The Official Trump Thread

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by sexualbanana


there's less money being sent back to Mexico to tax.

Unless I'm missing something...

Uh, you are, I'd argue a large minority/small majority of Mexicans sending money back are not going anywhere, and therefore, will continue to send money back.

You make it sound like that because the flow of people from Mexico to USA will decrease, somehow decreases the money from people already in the USA sending money back. I don't know what sort of logic that is, but if I am not understanding you correctly, by all means explain away.

He isn't going to deport 11 million illegal mexicans tomorrow. He specifically said that most resources will be dedicated to enforcing current laws and deporting criminals. Which I whole-heartedly agree with.

So combine a tax on banking services that send money to Mexico (say 10% tax on any money sent to Mexico from the USA by private individuals, on $25bil usd = $2.5bil already), plus an increase in the cost of US visas for Mexicans.

19,175,345

Amount of Mexicans that visisted America in 2015. Presumably they had to get visas. $20 per visa? $385mil per year.

So, the wall would be paid for in 4-5 years based on those measures. I dunno, seems pretty well thought out to me. Even if you reduce the money tax to 5%, it works out to $8.175bil over 5 years.

[killramos]

Make the tax that high and you encourage people to take measures to dodge it. Like suitcases of cash across the border, or sending the money through an intermediary.

[Gestalt]

Originally posted by killramos
Make the tax that high and you encourage people to take measures to dodge it. Like suitcases of cash across the border, or sending the money through an intermediary.

More criminals to deport.

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Uh, you are, I'd argue a large minority/small majority of Mexicans sending money back are not going anywhere, and therefore, will continue to send money back.

You make it sound like that because the flow of people from Mexico to USA will decrease, somehow decreases the money from people already in the USA sending money back. I don't know what sort of logic that is, but if I am not understanding you correctly, by all means explain away.

That is what I'm saying...

The gov't makes it more difficult/cost-prohibitive for Mexicans to work in the US. Doesn't that then diminish the supply of Mexicans sending money back?

I'm not saying this to be argumentative, I'm saying this because I'm curious and I'm not as familiar with the nuances of the finances and economics of it all.

Originally posted by killramos
Make the tax that high and you encourage people to take measures to dodge it. Like suitcases of cash across the border, or sending the money through an intermediary.

I've read that that's already happening. They try regular mail (score for the post man), or they just send it back in cash with someone they know heading back.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by sexualbanana


The gov't makes it more difficult/cost-prohibitive for Mexicans to work in the US. Doesn't that then diminish the supply of Mexicans sending money back?

No, because they are already there. I thought I already explained this? Honestly, feels like you are being obtuse here.

There were 11 million illegal immigrants in the USA when Obama was prez.

There are still (and will continue to be pretty close to that amount for the foreseeable future) 11 million illegal immigrants in the USA while Trump is prez.

So, if $25bil US was sent back with 11 million illegal (AND on top of that 11mil, legal) immigrants, it should theoretically stay the same.

I do not understand your "more difficult/cost prohibitive". It already is quite difficult, considering they entered a country illegally. Doesn't get more difficult than that. How the costs of them physically "being" in the USA changed is beyond me. How do you charge an illegal, undocumented immigrant MORE when you already can't do those things?

You also make it sound like that the number of illegals is magically going to be halved in 6 months... which is quite literally impossible. And not what Trump has advocated to do.

Originally posted by killramos
Make the tax that high and you encourage people to take measures to dodge it. Like suitcases of cash across the border, or sending the money through an intermediary.

Because that doesn't happen already, right? A 10% tax is not what I call high. But seeing as how the wall can be funded over many years, lets say a decade (assuming two republican majorities), the tax could be 5% and still work. Nobody is going to get up in arms about having to pay $5 of their $100 they are sending back to Nana in Guadalajara. That's the thing, its all small amounts. Not "briefcases" full lol.

[Gestalt]

We can't implement an income tax, people will just try and evade it, or stop working!

I thought they were joking. Now they appear to be serious.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1




Because that doesn't happen already, right? A 10% tax is not what I call high. But seeing as how the wall can be funded over many years, lets say a decade (assuming two republican majorities), the tax could be 5% and still work. Nobody is going to get up in arms about having to pay $5 of their $100 they are sending back to Nana in Guadalajara. That's the thing, its all small amounts. Not "briefcases" full lol.

