Re: US strike options on TSP

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 09 Dec 2015 10:58

Donald Trump should learn a trick or two from Fordiwal. Instead of outright banning of Muslims entering US, Donald Trump should say Muslims can enter US only on leap day (once in 4 years).

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Dec 2015 14:40

The hypocrisy of the West is astonishing.There are calls in the UK for trump to be banned from entering Britain,but mullahs and imams preaching jihad are protected within and not deported! Any jihadi bent upon carnage can enter the UK,but Trump ,who wants to fight jihadism by any means and proetct Americans from being victims is being hounded.

Donald Trump's Muslim ban plan plunges Republican party into chaos
Rival candidates and party leaders quick to brand the frontrunner as ‘un-American’ amid accusations of ‘fascism’ as some see reckoning on the horizon
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... arty-chaos

Donald Trump calls for complete ban on Muslims entering the US.

Tom McCarthy in New York, Ben Jacobs and Sabrina Siddiqui in Washington, Ryan Felton in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Kate Lamb in Jakarta, Indonesia

Wednesday 9 December 2015

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was disowned by his own party’s top leadership on Tuesday and faced calls to drop his White House bid as the world reacted with outrage to his plan for a ban on Muslims entering the United States.

The billionaire frontrunner’s plan tipped the Republican presidential race into chaos, with party leaders from the chairman of the Republican National Committee to former US vice-president Dick Cheney condemning the idea as “un-American”.

Trump toured the US television studios in unrepentant form, unmoved by the gale of criticism that followed his speech aboard an aircraft carrier on Monday evening. Speaking aboard the USS Yorktown, he acknowledged that his proposal was “probably not politically correct”, before whipping up a cheering crowd and adding: “But. I. Don’t. Care.”

“We need a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States while we figure out what the hell is going on,” Trump said. “We are out of control.”

But for perhaps the first time of the election cycle, Trump seemed at risk of being drowned out by voices raised on all sides in protest against him.

Horrified Muslims in the United States heard in Trump’s rhetoric an echo of Nazism, and they joined the Republican condemnation of Trump as un-American.

“He’s trampling on our constitution and packaging it as a snake oil cure for our security concerns,” said Kassem Allie, executive administrator of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, Michigan, one of the largest mosques in the US. “He’s using fear-mongering reminiscent of Nazi Germany and Stalin.”

‘This is outrageous’: US Muslim leader condemns Trump’s call to ban Muslims

A significant silence that had followed past outrageous statements by Trump – in which Republican elders have declined direct confrontation, and the targets of his remarks have seemed humiliated or intimidated – seemed finally shattered at the billionaire’s latest offense.

Republican establishment figures from Cheney to rivals like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio and RNC chairman Reince Priebus ramped up their condemnations.

“Well, I think this whole notion that somehow we need to say no more Muslims and just ban a whole religion goes against everything we stand for and believe in,” Cheney told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. “I mean, religious freedom’s been a very important part of our, our history.”
How does Trump do it? Understanding the psychology of a demagogue's rally

House speaker Paul Ryan said Trump’s remarks violated the constitution and were “not who we are as a party”.

“This is not conservatism,” the Wisconsin representative said, adding: “Some of our best and biggest allies in this struggle and fight against radical Islam terror are Muslims.”

Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee for president, backed Ryan, his former running mate, adding on Twitter: “On Muslims, @realDonaldTrump fired before aiming...@SpeakerRyan is on target.”

Party chairman Preibus said of Trump’s remarks: “I don’t agree. We need to aggressively take on radical Islamic terrorism but not at the expense of our American values.”

Donald Trump’s an ‘asshole’, says Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter (*glorious name! ) in reaction to his proposal to ban Muslims from entering the US

There were signs that Trump was not deaf to the Republican insurrection. He appeared to make a veiled threat on Twitter on Tuesday to run as an independent. “A new poll indicates that 68% of my supporters would vote for me if I departed the GOP & ran as an independent,” he wrote.

While such a bid would face logistical barriers that differ from state to state, experts have said an independent run would be possible for a candidate with money to spend on lawyers and signature-collection campaigns. Such a move would have a potentially disastrous effect on Republican hopes of winning back the White House.

Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton seized the moment with an 850-word statement on her website calling Trump’s idea “shameful” and “dangerous” and little more than the logical conclusion of other Republican candidates’ calls for religious tests for Syrian refugees. She also sent a message of support to American Muslims, telling them: “This is your country, too. I’m proud to be your fellow American. And many, many other Americans feel the same way.”

