Yes, Virginia, there IS a problem, pt 4

| | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

The first three parts of this series have presented a wealth of information about problems arising from illegal immigration in Northern Virginia. Rounding out the responses to this debate is Nathan Muller of www.forthecause.us with a plethora of hard data about tax receipts, impact on wages, and costs borne by local and state governments (or, "taxpayers").


The charge of "racism" is simply a tactic to instill feelings of guilt and shame in the hope that it will paralyze us into inaction and make us disappear from the scene. We all know the charge is baseless, but some people actually think this works. In reality, such people are intellectually incapacitated and demonstrate it loudly by incessantly playing the race card.

Now, here are just a few facts to consider about the real impact of illegal immigration on our communities...


Please click the link below to read the rest of this important report.

Several studies this year demonstrate the social impact of illegal immigration. Most recently, a study by The Urban Institute, et al, showed that illegal aliens in the Washington, DC metropolitan area are not paying their fair share of taxes. The entire report can be found here, at the Urban Institute Web site.

The cost to taxpayers to support Virginia's 200,000 illegal or undocumented immigrants is $360 million annually. Of that amount, $125 million is spent in Fairfax County, according to Del. David B. Albo (R-Fairfax).

The extent of Social Security fraud and identity theft committed by illegal aliens has been amply documented by Lou Dobbs in the past two weeks. All these video clips are available at www.forthecause.us.

A study this year by the University of Florida found that immigrant families cost that state a net $1,800 per household annually. Economist David Denslow, a pro-immigration Democrat, found that legal and illegal immigrants consume much more in public services and pay far less in taxes than the average resident. The government services most consumed were education and Medicaid.

A study by the University of North Carolina released early this year shows illegal immigration is depressing wages by some $2 billion in North Carolina alone and that illegal aliens are now taking desirable jobs from middle class workers. Seventy-six percent of Hispanics who have moved to the state since 1995 are illegal aliens according to John Kasarda of the University of North Carolina. Among the studies other findings, the influx of illegals did create 90,000 new jobs, while suppressing overall wage growth by $2 billion statewide. Additional costs in 2004 included education, $476 million; health care, $299 million; and law enforcement, $51 million; for an additional $817 million in the budget.

Increasingly, state politicians nationwide are beginning to realize the cost of illegal immigration in their states. Governor Pawlenty of Minnesota estimates that it cost his state roughly $180 million last year.

The National Research Council has estimated that the net fiscal cost of immigration ranges from $11 billion to $22 billion per year, with most government expenditures on immigrants coming from state and local coffers, while most taxes paid by immigrants who actually do pay taxes go to the federal treasury. The net deficit is caused by a low level of tax payments by immigrants, because they are disproportionately low-skilled and thus earn low wages, and a higher rate of consumption of government services.

A study by the Center for Immigration Studies found that the average welfare payout to immigrant households, legal and illegal, is about $2,700 a year - more than 50 percent higher than the payout for citizens and legal immigrants.

I could go on and on, but why bother? Those who make the charge of "racism" aren't really interested in the facts.

Nathan Muller
www.forthecause.us


Nathan and his wife Linda will be two of our featured speakers at the Help Save Loudoun/NOVA TownHall meeting on June 20 in Sterling. If you are within driving distance, please take advantage of this unique educational opportunity.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Yes, Virginia, there IS a problem, pt 4.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/383

10 Comments

Texas Truth said:

Yes, there is a problem with immigration and racism. Both are intertwined with each other. Some of the bleeding heart liberals just don't get it. Please visit my blog for a unique perspective on it.

That is a great post, TT. Thanks for visiting!

zimzo said:

Yes, an excellent post. Instead of confronting whether our own rhetoric and attitudes are racist, let's just redefine racism. Let's say that racism means not assimilating. Great idea. But why stop there? Why not redefine racism as not supporting George Bush? Why be a little absurd when you can be very absurd. But to be frank, I'm not sure that I would want to assimilate into a community that believes you can take English words, throw away the dictionary and make up new definitions.

"confronting whether our own rhetoric and attitudes are racist"

Boy, it must get old, sometimes, having to go back to that same old well.

TT's post made a pretty clear point about certain immigrants having no interest in learning English or considering themselves "Americans."

What does that have to do with "redefining racism?" Not much. Which, I assume, is what sent you back to that well. A little plaster to hold your flimsy argument together.

