4 ms·

Instead of down voting, please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally instead of funding a train for people who are here legally.

johnduhart 10y ago
I'm confused, where did the he/she state that?
Kluny 10y ago
I don't think anyone wants to fund them, and we aren't. We pretty generally agree that they contribute more to the economy than they take out of it. The California agricultural economy would collapse without them since employers can't afford to pay legal wages. Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage is a whole other problem. But as it stands, California is getting a damn fine deal out of their illegal Mexicans.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > We pretty generally agree that they contribute more to the economy than they take out of it. That fact is immaterial. The fact is that they're breaking the law, despite any other effects. Would you be ok with somebody living in your back yard if they watered and weeded the garden? After all, they're contributing more to the property than they are taking out of it.
  - Kluny 10y ago
    Well is material, since OP specifically said this: > please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally Which I addressed. I also stated that the fact they're here illegally is another matter. This was the line in which I did that, in case you have trouble reading: > Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage is a whole other problem.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      > please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally So your argument is that as long as each individual immigrant contributes to society, you're fine with aiding and abetting their breaking of the law? If somebody were a serial bank robber that donated most of their taking to charity, would that be acceptable also, since they're arguably performing a net service to society? > Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage In case you have problems reading, the business model of their employer has no relation towards their legal/illegal status. I don't know why you'd highlight that particular quote of yours.
eon1 10y ago
> Please resist commenting about being downvoted. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- davidf18 10y ago
  People should have the courage to state their opinion instead of simply down voting. I did not state something that was incorrect at least as far as I know and if I did, I would like to know what is incorrect about it. Perhaps there should be a rule that when downvoting, people state the reason. I suspect that some readers believe that people living here illegally deserve taxpayer funds. If so, they should have the courage of their convictions.

johnduhart 10y ago

I'm confused, where did the he/she state that?

Kluny 10y ago

I don't think anyone wants to fund them, and we aren't. We pretty generally agree that they contribute more to the economy than they take out of it. The California agricultural economy would collapse without them since employers can't afford to pay legal wages. Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage is a whole other problem. But as it stands, California is getting a damn fine deal out of their illegal Mexicans.

jimmywanger 10y ago
> We pretty generally agree that they contribute more to the economy than they take out of it. That fact is immaterial. The fact is that they're breaking the law, despite any other effects. Would you be ok with somebody living in your back yard if they watered and weeded the garden? After all, they're contributing more to the property than they are taking out of it.
- Kluny 10y ago
  Well is material, since OP specifically said this: > please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally Which I addressed. I also stated that the fact they're here illegally is another matter. This was the line in which I did that, in case you have trouble reading: > Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage is a whole other problem.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > please state why you want to fund people who are living in the US illegally So your argument is that as long as each individual immigrant contributes to society, you're fine with aiding and abetting their breaking of the law? If somebody were a serial bank robber that donated most of their taking to charity, would that be acceptable also, since they're arguably performing a net service to society? > Now, the fact that their business model is so unsound that they can't pay legal minimum wage In case you have problems reading, the business model of their employer has no relation towards their legal/illegal status. I don't know why you'd highlight that particular quote of yours.

eon1 10y ago

> Please resist commenting about being downvoted. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

davidf18 10y ago
People should have the courage to state their opinion instead of simply down voting. I did not state something that was incorrect at least as far as I know and if I did, I would like to know what is incorrect about it. Perhaps there should be a rule that when downvoting, people state the reason. I suspect that some readers believe that people living here illegally deserve taxpayer funds. If so, they should have the courage of their convictions.