Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

New goverment and residency


Drew
 Share

Recommended Posts

You're saying if there are too many unskilled applicants, you move their cases to a poorly-staffed consulate, which opens the first consulate up to better applicants, and effectively moves the "unworthies" to a location where no one cares about the increasing backlog... therefore providing a speedier path to the chosen few, and a dustbin for the unwanted. Is that it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got it baby. I think all clients were multi-millionaire businessmen, I never represented unskilled immigrants.  And then the political parties hide this fact. You would surprised how many Punjabi Sikhs are in Mexico City. I would get them visas for Costa Rica from that Consul General in Vancouver, which required air travel through Mexico City. They would simply get off the plane, and apply through Canadian Embassy in Mexico City. The size of Mexico City Canadian immigration was the same as the nearest consulate in India - but there were many thousands more applications in India. It is the same everywhere nowadays - the wait for U.S. Citizenship, after trouble free(no felonies) green cards, is now over two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All immigration should benefit the country receiving them. The country getting the immigrant should be able to seek only folks who will contribute the most. 

The USA has over the last 30 years accepted more immigrants than other country. This Data is for 2016 for permanent residents:

 The U.S. accepted 1,183,500

Germany accepted 1,051,000

The U.K. accepted 350,100

Canada accepted 296,400

France received 258,900

Australia accepted 223,500

Spain accepted 215,000

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geeser  look at the percentages of the numbers you gave in comparaison to the total population. the US let´s in very few people in comparaison to  Germany or Canada, , Australia . actually they let very few people in in comparaison to all the countries listed.. 

 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bmh said:

Geeser  look at the percentages of the numbers you gave in comparaison to the total population. the US let´s in very few people in comparaison to  Germany or Canada, , Australia . actually they let very few people in in comparaison to all the countries listed.. 

 

Per capita to GDP also not very equitable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2018 at 7:50 AM, Mainecoons said:

:D

It's being reported 63 percent of immigrant households there are collecting welfare.  Where do we sign up?

Unfortunately, when it comes to immigration, Mexico has a much better system and attitude (Mexico and Mexicans first) than the U.S.  What I find interesting are the people who live in this country that definitely follows a policy of placing itself and its citizens first react with hostility and hatred when anyone or any duly elected politician there suggests that the U.S. do the same. 

Go figure.

 

Illegals cannot collect welfare but they do pay billions a year in taxes from which they rarely benefit.

 "Undocumented immigrants pay $12 billion of taxes every single year. They pay their taxes."

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/oct/02/maria-teresa-kumar/how-much-do-undocumented-immigrants-pay-taxes/

"The best estimates come from research by the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, a Washington, DC, think tank, which suggests that about half of undocumented workers in the United States file income tax returns. The most recent IRS data, from 2015, shows that the agency received 4.4 million income tax returns from workers who don’t have Social Security numbers, which includes a large number of undocumented immigrants. That year, they paid $23.6 billion in income taxes."

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/13/17229018/undocumented-immigrants-pay-taxes

This doesn't include sales taxes. state income taxes, property taxes, gasoline taxes. etc. that they pay. Plus illegals are paid less keeping prices down and often cheated out of their paychecks and insurance coverage. They commit less, not more, crime. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest you Google "cost of illegal immigrants" and read a cross section of what you see there.  Suffice to say the cost figures are a lot higher than these figures plus obviously, and by your own report, the 23.6 billion includes an unknown number of citizens without SS numbers  Unless you can quantify that, it has no real meaning.

My comment about signing up was a bit of humor but the rest is quite true.  I applaud the efforts of both Mexico and now the U.S. to put the best interests of their citizens and legal immigrants first.  To me, that is why we elect these people--to work in the interests of their citizens as opposed to the globalist agenda.

One of the most negative impacts of illegal immigration is the depression of wages among the unskilled or less skilled legal citizens.  

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216

I also applaud the new effort by both the U.S. and Mexico to improve economic opportunity here and in Central America so that people are not so desperate they feel they have no choice but to uproot themselves and illegally enter either country.

I didn't comment on crime.  Plenty of that to go around on both sides of the border.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can tell you that all the undocumented workers working for us at the winery paid SS , they usually came up with someone´s number so the social security would get paid, they also have a huge numbers of numbers that are made up and not reconciled but the SS gets paid. and the illegals never collect..Things may have changed as Immigration came up with a system to check the SS numbers before hiring people but that was the way it was..After the checking system came up they used legal relatives or real SS numbers via fake cards so the SS got paid under other people´s names.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mainecoons said:

I suggest you Google "cost of illegal immigrants" and read a cross section of what you see there.  Suffice to say the cost figures are a lot higher than these figures plus obviously, and by your own report, the 23.6 billion includes an unknown number of citizens without SS numbers  Unless you can quantify that, it has no real meaning.