Here's a proposition for you. Let's call it Joe's Axiom Number One - you can implement it, gratis, while defending the South:

"In a debate, the more you use the word 'define' the less sense you make. And quadruple that effect when you meld it into 'redefine.'"

zimzo said:

Gee, Joe I wasn't doing the redefining here. The post was called "A Different View of the Term Racism." It included this sentence: "They are committing blatant acts of racism by choosing to remain in these enclaves and isolate themselves from the culture to which they have immigrated." I don't recall ever seeing this definition of racism in a dictionary so naturally I assumed they must be "redefining" the word. I'm not sure why this led you to feel you have to go around making strange axioms. Usually in a debate it makes things go a lot smoother if you can agree on some sort of basic definitions of what words mean. I didn't realize you would find that threatening. My bad.

By the way Nathan, I love your WeHateGringos.com website. Very classy. You seem to have a thing about being accused of hate and racism. I guess that's better than not having a thing about it.

I'm going to gestate about these fine statistics you've brought and then as one of our finest immigrants (who really is working hard at learning English and assimilating--I hope he succeeds some day) once said: "I'll be back."

Zimzo,

I was wrong. I only skimmed the TT site so I did not catch the fact your post was based on his "definition" argument when I read yours afterward.

So the final two paragraphs in my response to you are completely inane. No axioms from Joe.

As I've said many times here: I'm an idiot.

Jury and court reporter: Strike those paragraphs from the record.

Bailiff, whack his pee-pee.

Now, I'd still disagree with you, but I'd do it differently. I would say failure to assimilate IS equivalent to racism....not in a direct, cause and effect relationship, but because it creates a separatist mentality.

We do not know for certain that the separatists are racists, I admit. But the seeds are there. A good argument can be made against allowing separatists to become citizens.

That's my objection, take it for what it's worth: And please recognize I occasionally miss some details.

I firmly defend the main thrust of my argument, though. If you don't want to become American yet you want to live here permanently, you are a problem.

zimzo said:

I see that you are indeed a true Virginia gentleman and I accept your mea culpa.

You make an interesting if somewhat convoluted put that failure to assimilate is racism bacause it creates a separatist mentality, but you are missing an essential element. There is a huge difference between members of a dominant culture seeking to be "separate" from minorities in that culture and members of a minority culture failing to assimilate into that culture for whatever reason. Whenever one enters another culture there is enormous pressure to assimilate in certain ways. For example, go to an Islamic culture and wear shorts out on the street some day and see what happens to you (I speak from experience here). Usually, one is not handed a book upon entering another country with all of that countries mores listed (although most guidebooks include some). Often one learns through trial and error. But there are other ways of assimilating that are more difficult, such as learning the language. I have encountered many Americans who live in other countries who never even bothered to learn how to say thank you in the native tongue. For many Spanish-speaking immigrants and those from other countries as well learning English is difficult and requires time and money that many don't have. Historically, many new immigrants to this country did not learn English and relied on their children to translate. I know many people who had Italian garndparents who didn't speak English for example. Immigrants also historically tended to remain in their own communities with other immigrants. Again, American ex-patriates often do the same thing.

So instead of pointing accusatory fingers at those you consider unwilling to assimilate (and assimilate to what exactly? Increasingly culture is becoming global anyway), you might try to see things from their point of view something that seems to be distressingly missing in this debate.

Jon Swift said:

With all of this talk of "race cards" and "redefining words," I think you might find these two recent posts on my modest blog very informative.

stay puft marshmallow man said:

the following is a quote from

http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=491

"DO IMMIGRANTS COST THE GOVERNMENT MORE THAN THEY CONTRIBUTE IN TAXES?

Research into this subject reveals a consensus: over time, immigrants and their descendants collectively provide more to the federal government in taxes than they receive in benefits. For example, a report by the National Academy of Sciences found that a typical immigrant and his or her descendants will pay an estimated $80,000 (in 1996 dollars) more in taxes than they will receive in combined local, state, and federal benefits over their lifetimes. [8]

Perhaps the myth that immigrants are costly to American taxpayers stems from the fact that, at the state and local level, immigrants use more in services than they pay in local taxes (this is true for the vast majority of native citizens as well). The National Academy of Sciences study found that the average immigrant imposes a net lifetime fiscal cost on state and local governments of $25,000, attributable to their use of schools, roads, and so on. Those with very low levels of education and skill cost states and localities the most, particularly in health care outlays for emergency room and other hospital services. However, most of the taxes that immigrants pay, including Social Security contributions, go to the federal government, and these payments are well in excess of federal benefits received. [9] On balance, immigrants pay substantially more than they receive from all levels of government combined. [10]"

kevin said:

And as Federal Govt continues to cut funding to State governments for services. . .

Zimzo, a gentleman as well.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM