1/3 Californians are on MediCal

[My Spot]

Your opinion paper is hacky.
"Hundred of thousands of illegals file taxes" how about the other 8764568865445 millions?
Swj gonna swj
And Ive seen your posts, they reek of swj

Are actual figures from both the CBO and IRS "hacky" as well?

 

[Forkfoot]

Its the most populated state, the wealthiest and has a GDP per capita still above national average. All of that in a desert that was largely unpopulated a century ago.

A state that certainly has its issues but its still the first among the best.

If it was its own country it'd have the ninth largest GDP in the world.

 

[kpt018]

The middle 20% of earners in California pay a below-average amount of state and local taxes as a percentage of income (8.2% vs. 9.4% average).

Lol! This post should end the thread but it wasn't even addressed.

 

[method115]

Well, everyone has that subtle but steadily-growing suspicion that the collapse of civilization is quite nigh in the back of their minds.

Yea I guess that's it. It's just been weird to see. These aren't people who are struggling to make it either. Like one of my friends him and his wife make like 250,000 a year easily. She has a twin and they do about the same maybe only like 200,000. Neither couples wants kids. My friend said his wife brings it up sometimes but then they let it go. He said he's just waiting for her to get to old to even talk about it. I suspect if she has a kid that her twin sister will decide to have one as well.

 

[lebenize it]

The support from politicians when it comes to illegal immigration is nothing more than pandering for votes. If you think it is for anything else than you need to wake up. In no way do these CA politicians actually care about these people. They care about staying elected and do not care if CA goes broke while they make a killing.

 

[Forkfoot]

Yea I guess that's it. It's just been weird to see. These aren't people who are struggling to make it either. Like one of my friends him and his wife make like 250,000 a year easily. She has a twin and they do about the same maybe only like 200,000. Neither couples wants kids. My friend said his wife brings it up sometimes but then they let it go. He said he's just waiting for her to get to old to even talk about it. I suspect if she has a kid that her twin sister will decide to have one as well.

Doesn't matter how much you make when the economy collapses and the only currency is fuel, ammo and rape victims.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Lol! This post should end the thread but it wasn't even addressed.

I noticed a couple of years ago that while all states have regressive taxation, there's a pretty big difference between them in terms of how regressive they are. So a lot of "low-tax" states actually tax most of their residents at above-average rates, and "high-tax" states tax most of their residents at below-average rates.

Good site for it all here:

http://www.itep.org/whopays/

 

[kpt018]

I noticed a couple of years ago that while all states have regressive taxation, there's a pretty big difference between them in terms of how regressive they are. So a lot of "low-tax" states actually tax most of their residents at above-average rates, and "high-tax" states tax most of their residents at below-average rates.

Good site for it all here:

http://www.itep.org/whopays/

Woah, that is an awesome tool. I see that the middle 20% pays less than Texas, FL, GA, and most of the other southern red states. Ha!

 

[chardog]

what in blazes is sjw/swj, I'm getting confused as hell.

Cali is it's own country within the country, unfortunately it's the worst run state no matter who takes office. We need to get our scholars to take over for the cheerleader "politicians" they don't know how to govern or manage efficiently. :icon_chee

we have the upper middle class, where income goes into the hundreds of thousands per year, and then the lower middle class, which scrape by with 40-60, and then littered with the unemployed.

of course strictly opinion, income disparity seems absurd in this state. Cost of living is ridiculous as well, if I had to do some number crunching, I dont see how some survive.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Woah, that is an awesome tool. I see that the middle 20% pays less than Texas, FL, GA, and most of the other southern red states. Ha!

And people who live there think they're lucky to have low tax rates.

 

[chardog]

Lol! This post should end the thread but it wasn't even addressed.

right, so because the middle 20 cause a drain, we should amplify that drain with illegal immigrants, great logic there son.

 

[2GunTommy]

Hey dumb dumb! How you doing today?

You're right, their kids get medicaid, as is entitled to American citizens. The parents are still illegal. It was true yesterday, and it's true today.

Hey ! I thought I was dumb dumb ?

Agree with False for the first time ever. Can't blame the kids for their parents coming illegally. The kids are citizens and have a right to Medicaid.

Not so fast Atom :icon_chee

Try passing a constitutional amendment doing away with birthright citizenship then. By the way, what's the basis for your citizenship?

Actually you wouldnt have to pass any constitutional ammendment at all to do away with birthright citizenship. Just read the existing 14th and interpret it correctly. Here lets listen to what a constitutional lawyer has to say on the issue, shall we ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJgzfJ1nTQk
He starts speaking at about the 40 sec mark

 

[method115]

And people who live there think they're lucky to have low tax rates.

