Consolidated Immigration Issues Thread


#182

The California DMV just admitted that they registered 23,000 illegal immigrants to vote last year, they made the admission after being threatened by an audit from a couple of our GOP politicians; our corrupt governor stepped in after the audit was not called off and gave them TWO YEARS to comply with the audit.

Plenty of time to cover a lot of tracks, nothing will change.


#183

That would mean they’re using copies of an SS number to use with employers. You can’t use that to gather benefits.

It would go right into “unreconciled” account, and use to fund the rest.

People actually let illegals borrow their numbers, because the benefit is one-sided.


#184

:rofl: Hi, Pot; he’s Kettle…


#185

But they do absolutely qualify for and receive welfare.


#186

Nope, I’ve always admitted what were disagreeing on. You can’t name one time I didn’t.


#187

But you’re leaving out degrees of use, and what they qualify for:

benefits

Citizens, and citizen children of Noncitizens, use more than Noncitizens, adults or children.

The Department of Agriculture even reports Illegals who could get it, avoid using SNAP, either to build up a positive work/civil history to legalize, or because they’re afraid the Government would be tracking them through it (again, no idea if that’s possible.)


#188

Degrees?

What’s to leave out?

Do they receive it or not?

Yes.

Thanks.


#189

What do they qualify for? (mostly just emergency services)

Do they take more than they put in? (for Federal welfare, no, For State & local, yes)


#190

They qualify for SNAP (food stamps, elfare, EBT, whatever your state calls it.)
They get it, they spend it, they don’t contribute with anything other than whatever sales taxes contribute.

They get Section 8 housing benefits, which is Federal, and no, they do not contribute to that.

Income Taxes, which they do not pay, fund most of the federal government programs.

Public education, transportation, medical, you name it, are paid by income and property taxes. Some sales tax is all that they put in.


#191

Exactly, Friedman thought as I thought many years ago; that illegals were not eligible and therefore seeking a better life in America through hard work and liberty was the only motivation they had in coming here.

That is a great argument, I made it myself for many years; until 1999 when a Federal Court decided it was unconstitutional to deny illegals the Welfare State.

Now there are many reasons to come here illegally and most of them are bad, and the bad motives far outweigh the good ones in the minds of the Welfare Rats who come here illegally.

Friedman knew the Welfare argument was a solid concern, that is why he answered it directly (and correctly as far as anyone knew at the time) but the reality we live in today is that we are importing Welfare recipients who are content to live off the dole forever and work for cash on the side and under the radar of the IRS.

Which means a citizen who works construction and pay taxes is competing with workers who are living off his taxes and paying none themselves.

If that citizen cannot work for the price the illegal will work for and still pay the illegals bills through his taxes then he must either go on Welfare and cheat the system like the illegal or be unemployed.

AS wants this universal poverty and dependency because that keeps Democrats in power, there has NEVER been a credible economist that concluded it was good for the economy to import welfare recipients.

Because only a moron would ever even suggest such an idea out loud, trying to ruin Friedman’s legacy by attributing such a ridiculous idea to him is something only a Leftist could do.


#192

They do if they have an ITIN. Again, for an ITIN to work, you have to pay; and many use it, in the hope it’ll give them a “good behavior” history to offer when trying to legalize.

Nope, this is you lying about my position.

Unless you’re going to throw this accusation at every right wing economist who disagrees with you, you’re not being upfront about what the disagreement is about.


#193

For those who may be mislead, there is no verification of citizenship required when applying for any of the incarnations of Welfare.

Right now an illegal immigrant can get housing in the most expensive areas in California while tech workers making 6 figures can only afford a bunk in a converted warehouse or are living in their cars on public streets.

Healthcare, food, electricity and phone service are also subsidized for the illegal who then earns 25 to 30 dollars an hour under the table working in all of construction trades and mechanical service sectors.

I live and work right in the middle of the largest concentration of this activity in the United States; AS is good at repeating all of Nancy Pelosi’s spin but nothing he is saying is the reality.

There is NO REQUIREMENT to prove citizenship in any step of the process for acquiring “free money”.


#194

? Yes there is.

Actual citizens get denied welfare by States, if they moved, and don’t have their birth certificate.

Federal programs, like Medicare, have required citizenship verification since 2006. Enrollment visibly dropped that year.

California might run its own programs differently; that doesn’t change what the Feds or other States are doing.

And again, if a State chooses to be irresponsible with its own money, why do the Feds have to get involved? At worst, you take Federal funding that might be bleeding into the State programs away. I’m all for that quite frankly.


#195

There is no requirement to prove citizenship to get any incarnation of Welfare.

It was deemed unconstitutional in 1999 by the Federal Court which overturned proposition 187, social services and benefits cannot be denied based on immigration status; that decision has never been appealed or overturned.


#196

Don’t confuse him with facts, he has some “STATISTICS” somebody made up to justify the eradication of America as an independent country.


#197

He’s confusing Federal benefits with State benefits.

Look it up qix. Look at the SSA’s own website.


#198

State of California, infringing on Federal jurisdiction to manage immigration. No where does the decision say Federal benefits cannot be barred by citizenship or immigration status.

It’s written right in the law that they can, it’s on the USDA, SSA, and HHS’s own websites (which you can go look at). Unless everyone and all text involved is lying, this is in fact a requirement.


#199

I am confusing nothing, State issues are not settled in Federal Court and the Constitution does not say different things to California than every other State.

Some States may make it more cumbersome than others but benefits cannot be denied based on immigration status.


#200

Of course it is, that was the basis for Proposition 187 (forcing California to respect the federal parameters) and it was the basis for Friedman’s (and my own) argument back in the 90’s for not caring much about illegal immigration.

That was also why Prop 187 passed so easily as everyone assumed the law prevented abuses, but that is NOT what the courts decided and there were multiple aspects to 187; the accusation of “managing immigration” was only one objection and baseless since the Proposition merely mandated California to follow the law.

Illegals come for free housing, medical care, food, electricity and phone service in addition to the ability to work as independent cash labor with no regulations or taxation to encumber them.

That means their citizen competitors who must follow all those regulations AND pay the taxes that house and keep the illegals fat and happy must try to do so for the labor rates their illegal immigrant competitors are charging.

Illegal immigration has turned California into the highest poverty rate in the nation and is quickly eradicating the middle class in favor of only the very rich and the dependent poor.

You cannot prosper by importing Welfare recipients, only a fool thinks otherwise.

Unless you define “prosper” as establishing a permanent super majority for democrats, if that is the goal than it is a wonderful idea; a Proposition like 187 could not pull 30 percent of the vote in our post “open border” California.


#201

I meant the Federal law, just to be clear.

Congress is not barred from restricting welfare to natives and “qualifying aliens”. The law they wrote outright does this, and you (potential welfare seeker) are required to offer paper work to USDA, or SSA, or whatever agency you’re appealing to, to get access to the welfare they manage.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act created a 5-year ban for aliens, and restrictions for which aliens “qualify”, and courts have never ruled against it.

The biggest “loophole” if you want to call it that, appears to be if you have kids with U.S. citizenship. They get access. So hey, if Trump’s bid on birthright citizenship plays out, that goes away.

And yet poor people are leaving the state in droves; to include illegals. I’ve never seen you reconcile this.

It seems to me, that however generous California’s State welfare may be, it still doesn’t add up to what it costs to live there for most people (I’ve heard $48,000 is the base line), or make up for the lack of opportunity.

You also don’t prosper by appointing Government Economic God; you just spread the disease.

Government created the problem, you don’t solve it by giving Government more power.