Mexican have been leaving the Faster than entering..

[revelarts]

WHAT?!
but but but the immigrant problem is the worst problem ever ever ...except for the @#$%^Muslims!...
something must be done or the country is doomed!!

"Study finds more Mexicans leaving the US than coming"



http://news.yahoo.com/citing-jobs-family-more-mexicans-leaving-us-coming-170015460.html

SAN DIEGO (AP) — More Mexicans are leaving than moving into the United States, reversing the flow of a half-century of mass migration, according to a study published Thursday.

The Pew Research Center found that slightly more than 1 million Mexicans and their families, including American-born children, left the U.S. for Mexico from 2009 to 2014. During the same five years, 870,000 Mexicans came to the U.S., resulting in a net flow to Mexico of 140,000.....
..more at link (http://news.yahoo.com/citing-jobs-family-more-mexicans-leaving-us-coming-170015460.html).

<section class="yom-mod " id="mediacontentrelatedstory" data-ylk="mid:mediacontentrelatedstory;mpos:1;elm:hdln;elmt: ct;cat:Related Stories;rspns:nav;t1:a3;t2:lst-ct;itc:0;sec:lst-ct;" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Related Stories


[$$] Mexican Immigration to U.S. Reverses (http://www.wsj.com/articles/mexican-immigration-to-u-s-reverses-1447954334?ru=yahoo?mod=yahoo_itp) The Wall Street Journal
Family, border dangers keep Mexicans from returning to US (http://news.yahoo.com/family-border-dangers-keep-mexicans-returning-us-181224278.html) Associated Press
Why more Mexicans are leaving United States than entering (http://news.yahoo.com/why-more-mexicans-leaving-united-states-entering-222210935.html) Christian Science Monitor
The Cameraman Wasn't Expecting This To happen (https://beap.gemini.yahoo.com/mbclk?bv=1.0.0&es=oQZ8jYIGIS9PzzAk3z0FLuOinXxLAswLZSQQ7eYPq7d4469 6bjohKZQjAIEC8mWUR5rctCVT9xOdBxfMMq83Ok_hf.TIuH2Vr fd3I8Uv7ra2MMQxub5pUpY2rMF7jZsRGLkShxgIoheCpRKxprO HO2RJdZ2Da7SQh6ZgWEG3Teu0Bnci1LpTOuPNqHhWA5frk6hrZ gkWTZCYNq6QCQupCy7htCoj0mgvvXb_xx0cwdr37iQU5pcBeec m7y3366fo4txI.LBKS87R3QHI3h474gY9VSYzCP.QjuhXbn8UH IMXaeCU8hA3td5fvQJdNUTaYIIxhBf6wBfmhW2kztLe7vvzrAU a4HC7nhCK6D9Xwb3rZhf8iQVCTNQJ34qyWUMUzKuVW9VNczV7X Xl4Rcv.hhJJ9aPSQa8uwr1BARYlU9YkmGzq8zClfOre6_xxKyD NHPGvEaMucPr0Eli.KB4IzDVM1MaSklSGhTSSs9BUmYNP7j6t. ui4iUiEFGp19BcOHqJV.Nz5S7ScRQLGQt_5P0yclzCRJyNPfiR 68GF6whG1fxHqJK4oki16zN8QuPeODUWPWjSocCVy0FD3%26lp =) ViralBoom (http://viralboom.com/news-anchors-who-will-make-your-jaw-drop/?pi=1&utm_source=yhvbnewsanchors&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=yhvbnewsanchors32) Sponsored (https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN22774.html?impressions=true)

(https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/relevantads.html)


</section>

[Gunny]

WHAT?!
but but but the immigrant problem is the worst problem ever ever ...except for the @#$%^Muslims!...
something must be done or the country is doomed!!

"Study finds more Mexicans leaving the US than coming"

I'm calling foul. This is nothing more than a misdirection play a flat-out lie. They come here, get paid, burden our social infrastructure, and take the money back home. They bunch up like roaches in one apartment, scrimp and pool for minimal living, then run back to Mexico with OUR money they get in cash and pay NO taxes.

And yes, the employers are as guilty as the employees. The San Diego rag is leftwing piece of crap and HAS been at least since 1980 when I got my first copy during my 2 whole hours of "free time" on Sunday mornings in boot camp.

[LongTermGuy]

I'm calling foul. This is nothing more than a misdirection play a flat-out lie. They come here, get paid, burden our social infrastructure, and take the money back home. They bunch up like roaches in one apartment, scrimp and pool for minimal living, then run back to Mexico with OUR money they get in cash and pay NO taxes.

And yes, the employers are as guilty as the employees. The San Diego rag is leftwing piece of crap and HAS been at least since 1980 when I got my first copy during my 2 whole hours of "free time" on Sunday mornings in boot camp.

`Well said and Obvious IMO....More leftist "bring your guard down" Deceitful Foolishness...

[fj1200]

I'm calling foul. This is nothing more than a misdirection play a flat-out lie. They come here, get paid, burden our social infrastructure, and take the money back home. They bunch up like roaches in one apartment, scrimp and pool for minimal living, then run back to Mexico with OUR money they get in cash and pay NO taxes.

And yes, the employers are as guilty as the employees. The San Diego rag is leftwing piece of crap and HAS been at least since 1980 when I got my first copy during my 2 whole hours of "free time" on Sunday mornings in boot camp.

The source is Pew. Nevertheless, Trump takes credit in 3, 2...

[Gunny]

`Well said and Obvious IMO....More leftist "bring your guard down" Deceitful Foolishness...



I just have to wonder where rev lives at this point. Spent my life growing up in South Texas, South FL and CA. Spent half my career as a Marine in SoCal and the next 10 in San Antonio as a construction worker watching the bastards operate.. Currently live in NM.

I also know what the San Diego Union Tribune is worth. 0. IIRC correctly, the Hearst Corp owns it.

[revelarts]

Guuny, As FJ mentioned the research was done by the Pew Research Foundation. they are non-parisan as far as i can tell.
http://www.pewresearch.org/about/


but I have to ask there have been other polls and what not on the board on various issues you don't seem to question those.
Also if you've got some stats that counter these. I'd be glad to see them and compare there methods etc.BUt UNTIL THEN i see no reason -- --other than your speculations and discomfort with the stats-- to dismiss the info.


Here's More info from Pew research.

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2015/11/FT_15.11.19.Mexico.Unauthorized.Immigration.png


Six states alone account for 60% of unauthorized immigrants — California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois. But the distribution of the population is changing. From 2009 to 2012, several East Coast states were among those with population increases, whereas several Western states were among those with population decreases.

Mexicans make up about half of all unauthorized immigrants (49%), though their numbers have been declining in recent years.There were 5.6 million Mexican unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. in 2014 (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/chapter-1-migration-flows-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-have-slowed-and-turned-toward-mexico/#number-of-unauthorized-mexican-immigrants-declines), down from 6.4 million in 2009, according to preliminary Pew Research Center estimates.

Unauthorized immigrants make up 5.1% of the U.S. labor force. In the U.S. labor force, there were 8.1 million unauthorized immigrants either working or looking for work in 2012. Among the states, Nevada (10%), California (9%), Texas (9%) and New Jersey (8%) had the highest shares of unauthorized immigrants in their labor forces.

About 7% of K-12 students had at least one unauthorized immigrant parent in 2012. Among these students, about eight-in-ten (79%) were born in the U.S. In Nevada, almost one-in-five students (18%) have at least one unauthorized immigrant parent, the largest share in the nation. Other top states on this measure are California (13%), Texas (13%) and Arizona (11%).

There were 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2014. The population has remained essentially stable for five years (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/22/unauthorized-immigrant-population-stable-for-half-a-decade/), and currently makes up 3.5% of the nation’s population. The number of unauthorized immigrants peaked in 2007 at 12.2 million, when this group was 4% of the U.S. population.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

[jimnyc]

I wonder what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with pew research?

[Gunny]

Guuny, As FJ mentioned the research was done by the Pew Research Foundation. they are non-parisan as far as i can tell.
http://www.pewresearch.org/about/


but I have to ask there have been other polls and what not on the board on various issues you don't seem to question those.
Also if you've got some stats that counter these. I'd be glad to see them and compare there methods etc.BUt UNTIL THEN i see no reason -- --other than your speculations and discomfort with the stats-- to dismiss the info.


Here's More info from Pew research.

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2015/11/FT_15.11.19.Mexico.Unauthorized.Immigration.png


Six states alone account for 60% of unauthorized immigrants — California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois. But the distribution of the population is changing. From 2009 to 2012, several East Coast states were among those with population increases, whereas several Western states were among those with population decreases.

Mexicans make up about half of all unauthorized immigrants (49%), though their numbers have been declining in recent years.There were 5.6 million Mexican unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. in 2014 (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/chapter-1-migration-flows-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-have-slowed-and-turned-toward-mexico/#number-of-unauthorized-mexican-immigrants-declines), down from 6.4 million in 2009, according to preliminary Pew Research Center estimates.

Unauthorized immigrants make up 5.1% of the U.S. labor force. In the U.S. labor force, there were 8.1 million unauthorized immigrants either working or looking for work in 2012. Among the states, Nevada (10%), California (9%), Texas (9%) and New Jersey (8%) had the highest shares of unauthorized immigrants in their labor forces.

About 7% of K-12 students had at least one unauthorized immigrant parent in 2012. Among these students, about eight-in-ten (79%) were born in the U.S. In Nevada, almost one-in-five students (18%) have at least one unauthorized immigrant parent, the largest share in the nation. Other top states on this measure are California (13%), Texas (13%) and Arizona (11%).

There were 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2014. The population has remained essentially stable for five years (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/22/unauthorized-immigrant-population-stable-for-half-a-decade/), and currently makes up 3.5% of the nation’s population. The number of unauthorized immigrants peaked in 2007 at 12.2 million, when this group was 4% of the U.S. population.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

No such thing as non-partisan polling. They poll to reach a conclusion or there'd be no poll. Then the pollsters would lose their grant money to conduct the polls.

[Gunny]

I wonder what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with pew research?

It's a BS poll. I put MY resume out there. I've lived around them and/or worked around them all my life. As I said, sure they leave. For the weekend to go home. They're back on Monday.

[jimnyc]

No such thing as non-partisan polling. They poll to reach a conclusion or there'd be no poll. Then the pollsters would lose their grant money to conduct the polls.

A poll is one thing - have hard facts and stats is another. I don't but it. But it doesn't matter. Until the ENTIRE problem is handled and done, we are being taken advantage of by criminals who eat away at our economy. And I don't care where the illegals are from, quite frankly.

[jimnyc]

It's a BS poll. I put MY resume out there. I've lived around them and/or worked around them all my life. As I said, sure they leave. For the weekend to go home. They're back on Monday.

Probably. I just don't see how they can speak specifics. Regardless, the feds need to start enforcing the law, and come down hard. But even if 100% spot on, there's 870,000 more that need to go. And I'm confident that Pew can tell us right where they got this information, no?

[Gunny]

Probably. I just don't see how they can speak specifics. Regardless, the feds need to start enforcing the law, and come down hard. But even if 100% spot on, there's 870,000 more that need to go. And I'm confident that Pew can tell us right where they got this information, no?

The Mexicans told them. :laugh:

[LongTermGuy]

Probably. I just don't see how they can speak specifics. Regardless, the feds need to start enforcing the law, and come down hard. But even if 100% spot on, there's 870,000 more that need to go. And I'm confident that Pew can tell us right where they got this information, no?


~ "the feds need to start enforcing the law" ~


IMO....The Feds will never support the law... (should be obvious by now)`o`s lemming supportive Implants are In the gov at all levels ....(for now)...Until Trumps house cleaning occurs....

[jimnyc]

The Mexicans told them. :laugh:

"Hi, my name is Guillermo, and I am here illegally. Let me line you up with thousands of my friends so you know where all of us illegals are!"


~ "the feds need to start enforcing the law" ~


IMO....The Feds will never support the law... (should be obvious by now)`o`s lemming supportive Implants are In the gov at all levels .

The feds that are in there NOW won't enforce the law. Bush wasn't much better in that department. Trump may not be able to lay out his ideas entirely, I'm not naive - but every little effort he makes will be better than those prior, guaranteed.

[Gunny]

~ "the feds need to start enforcing the law" ~


IMO....The Feds will never support the law... (should be obvious by now)`o`s lemming supportive Implants are In the gov at all levels ....(for now)...Until Trumps house cleaning occurs....

