OBAMA says: You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh

[OCA]

Pres Reagan gave amnesity to what 2.7 million?

Now there are over 20 million and you say the problem is better??????

Because we have people here to do the work Americans won't do, that is good for the economy................well until Bush, Republicans, Wall St and greedy mortgage companies shot the economy in the head out of their uncontrollable greed.

[red states rule]

Because we have people here to do the work Americans won't do, that is good for the economy................well until Bush, Republicans, Wall St and greedy mortgage companies shot the economy in the head out of their uncontrollable greed.

Spoken like a true liberal OCA

And who will pay for the amnesty? The price tag a year and half ago was over $2 trillion

[OCA]

Spoken like a true liberal OCA

And who will pay for the amnesty? The price tag a year and half ago was over $2 trillion

The new taxes collected after the amestees are rolled into the system will more than pay for it I believe................if not we'll find it just like we do for the trillions spent on the social service action we've been performing in Iraq.

[red states rule]

The new taxes collected after the amestees are rolled into the system will more than pay for it I believe................if not we'll find it just like we do for the trillions spent on the social service action we've been performing in Iraq.

Oh really?

These people do not PAY any taxes OCA. That is the problem

Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion
by Robert E. Rector
WebMemo #1490
The Senate is currently considering a massive immigration reform bill, the "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007" (S. 1348). This bill would grant amnesty to nearly all illegal immigrants currently in the United States.

The fiscal consequences of this amnesty will vary depending on the time period analyzed. It is expected that many illegal immigrants who are currently working "off the books" and paying no direct taxes will begin to work "on the books" after receiving amnesty, and therefore tax payments will rise immediately. By contrast, under S. 1348, benefits to these immigrants from Social Security, Medicare, and most means-tested welfare programs (such as Food Stamps, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) will be delayed for many years. In consequence, then, the increase in taxes and fines paid by amnesty recipients may initially exceed slightly the increase in government benefits received. In the long run, however, the opposite will be true. In particular, the cost of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be very large. Overall, the net cost to taxpayers of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be at least $2.6 trillion.


http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

[OCA]

Oh really?

These people do not PAY any taxes OCA. That is the problem

Amnesty Will Cost U.S. Taxpayers at Least $2.6 Trillion
by Robert E. Rector
WebMemo #1490
The Senate is currently considering a massive immigration reform bill, the "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007" (S. 1348). This bill would grant amnesty to nearly all illegal immigrants currently in the United States.

The fiscal consequences of this amnesty will vary depending on the time period analyzed. It is expected that many illegal immigrants who are currently working "off the books" and paying no direct taxes will begin to work "on the books" after receiving amnesty, and therefore tax payments will rise immediately. By contrast, under S. 1348, benefits to these immigrants from Social Security, Medicare, and most means-tested welfare programs (such as Food Stamps, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) will be delayed for many years. In consequence, then, the increase in taxes and fines paid by amnesty recipients may initially exceed slightly the increase in government benefits received. In the long run, however, the opposite will be true. In particular, the cost of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be very large. Overall, the net cost to taxpayers of retirement benefits for amnesty recipients is likely to be at least $2.6 trillion.


http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm

Nah,the net receipts of rolling them into the tax system will far outweigh expenditures(if there are any), if not we can end the folly called "Iraq" and easily pay for it................in fact I think Iraq is ending inside of 18 months.

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

[red states rule]

Nah,the net receipts of rolling them into the tax system will far outweigh expenditures(if there are any), if not we can end the folly called "Iraq" and easily pay for it................in fact I think Iraq is ending inside of 18 months.

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

Oh really?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books


The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm


and


Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.co...-medicare.html

[red states rule]

Most illegals are hard working and receive or seek out few if any public monies or services...............unlike many native born able bodied Americans.

I can't wait for it to happen because there is little if anything Repubs can do to stop it.

Wrong again OCA


Figures from the Department of Public Social Services show that children of illegal aliens in Los Angeles County collected $450 million in welfare and food stamps in 2008 – an increase of $25 million from the previous year, announced Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich

Annually the cost of illegal immigration to Los Angeles County taxpayers exceeds over one billion dollars, which includes $220 million for public safety, $400 million for healthcare, and $450 million in welfare and food stamps allocations. Twenty-five percent of the County’s total allotment of welfare and food stamps benefits goes directly to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States.

“Illegal immigration continues to have a devastating impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” said Antonovich. “The total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education.”

http://www.hometownstation.com/local...9-10-51-2.html

[Yurt]

you've missed this twice...

i'll buy trust, but not experience. even mfm, er moderate democrat, said obama's experience didn't matter so much as character. people voted against bush more than they voted for obama. the simple fact is, obama did not have more experience. if he did, you could easily cite to it.

obama himself, when asked if he had more economic experience than palin, cited his campaign as experience and the large budge his campaign had. now thats funny! couldn't cite anything, so he cites the fact he is running for office as his experience....

for the third time....

[red states rule]

Oh really?

the Federal budget is running over $1 trillion short. That does not count the mega pork bill OCA - or the new $2 trillion bank bill I heard about this morning

SS and Medicare currently needs about $41 trillion to balance their books


The Net Retirement Costs of Amnesty

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants will greatly increase long-term costs to the taxpayer. Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would, over time, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. Fiscal costs would rise in the intermediate term and increase dramatically when amnesty recipients reach retirement. Although it is difficult to provide a precise estimate, it seems likely that if 10 million adult illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. were granted amnesty, the net retirement cost to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.6 trillion.