^so devils advocate here. If it is happening already then putting a tax is penalizing people who are at least working within the system. Don't see how that is better? How will that encourage the system in the right direction?


Also the money exiting the country via those means, is it really that much? what is the net change as well? You have to consider the value added by their labor

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by J-hop


If it is happening already then putting a tax is penalizing people who are at least working within the system. Don't see how that is better?

Because it takes away incentive to send the money back. That money, that value, is basically lost forever to the US economy by being sent to Mexico. It is direct wealth transfer with zero benefit to the US. It actually has little to do with illegal immigration itself, its just a way to pay for it. In my opinion, kills two birds with one stone; stops illegal immigration, prevents a decent amount of capital/income being gone forever from the US economy. It works well with Trumps "MAGA" pledge.

Some of these stats are confusing and/or not labeled well:

In 2014, 27 percent of the 11.7 million Mexican immigrants who resided in the United States were naturalized citizens, compared to 47 percent of the total foreign-born population.

Foreign born population of the United States by country of birth in 2013 (U.S. Census Bureau) for Mexico suggests that 11.7mil is accurate. So there are approximately 6 million illegals. If the tax curbs sending money back AND pays for the wall, all the better.

[J-hop]

Are there stats showing the drain of illegals (and people sending money back ) on the US economy? I haven't really heard much on that end. Again though it has to be put in a net context.

[Gestalt]

Don't overlook there are 57 million Hispanics in the US. A huge number of which send money back home to relatives.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by J-hop
Are there stats showing the drain of illegals (and people sending money back ) on the US economy? I haven't really heard much on that end. Again though it has to be put in a net context.

$25billion every year is directly transferred from those of Mexican nationality to Mexico from the USA.

You'll have to decide your own opinion if they are a net benefit or detractor from the economy. The funny thing is, usually an increase in people on the whole is beneficial to the economy (more people require more stuff/services) so the "stats" are usually portrayed favorably.

What this doesn't capture is how it affects working class Americans and their job opportunities. Its not as simple as "look at this one stat, clearly illegals are good for america". It's like the oil boom; I would argue $100+/barrel oil was bad for Alberta. I much would have rather seen $75-$80/barrel and no crash for a variety of reasons, ones that are not necessarily easy to discern in something as complicated as the environment.

And if you think Obama's lax immigration policies haven't directly lead to the importation of crime and drugs... well, ok then I guess.

[J-hop]

Completely agree, I do find on these polarizing issues it's really hard to figure out what the actual impact is in terms of net good or net bad. Which I think is why I'm so against the ideas that foreign labor is bad because it takes jobs away from Americans. As I'm sure the truth is much more complex. A Ford factory shuts down and moves out of country. But now the Ford Fiesta can be produced for X dollars cheaper which results in better pricing at the consumer end to compete with other companies for market share. Which in turn means X more dealerships were built X number of financing jobs were created and so on and so on.

It's so hard to take a cut and dry stance and say that they have to bring those jobs back to America at all costs and that it will absolutely be a good thing for the US. I'm not convinced. But I wouldn't be mad if I was proven wrong.

[ZenOps]

America has been the worlds greatest consumers, almost solely due to the US dollar and the greater US populace ability to go into massive amounts of dollar debt.

But looked at from a realists perspective, they are technically - only 350 million people or so, many of which already own one or two cars and HDTV's each.

I mean seriously, although many would like to think that the US can endlessly eat food until they hit 400 pounds per person, there probably is a limit to how much one can reasonably consume.

So by threatening tariffs, Trump may not have as big a threat as he might otherwise think.

[killramos]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1

A 10% tax is not what I call high.

What was your opinion of the carbon tax again?

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by killramos


What was your opinion of the carbon tax again?

:Facepalm: Its called context, good job on that reading comprehension though.

A 10% tax on money transfers out of country is not the same as a tax on breathing, derp Again, there is very little to lose and everything to gain by them doing this.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by killramos


What was your opinion of the carbon tax again?

We want freedom but not the freedom to take my jerb or money.

Originally posted by J-hop
It's so hard to take a cut and dry stance and say that they have to bring those jobs back to America at all costs and that it will absolutely be a good thing for the US. I'm not convinced. But I wouldn't be mad if I was proven wrong.

