I think so, what do you believe?

I'll throw in another, not as certain, conclusion: One other fact, America is leading in this evolution and the George Bush doctrine of 'Revolutionary Democracy' is an example.

The geo-political face of this planet is constantly changing. Bush's policy may have an incredible effect but some of the changes are bound to come about regardless. If only to a smaller degree.

I'm still on the fence about the worldwide threat of the islamic radicals. Part of me wants to believe that "killing all the infidels" can't really be a widespread Islam policy but I fear that it's going to continue. :(

I'm still on the fence about the worldwide threat of the islamic radicals. Part of me wants to believe that "killing all the infidels" can't really be a widespread Islam policy but I fear that it's going to continue. :(
Who can predict with certainty, however, given that in approximately the last 20 years of the 20th century Democratic government went from 40 democracies in the world to 120 democracies in the world. That is the greatest advance of freedom in the 2,500 year story of democracy.
America made military commitments in Europe and Asia thereby protecting free nations from aggression -as well as creating the conditions in which new democracies could flourish.

Today, in spite of America’s commitment to democracy, many nations of the Middle East have yet to change. Many question whether the people are ‘ready’, and others believe that democracy and the traditions of Islam are incompatible with representative government.

In Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi Governing Council are also working together to build a democracy; and there, Americas are sacrificing for the peace of Iraq and for the security of free nations.
So, yes I am optimist that soon, the Middle East will be democratic.

I don't know. I would like to think that the human race is becoming more advanced in terms of ethics, morality, etc. but current evidence at hand seems to argue against it.

Here's what I see:

I see a South American communist dictator trying to eliminate the freest, fairest and most successful country in the world in the name of "fairness".

I see a groups of Middle Eastern dictators trying to eliminate the worlds most religiously free nations in the name of religion. And I see terrorists trying to do the same.

I see Communist countries in Asia building up weapons of mass destruction to eliminate the last nuclear world power so that they can be the last nuclear powers in the world.

I see daily protests against the US government over a war to prevent this country being taken over by people who would eliminate all possibility of protest.

I see liberalism that doesn't liberate anything, progressivism that isn't making any progress, Democrats who don't believe in democracy, conservatives who have stopped acting conservative, and a Grand Old Party that is anything but grand.

Are we making progress as a people or in our governments? I don't know. You tell me. I have my doubts, though.

Elliot

I don't know. I would like to think that the human race is becoming more advanced in terms of ethics, morality, etc., but current evidence at hand seems to argue against it.

Here's what I see:

I see a South American communist dictator trying to eliminate the freest, fairest and most successful country in the world in the name of "fairness".

I see a groups of Middle Eastern dictators trying to eliminate the worlds most religiously free nations in the name of religion. And I see terrorists trying to do the same.

I see Communist countries in Asia building up weapons of mass destruction to eliminate the last nuclear world power so that they can be the last nuclear powers in the world.

I see daily protests against the US government over a war to prevent this country being taken over by people who would eliminate all possibility of protest.

I see liberalism that doesn't liberate anything, progressivism that isn't making any progress, Democrats who don't believe in democracy, conservatives who have stopped acting conservative, and a Grand Old Party that is anything but grand.

Are we making progress as a people or in our governments? I don't know. You tell me. I have my doubts, though.

Elliot
I see cruelty as entertainment in sixteenth-century Paris, –Cat Burning, burning in which a cat was hoisted in a sling on a stage and slowly lowered into a fire while everyone laughed and enjoyed the show.

I see a time when slavery was considered a labor-saving device,

I see a time when conquest was the mission statement of government.

I see a time when genocide was a means of acquiring real estate.

I see a time when torture and mutilation was routine for misdemeanors and differences of opinion

I see a time when pogroms were an outlet for frustration.


I see in the Bible violence in early civilizations-- This supposed source of moral values contains many celebrations of genocide, in which the Hebrew, prompted by God, slaughter every last resident of an invaded city.

