let us be invaded...
|
Count of Sabugosa
Nerdy floater



Registered: 08/20/15
Posts: 939
Last seen: 7 months, 26 days
|
|
I agree with your Washington sentiment, but I think your expectations are way too high... I'm not just talking about deportation, but about the result that it would yield.
-------------------- In Hebrew, the words "wine" and "secret" hold the same numerologic value. When wine comes in, secrets spill out. Do you think the person who said that knew mushrooms? When mushrooms come in... Is there anything beyond a secret?
|
paperbackwriter
Edward Lear


Registered: 03/31/14
Posts: 1,888
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22277731 - 09/23/15 07:55 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
"FAIR's methodology cherry picked the data"
Really? Including the children born from illegal immigrants is "cherry picking"? Give us a fucking break, they shouldn't even be given US citizenship in the first place, and their costs are real and should be included in the equation.
Now you're cherry picking the critique. There's more to it then that.
FAIR makes a number of assumptions in their study and leaves out many factors that bring the costs down, such as the taxes a child will pay over the course of their lifetime.
Quote:
Serious economists view education and healthcare for children as investments that pay off later when those children become workers and taxpayers. Healthy, well-educated children are more productive, earn higher wages, and pay more in taxes when they become adults.
FAIR’s calculations do not account for the fact that all children are “costly” today, but will pay back those costs later through a lifetime spent working and paying taxes.
Under FAIR’s methodology, education and healthcare for the native-born child of an unauthorized immigrant is counted as a “cost” assigned to unauthorized immigrants if that child is under 18. But the tax contributions made by the adult native-born child of an unauthorized immigrant are credited to the U.S.-citizen population.
The study is full of holes like this. If you keep citing those numbers I'm going to keep pointing out that they're flawed.
-------------------- Why should we strive with cynic frown To knock their fairy castles down? ~ Eliza Cook It's rather embarrassing to have given one's entire life to pondering the human predicament and to find that in the end one has little more to say than, 'Try to be a little kinder.' ~Aldous Huxley
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
paperbackwriter said:
Quote:
qman said:
"FAIR's methodology cherry picked the data"
Really? Including the children born from illegal immigrants is "cherry picking"? Give us a fucking break, they shouldn't even be given US citizenship in the first place, and their costs are real and should be included in the equation.
Now you're cherry picking the critique. There's more to it then that.
FAIR makes a number of assumptions in their study and leaves out many factors that bring the costs down, such as the taxes a child will pay over the course of their lifetime.
Quote:
Serious economists view education and healthcare for children as investments that pay off later when those children become workers and taxpayers. Healthy, well-educated children are more productive, earn higher wages, and pay more in taxes when they become adults.
FAIR’s calculations do not account for the fact that all children are “costly” today, but will pay back those costs later through a lifetime spent working and paying taxes.
Under FAIR’s methodology, education and healthcare for the native-born child of an unauthorized immigrant is counted as a “cost” assigned to unauthorized immigrants if that child is under 18. But the tax contributions made by the adult native-born child of an unauthorized immigrant are credited to the U.S.-citizen population.
The study is full of holes like this. If you keep citing those numbers I'm going to keep pointing out that they're flawed.
"education and healthcare for children as investments that pay off later"
That's the rational for pissing away billions on the invaders, I don't think so.
"pay more in taxes as they become adults"
Even if this was true, so what? It hardly justifies spending the ridiculous amount of money on illegals, they're NEVER going to contribute enough to equalize their expense to the taxpayer.
"tax contributions made by the adult native born child of an unauthorized immigrant are credited to the US- citizen population"
What very little they contribute shouldn't be credited, but that hardly changes the very real numbers in the study.
"The study is full of holes"
It's not, they are trying to discredit the study based on meaningless technicalities, it doesn't change the very simple fact that the invaders are huge leeches on the system.
|
paperbackwriter
Edward Lear