Actually. Border Patrol agents are just as frustrated as the military. They aren't allowed to do their job. Because of ... wait for it ... Guess who? BUT, the GOP is as much to blame because, as usual, they're scared. They don't want to alienate the Hispanic vote.

This is NOT a new issue. Been around as long as I can remember and both sides have purposefully avoided addressing it and/or enforcing the law. We don't need new laws. Enforce the ones we have.

As far as this particular poll goes, it's BS.

[Gunny]

"Hi, my name is Guillermo, and I am here illegally. Let me line you up with thousands of my friends so you know where all of us illegals are!"



The feds that are in there NOW won't enforce the law. Bush wasn't much better in that department. Trump may not be able to lay out his ideas entirely, I'm not naive - but every little effort he makes will be better than those prior, guaranteed.

I just have to wonder how if you can stand on the border and poll illegals why can't you stand on the border and stop them?

[jimnyc]

I just have to wonder how if you can stand on the border and poll illegals why can't you stand on the border and stop them?

Or even if you can poll them in the streets, then not charge them. If there is zero fear of being arrested for being here illegal, then of course there will be no fear in them for crossing the border.

And to give you and idea of what they cost, this is just your home state alone:

-----

The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on Texans (2014)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Click here to read the full report in PDF.

After a brief hiatus that coincided with the worst of the economic recession, Texas’s illegal alien population is on the rise again. There are about 1,810,000 illegal aliens residing in Texas — 70,000 more than resided in the state in 2010 when we estimated the fiscal burden at nearly $8.9 billion annually.

In 2013, illegal immigration cost Texas taxpayers about $12.1 billion annually. That amounts to more than $1,197 for every Texas household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at $1.27 billion per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, but we include an estimate of revenue from sales taxes, property taxes, alcohol taxes, and cigarette taxes.

Examining Texas’s fiscal outlays from the perspective of the current debate over adopting an amnesty for illegal aliens, we find that the fiscal burden to taxpayers would not be significantly lessened even if an amnesty like that proposed in the Senate’s S.744 were enacted. In fact, it becomes clear that the only way to significantly reduce the fiscal burden is to reduce the size of the population that illegally entered the country. State and local policymakers have options available to accomplish that objective. In Arizona, efforts to discourage the arrival of additional illegal residents and to hold employers accountable for knowingly hiring illegal workers have been effective in reducing the illegal alien population and, thereby, the fiscal costs associated with that population.

Aside from emotional arguments about compassion, proponents of an amnesty argue that granting legal status would allow the illegal alien population to seek higher paying jobs, move out of poverty, and contribute more taxes. Opponents of the amnesty proposal argue that besides undermining respect for the law the measure would encourage future illegal immigration and put the illegal alien population on the path to collecting the full range of public benefits that currently are not legally available.

http://www.fairus.org/publications/the-fiscal-burden-of-illegal-immigration-on-texans

[LongTermGuy]

Actually. Border Patrol agents are just as frustrated as the military. They aren't allowed to do their job. Because of ... wait for it ... Guess who? BUT, the GOP is as much to blame because, as usual, they're scared. They don't want to alienate the Hispanic vote.

This is NOT a new issue. Been around as long as I can remember and both sides have purposefully avoided addressing it and/or enforcing the law. We don't need new laws. Enforce the ones we have.

As far as this particular poll goes, it's BS.

Understand...Yup!...^^^

Trump scares many...*and they should be scared and pee in their pants with their Political Correctness and bullshit "tolerance" ...(it has only weakened us) .......screw the flaws and the past weakness of many...Time for a serious shake up...

[Gunny]

Or even if you can poll them in the streets, then not charge them. If there is zero fear of being arrested for being here illegal, then of course there will be no fear in them for crossing the border.

And to give you and idea of what they cost, this is just your home state alone:

-----

The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on Texans (2014)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Click here to read the full report in PDF.

After a brief hiatus that coincided with the worst of the economic recession, Texas’s illegal alien population is on the rise again. There are about 1,810,000 illegal aliens residing in Texas — 70,000 more than resided in the state in 2010 when we estimated the fiscal burden at nearly $8.9 billion annually.

In 2013, illegal immigration cost Texas taxpayers about $12.1 billion annually. That amounts to more than $1,197 for every Texas household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at $1.27 billion per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, but we include an estimate of revenue from sales taxes, property taxes, alcohol taxes, and cigarette taxes.

Examining Texas’s fiscal outlays from the perspective of the current debate over adopting an amnesty for illegal aliens, we find that the fiscal burden to taxpayers would not be significantly lessened even if an amnesty like that proposed in the Senate’s S.744 were enacted. In fact, it becomes clear that the only way to significantly reduce the fiscal burden is to reduce the size of the population that illegally entered the country. State and local policymakers have options available to accomplish that objective. In Arizona, efforts to discourage the arrival of additional illegal residents and to hold employers accountable for knowingly hiring illegal workers have been effective in reducing the illegal alien population and, thereby, the fiscal costs associated with that population.

Aside from emotional arguments about compassion, proponents of an amnesty argue that granting legal status would allow the illegal alien population to seek higher paying jobs, move out of poverty, and contribute more taxes. Opponents of the amnesty proposal argue that besides undermining respect for the law the measure would encourage future illegal immigration and put the illegal alien population on the path to collecting the full range of public benefits that currently are not legally available.

http://www.fairus.org/publications/the-fiscal-burden-of-illegal-immigration-on-texans

You're not allowed to ask them if they're illegal aliens or not. No one wants to fix the problem and they always blame it on money. The illegals cost more in the long run than it would take to deport them. The anchor baby crap needs to stop too, and whoever has read the 14th Amendment and thinks it covers them is a moron not fit to judge a kindergarten beauty contest.

[revelarts]

OK, so wait minute.
the pew research is wrong because , they just 'asked the Mexicans'. "chortle chortle" oh-ho yeah that's funny.
you know that's the method used because ... well... you just do. cause it just can't be right. vast left wing conspiracy no doubt.
chortle chortle.

But the Texas info.
You know thats perfect because... well.... you just DO.
that data is absolutely correct and unquestionable because... why.
because they didn't ask Mexicans?
Or because you know they did it the right way. And Pew would lose funds if they did it properly. but Texas would loose nothing by adjusting the numbers of course. cough.

I just want to get the picture of this totally rational unbiased detailed fact filled assessment of the data you guys are doing here.
I just want to know what is REAL unbiased Polling and researching works according to you guys.
so i know what to look for from now on.

And BTW over in another thread there are all these polls listed on what muslims REALLY think, at least 6,7,8+ different polls.
how'd they do those polls? did they just ask Muslims or something? :laugh::laugh:. thats funny right?
Anyone question the authenticity and methods of those polls? Anyone check the sources there or check for or MENTION bias of any kind?
Or should we just take ALL those at face value without any scrutiny at all?

since you guys just want to get the real facts and all.

[Gunny]

OK, so wait minute.
the pew research is wrong because , they just 'asked the Mexicans'. "chortle chortle" oh-ho yeah that's funny.
you know that's the method used because ... well... you just do. cause it just can't be right. vast left wing conspiracy no doubt.
chortle chortle.

But the Texas info.
You know thats perfect because... well.... you just DO.
that data is absolutely correct and unquestionable because... why.
because they didn't ask Mexicans?
Or because you know they did it the right way. And Pew would lose funds if they did it properly. but Texas would loose nothing by adjusting the numbers of course. cough.

I just want to get the picture of this totally rational unbiased detailed fact filled assessment of the data you guys are doing on here.
I just want to know what the REAL unbiased Polling, and Poll and researching works according to you guys.
so i know how to do it right from now on.

And BTW over in another thread there are all these polls listed on what muslims REALLY think, at least 6,7,8+ different polls.
how'd they do those polls? did they just ask Muslims or something? :laugh::laugh:. thats funny right?
Anyone question the authenticity and methods of those polls? Anyone check the sources there or check for or MENTION bias of any kind?
Or should we just take ALL those at face value without any scrutiny at all?

since you guys just want to get the real facts and all.

What's funny is, you posting a BS poll. What am I supposed to do? Take it seriously? I live down here, superstar. I SEE what's going on and I don't need some research eggheads with an agenda telling me my eyes are wrong. I know EXACTLY what they do because I used to work with them. Used to eat with them. I speak Spanish.

Then there's the fact I don't do polls. Never have and you can ask anyone on here that knows me. I've steadfastly stood by aforementioned position on them. I just happen to know from personal experience living most of my life neat the Southwestern border that this one's full of shit.

[jimnyc]

since you guys just want to get the real facts and all.

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole? I read what you posted over and over and honestly can't find anything that's concrete in how they came up with these numbers. Care to share that with us then?

The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals. Did you read the entire PDF? I highly doubt it. You're too busy trying to post like a dolt towards others.

[Gunny]

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole? I read what you posted over and over and honestly can't find anything that's concrete in how they came up with these numbers. Care to share that with us then?

The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals. Did you read the entire PDF? I highly doubt it. You're too busy trying to post like a dolt towards others.

What I've seen is most of these bleeding hearts don't live anywhere near where their hearts are bleeding. The Southern border. Whatever states they're going to dump these Syrians in. They read crap and post it.

I lived in a 2 br apt and INS bust the one next door. 21 illegals were holing up in it. And I wondered why I had to wage a damned war against roaches coming in from that wall. It was a nuclear void zone when I got done. :laugh:

What contractors will do is subcontract to a legit Tejano and HE brings in all the illegals to work. Contractor's hands are clean and for some unknown reason, INS doesn't come on construction sites.

[pete311]

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole?

All you guys can counter with is anecdotal opinions from looking outside your backyard. Now that I call BS.

Here is maybe more info
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/

[PixieStix]

I wonder what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with pew research?

Bingo! Nuff said!

[Perianne]

They might be going back to Mexico because they said there are too many Mexicans here! Hahahahaha


I am funny Perianne! lol hahahehar.

[Drummond]

I have a way of determining the veracity or otherwise of this information. Are you sitting comfortably .. ?

The BBC Reported It

... there y'go ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::uhoh:

Something else they reported on, a couple of days ago, was the refusal of American States to take refugees .. as represented by a map of America, with refusing States shaded in red. Their charming, non agenda-driven way of reporting it was to say that those States were 'frightened' to take them.

How's that for unbiased reporting ?

[fj1200]

No such thing as non-partisan polling. They poll to reach a conclusion or there'd be no poll. Then the pollsters would lose their grant money to conduct the polls.

Pollsters make money by being right.

[Drummond]

Pollsters make money by being right.

The UK's pollsters made a lot of money by consistently asserting that the 2015 General Election would produce a 'hung parliament' (no outright control by any one Party). To everyone's surprise, right up to election day, though nobody was predicting a Conservative win, that's what happened !

So, FJ, you were saying .. ??

[NightTrain]

I don't buy it.

Besides that, the millions of illegals aren't exactly easy to track down and find, are they? Or is there an illegal phone directory somewhere?

[fj1200]

The UK's pollsters made a lot of money by consistently asserting that the 2015 General Election would produce a 'hung parliament' (no outright control by any one Party). To everyone's surprise, right up to election day, though nobody was predicting a Conservative win, that's what happened !

So, FJ, you were saying .. ??

Pollsters make money by being right. Why pay a pollster if they are unreliable?

[DragonStryk72]

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole? I read what you posted over and over and honestly can't find anything that's concrete in how they came up with these numbers. Care to share that with us then?

The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals. Did you read the entire PDF? I highly doubt it. You're too busy trying to post like a dolt towards others.

Because he posted facts to start the discussion with, and posted more. You and Gunny's response has been, "Nuh uh!". Nothing else, no proof of your opinion on the matter. It's debate-policy-standard deflection, to dismiss proof out of hand, and then demand proof.

Gee, wonder why we might have fewer illegals here? Might have something to do every one being assholes to them, or there's the down economy, where there's not enough jobs to go around. Remember when they stated the numbers started to drop. It was back when the banks failed, and even by the graph in the OP, we've since leveled off, now that the economy is more stable. If we start going thru a boom, look for the numbers to tick back up. The graph follows common sense, if you take time to consider it honestly,

Your Texas poll also examines only one state, it's called confirmation bias. It's an endemic problem with polling of any kind. It's why you don't see me bother with polls on this forum. Basically, even if I could put forth a proper poll, I guarantee there are at least 3 or 4 that directly contradict it, and it's not like anyone will listen anyway unless they already agree with me on what the poll says.

Rev is right that there's a strong double-standard for polls, wherein if we believe it might be true, or fear it might be true, well believe it out of hand, regardless of what the truth actually is.

