Paying off pols to be soft on illegal immigration-where the money could come from.
Some countries probably can't afford to support all their poor and still have money left over for things like economic development.
Hypothetically, those countries could realize a net savings if they paid politicians in the US, Europe, and other comparatively wealthy places to be permissive on illegal immigration.
Then they could pressure some of their poor to leave so they'd no longer have to support them.
It need not be the actual governments doing it. It could be private industries who are tired of being bled dry for tax money to support the poor.
We wouldn't necessarily see the money. Politics is a money-hungry game. The side with the better funding usually wins. So the payoff for a politician could be power.
Some politicians also seem to be genius investors, despite their economic policies not always working out.
Hypothetically, those countries could realize a net savings if they paid politicians in the US, Europe, and other comparatively wealthy places to be permissive on illegal immigration.
Then they could pressure some of their poor to leave so they'd no longer have to support them.
It need not be the actual governments doing it. It could be private industries who are tired of being bled dry for tax money to support the poor.
We wouldn't necessarily see the money. Politics is a money-hungry game. The side with the better funding usually wins. So the payoff for a politician could be power.
Some politicians also seem to be genius investors, despite their economic policies not always working out.
0
-
NO NEED to pay off any foreign country when our elected and voters here think the world should get in AMERICA for FREE as long as they are not on those dear souls home turf...you see any illegals camping on the McCain or Pelousy estates ..?????? 0 -
You know, they are both wealthy, as you imply. Where'd they get the estates?spasmcreek wrote:...you see any illegals camping on the McCain or Pelousy estates ..??????
Suppose someone said they were an excellent investor, just to launder bribe money? Disclaimer: I have no evidence that Nancy Pelosi is wealthy because of any reason other than her investments and her pay.
Suppose someone married a broke heiress, not a rich but a broke heiress, in order to launder bribe money? Disclaimer: I have no evidence that John McCain was wealthy because of anything other than his marriage and his pay.0 -
Sad that lawmakers being lawyers. Make it impossible for us peons to discover how they make thier millions in corrupt money. How else would regular folk that enter office like Nancey Pelloci ackquire millions while in office?
Answer is, campain laws they enact allow them to collect excess. They also as privelidged law makers and breakers invest in things like current marijuana start ups since they have inside data on when things will happen legally.
Regarding illegal immigration. There are only 2 rules for politicos. 1) Get elected. 2) Get re elected. Illegal immigrants hold the key for corrupt democrats to get in and back in.0 -
The politicians in charge of these countries surely have a financial incentive for paying off our politicians, not that I have any evidence that they have. So do the better off people who are not politicians.
It must cost a lot to provide these people with what basic services they do receive, but if they had good jobs which pay a lot of tax, they wouldn't live like this, meaning they are a cost to their countries.
They're probably not bad folk, the issue is there's too many people for the investment capital, and the more there are, the more they'll eat up the investment capital that could provide more jobs, because they need things now.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/69/7c/5d/697c5d6426feaf49e453636da593dc56.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6XOQ9OZ9M3o/VU2sUaTWG1I/AAAAAAAAAb8/V5eonfFAl3o/s1600/Neza-Chalco-Itza+Picture.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bxleNCfB_Ek/VU2sTR43OnI/AAAAAAAAAbw/yZd00RuocOI/s1600/Dharavi+Picture.jpg0 -
Why would anybody have to pay off our liberal politicians. They're already being paid off by getting the votes from the illegal aliens, enabling them to continue to steal from the United States 0 -
But there's no reason they have to pander to illegals.remingtonoaks wrote:Why would anybody have to pay off our liberal politicians. They're already being paid off by getting the votes from the illegal aliens, enabling them to continue to steal from the United States
They could pander to the people already here.
In fact, why aren't they? Why aren't they educating the working poor about what illegals cost them?0 -
There is a whole bureaucracy built around helping poor people and the homeless. And I'd bet that much like many non-profits, pennies on the dollar end up where it could actually do any good.
I'd be more inclined to think the scam may be paying off politicians in middle America to push (encourage) them to move their people north to grow the business of the U.S.governmental agencies and non-profits.
Good schemes are seldom unidirectional, they are usually engineered around win, win, win, scenarios. Like increasing the Democratic voter base. Providing cheap (subsidized) household labor, increasing foreign grants (that are habitually plundered) and growing the U.S. bureaucracy paid to deal with the situation. Basically multi-level corruption.0 -
Those agencies probably don't have enough money to seriously corrupt US politics.Hessian wrote:There is a whole bureaucracy built around helping poor people and the homeless. And I'd bet that much like many non-profits, pennies on the dollar end up where it could actually do any good.