There isn't one conclusive study to say illegals are good or bad for economy. For Texas, state believe illegals contribute around $1/2 Billion surplus. But at the local level, schools and hospital, they estimate it is a $1B loss. So all in all, you are looking at a $1/2B loss.

In Florida, they expect illegal brings in around $10B but spent around $15B, so a $5B loss.

So in a way US taxpayers is subsiding corporations using illegal labor to keep cost low. I don't know what fruit prices will be there weren't illegals. As really there isn't a lot of native North American want to work these jobs anyway. Old friend has a farm in Ontario and they have to pay minimum wage + accommodation + 2 way ticket to import Mexicans to work on their farm because even at that cost, there is no local who want to work the field. They rather do nothing or stay on EI.

And the whole sending $ home argument is not just a Mexican issue. There won't be a Philippines if foreign workers can't make money here and send it home. All you need to know is that while they are here, they will have to spend something. And if they are making less than minimum wage, how much do you think they can really send home?

As for crime statistics, since illegal will probably operate in the lower 10% of the population in income, it isn't that different. Just look at us in Calgary on how many people turns to crime when they can't make bank drilling holes in the ground. It's just human nature. When you don't make enough, you are tempted to make it up in some way and those avenues are usually illegal.

It's estimated that 7% of greater Houston area are undocumented. So purging these much people, many who actually have kids born and raise in US as citizens, may be both a logistical and economic nightmare.

The way I look at Trump so far is that from a Calgarian on economic stand point, he is distablizing the world in such a quick pace that it is in our favor to make some $$ out of this. I have been saying it will take a major war to get oil back so we can afford double meat and Trump is doing an excellent job right now to set the path for more conflicts down the road.

But I'm wary of what's kind of society will be left behind after he's done. Even if he's done in 4 years, it's will take probably 2 more terms or more to clean up if his people don't keep Trump under control. The biggest issue I see is American credibility is out the door and we to the north get drag down with it as American's domination on the world stage winds down and we have to bow to Russia/China alliance.

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


:Facepalm: Its called context, good job on that reading comprehension though.

A 10% tax on money transfers out of country is not the same as a tax on breathing, derp Again, there is very little to lose and everything to gain by them doing this.

End of the day, the illegals are here because businesses hire them. The penalty isn't stiff enough for hiring illegals. Taking actions against illegals is treating the symptoms, not the cause.

If we have way to import legal Mexicans migrant workers here to work our farms, I don't see why US can't. They just got lobbied turn a blind eye and won't.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Xtrema

End of the day, the illegals are here because businesses hire them. The penalty isn't stiff enough for hiring illegals. Taking actions against illegals is treating the symptoms, not the cause.

If we have way to import legal Mexicans migrant workers here to work our farms, I don't see why US can't. They just got lobbied turn a blind eye and won't.

I believe we see eye to eye on this matter. My focus has been purely on how to pay for the wall, which affects illegal immigration.

There are indeed larger forces at play that should be dealt with. Businesses have profited for years on underpaid illegal labour, distorting the market. Time for a reality check, which unfortunately, might affect our own pocket books.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I believe we see eye to eye on this matter. My focus has been purely on how to pay for the wall, which affects illegal immigration.

There are indeed larger forces at play that should be dealt with. Businesses have profited for years on underpaid illegal labour, distorting the market. Time for a reality check, which unfortunately, might affect our own pocket books.

NAFTA's end game is to bring everybody up so then we can slowly become truly borderless and eventually no have talks about "illegals".

Unfortunately, corporations and wall street keep on finding way to keep the cost of business low and not paying taxes so in reality, it bring some people up (Mexicans) and brought a lot of people down (Canadians, Americans) and created large inequalities.

Even with TPP dead, and NAFTA half dead, we are only addressing issue we started 30 years ago. 30 years from now, automation will take even more jobs out of lower half of the population then these trade deals ever did. And there is so much distraction now that nobody is paying attention to that.

[sabad66]

Tax on imports from Mexico != Mexico paying for the wall

It will just mean higher prices for consumer goods... guess that means the good old taxpayers will be footing the bill in some form or another.


Payment aside, the whole "badly needed" wall idea is retarded and won't solve anything with immigration/drugs. There are much better ways to spend 20+ billion dollars. The only reason he wants a nice fancy wall is to boost his ego even more...what better way to remember your name than a nice big beautiful wall. He probably already has the exec order ready to go to rename it the 'trump wall'

[dj_patm]