T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
So did the SS. Rohm's SA was the first strong arm of the Nazi party.
The Untied States of America? [ICE operations in LA] | Dennis Kucinich
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Equal to Kristi's soldiers in black and masks today, but still not giving Trump full control of the country. Hence, no death camps for Libruls yet as you and @Stone advocated.
Example:
Scott
Verified User
Same old tired rhetoric. People here illegally need to be gone. If you wanted protection for them you nitwits shouldn't have put up a candidate that even you didn't want.I'd say that the children in all of this are those who don't see that the problem is the billionaires, like Trump, who don't really give a fig what the average American earns and are certainly not above contracting with companies that use undocumented migrant labour:
Trump Hired Undocumented Immigrants for $4 an Hour
Many of the workers later testified that they would often work 12- to 16-hour shifts without gloves, hard hats or masks.www.newsweek.com
This is all just a show for the MAGA part of his base that likes blaming their problems on migrants instead of the plutocrats like Trump that are siphoning most of the wealth in the country:
Trump isn't waging a war on poverty. He's waging a war on poor people.
And he's winning.www.motherjones.com
The law isn't always the best metric to go by when it comes to what needs to be done. There's plenty of evidence that illegal migrants contribute a lot to the U.S. economy:
Proof that immigrants fuel the US economy is found in the billions they send back home
A new study finds that immigrants contribute about $2.2 trillion annually to the US economy, and that might be an undercount.
theconversation.com
Any reasonable American would want the U.S. economy to do well, not tank. As to Kamala, as I've said in the past, if I were American, I wouldn't have voted for either Trump -or- Kamala. I'm not a big fan of choosing 'the lesser of evils', and frankly, I suspect she might have been worse than Trump as well.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Not in that article there isn't. That one-sided look conflates legal with illegal immigration. There is only one use of "undocumented" in the entire article. Instead, "immigrant" is used exclusively.The law isn't always the best metric to go by when it comes to what needs to be done. There's plenty of evidence that illegal migrants contribute a lot to the U.S. economy:
Proof that immigrants fuel the US economy is found in the billions they send back home
A new study finds that immigrants contribute about $2.2 trillion annually to the US economy, and that might be an undercount.
Any reasonable American would want the U.S. economy to do well, not tank. As to Kamala, as I've said in the past, if I were American, I wouldn't have voted for either Trump -or- Kamala. I'm not a big fan of choosing 'the lesser of evils', and frankly, I suspect she might have been worse than Trump as well.
A much more detailed congressional report on just illegal immigration shows it is a net drain, and a serious one, on the economy.
Chairman Arrington Responds to CBO Report on Net Cost of Illegal Immigration | The U.S. House Committee on the Budget - House Budget Committee
The Official U.S. Congressional website of The Republican Budget Committee
budget.house.gov
This group estimates the loss at about $152 billion and possibly as high as $182 billion.
Newsweek gives similar figures.
How much do illegal immigrants cost the U.S.?
The U.S. sees $150.7 billion yearly cost from illegal immigration, with policy shifts increasing taxpayer burden.
www.newsweek.com
The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer
Executive Summary Unlawful immigration and amnesty for current unlawful immigrants can pose large fiscal costs for U.S. taxpayers. Government provides four types of benefits and services that are relevant to this issue:
www.heritage.org
Scott
Verified User
You bring up a good point, I should have been more careful as what article I picked. This one is definitely focused on illegal/undocumented immigrants:
Undocumented Immigrants: How immigration plays a critical role
Discover more of NAE's groundbreaking research.
www.newamericaneconomy.org
Some interesting statistics from the page:
**
Scott
Verified User
A much more detailed congressional report on just illegal immigration shows it is a net drain, and a serious one, on the economy.
Chairman Arrington Responds to CBO Report on Net Cost of Illegal Immigration | The U.S. House Committee on the Budget - House Budget Committee
The Official U.S. Congressional website of The Republican Budget Committeebudget.house.gov
This group estimates the loss at about $152 billion and possibly as high as $182 billion.
Newsweek gives similar figures.
How much do illegal immigrants cost the U.S.?
The U.S. sees $150.7 billion yearly cost from illegal immigration, with policy shifts increasing taxpayer burden.
The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer
Executive Summary Unlawful immigration and amnesty for current unlawful immigrants can pose large fiscal costs for U.S. taxpayers. Government provides four types of benefits and services that are relevant to this issue:
I suspect that both the website I quoted in my previous post and the sources you have posted (assuming you are summarizing correctly) can't both be right.
Just finished reading Dennis Kucinich's article that shares the name of this thread, thought it was quite good. Quoting the introduction and conclusion of his article below:
**
The Untied States of America?
By deploying troops without state consent, the President is overriding state sovereignty, undermining federal law and defying the foundational documents of the Republic.
Jun 11, 2025
America is heading towards a Constitutional crisis, with the President of the United States, on his own instance, federalizing the California National Guard and sending in the Marines to support the quasi-military fugitive operations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), rounding up thousands of Angelenos in one of the most densely populated Hispanic and Latino counties in America—Los Angeles.
