It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Immigration at a NET LOSS, why all the fuss?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Can somebody explain to me, why it is that you are all so upset about the boarder?

Mexicans are LEAVING the US. There's a NET LOSS of immigration or NET 0 gain during the last 4 years.

Wiki had the most obvious information, there are plenty of other sources.

Wiki


The reduction has been driven mainly by a decrease in the number of new immigrants from Mexico, the single largest source. Net immigration from Mexico to the U.S. has stopped and possibly reversed since 2010. At its peak in 2000, about 770,000 immigrants arrived annually from Mexico; the majority arrived illegally. By 2010, the inflow had dropped to about 140,000—a majority of whom arrived as legal immigrants.[1]

One immigration research group reported that the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. was 12.5 million in August 2007 at its peak. This decreased by 1.3 million to 11.2 million by July 2008 (11%) due to either increased law enforcement or fewer job opportunities.[2] Based on the Department of Homeland Security estimates in 2009, unauthorized immigrant population living in the United States decreased to 10.8 million in January 2009 from 11.6 million in January 2008. Between 2000 and 2009, the unauthorized population grew by 27 percent.[3]


SO Explain to me, why people are crying and screaming about border security, when in fact, more people are trying to LEAVE than enter?

I get the Amnesty thing, the path to citizenship, that all has to be talked about and legislated accordingly. But all of this faux outrage over the fact that people are entering 'illegally' en mass, needs to stop.

Because it's just not true, and it's a fake, wedge issue being created on one side or another.

~Tenth




posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
The same as it's always been, it's largely about fear mongering:

1. They're here to take your jobs!
2. They're driving down wages!
3. They have diseases!
4. They're drug smugglers!
5. They'll rape your women and molest your children!
6. They won't assimilate! You'll have to learn another language!

EDIT:

The first immigration laws were passed in response to the Yellow Peril.


Yellow Peril (sometimes Yellow Terror) was a color metaphor for race that originated in the late nineteenth century with Chinese immigrants as coolie slaves or laborers to various Western countries, notably the United States. It was later associated with the Japanese during the mid-20th century, due to Japanese military expansion, and eventually extended to all Asians of East and Southeast Asian descent.

The term refers to perceptions regarding the skin color of East Asians, the fear that the mass immigration of Asians threatened white wages and standards of living, and the fear that they would eventually take over and destroy western civilization, replacing it with their ways of life and values.


Ironically, descendants of some of the very immigrant groups that were denigrated by the 19th and early 20th century WASPs didn't destroy America and now they too can join in the abject xenophobia!

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
**

** As long as they already speak English, aren't actually poor and are of the appropriate ethnicity
edit on 2014-7-8 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
It's a political pawn. That's it. It can be used by one side AND the other to gain votes. And, so, it will be done.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   


Explain to me, why people are crying and screaming about border security, when in fact, more people are trying to LEAVE than enter?


The same reason they're screaming about taxes being too high when they're at the lowest in 70 years.

This is great news to me though, as I am very worried about our country being destroyed be growth.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
An issue to consider is exactly what's happening now, in terms of the droves of children coming in. A precedent has been set that falsely says the US is WIDE OPEN to anyone needing a job, education, and the American dream - no matter how you get here. It's one thing to have regular immigrant patterns modeled on legal entry - it's another to have 60,000 kids flocking to get in and accept them without conditions or legal responsibilities.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Anything to take your mind off of the plundering of the productive classes by parasites.


(post by Granite removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
I have been doing a lot of searching, mind if I drop this here?

Biden Secretly Slipped Language Preventing Deportation Of Kids Into 2008 Renewal Of Clinton Sex Law
Read more at patdollard.com... rafficking-law/#9LiRbzFzqbMxpFu7.99



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
" Immigration at a NET LOSS, why all the fuss? "

The "net loss" between the U.S. and Mexico is not the issue.

1. the "new net" is from other countries it seems. The officials keep emphasizing other countries in Central America, not Mexico, and they are giving "official" counts.

2. There's still an *Estimated* 10 or 12 million "illegal" immigrants in the U.S. according to the "estimates".

3. We have a major "amnesty" push going on for a long time. If there were no "issues", why are they pressing the "issue" ?

4. "Undetected" smuggling certainly out-numbers "detected" smuggling. Smuggling includes goods as well as people.


In the meantime, we have the systems on overload.

The "overloads" contribute to the economic debt.

Maybe that's the underlying plan?



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

What net loss?



According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), different estimates of the total number of illegal immigrants vary depending on how the term is defined.[11] There are also questions about data reliability.[1


en.wikipedia.org...

When they make up their own names like 'unaccompanied children', 'undocumented whatever the hell they call them'.

But then again IF there is a net loss.

What is with all the rush with 'reform' and 'amnesty'.
edit on 8-7-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
For those saying that the fear of them taking jobs is just fear mongering:

c7.nrostatic.com...

They do. They price out a substantial portion of domestic labor from the market. This includes jobs for teenagers. People are always complaining about the younger generations not having a good work ethic etc. How can they develop a work ethic to begin with if they can't even get a job because they're legal, and therefore subject to taxes, minimum wage requirements, group benefits if they apply, and a host of other associated costs?

