Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

By the Conk American American Action Forum.

We examine the budgetary and economic implications of alternative strategies to addressing undocumented immigrants. In particular, we focus on the implications of immediately and fully enforcing current law, and find that it would be fiscally and economically costly. The federal government would have to spend roughly $400 billion to $600 billion to address the 11.2 million undocumented immigrants and prevent future unlawful entry into the United States. In order to remove all undocumented immigrants, each immigrant would have to be apprehended, detained, legally processed, and transported to his or her home country. In turn, this would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers and reduce real GDP by $1.6 trillion. The fiscal and economic costs are illustrated in Table 1.

The costs of enforcing current law toward all 11.2 million undocumented immigrants, while keeping any new immigrants from entering unlawfully, are quite large. We estimate that the federal government would have to spend $400 billion to $600 billion over 20 years to accomplish these objectives. $100 billion to $300 billion would be spent on removing the entire current undocumented immigrant population from the United States. Moreover, an additional $315 billion would be needed to keep new immigrants from unlawfully living in the country. Not only would it cost the public fiscally, but it would also greatly burden the economy. The labor force would shrink by 6.4 percent or 11 million workers and, as a result, in 20 years the U.S. GDP would be 5.7 percent or $1.6 trillion percent lower than it would be without fully enforcing current law.

http://americanactionforum.org/research ... ration-alt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lies, it would probably save us double that in money not used up handing out entitlements and free healthcare.

Plus it would create jobs, herding them up putting them in cages and shipping or trucking them back to where they came from. Quit supporting criminal behavior, we are supposed to be a nation of laws. Enforce them.

Think how much we'd have saved if we had actually secured our border 50 years ago. You don't need a fancy fence. A sentry post every few miles with a sentry and live rounds would have worked just fine and employed a few thousand people as well. Knowing you get lead in your ass when you cross the line sends a clear message to those who consider entering our country illegally.

93henfan wrote:Think how much we'd have saved if we had actually secured our border 50 years ago. You don't need a fancy fence. A sentry post every few miles with a sentry and live rounds would have worked just fine and employed a few thousand people as well. Knowing you get lead in your ass when you cross the line sends a clear message to those who consider entering our country illegally.

And think if we pulled home troops from Germany, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, etc. and put them on the border. No additional cost as we are paying, feeding, and housing them already. Plus the economic gains by having those troops spend their money in the US on beer, hookers, etc. instead of in those countries.

and this

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j2Duy_xzEA[/youtube]

The economic cost...

...of being dumb.

Yup! The Progs "Get out the illegal alien illegal voter" project succeeded!

By simply ignoring the law, enticing illegal immigrants with free education, healthcare, job training, welfare benefits, housing, rights to ensure their "freedom" not to be offended by their host country's patriotic symbols...

...game over!

Now, all the Progs need to do is persuade a majority of rational, sane, objective voters that the cost of enforcing laws isn't beneficial. Et voila'!

Election stolen, once again!

Jellydonut...

...you're clueless.

travelinman67 wrote:The economic cost...

...of being dumb.

Yup! The Progs "Get out the illegal alien illegal voter" project succeeded!

By simply ignoring the law, enticing illegal immigrants with free education, healthcare, job training, welfare benefits, housing, rights to ensure their "freedom" not to be offended by their host country's patriotic symbols...

...game over!

Now, all the Progs need to do is persuade a majority of rational, sane, objective voters that the cost of enforcing laws isn't beneficial. Et voila'!

Election stolen, once again!

Jellydonut...

...you're clueless.

Gawdamm prog employers!

kalm wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:The economic cost...

...of being dumb.

Yup! The Progs "Get out the illegal alien illegal voter" project succeeded!

By simply ignoring the law, enticing illegal immigrants with free education, healthcare, job training, welfare benefits, housing, rights to ensure their "freedom" not to be offended by their host country's patriotic symbols...

...game over!

Now, all the Progs need to do is persuade a majority of rational, sane, objective voters that the cost of enforcing laws isn't beneficial. Et voila'!

Election stolen, once again!

Jellydonut...

...you're clueless.

Gawdamm prog employers!

...ensuring a cheap labor force for themselves!