My comment about signing up was a bit of humor but the rest is quite true.  I applaud the efforts of both Mexico and now the U.S. to put the best interests of their citizens and legal immigrants first.  To me, that is why we elect these people--to work in the interests of their citizens as opposed to the globalist agenda.

One of the most negative impacts of illegal immigration is the depression of wages among the unskilled or less skilled legal citizens.  

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216

I also applaud the new effort by both the U.S. and Mexico to improve economic opportunity here and in Central America so that people are not so desperate they feel they have no choice but to uproot themselves and illegally enter either country.

I didn't comment on crime.  Plenty of that to go around on both sides of the border.

DAPA-eligible parents alone add $210 billion to the overall economy, a UCLA study in 2014 estimated. Combined with an existing policy that allows immigrants who arrived here as children to avoid deportation and work legally for two years, California could reap an additional $900 million in state taxes over five years if DAPA is implemented, a 2015 reportby the left-leaning Center for American Progress estimated. That report also estimatedadditional tax receipts of $347 million for Illinois, $184 million for New York and $25 million for South Carolina.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2016/04/20/states-weigh-costs-benefits-of-undocumented-immigrant-parents

All studies agree that immigrants would pay billions more into the economy if they were allowed to legally work.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More like speculated.  Every advocate of the various immigration position from open borders to total shutdown has official looking studies to buttress their positions.  What you didn't address at all is the impact of importing low/no skilled workers into an economy that has a surplus of same, both in terms of the incomes of the corresponding citizens and the social conditions that result as a result of their depressed wages.  In a free market economy, even one that is not so free, flooding the labor market with surplus labor leads to lower wages.  Trying to avert that with minimum wages only leads to more unemployment.

BTW California has the highest rate of poverty in America and also the greatest single state percentage and numbers of legal and illegal immigrants.  Perhaps there is a connection?  

This could go on ad nauseum.  Your study is just so much speculation from a source with a clear agenda.  In any case, there are two realities here:  There can be no immigration solution in the U.S. without control of same.  Any solution salubrious to the previous illegal immigrants simply causes a renewed flood of same in the absence of such control.  That has been proven over and over again starting with Reagan's amnesty.

Open borders guarantees immigration in direct proportion to the perceived level of opportunity.  That too has been proven over and over.  People exhibit economic rationality.  If they think they can do a lot better on the other side of the fence, they will go there until either they can't do better or until the recipient country decides to exert their own self interest and control that fence.  

Second, I'm glad I am living in a country which realizes open borders are a bad idea.  Fortunately, for all of us Mexico does not subscribe to the globalist agenda.  Mexico's government is Mex-centric as it should be.  This is why AMLO has announced they are closing all border crossings with Guatemala except the river crossing.  I suspect this is also part of the recently announced deal to try and reduce the impetus to immigrate in the first place.

And Angus, since you apparently follow Info-Wars perhaps you will share their fate with the rest of us.  From what I understand, not following it, the attempts at selective censorship so prevalent these days has had the opposite effect to that intended.  That too has been proven over and over.

:D

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i suspect that the closing of tje border is just talk amd show. The border was never designed to really stop people and the idea was to get the migrants when they would travel through Chiapas or getting put of Chiapas.. The Tapachuña crossing on the river is the main crossing. There is a small crossing via the mountains in Mesilla with the aduana in Comitan. otherwise you have mountains to cross and villages that can be friendly or unfriendly . The border is a biv river im the jungle with few roads, it is easy to hide. There are army retenes on the roads in all the area but it is easy to walk around them and there are plenty of people you can pay to help you find your way  Good luck on closing the southern border which is in a pretty lawless area.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

BTW California has the highest rate of poverty in America and also the greatest single state percentage and numbers of legal and illegal immigrants.  Perhaps there is a connection?

 

More Fox induced BS.

Census Bureau.

The lowest poverty rate was in New Hampshire, and the highest poverty rate was in American Samoa (the highest poverty rate among the states was in Mississippi.

