Trump to almost for sure end the Dreamers Program (illegal immigrants)

[wing2000]

It costs six times what it would to deport them to keep them:

Deporting the country’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants would cost nearly $125 billion, but allowing them to remain in the U.S. could cost taxpayers far more, according to a new report being released Thursday by a think tank that wants to see stricter immigration limits.

Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, crunched the numbers and found that the current population of illegal immigrants will drain nearly $750 billion from taxpayers over their lifetimes — amounting to six times the deportation costs. (Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers nearly $750 billion over lifetime: Report. Washington Times)​

Of course a study by the Center for Immigration Studies would say that....

In the past, their studies have been found to be flawed.

Center for Immigration Studies Report Exaggerates Immigrant Welfare Use

 

[Ana the Ist]

Wait a second - the Dreamers were NOT born in this country; they were brought here when they were children. Any brothers and sisters they might have who were born here can not be deported as they are naturally born citizens.

The Dreamers grew up here and were educated here. They may not even speak their parents' native language. If they get deported, they will be as foreigners. Since we've already educated them, it would be a waste of resources to throw them out now when they've already integrated into our society.

The poll has no option for me to choose - I would take the third but it is wrong because while this is horrible, all these people DON'T want to stay in - or be deported to - the country they were born, they want to stay HERE.

You are correct...and as the act applies, I'm pretty sure that anyone who applied for dreamer status while the law was passed cannot be deported simply because the law was rescinded...they would essentially be "grandfathered in".

Now, perhaps there are things one could do that would alter their dreamer status under DACA...such as commit a felony...I don't know. As it stands though, I don't think they can be deported simply because the law was repealed. Instead, repealing the law means that no new illegals can apply for the status.

 

[Allandavid]

It costs six times what it would to deport them to keep them:

Deporting the country’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants would cost nearly $125 billion, but allowing them to remain in the U.S. could cost taxpayers far more, according to a new report being released Thursday by a think tank that wants to see stricter immigration limits.

Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, crunched the numbers and found that the current population of illegal immigrants will drain nearly $750 billion from taxpayers over their lifetimes — amounting to six times the deportation costs. (Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers nearly $750 billion over lifetime: Report. Washington Times)​

Aren't we just referring to DACA in this thread...? What is the economic cost/benefit of deporting that 800,000 or so...?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

It costs six times what it would to deport them to keep them:

Deporting the country’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants would cost nearly $125 billion, but allowing them to remain in the U.S. could cost taxpayers far more, according to a new report being released Thursday by a think tank that wants to see stricter immigration limits.

Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, crunched the numbers and found that the current population of illegal immigrants will drain nearly $750 billion from taxpayers over their lifetimes — amounting to six times the deportation costs. (Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers nearly $750 billion over lifetime: Report. Washington Times)​

I'm not actually sure what the economic costs would be for one or the other but the point is, it would be tremendously expensive either way. Conservatives (who so often complain about wasteful government spending) would seemingly have no problem with the costs of moving 20 million or so people out of the country immediately but as soon as you mention possibly spending a similar amount on things like public college education or healthcare (for American citizens, mind you) we suddenly don't have enough money to spend on such fruitless endeavors.

 

[mark46]

Aren't we just referring to DACA in this thread...? What is the economic cost/benefit of deporting that 800,000 or so...?

almost all of whom are employed and paying taxes

 

[GoldenBoy89]

almost all of whom are employed and paying taxes

And know no other country besides the United States.

 

[mark kennedy]

I'm not actually sure what the economic costs would be for one or the other but the point is, it would be tremendously expensive either way. Conservatives (who so often complain about wasteful government spending) would seemingly have no problem with the costs of moving 20 million or so people out of the country immediately but as soon as you mention possibly spending a similar amount on things like public college education or healthcare (for American citizens, mind you) we suddenly don't have enough money to spend on such fruitless endeavors.

The waves of illegal immigrants has slowed and there is a surge in arrests for illegal immigration. Trump is requesting another 72 judges to help with the strain in the courts and they can just about forget about amnesty. I'm thinking getting funding for the wall is going to make Trump or break him, with a trillion dollar infrastructure spending bill he had better make some real progress.

 

[Arcangl86]

I want the President to do his job (like he is doing), and ICE and
other law enforcement agencies to deport all illegals.

Do you know what the process involves? It takes a lot of resources, and as such the government can only remove so many people at a certain rate. Quite frankly, the resources allocated to removal proceedings are so low that the President has no choice but to prioritize.

 

[mark kennedy]

Of course a study by the Center for Immigration Studies would say that....

In the past, their studies have been found to be flawed.

Center for Immigration Studies Report Exaggerates Immigrant Welfare Use

What about this one:

The findings of this analysis show that if a border wall stopped a small fraction of the illegal immigrants who are expected to come in the next decade, the fiscal savings from having fewer illegal immigrants in the country would be sufficient to cover the costs of the wall. This analysis takes the likely education level of illegal border-crossers and applies fiscal estimates developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) for immigrants by education level. NAS calculates the future fiscal balance immigrants create — taxes paid minus costs. NAS reports fiscal balances as "net present values", which places a lower value on future expenditures than on current expenditures.

Based on the NAS data, illegal border-crossers create an average fiscal burden of approximately $74,722 during their lifetimes, excluding any costs for their U.S.-born children. If a border wall stopped between 160,000 and 200,000 illegal crossers — 9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross in the next decade — the fiscal savings would equal the $12 to $15 billion cost of the wall. (The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration. Center for Immigration Studies)
​

It's cheaper to keep them out, that much I'm sure of.