Registered: 03/31/14
Posts: 1,888
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22279422 - 09/23/15 03:49 PM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The point is you can't do a cost benefit analysis of something and ignore the benefits. Not if you want numbers that mean anything.
The FAIR study is flawed. Illegals may be a drain on our resources but we can't tell that from a biased study that ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children completely while only focusing on the resources they drain.
There's other holes in the study too.
Quote:
FAIR assumes, without any empirical backing, that all children of unauthorized immigrants are low-income, and that they all attend low-income schools—and therefore that they are responsible for nearly 10 percent of the $13.8 billion in Title I funding aimed at assisting schools to improve the academic performance of children from poor families. In addition to being baseless, this assumption is inconsistent with other sections of FAIR’s report, where higher income levels are acknowledged or even used as a basis for computing costs. In other words, FAIR changes its assumptions about the income of unauthorized immigrants in order to maximize the costs which are attributed to them.
FAIR acknowledges that “only anecdotal information is available” about Medicaid fraud by unauthorized immigrants, yet inexplicably assumes that the number of unauthorized immigrants who fraudulently use Medicaid is equal to the number who seek emergency medical treatment. No explanation is provided as to why these two numbers would bear any resemblance to one another, but this assumption helps FAIR to produce $2.5 billion in alleged costs.
FAIR assumes that nearly three-fourths of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students in public schools are the children of unauthorized immigrants—and therefore utilize most of the $730 million in taxpayer-funded Title III programs for LEP students. Yet FAIR also states that the majority of the children of unauthorized immigrants are U.S. citizens, born and raised in the United States. It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign-born children.
I could go on.
-------------------- Why should we strive with cynic frown To knock their fairy castles down? ~ Eliza Cook It's rather embarrassing to have given one's entire life to pondering the human predicament and to find that in the end one has little more to say than, 'Try to be a little kinder.' ~Aldous Huxley
|
Count of Sabugosa
Nerdy floater



Registered: 08/20/15
Posts: 939
Last seen: 7 months, 26 days
|
|
Quote:
paperbackwriter said: The point is you can't do a cost benefit analysis of something and ignore the benefits. Not if you want numbers that mean anything.
The FAIR study is flawed. Illegals may be a drain on our resources but we can't tell that from a biased study that ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children completely while only focusing on the resources they drain.
There's other holes in the study too.
Quote:
FAIR assumes, without any empirical backing, that all children of unauthorized immigrants are low-income, and that they all attend low-income schools—and therefore that they are responsible for nearly 10 percent of the $13.8 billion in Title I funding aimed at assisting schools to improve the academic performance of children from poor families. In addition to being baseless, this assumption is inconsistent with other sections of FAIR’s report, where higher income levels are acknowledged or even used as a basis for computing costs. In other words, FAIR changes its assumptions about the income of unauthorized immigrants in order to maximize the costs which are attributed to them.
FAIR acknowledges that “only anecdotal information is available” about Medicaid fraud by unauthorized immigrants, yet inexplicably assumes that the number of unauthorized immigrants who fraudulently use Medicaid is equal to the number who seek emergency medical treatment. No explanation is provided as to why these two numbers would bear any resemblance to one another, but this assumption helps FAIR to produce $2.5 billion in alleged costs.
FAIR assumes that nearly three-fourths of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students in public schools are the children of unauthorized immigrants—and therefore utilize most of the $730 million in taxpayer-funded Title III programs for LEP students. Yet FAIR also states that the majority of the children of unauthorized immigrants are U.S. citizens, born and raised in the United States. It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign-born children.
I could go on.
It was the point I intented to raise, but you beat me to the punch. In fact, this why even when a real issue is brought up in terms of immigration, the fact that the issue is real does not mean that the analysis is unbiased in respect to the sentiment of the matter, which I am bringing back from previous posts.
When it comes to children of immigrants, how many do stay in the country and contribute to its wealth and health? There is a fair amount of noise as to what always existed and now seemed to have been rediscovered by the typical neocon regarding "skill drainage," as I like to put it. What about those who do contribute and stay, such as most of the group, of people I mostly know for years, responsible for advocating in favor of the Dream Act?
Also, what about so much more money spent on other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison to what is claimed to be spent due to illegal immigration?
There could be a more balance discussion, but, indeed, ideology (another name for party) is the denied but obvious dominant factor.
-------------------- In Hebrew, the words "wine" and "secret" hold the same numerologic value. When wine comes in, secrets spill out. Do you think the person who said that knew mushrooms? When mushrooms come in... Is there anything beyond a secret?
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 22 hours
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Liberals prefer concrete plans, which Trump is weak on.
You are right. How about "IN my administration, every bill will be posted for 5 days before it crosses my desk so the people can see it." or "in my administration, I won't have any lobbyists"

Or how about a REAL concrete plan: "We need more shovel ready jobs" 
You crack me up man.
|
spookman
Toad-licker

Registered: 04/17/15
Posts: 95
Last seen: 17 hours, 22 minutes
|
|
Surely Trump is a joke.
Then again, you guys elected Dubya. Twice.
By definition, almost half the population has less than average intelligence.
-------------------- Subterranean Hermes, guardian of my father's realms, Become my saviour and my ally, in answer to my prayer. For I am come and do return to this my land. - Aristophanes, The Frogs.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 57 minutes, 14 seconds
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Liberals prefer concrete plans, which Trump is weak on.
You are right. How about "IN my administration, every bill will be posted for 5 days before it crosses my desk so the people can see it." or "in my administration, I won't have any lobbyists"

Or how about a REAL concrete plan: "We need more shovel ready jobs" 
You crack me up man.
A few of the reasons why every liberal I know dislikes Obama.
--------------------
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs




Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,304
Last seen: 30 minutes, 6 seconds
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: Or how about a REAL concrete plan: "We need more shovel ready jobs"
Did Obama say that?
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (09/23/15 10:48 PM)
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
paperbackwriter said: The point is you can't do a cost benefit analysis of something and ignore the benefits. Not if you want numbers that mean anything.
The FAIR study is flawed. Illegals may be a drain on our resources but we can't tell that from a biased study that ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children completely while only focusing on the resources they drain.
There's other holes in the study too.
Quote:
FAIR assumes, without any empirical backing, that all children of unauthorized immigrants are low-income, and that they all attend low-income schools—and therefore that they are responsible for nearly 10 percent of the $13.8 billion in Title I funding aimed at assisting schools to improve the academic performance of children from poor families. In addition to being baseless, this assumption is inconsistent with other sections of FAIR’s report, where higher income levels are acknowledged or even used as a basis for computing costs. In other words, FAIR changes its assumptions about the income of unauthorized immigrants in order to maximize the costs which are attributed to them.
FAIR acknowledges that “only anecdotal information is available” about Medicaid fraud by unauthorized immigrants, yet inexplicably assumes that the number of unauthorized immigrants who fraudulently use Medicaid is equal to the number who seek emergency medical treatment. No explanation is provided as to why these two numbers would bear any resemblance to one another, but this assumption helps FAIR to produce $2.5 billion in alleged costs.
FAIR assumes that nearly three-fourths of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students in public schools are the children of unauthorized immigrants—and therefore utilize most of the $730 million in taxpayer-funded Title III programs for LEP students. Yet FAIR also states that the majority of the children of unauthorized immigrants are U.S. citizens, born and raised in the United States. It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign-born children.
I could go on.
"ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children"
Even when these children reached the age of 18, they most likely generate very little tax revenue working a low skilled and low wage job, that's just a fact.
"It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign born children"
Is this some type of joke or something? What difference does it make if the child was born here in the US or was born in another country and then sent to school in the US?
The point is they can't speak English and that does cost a lot of money. I can tell you that many of the schools that have children from illegals around here are full of problems, the reason? They can NOT speak good enough English!!
Once again, you're trying to rationalize what's going on, these children are from ILLEGALS, who gives a fuck where they were born? Pathetic.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
royque1980 said:
Quote:
paperbackwriter said: The point is you can't do a cost benefit analysis of something and ignore the benefits. Not if you want numbers that mean anything.
The FAIR study is flawed. Illegals may be a drain on our resources but we can't tell that from a biased study that ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children completely while only focusing on the resources they drain.
There's other holes in the study too.
Quote:
FAIR assumes, without any empirical backing, that all children of unauthorized immigrants are low-income, and that they all attend low-income schools—and therefore that they are responsible for nearly 10 percent of the $13.8 billion in Title I funding aimed at assisting schools to improve the academic performance of children from poor families. In addition to being baseless, this assumption is inconsistent with other sections of FAIR’s report, where higher income levels are acknowledged or even used as a basis for computing costs. In other words, FAIR changes its assumptions about the income of unauthorized immigrants in order to maximize the costs which are attributed to them.
FAIR acknowledges that “only anecdotal information is available” about Medicaid fraud by unauthorized immigrants, yet inexplicably assumes that the number of unauthorized immigrants who fraudulently use Medicaid is equal to the number who seek emergency medical treatment. No explanation is provided as to why these two numbers would bear any resemblance to one another, but this assumption helps FAIR to produce $2.5 billion in alleged costs.
FAIR assumes that nearly three-fourths of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students in public schools are the children of unauthorized immigrants—and therefore utilize most of the $730 million in taxpayer-funded Title III programs for LEP students. Yet FAIR also states that the majority of the children of unauthorized immigrants are U.S. citizens, born and raised in the United States. It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign-born children.
I could go on.
It was the point I intented to raise, but you beat me to the punch. In fact, this why even when a real issue is brought up in terms of immigration, the fact that the issue is real does not mean that the analysis is unbiased in respect to the sentiment of the matter, which I am bringing back from previous posts.
When it comes to children of immigrants, how many do stay in the country and contribute to its wealth and health? There is a fair amount of noise as to what always existed and now seemed to have been rediscovered by the typical neocon regarding "skill drainage," as I like to put it. What about those who do contribute and stay, such as most of the group, of people I mostly know for years, responsible for advocating in favor of the Dream Act?
Also, what about so much more money spent on other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison to what is claimed to be spent due to illegal immigration?
There could be a more balance discussion, but, indeed, ideology (another name for party) is the denied but obvious dominant factor.
"When it comes to children of immigrants, how many do stay in the country and contribute to it's wealth and health?"
It's irrelevant, their parents came here illegally, but the reality is that they don't contribute very much, most come from a culture that suffers from a lack basic education, that makes them a burden.
"money spent of other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison"
I love this rationalization, when people know that the burden from illegals is indefensible, they use the "what does it matter, we piss money away in other areas". That line of reasoning just doesn't cut it.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22282778 - 09/24/15 09:19 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
>when people know that the burden from illegals is indefensible, they use the "what does it matter, we piss money away in other areas". That line of reasoning just doesn't cut it.
That's called "liberal logic"
Another example is when they say obumble had to continue all those wars because they were started by someone else. So its not his fault we keep pissing away trillions in those rat holes, its all bush's fault.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Count of Sabugosa
Nerdy floater



Registered: 08/20/15
Posts: 939
Last seen: 7 months, 26 days
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22282798 - 09/24/15 09:23 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
It's irrelevant, their parents came here illegally, but the reality is that they don't contribute very much, most come from a culture that suffers from a lack basic education, that makes them a burden.
Source, any at all for you assessment that thet don't contribut bery much? Lack of basic education, such as what, a great percentage of Americans? Hmmmm. Ok, so there are no sentiments in your speech and I am Napoleon.
Quote:
"money spent of other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison"
I love this rationalization, when people know that the burden from illegals is indefensible, they use the "what does it matter, we piss money away in other areas". That line of reasoning just doesn't cut it.
It is not rationalization. If you have a business and someone comes and tells you, "hey, we need to cut expenses with healthcare benefits to our employees," but you are spending thrice as much in your parties and office fixtures, cutting down on what actually helps people in an economy is a great irresponsibility. Once again, basic accounting.
-------------------- In Hebrew, the words "wine" and "secret" hold the same numerologic value. When wine comes in, secrets spill out. Do you think the person who said that knew mushrooms? When mushrooms come in... Is there anything beyond a secret?
|
Count of Sabugosa
Nerdy floater



