ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2 of 4
< 12 34 >
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare
BanHam 08:43 AM 12-03-2018
by Paul Bedard
December 03, 2018 08:15 AM

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...ion-households


A majority of “non-citizens,” including those with legal green card rights, are tapping into welfare programs set up to help poor and ailing Americans, a Census Bureau finding that bolsters President Trump’s concern about immigrants costing the nation.

In a new analysis of the latest numbers, from 2014, 63 percent of non-citizens are using a welfare program, and it grows to 70 percent for those here 10 years or more, confirming another concern that once immigrants tap into welfare, they don’t get off it.



The Center for Immigration Studies said in its report that the numbers give support for Trump’s plan to cut non-citizens off welfare from the “public charge” if they want a green card that allows them to legally work in the United States.

“The Trump administration has proposed new ‘public charge’ rules making it harder for prospective immigrants to qualify for lawful permanent residence -- green cards -- if they use or are likely to use U.S. welfare programs,” said CIS.

“Concern over immigrant welfare use is justified, as households headed by non-citizens use means-tested welfare at high rates. Non-citizens in the data include illegal immigrants, long-term temporary visitors like guest workers, and permanent residents who have not naturalized. While barriers to welfare use exist for these groups, it has not prevented them from making extensive use of the welfare system, often receiving benefits on behalf of U.S.-born children,” added the Washington-based immigration think tank.

The numbers are huge. The report said that there are 4,684,784 million non-citizen households receiving welfare.

And nearly all, 4,370,385, have at least one worker in the house..

In their report, Steven A. Camarota, the director of research, and Karen Zeigler, a demographer at the Center, said that in census data, about half of those are in the United States illegally.

Their key findings in the analysis:
In 2014, 63 percent of households headed by a non-citizen reported that they used at least one welfare program, compared to 35 percent of native-headed households.
Welfare use drops to 58 percent for non-citizen households and 30 percent for native households if cash payments from the Earned Income Tax Credit are not counted as welfare. EITC recipients pay no federal income tax. Like other welfare, the EITC is a means-tested, anti-poverty program, but unlike other programs one has to work to receive it.





Compared to native households, non-citizen households have much higher use of food programs (45 percent vs. 21 percent for natives) and Medicaid (50 percent vs. 23 percent for natives).

Including the EITC, 31 percent of non-citizen-headed households receive cash welfare, compared to 19 percent of native households. If the EITC is not included, then cash receipt by non-citizen households is slightly lower than natives (6 percent vs. 8 percent).

While most new legal immigrants (green card holders) are barred from most welfare programs, as are illegal immigrants and temporary visitors, these provisions have only a modest impact on non-citizen household use rates because: 1) most legal immigrants have been in the country long enough to qualify; 2) the bar does not apply to all programs, nor does it always apply to non-citizen children; 3) some states provide welfare to new immigrants on their own; and, most importantly, 4) non-citizens (including illegal immigrants) can receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children who are awarded U.S. citizenship and full welfare eligibility at birth.
[Reply]
Fish 02:04 PM 12-03-2018
This is a bunch of cherry picked nonsense only used for sensational clickbait headlines. The Center for Immigration Studies is very well known for this kind of thing.

They re-release this thing about every 2 years, and it's always got the same fatal flaws in analysis.

2015 version
2016 version
2018 version

The "analysis" conveniently chooses to look only at what it calls "Immigrant households," instead of immigrants individually. This allows it to count welfare usage of everyone in the house regardless of whether they're actually an immigrant. Which allows for a shitload of number fudging. If you're looking at a household with an immigrant father, but native mother, and kids, it incorrectly classifies everything they receive even though the only actual immigrant is ineligible but the native kids receive something like a discounted school lunch or the mother files an EITC even though the father can't. In the same way, it includes stuff like medicaid, SSI, etc that actual immigrants aren't eligible for but their US-born spouse/children do qualify for. All based on survey.

This is super biased and clearly based on terrible methodology. Immigration absolutely needs reform in many ways. But this is nothing but fear mongering bullshit.
[Reply]
suzzer99 02:07 PM 12-03-2018
But what if I really really want it to be true?
[Reply]
Detoxing 02:14 PM 12-03-2018
Originally Posted by Fish:
This is a bunch of cherry picked nonsense only used for sensational clickbait headlines. The Center for Immigration Studies is very well known for this kind of thing.

They re-release this thing about every 2 years, and it's always got the same fatal flaws in analysis.