[DragonStryk72]

I have a way of determining the veracity or otherwise of this information. Are you sitting comfortably .. ?

The BBC Reported It

... there y'go ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::uhoh:

Something else they reported on, a couple of days ago, was the refusal of American States to take refugees .. as represented by a map of America, with refusing States shaded in red. Their charming, non agenda-driven way of reporting it was to say that those States were 'frightened' to take them.

How's that for unbiased reporting ?


Well, actually, most of the states that refused ARE red states. We call them that repeatedly, so in this instance, they might just have picked it by how we refer to them ourselves.

[Drummond]

Pollsters make money by being right. Why pay a pollster if they are unreliable?

Because people will have faith in them being right much of the time, and because pollster companies don't have a substitute that could quite do their job ?

But pollster companies cannot GUARANTEE their results to be accurate. There's always room for error. If there weren't, for example in the case of elections .. why not just have polls conducted, then dispense with the actual election ?

[Drummond]

Well, actually, most of the states that refused ARE red states. We call them that repeatedly, so in this instance, they might just have picked it by how we refer to them ourselves.

Another interpretation to put on it is that what was being observed was an outbreak of sheer commonsense .. :cool:

[Trigg]

That's groundbreaking stuff right there :lame2:


In the space of 5 years the mexican illegal population has gone down by 1 million people.

I'm glad we can stop worrying about them sneaking in. Afterall with an illegal mexican population of 6 million it will only take another 30 years for them to all go home.

[Gunny]

All you guys can counter with is anecdotal opinions from looking outside your backyard. Now that I call BS.

Here is maybe more info
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/

Nothing anecdotal about growing up around it,working around it living around it most of your life. I can tell you wher in Downtown San Antonio you can go pick the illegal day laborers up. I can tell you Valero looks like if you get there after a dozen of them bust out of their 1987 Suburban. One buys the bread, one the baloney, one the cheese, one buys the Cokes once the chips. They suck up all the coffee. Place looks like a kansas farm hit locusts. Got to get there early.

Then they come on the jobsite and turn their damned mariachi music up full blast even if you were there first. If I want to listen 8 - 10 hours one one long drone after another, I'll go work in a Mexican restaurant. The sheetrockers and painters and rough carpenters are the worst because guess what ... THEY are illegals and do unskilled jobs. The skill trades are fill by guess ... Americans.

[Gunny]

I don't buy it.

Besides that, the millions of illegals aren't exactly easy to track down and find, are they? Or is there an illegal phone directory somewhere?

It's a 3 in 1 trip. Get across the border and drop your baby. Then you get polled and your name is in the phone book. Driver's license tomorrow.

[LongTermGuy]

They might be going back to Mexico because they said there are too many Mexicans here! Hahahahaha


I am funny Perianne! lol hahahehar.


But your Interesting..ALSO.....and make many wonder???...what you will say and do next!:laugh:

[Gunny]

That's groundbreaking stuff right there :lame2:


In the space of 5 years the mexican illegal population has gone down by 1 million people.

I'm glad we can stop worrying about them sneaking in. Afterall with an illegal mexican population of 6 million it will only take another 30 years for them to all go home.

You're DEFINITELY like my daughter -- got the Old Man's mouth and eloquence. :laugh::laugh:

[jimnyc]

Because he posted facts to start the discussion with, and posted more. You and Gunny's response has been, "Nuh uh!". Nothing else, no proof of your opinion on the matter. It's debate-policy-standard deflection, to dismiss proof out of hand, and then demand proof.

I believe I posted a tad more than the lame shit you're trying to pin on me. Get the wieners out of your mouth and pay attention. When you start with this garbage when no one said a word to me, it just reminds me that you're an asshole at times and not worth replying to.

[jimnyc]

They might be going back to Mexico because they said there are too many Mexicans here! Hahahahaha


I am funny Perianne! lol hahahehar.

Even filth gets tired of filth. Filth can still kill filth.

[jimnyc]

Gee, wonder why we might have fewer illegals here? Might have something to do every one being assholes to them

Good. Now we step it up to get more out. Hopefully the same will work with muslims, gays, liberals and all the other people that send our society and country further swirling around the bowl.

[Gunny]

I believe I posted a tad more than the lame shit you're trying to pin on me. Get the wieners out of your mouth and pay attention. When you start with this garbage when no one said a word to me, it just reminds me that you're an asshole at times and not worth replying to.

I missed that post. Wondering how many times I have to say "I FUCKING LIVE HERE? BEEN AROUND THEM ALL MY LIFE? I'M ONLY GOING TO BE 56 NEXT MONTH. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND ME. Do I need to bold it next time?

But these know-nothings want to go with some poll made by a bunch of talking heads? How do you get that many illegals to talk to white nerd pollsters? They wouldn't. Hell, where you going to find enough bilingual nerd pollsters? Illegals talk to NO ONE but each other.

(And that's aimed at what you responded to, not you. I'm just too lazy to go look)

[jimnyc]

I missed that post. Wondering how many times I have to say "I FUCKING LIVE HERE? BEEN AROUND THEM ALL MY LIFE? I'M ONLY GOING TO BE 56 NEXT MONTH. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND ME. Do I need to bold it next time?

But these know-nothings want to go with some poll made by a bunch of talking heads? How do you get that many illegals to talk to white nerd pollsters? The wouldn't. Hell, where you going to find enough bilingual nerd pollsters? Illegals talk to NO ONE but each other.

(And that's aimed at what you responded to, not you. I'm just too lazy to go look)

None of it changes anything for me. We still have a shitload ton of illegals in our country. Even if numbers are going down, so what? Does that mean the problem is magically solved? Not even remotely. Borders sealed, laws upheld, deportations back in effect, stop employers with illegals, stop giving illegals and and all benefits of any sort.

I wonder how much of a nets savings there is in the entire country when 870,000 illegals leave? How much do we still pay for illegals yearly? It's something like $100+ billion each and every year.

[Gunny]

None of it changes anything for me. We still have a shitload ton of illegals in our country. Even if numbers are going down, so what? Does that mean the problem is magically solved? Not even remotely. Borders sealed, laws upheld, deportations back in effect, stop employers with illegals, stop giving illegals and and all benefits of any sort.

I wonder how much of a nets savings there is in the entire country when 870,000 illegals leave? How much do we still pay for illegals yearly? It's something like $100+ billion each and every year.

Two parts to the problem. The employers are fined minimally. Start hammering them with some REAL fines and some jail time, they might think twice. Everybody thinks this is a new topic. LBJ made his money in the 30s and 40s hiring illegals. It's only a new topic to people that don't live on the border. Guess where the first big city is to hide out in Texas and guess where I'm from? San Antonio.

First thing is, you stop the bleeding. And I ain't talking mo dumbass bigger wall. We have the technology and the manpower to enforce the border. Heat sensors, drones, satellite surveillance and a bunch of chair polishing bureaucrats that can man the border. Buck up or give up your easy ride on our tax dollars.

Part II is you deport them as you catch them. No major roundup effort. Cost too much. But if you got the border manned and sealed, they can't get back in once caught.

[aboutime]

WHAT?!
but but but the immigrant problem is the worst problem ever ever ...except for the @#$%^Muslims!...
something must be done or the country is doomed!!

"Study finds more Mexicans leaving the US than coming"




Love the Imitations of Obama, twisting facts to meet his previous, perpetual Lies.

[gabosaurus]

Like I have said before, Mexicans don't come to the U.S. before they like it here. Costs are a ton higher than south of the border. They come here for jobs that pay more than they can get at home. Take away the job and no one will cross the border.
But as long as everyone casts all the blame at the immigrants and turn a blind eye toward companies that hire them, you will always have illegal immigration.
In San Diego, there are labor offices that specialize in finding jobs for illegals. Most of them use off duty police officers for security. Everyone knows these places are there, but no one does anything about it.
Trump and Carson want to expand business opportunities, but deport illegal aliens. Do they just overlook who works at these businesses?

[aboutime]

Like I have said before, Mexicans don't come to the U.S. before they like it here. Costs are a ton higher than south of the border. They come here for jobs that pay more than they can get at home. Take away the job and no one will cross the border.
But as long as everyone casts all the blame at the immigrants and turn a blind eye toward companies that hire them, you will always have illegal immigration.
In San Diego, there are labor offices that specialize in finding jobs for illegals. Most of them use off duty police officers for security. Everyone knows these places are there, but no one does anything about it.
Trump and Carson want to expand business opportunities, but deport illegal aliens. Do they just overlook who works at these businesses?


You forgot to mention how they come here to KILL young women on a pier Gabby. But that goes against your Obama Idiology.

[pete311]

Nothing anecdotal about growing up around it,working around it living around it most of your life.

That is the definition of anecdotal and it doesn't mean squat overall

[revelarts]

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole? I read what you posted over and over and honestly can't find anything that's concrete in how they came up with these numbers. Care to share that with us then?

The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals. Did you read the entire PDF? I highly doubt it. You're too busy trying to post like a dolt towards others.


I wonder what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with pew research?
this an example of your fact filled reply?
Well i wonder how many Illegals coming to Texas are first registering with the Texas boarder patrol? hmm... Jim?

I posted Reseach data then you and others just went into blind denial and questioning mode.
For about a page and half there were lame BS jokes and comments but somehow my one sarcastic --but factually actuate-- remark is out of bounds?
You guys luuuv to dish out crap against opinions and FACTS you don't like but somehow can't take it.


OK So now you think I'm supposed lay down and ignore a page and half of BSery AND i'm somehow required to read ALL of your PDF, and then ONLY rebut or comment rationally without any jokes or or comebacks in reply? Since, after you read ALL OF the LINKS i posted you can't find anywhere that explained how the PEW data was gathered to your completely unbiased satisfation?

Sorry,
I'll read the whole report PDF after you and gunny do.
But here's some info to consider from Pew and your one linked page of Texas Info.


...The estimates are produced using a multistage method that subtracts the legal foreign-born population from the total adjusted foreign-born population, with the residual then used as the source of information about unauthorized immigrants. The source of these data is the U.S. Census Bureau’s March Current Population Surveys.
Because these estimates are derived from sample surveys, they are subject to uncertainty from sampling error, as well as other types of error. Each annual estimate of the unauthorized population is actually the middle point of a range of possible values that could be the true number. Additionally, the change from one year to the next has its own margin of error....(also here a page on how they got and used the data
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/appendix-b-methodology-7/)


...There are about 1,810,000 illegal aliens residing in Texas — 70,000 more than resided in the state in 2010...
PEW gave the estimate of Texas illegal aliens as...
"...2009 to 2012...Texas ranked second, with 1.7 million unauthorized immigrants, 15% of the total. No other state had more than a million."

seems the stats match roughly well so far in just a quick look. if others want to get more clarity and compare apples to apples.
state trends to state trends
national trends to national trends.
that'd be great.

But if you just want to piss on the data i posted out of consternation or for fun.
And then make up the HORRIFIC illegal immigration problem to have something to whine about as you go along this election season that's fine to I guess.
I won't bother you.

[Gunny]

That is the definition of anecdotal and it doesn't mean squat overall

It is not anecdotal. It's an assessment of a situation I have observed most of my life. It's the facts and truth. You have nothing to offer but an accusation, and appeasement.

[DragonStryk72]

I believe I posted a tad more than the lame shit you're trying to pin on me. Get the wieners out of your mouth and pay attention. When you start with this garbage when no one said a word to me, it just reminds me that you're an asshole at times and not worth replying to.

Actually, you didn't really. The poll you posted was a representation of only a single state paid for by that state. Even if true and unbiased (almost certainly not unbiased), it is still anecdotal, and doesn't even disprove his poll, which demonstrates an overall trend, performed by an independent research company.

Oh, and really? A lame gay crack? Come on, you HAD to have better than that.

[DragonStryk72]

It is not anecdotal. It's an assessment of a situation I have observed most of my life. It's the facts and truth. You have nothing to offer but an accusation, and appeasement.

Gunny, that is the definition of both confirmation bias, and anecdotal evidence. Unless you've been simultaneously living in all of TX, your experience is limited to one small region of the largest state in the union. It has literally been shown in research that Texas could actually house the entire world's population.

[Perianne]

I believe I posted a tad more than the lame shit you're trying to pin on me. Get the wieners out of your mouth and pay attention. When you start with this garbage when no one said a word to me, it just reminds me that you're an asshole at times and not worth replying to.

