Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mormon Dude

Were the Mormon Pioneers illegal immigrants?

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, JAHS said:

migrants.thumb.jpg.9ce77e5d63dfbc0f4ff9666f0a104035.jpg

I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I have known some illegal immigrants from Mexico, and believe me, they were hard workers and none of them was on welfare, as far as I could tell.  Even when a local Augusta, Georgia roofing company drove one of my sons out of his roofing business because the guy hired all illegals and then proceeded to undercut all the legally operating roofers, his illegals (when not intimidating legal roofing companies from making bids on large jobs) were likewise working very hard.  So, I don't think its fair to characterize all illegals as welfare kings/queens.

By the way, that roofer with the illegals operated that way for 2 years before ICE or whoever came and shut him down.  Then my son was able to re-establish his business -- and part his new work was fixing what those illegals had done incorrectly, because they weren't skilled in that work.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, JAHS said:

migrants.thumb.jpg.9ce77e5d63dfbc0f4ff9666f0a104035.jpg

Am curious about percentage of immigrants who immediately sign up for welfare. Do you have that number?

Another POV (don’t know how accurate which is why I am asking for references to compare it to), basically it is immigrants pay more than 1 billion in taxes, why shouldn’t they have access to tax benefits?  Also analysis of claims of immigrants allegedly using more welfare than citizens.

 https://www.google.com/amp/s/4thworldmovement.org/immigrants-come-use-welfare/amp/

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/6/2019 at 11:42 AM, The Nehor said:

Go back further.

I owe reparations for my ancestors participating in the Norman conquest.

Then you're doubly guilty . . . . probably related to Rollo and Ragnor Lothbrok and other Viking Marauders.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Am curious about percentage of immigrants who immediately sign up for welfare. Do you have that number?

Another POV (don’t know how accurate which is why I am asking for references to compare it to), basically it is immigrants pay more than 1 billion in taxes, why shouldn’t they have access to tax benefits?  Also analysis of claims of immigrants allegedly using more welfare than citizens.

 https://www.google.com/amp/s/4thworldmovement.org/immigrants-come-use-welfare/amp/

What I posted wasn't mine but it is probably referring to illegal immigrants, 63% of which are on welfare. 55% of all immigrants (citizen and non-citizen) are on welfare.
Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households
Of course we can't know if the intent of those immigrants was solely to get on welfare. Many were probably forced into it because they could not get jobs even though they wanted to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Do you have something besides " households"?  The problem with using households to measure usage is explained here ( from my link above):

Quote

What does this mean for this debate? Imagine then a family of four where one parent is an immigrant but the other parent and both children are citizens. And let’s say they rent out their basement to a local college student who is also a citizen. For census purposes, the household consist of five people. Even though four of them are citizens, if the one non-citizen opens the door when the census bureau comes, it is labeled an immigrant household. This means that if the student in the basement is using some kind of social program, even if the other adults in the household are billionaires, this is counted in census data as an immigrant household using benefits.

This situation is actually surprisingly common. Many immigrants have children who are citizens – and citizens are legally able to apply to any program in our social safety net. A child who is a citizen might qualify to receive Medicare, for instance, while their parents do not. In a study looking at households, this would be counted as an immigrant household (because of the parents) receiving a benefit (because of the kids) – despite the fact that, again, no non-citizen is actually receiving government assistance.

So using “households” instead of “individuals” lets opponents to legal immigration make dramatic claims about immigrant welfare use.

Also:

Quote

An analysis by the Libertarian think tank The Cato Institute found that using the same numbers when you control for socioeconomic factors, “Overall, immigrant households in poverty consume less welfare than native [U.S.-born] households in poverty.” [emphasis added] [4]

Going farther, the Cato Institute broke down the numbers available by individuals in a report titled, (SPOILER ALERT!) “Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens.”

The study found that, you guessed it, “Low-income immigrants use public benefits […] at a lower rate than low-income native-born citizens.” [5] Adult low-income immigrants used Medicaid at a lower rate (20% vs. 25%) than citizens, and their children were less likely to use CHIP (49% vs. 65%) or SNAP (33% vs. 51%). Moreover, even when immigrants are qualified and enrolled, their cost per person is lower than that for citizens. In the case of Medicaid, for instance, low-income immigrant adults cost 42% less per person than citizens. In the case of CHIP, low-income immigrant children cost 66% less per person than citizens. [5]

And then lastly, we have to point out that this whole discussion focuses on documented immigrants, who are eligible after five years to apply for welfare programs. Undocumented immigrants never have this right unless they change their immigration status, which means that despite the fact that undocumented immigrants pay close to a billion dollars in taxes each year, they never have the right to benefit from the system they help support [3].

