Mcabe admits plan to oust Trump

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hi EAllusion,

Pardon my ignorance, but will you please dumb that last sentence down for me? It went way over my head.

(1) Ajax seems to be arguing that opposition to his preferred border security policy constitutes treason because it increases immigration of poor people and this makes citizens economically worse off. (2) As it turns out, immigration of poor people makes citizens economically better off on average. (3) Opposition to it therefore is what makes people relatively worse off. (4) So if you are going to define treason in terms of policy that makes citizens economically worse off, which you shouldn’t, then Ajax is guilty of it on his own terms.

He's still not making his point simple enough, Dr. Shades. I'm here to help.

1) Ajax says allowing millions of laborers to come into the country decreases wages for American workers because illegals will work for much cheaper. This means jobs Americans used to do for, say, $30/hour are now done for, say, $12/hour. Additionally, you can pay illegals with cash, so you don't have to worry about insurance, social security, and all the other things Liberals say we're due. That's why someone who makes his living flipping houses will employ illegals because he can make huge profits by skirting their lawful obligations. He also ignores the secondary and tertiary costs to the taxpayer, but will simply assert the following:

2) This is where EA typically asserts we're better off because more workers in the labor pool has secondary and tertiary effects on the economy on the whole. He's posted some studies in the past that support his position. He's unconcerned with native-born Americans who are pushed out of one market due to wage competition believing they should or will naturally fill the void of an increasing active economy because there are more people in it AND participating in it.

3) This is where EA typically asserts that restricting unrestricted immigration negates those secondary and tertiary effects on the economy, while ignoring the savings to the taxpayer as mentioned above.

4) This is a typical EA maneuver where he re-frames the argument to his advantage, thus he's right, once again, and others are misinformed naves who can't reason well.

Even simpler:

Unrestricted immigration is good, Ajax says it's bad for the economy, therefore Ajax by his own standard for treason is an economic (and cultural) traitor because unrestricted immigration is good.

Let me know if I need to break this down further for better understanding.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Illegal immigrats tend to pay far more in taxes than they extract in government service because most operate through legal payrolls that capture taxes, but they remain ineligible for many programs. Paying SS taxes while not collecting SS has that effect. Responsible estimates of black market activity don’t come close to offsetting this. That’s why the focus shifts to wage competition in the first place. And what study after study finds there is that wage competition has little effect on most workers and likely has a modest negative effect on native workers without a high school education. Essentially, those with the least desired skills face the most pressure from immigrant wage competition. The measured effect is small, but every little bit counts when you aren’t making a lot to start with. On average, though, this is more than offset by the overall benefit of increasing the pool of economic activity to the point that further restrictions on immigration, of both kinds, yield predictions of substantial depression of GDP growth.

The short of it is that it’s somewhat bad for the bottom, bottom tier worker and neutral to good for everyone else. The idea that policy that hurts that specific demographic while benefitting everyone else is treasonous doesn’t pass the laugh test and doesn’t match Ajax’s politics on literally anything else. Dude’s normal political attitude towards them is contemptuous bordering on outright hostile.

[_EAllusion]

You know what else hurts the bottom economic rung? Schools being funded by property taxes. This is a much bigger deal, in fact. Does support of that system equate to treason? I am going to say no.

Further, if you are concerned about them facing reduced income from wage competition, but don’t want to take a chunk out of economic prosperity for everyone else, then you could just increase the earned income tax credit and offset it with higher taxes at the top. You still come out ahead. Is failure to do this treason, though? No, it’s just dumb.

[_huckelberry]

Or one could say that importing hard working immigrants legal or not is helping to support, through their hard work and taxes they pay, the deadbeat white citizens who weigh the country down.. ( and fill the air with lazy self pity)

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Or one could say that importing hard working immigrants legal or not is helping to support, through their hard work and taxes they pay, the deadbeat white citizens who weigh the country down.. ( and fill the air with lazy self pity)

Well. The government could just terminate welfare and section 8 housing. And Medicare. Just imagine the amount of people who would be motivated from hunger and a desire to pay rent if they were forced into the labor pool. They'd have the freedom to compete in a market for work, food, housing, and medical care. Also, outdoor equipment sales would go through the roof (a real market stimulator).

- Doc

[_Markk]

Illegal immigrats tend to pay far more in taxes than they extract in government service because most operate through legal payrolls that capture taxes, but they remain ineligible for many programs. ...

I think it would be fair to say the average wage of a illegal immigrant is 30-40K a year...but lets use 50k for easy math.

So worse case they have 10k withheld, with zero dependents, most claim as many as they can so it would be much less.

A low end average to send a kid to school is 10k a year. so if you have one child it is a push, without adding medical and other free programs, including wica and welfare. Fire, police, and other services they might use.

So if a immigrant has three kids and they send them through the school system at 10k a year that is about 360K of school, while paying less that 50k in payroll tax over those same years.

Not sure how your math would work, but show me?

[_Res Ipsa]

Markk: you have to look at marginal cost rather than average cost when analyzing the cost of education. Also, whether directly through home ownership or indirectly through rents, folks here illegally pay the property tax that funds schools, just like citizens do.

As for benefit use, here is some information: https://immigrationforum.org/article/fa ... -benefits/

[_huckelberry]

Markk, I believe most places pay for schools through property taxes. If you think only property owners pay property tax you could think again. People who rent give money to property owners who then use that money to cover property tax.

[_schreech]

I think it would be fair to say the average wage of a illegal immigrant is 30-40K a year...but lets use 50k for easy math.

So worse case they have 10k withheld, with zero dependents, most claim as many as they can so it would be much less.

A low end average to send a kid to school is 10k a year. so if you have one child it is a push, without adding medical and other free programs, including wica and welfare. Fire, police, and other services they might use.

So if a immigrant has three kids and they send them through the school system at 10k a year that is about 360K of school, while paying less that 50k in payroll tax over those same years.

Not sure how your math would work, but show me?

Holy Jeebus - here we see the level of critical thinking that got Trump elected.

Dude, you should just avoid any conversation that requires math...or numbers...or rudimentary economic knowledge...or basic understanding of how public systems are funded...or critical thinking. You might just want to stick with telling folksy anecdotes about how the world has changed and you don't like it.

Do you actually think public schools are only funded by income tax? Do you not see education as an investment? Are you really so one dimensional that you don't understand how labor works and is required for companies to function thus contributing, monetarily, to the community they are part of? Do you not understand property tax? Do you really think studies that show immigrants give more back to the community than they take involve comparing their income tax with what it costs to put a child through school????

Your "logic", even in your nonsensical example, is so shallow and flawed that it fails as even a basic exercise in logic as it doesn't even take working immigrants with no children into account as an offset in your idiotic example...shiat. I feel stupider for even having to point out that using one fictitious family with 3 kids to try to calculate how immigrants contribute more than they take is beyond absurd. Im guessing it somehow made sense to you though, which makes me sad.

I mean, Christ, I would mock my 13 year old if she were ignorant enough to try to "math" the way you did above - fortunately she is smarter than that.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Markk, I believe most places pay for schools through property taxes. If you think only property owners pay property tax you could think again. People who rent give money to property owners who then use that money to cover property tax.

So, uh, property owners then?

- Doc