The Bible also prescribes death by stoning as the penalty for a long List of nonviolent infractions, including idolatry, blasphemy, homosexuality, adultery, disrespecting one's parents, and picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

The Hebrew, of course, was no more murderous than other tribes; one also finds frequent boasts of torture and genocide in the early histories of the Hindus, Christians, Muslims, and Chinese.

But today, they are rare to nonexistent in the West and far less common everywhere than they used to be.
Today if the occur they are concealed and widely condemned when they are brought to light.

So I see the present, back dropped against history while you see in present time.

DC,

I agree with almost all of the categorizations in your post regarding human history. My question is are we appreciably better today as a race? I don't know. I see religiously sanctioned rape in Iraq, ethnic cleansing in Darfur and Bosnia, mass torture in Saddam's Iraq, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, targeting of civilians by terrorists, rampant crimes against humanity in every third world hole, etc. So have we come all that far from your vision of history? The only thing that I see is that we have better toys of torture and murder today than they had then. Does that make for advancement of the human race? I don't know.

Elliot

DC,

I agree with almost all of the categorizations in your post regarding human history. My question is are we appreciably better today as a race? I don't know. I see religiously sanctioned rape in Iraq, ethnic cleansing in Darfur and Bosnia, mass torture in Saddam's Iraq, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, targetting of civilians by terrorists, rampant crimes against humanity in every third world hole, etc. So have we come all that far from your vision of history? The only thing that I see is that we have better toys of torture and murder today than they had then. Does that make for advancement of the human race? I don't know.

Elliot
Elliot, the answer to your question, “…are we appreciably better today…”, is in your post: “…rampant crimes against humanity in every third world hole…”, “Does that make for advancement of the human race? Yes, because once they were the norm every place on earth. Afghanistan yesterday and Iraq today are just the beginning in the list of examples you give.

Elliot, the answer to your question, “…are we appreciably better today…”, is in your post: “…rampant crimes against humanity in every third world hole…”, “Does that make for advancement of the human race? Yes, because once they were the norm every place on earth. Afghanistan yesterday and Iraq today are just the beginning in the list of examples you give.

So perhaps the title of your thread should have read "MY world is continually evolving into....." :D

The world is continually evolving to be a better place to live, as is government. Hello DC:

I think the world is doing fine, but we better keep our eyes on the government.

excon

DC,

Please keep in mind that third world holes are the norm. First world countries are the exception. There are more people living in third world hovels than there are in the first world. I think the situation that I have3 described is the norm and the USA, the UK, France, Canada, Australia, etc. are the exception to the rule. Certainly the first world has seen improvement and continues to do so. But your original post regarded the world as a whole... and as a whole, the world is still living in the Dark Ages, despite improvements in technology.

Elliot

Still I think there is room for optimism and for DC's conclusion. He cites the rise in democracy .In 1970, there were 44 democratic countries. In 1980, there were 56. In 1991, following the amazing, mostly-peaceful collapse of the Soviet empire, that number jumped to 91. In 2007 there were 123 electoral democracies.

Even in the Muslim Middle East, democracy is an idea that is openly competing with the jihadists as successors to the old sheik Kingdoms and brutal dictator regimes. Majorities in nearly all 17 Muslim countries polled by the 'Pew Global Attitudes Project' were receptive to democracy. Introduction and Summary: Views of a Changing World 2003 (http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=185)

Economically there is room for optimism also .In the last 30 years, millions of people have lifted themselves out of poverty in China and India alone and as more of the world embraces capitalism I expect those numbers to increase even more.

Terrorism is a scourge but does it compare to 1963 ? My father who was hardly an alarmist rebuilt our basement into a shelter and stocked it with survival gear . I guess it did not help that we knew that Bethpage ,NY would be a prime target . I think there is a possibility of course that we could return to the days of a great power standoff in the future ,but as the world continues to embrace freedom ,liberty ,and justice the chances will become more remote I hope.

DC,

Please keep in mind that third world holes are the norm. First world countries are the exception. There are more people living in third world hovels than there are in the first world. I think the situation that I have3 described is the norm and the USA, the UK, France, Canada, Australia, etc. are the exception to the rule. Certainly the first world has seen improvement and continues to do so. But your original post regarded the world as a whole... and as a whole, the world is still living in the Dark Ages, despite improvements in technology.