List of U.S. states and territories by poverty rate

States, federal district and territories[edit]

Rank State
federal district
or territory
Poverty Rate
(by Household Income)
People in Poverty 
by Household Income
(in thousands)
2014 Poverty Rates 
(includes unrelated children)
Supplemental Poverty Measure (2010-2014 average) 
(Geographically Adjusted)
56 23px-Flag_of_American_Samoa.svg.png American Samoa[20][A] 57.8% 31.8
55 23px-Flag_of_the_Northern_Mariana_Island Northern Mariana Islands[19] 52.3% 27.9
54 23px-Flag_of_Puerto_Rico.svg.png Puerto Rico[18] 43.5% 1,451.6
53 23px-Flag_of_Guam.svg.png Guam[17] 22.9% 35.8
52 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States_Virgin_Is U.S. Virgin Islands[16] 22.4% 23.6
51 23px-Flag_of_Mississippi.svg.png Mississippi 21.9% 634 23.2% 16.1%[15]
50 23px-Flag_of_New_Mexico.svg.png New Mexico 20.6% 347 19.6% 16.1%
49 23px-Flag_of_Louisiana.svg.png Louisiana 19.9% 898 14.3% 18.5%[14]
48 23px-Flag_of_Alabama.svg.png Alabama 19.2% 905 16.8% 13.5%
47 23px-Flag_of_Kentucky.svg.png Kentucky 19.0% 812 17.1% 13.6%
46 23px-Flag_of_Arkansas.svg.png Arkansas 18.7% 539 19.1% 16.5%
44 Georgia (U.S. state) Georgia 18.4% 1,298 18.5% 18.2%
45 23px-Flag_of_the_District_of_Columbia.sv District of Columbia 18.4% 114 18.0% 22.7%[13]
43 23px-Flag_of_West_Virginia.svg.png West Virginia 18.3% 328 16.0% 12.9%
41 23px-Flag_of_Tennessee.svg.png Tennessee 18.2% 1,165 16.7% 15.5%
42 23px-Flag_of_Arizona.svg.png Arizona 18.2% 1,195 21.3% 18.8%
40 23px-Flag_of_South_Carolina.svg.png South Carolina 17.9% 838 13.8% 15.8%
38 23px-Flag_of_Texas.svg.png Texas 17.2% 4,519 17.4% 16.4%
39 23px-Flag_of_North_Carolina.svg.png North Carolina 17.2% 1,663 17.0% 14.2%
36 23px-Flag_of_Oklahoma.svg.png Oklahoma 16.6% 623 13.0% 13.4%
37 23px-Flag_of_Florida.svg.png Florida 16.6% 3,231 14.6% 19.5%[12]
34 23px-Flag_of_Oregon.svg.png Oregon 16.4% 637 7.11% 10.3%
35 23px-Flag_of_California.svg.png California 16.4% 6,253 15.5% 23.8%
33 23px-Flag_of_Michigan.svg.png Michigan 16.2% 1,567 27.6% 13.5%
32 23px-Flag_of_New_York.svg.png New York 15.9% 2,760 15.9% 18.1%[11]
31 23px-Flag_of_Ohio.svg.png Ohio 15.8% 1,778 13.5% 13.2%
30 23px-Flag_of_Missouri.svg.png Missouri 15.5% 908 15.6% 12.4%
29 23px-Flag_of_Nevada.svg.png Nevada 15.4% 430 13.1% 19.8%
27 23px-Flag_of_Montana.svg.png Montana 15.2% 151 13.5% 12.1%
28 23px-Flag_of_Indiana.svg.png Indiana 15.2% 968 16.4% 14.2%
- United States 14.8% 45,950   16.0%[1][2]
25 19px-Flag_of_Rhode_Island.svg.png Rhode Island 14.8% 149 13.2% 13.6%
26 19px-Flag_of_Idaho.svg.png Idaho 14.8% 237 13.9% 11.8%
24 23px-Flag_of_Illinois.svg.png Illinois 14.3% 1,802 13.3% 15.2%
23 23px-Flag_of_South_Dakota.svg.png South Dakota 14.1% 115 14.3% 10.6%
22 23px-Flag_of_Maine.svg.png Maine 14.0% 181 11.6% 11.2%
21 23px-Flag_of_Pennsylvania.svg.png Pennsylvania 13.6% 1,679 11.2% 12.6%
20 23px-Flag_of_Kansas.svg.png Kansas 13.5% 381 13.9% 11.5%
18 23px-Flag_of_Wisconsin.svg.png Wisconsin 13.2% 737 11.1% 10.8%
19 23px-Flag_of_Washington.svg.png Washington 13.2% 913 11.9% 12.2%
17 23px-Flag_of_Delaware.svg.png Delaware 13.0% 118 12.4% 13.9%
15 23px-Flag_of_Nebraska.svg.png Nebraska 12.3% 167 10.0% 9.8%[9][10]
16 22px-Flag_of_Iowa.svg.png Iowa 12.3% 368 10.9% 8.6%
14 23px-Flag_of_Vermont.svg.png Vermont 12.2% 72 9.7% 13.4%[8]
13 23px-Flag_of_Colorado.svg.png Colorado 12.1% 632 12.4% 13.7%
11 22px-Flag_of_Virginia.svg.png Virginia 11.8% 955 10.8% 13.3%
12 23px-Flag_of_Utah.svg.png Utah 11.8% 341 9.8% 11.6%
10 23px-Flag_of_Massachusetts.svg.png Massachusetts 11.7% 760 10.9% 13.8%
9 23px-Flag_of_Hawaii.svg.png Hawaii 11.5% 158 12.6% 17.3%
7 23px-Flag_of_Minnesota.svg.png Minnesota 11.4% 607 12.1% 9.7%
8 21px-Flag_of_Alaska.svg.png Alaska 11.4% 81 12.1% 12.5%
5 21px-Flag_of_North_Dakota.svg.png  North Dakota 11.1% 79 11.0% 9.2%
6 23px-Flag_of_New_Jersey.svg.png New Jersey 11.1% 972 13.7% 13.9%[6][7]
4 20px-Flag_of_Connecticut.svg.png Connecticut 10.8% 376 10.6% 12.5%[3][4][5]
3 22px-Flag_of_Wyoming.svg.png Wyoming 10.6% 54 9.3% 9.3%
2 23px-Flag_of_Maryland.svg.png Maryland 10.4% 604 9.6% 10.1%
1 23px-Flag_of_New_Hampshire.svg.png New Hampshire 9.2% 117 9.5% 15.5%
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

