Boehner is "hellbent" on passing amnesty this year

[Balog]

So glad those crazy open border libertarians aren't in power.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/18/boehner-reassures-gop-donors-im-hellbent-on-passing-immigration-reform-this-year/

[Strings]

republicans make stupid political move

In other news, scientists today announced that water is, in fact, wet. Still no word on the research to prove that fire is hot...

[Waitone]

Ahh, the eternal question.  How do you stop a dog from sucking eggs?

[AJ Dual]

Three part political calculus on his part.

- Boehner thinks the base is so pissed off after six years of Obama and Obamacare etc. that the GOP should make big gains anyway.

- Several business lobbies are pushing hard for the amnesty, because no way will the "native" American underclass scrub toilets, change sheets in hotels, lay tile, unless by some miracle the welfare rug gets pulled out from under them, and even then, they would be useless for any kind of 9-5 job for at least another generation.

- Someone is feeding him and the GOP leadership data that if passing Amnesty doesn't help the GOP, the fallout from not passing it would be "worse".  

Status quo is "better" AFAIK. At least illegals can't vote (as much... fraud, duh), and the big biz should just be willing to look the other way since they can pay them cash for less through subs.

Of course they're walking right into a trap. Never do what your enemy wants. Even if you think it will benefit you too.  

[RevDisk]

- Several business lobbies are pushing hard for the amnesty, because no way will the "native" American underclass scrub toilets, change sheets in hotels, lay tile, unless by some miracle the welfare rug gets pulled out from under them, and even then, they would be useless for any kind of 9-5 job for at least another generation.

Or they decide to may have to pay more to get someone to do it. I will say one truism about American corporations. They will scream like branded cattle if forced to raise wages due to market forces. They'll indulge in H1B visa fraud, demand high visa quotas, push for illegal immigrant amnesty, etc with exactly zero regard for the consequences of their actions.

 

[dogmush]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hell-bent

hell bent: Impetuously or recklessly determined to do or achieve something

Interesting choice of adjective for him to use. Accurate, but unintentionally honest.

[Scout26]

Passing amnesty will guarantee that another Republican will never be elected president and that the R's will forever* be the minority party.

All one has to do is look at CA.  It has not gone R since 1988.  The remaining "toss-up" states will be forever blue should amnesty pass.


It's one thing to be stupid, it's another entirely to be suicidal.  






*forever- being until the end of the Republic.  Or next Thursday....

[MechAg94]

In addition, they have a country with an economy and unemployement that have Obama's name written all over it, yet they want to do something that will put "REPUBLICAN" right up there with Obama to the point they will be blamed for everything.

[AJ Dual]

Or they decide to may have to pay more to get someone to do it. I will say one truism about American corporations. They will scream like branded cattle if forced to raise wages due to market forces. They'll indulge in H1B visa fraud, demand high visa quotas, push for illegal immigrant amnesty, etc with exactly zero regard for the consequences of their actions.

 

Agreed.

And this is definitely an instance where Libertarian and political Right groups need to get vocal and start calling out and publicly criticizing business interests.

It would also sow a lot of good FUD and cog-dis among the great unwashed who are knee-jerk Leftists/Democrats for "because reasons" and "fairness" etc. Pointing out what it does to union labor and inner city poor blacks is good too.

A very concrete way to hammer home the conservative message of "Yes, we DO want you to get ahead..."

[Scout26]

Agreed.

And this is definitely an instance where Libertarian and political Right groups need to get vocal and start calling out and publicly criticizing business interests.

It would also sow a lot of good FUD and cog-dis among the great unwashed who are knee-jerk Leftists/Democrats for "because reasons" and "fairness" etc. Pointing out what it does to union labor and inner city poor blacks is good too.

A very concrete way to hammer home the conservative message of "Yes, we DO want you to get ahead..."

This.  That's a winner of message.  We want you to make more money, but you can't if illegals who work for far less take your job.

[roo_ster]

Agreed.

And this is definitely an instance where Libertarian and political Right groups need to get vocal and start calling out and publicly criticizing business interests.

It would also sow a lot of good FUD and cog-dis among the great unwashed who are knee-jerk Leftists/Democrats for "because reasons" and "fairness" etc. Pointing out what it does to union labor and inner city poor blacks is good too.

A very concrete way to hammer home the conservative message of "Yes, we DO want you to get ahead..."

Most self-declared libertarians are open-borders fanatics.  They will get vocal in opposition to border control and pro-citizen measures.  Expect no help from that quarter.

Democrats have abandoned the white working class as well as the black working class in favor of homosexuals and illegal aliens.  Thw WWC is ripe for the picking if we do as you say.  The BWC will vote race, race, and more race.  Even if the Dems slaughter black babies on Main Street to supplement protein shakes for AIDS patients, they will still vote Dem.

[RevDisk]

Most self-declared libertarians are open-borders fanatics.  They will get vocal in opposition to border control and pro-citizen measures.  Expect no help from that quarter.

