How's that Constitution thing working out for you?

Laiya

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 2:43 pm

marina wrote:

Are you talking about private universities and organizations? Or public ones? Free speech rights protect you from action by a government official. You have no constitutional protection from private actors.

So yes, if your graduate school advisor was employed by a public university, that would be an atrocious violation of your free speech and I would have called an attorney immediately. Yale, however, is not a public institution, neither is HuffPo or DePaul, etc.

Trump, on the other hand, *is* the government, is the head of its executive branch whose job is enforcement.

Who said anything about lawsuits?

Fox was responding to your statement that,

marina wrote:

Our speech has been chilled. Anyone who wants to exercise his or her rights now may be reluctant to do so. That's how our basic freedoms have been disrupted.

And she gave several examples indicating that free speech has already been chilled.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:33 pm

Squishy wrote:

Illegal immigrants are NOT paying their
federal income taxes! They make up 3.9% of the population and pay .018% of Federal income taxes.

*based on numbers taken from the Atlanta and Washington Post

This doesn't mean anything. The vast majority of federal income tax is paid by the top 1%. Regular middle class pple do not pay income tax proportionate to their population size... bc we pay taxes based on income not how much percent of the population we make up.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:36 pm

Quote:

[quote="Laiya"]And she gave several examples indicating that free speech has already been chilled.

I'm sorry that I am not being clear. The concept of chilling free speech is a legal one and it exists ONLY when the actor is a government official. Free speech is not considered chilled or affected at all - legally - if the actor is a private individual or organization.

So none of the examples Fox gave had anything to do with free speech being chilled, which is a legal term and which is the ONLY way I am using it in all these threads.

Trump is violating the Constitution by chilling free speech, and nothing DePaul or HuffPo can do come even close to that legally. A private university does not violate the constitution because it is not the government.

And the reason for this difference, of course, is that a government actor has much more power over all our lives. DePaul can ban you from speaking at their university and your graduate school dean can kick you out of the program... but Trump - like he suggested - can end your citizenship and put you in jail if he doesn't like your speech. Not even remotely comparable.

Last edited by marina on Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:53 pm; edited 4 times in total

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:45 pm

Squishy wrote:

I agree they pay some taxes. Anytime anyone purchases cigerettes or fills up their tank, they pay taxes.

They are not entitled to Social Security now. They, and their employers, pay into it as a cost of having certain jobs. This is not voluntary in the slightest. It is taken out of their paychecks before they receive it.

Prior to MagentaYenta saying their taxes weren't returned to them, I never heard anyone claiming this and confusing the two. With all due respect, this is not a reasonable error when discussing public policy. I don't know if all these people who are confusing the two are liberals. Perhaps, this is the reason I find so much of their analysis junk.

What other taxes, besides FICA, are returned to citizens and not illegal immigrants?

I want to further crunch what percentage of the population are illegal immigrants and what percentage they contribute to running our country.

1. I am certainly not saying that illegal immigrants pay taxes out of a sense of civic duty. I'm not sure that many people do. This is just a discussion of fiscal policy. My position is that immigrants add more than they detract to this country, looking not only at taxes but at job creation, company growth, etc. You disagree. That's the discussion. Not whether illegal immigrants love America and want to pay for their good fortune in not being deported yet.

2. I dk what you're saying about liberals, but it doesn't sound charitable or relevant.

3. Illegal immigrants do not get unemployment, foodstamps,welfare, etc. unless it is for their children who are citizens.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:48 pm

Squishy wrote:

Illegal immigrants are NOT paying their
federal income taxes! They make up 3.9% of the population and pay .018% of Federal income taxes.

*based on numbers taken from the Atlanta and Washington Post

Also, since you did the research, I'm sure you saw that illegals pay a higher percent of their income in taxes than the top taxpayers:

Quote:

"Undocumented immigrants' nationwide average effective tax rate is an estimated 8 percent," the report said. "To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay an average nationwide effective tax rate of just 5.4 percent."

http://www.usnews.com/news/art.....taxes

It's all about how you present the numbers.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 6:57 pm

Squishy wrote:

You never responded about the death traps going on in sanctuary cities. Do you feel they should continue to shelter more and more illegal immigrants in these cities when clearly they exceed the housing stock?

When people are sleeping in shifts and multi-families are crammed into housing like they are living in refugee camps, something has to be done.

