so open the government, if republicans want this wall, this is your chance, you can have it for less then $100 a piece
And unemployment is at basic full employment at 3.5% about. It doesn't seem to have an affect on anyone wanting a job.
I am not opposed to legal immigrants getting jobs. That's exactly what I want. It's the moral hazard of our social safety net systems that worries me.
Pelosi is characterizing it as "Trump's vanity wall". To an extent, it is. That doesn't change anything. It's economically practical, and undeniably valuable to public safety. Pelosi's real concern is that Trump will become a juggernaut in 2020 when immigration reform and border security begin to sow fruits. Unemployment go lower? Wages rise higher? Too much winning
It is dangerous to allow anyone and everyone from anywhere to come and go unchecked and unregulated like Democrats want.
Those safety nets ease the pains and crashes when the economy actually does a down turn. As every bull market will be followed by a bear market. Forever and ever.
Fool's Gold. Illegals have saturated the unskilled and semi-skilled markets. The wages in the markets are less than they were in the 80s for many occupations due to this. Illegals working for next to nothing, paying no taxes and allowing employers to avoid thing like workman's comp insurance have damaged the economy in many ways. They have created a poverty class. The Democrats love this because it adds to their base.
More fake news without a source. However, anyone who has knowledge of businesses in these fields knows you can not operate above the board and compete. Since 95% of the people who have the guts and brains to operate their own business are Republicans, it stands to reason Republicans are using illegal labor too.
I see....some RWers on here do use ad homs at times when they lose an argument and you've just joined their ranks. Pathetic. Ok...since you insist, here another one....another republican. Pure hypocrites. https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...legal-workers-everify-immigration/1071563002/ By the way, you should learn about the rules of the forum, if you are capable.
Clinton makes Trump look like a Choir Boy. Sexual misconduct is not the same as sexual harassment. Get a clue. Mr. Clinton sent $850,000 to Paula Corbin Jones to settle the sexual misconduct lawsuit. This article is part of a series about Bill Clinton Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States (1993–2001), has been publicly accused of sexual misconduct by four women: Juanita Broaddrick accused Clinton of raping her in 1978; Kathleen Willey accused Clinton of groping her without consent in 1993; Leslie Millwee[1] accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her in 1980; and Paula Jones accused Clinton of exposing himself to her in 1991 as well as sexually harassing her. The Jones allegations became public in 1994, during Clinton's first term as president, while Willey's and Broaddrick's accusations became public in 1999, toward the end of Clinton's second term. Millwee did not make her accusations until 2016.
I think if you're willing to come and start a business you should get citizenship if it's still going after 5 years. That's something I can get behind. Taking the best and brightest, those who want to get ahead and make it for themselves through hard work and solid values. But that's a long way from the economic migrant laundering system currently in place.
I’m pointing out that you’re mistakenly mixing cases. Clinton, like Trump, settled sexual harassment claims that had gone to court. The claims you’re talking about, the ones dealing with Broaddrick and Willey, are sexual assault cases that never went to court. Which, by the way, Trump also has similarly dealt with. So, I’m not sure exactly how Trump makes Clinton look like a choir boy when they BOTH have sexual harassment AND assault claims against them.
Nah......I cant wait to see the pickle that puts republicans in when he does that and the republicans cant decide to prosecute him for stealing their money, or praise him for being a capitalist
No, it has more to do with that giant recession we had a decade ago. You know, there unemployment got to 10%. With that many people out of work, wages are not going to increase and most likely decrease. And much of the stagnation also came from the R backed NAFTA and other trade agreements of the 1990s. You know, where good paying mfg jobs left so corporate profits could rise. As for your silly thing about Ds and it's base. Only fools would think such a thing.
Mass immigration and welfare lead to economic unsustainability as "refugees" travel 12000km to get to a "safe country". It's a classic problem of moral hazard.