Elliot
Elliot, I think your conclusion is based on a false premise… comparing world progress based on a comparison between the best and the worst a one moment in history. Just as in economics I think we need to look at the average, in this case being the middle class.

Here is an interesting article: `A one-billion middle-class deluge from India, China by 2020'

The Hindu Business Line : `A one-billion middle-class deluge from India, China by 2020' (http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2006/06/29/stories/2006062901980800.htm)

Up until the 1950-60, that may have been true;however, over the last 30 years or so, standard of living in first world countries has become static and is beginning to decline for middle class individuals.

Problems such as massive overpopulation along with fewer middle class jobs for Americans have led to the conclusion that people cannot hope to see their income rise past their parents income.

We see in America the fight of the rich against the average folks with the hoped result being cornering as much wealth as possible before the rich are hopelessly outvoted.

One happy thougt about America is the immigrants from Asia and Europe and Hispanic countries who are changing America for the better by bringing their energy and hope and desire for freedom and the ideals of the American dream. I don't think that much can be said for western Europe, but not sure.


Choux

There are no happy endings.

You should watch this movie. The beginning is a little boring but I swear it will make you never think the same way again and it will open your eyes. Just keep watching because it gets really good. Zeitgeist - The Movie, 2007 (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/) it's Zeitgeist the movie and its all free online because the word is trying to be spread before the worst comes

The poverty level of the world has actually gone on a downward spiral since america has introduced its plans to get to democracy around the world. Its all business plans if you go and see what they are doing. All the plans in africa that the americans put in say that money have to be taken out of the school system and out of healthcare etc... and everyone knows that if you take money out of those two systems your country is going to go haywire

Up until the 1950-60, that may have been true;however, over the last 30 years or so, standard of living in first world countries has become static and is beginning to decline for middle class individuals.

Can you furnish any proof of that Chou? Because the demographic information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the "gap" between the poor and the rich in America is declining. They show that while the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting richer too, and at a faster rate than the rich.


Problems such as massive overpopulation along with fewer middle class jobs for Americans have led to the conclusion that people cannot hope to see their income rise past their parents income.

Proof please? I don't see any evidence of overpopulation, and I live and work in one of the most densely populated areas of the country. And I see average salaries rising regularly.

According to the BLS, average hourly salaries nationwide have increased sreadily over the past 10 years as follows:

Year Jan---Feb---Mar---Apr---May---Jun---Jul----Aug---Sep---Oct---Nov---Dec
1997 12.29 12.32 12.37 12.38 12.43 12.47 12.50 12.57 12.60 12.66 12.72 12.75
1998 12.78 12.84 12.88 12.92 12.96 12.99 13.01 13.09 13.11 13.14 13.18 13.21
1999 13.27 13.29 13.34 13.38 13.43 13.47 13.52 13.55 13.61 13.64 13.66 13.70
2000 13.75 13.80 13.85 13.91 13.94 13.98 14.03 14.07 14.13 14.19 14.23 14.28
2001 14.30 14.37 14.42 14.46 14.50 14.55 14.56 14.60 14.64 14.66 14.72 14.75
2002 14.76 14.78 14.82 14.84 14.88 14.94 14.98 15.02 15.07 15.12 15.15 15.21
2003 15.21 15.29 15.29 15.28 15.34 15.37 15.41 15.43 15.42 15.43 15.48 15.48
2004 15.50 15.54 15.57 15.60 15.65 15.67 15.72 15.75 15.79 15.81 15.85 15.88
2005 15.91 15.93 15.98 16.02 16.06 16.08 16.16 16.18 16.21 16.30 16.31 16.37
2006 16.43 16.49 16.55 16.63 16.66 16.73 16.79 16.84 16.88 16.94 16.99 17.07
2007 17.10 17.16 17.21 17.25 17.32(p) 17.38(p)
P : preliminary

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/CES0500000008_77914_1184851199647.gif


We see in America the fight of the rich against the average folks with the hoped result being cornering as much wealth as possible before the rich are hopelessly outvoted.

