That is a complex problem, and expert analysts disagree. Whatever the true overall cost-benefit figure, my personal share of it is higher than the per capita amount, due to the progressive tax system. Then there are the intangible social and cultural costs. Talk to a school teacher or law enforcement officer in an area with a large illegal immigrant population. I have.
_____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Omar Khyam Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 7:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Libertarian] Local Opposition to the Central State's Border Fence Posted by Anthony Gregory at January 16, 2008 06:09 PM Then, quantify it. What is the contribution versus the cost of illegal immigrants. How much do they contribute to production and revenues versus these alleged "forfeits" and "subsidies." The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. -- Winston Churchill ----- Original Message ---- From: Bob Giramma <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:evil_spock%40hotmail.com> com> To: Libertarian@ <mailto:Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 1:20:06 PM Subject: RE: [Libertarian] Local Opposition to the Central State's Border Fence Posted by Anthony Gregory at January 16, 2008 06:09 PM It is not socialist nonsense to me, since I am forfeiting real dollars and cents that I've earned to subsidize illegal immigrants. It is totally real and quantifiable. _____ From: Libertarian@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Libertarian@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of kiddleddee Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:09 PM To: Libertarian@ yahoogroups. com Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Local Opposition to the Central State's Border Fence Posted by Anthony Gregory at January 16, 2008 06:09 PM --- In Libertarian@ <mailto:Libertarian %40yahoogroups. com> yahoogroups. com, "Bob Giramma" <evil_spock@ ...> wrote: > > Some are present situations, while others are predictions for the future. > In either case, they must be balanced against he positive effects elsewhere. > If it has become too warm one place, it is now fine in another. > > And none of that proves a specific cause. From what I've read, if human > life had never existed, the earth would still be warming now. There is a > possibility that human-caused emissions are adding to it, but I am not > convinced. > > And no one has a "solution" that passes the cost-benefit analysis test. ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _ Are you speaking of the "global warming" fearmongering or the immigration fearmongering? All this stuff about "balancing" negative effects and "cost-benefit analysis". I've applied it to both the global warming and the immigration "problems" (at least in my own mind) and I find the alarmism about both to be pretty much equal amounts of socialist nonsense. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] __________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. <http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ> yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