 

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, JAHS said:

What I posted wasn't mine but it is probably referring to illegal immigrants, 63% of which are on welfare. 55% of all immigrants (citizen and non-citizen) are on welfare.
Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households
Of course we can't know if the intent of those immigrants was solely to get on welfare. Many were probably forced into it because they could not get jobs even though they wanted to.

 

I am not sure I comprehend the logic of a nation paying welfare payments to non citizens. It just does not compute in any shape, form, or degree. If you are not a citizen of a nation, any nation, then how and why on earth would you be given welfare? 

In one of our old wards, we had a family from Benin that came to the USA to allow the father to study in university. He wanted to be an interpreter in several languages. I know they had section 8 housing, free health insurance, and received welfare payments. They were a wonderful family and I enjoyed them very much. His studies became a drawn out process without much progress. He was studying at a community college and the challenge of progressing from that level to international interpreter appeared daunting to him. I think their main interest was to stay in the USA in whatever manner they could. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, JAHS said:

What I posted wasn't mine but it is probably referring to illegal immigrants, 63% of which are on welfare. 55% of all immigrants (citizen and non-citizen) are on welfare.
Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households
Of course we can't know if the intent of those immigrants was solely to get on welfare. Many were probably forced into it because they could not get jobs even though they wanted to.

 

There's this as well:

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/castro-we-already-pay-health-care-illegal-aliens-its-called-emergency

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I am not sure I comprehend the logic of a nation paying welfare payments to non citizens. It just does not compute in any shape, form, or degree. If you are not a citizen of a nation, any nation, then how and why on earth would you be given welfare? 

Because they pay taxes?

We were not citizens of Canada, but got lots of benefits living there.  I had major surgery two times, probably cost less than a hundred bucks.

Our daughter's week stay in the hospital when she was diagnosed with diabetes was iirc around 50$

There were some definite drawbacks for the daily stuff, insisting I stick with medication that had bad side effects rather than the stuff that worked better with less problems ( though I hear some states do the same thing though not Utah thank goodness) and my daughter wasn't going to be able to get a diabetes pump until she was 18 and showed control, which pump changed her life and gave her that control.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Because they pay taxes?

We were not citizens of Canada, but got lots of benefits living there.

If they pay taxes, how are they on welfare? Are these individuals working poor or unemployed? 

I would like to be in line for free insurance. Given my health challenges too many bad years would break us financially.

The fact that some nations pay welfare to non-citizens does not mean it is an appropriate thing to do. I am just trying to understand how an individual gets to the point that they say, "yeah, we need to allow these individuals into the nation illegally and then we should pay them welfare!"  That simply does not make sense morally or economically. 

To be clear, I support legal immigration from almost every nation. I appreciate the influence of various different cultures on the US culture. I am completely against illegal immigration and the destruction of US culture. Come, join our nation, become citizens, and become integrated into our society. That makes sense to me and will make us a stronger nation. However, come to our nation and demand that this nation become like the culture you left and that should be a ticket back to your homeland with a firm persona non grata stamped on your forehead. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Low income families may pay income taxes, they definitely pat sales taxes.

Quote

Welfare programs are government subsidies to the poor. Recipients must prove their income falls below a target, which is some percentage of the . In 2019, that's $25,750 for a family of four.

There are six major U.S. welfare programs. They are Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs, Supplemental Security Income, Earned Income Tax Credit, and Housing Assistance.

https://www.thebalance.com/welfare-programs-definition-and-list-3305759

A child might be a citizen and receive SNAP while living with an immigrant grandparent or parent.  That would count as one of the 63% households.  The grandparent could be legal as well as paying income taxes because the parent of the child who could be a citizen or not was low income.

Share this post


Link to post

Talking about destruction of the American culture is rather problematic for me when that culture is getting transported by .Hollywood and consumer goods into every country and often overwhelming local culture from what I have seen personally in Canada and Russia and heard from others.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Talking about destruction of the American culture is rather problematic for me when that culture is getting transported by .Hollywood and consumer goods into every country and often overwhelming local culture from what I have seen personally in Canada and Russia and heard from others.

That is a whole 'nother topic. I wish there was a way to temper, to limit the impact of Hollywood on culture worldwide. I understand that it is our problem and we should have to live with it, but I find the majority of the product of Hollywood to be so putrid that it should be shunned by almost everyone. There is so much literature that is being forgotten by this generation. Western culture and history is being ignored at the university level and yet it remains one of the great founts of the written word, poetry, and plays. I am rereading Goethe's Faust and it still amazes me. 

