Money well spent?

I suspect we will see upcoming stories of how deportations of illegals is inhuman, substandard, etc.

As a taxpayer you are funding the expense below. Is it a good use of your tax dollars? Or does it make sense to take care of American citizens first?

Would the CA money spent on illegals be better served to help those impacted by the fires?

Your thoughts if any?

Cost of illegal immigrants per state in 2023:

Alabama: 596 million
Alaska: 130 million
Arizona: 3.19 billion
Arkansas: 356 million
California: 30.9 billion
Colorado: 1.94 billion
Connecticut: 1.28 billion
Delaware: 244 million
Florida: 8.04 billion
Georgia: 3.14 billion
Hawaii: 771 million
Idaho: 405 million
Illinois: 5.27 billion
Indiana: 886 million
Iowa: 405 million
Kansas: 603 million
Kentucky: 367 million
Louisiana: 604 million
Maine: 90.3 million
Maryland: 2.14 billion
Massachusetts: 2.16 billion
Michigan: 1.28 billion
Minnesota: 657 million
Mississippi: 100 million
Missouri: 657 million
Montana: 45 million
Nebraska: 136 million
Nevada: 1.47 billion
New Hampshire: 108 million
New Jersey: 5.27 billion
New Mexico: 174 million
New York: 9.95 billion
North Carolina: 3.14 billion
North Dakota: 43.25 million
Ohio: 332.4 million
Oklahoma: 273 million
Oregon: 1.47 billion
Pennsylvania: 1.64 billion
Rhode Island: 313 million
South Carolina: 746 million
South Dakota: 57 million
Tennessee: 341 million
Texas: 5.35 billion
Utah: 931 million
Vermont: 75 million
Virginia: 2.84 billion
Washington: 2.62 billion
West Virginia: 12.9 million
Wisconsin: 246 million
Wyoming: 18.1 million

... Crikey! ... Thanks there, Joe... ... What a FAILURE!

#### Salty

Ah, the FAIR numbers

Where are these numbers coming from?
How are they estimated?

From a recent FAIR study. They were a staple of Lou Dobbs and Berry arguments in the past.

As part of their methodology they overestimate the number of undocumented. They also include U.S. Citizens born to undocumented parents and count education, Healthcare and other costs for those same U.S. citizens by claiming they aren't actually citizens. They also don't account well for tax revenues generated when they provide their analyses.

Pile of issues with their methodologies, but once they hit Twitter the cons run with the data from their studies and start gaslighting like they're spitting gospel. They were the basis for a lot of bad #'s floating around social media in the leadup to the election.

Best to ignore this. The data is trash. I won't even get into the other issues with FAIR

Where are these numbers coming from?
How are they estimated? Originally Posted by winn dixie

Very rich coming from you WD asking for an explanation of how data for the expense of illegal aliens is calculated.

The guy that that only knows Trump is bad, but can’t name one specific as to how.

And yes you guys caught me. Just far right conspiracy theories.

Illegal aliens are actually really good. They cost the taxpayer $0. Illegals should be prioritized over US citizens in need.

Bottom line I see where the UK is headed and try to share snippets to see if you leftists/globalists want to help pull the plane up so it doesn’t crash. Just doesn’t resonate with many of you. You either can’t see the big picture or that’s just what you want. Idk.

If you’re capable to look out 5-10-15 years of what an open border and taxpayer benefits to illegals will do to you, your family, your loved ones. It will end the American dream as we know it. This is my belief. Look at what is happening to Western Europe. You think that’s good?

But carry on.

whether the numbers are off or not, doesnt change the facts

illegals and what they have and will cost vastly outweighs any positive from taxes etc etc. they are a monsterous burden on the taxpayer

anyone who doesnt agree with that is either a liar or full of shit

Thanks for sharing, GM. I understand your points. The data, however, is wrong. Which takes what's a semi-valid point and undercuts it with hyperbole.

TLDR: Immigrants bad. Leftists/Globalists bad. Americans first.

Message recieved.

whether the numbers are off or not, doesnt change the facts

illegals and what they have and will cost vastly outweighs any positive from taxes etc etc. they are a monsterous burden on the taxpayer

anyone who doesnt agree with that is either a liar or full of shit Originally Posted by chizzy

Not necessarily. Plus, immigration is one way to bolster our population and tax base. Legal and illegal. Preferably no illegal, but a lot of folks you think are illegal aren't. This is just one reason why we need true comprehensive reform and intelligent conversation. Not this crap.

I recall a Charleroi discussion recently with a lot of bad assumptions about the status of folks and griping. This is just more of that with bad #'s.

Until you're capturing the real scope and cost, you can't really compare to the benefits. A few reviews of prior FAIR studies showed an 87% reduction in the projected costs due to erroneous methodology. That's pretty significant. So let's be intellectually honest about it.

Or don't, Chizz. Some of the money mentioned above supported 1st and 2nd generation U.S. citizens in need. You may still disagree with how it's spent... and I won't be shocked.

I saw a recent study done by Denmark and the Netherlands that showed immigrants from North Africa, Middle East, and Morocco actually have a negative ROI over time to the host county. There are others with a negative ROI and some with a positive ROI but top 3 is good enough for here.

Which reinforces that some cultures are more productive than others. Some cultures mesh better with other cultures. It’s the commoner that deals with the potential dent in the old pocketbook and the same commoner that must deal with day-to-day cultural aspect and hope its for the best. And it’s the commoner that can no longer escape the chains of socialism that holds them down as socialism is further down the road in the journey. To me socialism is a failed experiment with real examples.

Great book out there called “suicidal empathy” by Gad Saad. It’s a good read if you care about the West as we know it, the real dangers we face from globalism, and in general the west is “too nice” and turns a blind eye to not offend. It’s a losers strategy.

Howdy, strawman. Commoners is also an interesting choice of words.

I saw a recent study done by Denmark and the Netherlands that showed immigrants from North Africa, Middle East, and Morocco actually have a negative ROI over time to the host county. There are others with a negative ROI and some with a positive ROI but top 3 is good enough for here.

Which reinforces that some cultures are more productive than others. Some cultures mesh better with other cultures. It’s the commoner that deals with the potential dent in the old pocketbook and the same commoner that must deal with day-to-day cultural aspect and hope its for the best. And it’s the commoner that can no longer escape the chains of socialism that holds them down as socialism is further down the road in the journey. To me socialism is a failed experiment with real examples.

Great book out there called “suicidal empathy” by Gad Saad. It’s a good read if you care about the West as we know it, the real dangers we face from globalism, and in general the west is “too nice” and turns a blind eye to not offend. It’s a losers strategy. Originally Posted by Green_Mountain

... No bleedin' wonder that Sweden has had enough.

#### Salty

Hey lads... time to play devil's advocate. Maybe unlimited, unchecked, unvetted immigration via wide-open borders is a GOOD thing.

Consider: The world's population is currently growing by 80 million people a year. The US is only taking in 3-4 million each year (legal + illegal) and you can see how smoothly that's going (sarcasm alert).

Maybe Gristle wants to make the case for expanding that number times 20? Let's open the borders even more and let in 80 million a year!

That way we can be the global safety valve keeping the rest of the world at zero population growth.

Good idea, Gristle?

Seeking reductio ad absurdum but yet another strawman. Maybe try coming back to reality. Also, your number 3-4 million number per year is also a bit suspect

What's a reasonable rate of net immigration between GM's and what you just proposed?

And what does it cost?

Hint: It's likely net legal immigration growth that's between 37% and 50% more than today to address skills gap and to help balance the pop. Not 20x.