MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
THE SECOND CIVIL WAR? Or war to end MEXICAN OCCUPATION?
SEEMS LIKELY AS DAILY THE HISPANDERING CORPORATE OWNED POLITICIANS CONTINUE TO ABET WALL STREET’S UNENDING RAPE AND PILLAGE. A HUGE PART OF WALL STREET’S PILLAGE IS THE ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED. THEY’VE BEEN AS SUCCESSFUL IN THAT AS THE BANKSTERS WERE PILLAGING US AND THEN GETTING MASSIVE WELFARE, BONUSES AND NO REGULATION FROM THE VERY LA RAZA DEMS THAT SOLD OUT AMERICAN TO THE MEXICAN INVADERS. BOTH WELLS FARGO, AND SKANK OF AMERICA ARE MAJOR LA RAZA DONORS AND HAVE LONG VICTIMIZED FOR PROFITS ILLEGALS.
THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION CAUSES WAGES FOR LEGALS, YOU KNOW, THOSE THAT PAY THE REAL WELFARE AND CRIME COSTS OF THE OCCUPATION, SOME $200 - $300 BILLION PER YEAR.
WHO ARE WILL WE BE AT WAR WITH?
MEXICO. WE ARE MEXICO’S WELFARE SYSTEM. SO THAT THE MEXICAN ECONOMY CAN REMAIN IN THE HANDS OF THE SMALL RULING CLASS OF MEXICAN OLIGARCHS, THEY MUST KEEP DUMPING THEIR POOR, ILLITERATE, CRIMINAL AND FREQUENTLY PREGNANT OVER OUR BORDERS. THEY’VE NOW DUMPED 38 MILLION AND THOSE THAT ARRIVE HERE ARE BREEDING LIKE CATHOLIC BUNNIES!
LA RAZA, “THE RACE” THE VIRULENTLY RACIST POLITICAL PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY FUNDED BY….. get this…. YOUR TAX DOLLARS, THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT, AND GENEROUS DONATIONS FROM MUCH OF THE FORTUNE 500 WHO HAVE LONG BEEN AT WAR WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDER 20 YEARS OF CORPORATE PILLAGE OF BUSH, HILLARY, BILLARY, BUSH, their war profiteer FEINSTEIN, and HISPANDERING BARACK OBAMA.
THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, ALWAYS THE FRONT FOR CORPORATE PILLAGERS. THERE SIMPLY WILL NEVER BE A WAGE LOW ENOUGH TO SATISFY THE CHAMBER.
THE LA RAZA DEMS HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ ILLEGAL VOTES.
WORST HISPANDERERS: OBAMA, CLINTONS, PELOSI, FEINSTEIN, BOXER, WAXMAN, LOFGREN, BACA, FARR, BECERRA, REID, NAPOLITANO, AND PROBABLY ALL BUT A COUPLE IN THE ENTIRE GOVERNMENT.
38 MILLION ILLEGALS DIDN’T WALK OVER OUR BORDERS WITH NOTHING BUT A MEXICAN FLAG IN THEIR POCKETS BY ACCIDENT! THEY WERE SENT PACKING BY THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND TO THE MULTITUDE OF INVITATIONS AND INDUCEMENTS OUR GOVERNMENT PUTS OUT EVERY DAY, SUCH AS NO E-VERIFY, NO (REAL) WALL, NO ENGLISH ONLY, AND NO ID FOR ILLEGALS TO VOTE, “FREE” MEDICAL, AND WELFARE FOR ANY MOMMA THAT CAME OVER THE BORDER PREGNANT.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH JUSTIFIABLE NEARLY DESTROYED BY DECADES OF PEDOPHILE PRIEST ABUSE, NEEDS TO FILL THE PEWS WITH ABEYANT HEAVY BREEDERS. THEREFORE, IN VIOLATION OF THEIR TAX EXEMPTION, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OPERATES A FOREIGN POLICY AND ENCOURAGES THE BREAKING OF AMERICAN LAWS BY ILLEGALS, AND THE EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGALS.
A CRAIGLIST POST
Civil War With Illegals ?
It's totally a done deal.
All of the Mexicans have been brainwashed by their corrupt government that they are
here to take back the land that was "stolen" from them.
Of course, it's illogical for them to destroy the country that creates their existence, but
that's not the point. You're talking about lawless drones from a 500 year old culture.
