You said 50% of all illegal immigrants come by plane. 52% of all illegals immigrants are Mexican. Are they not included in your 50%?
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
I was simply going by the link, it didn't mention anything about retirees that I saw.
It stated people over 16 that were employed or actively looking for work were in the calculation.
Yep, they're included. Mexicans can enter the US legally or illegally), overstay their visa, and are thus illegal immigrants.
One woman I worked with from Mexico City did just this when she flew into SFO. Our nanny Dulce is from Leon, did the same thing.
You're assuming, incorrectly, that all illegal immigrants from Mexico simply walked across the border above ground.
That's fair. At least you now have a better idea of the method of entry for illegal immigrants.
I see what it says, but it doesn't mention a thing about retirees or age.
I've heard something similar, so I assumed baby boomers retiring had a part in it, but the link you provide doesn't show that.
I never assumed that, not once. There's all kinds of ways they can cross.
You're the one that said they didn't physically walk across. That's false. Might not be the majority, but of the 400k that were caught trying to cross in '16, I'm willing to bet thousands were on foot.
Always had a perfectly fine idea. You're the one who equated someone saying some come by foot as all. Quite the opposite, really.
Sure they physically walk across the border, both to the North and the South. You think a 12' wall will deter that? Like you said, there's all kinds of ways they (all illegal immigrants, not just Mexicans) can cross.
See that some of the resident Dems who were MIA after Hilary's defeat are starting to come out of the woods again. Welcome back
It will probably will be bigger. Besides, again, you're equating some with all.
No one ever said a wall will keep every single illegal from crossing. But what I do know, from those with far greater expertise than yourself, it will help tremendously.
Last edited:
I have been off for months due to a new baby and an occupational transition to a new organization. Thanks for the warm welcome back.
In all seriousness, I'll prolly disappear next week, just have a few down days.
So, interesting topic. Well to me anyway.
Just how much does the left hate Trump?
I'm a member of another board and they have something similar to the paddock. I've been a regular there for years. It's a graphing community.
I asked the question:
You get to re-do this election, and there's a third option.
Trump
H. Clinton
George Bush
The funniest part is watching people's initial thought of "omg no". After several days of moaning, long winded answers, and a little forcing, the results were fascinating. Out of about 450 votes ( board reaches a wide audience) I was stunned.
Over 50% say they would just rather have George Bush. Followed by 30% Clinton and 20% Trump. That's wild to be because Bush had an approval rating in the 30's back in 2008 and Hillary had one of the highest approval ratings in all of politics at the same time. It's amazing what a political election can change. (And corruption).
Not scientific of course, but kind of interesting.
Just how much does the left hate Trump?
I'm a member of another board and they have something similar to the paddock. I've been a regular there for years. It's a graphing community.
I asked the question:
You get to re-do this election, and there's a third option.
Trump
H. Clinton
George Bush
The funniest part is watching people's initial thought of "omg no". After several days of moaning, long winded answers, and a little forcing, the results were fascinating. Out of about 450 votes ( board reaches a wide audience) I was stunned.
Over 50% say they would just rather have George Bush. Followed by 30% Clinton and 20% Trump. That's wild to be because Bush had an approval rating in the 30's back in 2008 and Hillary had one of the highest approval ratings in all of politics at the same time. It's amazing what a political election can change. (And corruption).
Not scientific of course, but kind of interesting.
I'm telling you what it says, it doesn't lay out anything about retirees or age.
Damn, this dude went off lol. Hes not wrong though.
Which George Bush? I'd go H Clinton for me, followed very closely by GHWB, then very closely by GWB. If DT were running against Nixon's corpse I'd vote for the latter. I genuinely loathe DT as a human being, have for a while.
You can not believe the border patrol agents all you want. Makes no difference to me. What do they know about securing the border, right?
This thread needs a graph, it needs a graft too, but that's another post...
This is the labor participation rate during the O'bama tyranny. Of course that can easily be explained by the millions of people who retired early, right Mime?
