What's 'Immoral' About Caring for America's Poor First?

Sailor

Verified User
This is an interesting take on the reason for a wall or real enforcement of immigration law.

Congressional Democrats are butting heads with President Donald Trump over his demand for $5 billion to continue building a wall along the southern border. Rep. Nancy Pelosi vows not one dollar will go for a wall. She calls the idea of a wall "immoral."

Not building the wall is what's truly immoral. Allowing destitute, uneducated people with limited job prospects to flood across the southern border into the United States forces taxpayers here to toil longer and pay more in taxes to feed and house them, accommodate their children in public schools and pay for their medical care.

Americans are already maxed out caring for our own needy, including the homeless sprawled on city streets.

This nation has 40 million in poverty, 1 out of every 8 people and 1 out of every 6 children. That's far higher than in Canada or Great Britain.

Our country doesn't need to import more poverty.

For the same reason, Trump is also proposing that only immigrants who can support themselves without government handouts be granted green cards and permanent status.

Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted Trump's proposal as "un-American." New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said, "This plan is ugly, it is cruel."

Really? Why should Americans be compelled to provide a safety net for throngs pressing to get into the country?

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned two decades ago that America could have open borders or a generous welfare system -- but not both. Open borders benefit a growing economy by providing a source of labor. But that works only so long as immigrants are barred from government benefits.

Trump is tightening regulations under a longstanding law, on the books since 1882, which bars immigrants likely to need government benefits from getting permanent status. Starting with President Bill Clinton, the law has been applied so laxly that almost no one is denied a green card for that reason. A staggering 63 percent of households headed by a noncitizen depend on Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance or in some cases all of these taxpayer-funded programs, according to a December 2018 analysis of census data by Center for Immigration Studies. That's almost double what it is for American-born households.

Right now, newly arrived legal immigrants who earn little or nothing are eligible for fully subsidized Obamacare plans, with taxpayers paying the entire bill, even for co-pays and deductibles. And 6.8 million children of immigrants are enrolled in Medicaid, according to the Urban Institute. Meanwhile, millions of American-born taxpayers who fund this giveaway to newcomers are going without insurance themselves, because they can't afford it.

That doesn't jive with the ideal that a democracy's first duty is to protect its own citizens.

Democratic politicians are adamant about open borders, rejecting Friedman's wise warning.

But don't expect the American public to buy into open borders and unending handouts. That policy already bombed in Europe. Hungary and Spain have put up tall barbed wire fencing to keep out migrants from Africa and the Middle East. The British are erecting a high, unclimbable concrete wall in the seacoast town of Calais, France, to prevent migrants from jumping aboard ferries and trucks heading into the Channel tunnel. European voters have decided border walls are not immoral. They're essential.

Europeans are also fed up with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's self-righteousness. In the summer of 2015, Merkel welcomed hundreds of thousands of migrants, and told the public to just deal. Now the public is in revolt, and shifting their politics to the right.

This week, the United Nations announced a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The United States and at least 10 other major nations wisely refused to sign on. Expect more countries to do the same.

The international elites don't get it, but everyday people have the common sense to know you care for the poor in your own country first.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/12/trump_border_wall_showdown_138901.html
 
The problem to me is our overall immigration system is outdated and broken. We have industries that are labor intensive. Immigrants can provide it and do it for cheap wages and that benefits us all. However it's not easy to match employers needs with workers demands within the framework of our current system and thus we have so many willing to risk everything to fill these positions.

We want people to follow our rules, and they should, but we make sh*tty rules and it's to our detriment.
 
This is an interesting take on the reason for a wall or real enforcement of immigration law.

Congressional Democrats are butting heads with President Donald Trump over his demand for $5 billion to continue building a wall along the southern border. Rep. Nancy Pelosi vows not one dollar will go for a wall. She calls the idea of a wall "immoral."

Not building the wall is what's truly immoral. Allowing destitute, uneducated people with limited job prospects to flood across the southern border into the United States forces taxpayers here to toil longer and pay more in taxes to feed and house them, accommodate their children in public schools and pay for their medical care.

Americans are already maxed out caring for our own needy, including the homeless sprawled on city streets.

This nation has 40 million in poverty, 1 out of every 8 people and 1 out of every 6 children. That's far higher than in Canada or Great Britain.

Our country doesn't need to import more poverty.

For the same reason, Trump is also proposing that only immigrants who can support themselves without government handouts be granted green cards and permanent status.

Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted Trump's proposal as "un-American." New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said, "This plan is ugly, it is cruel."

Really? Why should Americans be compelled to provide a safety net for throngs pressing to get into the country?

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned two decades ago that America could have open borders or a generous welfare system -- but not both. Open borders benefit a growing economy by providing a source of labor. But that works only so long as immigrants are barred from government benefits.

Trump is tightening regulations under a longstanding law, on the books since 1882, which bars immigrants likely to need government benefits from getting permanent status. Starting with President Bill Clinton, the law has been applied so laxly that almost no one is denied a green card for that reason. A staggering 63 percent of households headed by a noncitizen depend on Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance or in some cases all of these taxpayer-funded programs, according to a December 2018 analysis of census data by Center for Immigration Studies. That's almost double what it is for American-born households.

Right now, newly arrived legal immigrants who earn little or nothing are eligible for fully subsidized Obamacare plans, with taxpayers paying the entire bill, even for co-pays and deductibles. And 6.8 million children of immigrants are enrolled in Medicaid, according to the Urban Institute. Meanwhile, millions of American-born taxpayers who fund this giveaway to newcomers are going without insurance themselves, because they can't afford it.

That doesn't jive with the ideal that a democracy's first duty is to protect its own citizens.

Democratic politicians are adamant about open borders, rejecting Friedman's wise warning.

But don't expect the American public to buy into open borders and unending handouts. That policy already bombed in Europe. Hungary and Spain have put up tall barbed wire fencing to keep out migrants from Africa and the Middle East. The British are erecting a high, unclimbable concrete wall in the seacoast town of Calais, France, to prevent migrants from jumping aboard ferries and trucks heading into the Channel tunnel. European voters have decided border walls are not immoral. They're essential.

Europeans are also fed up with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's self-righteousness. In the summer of 2015, Merkel welcomed hundreds of thousands of migrants, and told the public to just deal. Now the public is in revolt, and shifting their politics to the right.

This week, the United Nations announced a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The United States and at least 10 other major nations wisely refused to sign on. Expect more countries to do the same.

The international elites don't get it, but everyday people have the common sense to know you care for the poor in your own country first.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/12/trump_border_wall_showdown_138901.html

So the right will stop whining about helping the poor, and paying taxes for programs for the poor, if they get their damned wall? I thought the poor were supposed to pick themselves up, without assistance. At least in the conservative handbook anyway. I look forward to them not gutting every assistance for the poor there is, to fund superfluous stuff.
 
This is an interesting take on the reason for a wall or real enforcement of immigration law.

Congressional Democrats are butting heads with President Donald Trump over his demand for $5 billion to continue building a wall along the southern border. Rep. Nancy Pelosi vows not one dollar will go for a wall. She calls the idea of a wall "immoral."

Not building the wall is what's truly immoral. Allowing destitute, uneducated people with limited job prospects to flood across the southern border into the United States forces taxpayers here to toil longer and pay more in taxes to feed and house them, accommodate their children in public schools and pay for their medical care.

Americans are already maxed out caring for our own needy, including the homeless sprawled on city streets.

This nation has 40 million in poverty, 1 out of every 8 people and 1 out of every 6 children. That's far higher than in Canada or Great Britain.

Our country doesn't need to import more poverty.

For the same reason, Trump is also proposing that only immigrants who can support themselves without government handouts be granted green cards and permanent status.

Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted Trump's proposal as "un-American." New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said, "This plan is ugly, it is cruel."

Really? Why should Americans be compelled to provide a safety net for throngs pressing to get into the country?

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned two decades ago that America could have open borders or a generous welfare system -- but not both. Open borders benefit a growing economy by providing a source of labor. But that works only so long as immigrants are barred from government benefits.

Trump is tightening regulations under a longstanding law, on the books since 1882, which bars immigrants likely to need government benefits from getting permanent status. Starting with President Bill Clinton, the law has been applied so laxly that almost no one is denied a green card for that reason. A staggering 63 percent of households headed by a noncitizen depend on Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance or in some cases all of these taxpayer-funded programs, according to a December 2018 analysis of census data by Center for Immigration Studies. That's almost double what it is for American-born households.

