CBO Says DREAMERS Will Cost Taxpayers $26 Billion Over Next 10 Years

[Epic Beard Man]

Ah poor baby....him for got to follow the link to the CBO report that the Fox story used.....try reading once in awhile.

No thank you. How about getting the link from an independent news source that can validate your claim.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I do no agree with punishing kids, and I do not agree with giving them special consideration such as Citizenship unless they get in the back of the line. I do support the idea of allowing them special consideration if they perform a direct service to the country, say like going into the military.

You cannot do that. We are not Israel. you cannot ask kids who aren't even graduates of high school to be asked to serve in the military. That is like asking a kid in kindergarten if they can sign their own name to enlist in the future. Your idea is about ultimatums.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

If you do not speak the language of your adopted country you do not assimilate into society. The US is the only country I know of that takes special care to insure that a non-English speaking person can be assisted. Try that in any other county.

First off it is unconstitutional to make laws to force others to speak English plain and simple. But hey blame the government that is too lazy to pay its citizens therefore relying on outside help. Now that these people are taking advantage of the system now you want them to assimilate. LOL

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

If you do not speak the language of your adopted country you do not assimilate into society. The US is the only country I know of that takes special care to insure that a non-English speaking person can be assisted. Try that in any other county.

You need to get out more. There's a bunch of countries that offer such services (Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain. ..). There's even a bunch of countries with MULTIPLE official languages (Canada, Eire, Wales, Switzerland...).

Insular and parochial American exceptionalism is frustrating.

 

[leibowde84]

Keeping 'Dreamers' would cost taxpayers $26B over next 10 years, feds say

According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office)
Allowing 2 million illegal immigrant “Dreamers” to remain in the U.S. would cost taxpayers $25.9 billion over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office says in a report released Friday. In addition
S 1615 Dream Act of 2017

Nevertheless, they were brought here as children, so this is their home. It would be monstrously cruel to force them to leave a country they have spent practically their whole life in, where the vast majority of them are law abiding, contributing members of society.

 

[leibowde84]

Illegal activity shouldn't be encouraged.

The dreamers didn't break the law. Their parents did. Why should we punish dreamers for actions that their parents took?

 

[esmith]

The dreamers didn't break the law. Their parents did. Why should we punish dreamers for actions that their parents took?

Again I do not want to kick them out of the country, neither do I want them to grant them citizenship immediately; they need to go to the end of the line. It doesn't matter how they got here, they are in the country illegally. But I guess you really don't care about the law.

 

[suncowiam]

Again I do not want to kick them out of the country, neither do I want them to grant them citizenship immediately; they need to go to the end of the line. It doesn't matter how they got here, they are in the country illegally. But I guess you really don't care about the law.

I can agree with you on this. It's complicated but as long as they have a tether to our system for citizenship as opposed to simply just kicking them out, then I think that can also be a good alternative.

I have relatives that are also trying to be citizens. They should not be penalized for doing it the legal correct way.

 

[leibowde84]

Again I do not want to kick them out of the country, neither do I want them to grant them citizenship immediately; they need to go to the end of the line. It doesn't matter how they got here, they are in the country illegally. But I guess you really don't care about the law.

I care deeply about the law. It is ridiculous and unreasonable to assume that from what I said. It is a very Trumpian strategy though, so I shouldn't be surprised. It's almost as dishonest as saying "those who are against my fabulous wall must not care about national security."

But, in response to your comment, if they go to the back of the line they are forced to leave and go to a country where they have never lived, for all intents and purposes. So, in effect, you are advocating kicking them out of the country, at least temporarily (temporarily = years in this context).

 

[esmith]

But, in response to your comment, if they go to the back of the line they are forced to leave and go to a country where they have never lived, for all intents and purposes. So, in effect, you are advocating kicking them out of the country, at least temporarily (temporarily = years in this context).

Where do you come up with that ridiculous statement????
They are eligible for green cards or Visas?

 

[Stanyon]

Mass immigration worked out well for the Native Americans.

 

[Sunstone]

Guess you didn't read the CBO report did you.

Guess you didn't read my response. I was not talking about tax revenue. I was talking about GDP. That's why I said "boost the economy". Is it asking too much to ask you to take a moment to understand what's being said before snapping off a response?

 

[esmith]

Guess you didn't read my response. I was not talking about tax revenue. I was talking about GDP. That's why I said "boost the economy". Is it asking too much to ask you to take a moment to understand what's being said before snapping off a response?

That is only an opinion that they will increase the GDP.

See follow-on post for correction

 

[ImmortalFlame]

That is only an opinion that they will increase the GDP.

