[Rushtalk] Dallas

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at verizon.net
Wed Sep 2 13:12:24 MDT 2015

Your math is flawed.  Very.  On one hand you are talking/writing about premiums, and then you conclude with losses, assuming a $1000 (plus) loss for every illegal alien in the country.  And you doubled your own figure of $1000 to support your claim of losses by illegals.  I don't know what the annual insurance losses are across the country, my guess is that you didn’t either when you wrote this.  But not every illegal causes an accident, and not every uninsured accident is caused by an illegal.

Your post here seems to imply that we eliminate illegal immigration, we will eliminate uninsured drivers.  Not a valid argument at all.

This discussion was originally premised on uninsured motorists.  You have now tried to glue this to the argument of illegal immigration.  These two issues may have a mathematical intersection, but they are separate considerations.

-----Original Message-----
From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of Tom Matiska
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 10:28 AM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Dallas

Simple math says uninsured illegals(10M+++ ??) times $1K+ for insurance(double that in SoCal) equals $20B+ in losses for the insured motorists they victimize.

Plus the value of the 5K lives they claim on the road each year. In terms liberals understand that is the amount of lives lost in the first 10 years of both wars combined.

There is no legal reason I'm aware of to give qualified Mexican drivers a DL.   We don't need it in their country. Real issue is the left wishes to use the U.S. DL as a passport to citizenship. 

On Wed, 9/2/15, Stephen A. Frye <s.frye at verizon.net> wrote:

 And the mathematical correlation
 between illegals and mandatory car insurance is … _______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list