2015 version
2016 version
2018 version

The "analysis" conveniently chooses to look only at what it calls "Immigrant households," instead of immigrants individually. This allows it to count welfare usage of everyone in the house regardless of whether they're actually an immigrant. Which allows for a shitload of number fudging. If you're looking at a household with an immigrant father, but native mother, and kids, it incorrectly classifies everything they receive even though the only actual immigrant is ineligible but the native kids receive something like a discounted school lunch or the mother files an EITC even though the father can't. In the same way, it includes stuff like medicaid, SSI, etc that actual immigrants aren't eligible for but their US-born spouse/children do qualify for. All based on survey.

This is super biased and clearly based on terrible methodology. Immigration absolutely needs reform in many ways. But this is nothing but fear mongering bullshit.
Judging by the lack of conversation and debate in this thread, I'm pretty stoked that even most of our conservatives here aren't fooled by this bullshit. Which is fantastic.

Of course we'll have our few who believe simply because they WANT to believe. But so what.
[Reply]
TambaBerry 02:26 PM 12-03-2018
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
:-) @ this report.

I've had this conversation too many times to care to do it again. If you want to believe this bullshit, then so be it. No one will ever change your mind about it.

If you can't see how blatant the bias is in this, and how desperate they are to raise the numbers then you don't care to.

Using things like the EITC and SSI to try to label them as some sort of extra benefit that "non-citizens" should be shamed for being eligible for, even though they're clearly taxed therefore eligible.

Or the school lunch programs that pretty much everyone is eligible for....

They don't even define what "Any Welfare" is, and knowing you assholes it's probably something like, "Walks on the sidewalk". :-)
dude thanks for the laugh i needed it on this afternoon was falling asleep
[Reply]
Prison Bitch 02:54 PM 12-03-2018
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
So our taxpayer dollars support them while they take away jobs from Americans.

Seems like a self-defeating policy as it creates less Americans to tax. SanSalvador, Honduras and Gautamela rely on their remittances sent home. The money doesn't evben stay in the US.
Harvard's George Borjas has done decades of research on this. He found that immigration heavily improves the life of the immigrant, but does very little (good or bad) for the native. He also found that the little benefits that accrue to the native are totally gobbled up by the rich.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_J._Borjas


He was born in Cuba and escaped with his mother when Castro took power. But I still bet he's a "racist".
[Reply]
Great Expectations 04:06 PM 12-03-2018
If those numbers are inflated, what do you think the real numbers are?
[Reply]
HonestChieffan 05:15 PM 12-03-2018
I even find the OP data as questionable. Seems odd we have no idea where these data are geographically represented, we have no differentiation of "immigrants" when we know with no doubt the asian immigrants are far and away outstanding in every regard productivity, jobs, business establishment and kids are educated and smart as hell.

That said The SPLC should be blown to hell. That is an anti American terrorist bunch if there ever was one and anybody who uses then to support a position is a POS.

We need to do all we can to eject lifetime welfare scumballs and programs that reward breeding
[Reply]
Bump 05:26 PM 12-03-2018
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
The "Center for Immigration Studies" is a hate group masquerading as a think tank. https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-h...ration-studies



Their numbers are complete bullshit. Here's Cato, which is far from left-wing in any way. https://www.cato.org/publications/co...-welfare-state
:-) @ SPLC, nobody respects that scam. Didn't they also label a cartoon frog as a white supremacist symbol? :-):-)

.
[Reply]
Randallflagg 09:29 PM 12-03-2018
Originally Posted by BanHam:
by Paul Bedard
December 03, 2018 08:15 AM

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...ion-households


A majority of “non-citizens,” including those with legal green card rights, are tapping into welfare programs set up to help poor and ailing Americans, a Census Bureau finding that bolsters President Trump’s concern about immigrants costing the nation.

In a new analysis of the latest numbers, from 2014, 63 percent of non-citizens are using a welfare program, and it grows to 70 percent for those here 10 years or more, confirming another concern that once immigrants tap into welfare, they don’t get off it.



The Center for Immigration Studies said in its report that the numbers give support for Trump’s plan to cut non-citizens off welfare from the “public charge” if they want a green card that allows them to legally work in the United States.

“The Trump administration has proposed new ‘public charge’ rules making it harder for prospective immigrants to qualify for lawful permanent residence -- green cards -- if they use or are likely to use U.S. welfare programs,” said CIS.

“Concern over immigrant welfare use is justified, as households headed by non-citizens use means-tested welfare at high rates. Non-citizens in the data include illegal immigrants, long-term temporary visitors like guest workers, and permanent residents who have not naturalized. While barriers to welfare use exist for these groups, it has not prevented them from making extensive use of the welfare system, often receiving benefits on behalf of U.S.-born children,” added the Washington-based immigration think tank.