93henfan wrote:Think how much we'd have saved if we had actually secured our border 50 years ago. You don't need a fancy fence. A sentry post every few miles with a sentry and live rounds would have worked just fine and employed a few thousand people as well. Knowing you get lead in your ass when you cross the line sends a clear message to those who consider entering our country illegally.

Yep maybe you should run for president..........I will help

HI54UNI wrote:

93henfan wrote:Think how much we'd have saved if we had actually secured our border 50 years ago. You don't need a fancy fence. A sentry post every few miles with a sentry and live rounds would have worked just fine and employed a few thousand people as well. Knowing you get lead in your ass when you cross the line sends a clear message to those who consider entering our country illegally.

And think if we pulled home troops from Germany, Italy, Japan, S. Korea, etc. and put them on the border. No additional cost as we are paying, feeding, and housing them already. Plus the economic gains by having those troops spend their money in the US on beer, hookers, etc. instead of in those countries.

and this

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j2Duy_xzEA[/youtube]

travelinman67 wrote:The economic cost...

...of being dumb.

Yup! The Progs "Get out the illegal alien illegal voter" project succeeded!

By simply ignoring the law, enticing illegal immigrants with free education, healthcare, job training, welfare benefits, housing, rights to ensure their "freedom" not to be offended by their host country's patriotic symbols...

...game over!

Now, all the Progs need to do is persuade a majority of rational, sane, objective voters that the cost of enforcing laws isn't beneficial. Et voila'!

Election stolen, once again!

Jellydonut...

...you're clueless.

T-Man you are hilarious
I am so glad I don't live in your world - because your world sucks badly

Of course there are economic costs to deporting 11 million aliens. Logistically it just isnt possible.

Bit there's another cost that is much larger- and it is two fold-

First, the 11 million will actually turn into about 50 million automatically if we dont fix the INA.

The second is that if we amnesty these people without significantly improving border security first (and that includes not paroling people who make it in) then we will be right back here in 10 years.

Democrats dont want to do any of the above, so I find it somewhat hypocritical that they are the ones reminding us of "costs"

If America is so bad, why do so many people still want to come here? I have no problem with people coming to America to live and work.

Gil, Gil, Gil...

We estimate that the federal government would have to spend $400 billion to $600 billion over 20 years to accomplish these objectives. $100 billion to $300 billion would be spent on removing the entire current undocumented immigrant population from the United States. Moreover, an additional $315 billion would be needed to keep new immigrants from unlawfully living in the country. Not only would it cost the public fiscally, but it would also greatly burden the economy. The labor force would shrink by 6.4 percent or 11 million workers and, as a result, in 20 years the U.S. GDP would be 5.7 percent or $1.6 trillion percent lower than it would be without fully enforcing current law.

I vote go ahead and do it. Even if you go with the high end estimate of $300 billion to get rid of all the illegal interlopers over 20 years you're talking about an average of $15 billion per year. That's not that much relative to the size of the US budget and at least the money would be being spent for something government is SUPPOSED to be doing. Also if it's the low end of the range, $100 billion over 20 years, you're talking about an average of $5 billion per year.

Same kind of thing with the cost of keeping people from entering the country illegally. If it costs $15.75 billion per year to keep a bunch of human dross from flooding into the country unscreened in any way including unscreened for carrying disease I say spend the money. Again, it's something government is SUPPOSED to be doing and it's not that much relative to the size of the Federal budget.

As far as the GDP thing goes, I'm fine with that too. To me if what's important is GDP divided by population size. For example, to me, a population of 100 million people with a GDP of $10 trillion is better off than a population of 200 million people with a GDP of $18 trillion, for example. The GDP would be lower if we get rid of illegal immigrants than it would be if we don't but the population would also be smaller.

Get rid of them. I know we won't because the real truth is that is now a substantial Hispanic lobby in this country that feels an ethnic connection to the illegals and is lobbying to get them in and keep them in and also there are politicians who see keeping them in as being to their political advantage. But if you're showing me what the authors of that report say and ask me if that changes my mind about getting serious about kicking hose already hear out while keeping others from getting in I'm going to say it doesn't. If that's the cost of getting them out of the country and keeping them out and we really COULD get them out and keep them out for that price I'd say it's a bargain.