(03-20-2017 12:12 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:46 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:27 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-20-2017 11:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Just heard a report on the news this morning on a study that was done on the five largest sanctuary cities. The report finds that each of these cities account for 18 percent of the entire manufacturing production of the United States. Their population is younger than the national average and have less people on social services than the national average.
All told, the 5 larges sanctuary cities, rather than being a drag on the economy, actually pull more than their weight for this country.

Who did this study? I'm guessing it's somebody with an agenda who stacked the deck to get the result that he/she wanted.
And this result doesn't suggest that being a sanctuary city improves your economy. My guess is that they were in pretty much the same place economically before they became sanctuary cities. Would that be a good guess?

You may not be far off. Unfortunately, I caught the interview in the middle and didn't get a chance to find out who conducted the study. Otherwise, I would have looked it up and linked it here.
While I realize that most don't consider the economics when it comes to this issue, I think it's important to understand.
Changes in immigration policy will have economic consequences that people should consider.

I'm in favor of permanent guest worker status, but no citizenship for anyone who came here illegally.

Why? Why would you deny someone citizens because they in essence committed a misdemeanor?