Ah... yes. The great complaint about how all the wealth is concentrated in the hands of the rich. Well, what do you think made them rich in the first place. And who do you think will support the poor in the form of taxes if there are no rich?


One happy thougt about America is the immigrants from Asia and Europe and Hispanic countries who are changing America for the better by bringing their energy and hope and desire for freedom and the ideals of the American dream. I don't think that much can be said for western Europe, but not sure.

Well, that is certainly true of legal immigrants. But illegal immigrants cost us approximately $2.3 trillion (with a t) over a 10-year period in welfare, education costs, healthcare, etc. even if they manage to pay some taxes.



Choux

There are no happy endings.

There could be... it just takes enforcing the rule of law and letting the economy work freely without interference. It takes standing up against evil, even if it is unpopular to do so. And it takes being willing to choose right over wrong, good over evil, and rewarding right action instead of wrong action.

Elliot

Lol wolverine you are more brainwashed that I thought. The stats that come out of america are different than almost every stat that comes out of every country. This year america was the one nation on earth who's FBI came out with a report saying "terrorism has decreased around the world" and "environment is getting cleaner". The world laughs at both these claims. Not one western nation showed the same results as the FBI did in these two areas. Also america has told the united nations to calculate poverty in a way in which whoever makes one dollar a day around the world is not to be considered poor. That's hilarious isn't it. Don't believe what you say when you see that millions of americans have no healthcare. Also the average salary has gone up but that is zero indicator of whether the gap between the rich and poor is going away because prices of EVERYTHING HAVE GONE UP. Every person in an economics faculty can tell you this. I can't believe you couldn't figure that one on your own and tried to sell propagnada here. Go back to school

Here is another bit of information. Immigrants and illegal immigrants are causing less money to be sucked out of the system than true blue americans. Over 90 percent of the people who get their checks for doing nothing and get aid from the government are third generation white americans. This information was released by the Bush administartion.

Please post your source.

lol wolverine you are more brainwashed that i thought. the stats that come out of america are different than almost every stat that comes out of every country. this year america was the one nation on earth who's FBI came out with a report saying "terrorism has decreased around the world" and "environment is getting cleaner". the world laughs at both these claims. not one western nation showed the same results as the FBI did in these two areas. Also america has told the united nations to calculate poverty in a way in which whoever makes one dollar a day around the world is not to be considered poor. thats hilarious isnt it. dont believe what you say when you see that millions of americans have no healthcare. also the average salary has gone up but that is zero indicator of whether the gap between the rich and poor is going away because prices of EVERYTHING HAVE GONE UP. every person in an economics faculty can tell you this. i can't believe you couldnt figure that one on your own and tried to sell propagnada here. go back to school
Please, refer to your sources if you want to appear creadable, otherwise...

the stats that come out of america are different than almost every stat that comes out of every country. This year america was the one nation on earth who's FBI came out with a report saying "terrorism has decreased around the world" and "environment is getting cleaner". The world laughs at both these claims. Not one western nation showed the same results as the FBI did in these two areas.

Mario, now I know that you are full of crap.

The FBI doesn't report on environmental issues, at all. That is the job of the EPA.

The FBI doesn't issue reports on the threat of terrorism.

The National Intelligence Estimate, however, has quite clearly pointed out the rising international threat of terrorism. From the July 2007 NIE:

Key Judgments
We judge the US Homeland will face a persistent and evolving terrorist threat over the next
three years. The main threat comes from Islamic terrorist groups and cells, especially al-
Qa’ida, driven by their undiminished intent to attack the Homeland and a continued effort by these terrorist groups to adapt and improve their capabilities.

We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have constrained the ability of al-Qa’ida to attack the US Homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the Homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.

• We are concerned, however, that this level of international cooperation may wane as
9/11 becomes a more distant memory and perceptions of the threat diverge. Al-Qa’ida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the Homeland, as its central leadership continues to plan high-impact plots, while pushing others in extremist Sunni communities to mimic its efforts and to supplement its capabilities. We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al-Qa’ida senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.