I'd be more inclined to think the scam may be paying off politicians in middle America to push (encourage) them to move their people north to grow the business of the U.S.governmental agencies and non-profits.
Come to think of it, it's probably the rich.
If more people are allowed in, the rich can live in a country where their business interests are promoted by cheap labor.
The rich can live in a country with a larger military, for their own safety and the promotion of their interests abroad.
The reason you would think they don't want rampant illegal immigration is that the poor could get amnesty and citizenship and start voting themselves a lot of favors from the public treasury and cost the rich a lot, but....
the rich probably have confidence that they can manipulate the electorate. Look at what they did with Obama. The rich democrats at the top of the Chicago machine found an obedient sycophant and made him a talking head for their policies. Sure, he had some revolutionary touches, but fashion accessories cost money, like a fine purse or hat. To put it another way, do you think the chemicals used to create smoke screens during invasions are free? No, they cost, and the generals gladly incur the cost.
Look at Mexico. You had one party in power for 70 years for a while there, and you have a few very rich people and a lot of poor, too many for the jobs. The rich probably like it that way. There is not enough self sufficiency to stand up to them politically because everyone is dependent on the government.
That shows us two things: It shows why we don't want too many workers, and it shows that the rich here may not mind too many workers up to a point. Then, when we wrest power back from the rich and return to a little plurality in our politics, maybe our country will descend into chaos because all the people who had been dependent on government aid or subsidized farming will resort to violence.0 -
SoreShoulder wrote:
Those agencies probably don't have enough money to seriously corrupt US politics.Hessian wrote:There is a whole bureaucracy built around helping poor people and the homeless. And I'd bet that much like many non-profits, pennies on the dollar end up where it could actually do any good.
I'd be more inclined to think the scam may be paying off politicians in middle America to push (encourage) them to move their people north to grow the business of the U.S.governmental agencies and non-profits.
Come to think of it, it's probably the rich.
If more people are allowed in, the rich can live in a country where their business interests are promoted by cheap labor.
The rich can live in a country with a larger military, for their own safety and the promotion of their interests abroad.
The reason you would think they don't want rampant illegal immigration is that the poor could get amnesty and citizenship and start voting themselves a lot of favors from the public treasury and cost the rich a lot, but....
the rich probably have confidence that they can manipulate the electorate. Look at what they did with Obama. The rich women of the Chicago machine found an obedient sycophant and made him a talking head for their policies. Sure, he had some revolutionary touches, but fashion accessories cost money, like a fine purse or hat. To put it another way, do you think the chemicals used to create smoke screens during invasions are free? No, they cost, and the generals gladly incur the cost.
Look at Mexico. You had one party in power for 70 years for a while there, and you have a few very rich people and a lot of poor, too many for the jobs. The rich probably like it that way. There is not enough self sufficiency to stand up to them politically because everyone is dependent on the government.
That shows us two things: It shows why we don't want too many workers, and it shows that the rich here may not mind too many workers up to a point. Then, when we wrest power back from the rich and return to a little plurality in our politics, maybe our country will descend into chaos because all the people who had been dependent on government aid or subsidized farming will resort to violence.
Look at what the Clintons did in Haiti they figured out a way to skim most of the relief money for themselves and their cronies.
The best schemes as I've said before are those that pay off on many levels, I call them win, win, win scenarios. It is likely to be all of the above and not either or.0 -
Agree regarding the Clinton Haiti sceme. Like the illegal thing.
If you have a large enough crime family and network of cronies. Like the mobsters of old but with the new gov spin. Big profits.0 -
"So why do our rich want more poor workers, while the rich in other countries want less?"
Well, maybe they figure they could use a few less, and we could use a few more.0 -
Its about profit over loss... SoreShoulder wrote:"So why do our rich want more poor workers, while the rich in other countries want less?"
Well, maybe they figure they could use a few less, and we could use a few more.
Its your tax money if your a tax payer for these mental cases and criminals they are sending our way. Just like Cuba did...
Our loss.
Their profit.
We lose.0 -
Border security prevent voter fraud and Judicial Watch has some very good article about this. It seems the only one that vote for a democrap are illegals and welfare queens :evil: :evil: :evil: 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
13 comments