All Mexicans stink

I don't think it is fair to say, "All Mexicans stink." But, I must admit spending $113,000,000,000 a year on the education, health care, and welfare of illegal aliens and their anchor babies could be much better spent on our own U. S. Citizens. People who have broken and entered our country in violation of American law should not be rewarded.
 
I don't think it is fair to say, "All Mexicans stink." But, I must admit spending $113,000,000,000 a year on the education, health care, and welfare of illegal aliens and their anchor babies could be much better spent on our own U. S. Citizens. People who have broken and entered our country in violation of American law should not be rewarded.

I'd like to see a supporting link on that $113,000,000,000 a year spent on illegal aliens and their anchor babies. That is an awful lot of zeros!
 
Damn job stealing Mexicans. Think about it. If we just shot them all, our lives would be so much better, and the air would be cleaner. All they do is join gangs and lower the quality of our schools with their stupidity.

As we all know, specialization of labour is bad for an economy, so introducing more people to the labour force, obviously, hurts the economy. You fuckers are selling America!

Dude how have you been awesome for so long?
 
Haha, WM has to answer for yet another meth-induced thread of his. Isn't college life awesome?

:fuckyeah:

Maybe i am missing something, but the last paragraph seemed obviously sarcastic to me. Specialization of labor is bad... that's funny.

What needs explaining is why someone chose this 4 year old thread to offer up some anti immigration bullshit?
 
I cant remember who the hell william is now.

Its been so fricking long that I heard that posters name.
 
Senate chairman calls for action on immigration

By ERICA WERNER, AP
6 hours ago

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. greets President Barack Obama after the president ...
WASHINGTON — The Senate opened its first hearing on a comprehensive immigration overhaul Wednesday with a call from a committee chairman for swift action on a pathway to citizenship for the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants. Tensions quickly emerged as shouting protesters interrupted the hearing and Republicans called for border security first.

"The president is right: Now is the time," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told a packed hearing room a day after President Barack Obama used his State of the Union address to renew his call for immigration reform and eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants.

The emotions surrounding the issue were on display as protesters shouted down the first witness, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, calling for an end to deportations.

The protesters were ushered out. Napolitano declared the border more secure than ever and rejected the argument that border security must be the focus before comprehensive immigration reform or any pathway to legalization can be done.

"Too often the border security refrain simply serves as an excuse," Napolitano said. "Our borders have in fact never been stronger."

A top committee Republican, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., quickly contradicted her and Leahy, saying the administration has not focused sufficiently on enforcement, and contending that "you mean amnesty only, you really mean we're not going to have enforcement, we've got to have amnesty first."

The hearing came amid a concerted focus on immigration reform from the White House to Capitol Hill. Obama says he is determined to finally make good on his promise to the Latino community to sign into law a comprehensive immigration bill with border security, employer enforcement, improvements to legal immigration and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already here. Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of eight senators has been meeting to develop a bill by next month that accomplishes eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants while also containing enough border security and enforcement measures to gain conservative support.

It comes amid a rapidly shifting political environment with polls showing more Americans support eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants, and many Republican leaders increasingly supportive of action on immigration reform in the wake of a dismal showing among Latino voters in the November elections.

Yet, as Wednesday's hearing made starkly clear, the success of any legislation is no sure thing with many Republicans still deeply skeptical.

Several Republicans on the panel rejected Napolitano's contention that the border is secure, questioned why earlier immigration laws never yielded the promised enforcement mechanisms, and branded as "amnesty" attempts to legalize illegal immigrants.

"I do not believe the border is secure and I still believe we have a long, long way to go," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

Protesters interrupted the hearing several times, with some shouting and waving banners against deportations, which have increased markedly under the Obama administration. Later another group stood and turned their backs to the dais where the senators sat, with signs on their backs reading "human rights" and "immigrant rights." Leahy repeatedly chided the protesters for interrupting proceedings.

In an unusual move for Congress the hearing was also to feature testimony from an illegal immigrant, Jose Antonio Vargas, a former journalist who founded the group Define American, which campaigns for immigration reform.

The former head of America Online, Steve Case, also was on the witness list, along with Chris Crane, president of the immigration and customs' workers union, which has opposed Obama's immigration policies.

The bipartisan Senate negotiators, including Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and John McCain, R-Ariz., are operating separately from the Senate Judiciary Committee, but the committee is expected to vote on any legislation they produce.

A major difference between Obama's proposals and the blueprint embraced by the bipartisan Senate negotiators is that the senators are making a pathway to citizenship conditional on border security being accomplished first — something Republicans demand — while Obama's plan contains no such linkage.

Vargas acknowledged his illegal status in a high-profile piece in The New York Times Magazine in June 2011 but thus far has avoided deportation. He was part of a Washington Post team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2008 for coverage of the Virginia Tech massacre. He wrote in his Times essay that his mother sent him from the Philippines to live with grandparents in California in 1993 when he was 12. He wrote that he didn't find out he was in the country illegally until he applied for a driver's permit with forged documents.
 
I don't think it is fair to say, "All Mexicans stink." But, I must admit spending $113,000,000,000 a year on the education, health care, and welfare of illegal aliens and their anchor babies could be much better spent on our own U. S. Citizens. People who have broken and entered our country in violation of American law should not be rewarded.

I understand you're new around here (maybe) but why would you want to dredge up such a hateful and bigoted thread? Especially when yesterday, you were defending gays?