Haha. You said "wieners", lol. You are funny, jimnyc. hahahaha

[Jeff]

Like I have said before, Mexicans don't come to the U.S. before they like it here. Costs are a ton higher than south of the border. They come here for jobs that pay more than they can get at home. Take away the job and no one will cross the border.
But as long as everyone casts all the blame at the immigrants and turn a blind eye toward companies that hire them, you will always have illegal immigration.
In San Diego, there are labor offices that specialize in finding jobs for illegals. Most of them use off duty police officers for security. Everyone knows these places are there, but no one does anything about it.
Trump and Carson want to expand business opportunities, but deport illegal aliens. Do they just overlook who works at these businesses?

Gabby for some that is true, but not all. Have ya ever been in a heavy populated Mexican area ( how silly of me, your from LA sure ya have ) but in every state I have ever been if you drive through the Mexican area's say around 7 am you will find hundreds of illegals huddled together waiting for a days work. In Atlanta they have 100's of these pick up area's and guess what, when the guy comes offering 2 jobs and there are 200 Mexicans there, only 2 work that day. There are places I am sure that employee these folks full time, but there is just that many that are waiting to be picked up by someone needing help that day, those folks if lucky may work one day a week. When I was on the road we would use them from time to time to unload trailers, they are called lumpers.

Do you also know how many don't work a single day here in America, unless you call drug dealing and or robbery a job, I sat and spoke with a cop in the middle of the night as I was leaving out one night in Gainesville GA ( Little Mexico is what it is called ) and he explained to me how the crime was so bad because either these folks would run back to Mexico if the cops where onto them, or they would get busted and the be deported only to be sitting in the police station a week later with a different name and a different crime.

Gabs I agree there are those here looking for work, those are the good folks, but there are many more here looking for the easy money that our streets offer.

[indago]

if you drive through the Mexican area's say around 7 am you will find hundreds of illegals huddled together waiting for a days work.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XGJq8wrw5I

[Gunny]

Actually, you didn't really. The poll you posted was a representation of only a single state paid for by that state. Even if true and unbiased (almost certainly not unbiased), it is still anecdotal, and doesn't even disprove his poll, which demonstrates an overall trend, performed by an independent research company.

Oh, and really? A lame gay crack? Come on, you HAD to have better than that.

Independent research company = we're being paid to prove the results the people paying wish to achieve.

[Gunny]

Gunny, that is the definition of both confirmation bias, and anecdotal evidence. Unless you've been simultaneously living in all of TX, your experience is limited to one small region of the largest state in the union. It has literally been shown in research that Texas could actually house the entire world's population.

Where's the bias? I listed facts based on a lifetime of observation. A dumbass poll designed to lead people to believe what they want you isn't actually anecdotal, it's a lie and IT is bias.

You didn't read much, did you? Spent half my career in SoCal. Currently in NM. And most of my life in Texas. Now you might THINK that's "one small region" but guess which region the illegals come in at? I don't think it's the Canadian border.

As far as bias goes, some of my best friends have been and are Mexican. I AM bias against illegal immigrants. They are criminals by their very presence. And they don't come here to be American. They come here and bring Mexico with them. If I wanted to live in Mexico, I'd move there.

[fj1200]

But pollster companies cannot GUARANTEE their results to be accurate.

Nobody suggested otherwise.

[jimnyc]

this an example of your fact filled reply?

You took one post of mine out of many. And much of my discussion was back and forth with Gunny.

[jimnyc]

Actually, you didn't really. The poll you posted was a representation of only a single state paid for by that state. Even if true and unbiased (almost certainly not unbiased), it is still anecdotal, and doesn't even disprove his poll, which demonstrates an overall trend, performed by an independent research company.

Oh, and really? A lame gay crack? Come on, you HAD to have better than that.

Actually, I did. And again, I'll go with FACTS instead of polls when it comes to such things. You want to dismiss cold hard numbers taken from Texas, but then somehow see polls as factual throughout 350 million. Did they poll all 350 million? No, they didn't. You guys want to jump at what works for you and then dismiss what doesn't. What I posted was cold hard numbers. Of course then somehow it's 'biased', but whatever. That wasn't my point anyway. My point was to show how much illegals cost. And I purposely looked up Texas as I was going back and forth with Gunny.

And I thought my gay crack was awesome. Better than some asshole who thinks he knows me better than himself. I guess identity issues do that.

[Gunny]

Actually, I did. And again, I'll go with FACTS instead of polls when it comes to such things. You want to dismiss cold hard numbers taken from Texas, but then somehow see polls as factual throughout 350 million. Did they poll all 350 million? No, they didn't. You guys want to jump at what works for you and then dismiss what doesn't. What I posted was cold hard numbers. Of course then somehow it's 'biased', but whatever. That wasn't my point anyway. My point was to show how much illegals cost. And I purposely looked up Texas as I was going back and forth with Gunny.

And I thought my gay crack was awesome. Better than some asshole who thinks he knows me better than himself. I guess identity issues do that.

It's NOT that hard for me. They main route of transportation is I35 and guess which first 6 largest city in the Nation they come to first? San Antonio. It's also one of the biggest drug corridors because it runs from Laredo to Minneapolis.

Another route is to go up the coast from Brownsville to Houston. Or they just hop the fence at El Paso. Ciudad Juarez is right on the other side of it. Then there's San Ysidro, CA next door to Tijuana. Mexicali. Contrary to popular blief, most don't go crossing the desert in the middle the night. Only low-rent coyotes pull THAT crap.

[jimnyc]

It's NOT that hard for me. They main route of transportation is I35 and guess which first 6 largest city in the Nation they come to first? San Antonio. It's also one of the biggest drug corridors because it runs from Laredo to Minneapolis.

Another route is to go up the coast from Brownsville to Houston. Or they just hop the fence at El Paso. Ciudad Juarez is right on the other side of it. Then there's San Ysidro, CA next door to Tijuana. Mexicali. Contrary to popular blief, most don't go crossing the desert in the middle the night. Only low-rent coyotes pull THAT crap.

Did you know that for the first few pages, all you and I did was go "nu uh" and twiddle our thumbs and not even really discuss the OP, nor even discuss illegal immigration at all? Granted we shrugged at whether or not the numbers were real, but then we twiddled our thumbs. I gotta get better at this!! :laugh:

[Gunny]

Did you know that for the first few pages, all you and I did was go "nu uh" and twiddle our thumbs and not even really discuss the OP, nor even discuss illegal immigration at all? Granted we shrugged at whether or not the numbers were real, but then we twiddled our thumbs. I gotta get better at this!! :laugh:

So what makes that different than any other thread? Only thing that bothers ME is 10 threads having the same argument. Y'all act like I got any short term memory left or something. :laugh:

[fj1200]

Actually, I did. And again, I'll go with FACTS instead of polls when it comes to such things. You want to dismiss cold hard numbers taken from Texas, but then somehow see polls as factual throughout 350 million. Did they poll all 350 million? No, they didn't. You guys want to jump at what works for you and then dismiss what doesn't. What I posted was cold hard numbers. Of course then somehow it's 'biased', but whatever. That wasn't my point anyway. My point was to show how much illegals cost. And I purposely looked up Texas as I was going back and forth with Gunny.

I assume you're referring to post #17. Those data points are no more facts than the Pew poll was, economic assumptions are made all the time and their number of 1.8mm was likely derived from a poll of some sort. But that is beside the point; both things can be true. The argument shouldn't be poll against poll the argument should be the solution.

[jimnyc]

I assume you're referring to post #17. Those data points are no more facts than the Pew poll was, economic assumptions are made all the time and their number of 1.8mm was likely derived from a poll of some sort. But that is beside the point; both things can be true. The argument shouldn't be poll against poll the argument should be the solution.

So the money spend by Texas in that PDF was solely from a poll?

[fj1200]

So what makes that different than any other thread? Only thing that bothers ME is 10 threads having the same argument. Y'all act like I got any short term memory left or something. :laugh:

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003615639/79542436_12460_173326366335_3784682_a_answer_1_xla rge.jpeg

[fj1200]

So the money spend by Texas in that PDF was solely from a poll?

No, they likely made economic assumptions about revenues from sale taxes and costs from the state budget. But I don't disagree with your info, it just comes from the people who have an internal bias just like anyone else, just like I don't disagree with the Pew poll. They're just two bits of information that we should use to derive a solution.

[jimnyc]

No, they likely made economic assumptions about revenues from sale taxes and costs from the state budget. But I don't disagree with your info, it just comes from the people who have an internal bias just like anyone else, just like I don't disagree with the Pew poll. They're just two bits of information that we should use to derive a solution.

I'll take an extensive study over a poll. But you did say what I posted was a poll, and it's nothing of the sort. And it wasn't meant to counter anything about illegal immigration numbers. It was solely posted to talk about what illegal immigration costs.

Do you disagree that it's costly? Do you disagree that it costs about $100 billion and upwards per year? Do you disagree that it costs Texas about $12 billion?

[Gunny]

I assume you're referring to post #17. Those data points are no more facts than the Pew poll was, economic assumptions are made all the time and their number of 1.8mm was likely derived from a poll of some sort. But that is beside the point; both things can be true. The argument shouldn't be poll against poll the argument should be the solution.


So the money spend by Texas in that PDF was solely from a poll?

Go sit in an Emergency Room on any given evening. Swamped with people that you KNOW are illegals and guess who's footing the bill? They can't be denied medical treatment. Then they either disappear into the woodwork or go back to Mexico.

Every time you pay for your outrageous medical insurance bill, think about it. You're paying for deadbeats, same as you pay for shoplifters when the prices go up.

[jimnyc]

Go sit in an Emergency Room on any given evening. Swamped with people that you KNOW are illegals and guess who's footing the bill? They can't be denied medical treatment. Then they either disappear into the woodwork or go back to Mexico.

Every time you pay for your outrageous medical insurance bill, think about it. You're paying for deadbeats, same as you pay for shoplifters when the prices go up.

And it's so much more than just medical care. Think about that number - $100 billion. Only when looking at our entire national debt does that number seem 'normal'. Otherwise, that's a disgustingly high number, from people taking advantage of us. 870,000 less may help, but the rest are still having a HUGE impact.

[fj1200]

I'll take an extensive study over a poll. But you did say what I posted was a poll, and it's nothing of the sort. And it wasn't meant to counter anything about illegal immigration numbers. It was solely posted to talk about what illegal immigration costs.

Do you disagree that it's costly? Do you disagree that it costs about $100 billion and upwards per year? Do you disagree that it costs Texas about $12 billion?

I said the 1.8mm likely came from a poll because I'm guessing they didn't ask everyone in the state. I don't disagree but I can also probably find another extensive study with different illegal immigration numbers.

[Perianne]

Actually, I did. And again, I'll go with FACTS instead of polls when it comes to such things. You want to dismiss cold hard numbers taken from Texas, but then somehow see polls as factual throughout 350 million. Did they poll all 350 million? No, they didn't. You guys want to jump at what works for you and then dismiss what doesn't. What I posted was cold hard numbers. Of course then somehow it's 'biased', but whatever. That wasn't my point anyway. My point was to show how much illegals cost. And I purposely looked up Texas as I was going back and forth with Gunny.

And I thought my gay crack was awesome. Better than some asshole who thinks he knows me better than himself. I guess identity issues do that.

Hahahahah! Your crack is gay??? Jim, you are on a roll today!!!!!
@jimnyc (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1)

[jimnyc]

I said the 1.8mm likely came from a poll because I'm guessing they didn't ask everyone in the state. I don't disagree but I can also probably find another extensive study with different illegal immigration numbers.

Ok, let's test that. And no, shitty little blogs won't work. :) My point is that it's extremely costly to keep illegals here. You go ahead and find another extensive study that shows we gain money from them, or that it's not really costly. :)

[Gunny]

And it's so much more than just medical care. Think about that number - $100 billion. Only when looking at our entire national debt does that number seem 'normal'. Otherwise, that's a disgustingly high number, from people taking advantage of us. 870,000 less may help, but the rest are still having a HUGE impact.

I KNOW it's more. I was keeping it simple. My coffee ain't done yet. Dammit.

We foot the education and medial bills for anchor babies until they graduate. At the expense of taxpaying citizens in both cases. School taxes in SA are beyond belief.

[jimnyc]

Hahahahah! Your crack is gay??? Jim, you are on a roll today!!!!!
@jimnyc (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1)

Crack kills! And now today's crack makes you gay. Or are we talking about plumbers?

[Perianne]

Crack kills! And now today's crack makes you gay. Or are we talking about plumbers?