 

[Allandavid]

The waves of illegal immigrants has slowed and there is a surge in arrests for illegal immigration. Trump is requesting another 72 judges to help with the strain in the courts and they can just about forget about amnesty. I'm thinking getting funding for the wall is going to make Trump or break him, with a trillion dollar infrastructure spending bill he had better make some real progress.

The flow of immigrants was slowing well before Trump arrived on the scene...

 

[Allandavid]

What about this one:

The findings of this analysis show that if a border wall stopped a small fraction of the illegal immigrants who are expected to come in the next decade, the fiscal savings from having fewer illegal immigrants in the country would be sufficient to cover the costs of the wall. This analysis takes the likely education level of illegal border-crossers and applies fiscal estimates developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) for immigrants by education level. NAS calculates the future fiscal balance immigrants create — taxes paid minus costs. NAS reports fiscal balances as "net present values", which places a lower value on future expenditures than on current expenditures.

Based on the NAS data, illegal border-crossers create an average fiscal burden of approximately $74,722 during their lifetimes, excluding any costs for their U.S.-born children. If a border wall stopped between 160,000 and 200,000 illegal crossers — 9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross in the next decade — the fiscal savings would equal the $12 to $15 billion cost of the wall. (The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration. Center for Immigration Studies)
​

It's cheaper to keep them out, that much I'm sure of.

But Mark, what does any of this have to do with the DACA issue...?

 

[mark kennedy]

But Mark, what does any of this have to do with the DACA issue...?

Someone said we didn't have the money to deport all the illegal immigrants, I pointed out it's six times cheaper to deport them.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You are correct...and as the act applies, I'm pretty sure that anyone who applied for dreamer status while the law was passed cannot be deported simply because the law was rescinded...they would essentially be "grandfathered in".

Except Dreamer status must be renewed every two years -- and I don't think the government is going to be very accommodating when the status of current dreamers expires...

 

[Always in His Presence]

 

[wing2000]

What about this one:

The findings of this analysis show that if a border wall stopped a small fraction of the illegal immigrants who are expected to come in the next decade, the fiscal savings from having fewer illegal immigrants in the country would be sufficient to cover the costs of the wall. This analysis takes the likely education level of illegal border-crossers and applies fiscal estimates developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) for immigrants by education level. NAS calculates the future fiscal balance immigrants create — taxes paid minus costs. NAS reports fiscal balances as "net present values", which places a lower value on future expenditures than on current expenditures.

Based on the NAS data, illegal border-crossers create an average fiscal burden of approximately $74,722 during their lifetimes, excluding any costs for their U.S.-born children. If a border wall stopped between 160,000 and 200,000 illegal crossers — 9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross in the next decade — the fiscal savings would equal the $12 to $15 billion cost of the wall. (The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration. Center for Immigration Studies)
​

It's cheaper to keep them out, that much I'm sure of.

Sure.

And it's cheaper to do workplace enforcement instead of wasting money on ineffective walls!

I have yet to hear the President utter the words e-verify.

 

[wing2000]

Aren't we just referring to DACA in this thread...? What is the economic cost/benefit of deporting that 800,000 or so...?

Indeed.

We have already invested educational dollars in the DACA recipients. It would just be plain stupid to kick them out now.

 

[mark kennedy]

Sure.

And it's cheaper to do workplace enforcement instead of wasting money on ineffective walls!

I have yet to hear the President utter the words e-verify.

That wall will do one of two things, it will either be built and get him reelected or not doing this will take him down. No one but Trump and maybe Limbaugh really wants it but his base will not accept failure here. By the first of the year the House will be in reelection mode and not much will get done. I'm relieved that there isn't much chance that they can dismantle Dodd Franks and the ACA seems safe for the time being. He can blame anyone he wants but if he fails to build that wall he is done in politics.

As far as sending the dreamers away I think no law should be retroactive. If they have amnesty now then they should have it forever. There was a time when Constitutionally guaranteed rights actually meant something.

Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws). (Ex post facto law. Wikipedia)
​

I don't even know why we are talking about people who already have amnesty. What is more there is little question that they are not going to be offered it anymore, at least any time soon. How they are getting ready to write the actual laws is coming up and if the Health Care battle is any indication, no one will get to read it and no one will care.

 

[pat34lee]

You assume that the destination countries will admit those children. Remember, they are citizens of the US. YOU WILL BE PLACING THOSE COUNTRIES IN THE SAME POSITION YOU ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT, ie, permitting 'aliens' to reside in your country...

WRONG. TOTALLY.
As children of the citizens of those countries, they are
already citizens, just as children born to US citizens while
in other countries are citizens of the US.

 

[pat34lee]

Our government doesn't have the money or resources available to forcibly move that many people out at once. What it would cost to do that would probably be more than any money we would save by not having these people here.

Wrong. It has been worked out before. The savings to
the city, state and federal governments will more than
pay for the deportation within a year or two, and we
will run a surplus after that.

Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers (2013)

Based on previous analysis from the Center for American Progress, a mass deportation strategy would cost an average of $10,070 per person, for a total of $114 billion to remove 11.3 million people.
How Much Would It Cost to Deport All Undocumented Immigrants?

All this discounts the possibility of cutting off all government
aid, jobs, housing and schooling for illegals, and letting them
self-deport. Amend the Constitution to where only children
of legal citizens are legal citizens. No freebie for dropping a
kid over the border here.

 

[pat34lee]

You apparently live in a world with infinite government resource and no agency has to prioritize.

ICE = IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
Illegals are their priority. And with local and state
LEOs helping, it wouldn't take long to pick them up.
Shut down the places that hire illegals, and deny social
services to illegals, and many will choose to leave.