• As a result, we judge that the United States currently is in a heightened threat
environment.

So, either you don't bother reading the facts for yourself, or you make them up as you go along. I'm betting on the latter.


Also america has told the united nations to calculate poverty in a way in which whoever makes one dollar a day around the world is not to be considered poor. That's hilarious isn't it.

What is the source of your information?

If the average income in such a country is $0.22 per day then $1.00 per day is a fortune, isn't it. If the average salary is $30 per month, then $1 per day is about average. If the average salary is $5 per day, then $1 per day would be below average, but not necessarily poverty. You have to also take into consideration the costs of basic necessities of food and clothing. If milk costs a penny, and bread costs two pennies, then $1 per day is probably enough to live on. If milk costs $1, then $1 per day is probably not enough to live on. Unless you know what type of economy you are talking about, you cannot comment on what is considered poverty. You cannot apply your own standards to the economies of other countries. (And don't try arguing with me about economics, Mario. This is what I do for a living... I'm a financial analyst.)


don't believe what you say when you see that millions of americans have no healthcare.

Yep. About 15 million, to be precise. Which equates to 5% of the population. Of that number, about half are single males between the ages of 18-30 who are in good health and wish to spend their money on something other than healthcare, like a new flatscreen TV. I don't really care about them, it's their choice. The other 2.5%, roughly 7,000,000, are covered by hospitals that must treat them regardless of ability to pay. NOBODY in the USA is without a healthcare safety net if they need it.


also the average salary has gone up but that is zero indicator of whether the gap between the rich and poor is going away because prices of EVERYTHING HAVE GONE UP.

Non-sequitor. The prices have gone up for rich people too. Your statement is meaningless in this context.

But please read the report at this link (http://www.fullemployment.org/Understanding%20Poverty%20in%20America.pdf). In specific, please read the part that says:

If poverty means lacking nutritious food, adequate warm housing, and clothing for a family, relatively few of the 35 million people identified as being “in poverty” by the Census Bureau could be characterized as poor. While material hardship does exist in the United States, it is quite restricted in scope and severity.

The average “poor” person, as defined by the government, has a living standard far higher than the public imagines. The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

• Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

• Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago,
only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

• Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more
than two rooms per person.

• The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in
Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

• Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

• Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

• Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV
reception.

• Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians.

In other words, the people living in "poverty" in the USA live fairly well, for the most part. In terms of quality of life, the gap between rich and poor in the USA is smaller than in any other country, and is shrinking, not growing.


every person in an economics faculty can tell you this.

Then perhaps you should go and ask them. Having a degree in economics, and reading economic and financial reports on a daily basis, I think I have something of an understanding of economic issues.


I can't believe you couldn't figure that one on your own and tried to sell propagnada here. Go back to school

What I can't believe is that you think you actually know something about economics, and are telling me to "go back to school". This is what I do for a living, and I think I know more than the average bear about economics. I can't believe how easy it was to find statistical information to back up my position, as opposed to you who have provided none. And I can't believe that anyone would willingly take what they hear from liberal political talking points as gospel without bothering to go to the original data to find out for themselves. That's just pure laziness.

Elliot

Please post your source.

Well, he heard it somewhere, so it must be true.

here is another bit of information. immigrants and illegal immigrants are causing less money to be sucked out of the system than true blue americans. over 90 percent of the people who get their checks for doing nothing and get aid from the government are third generation white americans. this information was released by the Bush administartion.

Pure baloney.

First of all, what is your source?

Secondly, according to a recent Heritage Foundation report, the cost of a low-income illegal immigrant family to the USA is roughly $22,000 per year in schooling, healthcare, welfare, and other services provided "free" by the government. That is after they pay taxes (assuming that they even bother... they are illegal immigrants, after all). There are roughly 11 million such people, meaning that the cost to the USA is $242 Billion per year. Over a 10-year period, that amount is $2.4 TRILLION. The entire US national budget was only $2.6 Trillion (in 2006). That means that 1/10th of the entire national budget is being spent on supporting illegal immigrants and their families. The amount being spent on illegal immigrants is 65% of the total national budget for healthcare and education.

