Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

stamp em with a blue star on their forehead

2nd offenders get a less comfortable buss ride to the border

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has spent a record of at least $17.9 billion on military aid to Israel since the war in Gaza began and led to escalating conflict around the Middle East, according to a report for Brown University’s Costs of War project, released Monday on the anniversary of Hamas’ attacks on Israel.

An additional $4.86 billion has gone into stepped-up U.S. military operations in the region since the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, researchers said in findings first provided to The Associated Press. That includes the costs of a Navy-led campaign to quell strikes on commercial shipping by Yemen’s Houthis, who are carrying them out in solidarity with the fellow Iranian-backed group Hamas.

The report — completed before Israel opened a second front, this one against Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, in late September — is one of the first tallies of estimated U.S. costs as the Biden administration backs Israel in its conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon and seeks to contain hostilities by Iran-allied armed groups in the region.

I'm not really pro-admitting criminals and welfare recipients

This is frankly astounding to me.  Can you not even bring yourself to be unequivocally against immigration of criminals and welfare recipients?  

immigrants are less likely to be criminals than people already here

Are you honestly this naive?  

There is a study out there that makes this claim but i didn't realize that anyone was stupid enough to believe it so I guess I'll have to explain exactly how they are lying to you.  

First, I've said all along that I don't like admitting criminals and welfare recipients.  Even if this was actually true and immigrants were actually less likely to be criminals it is still OBVIOSLY detrimental to the US to admit ANY criminals.  Since enforcement was effectively banned by the Biden Administration up until they remembered that they have to run for office every four years, we let in literally MILLIONS of unvetted immigrants which obviously increases immigrant crime.  

That aside, I'll explain the lie in your "study".  If you look at their footnotes they got their numbers for immigrant crime from the FBI database which is populated by local law enforcement reporting to the FBI.  Have you figured it out yet?  

The "Immigrant" crimes were those reported as having been committed by immigrants.  

The rather obvious issue here is that most crimes and especially most immigrant crimes are committed in large, pro-regime, Democrat-controlled, Sanctuary Cities whose LEO's are legally prohibited from doing their jobs by laws imposed by the local commissars that prohibit them from asking about immigration status.  Thus, NONE of the crimes committed in those cities are counted as "immigrant" crimes by the study because the local PD didn't ask.  

Then, as an additional sleight of hand, they calculated "non-immigrant" crime by treating all crimes not known to have been committed by an immigrant as having been committed by a non-immigrant.  Thus, they not only dramatically undercounted crimes committed by immigrants, they also dramatically overcounted crimes committed by non-immigrants.  

If you aren't smart enough to see this, there isn't much that could help you.  

they don't really cost much in welfare, nor do they draw much in social security or medicare.

$1 is too much.  Immigrants want to come here.  We have a right to decide whether or not to admit them.  Why would we let in anyone who isn't contributing?

Beyond that, what kind of fool would trust that they won't eventually get SS/Medicare based on the next amnesty? 

It has been pointed out that @MaximumSam 's own link refutes his point.  He has not replied. 

This is confusing there being any downsides with immigration with saying it's all downside. I have never said there are no downsides to immigration. It's just that overall it helps grow the economy and is generally good. Which is why draconian measures against it are often stupid and make everyone poorer. I do not want to make us all poorer, which is why I'm against your position.

$1 is too much.  Immigrants want to come here.  We have a right to decide whether or not to admit them.  Why would we let in anyone who isn't contributing?

Beyond that, what kind of fool would trust that they won't eventually get SS/Medicare based on the next amnesty?

It's not just the medicare, but it's also the amount of medical care they receive at zero cost to themselves and the expense that puts on the system.

I was blessed with 20/20 my whole life, until I hit about 45 and then it started to go, as is pretty typical.  I now have a mild prescription for reading and close-up stuff, but my distant vision is still fine.

My i s c & a aggie wife on the other hand had terrible vision.  I paid for her LASIK while we were still dating, around 25 years ago, and it changed her life.  She's now suffering some normal deterioration in her vision and uses readers, but she wouldn't trade anything for the quarter-century of good vision she enjoyed after the surgery.