Registered: 08/20/15
Posts: 939
Last seen: 7 months, 26 days
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22282808 - 09/24/15 09:26 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
It's irrelevant, their parents came here illegally, but the reality is that they don't contribute very much, most come from a culture that suffers from a lack basic education, that makes them a burden.
Source, any at all for you assessment that thet don't contribut bery much? Lack of basic education, such as what, a great percentage of Americans? Hmmmm. Ok, so there are no sentiments in your speech and I am Napoleon.
Quote:
"money spent of other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison"
I love this rationalization, when people know that the burden from illegals is indefensible, they use the "what does it matter, we piss money away in other areas". That line of reasoning just doesn't cut it.
It is not rationalization. If you have a business and someone comes and tells you, "hey, we need to cut expenses with healthcare benefits to our employees," but you are spending thrice as much in your parties and office fixtures, cutting down on what actually helps people in an economy is a great irresponsibility. Once again, basic accounting.
BTW At least it seems liberals have SOME of logic going for them
-------------------- In Hebrew, the words "wine" and "secret" hold the same numerologic value. When wine comes in, secrets spill out. Do you think the person who said that knew mushrooms? When mushrooms come in... Is there anything beyond a secret?
|
paperbackwriter
Edward Lear


Registered: 03/31/14
Posts: 1,888
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22282809 - 09/24/15 09:27 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
paperbackwriter said: The point is you can't do a cost benefit analysis of something and ignore the benefits. Not if you want numbers that mean anything.
The FAIR study is flawed. Illegals may be a drain on our resources but we can't tell that from a biased study that ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children completely while only focusing on the resources they drain.
There's other holes in the study too.
Quote:
FAIR assumes, without any empirical backing, that all children of unauthorized immigrants are low-income, and that they all attend low-income schools—and therefore that they are responsible for nearly 10 percent of the $13.8 billion in Title I funding aimed at assisting schools to improve the academic performance of children from poor families. In addition to being baseless, this assumption is inconsistent with other sections of FAIR’s report, where higher income levels are acknowledged or even used as a basis for computing costs. In other words, FAIR changes its assumptions about the income of unauthorized immigrants in order to maximize the costs which are attributed to them.
FAIR acknowledges that “only anecdotal information is available” about Medicaid fraud by unauthorized immigrants, yet inexplicably assumes that the number of unauthorized immigrants who fraudulently use Medicaid is equal to the number who seek emergency medical treatment. No explanation is provided as to why these two numbers would bear any resemblance to one another, but this assumption helps FAIR to produce $2.5 billion in alleged costs.
FAIR assumes that nearly three-fourths of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students in public schools are the children of unauthorized immigrants—and therefore utilize most of the $730 million in taxpayer-funded Title III programs for LEP students. Yet FAIR also states that the majority of the children of unauthorized immigrants are U.S. citizens, born and raised in the United States. It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign-born children.
I could go on.
"ignores the tax revenue generated by immigrant children"
Even when these children reached the age of 18, they most likely generate very little tax revenue working a low skilled and low wage job, that's just a fact.
"It stands to reason that native-born children are less likely to be LEP students than are foreign born children"
Is this some type of joke or something? What difference does it make if the child was born here in the US or was born in another country and then sent to school in the US?
The point is they can't speak English and that does cost a lot of money. I can tell you that many of the schools that have children from illegals around here are full of problems, the reason? They can NOT speak good enough English!!
Once again, you're trying to rationalize what's going on, these children are from ILLEGALS, who gives a fuck where they were born? Pathetic.
FAIR started with the assumption that illegals are a drain on our economy and cherry picked the data to support that assumption.
That's the point I'm making. You can keep defending a bullshit study all day. But as long as you keep leaning on those figures I'm going to keep pointing out that their bullshit.
-------------------- Why should we strive with cynic frown To knock their fairy castles down? ~ Eliza Cook It's rather embarrassing to have given one's entire life to pondering the human predicament and to find that in the end one has little more to say than, 'Try to be a little kinder.' ~Aldous Huxley
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
|
--------------------
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
royque1980 said:
Quote:
qman said:
It's irrelevant, their parents came here illegally, but the reality is that they don't contribute very much, most come from a culture that suffers from a lack basic education, that makes them a burden.
Source, any at all for you assessment that thet don't contribut bery much? Lack of basic education, such as what, a great percentage of Americans? Hmmmm. Ok, so there are no sentiments in your speech and I am Napoleon.
Quote:
"money spent of other irrelevant bureaucratic BS and loopholes in comparison"
I love this rationalization, when people know that the burden from illegals is indefensible, they use the "what does it matter, we piss money away in other areas". That line of reasoning just doesn't cut it.
It is not rationalization. If you have a business and someone comes and tells you, "hey, we need to cut expenses with healthcare benefits to our employees," but you are spending thrice as much in your parties and office fixtures, cutting down on what actually helps people in an economy is a great irresponsibility. Once again, basic accounting.
"It is not rationalization"
Yes it is, you're changing the subject matter and justifying poor behavior with other poor behavior.
"cutting down on what actually helps people in an economy is a great irresponsibility"
That might be true when it applies to US citizens, not for people that don't belong here. How much responsibility does a taxpayer like myself have for poor people that enter in the US illegally? None, other than deporting them back to their homelands.
|
Count of Sabugosa
Nerdy floater



