Pick your own topic

1. Border Security is Needed1.1 Con only addressed only a fraction of the costs associated with illegal immigration. He missed two of the eleven sections of the cost study [12], the sections that account for the taxes paid by illegal immigrants. If all his objections were correct, which they are not, the total cost would still be over $60 billion, rather than $100 billion.a) The benefits of educating children come a generation later than the expenditures, If the US were running large budget surpluses e could afford more immigration now in return for a contributing population a generation to two later. Unfortunately we don't have the money now. The benefits will not accrue if the US collapses from overspending in the interim.Con's source claims a large return from early childhood nutrition and education, but that's compared to having the population and not educating them. We are providing the education, and the net cost to taxpayers is still over $60 billion. Currently, about half of Americans pay no income taxes, so adding low wage earners hurts, not helps. Estimated total Federal taxes paid by illegals is $9.4 billion [12, p. 44] of the approximate $2303.5 billion total collected [13]. b) Referring to page six of the study, fraudulent use of Medicaid is clearly a separate line item from emergency room expenses. Con was wrong is claiming that emergency room treatment was classified as fraudulent. Emergency room expenses are a cost consequence of illegal immigration, but are not fraudulent. Fraudulent use of Medicaid is the receiving of welfare medical benefits for which only citizens are legally eligible. Emergency medical care is only $250 million of the nearly $6 billion in Federal medical expenses for illegals. My opponent did not address the rest. The bulk of the costs fall upon the states, which my opponent also did not address. c) The total for fraudulent use of Medicaid is indeed incorrect in the B2 section of [12], however the correct number is given in the totals on p. 22 and again in the summary on p. 5. The error had no effect because it was not propagated.d) I don't see any double counting. It's a different category. e) Con says, "You're source failed to include taxes that illegals pay..." That's untrue. Section II (pp. 32-41) is a lengthy accounting of Federal taxes paid. Section VI (p 72) provides the accounting for state and local taxes. The summary on page five shows $9.4 billion in Federal taxes and $4 billion in state and local taxes. The Federal outlays for illegals are $28.3 billion and the state and local outlays are $83.3 billion. Both tax income and expenditure are fully disclosed in the Summary on Page three. The net of expenditures minus revenue is a cost of $100 billion to taxpayers.Con's reference to the National Research Council is a blog post that asserts "Illegal Immigrants are Paying a Lot More Taxes Than You Think." I see no reference to the National Research Council, nor are there any numbers. The blog says that welfare reform in the 1990's reduced welfare payments to illegals. The blog was written in 2006, Welfare reform was undone by the Stimulus in 2009. [14]Con's link does not lead to the Perryman Report he cites, and I can't find it. However, generating economic activity does not translate to an equal amount paid in taxes. Our total GDP is $14.2 trillion, and that yields $2.3 trillion in taxes. With that proportion, we'd expect the $245 billion to generate $40 billion in taxes. $13 billion of that is accounted for in the taxes paid by the illegals, and the rest would be by taxes on the increased economic activity of their employers. Hence if the claim of $245 billion is true, the expenditures for illegals are $113 billion and $40 billion is returned in taxes, including the imputed economic activity. The net cost is $73 billion. Nearly all the activity could be generated with a legal guest worker program that avoids most of the expenses. Legal border crossing allows workers to return home, so they don't need to relocate their families. Unemployed workers would have to pay the overhead costs associatd with their employees such as medical expenses. Does the Perryman report deduct the economic activity lost by illegals wending money out of the country? Immigrants send about $69 billion out of the US to Latin America each year. [16] We cannot be sure what percentage of that is from illegals, but the illegal population is put at about 12 million [19] and the total Hispanic population at about 48 million [17], so a guess is that about $17 billion is exported by illegals. When money is sent out, it no longer circulates in our economy. The effect on the economy is multiplied by the velocity of money, MZM. MZM excludes long term bonds and the like. MZM is now about six, [20] If illegal immigrants send out $17 billion, the impact will be about $102 billion. The claimed $245 billion would then be $143 billion and taxes collected on that activity reduce to $24 billion. The net cost to legal taxpayers is then $89 billion.1.2 Methods of smuggling in illegals goods have changed over time. In the past we didn't need to x-ray luggage, now we do. Now there are established smuggling routes across the Mexican border that did not exist in the past. The border fence is needed now to adjust to the changing environment.1.3 Con argues that if the border fence cuts off human trafficking, other illegal methods will be found. We don't know if other methods will be found, and if they are found if they will be as effective. The principle is that criminals are deterred by increasing the probability of their being caught, so we should deter them.Con does not address the problem of terrorists crossing the border. Arabs and Iranians have been apprehended by the Border Patrol. [19] Estimates are that only person in three is caught. 1.4 Con says he doubts that stopping the import of fake or uninspected goods will be worth the expense. Counterfeiters' bogus goods cost legit businesses about $650 billion a year worldwide, [15] The US has about 20% of the world economy, so we'd expect at least $130 billion of the world's faked goods, and probably much more since high-end goods are most often faked. The annualized cost of a secure border fence is only about $400 million, so the e savings could easily be significant.1.5 Let's suppose all drugs were legalized. When alcohol was legalized after Prohibition, the Mafia did not go out of business, They turned to other crimes. The crime of choice for the drug cartels is kidnapping. A free border would facilitate that.1.6 Con asserts without evidence that the benefits of illegal immigration would outweigh the loss in taxes by the smuggling of taxed legal products. Since under an optimistic scenario, illegal immigration is a net loss of $73 billion, that's not possible.2. A border fence is effectiveCon does not dispute that a border fence would be effective. He only argues it would not be worth $0.4 billion of the $56 billion homeland security budget. It would save at least $73 billion and increase national security. There are a dozen reasons why the US needs secure borders, and a fence is a cost effective way of providing increased security.[12] http://www.fairus.org...[13] http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com...[14] http://www.nationalreview.com...[15] http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...[16} http://m3report.wordpress.com...[17] http://www.infoplease.com...[18] http://www.breitbart.com...[19] http://www.warriorsfortruth.com...[20] http://research.stlouisfed.org...