Reporting by the Center for American Progress has found that nearly 91% of DACA recipients (Svajlenka, Jawetz and Bautista-Chavez, 2017) are currently employed across the country, contributing billions of dollars to our communities, our economy, and in tax revenue. Removing DACA recipients from the workforce will cost $460.3 billion in GDP loss over a decade (Svajlenka, Jawetz and Bautista-Chavez, 2017). It will cost employers $3.4 billion in unnecessary turnover costs, and would cut contributions to Medicare and Social Security by $24.6 billion over a decade (Magaña-Salgado, 2016). Moreover, DACA recipients have been important drivers of economic growth in their communities. Nearly 6% of DACA recipients have launched businesses, many employing American citizens (Wong et al., 2016). Further, almost 55% of DACA recipients purchased a vehicle, and more than one in ten have purchased their first home (Brannon and Albright, 2017).

SOURCE:
https://dreamers.fwd.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/20170823-DACA-Job-Loss-Report.pdf

 

[Underhill]

Keeping 'Dreamers' would cost taxpayers $26B over next 10 years, feds say

According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office)
Allowing 2 million illegal immigrant “Dreamers” to remain in the U.S. would cost taxpayers $25.9 billion over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office says in a report released Friday. In addition
S 1615 Dream Act of 2017

A pittance.

 

[esmith]

Guess you didn't read my response. I was not talking about tax revenue. I was talking about GDP. That's why I said "boost the economy". Is it asking too much to ask you to take a moment to understand what's being said before snapping off a response?

After reading the report again and paying closer attention to your above statement I was wrong in my first response.
You are saying that the Dreamers will increase the GDP/economy . However in order to increase the economy one must increase the GDP, which is which is defined as the combined value of all goods and services produced within a country in a year.
So please explain how you come to the conclusion that the Dreamers will increase the GDP.

And yes I read post #56.
Again I see no problem with them obtaining legal status to remain in the U.S. However, I have a problem allowing them to obtain Citizenship ahead of those already in line. In addition the US has a immigration quota of 675,000 a year. So did their numbers negatively affect the number of those seeking legal immigration into the U.S. ? I don't know, but it is something one must ask oneself.
Yes the Immigration Act of 1924 needs to be thrown out and a new one written on the current needs of this country.
In my opinion immigration into this country should be based on the needs of the country each year and the benefit the U.S. gains from these immigrants.
I would start with the following. (Number 1 will probably not happen in my lifetime)
Amend the Constitution to do away with the so called "anchor baby" policy
Do away with so called "chain immigration"
Do away with the "lottery Visa" system
Do away with country quota system.

 

[leibowde84]

[QUOTE="leibowde84, post: 5432175, member: 56049"
But, in response to your comment, if they go to the back of the line they are forced to leave and go to a country where they have never lived, for all intents and purposes. So, in effect, you are advocating kicking them out of the country, at least temporarily (temporarily = years in this context).

Where do you come up with that ridiculous statement????
They are eligible for green cards or Visas?[/QUOTE]
Illegal immigrants are not eligible for green cards or visas. If the Dreamers Act goes down, the dreamers will become illegal immigrants. Or are you advocating for another law that allows them to stay until they can apply for a Green Card and remove the requirement for them to return to their country of origin first? Because, that would all be necessary.

 

[esmith]

But, in response to your comment, if they go to the back of the line they are forced to leave and go to a country where they have never lived, for all intents and purposes. So, in effect, you are advocating kicking them out of the country, at least temporarily (temporarily = years in this context).

Where do you come up with that ridiculous statement????
They are eligible for green cards or Visas?

Illegal immigrants are not eligible for green cards or visas. If the Dreamers Act goes down, the dreamers will become illegal immigrants. Or are you advocating for another law that allows them to stay until they can apply for a Green Card and remove the requirement for them to return to their country of origin first? Because, that would all be necessary.

I tried to square-away your post not sure if I got it right.
Will try and explain what I meant when I said "Where do you come up with that ridiculous statement????
They are eligible for green cards or Visas?"
If they have to go back to the back of the line to obtain Citizenship that means that they would be recognized as "legal" immigrants. That is the only option other than deporting them. If they are now considered "legal" immigrants they can get a green card or Visa. Is that not correct?

 

[Milton Platt]

No, what did they do.....Oh that's right they reported on a report by the CBO ( which was supplied). You have a problem with that or is it you are blinded by your leftwing media sources.

But what is the long term benefit to the economy?

 

[esmith]

But what is the long term benefit to the economy?

Who the Dreamers? Nope they will have little or no effect on the economy and will cost the taxpayers more than they contribute.