The President was not asked by local officials for help in controlling violent protests, perhaps because Los Angeles city and county together employ nearly 20,000 sworn law enforcement officers, trained and experienced in handling ambiguous and confrontational situations.
Yet, the President chose to bypass local authority, sending in 4,000 Guardsmen and 700 Marines under the authority of Title 10 of the U.S. Code, dealing with the Armed Forces, Chapter 13, which defines military operations in an insurrection, a violent uprising against the government.
However, Article II of the U.S. Constitution, which established the Executive branch and the office of the President, did not confer unfettered domestic control. The President’s power as Commander-in-Chief is limited. It does not extend to military deployment inside the United States except under sharply restricted circumstances.
The President is strictly prohibited from using active-duty federal troops for local law enforcement, arrests, or searches under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, unless explicitly authorized by statute. No such statutory authorization has been invoked.
(‘Posse Comitatus’ derives from Latin, “the power of the county,” relating to the ability of a Sheriff to call upon local, able-bodied citizens to assist in law enforcement.)
The controlling statute—the Insurrection Act of 1807—was passed to enable the federal government to use troops when there is an attempt to overthrow the government or when state authorities cannot or will not act to enforce the law. Where is the insurrection? Where is the rebellion? Mass protest and public unrest, however widespread or inconvenient, do not meet the legal threshold.
The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This state–federal power-sharing amendment, a cornerstone of the Bill of Rights, was essential to the ratification of the Constitution on June 21, 1788. States became known, in the apocryphal words of Justice Louis Brandeis, “the laboratories of democracy.”
The modern reality is that while states function semi-autonomously, they are often starved of resources to perform the “laboratory” experiments, while enmeshed in federal-state partisan political battles and riven by federal pre-emption, a dilemma further detailed in the Columbia Law Review “The Myth of the Laboratories of Democracy,” by Charles W. Tyler and Heather K. Gerken.
Still the Tenth Amendment stands as a bulwark for states, particularly when it comes to controlling its own militia, the National Guard. The Tenth Amendment reserves to states the right to control their own National Guards, unless and until properly federalized.
By deploying troops without state consent, the President is overriding state sovereignty, undermining federal law and defying the foundational documents of the Republic.
If a governor objects to federalization, the burden is on the President to demonstrate, legally and constitutionally, why that state’s authority should be suspended over its affairs of public safety. The federal government must prove its case. Absent a collapse in law and order, the Insurrection Act cannot be used to mask political motives or suppress lawful protest.
The President’s use of the military in contravention of the Tenth Amendment is a direct assault on the structural integrity of the Union, a raw power grab.
It is not traditional political conflict, we are witnessing, it is the slow unraveling of the Republic. If authoritarian practices are unchallenged and become normalized, autocracy will transit to fascism, unless the federal courts, and ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes quickly.
The moment harkens back to the cautionary words of Ben Franklin on September 17, 1787, uttered on the last day of the Constitutional Convention. When questioned by Elizabeth Willing Powell, a woman famous in Philadelphia social and political circles, “Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
Franklin answered, “A Republic, if you can keep it.”
[snip]
In 2026 we will observe America’s 250th birthday. Let us honor the memory of our Founders and of those who gave their lives in defense of the principles of liberty, by celebrating the Spirit of Independence every day, committing ourselves to active citizenship which challenges at every turn any system of government or leader, or any law, which compromises our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. It is this vigilance under which we must unite. It is this vigilance which guarantees the triumph of freedom.
**
Full article:
The Untied States of America?
By deploying troops without state consent, the President is overriding state sovereignty, undermining federal law and defying the foundational documents of the Republic.kucinichreport.substack.com
lol so another commie supports foreign nationals throwing firebombs at American police and soldiers, and dropping concrete blocks on cars on the freeways.
Whoda thunk? Deport that piece of shit to North Korea, I hear the Mad Midget needs more sailors for its Navy this week. lol his big bad new modern destroyer capsized when it was launched. hahahha
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
That's against sending illegals sending about $150 billion in wealth out of the country in remittances per year. Again, a net loss.You bring up a good point, I should have been more careful as what article I picked. This one is definitely focused on illegal/undocumented immigrants:
Undocumented Immigrants: How immigration plays a critical role
Discover more of NAE's groundbreaking research.
Some interesting statistics from the page:
**
[td]$100 billion: Surplus generated by undocumented immigrants in the Social Security program in the last decade.[/td] [td]$35.1 billion: Surplus generated by undocumented immigrants in the Medicare Trust Fund, 2000-2011.[/td] [td]48 percent: Decline in U.S. violent crime rate from 1990-2013, a time when the undocumented population tripled.[/td]
**
Remittances to Mexico Collapse as Trump Cracks Down on Illegal Immigration – [your]NEWS
Remittances fell for a third straight month as deportation fears rise and a new 3.5% tax looms under the “Big Beautiful Bill.”
yournews.com
As for crime, correlation does not equal causation.
A better metric is the measurable fact that illegal immigrants go to prison at roughly triple the rate of legal immigrants and citizens.
Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests, Convictions, Costs, and Removals
What GAO Found From fiscal years 2011 through 2016, the criminal alien proportion of the total estimated federal inmate population generally decreased...
Departments of Justice and Homeland Security Release Data on Incarcerated Aliens
Today, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security released the Alien Incarceration Report for Fiscal Year 2019. The data shows that 94 percent of confirmed aliens incarcerated in Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and United States Marshals Service (USMS) facilities were...
20% federal inmates are immigrants, mostly Mexican - Washington Examiner
One-fifth of all federal prison inmates are not U.S citizens, many facing illegal immigration charges, according to new data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons.There are a total of 35,009 “criminal aliens” of 180,344 in prison, and 60% are Mexican, according to an analysis provided to Secrets by...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Pre Biden somewhere between 3 and 5% of all people in the US were here illegally. They make up about 20% of the federal prison population, and anywhere from 12 to 15% of state prison populations.
So, while violent crime is down, it isn't because of an increase in illegal immigration.
Yakuda
Verified User
There is no logical connection between the health of the US economy and entering the country illegally. That is the most asinine argument I have ever heard. If you want to work come through a port entry and apply for a work permit. No problem with that but to tell me we need illegals that's fucking stupid. We need workers not illegal workers. Stop pitching that shit.The law isn't always the best metric to go by when it comes to what needs to be done. There's plenty of evidence that illegal migrants contribute a lot to the U.S. economy:
Proof that immigrants fuel the US economy is found in the billions they send back home
A new study finds that immigrants contribute about $2.2 trillion annually to the US economy, and that might be an undercount.
Any reasonable American would want the U.S. economy to do well, not tank. As to Kamala, as I've said in the past, if I were American, I wouldn't have voted for either Trump -or- Kamala. I'm not a big fan of choosing 'the lesser of evils', and frankly, I suspect she might have been worse than Trump as well.
I want the economy to do well too but there is no logical argument to say that can only be accomplished with illegals.
This is more bad logic on your part. Here's the start reality, the chance that someone other than trump or Harris was going to be the next president was and is infinitesimal. Refusing to vote for one of those two people only helped the candidate that you think is more evil get elected. People think by not voting or voting for a third party candidate they somehow have some higher moral standard. All they did was help the candidate they most disliked. It's silly at best and destructive at worse.
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
Don't misunderstand me.
I have dismissed 77 million Americans as being completely and permanently irredeemable.
You seem to think that under less stressful conditions,
should such conditions ever manifest themselves,
some of those that I've condemned to trash status
are capable of recovering.
I can't for the life of me imagine that happening.
If it did happen,
as, in your typically optimistic view, you believe to be possible,
then perhaps America would not have to partition
in order to stop being the cauldron of hate that it is now.
Nothing in my wildest imagination can see that happening,
and whenever I've made dire forecasts in this life,
I've unfortunately been right.
Like all of us, I have flaws,
but I've never been one to allow what I want
to influence what I expect.
I had a sick feeling, for example, that the Patriots were ripe to lose Super Bowl XVII against the Giants after winning 18 games in a row.
They didn't look good in the regular season game that they won against the Giants,
and the Giants had played better in the playoffs than they had in the regular season.
I bet on the Patriots anyway, pretty much as a moral obligation,
but in my mind, I knew that I had just set fire to a couple hundred bucks.
But it wasn't just frivolous stuff like sports entertainment where I predicted disaster.
I could see that we weren't going to win anything in Vietnam when I was there.
Militarily, there was no comparison between us and our alleged "enemies,"
but they would only let a war of total genocide defeat them, and as you well know,
we didn't have the stomach for that, already knowing we were the aggressors
just to satisfy the requirements of inane treaties.
Also, there was Judge Green breaking up AT&T in the early 80s.
I was certain that was the death knell of American manufacturing,
and it pretty much was. If they had nationalized it instead, we'd be a far more stable nation today.
We'd also all have the same cell phone supplier, the same cable TV carrier, and the same PC maker and the same internet provider--a stronghold of neatness like what I love and you don't. It would be a public utility in the public sector and it would then be non-profit.
And we'd still have the 170 million Western Electric manufacturing jobs,
good union jobs that went down the drain shortly after the breakup.
Now they'd be public sector unions, and public sector unions are still somewhat strong.
Yup, I ALWAYS see the catastrophes coming--it's my curse.
Maybe I could be happily wrong for once, but I doubt it.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Feel free to wallow in your prediction. Time will tell. If you're right you can die knowing the glass was, indeed, half empty.
Scott
Verified User
I don't know what the best solution is- I've heard there are many repressive governments have nationalized their internet:
Repressive regimes around the world are nationalizing the internet and isolating people - Coda Story
Authoritarian Tech is a weekly newsletter tracking how people in power are abusing technology and what it means for the rest of us. Also in this edition: A stunning hack exposes how the Mexican military is spying on feminists and Oakland police eye killer robots
www.codastory.com
Reddit did a thread on whether nationalizing the U.S. internet would be a good idea, not sure if they came to any conclusions on it:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/NeutralPolitics/comments/1c1sam/should_the_us_nationalize_internet_service/