I thought you were talking about your butt crack. heheheh



(In medical terms, the butt crack is known as the intergluteal fold.)

[revelarts]

The research data wasn't based on polls but census bureau data. Read the info instead of assuming the worse. As some say "get the facts"
PEW research is solid. They may have even done some of the research for the Texas data. If we're just making assumptions about the sources anyway.

[jimnyc]

I thought you were talking about your butt crack. heheheh



(In medical terms, the butt crack is known as the intergluteal fold.)

I don't think I like that term. I'm going back to just crack!

[Perianne]

I don't think I like that term. I'm going back to just crack!

The next time fj posts something goofy, you can say "That sounds like it came right out of your intergluteal fold!". That will show him.

I suppose it is Nurses' humor and doesn't play well with the general population.

[Gunny]

The research data wasn't based on polls but census bureau data. Read the info instead of assuming the worse. As some say "get the facts"
PEW research is solid. They may have even done some of the research for the Texas data. If we're just making assumptions about the sources anyway.

I don't assume about the sources. You are just a freakin hard headed dumbass. I LIVE here. Just how many illegals do you figure fill out a census form? I bet they line right up. Most can't even speak English much less read a write it. You're just in your own little world and sticking to it.

The PEW research you are so proud of is pure BS. You'll believe anything. Illegals are leaving and the Air Force deals coke. And it doesn't matter what anyone else tells you even though they have direct knowledge. You and PEW have NO friggin clue how many illegals there are. Most obvious should be they don't announce their damned arrival. Wonder why? :rolleyes:

And by all means don't listen to someone who lives and worked with them. Your argument and data are bullshit and have been since the OP.

[fj1200]

Ok, let's test that. And no, shitty little blogs won't work. :) My point is that it's extremely costly to keep illegals here. You go ahead and find another extensive study that shows we gain money from them, or that it's not really costly. :)

I'm not sure the point. I don't disagree. Different people make different assumptions.

Is Illegal Immigration an Economic Burden to America? (http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788)

[jimnyc]

I'm not sure the point. I don't disagree. Different people make different assumptions.

Is Illegal Immigration an Economic Burden to America? (http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788)

Either they cost $100 billion + per year or they do not. It's not a debate (I don't mean between you and I). We can debate numbers crossing the borders of course - but does ANYONE in the entire world truly think that the illegal immigration problem MAKES us money? That's absurd and it will take a LOT more than a paragraph from some to override the financial numbers we see year after year after year.

[fj1200]

Either they cost $100 billion + per year or they do not. It's not a debate (I don't mean between you and I). We can debate numbers crossing the borders of course - but does ANYONE in the entire world truly think that the illegal immigration problem MAKES us money? That's absurd and it will take a LOT more than a paragraph from some to override the financial numbers we see year after year after year.

Did anyone make that argument?

[Gunny]

Either they cost $100 billion + per year or they do not. It's not a debate (I don't mean between you and I). We can debate numbers crossing the borders of course - but does ANYONE in the entire world truly think that the illegal immigration problem MAKES us money? That's absurd and it will take a LOT more than a paragraph from some to override the financial numbers we see year after year after year.

One other thing to add to the mix ... all these illegals are not just Mexicans. They come from Central and South America as well. They sneak into FL from the Caribbean islands. And as was pointed out some-damned-where around here, the Asians have a complete industry.

Somebody needs to say enough is enough.

[jimnyc]

Did anyone make that argument?

Not directly, but the link you provided talks about net gains in labor. how they pay taxes. Greenspan talks about growth to our economy, and how the economic benefits outweigh the costs. I assumed that's why you posted such. The title is even "is illegal immigration an economic burden" - which sounds like a question to me.

[jimnyc]

One other thing to add to the mix ... all these illegals are not just Mexicans. They come from Central and South America as well. They sneak into FL from the Caribbean islands. And as was pointed out some-damned-where around here, the Asians have a complete industry.

Somebody needs to say enough is enough.

Oh, I know, I've stated as much many times. And I don't care if from Russia, Mexico or Venezuela - if illegal - GTFO.

[Perianne]

One other thing to add to the mix ... all these illegals are not just Mexicans. They come from Central and South America as well. They sneak into FL from the Caribbean islands. And as was pointed out some-damned-where around here, the Asians have a complete industry.

Somebody needs to say enough is enough.

That's why it is appropriate to call them "wetbacks". "Wetbacks" covers a wide variety of undesirables.

[Gunny]

That's why it is appropriate to call them "wetbacks". "Wetbacks" covers a wide variety of undesirables.

The term "wetback" is very old. It originated from Mexicans swimming the Rio Grande. They came out wet and that's how most got caught, if not shot. I've heard a few stories from my grandfather. Catch and release wasn't exactly policy in the old days. So technically, it refers to Mexicans swimming the river.

You need to learn your dirty names. For instance, calling a Cuban a spick is like calling a black a nigger. What most don't realize are all the nuances. The myth that Americans of Hispanic descent will vote against the GOP for closing the border and deportation is just that .. a myth. You think they want them around making them look bad? Like I want some toothless hayseed making meth in his bathtub around me.

[Perianne]

The term "wetback" is very old. It originated from Mexicans swimming the Rio Grande. They came out wet and that's how most got caught, if not shot. I've heard a few stories from my grandfather. Catch and release wasn't exactly policy in the old days. So technically, it refers to Mexicans swimming the river.

You need to learn your dirty names. For instance, calling a Cuban a spick is like calling a black a nigger. What most don't realize are all the nuances. The myth that Americans of Hispanic descent will vote against the GOP for closing the border and deportation is just that .. a myth. You think they want them around making them look bad? Like I want some toothless hayseed making meth in his bathtub around me.

"Wetback" is not a dirty name, sir. It is a descriptor of a variety of illegal people (or at least I though it to be so). And as you said, the term is very old. It has been around long enough to gain acceptance.

[Gunny]

"Wetback" is not a dirty name, sir. It is a descriptor of a variety of illegal people (or at least I though it to be so). And as you said, the term is very old. It has been around long enough to gain acceptance.

Sorry ma'am, but I live with the wetbacks. It's like calling a black a nigger. If someone's usurped the word to describe anyone but an illegal swimming the Rio Grande, while not surprising, it's on them.

[Perianne]

Sorry ma'am, but I live with the wetbacks. It's like calling a black a nigger. If someone's usurped the word to describe anyone but an illegal swimming the Rio Grande, while not surprising, it's on them.

Thanks, Gunny. My mistake. Sometimes I am a little behind on proper usage of contemporary language. I take it wetbacks don't like being called wetbacks? Even if the term is accurately applied?

[Gunny]

Thanks, @Gunny (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=30). My mistake. Sometimes I am a little behind on proper usage of contemporary language. I take it wetbacks don't like being called wetbacks? Even if the term is accurately applied?

It's the same as with blacks who call each other nigger .. they call each other wetbacks you best not.

[Perianne]

It's the same as with blacks who call each other nigger .. they call each other wetbacks you best not.

I have learned a lot from you, sir.

[fj1200]

Not directly, but the link you provided talks about net gains in labor. how they pay taxes. Greenspan talks about growth to our economy, and how the economic benefits outweigh the costs. I assumed that's why you posted such. The title is even "is illegal immigration an economic burden" - which sounds like a question to me.

It was phrased that way because it's a pro and con site; Pose a question and there is a yes and a no. But I was just reiterating my initial point that there are different opinions on the subject even on one side of the question. Are there some benefits? No question yes. Are there costs? No question yes. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? Debatable but either way we need to get a handle on the issue. If we had a vibrant growing economy like we did in the early years of our country then any immigration would be easily absorbed. An advanced economy that is burdened by burdensome regulations, taxes, etc. they are not so easily absorbed.

[Perianne]

It was phrased that way because it's a pro and con site; Pose a question and there is a yes and a no. But I was just reiterating my initial point that there are different opinions on the subject even on one side of the question. Are there some benefits? No question yes. Are there costs? No question yes. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? Debatable but either way we need to get a handle on the issue. If we had a vibrant growing economy like we did in the early years of our country then any immigration would be easily absorbed. An advanced economy that is burdened by burdensome regulations, taxes, etc. they are not so easily absorbed.

Well-stated, fj1200. There is hope for you yet! :)

[fj1200]

Well-stated, @fj1200 (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=728). There is hope for you yet! :)

:confused:

[jimnyc]

It was phrased that way because it's a pro and con site; Pose a question and there is a yes and a no. But I was just reiterating my initial point that there are different opinions on the subject even on one side of the question. Are there some benefits? No question yes. Are there costs? No question yes. Do the benefits outweigh the costs? Debatable but either way we need to get a handle on the issue. If we had a vibrant growing economy like we did in the early years of our country then any immigration would be easily absorbed. An advanced economy that is burdened by burdensome regulations, taxes, etc. they are not so easily absorbed.

I don't think over $100 billion makes it much of a debate. I don't see really any benefit at all that can come even remotely close to offset that kind of money.

[Perianne]

I don't think over $100 billion makes it much of a debate. I don't see really any benefit at all that can come even remotely close to offset that kind of money.

But they are doing all those millions of jobs that Americans won't do. And our farm economies would crash if we sent them back. Or something like that.

[jimnyc]

It's the same as with blacks who call each other nigger .. they call each other wetbacks you best not.

What about "beaner"? http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/fans/mexican-fan-smiley-emoticon.gif

[jimnyc]

But they are doing all those millions of jobs that Americans won't do. And our farm economies would crash if we sent them back. Or something like that.

Oh please. Many will happily fill them. But even if some, then raise the prices a little as they increase the salaries a little when not employing illegals. $1.00 more for my celery cabbage isn't going to destroy our economy. That old argument is from Dem supporters who see votes going away.

[Black Diamond]

What about "beaner"? http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/fans/mexican-fan-smiley-emoticon.gif

Bibgy coffee used to be called beaner. Can't figure out why they changed the name. :cool:

[jimnyc]

Bibgy coffee used to be called beaner. Can't figure out why they changed the name. :cool:

I don't understand the insult anyway. Kinda like someone calling me cracker. Oh no, my night is ruined. Had someone go as far as to call me "saltine" once. The horror! And yet even another called me "wonder bread" LOL

[Gunny]

I don't understand the insult anyway. Kinda like someone calling me cracker. Oh no, my night is ruined. Had someone go as far as to call me "saltine" once. The horror! And yet even another called me "wonder bread" LOL

You got to get out more. I'm cracking up here. Mexicans eat a LOT of rice and beans and anything in tortilla is a taco. Tacos down here ain't taco bell. But "beaner" is DEFINITELY a derogatory remark to a Mexican and worse toa Mexican American. You can probably get shot for it. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

[fj1200]

I don't think over $100 billion makes it much of a debate. I don't see really any benefit at all that can come even remotely close to offset that kind of money.

Like I said I agree but that doesn't take into account taxes paid nor other businesses that exist because of their presence.


Oh please. Many will happily fill them. But even if some, then raise the prices a little as they increase the salaries a little when not employing illegals. $1.00 more for my celery cabbage isn't going to destroy our economy. That old argument is from Dem supporters who see votes going away.

And many will not. We shouldn't have illegal immigrants but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have legal immigrants who may do some of the same work.

[Perianne]

Oh please. Many will happily fill them. But even if some, then raise the prices a little as they increase the salaries a little when not employing illegals. $1.00 more for my celery cabbage isn't going to destroy our economy. That old argument is from Dem supporters who see votes going away.

What in the world is celery cabbage?

[jimnyc]

Like I said I agree but that doesn't take into account taxes paid nor other businesses that exist because of their presence.



And many will not. We shouldn't have illegal immigrants but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have legal immigrants who may do some of the same work.

I don't think anyone stated otherwise about regular immigrants. Between legal immigrants, and Americans, there won't be some mass hiatus from tough jobs if illegal immigrants are taken away from the jobs. Folks that are legal will fill the jobs. If it costs more to run the places, and the wages are higher, and then we pay more at the market - I have no issue with that is all I'm saying. Some seem to think America will fall apart if illegals were somehow stopped from being able to work here.

[jimnyc]

What in the world is celery cabbage?

"celery, cabbage..."

I swear it was there before. I think a little mexican came in and at my comma! :lol:

[fj1200]

I don't think anyone stated otherwise about regular immigrants. Between legal immigrants, and Americans, there won't be some mass hiatus from tough jobs if illegal immigrants are taken away from the jobs. Folks that are legal will fill the jobs. If it costs more to run the places, and the wages are higher, and then we pay more at the market - I have no issue with that is all I'm saying. Some seem to think America will fall apart if illegals were somehow stopped from being able to work here.

