Donald Trump’s immigration tab: $166 billion

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you don't want to hear the answer then don't ask the question.

I'm pretty sure I didn't ask you a question about what you replied to. But whatever.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Then there are the H1-B Visas. Do you know what those are? They are temporary visa that allows an employer to more or less import foreign labor. The way the rules are worded.

www.powerlineblog.com...

An employer can more or less bring in his or her own indentured servants, fire the Americans who were working in those positions, and pay the new foreign workers much less than market cost. This depresses wages across the board for everyone in that marker sector. It is being used to depress the value of STEM jobs in this country. That impacts the tax base. After all, the new foreign workers are being brought in to Silicon Valley, getting paid in the neighborhood of $50 to $60K meaning they likely have to be subsidized by the tax payer given the Cali cost of living.

But H1-B visas are being used all over this country which is another source of loss and wage depression across the board for everyone. In order to keep your job, you have to accept a lower wage or you risk being replaced by a foreign indentured servant, and when the visa runs out, they simply stay, green card or no.

This represents a lesser tax base. People who make less, pay less in taxes at every level, in every way.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I see both of you are asking me to work it out when I'd already asked you to divulge the pros.

That's not how debate works.


Give me some statistics of what you'll save, not specious questions that seemingly imply with, no data basis I might add, that it will undoubtably be a benefit.
That's a logical fallacy.

I can do that too...
What about the loss of revenue to the PIC...
What about the cheap labour that if gone would destroy certain economic aspects of society having to spend more on the same work...

You see why that's annoying?
I haven't given you any details, I just answered a question over confidently as if that proves my point.
That's not how this works.

Show me the maths.
Thanks.

Here are some numbers for you

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Mexico is sending back nearly double the amount of any other country that has workers here at 23 Billion, they are only receiving about 24 billion in worldwide remittances back to Mexico. So that means that no other country is allowing them easy access and they are heavily reliant on us to funnel that money back which in business terms equates to the leverage that Donald sees.

By the way thats two SOURCES that show mexico is funneling a concrete 20-25 billion out of this country every year. Where does your hypothetical (since you accused me of using shallow information) 55 Billion Dollar impact come from?

ETA: before anyone says 'well of course mexico gets most of their money from us, we are their closest neighbors' take a look at how much flows back into China and India from all over the world.

But please also note that almost NO money is coming back here.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Hes talking about you asking the forum since you started the thread on this topic. If you dont want to see any answers then why did you start the discussion is the point I think that was trying to be made here.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Because you talk about "conservative spending" but Obama has added more to our national debt than every SINGLE president before him combined. The guy flys his dogs on separate planes to vacation, so democrats aren't exactly a shining beacon of fiscal responsibility.

Sorry but you are wrong Obama's policies have not added more to our debt than every other President combined. The President that thought it was a good idea to start two unfunded wars is responsible for that debt. Obama is the smallest spender since Eisenhower.
Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?

Wow. What do ya know...
Here is an article from the same source as yours that says obama and the dems are the biggest spenders.

www.forbes.com...

i guess opinions are like armpits, we all have them and they all stink.

a reply to: DelMarvel

Does Trump think there are a bunch of legal citizens waiting to take over the jobs on the line in (for just one example) the poultry processing plants? Talk about delusional. Agribusiness would be paralyzed in this country without undocumented workers and that would hardly be the only industry affected.

Seriously? You don't think that an unemployed citizen would take a job, no matter what that job is to feed his family if he had to? Years ago when ICE raided companies and deported illegals, jobs were easily and quickly taken up by the citizens! Who do you think did the jobs before the onslaught of illegal immigration? We have millions of unemployed people, homeless and hungry people who would take those jobs. We will survive without illegals.

a reply to: phishfriar47

And yet, we have a worse problem with money leaking out to India.

Why India remains top of remittances league

n 2012, India topped the list with $70bn (£47bn) of remittance inflows, followed by China ($66bn), the Philippines and Mexico ($24bn each), Nigeria ($21bn), according to the latest World Bank figures on migration and remittances.

So now lets have a breakdown of the visas.

a reply to: phishfriar47

The $55billion is not loss of revenue from cheap workers...
That's a completely different loss I haven't looked into the stats to work out.


It's the consumer economy that will lose $55billion.

The next thing I'd ask is what are the most populace States for illegals and that's where the consumer economics will suffer the accumulated (and generous estimate) of $55billion. Per year.



"Logical fallacies. LOL"

No be fair friar, answering a question with a question is a logical fallacy.

You can clearly debate, so own that fella.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm gonna say it again, not to spam, but because I want an answer from the oh so wise defenders of this mass deportation plan.

Being generous with the estimates...
Losing 11million immigrants, aside from the $160billion in costs to deport...

Would also hit the economy for at least $55billion per year...

Within a decade you'd lose half a trillion economically...


Tell me the pros again!
Aside from an excessively sybaritic POTUS.

I'm no pro, and yes you are correct if you follow your logic on this. However, I thin the underlining grand theme of all of this talk is this;

Get rid of illegals.

Enforce corporations to only hire legal citizens and pay them at the very least the minimum wage.

Be prepared to pick up the slack due to heavy tariffs imposed on us by countries that hate our suddenly strict immigration policy by bringing the manufacturing back to the US. This will create new products that are made in America by Americans.

Yes, it will be a tough transition but the end result would have us far more self sustainable and overall stronger.

originally posted by: phishfriar47
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Hes talking about you asking the forum since you started the thread on this topic. If you dont want to see any answers then why did you start the discussion is the point I think that was trying to be made here.

I just posted information about the costs, and there was no question there either except how do we buy into this and not that.

And I didn't see a single on topic response from him and a few others. The conversation did finally get better and more on topic. Sort of.

Alabama tried it, things did not go well.

But, hey... if an America where one has to produce their papers at every turn, even to make basic purchases or receive basic services is what folks want? I think that, in the big picture, a little domestic West Germany experience might well illustrate how misguided some thinking really is.

What we need to do is effectively stop immigration entirely for a while or put some quotas in place until we can sort out the mess we've made of our interior. We need to have time to properly assimilate and settle again before we open the taps up to more.

We also have to repair our own economy to actually create demand for more laborers than our own populace can supply.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I don't imagine that it will be his money he's spending, do you?

I know, his "build a continuos fence and guard it… they won't go under or over it" solutions are contemptuous.

Its been attempted before. Hadrian's wall, The Great China Wall, the Maginot Line, Festung Europa, the Ziegfried Line, the Iron Curtain and Berlin Wall, all historic lessons from former empires.

"Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man." --General George S. Patton

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: phishfriar47

The $55billion is not loss of revenue from cheap workers...
That's a completely different loss I haven't looked into the stats to work out.


It's the consumer economy that will lose $55billion.

The next thing I'd ask is what are the most populace States for illegals and that's where the consumer economics will suffer the accumulated (and generous estimate) of $55billion. Per year.



"Logical fallacies. LOL"

No be fair friar, answering a question with a question is a logical fallacy.

You can clearly debate, so own that fella.

Im gonna help you out some more since you are playing nice :-)

Logical Fallacy Definition:

Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim

I never undermined my logic at all, I may not have answered the question fully until you started pressing, but my logic is pretty sound and my thoughts are pretty on point with this, and my information is backing it up nicely.

Now back to your topic in this response. I may have misunderstood your point about the cheap labor loss versus consumer hit, but my answer is CLEARLY correct here.

If the 'illegals' are spending 55 billion here, but are sending 25 of that home also, then the impact is still only half of the original 55 billion or two-thirds of the overall. If we replaced those workers with Americans, then thats 75-80 billion staying in our economy versus just the 55, and it furthers our growth and consumer spending by multiples when all of that money is circulating (which it would because that demographic doesnt invest or save much) in this country by merchants all over.

a reply to: intrptr

At the same time, we have an army that does all kinds of duty in the desert environments. They need to train in those environments ...

Gosh ... that southern border looks an awful lot like a big desert environment to me.

And let's not kid ourselves that the cartels are playing out in the sand with BB guns and paintball.

originally posted by: Hefficide

Alabama tried it, things did not go well.

But, hey... if an America where one has to produce their papers at every turn, even to make basic purchases or receive basic services is what folks want? I think that, in the big picture, a little domestic West Germany experience might well illustrate how misguided some thinking really is.

Exactly.

People are too wrapped-up in the emotional and political aspects of this issue to look at it clearly. How we address this topic will have consequences far beyond the illegal immigrants themselves.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm gonna say it again, not to spam, but because I want an answer from the oh so wise defenders of this mass deportation plan.

Being generous with the estimates...
Losing 11million immigrants, aside from the $160billion in costs to deport...

Would also hit the economy for at least $55billion per year...

Within a decade you'd lose half a trillion economically...


Tell me the pros again!
Aside from an excessively sybaritic POTUS.

This is true. The other side of that is Americans would take the jobs (which its been proven time and time again, they mostly wouldn't). And then the other side of that is that costs would go up on things like produce and construction and other services.

This is a many faceted issue that we can go round and round about all day long.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: phishfriar47

And yet, we have a worse problem with money leaking out to India.

Why India remains top of remittances league

n 2012, India topped the list with $70bn (£47bn) of remittance inflows, followed by China ($66bn), the Philippines and Mexico ($24bn each), Nigeria ($21bn), according to the latest World Bank figures on migration and remittances.

So now lets have a breakdown of the visas.

India may be receiving 70 Billion from its citizens across the world, but we are only sending 10 billion back to India by their immigrants here.

Also check my map, we receive barely 5 billion back from our citizens across the world, and that may be due to us just content here and not needing to seek other countries for better opportunities.

We also have to consider the Illegals in this situation. I doubt most of the world immigrants are there illegally like our friends to the South here. Its not like Chinese workers can just walk over to Canada or Indian immigrants walking to the UK.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

And my final nail, your information is from 2012, and mine is from 2013, but either way you are reading it wrong, we dont have Indian immigrants sending back 70 billion from our economy back to India.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ~Lucidity

I don't imagine that it will be his money he's spending, do you?

I know, his "build a continuos fence and guard it… they won't go under or over it" solutions are contemptuous.

Its been attempted before. Hadrian's wall, The Great China Wall, the Maginot Line, Festung Europa, the Ziegfried Line, the Iron Curtain and Berlin Wall, all historic lessons from former empires.

"Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man." --General George S. Patton

Again, the $166B appear to be immediate and tangible costs of deportation aside from the wall.

As to the wall, if the Mexicans do build it, and I wouldn't at this point blame them if they did, it would be a much more beautiful wall than the one we're attempting to build.

166 billion


Imagine the cost of doing nothing !