Immigration Reverse! More Mexicans Are Leaving U.S. Than Coming In

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

So in other words, it's not true because YOU don't want to believe it is true? You're gonna have to try better than that hun.

No, because illegals, by another definition are "undocumented" . That is one of the biggest points of contention when it comes to illegal immigration in the first place! That they are essentially invisible to the government. That is the point he is trying to make, we don't know how many Illegals are really here, so how can we make an estimate of an unknown? That is an equation that is impossible to solve.

So you are saying that all processes to attempt to estimate this number are flawed? And because they are flawed we should NEVER attempt to estimate the number of illegals? Though I wonder which estimates YOU think are correct? The ones one Fox News that tell you that the numbers are much higher?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

So in other words, it's not true because YOU don't want to believe it is true? You're gonna have to try better than that hun.

He makes a very good point though.


He also asked a great question that went un-answered by you or the article. How can we or anyone know the numbers of illegal imigrants that come in or go out and see if there all of a sudden more going out then comming in ?

Sure your article talks about "studies" , that doesnt tell anyone much. Where they peer reviewed? If so then we should be able to see by who and how the studie was conducted.

Got any links for that and the numbers?

a reply to: everyone

How about do you have any links or numbers that are in conflict with what the OP is saying? I see a lot of doubt from conservative members here, yet no substance to their doubt. "It's not true because I don't know how they obtained the data, yet I refuse to post any data of my own."

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

How about do you have any links or numbers that are in conflict with what the OP is saying? I see a lot of doubt from conservative members here, yet no substance to their doubt. "It's not true because I don't know how they obtained the data, yet I refuse to post any data of my own."

The OP is making the claim so how about the OP backs them up?


My argument was in support of xuenchen's argument wich was "how can you have official numbers for this?" But then you come back with telling me that i or xuenchen should come up with numbers that prove the OP wrong? That is a very dishonest and not to mention cheap position tot take in support of the OP's claim.


Have a gander at this for a second. For perspective. It is educational and much needed in this thread.
star.txstate.edu...

I read in a study that eating egg yolks is just as bad as smoking cigarettes. This must be true because “they” conducted a study on it, right? This is the biggest misconception that people today have about studies and their reliability.

When engaging in a debate with someone, one of the first things a person tends to say to establish credibility is that there was a study proving their point. Random studies should not be sources used to establish credibility. The biggest fault with this reasoning—aside from the content itself—is that people do not actually know who conducted the study and how they are credible.

But again. You made the claim so its your repsonsibility first and foremost. Now be prepared to back it up and show us the studies and if they are peer reviewed or not and if so by who and how where they conducted.

Should not be very dificult to do if it is all proper and true so why not do it , why havent you done so already after being asked several times already
.

a reply to: everyone

Actually I made a claim, I backed it up with evidence. It is up to YOU to present evidence for you counter-claims. If my evidence isn't good enough, produce the counter-evidence that says so. Just because you don't like my evidence isn't a means to just dismiss it. So until you produce some counter-evidence I'm not going to worry about your argument. I tire of people telling me I'm wrong without proving it themselves. It gets tedious.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

Actually I made a claim, I backed it up with evidence. It is up to YOU to present evidence for you counter-claims. If my evidence isn't good enough, produce the counter-evidence that says so. Just because you don't like my evidence isn't a means to just dismiss it. So until you produce some counter-evidence I'm not going to worry about your argument. I tire of people telling me I'm wrong without proving it themselves. It gets tedious.

But you did not back it up with evidence. You only claim to have evidence but there is none. Wich is why the information about the study is being asked for. What you call evidence is not evidence. As you could have read in that link i provided you with.

I read in a study that eating egg yolks is just as bad as smoking cigarettes. This must be true because “they” conducted a study on it, right? This is the biggest misconception that people today have about studies and their reliability.

Anyone can come out and say X and claim it is true because "a studie".

What you have been asked for now numerous times is to provide substancial information about that study that you want to use as evidence for something. Wich is very much needed tbh. I also dont see why you would get tired of any of this. People are not sying that you are wrong , they are simply being skeptical because all that you have to show for so far is a study, from someone of wich nobody here knows anything about,how it was conducted and wether it is peer reviewed or not.

Its really very easy , you are the one that is making it into a tiresome issue but for some reason you refuse to give the requested information so people can actually agree with you if it is indeed a proper study. Or do you expect people to just take your word for it, especially as you refuse to give said information about it? Aparently you do. You seem like a very naive person surrounded by not so very naive people.

So how about you stop tiring yourself out and provide the information on who conducted the study, how it was conducted and who peer reviewed it? Witouth it is simply is no credibility to it. If it is so truthfull as you say it is then what is the problem? It would only make a solid case for you wouldnt it.

The only thing that is getting tedious here is your refusal to provide the information that is requested and needed to properly evaluate yours and the studies claim and until you do your OP is not worth anything, sorry. You have been given quite a few oportunities to do so. The fact that you dont only tells us that the study cant be trusted.


If you still dont i will be sure to in the future, take everything i see from you with a big grain of salt.



(you are acting a bit like a spoiled child about it tbh. "why dont they just believe me ! *Grabs ball and goes home"

a reply to: everyone

Don't lie to me, you aren't looking to agree with me. You are looking to poke holes in my argument and look for a way to tell me I'm wrong. The STUDY was done by Pew Research Center. Why are their studies good material for just about any other topic, but when I present one that goes against the common trope of "MILLIONS OF ILLEGALS ENTERING THE COUNTRY!" suddenly that source isn't good enough?

www.pewhispanic.org...

This is a mind boggling amount of nonsense! It's like saying "Studies show less ghosts are entering our dimension"
How do you trace something untraceable? But, everyone already said that, I'm just flogging a dead horse.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

3.14.2023 Musings...

So, after America is no longer a magic genie or golden goose, the influx of migrants will reverse and become an exodus?

That would help with the current BACKLOG of migrants waiting for their day in immigration court.

Immigration courts are backlogged around the country:

-Indianapolis: Booked through 2026
-Milwaukee: 2026
-San Antonio: 2027
-Atlanta: 2027
-Jacksonville: 2028
-New York City: 2032!

This is what happens when you willingly let millions of illegal aliens cross the border.

Source: twitter.com...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

So in other words, it's not true because YOU don't want to believe it is true? You're gonna have to try better than that hun.

yeah coz the mexican prez said mexico is safer and no fentanyl.

originally posted by: sarahvital

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

So in other words, it's not true because YOU don't want to believe it is true? You're gonna have to try better than that hun.

yeah coz the mexican prez said mexico is safer and no fentanyl.

Former AG Barr says the Mexican El Presidente is OWNED by the Cartels.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: sarahvital

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

So in other words, it's not true because YOU don't want to believe it is true? You're gonna have to try better than that hun.

yeah coz the mexican prez said mexico is safer and no fentanyl.

Former AG Barr says the Mexican El Presidente is OWNED by the Cartels.

no doubt and half the cops and military plus the DOJ.

we should do what nixon did to cambodia, in secret this time.

oh wait.