French cinema is still worth watching to a degree. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, JAHS said:

What I posted wasn't mine but it is probably referring to illegal immigrants, 63% of which are on welfare. 55% of all immigrants (citizen and non-citizen) are on welfare.
Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households
Of course we can't know if the intent of those immigrants was solely to get on welfare. Many were probably forced into it because they could not get jobs even though they wanted to.

 

Although I do not doubt that immigrants on average make less money than non immigrant (Hence they are eligible for more benefits),  I believe the survey does a bit of cherry picking on what it calls welfare.

It calls EITC welfare but doesn't call child tax credit welfare (child tax credit is usually bigger and applies to more people than the EITC.)

Also, most people don't realize that these credits are based on income, not assets.   I have seen millionaires qualify for EITC, income can be easily (and legally) manipulated to qualify for the credit

An illegal immigrant in most cases will not qualify for EITC. A valid social security number is required. Even if a person has a valid social security number, they cannot claim the EITC if married to someone who doesn't have a valid social security number. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Danzo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, JAHS said:

What I posted wasn't mine but it is probably referring to illegal immigrants, 63% of which are on welfare. 55% of all immigrants (citizen and non-citizen) are on welfare.
Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare, 4.6 million households
Of course we can't know if the intent of those immigrants was solely to get on welfare. Many were probably forced into it because they could not get jobs even though they wanted to.

 

Actually, looking at the cash benefits  section, I declare the article bovine feces.

It shows cash welfare as SSI EITC and TANF.

EITC and TANF are tiny compared to Social Security payouts.

There is no way that immigrants collect more social security income than Native households. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I declare the article bovine feces

I believe the correct term is "meadow muffins"  😊

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/11/2019 at 11:41 PM, Calm said:

Am curious about percentage of immigrants who immediately sign up for welfare. Do you have that number?

Another POV (don’t know how accurate which is why I am asking for references to compare it to), basically it is immigrants pay more than 1 billion in taxes, why shouldn’t they have access to tax benefits?  Also analysis of claims of immigrants allegedly using more welfare than citizens.

 https://www.google.com/amp/s/4thworldmovement.org/immigrants-come-use-welfare/amp/

Yes, and all that, but for example, I have legal residence status in the UK, but I am not entitled to public funds in the UK, regardless of whether I pay taxes here or not.  It's not dependent upon whether I pay taxes -- its dependent upon my exact immigration status.  Just like in the US.  And practically any other country in the world.

I do get the free medical care here -- not that I need it, I'm too healthy -- but I had to pay for it in advance as a prerequisite to being granted legal residence.  

Edited by Stargazer

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2019 at 5:12 PM, Mormon Dude said:

Given the current political immigration situation in the US and the Pioneer Day holiday in Utah, I've been hearing a lot about the legality of the pioneers' arrival in the Salt Lake Valley, which was in Mexico in 1847.

It is not hard to find "Mormon friendly" sources that indicate the Saints settled without permission from Mexican authorities–which just seems to be a euphemism for illegally settled.

I understand that church leadership made sure to get permission from the Native Americans before establishing Winter Quarters, but is anyone aware of church leadership making sure to get permission before settling in what would become Utah?

There were a number of Mexican laws on the books which prohibited Americans from settling in Mexico, required proper documentation before crossing the border, and even outlawed any religion but Catholicism. These include: 

By 1847 the illegal immigration of Americans into Mexico (which had been on going for decades) had reached the point that the two countries were at war, so I don't think the Saints could claim they just didn't know Mexico was opposed to any additional Americans settling in their lands. Did the Saints simply follow the crowd and ignore Mexico's legal authority over their territory?

The only counter claim I have found to the Saints being illegal is that Alta California had already been "captured" by the US before July 1847, but that's a sketchy claim to me. In the US Supreme Court's 1890 Late Corp. of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States case, the court's opinion regarding legal authority in the early Utah area was: "Deseret, or Utah, had ceased to belong to the Mexican government by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo" The treaty was signed in February 1848 and it's clear the Supreme Court considered Deseret to be part of Mexico until the treaty, regardless of other claims. I am sure Mexico considered it their own until the treaty as well. While the majority of Saints arrived after 1848, those first few wagon companies certainly arrived before the treaty.

This is an interesting question that hasn't been explored much. Does anyone have additional insight into the issue? Especially the question of seeking permission to settle from Mexico?  And could we consider Brigham Young one of the most famous illegal immigrants in history?