Can you explain what your talking about a bit more? I live in Texas and this sounds interesting. Or just let me know what to Google and ill be happy to read it oh my own.

 

[My Spot]

Actually you wouldnt have to pass any constitutional ammendment at all to do away with birthright citizenship. Just read the existing 14th and interpret it correctly. Here lets listen to what a constitutional lawyer has to say on the issue, shall we ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJgzfJ1nTQk
He starts speaking at about the 40 sec mark

Would that include ignoring the various SCotUS decisions as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourt...tes_Constitution#Selected_Supreme_Court_cases

 

[Jack V Savage]

Can you explain what your talking about a bit more? I live in Texas and this sounds interesting. Or just let me know what to Google and ill be happy to read it oh my own.

Total tax burden (including fees--we're looking at all gov't revenue) by state varies from about 7% to about 12% as a share of the overall economy and for the most part are bundled very closely. But they vary a lot based on where that 10% or so is coming from. For example, the top 1% of family earners in Texas pay 2.9% of their income in state and local taxes (including fees), while the bottom 20% pays 12.5% of their income. In Oregon (just randomly picked another state), the top 1% pays 6.5%, while the bottom 20% pays 8.1%.

Check the site I linked to (http://www.itep.org/whopays/). You can scroll over the states to get a bigger-picture look at it or click on them to get more detail, and on the home page, you can click on the full report for more details. You'll see that a lot of "high-tax" states really just collect a lot more from people at the top of the income distribution and a lot of "low-tax" states really just collect a lot less from people at the top. They aren't necessarily "high-tax" or "low-tax" for most of the residents.

 

[2GunTommy]

Would that include ignoring the various SCotUS decisions as well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourt...tes_Constitution#Selected_Supreme_Court_cases

Quote from the author of the 14th amendment (Jacob Howard R-MI)

"Every person born within the limits of the United States,and subject to their jurisdiction,is by virtue of natural law and natural law a citizen of the United States.
This will not of course include persons born in the United States who are foreigners,ALIENS,who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the govt, but will include every other class of persons
This settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States."

So as you see straight from the authors mouth, it was NEVER intended to include children of illegal aliens. He specifically excluded them in this statement.

More from Mark Levin, constitutional lawyer.....

"Levin said that people are getting the clause wrong,

 

[My Spot]

You're right, I guess a conservative talk radio host's interpretation is interesting.

 

[2GunTommy]

You're right, I guess a conservative talk radio host's interpretation is interesting.

Thats just avoidance or ignorance. Yeah hes just a conservtard radio talk show host who doesnt really know anything about the constitution

Mark Reed Levin (born September 21, 1957) is a Constitutional lawyer, president of the the prestigious Landmark Legal Foundation in Washington D.C., a top-rated nationally syndicated conservative talk radio host and a best selling non-fiction author. Also, the former Chief of Staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese during the Reagan Administration.

Beginning in 1981, Mark R. Levin served as advisor to several members of President Ronald Reagan's Cabinet, eventually becoming Associate Director of Presidential Personnel and ultimately Chief of Staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese; Levin also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education at the U.S. Department of Education, and Deputy Solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior. He has practiced law in the private sector, and is president of the Landmark Legal Foundation in Leesburg, Virginia. He holds a B.A. from Temple University, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude, as well as a J.D. from the Temple University Beasley School of Law.

In 2001, the American Conservative Union named Levin the recipient of the prestigious Ronald Reagan Award.

Any other comments smart guy ?

 

[My Spot]

Strawman.
At the end of the day, an interpretation from anyone is an opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[2GunTommy]

Strawman.
At the end of the day, an interpretation from anyone is an opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

Really ? Wow dude. How about the actual author of the 14th amendment actually specifying that it was NOT intended to give children of illegals citizenship ? Is that just his interpretation ?

"Every person born within the limits of the United States,and subject to their jurisdiction,is by virtue of natural law and natural law a citizen of the United States.
This will not of course include persons born in the United States who are foreigners,ALIENS,who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the govt, but will include every other class of persons
This settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States."

So as you see straight from the authors mouth, it was NEVER intended to include children of illegal aliens. He specifically excluded them in this statement.

Now im not saying im an expert on constitutional law (although Levin is), but you have to see that it is a fact that anchor babies were NOT included. Also that congress is the one who officially has the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, Not the SC, not the POTUS, and not ICE.

This is an issue that is going to be debated and challenged in the near future for sure.