Right now, newly arrived legal immigrants who earn little or nothing are eligible for fully subsidized Obamacare plans, with taxpayers paying the entire bill, even for co-pays and deductibles. And 6.8 million children of immigrants are enrolled in Medicaid, according to the Urban Institute. Meanwhile, millions of American-born taxpayers who fund this giveaway to newcomers are going without insurance themselves, because they can't afford it.

That doesn't jive with the ideal that a democracy's first duty is to protect its own citizens.

Democratic politicians are adamant about open borders, rejecting Friedman's wise warning.

But don't expect the American public to buy into open borders and unending handouts. That policy already bombed in Europe. Hungary and Spain have put up tall barbed wire fencing to keep out migrants from Africa and the Middle East. The British are erecting a high, unclimbable concrete wall in the seacoast town of Calais, France, to prevent migrants from jumping aboard ferries and trucks heading into the Channel tunnel. European voters have decided border walls are not immoral. They're essential.

Europeans are also fed up with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's self-righteousness. In the summer of 2015, Merkel welcomed hundreds of thousands of migrants, and told the public to just deal. Now the public is in revolt, and shifting their politics to the right.

This week, the United Nations announced a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The United States and at least 10 other major nations wisely refused to sign on. Expect more countries to do the same.

The international elites don't get it, but everyday people have the common sense to know you care for the poor in your own country first.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/12/trump_border_wall_showdown_138901.html

The net costs to taxpayers for every illegal immigrant who sneaks into the United States has reached nearly $70,000, about seven times the cost of deporting them, and about $70 billion, according to a new report.

And, according to federal Census data, the surge of legal and illegal immigrants across the Mexico-U.S. border has reached a new high since 2011 and matched the historic high of 1.75 million set in 1999.

The latest Census data from 2016 shows that immigrants continue to come into the United States, both legally and illegally, and the costs to taxpayers in enforcement and social services continues to rise — even when offset by the taxes they pay.

Steven Camarota, the director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, said that inflation has helped to raise the costs of caring, housing and law enforcement for illegal immigrants by $3,000 since 2016.

Camarota explained the costs this way:

The reason illegal immigrants are unambiguously a net fiscal drain is that less-educated people, native-born or immigrant, earn on average modest wages and as a result they tend to make modest tax contributions, while needing significant social services. As we pointed out in our prior study, research by the Center for Immigration Studies, the Pew Research Center, the Heritage Foundation, and others have all found that a very large share of illegal immigrants have relatively few years of schooling — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education. The fiscal drain illegal immigrants create is not because they are all lazy and on welfare, nor it simply because they often work off the books and don't pay taxes. Rather they tend to earn wages commensurate with their education levels and, as result, they typically have low incomes on average, though there are individual exceptions. Those with low incomes as a group, regardless of legal status, use more in public services than they pay in taxes. It's why cities and states worry so much about losing their middle- and upper-income tax base. It is middle- and upper-income residents who pay most of the taxes, which does not describe the average illegal immigrant.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...l-immigrant-costs-70-000-7x-deportation-price

********************

It would be nicer to hand $70k to American widows and orphans and many poor elderly who worked all their lives paying taxes towards helping America's poor who perhaps now that they're older are the ones in need.
 
So the right will stop whining about helping the poor, and paying taxes for programs for the poor, if they get their damned wall? I thought the poor were supposed to pick themselves up, without assistance. At least in the conservative handbook anyway. I look forward to them not gutting every assistance for the poor there is, to fund superfluous stuff.

Go back and read it again. Slowly. It makes perfect sense.
 
Dunderheads like bath-tub become fascinated with fascism in the guise of patriotism- so fascinated that they cut-and-paste swathes of it because it echoes their own mental swill.
They frequently vomit it up with the introduction- ' This is an interesting take....' because they are too illiterate and gutless for original thought. Fuck- this place is brimming with bath-tubs.
 
The international elites don't get it, but everyday people have the common sense to know you care for the poor in your own country first

This is horseshit. You put aid where it's needed most. It acts as a safety-valve against war- war which will consume the lives of your own population- and as a foil against disease- disease which will consume the lives of your own population- and as a sedative to ideologies which might spread and take root in your own society.
Foreign aid is just as important as domestic relief.
 
When Conservatives say they want to take care of the poor, they mean "take care" (drags finger across throat).
 
We do try to take care of Americans first!

North Americans, Central Americans, and South Americans!