I think we'll need a much larger legal immigrant plan to make up for an absence of illegal workers. If all illegals were gone tomorrow there would be large disruptions that would have to work themselves out over time.

[Trigg]

Like I have said before, Mexicans don't come to the U.S. before they like it here. Costs are a ton higher than south of the border. They come here for jobs that pay more than they can get at home. Take away the job and no one will cross the border.
But as long as everyone casts all the blame at the immigrants and turn a blind eye toward companies that hire them, you will always have illegal immigration.
In San Diego, there are labor offices that specialize in finding jobs for illegals. Most of them use off duty police officers for security. Everyone knows these places are there, but no one does anything about it.
Trump and Carson want to expand business opportunities, but deport illegal aliens. Do they just overlook who works at these businesses?


I believe many on here have said fine the hell out of the employers and mandate e-verify.

Jobs are a pull factor, eliminate the opportunity to work and illegal immigration will drop considerably.

[jimnyc]

I think we'll need a much larger legal immigrant plan to make up for an absence of illegal workers. If all illegals were gone tomorrow there would be large disruptions that would have to work themselves out over time.

That would go for ANY job/company where you take away a large number of employees at once. I'd rather forego some veggies for awhile - as opposed to just leaving things as they are, just so there aren't disruptions. The law in our country should be more important.

[Elessar]

This is NOT a new issue. Been around as long as I can remember and both sides have purposefully avoided addressing it and/or enforcing the law. We don't need new laws. Enforce the ones we have.

As far as this particular poll goes, it's BS.

Spot on....

Just like "Gun Laws".

Enforce the present ones. New ones are not needed.

[Elessar]

None of it changes anything for me. We still have a shitload ton of illegals in our country. Even if numbers are going down, so what? Does that mean the problem is magically solved? Not even remotely. Borders sealed, laws upheld, deportations back in effect, stop employers with illegals, stop giving illegals and and all benefits of any sort.

I wonder how much of a nets savings there is in the entire country when 870,000 illegals leave? How much do we still pay for illegals yearly? It's something like $100+ billion each and every year.

Bad thing is, though...Most people in Los Angeles or Long Beach would not have anyone
to mow the lawn or trim the bushes. They would have make their own kids get off
their ass and do something! But there would be no leaf blowers used to push the cuttings
down the storm drains and clog them, so it would be a good thing!:laugh:

[Elessar]

Oh please. Many will happily fill them. But even if some, then raise the prices a little as they increase the salaries a little when not employing illegals. $1.00 more for my celery cabbage isn't going to destroy our economy. That old argument is from Dem supporters who see votes going away.

There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of people standing on street corners holding
cardboard signs saying "Please Help" in California alone. Let them go out and hand pick the vegetables and
earn a living. Kick the illegals out!

[LongTermGuy]

There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of people standing on street corners holding
cardboard signs saying "Please Help" in California alone. Let them go out and hand pick the vegetables and
earn a living. Kick the illegals out!

Agree Elessar...in my neck of the woods also....

[Gunny]

Agree Elessar...in my neck of the woods also....

Same.

I've worked 2 jobs at a time before just to get by. Ain't going to get a lot of sympathy out of me.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

REFUTED!!!

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/11/23/no_there_s_not_a_massive_exodus_of_illegals

No, There's Not a Massive Exodus of Illegals
November 23, 2015
Listen to it Button
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Another See, I Told You So. Remember the news last week from the Pew Research Center claiming they had data saying that more Mexicans were leaving the country than arriving and that it was, therefore, nothing to worry about anymore? Illegal immigration, we have a net loss here, essentially, because, yes, while there are a certain number of Mexicans and others arriving across the southern border, more are leaving. And my extraordinary memory kicked into gear, and I said, "You know, it seems like I've heard this story before, like back in 2012." It seems like every presidential election year I recall from recent times hearing news like this. And that it turns out to be not true, and it's just made up to limit the damage and kind of take the illegal immigration table down a notch or two so that it doesn't engender such turnout.

Well, right here I have data. Daniel Horowitz at ConservativeReview.com: "Appallingly Dishonest Pew Study on Immigration Trend from Mexico -- If you want to know the depths of dishonesty and obfuscation the liberal elite employ in order to distort the reality on any given issue, take a look at this Pew research report on immigration from Mexico. Pew claims that migration from Mexico is down to such a point that there is net out-migration -- that is to say more Mexicans in America have died or gone back home than returned," or are coming.

"Media outlets, from The Hill and Politico to the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, are breathlessly promoting the headline of this report as if it reflected the truth of the moment. Their broader message was: 'See, the right wing nuts are going crazy about a border crisis when, in reality, there is zero net migration from Mexico.' The one problem? Pew was using old data from 2009-2014."

I was more right than I knew. They were recycling the same news that they used in 2012. They just repackaged it and updated it, and they added a couple of years, taking us to 2014, making it look like they had brand-new news which confirmed, but of course they didn't reference the same story they did back in 2012. It was only my memory. But obviously Horowitz here at the Conservative Review had the same memory jog.

And he says, "There is nothing new about this. Pew has been reporting on a number of occasions that in light of the recession a number of illegal immigrants from Mexico returned home." Now, the problem with this is, of course, that there isn't a recession, if you listen to Obama. If you listen to Obama and the Democrats, we're in a robust recovery. Why, what's the unemployment rate now, 5%, 5.1%. If you listen to the Regime they're hyping all these new jobs that have been created. Well, if you didn't know any better, you'd think that we're smoking. And if you don't have a job, it's not because of anybody's fault than yours. You're just not on the bandwagon. You haven't gotten on the gravy train 'cause, man, we're smoking out there. Where are you?

Of course that's not true. We have 94 million Americans not working. The unemployment rate really is 11 or 12% or maybe higher. There is no economic recovery and so there's no reason for Mexicans to be going home because the economy is so bad, except that it is bad and Mexicans aren't going home. Every premise in this story is phony.

"Pew has been reporting on a number of occasions that in light of the recession a number of illegal immigrants from Mexico returned home. But guess what? As we reported several months ago, according to the most up-to-date census data, based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), there has been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico." It's actually up and everybody knows this.

Amidst news stories day after day about all the arrivals flooding the Southern border, Pew wants to tell us that even with that more are returning home, but there aren't any pictures of that. Have you ever seen any pictures of Mexicans leaving? Or not just Mexicans, any illegal immigrant leaving, you don't see the pictures of it. Isn't happening. Some, maybe, but it's not mass like they're trying to point out here.

But the Census Bureau just nukes the Pew Research Center data. That's right. "There's been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico since 2014, precisely after Obama and the Gang of Eight began encouraging illegal immigration in a number of ways. The fact that 80 percent of illegal immigrants are now officially shielded from deportation and most others are unlikely to ever encounter resistance has clearly contributed to the surge," of new migrants. "Intelligence reports based on interviews of illegal aliens bear out the growing perception that our policies incentivize illegal immigration. Yet, Pew was dishonest enough to report this data as if it reflects the current reality, even though the current trend portends a political dynamic completely the opposite of that which they are trying to implant in the media cycle."

And they'll succeed, with the Post having picked it up and the New York Times shortly, and Politico, just like this phony Trump story, it's not gonna be long before wherever you look that more Mexicans are leaving than arriving. It's nothing to see here, and it isn't any big deal, and so you don't even need to worry about electing somebody's gonna deport 'em 'cause they're deporting themselves, don't sweat it. They're trying to take it off the table because they know it's a big turnout issue. So it's an effort to suppress Republican turnout and a number of other things.

But as Mr. Horowitz writes here, "The Pew report proves every premise of the border hawks. The fact that some illegal aliens returned home following the recession demonstrates how the false choice between amnesty and mass deportation is a straw-man argument. Mere passive economic disincentives from a recession were strong enough to entice illegal immigrants to repatriate. Imagine the effects of cutting off welfare and education benefits, jobs, and unqualified birthright citizenship?"

This has been the point that we've been making. You don't need to deport a bunch of people. They'll go home on their own once you start enforcing current immigration law. This is the big point I think that's overlooked in this immigration debate every time it's brought up. There is this incessant need for Washington to do something, we've got to do something, it's a crisis, we've gotta do something, comprehensive immigration reform. No. All we need to do is enforce the laws already on the books. It's already illegal to emigrate here illegally. Enforce every other law attached and you won't have to deport anybody, because then you really will have a net reduction in immigration. You eliminate the reasons, you know, all of them, those that want to come for work, not allowed to be hired. Those that want to come get in a safety net of a hammock, not gonna have the payments for it. It's simple. The law is already there, or I should say the laws are already there. And the fact that they're there and being ignored proves that all of this is nothing more than a political issue for both parties, in their own ways trying to increase their own power at the ballot box.

And for the Republican side, find a way to get cheaper employees in certain kinds of work. Anyway, I just wanted to point it out, folks, 'cause it's all BS. There is not a net loss of immigrants in the United States. They're coming here in numbers continually greater than those who are deporting.

[aboutime]

Thanks, Gunny. My mistake. Sometimes I am a little behind on proper usage of contemporary language. I take it wetbacks don't like being called wetbacks? Even if the term is accurately applied?


Perianne. Political Correctness demands the CEASE of using Wetback. So, in keeping with PC. Let's just call them what OBAMA refuses to call them???? ILLEGALS!:laugh:

[Abbey Marie]

Given all the sneaking over the border, and living off the grid once here, I don't think it is likely these numbers are verifiable. I wouldn't give it much regard.

[Gunny]

Perianne. Political Correctness demands the CEASE of using Wetback. So, in keeping with PC. Let's just call them what OBAMA refuses to call them???? ILLEGALS!:laugh:

Funny thing is, the tejanos call them wetbacks.

[revelarts]

REFUTED!!!

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/11/23/no_there_s_not_a_massive_exodus_of_illegals

No, There's Not a Massive Exodus of Illegals
November 23, 2015
Listen to it Button
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Another See, I Told You So. Remember the news last week from the Pew Research Center claiming they had data saying that more Mexicans were leaving the country than arriving and that it was, therefore, nothing to worry about anymore? Illegal immigration, we have a net loss here, essentially, because, yes, while there are a certain number of Mexicans and others arriving across the southern border, more are leaving. And my extraordinary memory kicked into gear, and I said, "You know, it seems like I've heard this story before, like back in 2012." It seems like every presidential election year I recall from recent times hearing news like this. And that it turns out to be not true, and it's just made up to limit the damage and kind of take the illegal immigration table down a notch or two so that it doesn't engender such turnout. OK, it was said in 2012. if true then so what if not where's the counter data?

Well, right here I have data. Daniel Horowitz at ConservativeReview.com: "Appallingly Dishonest Pew Study on Immigration Trend from Mexico -- If you want to know the depths of dishonesty and obfuscation the liberal elite employ in order to distort the reality on any given issue, take a look at this Pew research report on immigration from Mexico. Pew claims that migration from Mexico is down to such a point that there is net out-migration -- that is to say more Mexicans in America have died or gone back home than returned," or are coming.

"Media outlets, from The Hill and Politico to the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, are breathlessly promoting the headline of this report as if it reflected the truth of the moment. Their broader message was: 'See, the right wing nuts are going crazy about a border crisis when, in reality, there is zero net migration from Mexico.' The one problem? Pew was using old data from 2009-2014."

I was more right than I knew. They were recycling the same news that they used in 2012. They just repackaged it and updated it, and they added a couple of years, taking us to 2014, making it look like they had brand-new news which confirmed, but of course they didn't reference the same story they did back in 2012. It was only my memory. But obviously Horowitz here at the Conservative Review had the same memory jog.
so if the data was correct in 2012 then isn't all you have to do is update it?

And he says, "There is nothing new about this. Pew has been reporting on a number of occasions that in light of the recession a number of illegal immigrants from Mexico returned home." Now, the problem with this is, of course, that there isn't a recession, if you listen to Obama. If you listen to Obama and the Democrats, we're in a robust recovery. Why, what's the unemployment rate now, 5%, 5.1%. If you listen to the Regime they're hyping all these new jobs that have been created. Well, if you didn't know any better, you'd think that we're smoking. And if you don't have a job, it's not because of anybody's fault than yours. You're just not on the bandwagon. You haven't gotten on the gravy train 'cause, man, we're smoking out there. Where are you?

Of course that's not true. We have 94 million Americans not working. The unemployment rate really is 11 or 12% or maybe higher. There is no economic recovery and so there's no reason for Mexicans to be going home because the economy is so bad, except that it is bad and Mexicans aren't going home. Every premise in this story is phony.

