Social Housing and Caring for Illegal Immigrants is Costing US Tax Payers $451 Billion per year...

Can you explain how 10 million people would not impact GDP at all, which is your (absurd) contention?
I said 10 million additional people eating from the same economic pie.

And you seemed to have forgotten the other things I mentioned.

The cognitive dissonance must be hard on you, but you'll keep fighting it.
 
Who are the people who actually believe that we're paying 451 billion a year for illegal immigrants? LOL, I dont' think you guys even understand how numbers work if you believe a figure like that without questioning the source.
 
I said 10 million additional people eating from the same economic pie.

And you seemed to have forgotten the other things I mentioned.

The cognitive dissonance must be hard on you, but you'll keep fighting it.
Yes, so if we are using our as analogy for GDP, how is it the pie stays the same size with an additional 10 million people?

Again, you seem to not understand what GDP is.
 
Yea I agree. But that has nothing to do with my complaint that the GOP could have passed significant immigration reform, but pulled out at the last minute for Trump's political campaign.

Yea they could have passed it but if they did anyone that voted for them should be pissed off they did because it was not what they want.
 
Yes, so if we are using our as analogy for GDP, how is it the pie stays the same size with an additional 10 million people?

Again, you seem to not understand what GDP is.
No you. <lmao>
 
I see, well perhaps one day you'll learn such basic economic concepts at GDP and why adding 10 million to a population -- even if we assume they don't work -- increases GDP.

In the meantime, keep doing your best impression of a money slinging shit at a wall. It's charming.
 
Yea they could have passed it but if they did anyone that voted for them should be pissed off they did because it was not what they want.

But it is what they want. If they actually bothered to know what was in the bill, most of the anti-immigration folks would have wholeheartedly supported it.

But they didn't because they just read articles on it and or saw some story on Fox News.

Learn how to think independently.
 
But it is what they want. If they actually bothered to know what was in the bill, most of the anti-immigration folks would have wholeheartedly supported it.

But they didn't because they just read articles on it and or saw some story on Fox News.

Learn how to think independently.

The bill.the Republicans introduced was better. Not that it had everything that was needed.

The bill you are talking about was short on control and long on making them legal.
 
The bill.the Republicans introduced was better. Not that it had everything that was needed.

The bill you are talking about was short on control and long on making them legal.

The bill that was rejected was negotiated for months and agreed upon. But it needed most of the GOP to support it to pass.

At the last minute, the far right faction of the GOP rejected it.

To say something didn't go far enough is a lame excuse, because something is better than nothing. There hasn't been any comprehensive immigration reform for literal decades. Republicans just threw away a huge opportunity.

Again, if you actually check what was in the bill, you'd be pissed that it didn't pass. Stop reflexively defending everything the GOP does.
 
The bill that was rejected was negotiated for months and agreed upon. But it needed most of the GOP to support it to pass.

At the last minute, the far right faction of the GOP rejected it.

To say something didn't go far enough is a lame excuse, because something is better than nothing. There hasn't been any comprehensive immigration reform for literal decades. Republicans just threw away a huge opportunity.

Again, if you actually check what was in the bill, you'd be pissed that it didn't pass. Stop reflexively defending everything the GOP does.

Better then nothing is why they should not support it.

Because we will never get anything better because democrats will point to this better then nothing and say we did all we need to do.

Better to keep the pressure until we get something much better.
 
Better then nothing is why they should not support it.

Because we will never get anything better because democrats will point to this better then nothing and say we did all we need to do.

Better to keep the pressure until we get something much better.

They could have passed this, which was a huge step in the right direction, and gone for more later.

To excuse this not passing is a desperate cope.
 
They could have passed this, which was a huge step in the right direction, and gone for more later.

To excuse this not passing is a desperate cope.

There would be no more later that's my point.

This only came because of the pressure with the border out of control and the border state bussing to democrats city's. That and an election year.
 
There would be no more later that's my point.

This only came because of the pressure with the border out of control and the border state bussing to democrats city's. That and an election year.

There's going to be no more later anyway.

Meanwhile immigrants are pouring through the border RIGHT NOW, claiming asylum and then just being let go into the US.

This bill would have immediately stopped the asylum seekers and kept them outside the US.

You're playing partisan politics while real problems aren't getting solved.

You don't even know what's in the bill.
 
Same with every country on earth ..
Every (or most) country may have been invaded at some point, but not all have been raped and taken over on the scale that America has. Not all countries has a bunch of natives who are shit on and are all too aware their ancestors were robbed and murdered for outsiders to just take their land.
 
There's going to be no more later anyway.

Meanwhile immigrants are pouring through the border RIGHT NOW, claiming asylum and then just being let go into the US.

This bill would have immediately stopped the asylum seekers and kept them outside the US.

You're playing partisan politics while real problems aren't getting solved.

You don't even know what's in the bill.

Even you admitted the bill is little mote then a stop gap and its certainly not what is needed.

We will see what happens as the democrats cities and states are flooded with more and more.

Republican cities and states can push them there with laws making it hard onnthem and free travel.
 
There's no chance of that happening, and the majority is dissipating even faster than predictions from less than a decade ago.
Notice as the white population wanes, so does the overall prominence of the country.
Diversity is not necessarily a good thing.
 
Every (or most) country may have been invaded at some point, but not all have been raped and taken over on the scale that America has. Not all countries has a bunch of natives who are shit on and are all too aware their ancestors were robbed and murdered for outsiders to just take their land.
<Dany07>
 
I see, well perhaps one day you'll learn such basic economic concepts at GDP and why adding 10 million to a population -- even if we assume they don't work -- increases GDP.

In the meantime, keep doing your best impression of a money slinging shit at a wall. It's charming.
I'm not going to teach you macroeconomics101.

 
I'm not going to teach you macroeconomics101.

Still grasping for straws I see. The fact that you think 10 million people can live in a country and not increase GDP is laughable and says all I need to know about your ignorance of basic economics. I'm still waiting for you to explain how that's possible.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,243,344
Messages
55,903,351
Members
174,980
Latest member
Carmelo
Back
Top