No one said you had to personally like it!
 
ok sailor boy, name some jobs, backed up by FACTS, the immigrants are taking from whites?

not the ones you imagine, the actual jobs

let's see it
 
ok sailor boy, name some jobs, backed up by FACTS, the immigrants are taking from whites?

not the ones you imagine, the actual jobs

let's see it

I am sure some immigrant has taken your menial job. Hence the reason you are a welfare fuck. What other proof do you need?
 

What does that have to do with the OP to begin with. Nothing. And what does it have to do with you being on welfare? If anything you should be worried. At least immigrants try to work.
 
This is an interesting take on the reason for a wall or real enforcement of immigration law.

Congressional Democrats are butting heads with President Donald Trump over his demand for $5 billion to continue building a wall along the southern border. Rep. Nancy Pelosi vows not one dollar will go for a wall. She calls the idea of a wall "immoral."

Not building the wall is what's truly immoral. Allowing destitute, uneducated people with limited job prospects to flood across the southern border into the United States forces taxpayers here to toil longer and pay more in taxes to feed and house them, accommodate their children in public schools and pay for their medical care.

Americans are already maxed out caring for our own needy, including the homeless sprawled on city streets.

This nation has 40 million in poverty, 1 out of every 8 people and 1 out of every 6 children. That's far higher than in Canada or Great Britain.

Our country doesn't need to import more poverty.

For the same reason, Trump is also proposing that only immigrants who can support themselves without government handouts be granted green cards and permanent status.

Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted Trump's proposal as "un-American." New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said, "This plan is ugly, it is cruel."

Really? Why should Americans be compelled to provide a safety net for throngs pressing to get into the country?

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned two decades ago that America could have open borders or a generous welfare system -- but not both. Open borders benefit a growing economy by providing a source of labor. But that works only so long as immigrants are barred from government benefits.

Trump is tightening regulations under a longstanding law, on the books since 1882, which bars immigrants likely to need government benefits from getting permanent status. Starting with President Bill Clinton, the law has been applied so laxly that almost no one is denied a green card for that reason. A staggering 63 percent of households headed by a noncitizen depend on Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance or in some cases all of these taxpayer-funded programs, according to a December 2018 analysis of census data by Center for Immigration Studies. That's almost double what it is for American-born households.

Right now, newly arrived legal immigrants who earn little or nothing are eligible for fully subsidized Obamacare plans, with taxpayers paying the entire bill, even for co-pays and deductibles. And 6.8 million children of immigrants are enrolled in Medicaid, according to the Urban Institute. Meanwhile, millions of American-born taxpayers who fund this giveaway to newcomers are going without insurance themselves, because they can't afford it.

That doesn't jive with the ideal that a democracy's first duty is to protect its own citizens.

Democratic politicians are adamant about open borders, rejecting Friedman's wise warning.

But don't expect the American public to buy into open borders and unending handouts. That policy already bombed in Europe. Hungary and Spain have put up tall barbed wire fencing to keep out migrants from Africa and the Middle East. The British are erecting a high, unclimbable concrete wall in the seacoast town of Calais, France, to prevent migrants from jumping aboard ferries and trucks heading into the Channel tunnel. European voters have decided border walls are not immoral. They're essential.

Europeans are also fed up with German Chancellor Angela Merkel's self-righteousness. In the summer of 2015, Merkel welcomed hundreds of thousands of migrants, and told the public to just deal. Now the public is in revolt, and shifting their politics to the right.

This week, the United Nations announced a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The United States and at least 10 other major nations wisely refused to sign on. Expect more countries to do the same.

The international elites don't get it, but everyday people have the common sense to know you care for the poor in your own country first.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/12/12/trump_border_wall_showdown_138901.html

So that is a "reason" for building a Wall? Building a wall is the only way to stop such from occurring? This justifies a Wall as the only means to address our immigration problems or border security?
 
So that is a "reason" for building a Wall? Building a wall is the only way to stop such from occurring? This justifies a Wall as the only means to address our immigration problems or border security?

Of course not. Democrats could actually address immigration or help enforce current laws. You know damn well that will not happen though.
 
Of course not. Democrats could actually address immigration or help enforce current laws. You know damn well that will not happen though.

Not true, another Trump lie, the Democrats have worked on partisan efforts toward border security, nearly unanimously supporting the 1.6 Billion package passed last March

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-trump-falsely-claims-democrats-oppose-any-e/

What the Democrats oppose is Trump's 6 billion dollar Wall, as do most Americans
 
Back
Top