White House press secretary Josh Earnest called Trump’s remarks “incendiary” and “morally reprehensible”, adding: “What Donald Trump said yesterday disqualifies him from serving as president.”

Trump’s anti-Muslim comments ‘disqualify him for president’, says White House.

In Congress, a Florida Republican spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives to make a passionate demand for Trump to quit the presidential race.

“It should be heartbreaking to every American that we have a frontrunner in the presidential race that suggests there will be a religious test for anybody who wishes to come to our shores,” said Representative David Jolly. “It is an affront to the principles upon which our nation was founded.”

Bush, a would-be presidential rival of Trump who has been trailing him badly in the polls, said the real estate mogul was “unhinged”. An outside political group supporting Bush, meanwhile, announced a $3.7m ad campaign featuring a video calling Trump “impulsive and reckless”.

Rubio, another Republican hopeful, said the threat from ISIS was “a very serious issue” that would not be addressed by what he said was an “impulsive” proposal from Trump.

“What he proposed is not well thought out. It was impulsive. He didn’t think it through,” Rubio told conservative radio show host Hugh Hewitt in an interview Tuesday.

“It violates the Constitution. It places a religious test and it isn’t the best way to face this threat.”

Rubio added that there would be some refugees from Syria and Iraq who simply could not be vetted.

Earlier in the program, he also reiterated his claim that “there is no evidence” of widespread or systemic discrimination against Muslims in America. Democrats have pointed to those comments, originally made in an interview with Fox News on Sunday, to link Rubio to Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations said it has documented thousands of hate crimes annually. According to data from the FBI, Muslims are now five times more likely to be victims of a hate crime than they were before the attacks on Sept. 11. Studies have also found a growing number of lawsuits filed on behalf of Muslims facing workplace discrimination.
Donald Trump shows hate speech is now out and proud in the mainstream

The outrage over Trump’s proposal was not limited to the United States. British prime minister David Cameron issued a statement that said he “completely disagrees” with the comments and regards them as “divisive, unhelpful and quite simply wrong”.

Ukip leader Nigel Farage released a statement saying Trump had “gone too far”.

London’s Metropolitan police reacted strongly to Trump’s accusation that officers were afraid because parts of the British capital were were so “radicalised”. Stating that they “would not normally dignify such comments with a response”, the police organisation said he “could not be more wrong”.

Muslim groups around the world expressing outrage at Trump’s proposal included Dar al-Ifta, the state religious body in Egypt.

“Such hostile attitudes towards Islam and Muslims will increase tensions within the American society of which Muslims represent around 8 million peaceful and loyal American citizens,” the group said in a statement.

The call was echoed by Muslims in the United States.

“This statement is pretty much un-American, and goes against every value and principle that we hold dear as American citizens,” said Adam Soltani, executive of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Oklahoma. “And it’s not a stance we should be taking as a country, and it’s definitely not a stance that an individual running for the highest office in our country should adopt.”

Trump followed up the speech with a media blitz Tuesday morning, in which he claimed the mantle of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, citing the internment of Japanese Americans during the second world war as precedent for his policy.

“This is a president highly respected by all, he did the same thing,” Trump said on ABC News. “If you look at what he was doing, it was far worse.”

However, Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist who has been a vocal critic of Trump, told the Guardian: “There was a whiff of fascism around this guy. Now there’s a reek of fascism”.

Wilson noted with horror that Trump has been evasive on whether his ban applies to American citizens, something which would be grotesquely unconstitutional. “I wanted to hear that explicitly stated,” Wilson said. “American citizens are exempted from this, and in order to satisfy his supporters, he can’t and won’t say that.”

Wilson thought that Trump posed a profound challenge for the future of the Republican party. “We are going to end up having a point where there’s going to be a ‘come to Jesus’ moment about whether this party can survive Donald Trump.” Wilson also noted: “A lot of Trump’s fans and supporters don’t want the party to survive. They want to form a populist, nationalist party that isn’t about limited government and the constitution.”
Utterly repellant and malignant: world reacts to Trump's anti-Muslim tirade
Read more

When the point comes, Wilson said, “we have to decide if this going to be the troll party or the Republican party”.

Reactions elsewhere in the national politics ranged from amused to exasperated. The Philadelphia Daily News put a picture of Trump delivering a stiff wave on its cover, with the caption “The New Furor”.

The Democratic mayor of St Petersburg, Florida, Rick Kriseman, tweeted that Trump was not welcome in the city. “I am hereby barring Donald Trump from entering St. Petersburg until we fully understand the dangerous threat posed by all Trumps,” he wrote.

In a meeting with local church groups in Baltimore, Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders expressed general frustration with the conversation around Trump.

Sanders was questioned in a press conference about why his staff had instructed journalists not to ask him about him about Islamic State.

“What about Isis, guys?” Sanders asked as he laughed and he turned to the black church leaders standing next to him. “How often are these people talking about the issues that we talked about today?”

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 09 Dec 2015 22:19

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... -shootings
This is from October 2015
" FBI chief: 'unacceptable' that Guardian has better data on police violence

James Comey tells crime summit that ‘it’s ridiculous’ Guardian and Washington Post have more information on civilians’ deaths at hands of US police than FBI
"

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Dec 2015 08:54

One can expect a new phase in violent America with the Mozzies getting the benefit of US racists
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 67256.html

Muslim storeowner brutally beaten in New York City
Police investigate attack as hate crime amid a surge in Islamophobic violence
Massoud Hayoun New York |

A New York City Muslim storeowner has been brutally beaten in what police are investigating as a hate crime.

The New York Police Department (NYPD) told The Independent that Florida-resident Piro Kolvani on Saturday attacked Sarker Haque, 53, who owns Fatima Food Market in the city’s Astoria neighborhood. Mr Kolvani was arrested shortly after the incident.

The NYPD is investigating the alleged attack as a hate crime amid an apparent spike in similar Islamophobic attacks occurring in the wake of an attack by self-professed adherents of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) killed 14 people last week in San Bernadino, California.

Mr Haque told The Independent that Mr Kolvani entered his store and appeared to have been incensed by the cover of the New York Post, which on Saturday featured a photo of Tashfeen Malik, one of the San Bernadino shooters. “Massacre Woman Loved ISIS: Wife From Hell,” the cover reads.

National media have criticized the Post for that and other covers that Muslim community advocates have said demonize Muslims in the wake of the attack. “Muslim killers,” a headline on a cover three days before Haque’s assault read.

“I think the newspaper attracted him, to be honest,” Mr Haque said.

The beating went on for six to eight minutes, Mr Haque said, before a long-time customer came to his aid and detained Mr Kolvani until the police arrived.

“I never saw a situation like that. Not even after 9/11” Mr Haque said.

The New York branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reached out to Mr Haque after he was released from hospital care Monday to assist him in dealing with law enforcement.

For CAIR's New York director, Sadiya Khalique, its often difficult to get victims of Islamophobic incidents to report attacks. “Many people who contact us don't want to report because they don't want to relive the incident during questioning,” Ms Khalique told The Independent.

The United States has seen a steady rise in Islamophobic attacks this year, CAIR says. The organisation’s national branch reported in July that the number of attacks on mosques had surpassed the total number for all of 2014. Ms Khalique says that despite what appears to be a surge in anti-Muslim crime nationwide, she has no New York City-specific statistics, and that the data is often misleading, precisely because many victims, who she says are traumatized by the assaults, choose not to come forward.

Victims of Islamophobic hate crimes are often women, Muslim community advocates say, because they are more clearly indentified as Muslim when they wear headscarves. But NYPD hate crime data shows that men comprise a majority of hate crime victims.

Ms Khalique wears a headscarf, or hijab. Despite being the head of a rights advocacy organisation, she fears for her safety, particularly in a climate where anti-Muslim rhetoric is an evermore common form of political discourse. On Monday, Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump called to ban Muslims from entering the US.

“For me, I am fearful that I might be next,” Ms Khalique said. “I wear a hijab and am visibly Muslim. And despite doing civil rights work, I am fearful. For me and for my mother and my sister.”

Trump to visit controversial Jerusalem site, PM Netanyahu
Muslim moguls split on Donald Trump's business

A growing number of American Muslim children face bullying in local schools, she added.

Last month, a Muslim elementary school student was brutally beaten by her fellow students and called “ISIS,” the abbreviation for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria armed group. Police declined to file a police report against the alleged assailants, who will face a disciplinary hearing, according to new site RawStory.com.

Ms Khalique, who aided the victim’s family, said that they will not pursue further legal action at this time.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Dec 2015 09:27

US Senators introduce legislation to cut H1B visas by 15,000

What really struck me about this news was:

The bill proposes that visas be granted to the highest wage earners first.

Most people in the world are bombarded with the idea that the US will allow in the poor and the oppressed and the un-free. It does not take too long for an Indian in this discussion to be told about the proof of this in the "long visa lines at US consulates in India". I have been told that several times on this forum.

The point is that those "long lines" are only for a subset of educated people whom the US wants. US visas are a quid pro quo transactional thing. It is not about allowing the oppressed or the needy. It is about allowing in whom the US wants from nations that have oppressed and needy people. There is a huge difference. The people who actually get into the US are often well educated and wealthy and useful to the US in some way. But the US tends to talk about immigrants who come to the US for its freedoms and its opportunity, ignoring the fact that a lot of people are already quite free and fairly wealthy in their own home countries. They go to the US like a business opportunity - to try and get more than what they already have. And many immigrants to the US are welcome in the US and in their home countries, and often have family and property in both countries - a luxury that most native born US citizens cannot enjoy.

If the US really allowed in the poor and the needy and the oppressed then the US would become poor and needy pretty soon so this "Land of Freedom and Liberty" is a slogan. "Land of opportunism" is possibly an appropriate expression because a whole lot of people who go to the US are opportunists who want to get there by hook or by crook. And many do get in exactly by those means. And those people are the ones who gain most be pretending to be very American and lecturing others about the greatness of the US. A wealthy RAPE Paki in the US gains status by going to the US although he may be very wealthy and have all sorts of freedoms at home unavailable in the US. He lives like an American in the US (does his own laundry) but will live the life of a Sultan back in shitistan.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 10 Dec 2015 09:35

We may or may not like Trump, but we are clear about what he thinks. The same can not be said about Hillary. Frankly, I do not see what is wrong with banning Muslims coming into U.S. If U.S. feels that its national security is threatened by Muslims then they can and should do so. But how far this thing works is another question.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 10 Dec 2015 12:51

How come we no longer hear about Al-Q anymore and all terrorists suddenly belong to ISIS ?
Did Al-Q division of SeeEyeAye wound up shop and merged into Daesh ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Dec 2015 14:11

Yagnasri wrote:We may or may not like Trump, but we are clear about what he thinks. The same can not be said about Hillary. Frankly, I do not see what is wrong with banning Muslims coming into U.S. If U.S. feels that its national security is threatened by Muslims then they can and should do so. But how far this thing works is another question.

US national security is threatened by morons. If Trump is elected they would be bigger morons - not because I have any dislike for Trump, but because Trump's statement is empty political rhetoric like "Garibi Hatao" that cannot be implemented.

Now all I need is someone to tell me that when the US sets its mind on something - it will be done. I would agree with that - which is why the US picks on easily doable things to do like mollycoddling and bribing Pakistan rather than anything serious.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Dec 2015 15:42

http://seekingalpha.com/news/2975646-am ... e-majority
America's middle class no longer the majority
Dec 10 2015, 05:12 ET | By: Yoel Minkoff, SA News Editor Contact this editor with comments or a news tip
Middle class Americans now comprise less than half, or 49.9%, of the nation's population, down from 61% in 1971,

according to a new Pew Research Center report.Pew defined middle class as households earning between two-thirds and twice the overall median income, after adjusting for household size.A family of three, for example, would be considered middle income if its total annual income ranged from about $42K-$126K.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Dec 2015 19:10

shiv wrote:Trump's statement is empty political rhetoric like "Garibi Hatao" that cannot be implemented.

And that is what Ayaan Hirsi Ali also says
https://twitter.com/AC360/status/674766353912438784

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 10 Dec 2015 20:04

VikasRaina wrote:How come we no longer hear about Al-Q anymore and all terrorists suddenly belong to ISIS ?
Did Al-Q division of SeeEyeAye wound up shop and merged into Daesh ?

Because al-Nusra, Al-Q affiliate in Syria, is being promoted as "the moderate Syrian opposition".

habal · Post by **habal** » 10 Dec 2015 20:28

VikasRaina wrote:How come we no longer hear about Al-Q anymore and all terrorists suddenly belong to ISIS ?
Did Al-Q division of SeeEyeAye wound up shop and merged into Daesh ?

while not aware of exact reasons, my gut feeling is Nusra was always led by Turkey, Saudi, Qatar, Israel etc and did not follow instructions from USA to a tee. They had their own priorities led by their regional mentors and could not be depended upon to stick to the big plan. Being led by 4 or even more horses, this chariot was not manageable.

this was around when McCain started furiously shuttling around mid-east and got together a group of ex-iraqi sf types, naqshbandis of Izzat Ibrahim al-douri again from ex-Iraqi army, ex Iraqi MI, and some other contacts and formed core group of ISIS. So ISIS is supposed to follow US battle plans to a tee. It became new munna. And Baghdadi just missed time magazine cover page. Most popular man in USA covert circles atleast. This is my dus paisa on this issue.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 10 Dec 2015 21:16

Trump will have dealings with Prince Talal which will emerge after the elections or so...He should learn from Delhi rule on License plates....First all muslims banned, then exempt Wahabis, then MUNNAs, then Turks, then Muslims from allied nations etc...all that will be left will be Indian Muslims...final Question! what will be Trump's visa policy on Ahmediyas?

It is the oldest trick in the people....Reagan did it, Bush did it...in India VP Singh did the same, Kejriwal pulled it off in Delhi recently, works all the time!

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 11 Dec 2015 09:28

TEXAS POLICE CHIEF WARNS OBAMA: 'REVOLUTION' IF GUN GRAB - URGES CITIZENS TO ARM THEMSELVES
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrnZMbZJtrs

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 11 Dec 2015 19:46

http://www.vox.com/2015/12/10/9882762/t ... ite-voters
"Trumpism is a natural consequence of the GOP refusing to moderate on taxes or immigration"

As Brian Beutler put it in July, Trump is frightening Republicans in part because he's "showing them what it takes" to run and win as the party of disaffected white people in an increasingly nonwhite country. They don't like what they see, but as a movement they've committed to the kind of political strategy that he was pursuing — a strategy built around the notion that the 2012 election featured a pile of "missing" white voters who could be activated to push the GOP to victory without it needing to do anything to broaden its demographic appeal.

i.e., the Republicans aren't willing to do anything meaningful to appeal to the growing number of Hispanic voters; "downscale, rural, Northern whites" are not turning out to vote; the Republican Party thinks it can win with just the white vote if it can get these people to vote; it is not willing to expand its economic agenda beyond "cut taxes for the rich" in order to appeal to the economic interests of these voters; so it is appealing instead to their xenophobia.

But read the whole article.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Dec 2015 19:57

Satya_anveshi wrote:TEXAS POLICE CHIEF WARNS OBAMA: 'REVOLUTION' IF GUN GRAB - URGES CITIZENS TO ARM THEMSELVES
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrnZMbZJtrs

The man says that these are dangerous times. Why? Lot of tornadoes?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 11 Dec 2015 20:43

What if there were no tornadoes and no terrorists in the guise of refugees? Will that be any good reason for taking arms away from these guys? Still no.

Because once you take away the arms, there is a level playing field between whites and everyone else. Today non-white owning guns means they are terrorists and some form of "bad guys".

White people owning guns means defenders of 2nd Constitutional Amendment.

Once guns are taken away, they have to 'commit crime' when they use the guns on others just like others do today. No hunting of people anymore.

(This is tantamount to taking arms and (any number of legit) beeches away from us Arya / (dharma rakshaks) by the "modern" shitty law. But the above is not acceptable to adharmis. But may be that is the point)

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 11 Dec 2015 20:52

shiv wrote:US Senators introduce legislation to cut H1B visas by 15,000

What really struck me about this news was:
The bill proposes that visas be granted to the highest wage earners first.
Most people in the world are bombarded with the idea that the US will allow in the poor and the oppressed and the un-free. It does not take too long for an Indian in this discussion to be told about the proof of this in the "long visa lines at US consulates in India". I have been told that several times on this forum.

The point is that those "long lines" are only for a subset of educated people whom the US wants. US visas are a quid pro quo transactional thing. It is not about allowing the oppressed or the needy. It is about allowing in whom the US wants from nations that have oppressed and needy people. There is a huge difference. The people who actually get into the US are often well educated and wealthy and useful to the US in some way. But the US tends to talk about immigrants who come to the US for its freedoms and its opportunity, ignoring the fact that a lot of people are already quite free and fairly wealthy in their own home countries. They go to the US like a business opportunity - to try and get more than what they already have. And many immigrants to the US are welcome in the US and in their home countries, and often have family and property in both countries - a luxury that most native born US citizens cannot enjoy.

If the US really allowed in the poor and the needy and the oppressed then the US would become poor and needy pretty soon so this "Land of Freedom and Liberty" is a slogan. "Land of opportunism" is possibly an appropriate expression because a whole lot of people who go to the US are opportunists who want to get there by hook or by crook. And many do get in exactly by those means. And those people are the ones who gain most be pretending to be very American and lecturing others about the greatness of the US. A wealthy RAPE Paki in the US gains status by going to the US although he may be very wealthy and have all sorts of freedoms at home unavailable in the US. He lives like an American in the US (does his own laundry) but will live the life of a Sultan back in shitistan.

The US has always maintained immigration as a way to keep itself competitive. That said, the US also sponsors a green card lottery. Indians can't apply because they're over represented. I've seen a few nepali cab drivers in the bay area arrive via that route. Of all the wealthy western countries, the US is by far the most welcoming of immigration.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 11 Dec 2015 20:59

Whatever economic growth (real or madeup) in US is, is due to immigrants. There is no one buying anything anymore beyond already bloated consumption figures of last decade and half or so. Just like cars, it is now common for people to have multiple homes. There is no effing way on earth for US to continue the growth like it did. Ditto with Europe. Restaurant industry is the only one that will show best growth.

Immigrants tend to consume way more than settled guys so long they have jobs.

Assuming/imposing altruistic motives to US for accepting immigrants is being extremely naive and ignorant.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 12 Dec 2015 04:11

Satya_anveshi wrote:Whatever economic growth (real or madeup) in US is, is due to immigrants. There is no one buying anything anymore beyond already bloated consumption figures of last decade and half or so. Just like cars, it is now common for people to have multiple homes. There is no effing way on earth for US to continue the growth like it did. Ditto with Europe. Restaurant industry is the only one that will show best growth.

Immigrants tend to consume way more than settled guys so long they have jobs.

Assuming/imposing altruistic motives to US for accepting immigrants is being extremely naive and ignorant.

What is ignorant is your claims of who's driving consumption. That immigrants drive up consumption is known. How much of US consumption is the immigrants though ?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 12 Dec 2015 04:26

http://cis.org/node/4573
The Fiscal and Economic Impact of Immigration on the United States
By Steven A. Camarota May 2013

Impact on Aggregate Size of Economy

- George Borjas , the nation's leading immigration economist estimates that the presence of immigrant workers (legal and illegal) in the labor market makes the U.S. economy (GDP) an estimated 11 percent larger ($1.6 trillion) each year.1

- But Borjas cautions, "This contribution to the aggregate economy, however, does not measure the net benefit to the native-born population." This is because 97.8 percent of the increase in GDP goes to the immigrants themselves in the form of wages and benefits.2

Impact on Wages and Employment

- Using the standard to textbook model of the economy, Borjas further estimates that the net gain to natives equals just 0.2 percent of the total GDP in the United States — from both legal and illegal immigration. This benefit is referred to as the immigrant surplus.3

Conclusion
Immigration makes the U.S. economy larger.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 12 Dec 2015 07:19

KrishnaK: Both Sierra Club and IEEE (yes IEEE) were (still are?) against raising H1B caps. The reason they gave was that immigrants add to emissions disproportionately. If they were to remain in their own countries, CO2 emissions will be at their country's level.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Dec 2015 07:44

beats kapil sibal it does.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2015 08:00

KrishnaK wrote:The US has always maintained immigration as a way to keep itself competitive.

Correct. I don't see the US welcoming beggars. They welcome educated, smart people who will contribute to US dominance.

This means that the US is not allowing in the poor and the oppressed as is claimed, but the relatively wealthy and smart.
That is true for Pakistanis who come to the US as well.

But when an immigrant is involved in terrorism, Americans tend to take the line that the immigrant is ungrateful for all that the US has given him, lifting him out of his former misery. This is the bullshit that the US peddles for itself. The fact is that immigrants are often wealthy and have a place in their own societies. They just get more wealthy and influential in their own countries by emigrating to the US while maintaining ties with their home country. The idiotic argument about "long lines outside the consulates" is used as if people are so poor and desperate that the want to get to the US. Fact is those long lines are smart and educated, often wealthy people who are just trying to grab a bigger slice of pie. The poor and needy and unfree don't stand a chance.

The US expects loyalty from immigrants but given that it takes in immigrants who are smart enough and wealthy enough to grab opportunities over the heads of others, those immigrants are also smart enough to be grateful to the US only for what the US has given them and they retain contacts and influence in their home countries and remain grateful to people and societies in their country of origin for things that the US did not or cannot offer them, They are not morons. This manifests in different ways. The Chinese may spy for the PLA while in the US. Pakis may fund Islamist organizations. Arabs may long for Wahhabi male dominance.

But the US reacts to "ungrateful immigrants" with indignation and xenophobia. They expect different behaviour from them. But the US can't do without those immigrants. All smart immigrants will take what the US gives and pretend that all is well as long as they need the US and give it back in kind when the time is right. That is what the Arabs and Pakis are doing now. And none of these people are "poor and oppressed" in their home countries even if they have sworn to that for getting into the US. When the US interferes adversely in the countries that its immigrants come from, blowback is to be expected. Despite the bluster, US identity is about money and nothing else. Not even freedom. Most immigrants to the US have freedom and influence in their home countries. They only want more money to add to their lifestyle.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 12 Dec 2015 08:26

CReAM is Center for Research & Analysis on Migration

Illegal migration and consumption behavior of immigrant households
Christian Dustmann, Francesco Fasani, and Biagio Speciale
September 2015
http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_upl ... _12_15.pdf

If we assume that our estimates also apply to the U.S., the per capita increase in
monthly consumption after regularization would be around 430 U.S. dollars, based on the
2012 Consumption Expenditure Survey (CEX) data on the expenditures of individuals of
Latino or Hispanic origin.44 Given an estimate of 11.5 million undocumented immigrants, an
amnesty regularizing the legal status of all those immigrants would imply a higher level of
expenditures in the U.S. of about 60 billion U.S. dollars; that is, approximately 0.4 percent of
the nation’s 2012 GDP. These calculations suggest that – again, with the caveat that we
ignore general equilibrium effects - the expected increase in expenditures after regularization
may be substantial, with clear distributional consequences in favor of the host countries.
Our findings are also important for analysis on the effects of immigration on the host
economy more generally. Borjas (2013) highlights the importance of understanding the
balance between the impact of immigration on the size of the consumer base for
assessment of permanent wage effects. Our analysis suggests that undocumented
immigrants lead to a lower expansion of consumption than legal immigrants, which may
have important implications for how they impact on the labor market, wages, employment, as
well as tax revenue

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 12 Dec 2015 09:06

Economic Policy Institute
http://www.epi.org/publication/immigration-facts/

Facts About Immigration and the U.S. Economy
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
By Daniel Costa, David Cooper, and Heidi Shierholz | August 12, 2014

4. How much do immigrants contribute to the economy?

One way to quantify immigrants’ contribution to the U.S. economy is to look at the wages and salaries they earn, as well as the income of immigrant-owned businesses, as a share of all wages, salaries, and business income in the United States. (See Table 1.)

For the United States as a whole, immigrants’ share of total output was about 14.7 percent over 2009–2011. Note that this is actually larger than immigrants’ 13 percent share of the population.

TABLE 1
Immigrant and U.S.-born shares of total U.S. economic output

Total population -> $5,042,277,015,987 -> 100.0%
U.S. born -> $4,298,840,505,997 -> 85.3%
Immigrant -> $743,436,509,990 -> 14.7%

Note: All figures are in 2011 dollars. Economic output is derived from wages and salary and proprietors' income. The immigrant share is simply the total income from these sources attributable to immigrant workers and business owners. For more details, see

Immigrants have an outsized role in U.S. economic output because they are disproportionately likely to be working and are concentrated among prime working ages. Indeed, despite being 13 percent of the population, immigrants comprise 16 percent of the labor force. Moreover, many immigrants are business owners. In fact, the share of immigrant workers who own small businesses is slightly higher than the comparable share among U.S.-born workers. (Immigrants comprise 18 percent of small business owners.)

12. Should we wait until the economy has recovered before regularizing the unauthorized immigrant population?
A. No, this is precisely the time we should regularize the country’s 11.7 million unauthorized immigrants by providing them legal status and a path to citizenship; it would actually be good for the economy and generate jobs. Providing legal status and citizenship enables unauthorized immigrants to produce and earn significantly more than they do when they are working without legal rights or protections and in constant fear of deportation. Their resulting productivity and wage gains ripple through the economy because immigrants are not just workers—they are also consumers and taxpayers. In particular, they will spend their increased earnings on items like food, clothing, housing, cars, and computers. That spending, in turn, will stimulate demand for more goods and services, which will create the need for more workers. In other words, it will create jobs.

There are ~4 times more documented immigrants than undocumented immigrants.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 12 Dec 2015 09:46

A Global American gives forth his opinion:

Saudi billionaire calls Trump a 'disgrace' to America

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/11/news/al ... index.html

I....I....am in shock and awe........

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Dec 2015 09:53

What is shocking is the deep decline of the Ummah. Where are the fatwas, hain?

partha · Post by **partha** » 12 Dec 2015 10:23

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comm ... _becoming/

[Serious] People who support Donald Trump becoming president, what are you main reasons? What do you agree with him on?serious replies only

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 12 Dec 2015 11:49

KrishnaK wrote:The US has always maintained immigration as a way to keep itself competitive. That said, the US also sponsors a green card lottery. Indians can't apply because they're over represented. I've seen a few nepali cab drivers in the bay area arrive via that route. Of all the wealthy western countries, the US is by far the most welcoming of immigration.

Pardon the rhetoric

Why Indians are over-represented is obvious from the Indian side when one looks at Indians and our psychological make up.

What is curious to me, however, the root cause from the US side on why there is "over-representation". (And no the answer is not: "because a lot of Indians want to come here").

I encourage everyone to find the reason for it, was quite educational for me.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 12 Dec 2015 12:09

Indians are Over represented because like 16th-19th Century Europe thier Native land is overcrowded andd they need new land to settle. Unlike Europeans eliminated the native population, they don't have the miltary strength to overrule the Natives sentiments.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 12 Dec 2015 12:14

TSJones wrote:A Global American gives forth his opinion:

Saudi billionaire calls Trump a 'disgrace' to America

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/11/news/al ... index.html

I....I....am in shock and awe........

the same saudis who sat in those cockpits??

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 12 Dec 2015 12:18

Aditya_V wrote:Indians are Over represented because like 16th-19th Century Europe thier Native land is overcrowded andd they need new land to settle. Unlike Europeans eliminated the native population, they don't have the miltary strength to overrule the Natives sentiments.

The answer lies around the circumstances that resulted in this law: 1924 Immigration Act. You can guess the reasons and the urgency to pass such selective laws that institutionalized divisions among people.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2015 14:02

Someone had posted this earlier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrnZMbZJtrs

Texas police chief urging law abiding citizens to arms themselves and be ready to help the Police to pull their "bacon out of the fire" in case the police are unable to handle a situation. he says the police, especially in rural areas can't protect everyone.

That is an interesting piece even though I was enthralled by the man's immobile upper lip. Calling for citizens to help the police and saying that there may be situations the police can't handle goes against the fundamental tenet that the government must retain under its control the most powerful coercive force.

Of course the hidden text is that if the US government orders a gun grab the police can't disobey so the man is telling people that he can't help and that people must buy lots of guns and make sure they have enough ammunition.

Of course this is all well known to American gun owners. People do stock up on ammunition - and more so when they feel that the government may ensure that some types go out of stock. There was news that the US government was buying up stocks of one of the more popular calibers of ammunition raisin prices and making it unavailable in some instances. There are videos that explain to people what they should do if the government orders a gun grab.

To me it appears that a gun grab would not only be unpopular - it is actually unlikely to happen.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 12 Dec 2015 14:13

The second ammendment (like everything in the US) was paved with good intentions and ended up being used for completely different purposes than intended.

Here is a caricaturized (but accurate) brief history on why the second ammendment is SUCH a big deal when compared to another white encroached country like Australia:

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 12 Dec 2015 15:05

Satya_anveshi wrote:Whatever economic growth (real or madeup) in US is, is due to immigrants. There is no one buying anything anymore beyond already bloated consumption figures of last decade and half or so. Just like cars, it is now common for people to have multiple homes. There is no effing way on earth for US to continue the growth like it did. Ditto with Europe. Restaurant industry is the only one that will show best growth.

Immigrants tend to consume way more than settled guys so long they have jobs.

Assuming/imposing altruistic motives to US for accepting immigrants is being extremely naive and ignorant.

Besides past performance if no guarantee for future success.

People migrated to America because in their native lands there was an artificially generated scarcity of resources due to financial warfare started by the US, property rights (physical, intellectual) were not respected to compensate for the financial warfare and inter group relationships were exploited by the US based groups to generate fissiparous tendencies as evident from the Afro-Dalit project.

As of today within the US there is a scarcity of jobs, property rights of non white population in a white neighbourhood (and vice-versa) are enforced with extreme violence and the inter group relationships like white-black, christians-muslims etc. are more or less beyond repair.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2015 20:15

This video is a must watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSPvnFD ... e=youtu.be

The video points out that there have been 122 Islamist terror incidents in the US since 9-11. Why is it that some Americans are in denial imagining that only tornadoes are to be feared in America? Is it secularism?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 12 Dec 2015 20:41

^^Superb!!

Raheel Raza ji should be made to visit India along with Tarek Fatah saab for educating the public. Desis must spread this video far and wide.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Dec 2015 20:49

'Group think' and 'Bridge on River Kwai' syndrome.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Dec 2015 09:35

I heard the Republican candidates debate on National Security.
Trump, Carson, Cruz, and Graham were++
Others were -
some others were --