Economy Should we provide migrants with housing, welfare, medical, etc..?

[Michaelangelo]

I still like the idea of an immigration Olympics where illegal immigrants participate in an annual televised contest. Kind of like an American l gladiator, running man, squid game like contest where the winners get free citizenship without having to go through the intense rigermole of legal immigration. And the losers well…

You can ship the losers to Canada

Give those Quebec cans some company

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Do you think we should provide migrants with free housing, food, medical, welfare in general, etc..?

If yes, how long should we provide them these services?

Where I grew up, there are whole populations from migrant backgrounds, both legal and illegal that are generations in and that are on permanent welfare in several forms such as housing assistance, EBT, medical assistance, etc..

Touchy subject. Controlled migration? Yes. Because you need to take care of people within your borders.

Uncontrolled migration? Fuck no. If you break into my backyard and start squatting there I am not feeding you. And if I do, you will call your cousins to come over.

Moral of the story: close your fucking borders it's not that complicated.

 

[The Big Yin]

I think you should do more. Anyone who is openly pro mass immigration should house them in their own homes, feed them and also be held directly accountable, with the same sentences, for any crimes the illegal migrants commits.

I'm sure there will be a massive queue of liberals wanting to sign up to his humanitarian mission.

 

[tenniswhiz]

In order to be eligible for asylum, the seeker must not have passed through other countries on their way to the USA.
The law states that if they HAVE passed through other countries, then they must have applied for asylum in the transit country (or countries) and been denied, in order to apply for asylum in the USA.

So basically anyone who is crossing the Mexican border, who isn’t a Mexican national, is supposed to be ineligible for asylum unless they have paperwork proving rejected asylum from every country they passed through on the way.
Is this law actually observed by the authorities?

 

[AbominableJoman]

No. They need to lace up their bootstraps and earn their keep!

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

No. Give them jobs.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Your falling into the trap of perceiving any disagreement with a party stance as partisan (at least in the party-vs-party sense).

The Heritage Foundation is a partisan, activist organization, though. Their "findings" are already determined before they do any studying because their object is not the expansion of knowledge but advocating for conservative policy. And the specific study they're talking about is contradicted by real research (multiple studies) and has been shredded by more serious researchers. I suspect you just thought that MMA fans wouldn't be familiar with them.

By "spending money", I suppose you are referring to sales tax?

Sales tax is collected at the state level, not the federal level (where the transfer payments primarily occur). Buying groceries does not contribute toward the vast majority of housing assistance, TANF, Medicaid, or any federal assistance programs. Only ~25% of transfer payments occur at the state level, and states themselves (on average) receive ~33% of those funds from the federal system. (IOW, the average state receives money from the feds to the tune of ~330$ billion).

Those receiving housing assistance and food assistance are not even contributing as much as has been mentioned. The NIH reports ~25% of illegal immigrants are elderly or near-elderly, which means they will never contribute what they cost. Additionally, ~16% are children, meaning although they may contribute in the future, they will not do so now.

Simply increasing the population does not increase the federal tax base at all.

Increasing the tax rate is precisely the sort of question I was asking; but who do you want taxed more? The top 1% pay 42% of all federal taxes already, and the top 10% pay more the entire bottom 90% combined. AND this still results in a enormous deteriorating primary deficit.

As things are right now, excluding illegal immigrants, very large spending cuts or tax increases are already necessary. How do you propose to pay for more?

Well, immigrants are a net benefit to the budget. And the U.S. doesn't have a resource-extraction-based economy. Having more workers grows the economy and the tax base.

 

[Belaya Smert]

Not unless you have a program for the people at the bottom of society that already live here. Our immigration policy is as bad as our foreign policy.

 

[BreatheSherBro]

Of these two immigrants, which one is more likely to contribute to the US in your opinion.
1. Someone who gave up everything to travel thousands of miles on a dangerous journey with no guarantee of success and extremely limited access to welfare or government support.
2. Someone who flew here on a plane because their parents were rich enough to invest in some very expensive property.

I get what you are saying, but being needy and desperate aren't the best indicators of beneficial immigration. If being needy and desparate were the best indicators of beneficial immigration then we would need to allow just about everyone in that comes from a poor country. It would be overwhelming and a strain on resources rather than a benefit to the united states.

 

[Lucas1980]

I get what you are saying, but being needy and desperate aren't the best indicators of beneficial immigration. If being needy and desparate were the best indicators of beneficial immigration then we would need to allow just about everyone in that comes from a poor country. It would be overwhelming and a strain on resources rather than a benefit to the united states.

And now these free loading illegals aren't even trying to play the part of looking or being needy anymore...they just want a free ride and someplace better then where they left. If America took in everyone that had that mindset we wouldn't be able to sustain as a country.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I get what you are saying, but being needy and desperate aren't the best indicators of beneficial immigration. If being needy and desparate were the best indicators of beneficial immigration then we would need to allow just about everyone in that comes from a poor country. It would be overwhelming and a strain on resources rather than a benefit to the united states.

People in possession of in-demand skills make for the most beneficial immigration, but for a country like the U.S., almost all immigration is beneficial. Workers reduce the strain on resources. We're not hunter-gatherers who have to worry that the new people will eat the precious berries.

