J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> wrote in news:vhasrq$4ciq$5@dont-email.me:

> On 11/16/2024 11:38 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> wrote in
>> news:vhahkp$3h0f$1@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> On 11/16/2024 6:31 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>> J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> wrote in
>>>> news:vh98e6$3rp0c$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/15/2024 7:39 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>> J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:vh88kg$3ho98$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/14/2024 6:55 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Klaus Schadenfreude
>>>>>>>> <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:rrlcjjtoainkmkfni3bj2v1m4ej4s47dgd@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging
>>>>>>>> .c oc ks uck ing.dwarf.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [Default] Mitchell Holman <noemail@aol.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Klaus Schadenfreude
>>>>>>>>>> <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:uvacjjhper5oi93njrrm7i25ku2rmi9nid@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forgi
>>>>>>>>>> ng .c oc ksu ckin g.dwarf.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [Default] Baxter <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sanity Returns <cracking@nuts.org> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:vh3sd6$1rld$1 @news.tambov.ru:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:vh1msm$23vjs$2@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sanity Returns wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> President-elect Donald Trump has appointed former ICE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director Tom Homan as the new 'Border Czar,' signaling a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tough, approach to immigration. Homan, known for his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fiery confrontations with Democrats and his unwavering
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stance on deportation, is set to lead Trump's aggressive
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> immigration plan, which aims to deport millions of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> undocumented migrants.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see he is still negotiating bribes from agricultural
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monopolies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doubtful. They don't have enough money.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to get with the times. Automation has eliminated
>>>>>>>>>>>>> much of the need for migrant labor.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In your dreams. There's still millions employed in
>>>>>>>>>>>> agriculture, and we import something like 51% of our food.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not all of them are illegal. But they will self-deport soon.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And you will take their place in
>>>>>>>>>> the fields and slaughterhouses and
>>>>>>>>>> nursing home bedpan crews, right?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are plenty of legals to take care of that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So where are they when growers need them?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is *zero* doubt that the presence of lots of low-skill
>>>>>>> unauthorized immigrants depresses the wages for farm labor below
>>>>>>> a level that American citizens and authorized immigrants will
>>>>>>> accept to work in agriculture. But low grocery prices is not an
>>>>>>> argument for allowing immigrants to enter the country without
>>>>>>> authorization. Every reasonable effort should be made to prevent
>>>>>>> illegal entry into the country and to remove, in a non-chaotic
>>>>>>> manner, those who are here. NOTE: "reasonable" means "no $100
>>>>>>> billion wall."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. secure the border; stop unauthorized entry
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No president has done that.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it unequivocally *should* be done.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. create a temporary worker program
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why didn't Trump do that before?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mostly because Trump is a failure. But doing it requires
>>>>> congressional action.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. gradually but steadily, locate and deport unauthorized
>>>>>>> immigrants
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At $10,000 per migrant.
>>>>>
>>>>> Supposedly. I don't believe those numbers, and you have nothing to
>>>>> support them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://tinyurl.com/k3jnek7y
>>>
>>> From *your* source:
>>>
>>
>> "the average cost of a deportation, also
>> referred to as a removal, was $10,854 in
>> FY 2016, including apprehension, detention,
>> and processing."
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Researchers agree that illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have
>>> modest levels of education — most have not completed high
>>> school or have only a high school education. There is also
>>> agreement that immigrants with this level of education are a
>>> significant net fiscal drain, creating more in costs for
>>> government than they pay in taxes.
>>
>>
>> So Americans with only high school
>> educations are a "drain" that "costs
>> the government". Should we deport them
>> as well?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus
>>> services used) of immigrants based on their educational
>>> attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the
>>> education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain
>>> of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their
>>> children.2
>>>
>>> Based on this estimate, there is a total lifetime fiscal drain
>>> of $746.3 billion. This assumes 11.43 million illegal
>>> immigrants are in the country based on the U.S. government's
>>> most recent estimate.
>>>
>>> The fiscal cost created by illegal immigrants of $746.3 billion
>>> compares to total a cost of deportation of $124.1 billion,
>>> assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using
>>> FY 2012 deportation costs.
>>>
>>> So the net fiscal effect of not deporting them vastly exceeds the
>>> cost of deporting them. Your case is demolished.
>>>
>>> But you never had a case anyway. There are lots of things you think
>>> should be done that cost money with no fiscal return.
>>>
>>
>>
>> From the URL you deleted:
>>
>>
>> "Each deportation
>
> You already said that. Why do you dishonestly, and in bad faith,

You delete the proof
posted by others and then
accuse THEM of "bad faith"?

> ignore *your* source's documentation that the fiscal effects of not
> deporting them *exceed* the cost of deporting them?
>

The part you deleted proves
the point I made, you deletion
of it just proves your desperation.

>>
>>>>
>>>>> The fact that it costs money doesn't mean it should not be done.
>>>>> Lots of things that should be done cost money, and *you* support
>>>>> spending the money to do them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suppose you do deport them all,
>>>> what then?
>>>
>>> Then we won't have the social and political irritant of having a
>>> huge population of non-citizens who are here without authorization.
>>> You seem to be unaware that that was a big part of the Democrats
>>> losing the presidency and returning the corrupt felon and
>>> insurrectionist to office.
>>
>> Is that what this boils down to?
> ♣
>
> You've never hesitated before to propose doing something solely for
> your side's political gain.
>
> But I'm not suggesting that it *is* what it boils down to. I'm
> instructing you that a huge majority of the country do not want
> unrestricted entry into the country, including among most Democrats,
> and you're proposing that we allow that, even though that works to
> your political detriment.
>