The Mexican American War was on in 1845-1847, thus the Mormon Battalion, which basically captured a small Mexican outpost called Tucson which is south of the Gila River the northern boundary of the Gadsden Purchase of 1853.

Two months after the Pioneers first entered the Salt Lake Valley, American Forces captured Mexico City in the middle of September 1847. Ever heard the phrase “The Walls of Montezuma” in the US Marine hymn? That’s where it came from.

What Mexican Law did the early Saints then break when the United States was at war and the Mormon Battalion as official US Armed Forces, captured land from Tucson northward and the United States could have annexed the entire country of Mexico?

After the War, the United States govt allowed Mexican Citizens in the acquired lands to relocate to Mexico or remain and become US Citizens with all the rights that it granted them.

A giant nothing burger this is.

“Mormon Pioneers were illegal immigrants”. BwaHahaha!

Edited by Burnside

Share this post


Link to post

The numbers are skewed a lot. A household that has kids that get reduced price or free lunches at school are counted as “on welfare”. Immigrants are very rarely getting cash benefits other then then the Earned Income Tax Credit which means they are reporting some income. I got that tax credit one year. I only worked two months that year. I think I got about $200. Very few non citizens get SSI or TANF or other cash programs.

They get a lot of the school lunches. Numbers fall but are still substantial for WIC and SNAP (food stamps) which are the primary food programs.

The other benefit non-citizens use a lot is Medicaid primarily through emergency care.

Now one thing skewing the numbers is that while a higher percentage of undocumented migrants get some form of assistance and the per capita spending on citizens is higher then that of non-citizens. Basically non citizens are more likely to be on some program but they get far less. This makes sense as undocumented and green card immigrants are ineligible for most means tested welfare. American citizens cost more per capita then immigrants. Note also that some states offer some federal programs to migrants that are not entitled to it by federal law. This is allowed as long as (in most cases) the state pays for it.

It is fair to discuss what programs immigrants should be allowed to access and their access is already limited. Blaming the welfare state on immigrants is not reasonable.

I think welfare cuts are sorely needed but I say we start with corporate subsidies and tax breaks paid for by campaign contributions. Corporate welfare is costly and the reasoning for it is shallow and the beneficiaries do not need it to live. Once we get rid of what amount to direct cash infusions we can look at corporations that do not pay a living wage and outsource the maintenance of their low income workers to welfare programs so taxpayer money keeps their employees housed, fed, and healthy. I would argue if they cannot pay their workers enough to live on the company deserves to die and be replaced by one more efficient that contributes to the general welfare of the nation instead of being a parasite that expects the taxpayer to foot the bill for their workforce.

After those messes are cleaned up I say we dig into means tested welfare and figure out what we want to do. I would say let them keep school lunches. It is low cost and early nutrition is so important. Medical care is screwed up and I have no idea how to fix it for citizens let alone migrants. I am pretty sure we do not want to demand proof of citizenship at the emergency room and if you do not happen there is a lovely sidewalk outside to suffer and/or die on. I would consider abolishing the EITC in general and just lower the lowest income brackets a bit. It is simpler and has a similar effect. If we have to leave it in I would deny it to non-citizens. The other cash programs are difficult for non citizens to get on and that seems right. Does not seem appropriate to get. I am torn on other food programs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The numbers are skewed a lot. A household that has kids that get reduced price or free lunches at school are counted as “on welfare”. Immigrants are very rarely getting cash benefits other then then the Earned Income Tax Credit which means they are reporting some income. I got that tax credit one year. I only worked two months that year. I think I got about $200. Very few non citizens get SSI or TANF or other cash programs.

 

One small quibble, an illegal immigrant, or someone married to an illegal immigrant  probably won't qualify for the Earned Income Credit (a legal one might). Current law doesn't allow for someone who has an ITIN number or is married to someone with an ITIN number to get EITC. (The DACA people are issued social security numbers so they can qualify as long as they are married to someone with a social security number, as well as a few people who were legal once and let that status lapse).

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2019 at 6:51 PM, RevTestament said:

You mean the Spanish didn't take their lands? The Spanish that stayed in Mexico integrated a little more readily - largely because they had no wives back home. The Americas largely became an extension of the feud between the Gothic Catholics of Europe and the Gothic Protestants of Europe. Under BY I can't say the Church treated the Natives too much better than the Federal gubbermint, but at least the English and French didn't try to enslave the natives like the Spaniards. Everyone wanted the land the Natives had - there wasn't much idea of sharing it.

Actually the Spanish married the indigenous population thereby making the Mestizos.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...