Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Washington Wants Americans To Remain Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform Stupid

Washington Wants Americans To Remain Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform Stupid

Over the last nine years I have read hundreds of posts by Americans concerning illegal immigration and immigration reform.

The vast majority see this "problem" as a "no-brainer":  boot them all out, fine the heck out of the employers, fully enforce E-verify, seal the border, cut off the jobs magnet, have all police departments enforce immigration laws, arm the drones, and so on.

Here is what many American exceptionalists do not get:  illegal immigration and immigration reform have become profitized industries in the US.  They are not unlike Washington's 40+ year long war on drugs:  continual business profits are guaranteed by the never-ending enforcement "battles";  there is no money in ending the wars or creating solutions to really fix the problems.

Dig into Section 6 of this bill already passed by the Senate: S. 744: Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act also known as "Comprehensive Immigration Reform":

They initially want 46.3 billion taxpayer enforcement dollars in order to legalize 11.2 million undocumented people?  Check my math - isn't that about $4,134 dollars per each of the 11.2 million undocumted people?  

One billion is one thousand million(s).  Where is all this money really going?  Reagan's Amnesty legalized 3 million undocumented and initially cost the tax payer's some 900 million INS enforcement dollars.   Check out section  111 (b) (1)

Regan's Amnesty:  $900 million divided by 3 million (undocumented people) equals $300 per undocumented person?

S.744:  $46.3 billion divided by 11.2 million (undocumented people) equals some $4,134 per undocumented person?

Where can I invest in that kind of return?  Do you actually think the US government wants to end either illegal immigration or the war on drugs with those amounts of taxpayers' monies flowing into someone's' pockets?


No comments:

Post a Comment