"Pew has been reporting on a number of occasions that in light of the recession a number of illegal immigrants from Mexico returned home. But guess what? As we reported several months ago, according to the most up-to-date census data, based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), there has been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico." It's actually up and everybody knows this.
so they are ALSO talking about NEW updated data, but they made it sound like updating was bad a minute ago.

Amidst news stories day after day about all the arrivals flooding the Southern border, Pew wants to tell us that even with that more are returning home, but there aren't any pictures of that. Have you ever seen any pictures of Mexicans leaving? Or not just Mexicans, any illegal immigrant leaving, you don't see the pictures of it. Isn't happening. Some, maybe, but it's not mass like they're trying to point out here.
so if we don't see pictures then the numbers are wrong? Really? Any pictures of all the MILLIONS that have come in?

But the Census Bureau just nukes the Pew Research Center data. That's right. "There's been a massive spike in net migration from Mexico since 2014, precisely after Obama and the Gang of Eight began encouraging illegal immigration in a number of ways. The fact that 80 percent of illegal immigrants are now officially shielded from deportation and most others are unlikely to ever encounter resistance has clearly contributed to the surge," of new migrants. "Intelligence reports based on interviews of illegal aliens bear out the growing perception that our policies incentivize illegal immigration. Yet, Pew was dishonest enough to report this data as if it reflects the current reality, even though the current trend portends a political dynamic completely the opposite of that which they are trying to implant in the media cycle."

And they'll succeed, with the Post having picked it up and the New York Times shortly, and Politico, just like this phony Trump story, it's not gonna be long before wherever... Blah... blah... Obama!....

Ok now at least we can talk about conflicting data.... OR IS IT?
It seem the Report that Rush and Horitiz are using to "refute" and call PEW a lie, doesn't.
IT doesn't really refute. It just looks at new numbers AFTER 2014.

from the study Rush sites


Immigrant Population Hits Record 42.1 Million in Second Quarter of 2015

...A new analysis of monthly Census Bureau data by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that the nation's immigrant population (legal and illegal) hit a record high of 42.1 million in the second quarter of this year — an increase of 1.7 million since the same quarter of 2014. Growth in the immigrant population in the last year was led by a 740,000 increase in the number of Mexican immigrants. After falling or growing little in recent years, the number of Mexican immigrants again seems to be growing significantly. The monthly Census Bureau data, referred to as the Current Population Survey (CPS), is released before other data. As more information becomes available, it should confirm the findings from the CPS.1 (http://cis.org/Immigrant-Population-Hits-Record-Second-Quarter-2015#1)Among the findings:

The nation's immigrant (foreign-born) population, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, grew by 4.1 million from the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2015 — 1.7 million in just the last year.
Growth in the last year was led by a rebound in the number of Mexican immigrants, which increased by 740,000 from 2014 to 2015 — accounting for 44 percent of the increase in the total immigrant population in the last year.
The total Mexican immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 12.1 million in the second quarter of 2015 — the highest quarterly total ever.
Prior research has indicated that net migration (the number coming vs. leaving) from Mexico had fallen to zero; the recent growth indicates that the period of zero net migration has ended. ...

http://cis.org/Immigrant-Population-Hits-Record-Second-Quarter-2015
So It seems the PEW study is CONFIRMED. But it also looks there's been a new surge, OF LEGAL AND ILLEGAL. So rather than make up stuff and pretend someones lying or assume the facts are wrong because it upsets the foundation of the daily 3-minute hate against illegals, how about everyone settle down and just look at what seems to be happening.

[aboutime]

rev. Why don't you just Fess Up? Nothing anybody says here, posts here, thinks here, or has an opinion about here...unless YOU agree with it...Matters, and must always be proven to be like everything Obama says...as in LIES because it doesn't meet your requirements to always be UNQUESTIONABLY RIGHT????

Hypocrisy is your motto, even if you disagree with yourself.

[Elessar]

rev. Why don't you just Fess Up? Nothing anybody says here, posts here, thinks here, or has an opinion about here...unless YOU agree with it...Matters, and must always be proven to be like everything Obama says...as in LIES because it doesn't meet your requirements to always be UNQUESTIONABLY RIGHT????

Hypocrisy is your motto, even if you disagree with yourself.

Nailed it!

Holier than Thou Syndrome.

[revelarts]

Nailed it!

Holier than Thou Syndrome.

More factually accurate than thou
maybe, OK, i'll take that.

just give me some facts that correct me.
rather than name calling, lame jokes and insults on my personality.

I've moved from my 1st post to the last, based on the data.
if anyone took time to look at the facts rather than assume, or just say what they "know" from personally counting the illegal immigrants.

[Black Diamond]

More factually accurate than thou
maybe, OK, i'll take that.

whow about give me some facts that correct me.
rather than name calling and lame jokes and insults on my personality.

I've moved form my 1st post to the last, based on the data.
if anyone took time to look at the facts rather than assume, or just say what they "know" personally counting the illegal immigrants.

ROFLMAO

That's funny shit ravs. You just proved elessars and about times' points. That's just f-ing classic.

[revelarts]

ROFLMAO

That's funny shit ravs. You just proved elessars and about times' points. That's just f-ing classic.
maybe, But you, AT and El proved mine as well.
you guys keep making it about personality rather than the data.

just correct me with the some facts, believe me i'll either agree or shut the heck up.

[Black Diamond]

maybe, But you, AT and El proved mine as well.
you guys keep making it about personality rather than the data.

just correct me with the some facts, believe me i'll either agree or shut the heck up.

How did *I* prove anything? *You* proved you're arrogant as all holy hell..

[aboutime]

More factually accurate than thou
maybe, OK, i'll take that.

just give me some facts that correct me.
rather than name calling, lame jokes and insults on my personality.

I've moved from my 1st post to the last, based on the data.
if anyone took time to look at the facts rather than assume, or just say what they "know" from personally counting the illegal immigrants.


Therein lies your main problem here rev. You are the only one who thinks everything must be a competition to make you convince yourself...only you can be right.

[Abbey Marie]

Therein lies your main problem here rev. You are the only one who thinks everything must be a competition to make you convince yourself...only you can be right.

Actually, there's a lot of that going around. Rev is not the worst offender by far.

[fj1200]

REFUTED!!!

No, There's Not a Massive Exodus of Illegals

He didn't really refute anything. Did someone state a "massive exodus"?

[revelarts]

How did *I* prove anything? *You* proved you're arrogant as all holy hell..
you only commented on what you think of me.
you did not comment at all on the information or conclusions with counter or corrective info.
that's what i mean.

But BD here's how i see it. I started the thread with.
"hey look this PEW study it says XYZ."

Folks reply with stuff like
...the PEW "poll" is wrong wrong wrong...
...it's leftist...
...it's paid for...
...did the illegal Mexicans log in with PEW? LOL...
...the datas junk...
...I know better because I have EYES...
...Rev you're #$&%& for believing that stuff...
...and look Texas says something slightly different about part of it and IT COST ALOT anyway!
...and wait RUSH says the study is total leftist lying crap LOOK!...
...see the PEW "poll" is crap.
...Rev you're a #$&%&

So I read the Texas info, I read a Rush info, to see if it's true or corrects/contradicts PEW.
then I reply with one snarky comment and the reasons why the PEW study, the Texas report and the source of Rush's study ALL appear to align.

then guys reply with stuff like
...Rev you're an arrogant #$&%&
.... REV you think you ....
....#$*^$#% Rev

so BD, I guess It'd be humble of me to just believe Gunny's "eyes" and everyone's opinion over the Pew, Texas and even's Rush's study. Sorry BD i'm not going to let people buffalo me with confident (but not arrogant?) opinions without PUTTING UP some info that really shows the PEW study wrong here.

if that's what you call arrogance then well, ok.

[jimnyc]

...and look Texas says something slightly different about part of it and IT COST ALOT anyway!

Here we go again...

What was posted about Texas was a part of my discussion with Gunny, about what it costs. I looked for Texas because that's where Gunny is from. It had ZILCH to do with what you posted. Plus, I have already stated what I am stating right now. So please, stop being dishonest when you "quote" things - as that's clearly not what I wrote, nor anything at all what I was writing about.

[revelarts]

I wonder what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with pew research?
your 1st reply to my post.
I later asked you what percentage of illegals coming into America are first registering with the state of TEXAS?
you said ...

You took one post of mine out of many. And much of my discussion was back and forth with Gunny.
Not much of a reply.

You posted the Texas info

Or even if you can poll them in the streets, then not charge them. If there is zero fear of being arrested for being here illegal, then of course there will be no fear in them for crossing the border.
And to give you and idea of what they cost, this is just your home state alone:
-----
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on Texans (2014)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Click here to read the full report in PDF.
After a brief hiatus that coincided with the worst of the economic recession, Texas’s illegal alien population is on the rise again. There are about 1,810,000 illegal aliens residing in Texas — 70,000 more than resided in the state in 2010 when we estimated the fiscal burden at nearly $8.9 billion annually.
In 2013, illegal immigration cost Texas taxpayers about $12.1 billion annually. That amounts to more than $1,197 for every Texas household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at $1.27 billion per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, but we include an estimate of revenue from sales taxes, property taxes, alcohol taxes, and cigarette taxes.
Examining Texas’s fiscal outlays from the perspective of the current debate over adopting an amnesty for illegal aliens, we find that the fiscal burden to taxpayers would not be significantly lessened even if an amnesty like that proposed in the Senate’s S.744 were enacted. In fact, it becomes clear that the only way to significantly reduce the fiscal burden is to reduce the size of the population that illegally entered the country. State and local policymakers have options available to accomplish that objective. In Arizona, efforts to discourage the arrival of additional illegal residents and to hold employers accountable for knowingly hiring illegal workers have been effective in reducing the illegal alien population and, thereby, the fiscal costs associated with that population.
Aside from emotional arguments about compassion, proponents of an amnesty argue that granting legal status would allow the illegal alien population to seek higher paying jobs, move out of poverty, and contribute more taxes. Opponents of the amnesty proposal argue that besides undermining respect for the law the measure would encourage future illegal immigration and put the illegal alien population on the path to collecting the full range of public benefits that currently are not legally available.
http://www.fairus.org/publications/the-fiscal-burden-of-illegal-immigration-on-texans

I then made general reply to everyone that was Sarcastic.
you replied to that with...

Then why not counter what we are saying with facts, instead of posting like a sarcastic asshole? I read what you posted over and over and honestly can't find anything that's concrete in how they came up with these numbers. Care to share that with us then?
The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals. Did you read the entire PDF? I highly doubt it. You're too busy trying to post like a dolt towards others.

I replied 1st commenting on your tone and ridiculous expectations and double standard but also with...

....But here's some info to consider from Pew and your one linked page of Texas Info.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Pew Research from links in my post
...The estimates are produced using a multistage method that subtracts the legal foreign-born population from the total adjusted foreign-born population, with the residual then used as the source of information about unauthorized immigrants. The source of these data is the U.S. Census Bureau’s March Current Population Surveys.
Because these estimates are derived from sample surveys, they are subject to uncertainty from sampling error, as well as other types of error. Each annual estimate of the unauthorized population is actually the middle point of a range of possible values that could be the true number. Additionally, the change from one year to the next has its own margin of error....(also here a page on how they got and used the data
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/1...methodology-7/ (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/appendix-b-methodology-7/))

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by the Texas PDF speaking of 2014
...There are about 1,810,000 illegal aliens residing in Texas — 70,000 more than resided in the state in 2010...

PEW gave the estimate of Texas illegal aliens as...
"...2009 to 2012...Texas ranked second, with 1.7 million unauthorized immigrants, 15% of the total. No other state had more than a million."

seems the stats match roughly well so far in just a quick look. if others want to get more clarity and compare apples to apples.
state trends to state trends
national trends to national trends.
that'd be great....

Now i summerize part of your post with,
"...and look Texas says something slightly different about part of it and IT COST ALOT anyway!"
and you say

Here we go again...
What was posted about Texas was a part of my discussion with Gunny, about what it costs. I looked for Texas because that's where Gunny is from. It had ZILCH to do with what you posted. Plus, I have already stated what I am stating right now. So please, stop being dishonest when you "quote" things - as that's clearly not what I wrote, nor anything at all what I was writing about.