Democrats have abandoned the white working class as well as the black working class in favor of homosexuals and illegal aliens.  Thw WWC is ripe for the picking if we do as you say.  The BWC will vote race, race, and more race.  Even if the Dems slaughter black babies on Main Street to supplement protein shakes for AIDS patients, they will still vote Dem.

Eh, haven't met that many self-declared libertarians that want open borders in our current situation. Unless they intentionally want the country to financially explode, so that some fabled "return to Constitutional rule" utopia can descend from the heavens. Kinda like the folks who want to kickstart Armageddon in order to hasten the Second Coming. Folks looking to start the apocalypse are not new or original. Plenty of small-L libertarians are sane and don't wish to destroy America, which would occur with open borders.

Re Democrats abandoning the middle class, meh. It's true and it isn't. Yes, they ARE putting the knife in when it comes to the middle classes. But they are trying to position themselves as the folks keeping the Evil Big Corporations at bay, plus keeping the warmongering freedom-stealing neocons at bay. The Republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot by making really bad decisions. The Dems want the Republicans to have a reputation of not being friendly towards women, gays or minorities. Republican politicians are often happy to assist the Dems in doing so.

If Republicans restrained themselves from shoveling morality legislation and stuck to petty graft while continuing the lie that they care about restraining government, they'd be doing much better than they currently are. Getting the GOP to actually restrain government is likely impossible. It's like telling a person not to breathe.

[roo_ster]

Rev:

Open borders libertarians are very common and not outside the libertarian mainstream(1).  For instance, is the Wall Street Journal looking to armageddon-it?  They want a constitutional amendment, "There shall be open borders."  Bryan Caplan does not seem to be an "immenentize the eschaton for fun & profit" sort of guy. http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/03/open_borders_da.html

Look at Reason, Cato, and many other self-avowedly libertarian orgs.  Open borders is their default position.

IOW, I think you are wrong given the evidence.



(1) "Libertarian mainstream" may sound chuckle-worthy, but it does describe something real.

[RevDisk]

Well, depends. Do they say "open borders after we went the welfare state and entitlement programs" or "open borders right here and now" ?

First is understandable, even if I don't completely agree.
Second is elaborate suicide or apocalypse mongering. If so, I admit my mistake and apologize for my error, while horrified at such insanity and depravity.

[charby]

I'm torn on amnestry

Against: for the same reasons mentioned above

For: well now they are going to have to pay income, FICA and Medicare taxes. Might be cheaper then trying to deport everyone.

[RevDisk]

I'm torn on amnestry

Against: for the same reasons mentioned above

For: well now they are going to have to pay income, FICA and Medicare taxes. Might be cheaper then trying to deport everyone.

Uhm, could fine them equal to income, FICA and Medicare for the duration of their illegal stay in the US and then deport them? Besides, you know, breaking the law by illegally entering the country, they DO actually owe taxes on illegal employment.

I honestly don't care which border an illegal immigrant comes from. Yes, our immigration system sucks and likely needs an overhaul. But you don't make a strong argument for citizenship by breaking the law and committing numerous crimes. I'm not a big "fair" advocate, but I question the wisdom of rewarding those that break the law and punishing those that follow the law.

[charby]

Uhm, could fine them equal to income, FICA and Medicare for the duration of their illegal stay in the US and then deport them? Besides, you know, breaking the law by illegally entering the country, they DO actually owe taxes on illegal employment.

I agree but how are you going to collect that money?

[Balog]

Well, depends. Do they say "open borders after we went the welfare state and entitlement programs" or "open borders right here and now" ?

First is understandable, even if I don't completely agree.
Second is elaborate suicide or apocalypse mongering. If so, I admit my mistake and apologize for my error, while horrified at such insanity and depravity.

A lot of the folks I see don't really care about the order. They view both as important goals and they will take either when they can get it.

[brimic]

Open Borders actually makes sense, provided there aren't welfare incentives to pull the wrong people across the border.
Without reducing, removing, restricitng 'safety net' benefits, there is no good reason to relax the border.

[roo_ster]

Well, depends. Do they say "open borders after we went the welfare state and entitlement programs" or "open borders right here and now" ?

First is understandable, even if I don't completely agree.
Second is elaborate suicide or apocalypse mongering. If so, I admit my mistake and apologize for my error, while horrified at such insanity and depravity.

Here & now.  I usually riposte with Milton Friedman on the topic (can't have open borders with a welfare state) but that gets shrugged off.  MF is insufficiently libertarian on this topic.

Check out the intelligence squared debate "Let Anyone Take a Job Anywhere." 
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/909-let-anyone-take-a-job-anywhere

Bryan Caplan, econ prof at G Mason U, uses the debate to push for open borders, which is what the proposition would require.  His sidekick is Vivek Wadhwa, who also is for it.  He pushes the techno-libertarian open borders line.  Both think it is a great idea, not apocalypse-courting "lets bring down the whole system hahahahahah!" crazy talk.

Ron Unz and Kathleen Newland won (no to the proposition) pretty handily, mostly because though Unz is a geeky computer guy, he understands how to appeal to an audience (Manhattan). 