Registered: 08/20/15
Posts: 939
Last seen: 7 months, 26 days
|
Re: The Trump Phenomenon [Re: qman]
#22283285 - 09/24/15 11:09 AM (8 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
"It is not rationalization"
Yes it is, you're changing the subject matter and justifying poor behavior with other poor behavior.
No. I am not as far as anything I wrote here. I am talking about basic economics of priorities v. the sentiments I see you express as opposed to raw or crude ideas.
Quote:
That might be true when it applies to US citizens, not for people that don't belong here
literally said Hitler. If so many presidents did provide citizenship for prior people illegally in the country, "not to belong here" is clear value and sentiment attribution.
Quote:
How much responsibility does a taxpayer like myself have for poor people that enter in the US illegally? None, other than deporting them back to their homelands.
How much? Please, show me your numbers. Insofar as the sources...
-------------------- In Hebrew, the words "wine" and "secret" hold the same numerologic value. When wine comes in, secrets spill out. Do you think the person who said that knew mushrooms? When mushrooms come in... Is there anything beyond a secret?
Edited by Count of Sabugosa (09/24/15 11:12 AM)
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 1 hour
|
|
Quote:
royque1980 said:
Quote:
qman said:
"It is not rationalization"
Yes it is, you're changing the subject matter and justifying poor behavior with other poor behavior.
No. I am not as far as anything I wrote here. I am talking about basic economics of priorities v. the sentiments I see you express as opposed to raw or crude ideas.
Quote:
That might be true when it applies to US citizens, not for people that don't belong here
literally said Hitler. If so many presidents did provide citizenship for prior people illegally in the country, "not to belong here" is clear value and sentiment attribution.
Quote:
How much responsibility does a taxpayer like myself have for poor people that enter in the US illegally? None, other than deporting them back to their homelands.
How much? Please, show me your numbers. Insofar as the sources... 
"How much? Please, show me your numbers."
It was a rhetorical question and I already made my point. Taxpayer money should be used for deportation, border enforcement, and prosecuting employers who hired them.
|
|