Additionally, although some of our most insane teabagger members don't feel the need to post a link to claims, it's easy to source wild claims such as yours.

Which is utter bullshit.

This chain e-mail has been forwarded to us by readers many times over the past year. The most recent version adds a new angle, claiming that the amount of money taxpayers spend on illegal immigrants would be enough to "stimulate the economy." But no matter the spin, the e-mail is rife with errors.

It also contains several red flags that should tip off readers that this is more bogus than believable. For one thing, the figures given don’t add up to a "whopping $338.3 billion dollars a year" spent on illegal immigrants in the U.S., as the e-mail claims.

The e-mail lists 14 claims about illegal immigrants, all of which were included in a longer list penned by anti-immigration activist Frosty Wooldridge and published on the conservative Web site NewswithViews.com on Jan. 22, 2007. Another NewswithViews columnist, Lynn Stuter, included Wooldridge’s list, with some updated links, in an article posted on April 15, 2008.

The source cited for at least nine of the items is either the conservative Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) or the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), both of which call for more restrictive immigration laws. CIS spokesman Bryan Griffith told us that he had never seen the e-mail but that he suspected something was out there because of occasional surges in traffic that forced him to rewrite Web pages. When told about the e-mail’s contents and conclusion of a $338.3 billion yearly cost, he responded that CIS "never said anything of the like and is not going to comment on a chain e-mail that is in no way scientific."

The e-mail also continually blurs the important distinction between legal and illegal immigrants – a sign of sloppy and untrustworthy work.

Summary

Because we’re gluttons for punishment, we’ve gone through each claim in turn and report on each in detail farther down. But here are a few highlights (or lowlights) of what we found:

The e-mail includes a link to a CIS report that contradicts some of the e-mail’s own claims. The report found that illegal immigrant welfare use "tends to be very low." It also estimates the total federal net cost of households headed by illegal immigrants at under $10.4 billion, a small fraction of what this message claims.

One "paper" that is cited is a non-peer-reviewed, non-scientific study that essentially fabricates a number for illegal immigrant criminals.


Five of the links lead to transcripts of Lou Dobbs’ cable television show, which fulminates regularly against illegal immigration and is hardly a neutral source. Furthermore, in all instances, the e-mail then takes the original Dobbs reporting out of context.

So, how much do illegal immigrants cost federal, state and local governments in the U.S.? Estimates vary widely, and no consensus exists. The Urban Institute put the net national cost at $1.9 billion in 1992; a Rice University professor, whose work the Urban Institute criticized, said it was $19.3 billion in 1993. More recently, a 2007 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office examined 29 reports on state and local costs published over 15 years in an attempt to answer this question. CBO concluded that most of the estimates determined that illegal immigrants impose a net cost to state and local governments but "that impact is most likely modest." CBO said "no agreement exists as to the size of, or even the best way of measuring, that cost on a national level."

The Details

For those who want more, we take on each of the e-mail’s claims in order:

1. "$11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year."

This item is completely false. The link given to "verify" the claim actually leads to an issue brief by the conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform. But the FAIR brief says nothing of the sort. It says: "Each year, state governments spend an estimated $11 billion to $22 billion to provide welfare to immigrants." That’s welfare payments in 2001 to all immigrants – both legal and illegal – plus households including U.S. citizens if they are headed by a person who was born outside the United States.

The site says the FAIR report was last updated in October 2002, but a footnote credits this statistic to a March 2003 report from the Center for Immigration Studies. CIS began as an off-shoot of FAIR. But the CIS report doesn’t actually say anything about $11 billion or $22 billion. And it explains that its references to "immigrant households" include persons here legally and persons born outside the U.S.

There's more. Maybe you'll read it.

While we're on the subject, are you aware that these illegal immigrants pay near to $9 billion per year in income taxes? That pretty much covers a lot of their bills, huh?
The tax system collects its due, even from a class of workers with little likelihood of claiming a refund and no hope of drawing a Social Security check.

Illegal immigrants are paying taxes to Uncle Sam, experts agree. Just how much they pay is hard to determine because the federal government doesn't fully tally it. But the latest figures available indicate it will amount to billions of dollars in federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes this year. One rough estimate puts the amount of Social Security taxes alone at around $9 billion per year.

Paycheck withholding collects much of the federal tax from illegal workers, just as it does for legal workers.

The Internal Revenue Service doesn't track a worker's immigration status, yet many illegal immigrants fearful of deportation won't risk the government attention that will come from filing a return even if they might qualify for a refund. Economist William Ford of Middle Tennessee State University says there are no firm figures on how many taxpayers are in that situation.

"The real question is how many of them pay more than they owe. There are undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of people in that situation," Ford said.

But some illegal immigrants choose to file taxes and write a check come April 15, using an alternative to the Social Security number offered by the IRS so it can collect income tax from foreign workers.

"It's a mistake to think that no illegal immigrants pay taxes. They definitely do," said Martha Pantoja, who has been helping Hispanic immigrants this tax season as an IRS-certified volunteer tax preparer for the nonprofit Nashville Wealth Building Coalition.
 
Here's the original claim from four years ago that the OP failed to include.

Of course, it's from FOX and the same information that FactCheck found to be horribly wrong.
 
Ohh wait Fluttershy is WM.
Ohh well he has not changed a bit either.

And I am the uscitizen posting in thsi thread.
Thankfully I have not changed either.
 
Back
Top