This is the labor participation rate during the O'bama tyranny. Of course that can easily be explained by the millions of people who retired early, right Mime?
Being from Tennessee is took me three times to fully understand the language.
They're right. And I wish other New Yorkers would wake up, but the grievance and entitlement society that is that city is irreversible. We'll never see another republican win New York. Not in this political time anyway. Imo.
This thread needs a graph, it needs a graft too, but that's another post...
This is the labor participation rate during the O'bama tyranny. Of course that can easily be explained by the millions of people who retired early, right Mime?
Not solely due to early retirement, more by the impact of the great recession............but bolstered by retirees. The impact of the Great Recession (referred to as the 'economic malaise') continued until about 2012.
And, as I stated, economists hold that this will continue to decrease, with or without economic growth, due to the aging population.
Lastly, what is your source? Kind of a shoddy graph completed in Windows 2000.
Last edited:
Can't read. Says I must log in. Is this another Mnuchin foreclosed on a 92 year old widow over 27 cents or a Russia hacked the electrical grid and are planning to take over the world?
Had a woman come in my office today sounding like Z. Donald Trump is destroying our economy! I ask how and she said "Can't you see how bad our economy is now?" 7 days from everything is great to everything is terrible. Educated? No you on the left are not.
Thanks! It's been a fantastic whirlwind. He turned 5 months today. FLOWN BY.
The idea that Mexicans are coming in droves by plane is comical. I don't believe that BS. These are rats that scurry across the border.
Just repeating the garbage she has been fed. Trump has already done a great service to keep businesses here and keep jobs not to mention bring in millions of more jobs.
I can't stomach talking to the left anymore. They're clueless and hypocrites. I'm okay with someone not liking my preferred candidate or disagree with me in a civil manner but that's not the left and they're surrounded by their opinion so much that they never hear truth about things like Islam, black on white violence, being funded by Soros, what the third world does or understand economics or common sense. Everything is about ideology and virtue signalin in the same manner as a cult.
They simply only know how to call people names, use shame tactics and bully people, riot and act like fools when they don't get their way, etc.
No way was this side coming back to any sense of normalcy after being empowered by Obama.
I agree. Funny that moe thought that's what I meant.
Even funnier you actually said it. Don't try to joke and backtrack now. You own that.
first off, there is no such thing as an illegal immigrant. Only if they are legal, are they an immigrant. Blame me for semantics if you wish.
Not sure what specific scenarios you would like to configure to indicate air travel for introduction of illegals from Mexico. At a minimum to get through US Customs, they would have to have some form of documentation. As just one example, a temporary work visa, which would have required that they already have a job and their US employer will have filed to USCIS for them, and they will have been interviewed at a US consulate in May-hee-ko, and - behold - temporary work visa - good for a set period of time. If they exceed this period and stay, or begin working for a different employer as so damn many of them do (or just don't and start reproducing in large numbers on our turf), then yes, they become illegal at that point, but this is after, often months or more after, when they got off the damn airplane. This process also very commonly occurs after student visas run out.
You seem to be putting a mild amount of effort into simplifying for your own benefit - the wall is useless argument - this "illegals come here by plane too" discussion, which is dumb, as they cannot be illegal AT THE MOMENT they step off the plane in the same fashion THAT THEY ARE illegal when they walk across the g'd-dammed border, without even so much as their stinking names written on a dirty cocktail napkin.
https://www.immigrationdirect.com/us-visas.jsp#how-apply-work-visa
I found the graph on a website that deals with the subject. I also saw some info that I believe would lead you to your thoughts. There are many different ways to look at it, but you chose the one that takes any and all responsibility for the employment rate away from O'bama and place it on circumstances. The population was growing during the times the rate was higher. People were retiring as well. Why don't we just manipulate the numbers and make the rate flat going back to 1920?
True, those overstaying their student, worker, or tourist visas are legal when they enter the US. However, they are included in the 'illegal immigrant' numbers that are cited ad nausea.
I agree on the terminology, it should be 'unauthorized immigrants'. But you're getting bogged with semantics.
Similar threads