Their concept of reality is simply symbolic.
They do not realize that Americans are superior because of their cultural proclivities;
they think it's all due to the location of the land we "stole." Therefore, they think that
if they take it back for Mexico, the country that betrayed their dreams, they too
will magically be successful.
But the truth of their beliefs is seen on a daily basis in every town and city they
infest: they destroy them because fo their freely chosen cultural proclivities.
Anyway, it won't take much to set off the fuse.
The truth is that Third World hispanics are hostile to Americans and our way of life.
They want to live here, only as long as they can continue to obtain "bread and circuses."
If there is an interruption, they'll lose their shit. And if we continue with the rewards, the
numbers will increase and they'll become emboldened.
Either way, get your boomsticks and lock and load, ' cause it's coming
*
The Mexican Invasion................................................ 3 MILLION ILLEGALS HOP THE BORDER EVERY YEAR. 1.5 MILLION AMERICANS FALL INTO POVERTY..... AND UNLESS YOU’RE PART OF THE CORPORATE CLASS OF BILLIONAIRES, YOU’RE NOT DOING WELL EITHER. WHAT THIS CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR ARTICLE FAILS TO MENTION IS THAT THE NARCO-MEXICAN STATE ALSO EXPORTS THEIR CRIMINAL CLASS TO BE HOUSED IN OUR PRISONS AND JAILS. As well as 10 billion dollar drug trade with all the criminal elements still attached. ILLEGALS NOW MAKE UP ALMOST HALF THE COST OF THE US PRISON SYSTEM. ONE-THIRD OF ALL FEDERAL CRIMINAL COURT CASES ARE WITH ILLEGALS. However this article is not entirely fair. Mexico does manufacture and export approximately a half-billion dollars of counterfeit DVD’s stolen from the American economy besides their poor and criminal classes. from the March 30, 2006 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0330/p09s02-coop.html Mexico prefers to export its poor, not uplift them At this week's summit, failed reforms under Fox should be the issue, not US actions. By George W. Grayson WILLIAMSBURG, VA. - At the parleys this week with his US and Canadian counterparts in Cancún, Mexican President Vicente Fox will press for more opportunities for his countrymen north of the Rio Grande. Specifically, he will argue for additional visas for Mexicans to enter the United States and Canada, the expansion of guest-worker schemes, and the "regularization" of illegal immigrants who reside throughout the continent. In a recent interview with CNN, the Mexican chief executive excoriated as "undemocratic" the extension of a wall on the US-Mexico border and called for the "orderly, safe, and legal" northbound flow of Mexicans, many of whom come from his home state of Guanajuato. Mexican legislators share Mr. Fox's goals. Silvia Hernández Enriquez, head of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations for North America, recently emphasized that the solution to the "structural phenomenon" of unlawful migration lies not with "walls or militarization" but with "understanding, cooperation, and joint responsibility." Such rhetoric would be more convincing if Mexican officials were making a good faith effort to uplift the 50 percent of their 106 million people who live in poverty. To his credit, Fox's "Opportunities" initiative has improved slightly the plight of the poorest of the poor. Still, neither he nor Mexico's lawmakers have advanced measures that would spur sustained growth, improve the quality of the workforce, curb unemployment, and obviate the flight of Mexicans abroad. Indeed, Mexico's leaders have turned hypocrisy from an art form into an exact science as they shirk their obligations to fellow citizens, while decrying efforts by the US senators and representatives to crack down on illegal immigration at the border and the workplace. What are some examples of this failure of responsibility? • When oil revenues are excluded, Mexico raises the equivalent of only 9 percent of its gross domestic product in taxes - a figure roughly equivalent to that of Haiti and far below the level of major Latin American nations. Not only is Mexico's collection rate ridiculously low, its fiscal regime is riddled with loopholes and exemptions, giving rise to widespread evasion. Congress has rebuffed efforts to reform the system. Insufficient revenues mean that Mexico spends relatively little on two key elements of social mobility: Education commands just 5.3 percent of its GDP and healthcare only 6.10 percent, according to the World Bank's last comparative study. • A venal, "come-back-tomorrow" bureaucracy explains the 58 days it takes to open a business in Mexico compared with three days in Canada, five days in the US, nine days in Jamaica, and 27 days in Chile. Mexico's private sector estimates that 34 percent of the firms in the country made "extra official" payments to functionaries and legislators in 2004. These bribes totaled $11.2 billion and equaled 12 percent of GDP. • Transparency International, a nongovernmental organization, placed Mexico in a tie with Ghana, Panama, Peru, and Turkey for 65th among 158 countries surveyed for corruption. • Economic competition is constrained by the presence of inefficient, overstaffed state oil and electricity monopolies, as well as a small number of private corporations - closely linked to government big shots - that control telecommunications, television, food processing, transportation, construction, and cement. Politicians who talk about, much less propose, trust-busting measures are as rare as a snowfall in the Sonoran Desert. Geography, self-interests, and humanitarian concerns require North America's neighbors to cooperate on myriad issues, not the least of which is immigration. However, Mexico's power brokers have failed to make the difficult decisions necessary to use their nation's bountiful wealth to benefit the masses. Washington and Ottawa have every right to insist that Mexico's pampered elite act responsibly, rather than expecting US and Canadian taxpayers to shoulder burdens Mexico should assume.
