Joseph Perkins
Joseph Perkins is a conservative and sophisticated author that voices his opinions on common political matter with well developed evidence in order to support his claim. Perkins’s comments on politics are usually the republican reaction, which proves him to be a bias author. This bias writing style is developed through the use of specific words and sentence structure. In Perkins’s column, “Taxpayers shouldn’t support illegal immigrants,” his opinion is developed through compound and complex sentences in order to portray a negative tone for his readers towards immigration. In this column, Perkins strongly disagrees with illegal immigration, however does not consider himself a racist; instead, Perkins follows the “rule of law” that involves the belief that “tax-payer funded benefits should be reserved for American citizens and legal residents.”
Do you believe that Perkins is a bias author? Do you agree or disagree with Perkins that taxpayers should not be paying or supporting illegal immigration in the United States? Why or why not?
I don’t think that Perkins is biased, only because they are illegal immigrants and do not deserve the same benefits American citizens do. They should not be able to get free college, welfare and food stamps. It is just taking away from the citizens of the United States who have lived here their whole lives or have gone through the proper steps to become a citizen. Taxpayers money is meant for the people of the U.S. I believe that illegal immigrants should be forced to go back to their countries, no matter their living situation there because it is not our responsibility it is their homelands.
Joseph Perkins seems like an opinionated columnist. I agree with him that taxpayers should not be paying or supporting illegal immigration in the United States. The tax money should be used strictly on U.S. citizens. If illegal immigrants are given “tax-payer funded benefits”, it takes away from the citizens who really need it in the U.S. I don’t think that Perkins’ opinion is racist at all and he doesn’t seem extremely biased from this column.
Joseph Perkins seems to be a biased writer. He picks his topic, and writes to make the reader agree with him. That is how a persuasive columnist should write. I do agree with Perkins that the taxpayers’ money should not go towards paying for illegal immigrants. These immigrants should have to first become actual citizens of the United States. Then, they should have to earn their own living. They won’t stop coming to this country if they know that once they get across the border then the taxpayers will take care of paying for all their needs. They should have to earn citizenship and then earn their way in this country, just like everyone else.
Perkins does seem like a biased columnist. Although he gives support for the information he has provided he never supports or shows the other side of the story and why he doesn’t like that side of the story. I do agree with Joseph though I do not believe that takes should pay for illegal immigrants if they want to try to become legal citizens and they need help that’s a whole other story. If they do not belong in the U.S. why should we pay for their needs even if they do need help. I agree with Alex they should gain citizenship like everyone else and then we should help them.
I do think that Perkins seems like a biased writer. He says he is a Republican, meaning that he probably does not look at topics from all sides, instead he just looks at the topic through the republicans’ point of view. I do agree with Perkins that taxpayers should not be paying or supporting illegal immigration. This already has and will continue to cause overpopulation in the United States. In my opinion, it is already too easy to become a citizen in the United States. Immigration to the United States will only increase if they know that taxpayers will pay for them to live here.
I do believe that Perkins is a biased writer, although i believe he has a point. The money of our taxpayers should not be used on non tax paying, illegal immigrants. If a person is living legally in the country then they should be given the benefits of the tax money and should not have to split the benefits with a non paying, illegal immigrant. I do not believe this is racist, should an English citizen pay for an American citizen to live in England without paying? Should an Italian pay for a French citizen living in Italy?
Perkins is biased, and he does a good job proving his point because I agree with him that tax payers should not be paying for illegal immigrants. They should not be paying for them with welfare and such, but I do think it is okay for illegal immigrants to be here if they had to leave their country because it was unsafe. I also do not think it is racist to not want to pay for illegal immigrants, it would be racist if he thought America should not let immigrants in.
I think that Perkins is extremely biased writer. I think that Perkins is a good writer because I agree with him in this situation. I do not think that tax payers should be paying for illegal immigrants. I think it is ridiculous that these immigrants can come here and get free medical care, food stamps, and even free housing. Hard working American citizens shouldn’t be paying for these immigrants wants and needs. I think allowing them to come to our country is a privilege in itself. They should have to find their own income on their own.
Perkins is clearly a biased writer. I do agree that taxpayers should not have to pay for illegal immigrants. As Ana mentioned if their country is unsafe we should give them a chance in ours. But that being said if they are going to live here they need to get jobs and not sit around collecting welfare while others are out working hard for their money and supporting their families. I do not believe this is racist because Perkins does not want to pay for the illegal immigrants lives and that s in no way discriminating another race.
I believe that Perkins is a bias writer because of his tone represented in his column. If he is referring to the immigrants in this annoyed and uncomfortable mood hoping the reader feels the same way then he is bias. Although he is bias, I support his decision in saying that tax payers should not pay for them being in our country and that only citizens should get the money. If we are going to put our money towards people who do not speak our language or are not registered citizens then they should not get any money.
I do believe that Perkins shows bias because he is a republican. I agree with Perkins that taxpayers should not be paying or supporting illegal immigration in the USA because the illegal immigrants themselves are not paying taxes. Also, taxpayers already have enough legal things to pay for, they shouldn’t have to pay for anything illegal.
I do believe that Perkins is a bias author because he is a republican and says what he believes is right. Yes, I do agree with Perkins that taxpayers should not be paying for or supporting illegal immigration in the United States because they are illegal immigrants. That means that they aren’t citizens in the U.S. which means that they themselves do not have to pay taxes. If they aren’t paying taxes then taxpayers should not be paying for or supporting them. If they want help from taxpayers, they should become legal citizens. Taxpayers should not have to waste money on illegal immigrants. They need to become legal citizens to receive money and support from taxpayers.
Perkins is a biased columnist, but he does make a valid point. Taxes are payed by U.S. citizens to fund public services and government projects. If someone is an illegal, they do not contribute to the government, which by extension means they do not contribute to these two items. Most Americans pay their fair share when it comes to taxes, and as a result they receive the services that their taxes pay for. An illegal pays no taxes, so why should they receive these benefits? By allowing illegal immigrants to be supported for by taxes, it only encourages more illegal immigration.
All though I agree with Perkins to an extent, he does seem biased in some way or another. I do agree with Perkins and even though ive never read his writing im pretty sure id enjoy his writing. If someone works their butt off, they shouldn’t have to pay for some free loaders who want to do something and gets it just because they can. These things come as benefits to those who didnt earn them at the fault of those who work their lives away.