And Angus, since you apparently follow Info-Wars perhaps you will share their fate with the rest of us.  From what I understand, not following it, the attempts at selective censorship so prevalent these days has had the opposite effect to that intended.  That too has been proven over and over.:D

 

I never watched the buffoon on InfoWars, but I know right-wing buzzwords.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe but you don't seem to know much about what is going on in the world these days.  I suggest you follow developments in Europe more closely and also learn who the open borders "leaders" are.  Probably the next guy to have this destructive philosophy blow up in his face will be north of the country you love to hate.  :D

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

O oh mc. My elf informant  tells me that Santa has downgraded you further on his naughty list. This means you will be getting coal in your stocking, but rather doggie poo. Your crime? Supporting very unpopular opinions about Mexico  and Mexicans, while living in Mexico and then cowering behind  your moderator cloak when things get hot.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2018 at 3:06 PM, Drew said:

I had heard that after the first of the year that the new goverment was going to raise the finacial requirments for new residency applications.Has anyone else heard this?

I want to go back the the original post as the discussion has ventured way way way of the topic..did anyone respond to the question:015::rolleyes::015:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Paco Loco said:

https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/jan/20/chad-mayes/true-california-has-nations-highest-poverty-rate-w/

Years of socialist policies and a flood of illegal aliens will kill the Golden Goose.

 

So your solution is to move to a socialist country, and then insult Mexicans on a public weboard. These are my friends, neighbours, and now since I am an immigrant here for many years, my adopted countrymen. A great many of them are very hard working, but still live in poverty.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 12/12/2018 at 3:17 PM, More Liana said:

So you think it's better for people to earn the current minimum wage of 88.8 pesos a day?  

The posting I made was about rumored doubling of minimum wage. You may not agree but the Guadalajara Reporter on page 1 says: The central bank had raised concerns the new government policies could lead to an inflationary spiral and this was on only a 16% increase.  They have voted to raise interest rates by 8.25%.  Glad I'm in good company. As for what I think Liana, I believe it is better not to have runaway inflation. Just look at Venezuela today for inflation nightmares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to the original post:  

The increase in MX minimum hourly wage will effectively raise, by an equivalent percentage, the minimum monthly income necessary to obtain MX resident visas.  Temporary resident visa (annual renewal) applicants must prove monthly income of 300 times minimum wage.  Permanent resident visa (four years) applicants must prove income of 500 times minimum wage.  Otherwise, there are not any significant differences.  (For purposes of computation, the exchange rate was recently 20.13 pesos per dollar on which rate the minimums are calculated below.  Lower dollar exchange rates of, say, 19.00 pesos per dollar can also serve to increase the final computation of the requirements.)

Temp resident:     $102.68 x 300 = MX $30,804 / $20.13 = US $1,530 per month
Perm resident:     $102.68 x 500 = MX $51,340 / $20.13 = US $2,550 per month

In any case, one must doubt the MX government will leave in place any rules that are too restrictive of potential U.S. immigration.  The MX economy benefits from, and relies upon, steadily growing retirement immigration from the U.S.  Mexico is the largest retirement destination for the rapidly growing number of U.S. retirees.  The baby boomer flood is on its way!  And Mexico is not going to let it dry up.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...