I'm torn on amnestry

Against: for the same reasons mentioned above

For: well now they are going to have to pay income, FICA and Medicare taxes. Might be cheaper then trying to deport everyone.

The problem is that most of the illegals make little money and consume taxpayer-funded public services disproportionately. 

The crazy fact is, in America you gotta make in excess of $40-$50k/year on average (and pay the full panoply of taxes on that income: sales, income, FICA, etc) to start pulling the wagon instead of being in the wagon.  This is for ANY resident in the USA, legal or otherwise.  Includes all the usual benefits one associates with welfare, plus the gov;t's legitimate activities like roads & such.

Given that illegals are disproportionately poor, most are pretty much in the wagon, not pulling ("pulling" meaning tax dollars paid > tax dollars consumed in gov't activity).

About 30% or more get on some sort of means-tested welfare once htey cross the Rio Grande.  And they have greater birthrates in America than they do in Mexico.  Because Americans subsidize their fecundity.

Deportation is relatively inexpensive, especially if you project out medicaid/medicare/social security costs.  Also, it has been demonstrated that when the law is applied with vigor, illegals skeedattle.  Seen recently in several states and back in the 1950s with Operation Wetback.  Most self-deport once the heat is on.  We could spend more on it by recording and using a "one dip and you're out" policy (one interaction with gov't: ER room, school, police, etc. and then back home).

[Balog]

Illegals aren't the ones paying lobbyists millions, and giving congress-critters cushy six figure sinecures once they leave office. If you want to get politicians to stop illegal immigration, you need to stop the people who are bribing Congress.

[Waitone]

What the political class does not get is by and large conservatives (you supply the definition) do not trust them.  We've seen the Lucy and Charlie Brown schtik too many time before to actually buy the heartfelt sincerity Jeb Bush or Chuck Schumer or Lindsey Graham.  The operating assumption is they are lying about the need for immigration reform.  It is clearly needed to anyone with any self-awareness; we simply can not trust parties to do as they say they will because they are liars.  Full stop. 

Note to republicans -- spend time rehabilitating your image into someone conservatives trust.  Then get back to us about immigration fixes.

[erictank]

Eh, haven't met that many self-declared libertarians that want open borders in our current situation. Unless they intentionally want the country to financially explode, so that some fabled "return to Constitutional rule" utopia can descend from the heavens. Kinda like the folks who want to kickstart Armageddon in order to hasten the Second Coming. Folks looking to start the apocalypse are not new or original. Plenty of small-L libertarians are sane and don't wish to destroy America, which would occur with open borders.

Most open-borders libertarian types I know or have heard of seem to be of the strongly-held opinion that welfare reform needs to come *FIRST*. Then you can open the borders, after having taken away the incentive to come in and mooch off a welfare society built on the backs of those choosing to work for a living.

Personally, I *WANT* motivated immigrants seeking those better jobs, looking for the freedom to innovate, to work hard and succeed. Success does *NOT* have to be a zero-sum game. But if we're not going to remove the ability to mooch as stated above, it WOULD destroy the country - we can't sustain what we're dealing with now, even.

[Scout26]

For: well now they are going to have to pay income, FICA and Medicare taxes. Might be cheaper then trying to deport everyone.

But no, they are not paying income taxes.  They get Earned Income Credit and the Child Tax Credit for kids that don't even live in the US.   And whatever FICA taxes they pay, they get back and then some once they go back to Mexico and hit age 62/65 and apply.  (Yes, they get a monthly check, just like everyone else.)

I bet we could begin to deport ~15 million illegals for less then $4 billion per year.  http://wealthalchemyblog.com/2012/05/tax-fraud-by-illegal-immigrants-costs-uncle-sam-4-2-billion/

Once word gets out that Uncle Sugar is rounding them up, then there will probably be a some "Self-deportation", so the numbers also will drop that way.

And "Anchor babies"?  Sorry if neither Mom nor Dad is a citizen, then tough cookies, you get to go back to your parents homeland.   Show me the word "fair" on your birth certificate.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

But no, they are not paying income taxes.  They get Earned Income Credit and the Child Tax Credit for kids that don't even live in the US.   And whatever FICA taxes they pay, they get back and then some once they go back to Mexico and hit age 62/65 and apply.  (Yes, they get a monthly check, just like everyone else.)

I bet we could begin to deport ~15 million illegals for less then $4 billion per year.  http://wealthalchemyblog.com/2012/05/tax-fraud-by-illegal-immigrants-costs-uncle-sam-4-2-billion/

Once word gets out that Uncle Sugar is rounding them up, then there will probably be a some "Self-deportation", so the numbers also will drop that way.

And "Anchor babies"?  Sorry if neither Mom nor Dad is a citizen, then tough cookies, you get to go back to your parents homeland.   Show me the word "fair" on your birth certificate.

not exactly true

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-04-10-immigrantstaxes_N.htm

and a better indepth crunch of the numbers

a more broad longer look
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/02/immigration-and-social-security/

this last piece from business insider gets to bottom line numbers
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-illegal-immigrants-pay-taxes-2012-3