There are those who refuse to acknowledge the difference between charitable giving and tax tyranny.
JWK
There is no magic wand in government force which changes the definition of thievery. Those who use and rely upon government force to gain possession of the product of their neighbor’s labor for their personal economic needs are complicit in the act of thievery.
a September 2016 Washington Times story headlined: “Mass immigration costs government $296 billion a year, depresses wages.” It reported on a study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on the economic and fiscal consequences of immigration.
A consultant who contributed to the report told us that in 2013 the total fiscal burden – average outlays minus average receipts multipled by 55.5 million individuals – was $279 billion for the first generation of immigrants. But making a conclusion on that one figure is a mighty case of cherry-picking.
The study actually took into account that native born Americans when they hit their 60s actually collect social security and medicare. As if this somehoe levels the playing field?
Over the period 1994-2013, the net fiscal contribution (federal, state, and local combined) of first-generation immigrants was, on average, consistently less favorable than that of native-born generations. Annual cross-sectional data reveal that, compared with the native-born, first-generation immigrants contributed less in taxes during working ages because they were, on average, less educated and earned less. However, this pattern reverses at around age 60, when the native-born (except for the children of immigrants) were consistently more expensive to government on a per-capita basis because of their greater use of social security benefits.
The old “vote for me, and I’ll steal from your neighbors to give you their money,” ploy.
No theft involved.
Legalized theft, sometimes used by corrupt politicians just to get elected.
Nope no theft.
JWK
"To lay with one hand the power of the government on the property of the citizen [a working person’s earned wage] and with the other to bestow upon favored individuals, to aid private enterprises and build up private fortunes is none the less a robbery because it is done under forms of law and called taxation."____ Savings and Loan Association v.Topeka,(1875).
In regard to what you state above, one of our wise forefathers stated the following:
"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Rep Page
JWK
Just a reminder that for the more than $70 million already planned to be spent on Trump sending troops to the border for a political stunt, we could have housed and fed every single member of that caravan easily.
Same here, I’m a 1st generation American born in the USA of a Sicilian immigrant and I also love Italy and my roots, but I’m an American first and foremost and I also want all illegal immigrants gone, I don’t care what continent or country they come from!
Illegals literally have more rights, privilege and “sanctuary” then Amerian born or Naturalized citizens, that is WRONG and it’s a way to destroy a nation.
Political stunt? Had President Trump not deployed troops to the southern border to reinforced the border “fence”, we would have been bum rushed with thousands upon thousands of disease infected, criminals and the poverty stricken populations of central America, the cost of which would have been far greater.
JWK
Yes, running some barbed wire hundreds of miles from where the caravan showed up really did a ton to protect 'Murica. It was such a bigly success that they were talking about bringing the troops home almost immediately after the election was over. Why do you think that is?
Because it was a political stunt.
Ananias and Sapphira heart this.
Watch out guys, illegal immigrants comprise of 0.5% of all healthcare expenditures. They are going to break the bank!
Illegal immigrants’ healthcare costs put the devastating burden of $50 per year on each and every American! We must cast off these fetters and rise up or else we’ll be tax slaves!
I would rather my taxes go to the military protecting our borders then thousand of illegal asylum seekers and I believe most tax paying American feel the same.
Its not just about this caravan. Its about all the caravans to follow if they are just allowed in without stringent vetting for legitimate asylum purposes first.
And if you really have a legitimate asylum or refugee claim, make it before you go a thousand miles.
And therein lies a problem.
You would spend $100 million for a month and half political stunt that does nothing to actually make any of us safer, but the idea of that money going to give desperate, impoverished people a helping hand is wrong to you. It’s the same story in communities all around the country. We could do so much good for so many people, but conservative America has been tricked into thinking we need to fight over scraps while the rich get richer and the military gets more bloated.
When you are worried about your kids being butchered by drug cartels, you probably aren’t going to wait around for years filling out paperwork and hoping for the best.
lol - Sorry bud, was on a timeout in the corner.
Your question is not honest man, the Democrats are on board with stopping illegal immigration. Their just not turning into drooling psychotics about it like some on the Republican side of the isle like Trump and a few of his stooges, especially the freak Stephen Miller.
They are working people like you up into a frenzy and it is a shame.