Right now, California has about 12% of the country's population. However, about 34% of the country's entire welfare recipients reside in California. Municipalities and state funded institutions like hospitals are right on the precipice of bankruptcy.

media.utsandiego.com...

Amnesty isn't a solution, economically, because it would require all of the illegal residents with jobs to start paying taxes on their income. Their income would also be subject to minimum wage laws. Combine those two requirements, and they would instantly be priced out of the labor pool for the jobs they currently have and not only add to the unemployment statistic, but also add to the tax burden by increasing the welfare population statistic. The only place these jobs could feasibly go in a short period of time would be to NEW illegal residents who weren't there for amnesty. It would be instant economic catastrophe, and a negative feedback loop. Being an economics major in college, I don't say this lightly.

I'm not anti-immigration. My parents were immigrants. They immigrated legally, they spent years penetrating the bureaucracy and thousands in legal fees.

I'm for controlled and considered immigration. The current position of the US isn't that. Every single instance in history when immigration goes unchecked, the host society dissolves or becomes so similar to the migrant society, that it ceases to exist anyway. Every single time in history when immigration is on the host society's terms, it's a huge benefit to said society with almost no negative side effects.

It absolutely annihilates my sense of sanity to think that this could possibly be an issue for any well educated and or reasonable human being.

Edit: Included Statistical Sources
edit on 8-7-2014 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
How can you claim to have numbers on a net loss when they are ILLEGAL? Yes you might have a net loss on people that are documented. Or even those who have been caught. But the majority don't get caught or change identities.....

Sometimes the congnitive disconnect is so thick here it's sickening.....



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

So where is the data showing otherwise?

This is the problem. Show data, claim data is irrelevant, or not accurate and then keep talking the same talking points you were.

Without any additional facts. This is what bothers me.

Multiple sources, report a NET LOSS or NET 0 immigration. Where are the sources claiming otherwise?

~Tenth



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Because they're breaking laws. We're screaming for the existing laws to be enforced. Legal immigration is great - it works - it enhances our nation. Flocks of illegals only support corporatists and politicians who use them for cheap labor pools and voting bases.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Don't you love how the word net is used, then qualified by a time frame. Correlate that time frame to the US's economic position and hey look, the estimated number correlates rather well with the strength of the economy. Makes sense, come when there's money to be made, leave when there isn't.

Net net net... there's still + ~11 million people here illegally.

ManBehindTheMask, You've nailed it. There seems to be a cognitive disconnect that prevents some individuals from putting 2 + 2 together to get 4.



Ironically, descendants of some of the very immigrant groups that were denigrated by the 19th and early 20th century WASPs didn't destroy America and now they too can join in the abject xenophobia!


Until the Immigration and Nationality act of 1965, Immigration into the US was strictly controlled. Until this point, no immigrant population could destroy our formula for success through sheer weight of numbers because they immigrated on our terms, not theirs.
edit on 8-7-2014 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

If it is a net loss, then why does Obama want immigration reform?

If it is a net loss, why did Obama say, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform"?

Read more at iowntheworld.com...

Does it matter if only 4 million are breaking the law instead of 5 million?

If there are less bank robberies, do we excuse the crime?



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
I'm not sure, there's a thread talking about illegals having infections that's absolutely insane in the reasoning presented. One person mistakes information, others roll with it, and keep flipping it a bit.. next thing you know, we're all going to die, just cause, and it's all Obama's or somebodies fault, I dunno...

Just seems really freaking weird.

I can't help but feel this is hardcore propaganda, but how it ends up being shaped, and who gains the most from this irrational nonsense, I'm not sure yet.

What I know is that trying to poke holes in the delusions will certainly get you negatively labeled. Truth doesn't seem to be wanted on this site all too much.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
With all due respect, it's extremely naive to believe for one minute that numerical statistics on a wiki page represent the reality of illegal immigration.

Anybody in America who thinks that illegal immigration hasn't created extremely serious and in many cases irreversible problems in this country, needs to take their family and relocate to a U.S. border city. I was born and raised in Los Angeles county, and have lived and worked in San Diego county for the past four decades.

There are many Americans who don't have the luxury of viewing illegal immigration from an ivory tower, instead like myself they've had to spend years in the trenches, working and competing with this overwhelming surplus of human labor. Today for one reason or another, I continue to live in poverty among them on the fringes of society.


edit on 8-7-2014 by seasoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: seasoul




With all due respect, it's extremely naive to believe for one minute that numerical statistics on a wiki page represent the reality of illegal immigration.


Oh now!

Government census workers go around to every city in the country, and knock on doors, and ask people if they are 'illegal'.

If so they check a box. Then they scan the results and emails them back where they get stored on a hard drive.

Hope it doesn't crash.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask




How can you claim to have numbers on a net loss when they are ILLEGAL? Y


The logic is to ignore the net gain, and focus on the net loss.

We have a NET GAIN of 11 million illegals.

We have NET 'loss' of 900,000 illegals that come across that border every YEAR.

And that is a 'positive' thing.

Fuzzy math at work.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join