"Estimates"? What good are they? There are between 12 and 20 million illegals, how useful is what is no better than a guess?
So in one breath you basically say estimates are useless, and then in the very next you use an estimate (and the far upper limits of the estimates as well.. presented as a fact no less). Sense of humor... you gots one. :lol:
Generally, from everything I've seen on the matter, the consensus view seems to be that there are around 11-12 million illegals in the country.
The 50% estimates I've seen are based on these estimates and the amount of "extra" money found in medicare and SS money.
They are often used in arguments against illegal aliens.
The facts are better than whatever links - which may or may not be legit. Hospitals are closing all over the US due to illegals unable to pay their bills. My school system, the nation's largest, has a significant portion of undocumented, whose parents do not contribute to the taxes needed to pay for the school teachers, etc.
The facts are present in the studies, which are found at the links to which I refer. What you keep repeating without sourcing is the rhetoric.
Ok, since you said so, I guess that's that
Seems to be your MO since you've yet to substantiate any of the things you've claimed.
Since it is clear you do not have an accounting background, all a return accomplishes is authenticate the numbers ALREADY PROVIDED to the IRS. There is no causal connection between a person sending in their returns and receiving a refund from the IRS. The return merely declares "offline" income, such as from stocks, bonds, real estate holdings etc, not reported directly to the IRS by one's employer.
True, I should have said "refund". My apologies.
As I noted, filing or not filing a return is meaningless, particularly since one would understand that most illegals are not swimming in IBM dividend income...
Yes, but most W2 employees making the same amount as the average illegal receives a refund of nearly all income tax paid.
The fact that they are low income is actually a huge part of my argument. Almost all of the money paid by the LEGAL W2 employees at comparable incomes gets refunded at the end of the year.
Almost none of the income taxes that
do get paid by illegals gets refunded.
Thus, when taken as a whole, it's likely that illegals pay more income tax than comparable legal citizens (they do pay less into SS and Medicare, but they take almost none of these as well)
What facts are those, such as that even using YOUR numbers, over half of illegals are paid off the books - and therefore, PAY ZERO income tax?
Most people with the same level of income PAY ZERO income tax as well. Teh fact that ANY illegals are paying income tax, and not getting it refunded, means that as a whole, more income tax is paid by illegals than is paid by comparable legals.
Since no income tax is being paid on these wages, and a high proportion of them are being sent out of the country, thereby, no sales taxes either will be paid on their purchases, of course it is very relevent.
There
is income tax being paid on these wages. The money that is sent abroad doesn't differentiate between what was sent by legals and what was sent by illegals, nor does it differentiate between those who use fake SS numbers and those who don't.
Hilarious, I am as far from liberal as one can be...:roll:
You'd be surprised at the amount of people who support an unconstitutional increase of federal authority regarding state residency laws and support the judicial activism that granted federal authority to the issue of residency in the first place, then.
If you are as far from liberal as one can be, then you clearly must agree with me that legal residency was not a federal power enumerated by the constitution. The full extent of federal authority granted by the constitution towards immigrants was that of creating universal naturalization laws. Residency was specifically left out of the constitution because it is only the state that has the right to decide who is a legal resident of said state.
Just as was explained by Jefferson in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.
This is getting boring. You keep accusing me of not knowing the "facts" as you place them, yet you use none in your posts... :spin:
I've been using sources provided by my
opponents in this debate to in my arguments. One cannot say that I'm using biased sources.
My "research" on this topic is based upon 50 years of living in the US' largest city, and reading 12 newspapers daily. The "facts" as you present would have to take everything that the WSJ, NYT and every major study - including academic papers and common sense - and throw them right out the window. Sorry, but that just doesn't jive.
That'd be fine if it were true, but my statements
are supported by the research as well as common sense. The links I have directed you to provide the evidence.
Your claims are completely unsubstantiated and they actually do fly in the face of the research AND the common sense.
Zzzzzz....more fluff nonsense... :roll: :doh
I take it you don't have anything that can prove my statement wrong, thus proving that all you have shared thus far really is mindless rhetoric.
Oh really, and the revenue that pays for medicaid doesn't come from taxes? You mean the federal government just magically pays for medicaid - along with the states - from thin air?
That's not even remotely close to what I've said, and it moves the goal posts form your original comment of:
Also, the medicare deduction is far larger than that for social security, so your other claim is also wrong.
Illegals who use fake SS numbers pay into medicare without having any access to medicare.
You could only have made the above statement about medicare if you were ignorant of the fact that they are funded in entirely different fashions since both SSS and Medicare receive major boosts form illegals that are never drawn from by those illegals.
Fact: Illegals cost less federal money on average than the average citizen does. This was shown in the study I keep directing you to, which is actually arguing
against illegal immigrants (i.e. has a polar opposite view on illegals than I do).
I'm sticking with those data because it actually supports my argument about deporting natural born citizens who are low-income and low education and replacing them with illegals to save money.
It'll be cheaper in the long run to do this. It's the most obvious conclusion one could reach when one actually looks at ALL of the data (i.e. not just the cost of illegals, but making a true comparison of their costs to those of citizens who are comparable in skill and education level to illegals)
Why deport those who cost us less? They are undocumented and they keep coming back over and over again.
Instead we should deport the citizens who cost more than double what an illegal does. The bonus is that these people are clearly documented already AND since they managed to live in this country form birth without acquiring more skills and education than an illegal alien, they are probably too lazy and slow witted to successfully return once deported. I say send em over to Mexico. We'll take most of their hardest workers and they get our laziest ones in return.
The fact that illegals cost money is not an issue to me. I don't deny that.
What I'm saying is that they cost
less than citizens at comparable levels of education and income. This should be simple common sense because citizens have
more access to entitlements than illegals do.
Thus, the most expedient and economical approach is to replace our
citizen underclass with an
illegal non-citizen underclass.
I would support such legislation in my state.