 

[avenue94]

Those receiving housing assistance and food assistance are not even contributing as much as has been mentioned. The NIH reports ~25% of illegal immigrants are elderly or near-elderly, which means they will never contribute what they cost. Additionally, ~16% are children, meaning although they may contribute in the future, they will not do so now.

What housing assistance and food assistance programs do illegal immigrants have access to?

By "spending money", I suppose you are referring to sales tax?

That, but they also contribute through payroll tax in a rather big way.

Simply increasing the population does not increase the federal tax base at all.

For a population under replacement rate, it certainly does.

Increasing the tax rate is precisely the sort of question I was asking; but who do you want taxed more? The top 1% pay 42% of all federal taxes already, and the top 10% pay more the entire bottom 90% combined. AND this still results in a enormous deteriorating primary deficit.

There's quite a bit of room to increase tax rates to align more with other countries. For example, if Social Security is your concern, removing the payroll tax phase out would go a long way.

This is a lot of to reply to but raising taxes doesn’t mean anything if the govt can’t spend it responsibly

Also the guy who flew in a plane has parents who likely paid taxes. In a way his parents earned the right to have their son join them.

The guy who is sneaking in will likely get a job off the books while receiving all the welfare benefits (free health care, etc.) with zero contribution to actual taxes.

That's one way of looking at it, but if we're talking, literally, of those two people, which will likely be a go getter and do more for the country, blah blah blah, you can't seriously think it's the one who coasted on his parents being rich. And immigrants do not have access to programs like Medicaid, Medicare, or the exchanges. What healthcare do you think they receive? And as I mentioned before, immigrants still pay sales tax and other consumption taxes, not to mention most don't work off the books (aka payroll tax counts still).

 

[Beechwood]

I read an article yesterday about the state of New York. there they are spending 3 times more on feeding illegal immigrants than they do American citizens in need of food assistance. New York has it's priorities apparently.

 

[avenue94]

I get what you are saying, but being needy and desperate aren't the best indicators of beneficial immigration. If being needy and desparate were the best indicators of beneficial immigration then we would need to allow just about everyone in that comes from a poor country. It would be overwhelming and a strain on resources rather than a benefit to the united states.

That's literally what the US did for most of its history and one of the main reasons it's a superpower. What resources would be strained exactly on a national level?

And now these free loading illegals aren't even trying to play the part of looking or being needy anymore...they just want a free ride and someplace better then where they left. If America took in everyone that had that mindset we wouldn't be able to sustain as a country.

"Free loading illegals" have worked far harder and done more to earn citizenship than most immigrants through US history. You can argue that the US should change its policy from historical precedent, but the amount of people who unironically ignore what's subscribed on the Statue of Liberty is hilarious.

 

[RoastBeast]

Notice how the people who don't know how money works are the ones who advocate for this?

These guys have good hearts but they put next to zero thought into anything past step one when it comes to these topics. Ask them to put their money where their mouth is and go out and lend a helping hand to illegal immigrants and they immediately go quiet. They won't help them on a personal level but they'll sure vote to ensure that everyone else is forced to do it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

There's quite a bit of room to increase tax rates to align more with other countries. For example, if Social Security is your concern, removing the payroll tax phase out would go a long way.

If you're familiar with @Two Crows' posting, you also might not be shocked to learn that the numbers he posted are inaccurate. The top 1% of earners pay an ETR of 26%, not 42%, and that is low by historical and international standards. He also messed up the talking point that the top 10% of earners pay most *federal income tax* (saying "federal taxes").

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

Good Chait piece on that bit of propaganda:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/fact-check-richest-1-dont-pay-40-of-the-taxes.html

 

[avenue94]

If you're familiar with @Two Crows' posting, you also might not be shocked to learn that the numbers he posted are inaccurate. The top 1% of earners pay an ETR of 26%, not 42%, and that is low by historical and international standards. He also messed up the talking point that the top 10% of earners pay most *federal income tax* (saying "federal taxes").

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

I also the attempt to place federal and state funding in entirely separate budgets, as if they operate in a vacuum and don't affect each other.

 

[Striderxdj]

I dont think it's unreasonable for people to be upset that immigrants (illegal or otherwise) might get certain benefits that aren't provided to current U.S. citizens.

That being said, its certainly laughable that the people who rail against immigrants always bring up the poor, homeless, veterans, and/or the mentally ill when they don't give a f**k about them either.

 

[Lucas1980]

That's literally what the US did for most of its history and one of the main reasons it's a superpower. What resources would be strained exactly on a national level?

"Free loading illegals" have worked far harder and done more to earn citizenship than most immigrants through US history. You can argue that the US should change its policy from historical precedent, but the amount of people who unironically ignore what's subscribed on the Statue of Liberty is hilarious.

We had 119 million Americans when the Statue of Liberty was giving to us and now we have well over 340 million Citizens and the melting pot has boiled over. Those Free Loading Illegal aliens have not worked harder or done more to earn their citizenship because they aren't actual citizens and shouldn't be because they aren't following the legal process. Every illegal immigrant is pissing on those who came here legally and only hurt the minority communities that democrats pretend every election cycle they care so much for.

 

[Staph infection]

If they are illegal no, send them back to their home country. The US cannot take care of its citizens so until the can do that no illegal should be provided anything.