The calculation of this figure is as follows. As noted above, in 2007 there were, by the most commonly used estimates, roughly 10 million adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most illegal immigrants are low-skilled. On average, each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost (benefits minus taxes) on the taxpayers of about $17,000 per year. The major elements of this cost are Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. (The figure includes federal state and local government costs.) If the government gave amnesty to 10 million adult illegal immigrants, most of them would eventually become eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits or Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid benefits.

However, not all of the 10 million adults given amnesty would survive until retirement at age 67. Normal mortality rates would reduce the population by roughly 15 percent before age 67. That would mean 8.5 million individuals would reach age 67 and enter retirement.

Of those reaching 67, their average remaining life expectancy would be around 18 years.[17] The net cost to taxpayers of these elderly individuals would be around $17,000 per year.[18] Over 18 years, the cost would equal $306,000 per elderly amnesty recipient. A cost of $306,000 per amnesty recipient multiplied by 8.5 million amnesty recipients results in a total net cost of $2.6 trillion.

These costs would not occur immediately. The average adult illegal immigrant is now in his early thirties; thus, it will be 25 to 30 years before the bulk of amnesty recipients reaches retirement. At their peak level, it appears the amnesty recipients will expand the number of beneficiaries under Social Security by 5 to 10 percent. This will occur at a point when Social Security will already be running deficits of over $200 billion annually.

This is a rough estimate. More research should be performed, but policymakers should examine these potential costs very carefully before rushing to grant amnesty, "Z visas," or "earned citizenship" to the current illegal immigrant population.

http://www.heritage.org/research/Immigration/wm1490.cfm


and


Is Social Security and Medicare Sustainable?

A recent report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office) has established that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable with the rising cost of services, compounded with the number of recipients going up. In fact, the report asserted that for the governmental programs to deliver their promised benefits over the next 75 years, they will need to come up with an extra $41 trillion.

The report stated that Social Security alone will need more than $7 trillion. Medicare Hospitalization will need $12 trillion, while Medicare Part B (doctor’s services) and Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) will need $13 trillion and $8 trillion.

The GAO’s report doesn’t just simply state that Social Security and Medicare are not monetarily sustainable for the future, it proposes that the programs should be updated and modified for the rapidly changing needs of the elderly and the new challenges the 21st century. The report mentions that the health care system, the tax system and all other government programs should be assessed and changed to make them more sustainable for the not-so-distant future.

If the programs don’t change, the $41 trillion will have to be created over the next 75 years through new taxes and spending cuts.

http://disabilityblogger.blogspot.co...-medicare.html

I guess OCA gave up on this one

[moderate democrat]

You are correct. My first vote was for Ronald Reagan in 1980

I have never voted for a Dem because all your party has ever put up are tax and spend big governement liberals

The difference between you and me is - I am truthful and up front about myself - while you lie every chance you get

That is why you feel so at home in the Democrat party

And I have never voted for a republican because all your party has ever put up are candidates who support the republican party agenda...

I am certainly truthful about that. Why would I be otherwise? I happen to believe that the democratic party offers the best hope for America's future. I vote for my country when I vote for democrats...just like you believe that you are voting for your country when you vote for republicans.

[red states rule]

And I have never voted for a republican because all your party has ever put up are candidates who support the republican party agenda...

I am certainly truthful about that. Why would I be otherwise? I happen to believe that the democratic party offers the best hope for America's future. I vote for my country when I vote for democrats...just like you believe that you are voting for your country when you vote for republicans.

So in 2008 you voted for change since the economy was in such bad shape

Yet in 1980 you did not vote for change - and the economy was in much worse shape

I wonder why?

[moderate democrat]

So in 2008 you voted for change since the economy was in such bad shape

Yet in 1980 you did not vote for change - and the economy was in much worse shape

I wonder why?

Clearly, I did not agree with the plan that the republican candidate was proposing to deal with the economy.

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

[red states rule]

Clearly, I did not agree with the plan that the republican candidate was proposing to deal with the economy.

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

So you were happy with double digit inflation, a prime rate of 21%, gas lines around the block, a top tax rate of 70%, near 10% unemployment, double digit inflation, and US hostages held for 444 days?

I guess you were opposed to fixing those problems for the sake of the Dem party

I knew what Obama would do - wioth a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

[moderate democrat]

So you were happy with double digit inflation, a prime rate of 21%, gas lines around the block, a top tax rate of 70%, near 10% unemployment, double digit inflation, and US hostages held for 444 days?

I guess you were opposed to fixing those problems for the sake of the Dem party

I knew what Obama would do - wioth a liberal Congress

And the $1 trillion mega pork bill is only the beginning

you didn't answer my question. I answered yours. Why don't you try again:

YOU voted for change in 1980, but did not do so in 2008. Why was THAT?

[5stringJeff]

Nope, wrong again.

OCA was always for amnesty, why not have amnesty for the people who do the work Americans won't do?

BTW, that is coming soon.....guess which Repub senator will vote along with Demos?

When unemployment hits 10%, I think there will be a whole lot fewer jobs Americans "won't do." In fact, the tide of immigration is already starting to slow.