So Jim, If it was just "part of your discussion with gunny about what it cost" why did you ask me to reply to the Texas pdf --what you were saying in general-- earlier as part of your factual response to the Pew study Jim?
you said.
"Then why not counter what we are saying with facts,... ..The Texas article I posted has a lot more factors involved, and monies spent, to account for more illegals...." (quoted in full above BTW)

so tell me how am i horribly misquoting you or taking you out of context in my summery
"...and look Texas says something slightly different about part of it and IT COST ALOT anyway!"?

[jimnyc]

Holy fucking gibberish. :rolleyes:

I've now stated TWO FUCKING TIMES WHY I MADE THE POST ABOUT TEXAS AND THE YEARLY COSTS.

"texas says something different" or "slightly different" - is simply something that was never stated. And what WAS actually stated, WAS NOT meant as a reply to anything you wrote. It was a post to Gunny.

Are we clear now, or would you like to continue taking my words and twisting them, to somehow use them as a tool to state it was made towards your OP? It WAS NOT. If my prior post wasn't good enough, and then my post this morning, and now THIS post explaining it - then too fucking bad.

[revelarts]

Holy fucking gibberish. :rolleyes:

I've now stated TWO FUCKING TIMES WHY I MADE THE POST ABOUT TEXAS AND THE YEARLY COSTS.

"texas says something different" or "slightly different" - is simply something that was never stated. And what WAS actually stated, WAS NOT meant as a reply to anything you wrote. It was a post to Gunny.

Are we clear now, or would you like to continue taking my words and twisting them, to somehow use them as a tool to state it was made towards your OP? It WAS NOT. If my prior post wasn't good enough, and then my post this morning, and now THIS post explaining it - then too fucking bad.

I quoted your gibberish completely word for word and you don't like it.
I summarize your post and you don't like it.
I post where you asked (scolded me) for a reply to your comments including the Texas PDF.
now you deny i was suppose to reply to that or that it was meant to have any reference to ANYTHING i wrote... that it was just for Gunny.

Oh yeah, i'm clear.

[jimnyc]

I quoted your gibberish completely word for word and you don't like it.
I summarize your post you don't like it.
I post you where asked for a reply to your comments including the Texas PDF.
now you deny i was suppose to reply to that. or that it was meant to have any reference to ANYTHING i wrote... that it was just for Gunny.

Oh yeah, i'm clear.

You simply can't comprehend or keep up. And YES, it WAS for gunny. Did you see the part in the post where I even mention it was his home state? Surely I'm allowed to branch off a tad and discuss finances of the costs of illegals, while others were discussing head counts? Do I need your permission? How many fucking times do I need to explain to you what my post was about? I had already explained it, and then you use it somehow to make it appear that it was in reply to your OP, when it was not. Then I further explain, and further explain - and you are going to continue to TELL ME what my post was meant to be about - even though it states it's to his home state, in the midst of a discussion between the 2 of us?

Go eat a bag of dicks, I don't need to explain any more than that to you. If it ain't good enough, immerse yourself in said bag. Enjoy!

[aboutime]

Rev. About time you catch up with reality, and understand how YOU are the primary one Spouting GIBBERISH

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Ok now at least we can talk about conflicting data.... OR IS IT?
It seem the Report that Rush and Horitiz are using to "refute" and call PEW a lie, doesn't.
IT doesn't really refute. It just looks at new numbers AFTER 2014.

from the study Rush sites
So It seems the PEW study is CONFIRMED. But it also looks there's been a new surge, OF LEGAL AND ILLEGAL. So rather than make up stuff and pretend someones lying or assume the facts are wrong because it upsets the foundation of the daily 3-minute hate against illegals, how about everyone settle down and just look at what seems to be happening.





Hoss, you should be worried as you got the fj thanking you on that crap.
He supports mexican illegals, muslim terrorists, gay perverts etc---just like the good little lib he is...

You just may be one of the last 3 or 4 members here that has not finally seen what he is and how he disguises his true(socialist-muslim loving ) agenda- but enjoy your buddy..ok..--Tyr

[fj1200]

Hoss, you should be worried as you got the fj thanking you on that crap.
He supports mexican illegals, muslim terrorists, gay perverts etc---just like the good little lib he is...

You just may be one of the last 3 or 4 members here that has not finally seen what he is and how he disguises his true(socialist-muslim loving ) agenda- but enjoy your buddy..ok..--Tyr

I frequently thank truth. I don't generally thank lying little trolls such as yourself; It's just a shame that your post turned out to be false. :)

Scamper away now.

[revelarts]

Hoss, you should be worried as you got the fj thanking you on that crap.
He supports mexican illegals, muslim terrorists, gay perverts etc---just like the good little lib he is...

You just may be one of the last 3 or 4 members here that has not finally seen what he is and how he disguises his true(socialist-muslim loving ) agenda- but enjoy your buddy..ok..--Tyr

SO Tyr, I din't post about FJ. but about the pew study.
and it seems it accurate. it doesn't matter who likes it or not. The question is, if it's true then some of the Hype and concern of illegals immigrants is overblown. since the trend basically slowed to nothing for a few years even during the Obama admin.
Facts aren't partisan they just are.

the sun is shining, there are over 300 million americans, the tide came in at 5:45
doesn't matter who agrees, it is what it is right?

[jimnyc]

Mexican Americans don't like to just get into gang fights,
they like flowers and music and white girls named Debbie too.

Mexican Americans are named Chata and Chella and chemma
and have a son in law named jeff.

Mexican Americans don't like to get up early in the morning
but they have to so they do it real slow.

Mexican Americans love education so they go to night school
and they take spanish and get a B.

Mexican Americans love their Nana's and their Nono's and their
Nina's and their Nino's........ Nano Nano Nina Nono!

Mexican Americans don't like to go to the movies where the
dude has to wear contact lenses to make his blue eyes brown
cause don't it make my brown eyes blue.....

"And thats all i got, how do ya like it?"

"Beaners" "Beaners"

*phone rings*
Mexican Americans like to answer telephone calls and say hello
to whoever's on the other end


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtFb_xem6k8

[fj1200]

Facts aren't partisan they just are.

I thanked that. Sorry.

[jimnyc]

SO Tyr, I din't post about FJ. but about the pew study.
and it seems it accurate. it doesn't matter who likes it or not. The question is, if it's true then some of the Hype and concern of illegals immigrants is overblown. since the trend basically slowed to nothing for a few years even during the Obama admin.
Facts aren't partisan they just are.

the sun is shining, there are over 300 million americans, the tide came in at 5:45
doesn't matter who agrees, it is what it is right?

And yet millions of criminal illegal scum are taking advantage of us and eating our resources. The trend of costing our country well over $100 billion dollars per year is NOT overblown. The crime from illegal immigrants is NOT overblown.

A net drop over a few years, and then increasing since, isn't some grand and great news. And the costs and damage to our country remains.

Oh yay though, the tide came in! :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

Mexican Americans don't like to just get into gang fights,
they like flowers and music and white girls named Debbie too.

Mexican Americans are named Chata and Chella and chemma
and have a son in law named jeff.

Mexican Americans don't like to get up early in the morning
but they have to so they do it real slow.

Mexican Americans love education so they go to night school
and they take spanish and get a B.

Mexican Americans love their Nana's and their Nono's and their
Nina's and their Nino's........ Nano Nano Nina Nono!

Mexican Americans don't like to go to the movies where the
dude has to wear contact lenses to make his blue eyes brown
cause don't it make my brown eyes blue.....

"And thats all i got, how do ya like it?"

"Beaners" "Beaners"

*phone rings*
Mexican Americans like to answer telephone calls and say hello
to whoever's on the other end


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtFb_xem6k8

your racism is showing Jim.

[jimnyc]

your racism is showing Jim.

I love Cheech and Chong! Neither of which are illegal, BTW. But in reality, I do have a bitter taste towards Mexican folks, due to many problematic issues over the years. Downright racism? Nah. But certainly have some preconceived thoughts and such. And 8 out of 10 times I am generally right. I admit that much about myself, unlike others. And you know what? In addition to the few Mexican folks I know, even those I don't know, if here legally, and are cool people, I'll buy the first case and have a blast with them! It's the caution I have in the beginning - and of course some things like tacos, burritos, craapy weed, cartels, illegals, hot sauce, tijuana and drugs...

Sue me.

[aboutime]

your racism is showing Jim.



Rev. Once again, you pull the racist card by always attacking others who NOTICE, and EXPOSE your racism by calling others racists. It's a LOSE-LOSE for you. But you're not smart enough to understand your own words are exposing you...EVERY TIME.

[Black Diamond]

your racism is showing Jim.

:laugh:

[Perianne]

You simply can't comprehend or keep up. And YES, it WAS for gunny. Did you see the part in the post where I even mention it was his home state? Surely I'm allowed to branch off a tad and discuss finances of the costs of illegals, while others were discussing head counts? Do I need your permission? How many fucking times do I need to explain to you what my post was about? I had already explained it, and then you use it somehow to make it appear that it was in reply to your OP, when it was not. Then I further explain, and further explain - and you are going to continue to TELL ME what my post was meant to be about - even though it states it's to his home state, in the midst of a discussion between the 2 of us?

Go eat a bag of dicks, I don't need to explain any more than that to you. If it ain't good enough, immerse yourself in said bag. Enjoy!

I am not sure exactly what that means, but I think it is an insult! :)

[jimnyc]

As far as leaving faster than entering. I thought of this thread when I read this article.

-----

A new surge in families trying to enter the U.S. from Mexico illegally should prompt a federal appeals court to act more quickly to restore the government's authority to lock up those families pending deportation, the Justice Department argued in a motion filed Tuesday night.

While immigration officials have said monthly apprehensions of families have nearly tripled compared to last year, a top Border Patrol official said in a new declaration that detentions of families have spiked to more than 300 people per day on recent occasions.

"Within the last 15-20 days, there have been several days in which the number of individuals in family units apprehended along the Southwest Border has topped 300 in a single day," Border Patrol Plannng and Analysis Chief Woody Lee wrote. "For example, on November 21, 2015, the Border Patrol apprehended 344 individuals in family units, the highest number of apprehensions in a single day Since July 2014."

Lee said it is "especially concerning" that the numbers are rising now since "illegal migration along the Southwest Border is typically lower during the fall and winter seasons."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/12/citing-surge-in-families-at-border-feds-ask-to-speed-immigration-appeal-216365#ixzz3tDa8OwM9

[Perianne]

They are not gonna leave until we stop giving them everything.

[indago]

They are not gonna leave until we stop giving them everything.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6ERbwik_m4

[jimnyc]

Looks like this "leaving faster than they are coming" has changed this past year, and getting worse.

----

The surge of illegal immigrant children continued unabated in November, pushing the Obama administration to announce emergency measures to try to handle a problem it thought it had solved earlier this year.

Two months into the new fiscal year, the number of unaccompanied minors jumping the border and getting caught is at an all-time high. So far, the U.S. Border Patrol has picked up over 10,500 — more than twice the number at the same point last year.

The number of families trying to cross also has surged, with more than 12,500 people caught — a 173 percent increase over last year. The family surge underscored the changing nature of the flow of migrants, with parents increasingly risking the journey with young children in tow, hoping to take advantage of what they believe are lenient deportation policies under President Obama.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/8/border-children-surge-overwhelms-immigration-offic/

[Gunny]

They are not gonna leave until we stop giving them everything.

Neither are the Dems.

[Abbey Marie]

Looks like this "leaving faster than they are coming" has changed this past year, and getting worse.

----

The surge of illegal immigrant children continued unabated in November, pushing the Obama administration to announce emergency measures to try to handle a problem it thought it had solved earlier this year.

Two months into the new fiscal year, the number of unaccompanied minors jumping the border and getting caught is at an all-time high. So far, the U.S. Border Patrol has picked up over 10,500 — more than twice the number at the same point last year.

The number of families trying to cross also has surged, with more than 12,500 people caught — a 173 percent increase over last year. The family surge underscored the changing nature of the flow of migrants, with parents increasingly risking the journey with young children in tow, hoping to take advantage of what they believe are lenient deportation policies under President Obama.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/8/border-children-surge-overwhelms-immigration-offic/


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EfUAFljXsFU/UqCk5l8kPiI/AAAAAAAABbk/e1krJH-QhPM/s1600/shocked+shocked.png

[Gunny]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EfUAFljXsFU/UqCk5l8kPiI/AAAAAAAABbk/e1krJH-QhPM/s1600/shocked+shocked.png

I have TWO copies of Casablanca. :)

[indago]

I have TWO copies of Casablanca. :)

"Round up the usual suspects!" — Famous Line From Casablanca