Keep in mind that financial aid is given in more than one way. In addition to a "check for doing nothing", there is financial aid for schooling, food stamps, health care, etc. So a lot more aid is going to illegals than just the "check from the government".

According to the USDA (http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/tb1898/tb1898h.pdf), 34% percent of families that receive foodstamps are Black. So your 90% figure is automatically wrong.

Just because someone said it to you doesn't make it true, Mario. Go look it up for yourself.

Elliot

Pure baloney.

First of all, what is your source?

Secondly, according to a recent Heritage Foundation report, the cost of a low-income illegal immigrant family to the USA is roughly $22,000 per year in schooling, healthcare, welfare, and other services provided "free" by the government. That is after they pay taxes (assuming that they even bother... they are illegal immigrants, after all). There are roughly 11 million such people, meaning that the cost to the USA is $242 Billion per year. Over a 10-year period, that amount is $2.4 TRILLION. The entire US national budget was only $2.6 Trillion (in 2006). That means that 1/10th of the entire national budget is being spent on supporting illegal immigrants and their families. The amount being spent on illegal immigrants is 65% of the total national budget for healthcare and education.

Keep in mind that financial aid is given in more than one way. in addition to a "check for doing nothing", there is financial aid for schooling, food stamps, health care, etc. So a lot more aid is going to illegals than just the "check from the government".

According to the USDA (http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/tb1898/tb1898h.pdf), 34% percent of families that receive foodstamps are Black. So your 90% figure is automatically wrong.

Just because someone said it to you doesn't make it true, Mario. Go look it up for yourself.

Elliot
I suspect that he may be using social security retirement as a government give-away.

All immigrants that are receiving the aid you reference; do they add anything to the GNP; and do the figures you use include loans which must be repaid?

Mario, that movie you referred me to sounds interesting. I have to get off this dial up so I can get good reception on my computer.

Hey, excon, great to see you again! I didn't drink the koolaid either. Plenty have. ;)

Choux

There are no happy endings.

I suspect that he may be using social security retirement as a government give-away.

All immigrants that are receiving the aid you reference; do they add anything to the GNP; and do the figures you use include loans which must be repaid?

Good question.

The report talks about direct benefits, means tested benefits, public education, population based services etc.

The average illegal alien household receives benefits as follows (with examples of the type of benefit in parenthesis):

Direct benefits: $7,326 (Medicare, etc.)
Means-tested benefits: $4,920 (Foodstamps, etc.)
Educational benefits: $5,143 (Public school, vocational school, Pell grants, etc.)
Population-based services: $5,765 (police, roadways, the stuff provided to EVERYONE)
Interest and related costs: $3,495 (interest on borrowings b the govt. to cover costs associated with providing benefits that would otherwise not be necessary)
Pure Public Goods Expenditures: $6,056 (something that is not used up when one person uses the service... everyone can use the service equally. Examples: a lighthouse, a cure for cancer, etc. The fact that one person uses it doesn't eliminate its use by another. This differs from population-based services, because roadways can become congested, police that are answering one call are not available for another call.)

Total: $32,706.

The same report shows that tax revenues (Federal State and Local) from low-skilled illegal immigrant workers who bothe to actually pay their taxes, is roughly $9,689. This includes FICA, State and local consumption taxes, Federal individual income taxes, state and local property taxes, corporate income taxes, state loterry purchases, state individual income taxes, federal excise taxes and custom duties, unemplyment insurance and workers compensation taxation, federal highway taxes, sales taxes, and other taxes.

This leaves a net annual deficit of roughly $22,000.

Now, I don't see a calculation for their contribution to GNP or GDP. But it may be included in the appendix (the appendix is about 40 pages long). Personally, I think that the calculation for taxes collected offsets the growth of GDP, but I could be wrong. Still, we are, by and large, talking about low-income, low education families that are not large contributors to the GDP.

I continue to look through the report and let you know if I find anything about GNP or GDP in the calculations.

Elliot