The numbers are huge. The report said that there are 4,684,784 million non-citizen households receiving welfare.

And nearly all, 4,370,385, have at least one worker in the house..

In their report, Steven A. Camarota, the director of research, and Karen Zeigler, a demographer at the Center, said that in census data, about half of those are in the United States illegally.

Their key findings in the analysis:
In 2014, 63 percent of households headed by a non-citizen reported that they used at least one welfare program, compared to 35 percent of native-headed households.
Welfare use drops to 58 percent for non-citizen households and 30 percent for native households if cash payments from the Earned Income Tax Credit are not counted as welfare. EITC recipients pay no federal income tax. Like other welfare, the EITC is a means-tested, anti-poverty program, but unlike other programs one has to work to receive it.





Compared to native households, non-citizen households have much higher use of food programs (45 percent vs. 21 percent for natives) and Medicaid (50 percent vs. 23 percent for natives).

Including the EITC, 31 percent of non-citizen-headed households receive cash welfare, compared to 19 percent of native households. If the EITC is not included, then cash receipt by non-citizen households is slightly lower than natives (6 percent vs. 8 percent).

While most new legal immigrants (green card holders) are barred from most welfare programs, as are illegal immigrants and temporary visitors, these provisions have only a modest impact on non-citizen household use rates because: 1) most legal immigrants have been in the country long enough to qualify; 2) the bar does not apply to all programs, nor does it always apply to non-citizen children; 3) some states provide welfare to new immigrants on their own; and, most importantly, 4) non-citizens (including illegal immigrants) can receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children who are awarded U.S. citizenship and full welfare eligibility at birth.


Frankly I am a tad surprised.....I would have thought that it would be higher.....
[Reply]
GloryDayz 11:34 AM 12-04-2018
I kinda feel a little bad for Texas, but the other states are too thick with shitty, unAmerican, dick-hole idiots to do anything but laugh about.

Fucking Firefornia!
[Reply]
BDj23 11:39 AM 12-04-2018
Originally Posted by Bump:
:-) @ SPLC, nobody respects that scam. Didn't they also label a cartoon frog as a white supremacist symbol? :-):-)

.
Oakland says my avatar might as well be a swastika
[Reply]
Bowser 11:50 AM 12-04-2018
Originally Posted by Bugeater:
This is what many fail to understand, the economic impact affects everyone in one way or another. They just don't realize it because many of the costs are hidden.
What about basic human compassion, you heartless fuck? These people just want a better life! /those that quote from the Sharia Protection Law Center
[Reply]
Bowser 11:51 AM 12-04-2018
Originally Posted by Bump:
:-) @ SPLC, nobody respects that scam. Didn't they also label a cartoon frog as a white supremacist symbol? :-):-)

.
Everything white is white supremacist according to that racist organization.
[Reply]
suzzer99 02:30 PM 12-04-2018
Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees


Originally Posted by :
WASHINGTON — Trump administration officials, under pressure from the White House to provide a rationale for reducing the number of refugees allowed into the United States next year, rejected a study by the Department of Health and Human Services that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost.

The draft report, which was obtained by The New York Times, contradicts a central argument made by advocates of deep cuts in refugee totals as President Trump faces an Oct. 1 deadline to decide on an allowable number. The issue has sparked intense debate within his administration as opponents of the program, led by Mr. Trump’s chief policy adviser, Stephen Miller, assert that continuing to welcome refugees is too costly and raises concerns about terrorism.

Advocates of the program inside and outside the administration say refugees are a major benefit to the United States, paying more in taxes than they consume in public benefits, and filling jobs in service industries that others will not. But research documenting their fiscal upside — prepared for a report mandated by Mr. Trump in a March presidential memorandum implementing his travel ban — never made its way to the White House. Some of those proponents believe the report was suppressed.

The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees “contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government” between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. “Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.”
Stop pretending this is about anything but white nationalism and preserving the ever shifting definition "white culture" - it's not that long ago Irish and Italian weren't included in the tribe.
[Reply]
suzzer99 02:31 PM 12-04-2018
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Judging by the lack of conversation and debate in this thread, I'm pretty stoked that even most of our conservatives here aren't fooled by this bullshit. Which is fantastic.

Of course we'll have our few who believe simply because they WANT to believe. But so what.
Hint: it's not about economics.
[Reply]
Page 2 of 4
< 12 34 >
Up