Trumps proposal for Temp Muslim Ban

Where did I mention ISIS? It seems you are making another pathetic attempt at a strawman. Islamic violence occurs all over the world - Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Nigeria, Qatar, etc, it isn't specific to ISIS controlled territory.

I said I would use your 10x number without even scrutinizing your source.

Your false premise is that they are generating tax revenue, when instead, they are leeching welfare. There is no economic benefit to dead weight.

You specifically, directly asked me specifically for an event that occurred in the past. I gave it to you. Now you are sad

 

You responded to this:

With this:

I mentioned ISIS. To which two figures are you comparing? I only mention the group and Muslim Americans.

That figure represented terror attacks (politically/religiously motivated attacks). I didn't provide any source that indicated "Muslims commit many times more violence than the average American".

I'd like to see your source on that however.

Prove me wrong. You're saying I'm wrong, but I've given factual evidence that proves both statements are true, and I'm given no credible retort by you.

You responded to this:

You're saying the problem is through traditional migration. This obviously isn't the case if it's now at it's highest point of significance and interest. You can also say this for infamous mass shooters in American history or anyone who commits a crime, but I don't see the point.

 

Muslims outside the US and Muslims inside the US.

Islamic Statistics on violence, rape, terror, sharia, isis, and welfare

You can't just post an incorrect source in order to back up a false assertion. We already covered this, you can't just pretend like we didn't already discuss this:


You said:

I said:

You said:

I said:

There are economic benefits to free movement, but open borders + the welfare state adds another variable you completely ignored.

What do you mean "I don't see the point"? If you have a sworn enemy who tells you they are going to kill you, you defend yourself instead of funding, feeding, and housing them.

 

I specifically mentioned two figures, ISIS and Muslim Americans. What is the relevance in your response to my own?

What am I looking at? I don't see any statistics that backs your claim.

Your claim:

Although Muslims in the world outnumber Americans 5:1, I'd like to see the figures by comparison that they commit many times more violence than the average american, meaning per capita. The source you provided doesn't exemplify that.

Also, the U.S. ranks 1st in death by violence in worldwide rankings when compared to 16 other high-income democracies by a significant margin. Just so you get an idea.

Still waiting to be proven wrong. Debating doesn't work that way. Typically, a counter argument is provided in response to another. Saying the source is incorrect isn't an argument.

Who said they are coming to pay taxes? Taxes are compulsory.

Income Tax
Sales Tax
Property Tax
Estate Tax
Hotel Tax
Sin Tax

More people coming to America and paying any of the taxes listed means an increase in the tax base. It is common sense.

You're stereotyping a group of people. 25% of Muslims in the U.S. say they advocate violence against Americans. What about the other 75%?

 

No you didn't. Here is your exact quote:

You are trying to needlessly create multiple entities. We are talking about Muslims.

Waiting for what? I posted the welfare statistics. Your source is incorrect, it doesn't show Muslim migrants, it shows all immigration. Stop pretending that posting a link automatically makes your argument infallible when your premises are false.

You did, I quoted you saying that they increased the tax base. I proved you wrong with the statistics showing that they do not increase the tax base, they increase the burden on the native taxpayers who subsidize them.

Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Welfare
Taxpayer

9/10 are a net drain, 1/10 are possible contributors. This displaces any group with higher tax payments vs tax recipients.

 

Seems to be a misunderstanding. Thought you were referencing ISIS as the "group". If you're talking about Muslims, say Muslims.

How is the source incorrect? Of course it shows the statistics immigration as a whole, I did say and claim immigration spurs economic growth and the sources I provided attest to that claim. You mentioned the refugees being uneducated and low-skill labor workers, with an excess of labor work in the U.S.. I also covered this, and the source I provided also covers this, and refutes that last point. I'm still waiting for a credible retort by you.

I didn't say they are "coming to pay taxes". Stop with the strawman, the quote you're referencing does not say this either.

Base - Foundation of something

More people coming into the U.S. and paying taxes increases this foundation. It's simple understanding of reason.

That wasn't the argument.

You said:

What I said in my prior post clearly shows this is false.

 

Dead weight isn't an increase.

 

America was founded upon freedom of religion, but there is a standard to be kept. Personally, America shouldn't allow anybody in without background checks/past criminal records, but that's impossible. They can keep their religion, but from what I've seen in the UK, they should ban muslims.

 

i have not like the drum because they have banned the Muslim in America
that is not good sign for Muslim

 

Lmao what have you seen in the UK?

 

They should make a new country for muslims only made my america.