Someone needs to delegitimize sanctuary cities. Federal laws cannot be ignored. NYS housing codes shouldn't be overridden by local authorities. The same goes for their food vendors. As I haven't ranted before ; ), they are no good for the local people that are taxed to support them. They are no good for the first generation citizens and their siblings who don't have a proper home. The local public schools are scary with stabbings. We have a local guy from the sanctuary city who who likes to hang around on his day off because he is not safe inside his house, nor does he feel safe on the streets when the biggest thrill for men is hanging out and drinking out of a paper bag.

Whatever side of the immigration question one is on, these sanctuary cities are producing flavelas here in suburbia.

I am also not suggesting that the situation you describe above is acceptable. Of course illegal immigration laws should be enforced.

That's why Obama deported more people than any other president ...and why our illegal immigrant population is at an all time low... and we actually have more people leaving than entering.

But FYI there are so many things you are conflating. The local public schools are scary with stabbings? Data shows that illegal immigrants are much less likely to commit crime than the average citizen. In fact, historically crime increases have not correlated with illegal immigration numbers at all

gold21

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 7:03 pm

The first amendment is concerning you, the same way the second amendment concerns Republicans I guess. Conservatives have been championing the second amendment for years. (Personally, I think there should be some leeway for changes with regards to the second amendment, we should update our gun laws, I liked what Obama has had to say on this issue. But changing an amendment is changing an amendment.)

I am passionate about free speech but flag burning isn't something I could ever get behind. And then, let's define free speech. If I were to publicly say something offensive, like, "Hitler was right, Jews are vermin" should I be allowed to do so? So, no, I definitely don't think that flag burning should be punishable with prison time, but if there were a fine in place for that kind of behavior, I would support it.

Hate me for my opinions if you will, I'm entitled to them. Right? Tongue Out

33055

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 8:02 pm

marina wrote:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes

It's all about how you present the numbers.

Yes, it is about how you present the numbers. ITA!!! The way these numbers are presented is garbage.

Let's break it down.

The 8% rate is largely because of money that is withheld from them - federal withholdings. This comes out to $7.65% on the first $118,500 paid*. Remember, best estimate is a large number are noncomplianant with working on the books.

The average US homeowner pays 27% of their total income in income, sales and real estate taxes.

The average American worker faces a 31% tax wedge between income and payroll tax. The average American worker pays $8,741 while the average illegal immigrant was slightly more than $250. Are you not seeing a disparity yet?

The more I look at the numbers, the more disgusted I get.

You tout they pay BILLIONS, but the cost of government is TRILLIONS. It is not impressive. Imagine it costs $4,600 thousand to run an association and some group says we almost chipped in ten bucks, so we contributed meaningfully. Yes, they paid something, but it isn't as significant as you make it out to be.

* This is 6.2% of the first $118,500 earned. This is a regressive tax in that if someone earns twice $118,500 or $237,000 their tax rate would be half of someone earning below the threshold. The more you have of earned income, the lower your rate is. Medicare tax which is part of payroll is a progressive tax, but it doesn't have a higher threshold until $200,000.

33055

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 8:29 pm

marina wrote:

Do we not count fraud as a crime anymore? Illegal immigrants can't be here unless they have broken a law.

I think the number of violent crime reported is low because of group on group crimes. Illegal immigrants don't report crimes against them because they fear police. They are vulnerable victims. They don't have access to resources. They also are not educated that certain behaviors are unacceptable. For instance, I have had more than one cleaning lady whose "husband" knocks her around when he drinks.

When you live in overcrowded conditions when the males are drinking and not grounded by steady work, you increase the danger to women who won't report their assaults. One lady, not my cleaning lady, told me she was ganged raped and she stopped counting after 17 while she was making her way to NY.

Conversely, illegal immigrants now are falsely reporting crimes because they can't be deported when they are crime victims. It is a fast-track for a U Visa. Just like there are many false OPs given, so that spouses can gain legal advantages in divorces, so is this being misused.

As far as the stabbings, there were more than one this year, I can't tell up if it was by a citizen, a sibling of a citizen, or an illegal immigrant as they don't report identifying info because they are minors.

If you are pro-enforcing immigration law, then what are we talking about? It seems we agree.

33055

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 8:38 pm

marina wrote:

You are the one that claimed this group is paying their taxes. I say not so much as to be meaningful. That's it.

BTW the top 1% pay almost half the taxes, but I am with you on this one.

33055

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 9:09 pm

marina wrote:

2. I am disappointed by the reasoning of liberals and I am trying to figure out if they know what they are doing when they alter reality when reporting, or they don't know. I think the times must have known, but felt beating Trump was the greater good than being honest. I think the Huffington Post is just out there.

3. Illegal immigrants are entitled to schooling when they are of age.

They get Medicaid for prenatal care and the emergency room.They can get free health services in the heath clinics. They get free dental care which I don't. We have very busy health centers in Rockland County with Spanish speaking employees. When family comes to visit the illegal immigrants, they take advantage of this and get free care also.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 10:54 pm

Squishy wrote:

Sorry, how is this related to legal status instead of low income? Doesn't everything you wrote above hold true for anyone living at or just above the poverty level?

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 10:58 pm

Squishy wrote:

You are the one that claimed this group is paying their taxes. I say not so much as to be meaningful. That's it.

BTW the top 1% pay almost half the taxes, but I am with you on this one.

Further, you are not considering the less-tangible benefits of illegal immigrants and low wage earners in general. How do you think America's economy would be affected if tomorrow, the illegals would all just suddenly disappear? Most research I've done says it won't be pretty.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 11:05 pm

Squishy wrote:

1. I don't know that this has anything to do with liberals or conservatives. Did you read the WSJ article? It's not showing that Arizona's laws definitively benefited their economy. If you disagree with the WSJ, surely it's not because it is a liberal outlet.

Personally, most of the outrage that you've offered here relates to poverty, not to illegal status so I find that position less than convincing. I'm not attributing that to your conservative outlook, though.

2. We specifically allow schooling and medicaid because we don't want to live in a society where people are dying on the street and raising uneducated families. That's a deliberate choice we as a country made. It's not a way the illegals are siphoning off the system.

But again- it's a cost benefit analysis. Taking into account the sales tax, the income tax, the social security system ( which apparently would have ended in 2009 without illegals paying into the system?), taking into account the companies that benefit from illegals and the jobs that these wealthier companies can offer, etc etc, and then subtract how much they cost in school costs and medicaid. I have no idea if it's a net loss and if so, how much. I think that number is very murky and I haven't seen anything unbiased that shows a serious net loss for the country.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 11:07 pm

Squishy wrote:

You are the one that claimed this group is paying their taxes. I say not so much as to be meaningful. That's it.

BTW the top 1% pay almost half the taxes, but I am with you on this one.

Also I want to point out that illegal immigrants are poor and don't make a lot of money... because of their status. If we develop and implement laws that allow some of them to go to college and work in good professions instead of at minimum wage, the picture may look very different.

It's hard, in other words, to blame them for their poverty.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 11:11 pm

Squishy wrote:

I'm talking about violent crime. Obviously if you want to point out that being here illegally is a crime, they're all guilty. You offered the example of stabbings in schools.

They fear the police and that's why there are less crimes. They risk deportation, not a few months in jail. The data does not show a correlation at all with increased illegal immigration and increased crime- it just doesn't. And if you want to argue that their crime is unreported- ok. I just have no way of assessing that as true or false so I can't really comment on that theory. As far as I know, it's unsupported.

The U visa domestic violence safety harbor started out as a good idea, but I agree that it can be misused and should be monitored more carefully.

marina

Thu, Dec 01 2016, 11:16 pm

I have a favorable outlook towards illegal immigrants and that's really what we are arguing about. I have a morally positive perspective because legal immigration is not easy at all. People imagine illegal aliens are just cutting the line because they're lazy or whatever, but in reality, it's just not feasible for many of them to immigrate legally.

There are quotas for every country, even for refugees and even for those who have families here. For some people there is literally no chance to ever come here legally. The cost of filling out the forms is more than they make in a year.

I emigrated as a child and I literally did nothing to be born into a family that had the resources and connections to live here legally. It was an accident, a fortunate fate. I could have easily been born into a family anywhere else on the planet where they have to sell their daughters on the street to make ends meet. And my family would have been stuck there.

I certainly do not blame the illegals for trying to come here and make a better life for themselves and their children. I would have done the same.

marina

Fri, Dec 02 2016, 8:36 am

gold21 wrote:

First, let's just differentiate between the two amendments and acknowledge that the harm from extreme speech ( e.g flag burning) and the harm from extreme bearing arms ( no background checks, no limits on felons, no limits on weapon type) are in no way the same.

Next, let's agree that we don't need to change any amendments. The Supreme court is the ultimate authority on what the amendments mean and flag burning is protected and the right to bear handguns is protected. No need to change either amendment to enforce, for example, existing gun laws.

If you are going to so say something publicly offensive as in your Hitler example, you are usually protected from government action. So Trump cannot jail you or take away your citizenship, neither can your local police department etc.

But you are not protected from private actors. If your boss is not a government official, she or he can fire you.

Just like here- if Yael doesn't like something I say, she can ban me. If this was a public forum run by a government organization ( say a facebook page run by a local government entity) it would be harder.