• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households

I've always said I have no problem with immigrants, as long as they come here LEGALLY.

Ok, now that the fact that you have no problem with legal immigration is established. Why do you portray an article by the WashingtonExaminer as being truth when Green Card holders are legal permanent residents of the US on a path to citizenship? They work and pay taxes and have most of the rights to government benefits full citizens do. Why do you suppose the WashingtonExaminer even included Green Card holders? Why didn't they just include undocumented immigrants in their study? You make political hay by saying 63% of immigrants have applied for some form of welfare while leaving out the details. 63% may or may not be true but what use is it when we still don't know anything about what illegal immigrants get in welfare. There are sources to get even that information. I don't have any problem with peoples views even when they diverge wildly from mine. My problem with ALL of us is just accepting stuff as gospel without being curious enough to dig deeper. I realize that some views will never change regardless of the information.
 
The point of the OP is to paint "non-citizens" as welfare cases and promote xenophobia. The organisation that made the report.. states clearly from the start that it is against immigration which automatically sets the alarm clocks ringing.

The point is that illegals come here with nothing but the shirts on their backs, if that. Take the Migrant Caravan, for instance. How much money are they bringing with them to support themselves? The OP is valid because it clearly shows that people who shouldn't be here in the first place start right off getting government benefits and, in many cases, it continues. Pretty much everyone gets government assistance. Schools cost money, school lunches cost money, and if they need healthcare they can't even be turned away from hospitals so somebody somewhere pays that bill too. Absolutely no one should come here illegally. There is a system in place to come to this country legally.
 
Last edited:
That is the problem. The definition is wayyyy too wide to have any meaning.

1) EITC... it is a tax credit, hence to get this you need to pay taxes!!!

Not just pay taxes, but also be a citizen. EITC is also based on how many children you claim. Since its been proven that many illegal aliens file taxes and get tax returns and that they also claim children that don't even live with them and never have this is costing taxpayers millions.

2) SSI is for handicapped people.. I mean come on.

Again, a system set up for citizens. And not just handicapped people. But also people 65 or older whether they are disabled or not.

3) WIC and school lunches.. that is babies and small children.

So?

And then there is subsidized and public housing... rather broad.

No, its not.
 
Renae is getting her information from a hate site with a history of publishing lies, so none of this should come as a surprise imo. This is not the first time this has happened, and I would suggest doing a quick google regarding the source of any link she provides you. See post #38 for info on the source of data in the OP.

Oh, I saw earlier posts about that before I made mine. I didn't bother reaching that far because the report and the OP's presentation of it were false on their own terms.
 
You didnt offer any discussion though. Whats the point of your OP?

I posted it to stir discussion, and as I was working I chose to post and go back to work stuffs
 
The latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California —the number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S. Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of households headed by native-born Americans use welfare in California.
Incidentally, they're not talking about EITC (this is an income tax credit -only available to people who pay income tax).
All four states with the largest foreign-born populations, including California, have extremely high use of welfare by immigrant households. In Texas, for example, nearly 70 percent of households headed by immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare. Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of native-born households in Texas are on welfare.

In New York and Florida, a majority of households headed by immigrants and noncitizens are on welfare. Overall, about 63 percent of immigrant households use welfare while only 35 percent of native-born households use welfare.
Curious how the same figure (35%) applies to the citizenry on public assistance regardless of the State.

Trump proposes greater immigration controls which would restrict immigrants who could become "public charges" which would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.
As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...lifornia-immigrant-households-are-on-welfare/
If they are talking about just free school lunches, these are costing about $34 per day for each child of non-citizens.
 
Last edited:
It's discussing immigration, and the impacts. Has nothing to do with Xenophobia.

Lots of lazy white trash on Welfare...The works, Food Stamps, monthly subsidy's, medical etc.....At least most illegals work
 
Multiple giant size fonts, with multiple special effects. My oh my, you really know how to put together a incoherent argument, don't you? SMH.


The data in the OP, the data you're using to base your opinion on, is from a hate site with a history of using false data.

Where in the world did you learn that using giant font sizes equates to truth and making a coherent argument? Or that hate sites are a good place to get factual information? Are you home schooled?

You missed the simple math and reference to what it costs Germans per person.

I understand, bolded text and large fonts confuse Leftists.

It’s why you’re Leftists.

ROTFLOL... “hate site”.

Do the Germans “hate” too? ROTFLOL...
 
Lots of lazy white trash on Welfare...The works, Food Stamps, monthly subsidy's, medical etc.....At least most illegals work

Most illegals are on the take.
 
You didnt offer any discussion though. Whats the point of your OP?

The point is... most illegals are on the take.
 
The point is... most illegals are on the take.

Technically no, that phrase indicates someone accepting a bribe. The article also says non citizens, not illegals. Certainly, if most legal immigrants are on public assistance that is not a good argument for bringing in more. But then, IIRC, half of citizens also get some form of subsidy, so we arent much better. This is more an argument for getting rid of govt, than immigrants.
 
Back
Top Bottom