*********************************************************************** Unfettered Immigration = Poverty By Unfettered Immigration = Poverty
By Robert Rector Heritage.org
May 16, 2006 This paper focuses on the net fiscal effects of immigration with particular emphasis on the fiscal effects of low skill immigration. The fiscal effects of immigration are only one aspect of the impact of immigration. Immigration also has social, political, and economic effects. In particular, the economic effects of immigration have been heavily researched with differing results. These economic effects lie beyond the scope of this paper. Overall, immigration is a net fiscal positive to the government’s budget in the long run: the taxes immigrants pay exceed the costs of the services they receive. However, the fiscal impact of immigrants varies strongly according to immigrants’ education level. College-educated immigrants are likely to be strong contributors to the government’s finances, with their taxes exceeding the government’s costs. By contrast, immigrants with low education levels are likely to be a fiscal drain on other taxpayers. This is important because half of all adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. have less than a high school education. In addition, recent immigrants have high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing, which increases welfare costs and poverty. An immigration plan proposed by Senators Mel Martinez (R-FL) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) would provide amnesty to 9 to 10 million illegal immigrants and put them on a path to citizenship. Once these individuals become citizens, the net additional cost to the federal government of benefits for these individuals will be around $16 billion per year. Further, once an illegal immigrant becomes a citizen, he has the right to bring his parents to live in the U.S. The parents, in turn, may become citizens. The long-term cost of government benefits to the parents of 10 million recipients of amnesty could be $30 billion per year or more. In the long run, the Hagel/Martinez bill, if enacted, would be the largest expansion of the welfare state in 35 years. Current Trends in Immigration Over the last 40 years, immigration into the United States has surged. Our nation is now experiencing a second “great migration” similar to the great waves of immigrants that transformed America in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 2004, an estimated 35.7 million foreign-born persons lived in the U.S. While in 1970 one person in twenty was foreign born, by 2004 the number had risen to one in eight. About one-third of all foreign-born persons in the U.S. are illegal aliens. There are between 10 and 12 million illegal aliens currently living in the U.S.[1] Illegal aliens now comprise 3 to 4 percent of the total U.S. population. Each year approximately 1.3 million new immigrants enter the U.S.[2] Some 700,000 of these entrants are illegal.[3] One third of all foreign-born persons in the U.S. are Mexican. Overall, the number of Mexicans in the U.S. has increased from 760,000 in 1970 to 10.6 million in 2004. Nine percent of all Mexicans now reside in the U.S.[4] Over half of all Mexicans in the U.S. are illegal immigrants,[5] and in the last decade 80 to 85 percent of the inflow of Mexicans into the U.S. has been illegal.[6] The public generally perceives illegals to be unattached single men. This is, in fact, not the case. Some 44 percent of adult illegals are women. While illegal men work slightly more than native-born men; illegal women work less. Among female illegals, some 56 percent work, compared to 73 percent among native-born women of comparable age.[7] As well, Mexican women emigrating to the U.S. have a considerably higher fertility rate than women remaining in Mexico.[8] Decline in Immigrant Wages Over the last 40 years the education level of new immigrants has fallen relative to the native population. As the relative education levels of immigrants have declined, so has their earning capacity compared to the general U.S. population. Immigrants arriving in the U.S. around 1960 had wages, at the time of entry, that were just 13 percent less than natives’. In 1965, the nation’s immigration law was dramatically changed, and from 1990 on, illegal immigration surged. The result was a decline in the relative skill levels of new immigrants. By 1998, new immigrants had an average entry wage that was 34 percent less than natives.’[12] Because of their lower education levels, illegal immigrants’ wages would have been even lower. The low-wage status of recent illegal immigrants can be illustrated by the wages of recent immigrants from Mexico, a majority of whom have entered the U.S. illegally. In 2000, the median weekly wage of a first-generation Mexican immigrant was $323. This was 54 percent of the corresponding wage for non-Hispanic whites in the general population.[13] Historically, the relative wages of recent immigrants have risen after entry as immigrants gained experience in the labor market. For example, immigrants who arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and 1970s saw their relative wages rise by 10 percentage points compared to natives’ wages during their first 20 years in the country. But in recent years, this modest catch up effect has diminished. Immigrants who arrived in the late 1980s actually saw their relative wages shrink in the 1990s.[14] Immigration and Welfare Dependence Welfare may be defined as means-tested aid programs: these programs provide cash, non-cash, and social service assistance that is limited to low-income households. The major means-tested programs include Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, public housing, the earned income credit, and Medicaid. Historically, recent immigrants were less likely to receive welfare than native-born Americans. But over the last thirty years, this historic pattern has reversed. As the relative education levels of immigrants fell, their tendency to receive welfare benefits increased. By the late 1990s immigrant households were fifty percent more likely to receive means-tested aid than native-born households.[15] Moreover, immigrants appear to assimilate into welfare use. The longer immigrants live in the U.S., the more likely they are to use welfare.[16] A large part, but not all, of immigrants’ higher welfare use is explained by their low education levels. Welfare use also varies by immigrants’ national origin. For example, in the late 1990s, 5.6 percent of immigrants from India received means-tested benefits; among Mexican immigrants the figure was 34.1 percent; and for immigrants from the Dominican Republic the figure was 54.9 percent.[17] Ethnic differences in the propensity to receive welfare that appear among first-generation immigrants persist strongly in the second generation.[18] The relatively high use of welfare among Mexicans has significant implications for current proposals to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. Some 80 percent of illegal immigrants come from Mexico and Latin America.[19] (See Chart 1) Historically, Hispanics in America have had very high levels of welfare use. Chart 2 shows receipt of aid from major welfare programs by different ethnic groups in 1999; the programs covered are Medicaid, Food Stamps, public housing, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, General Assistance, and Supplemental Security Income.[20] As the chart shows, Hispanics were almost three times more likely to receive welfare than non-Hispanic whites. In addition, among families that received aid, the cost of the aid received was 40 percent higher for Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites.[21] Putting together the greater probability of receiving welfare with the greater cost of welfare per family means that, on average, Hispanic families received four times more welfare per family than white non-Hispanics. 1. Part, but not all, of this high level of welfare use by Hispanics can be explained by background factors such as family structure.[22] It seems likely that, if Hispanic illegal immigrants are given permanent residence and citizenship, they and their children will likely assimilate into the culture of high welfare use that characterizes Hispanics in the U.S. This would impose significant costs on taxpayers and society as a whole. Welfare use can also be measured by immigration status. In general, immigrant households are about fifty percent more likely to use welfare than native-born households.[23] Immigrants with less education are more likely to use welfare. (See Chart 3) 1. The potential welfare costs of low-skill immigration and amnesty for current illegal immigrants can be assessed by looking at the welfare utilization rates for current low-skill immigrants. As Chart 4 shows, immigrants without a high school degree (both lawful and unlawful) are two-and-a-half times more likely to use welfare than native-born individuals.[24] This underscores the high potential welfare costs of giving amnesty to illegal immigrants. 1. All categories of high school dropouts have a high utilization of welfare. Immigrants who have less than a high school degree are slightly more likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts. Legal immigrants who are high school dropouts are slightly more likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts.[25] Illegal immigrant dropouts, however, are less likely to use welfare than native-born dropouts mainly because they are ineligible for many welfare programs. With amnesty, current illegal immigrants’ welfare use would likely rise to the level of lawful immigrants with similar education levels.
MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment