@Aleron and @dachuda86 are spot on. The smarter democrats agree with them, the ones in here well prove time and time again they don't get it. Illegals do not add real value and hurt the positions filled by the existing illegals and poor, who are by no means living in secure conditions. Until their situation is improved you cannot go around inflating the population hoping it all works out. Resources are limited, not acknowledging that will lead to the bottom falling out sooner than expected.
It's funny when you guys cite these think tanks that turn out to be quacks, bigots, and liars. Just yesterday Mississippi elected someone a Senator that made jokes about lynching. Why do you think Republicans tend to cite and support such with regularity? "CIS has a long history of bigotry, starting with its founder, white nationalist John Tanton, but in 2016, the group hit a new low. CIS commissioned Jason Richwine, a man who’s Ph.D. dissertation endorses the idea of IQ differences between the races, to write multiple reports and blog pieces for the organization. The group also continued to circulate racist and anti-Semitic authors to its supporters, and finally, staffer John Miano attended the white nationalist group VDARE’s Christmas party in December." Let’s look at the evidence cited by SPLC in more detail: Email listserv: CIS circulates a weekly email listserv with dozens of links to articles about immigration. The SPLC said that these emails have highlighted articles by "white nationalists" such as Paul Weston, a Holocaust denier, and articles by American Renaissance, run by Jared Taylor, who has made racist statements about blacks. One article entitled "Voting for Hillary equals more Muslim killings of Americans" claimed that Clinton’s assistant "works fervently for Sharia law in America" and that Trump would give the United States a chance to "survive this immigration invasion." These suggested reading lists "tipped the balance" for the SPLC to name CIS a hate group, Beirich told PolitiFact. https://www.politifact.com/florida/...-immigration-studies-hate-group-southern-pov/
I believe we should deport all illegals and change the Constitution's birthright citizenship law. However, how on Earth did you quantify what value illegals add or don't add? Did you just read a blog and then come post your diatribe per your usual? Please cite your evidence quantifying the contention that illegals don't add real value. Anyone that lives in Houston knows the value that illegals have added just from the low construction/housing costs alone.
Gets mad about think tank as a source then uses SPLC like it is any less politically charged lol If you have politics they disagree with they are more than happy to label you a bigot. But keep in mind that is one very politically connected organization. It isn't some neutral organization that isn't connected to an agenda. It is usually called guilt by association. They label the obvious ones like the KKK then try to equate other groups with them.
Housing costs are rising and rents a high because we have too many people and the construction of new housing hasn't kept up with the population growth. It isn't that clean cut. The only value they could add is building new homes, if they even have that skillset in the first place. Those are workers who are displacing Americans though from entering that field and depressing the wages of said employees. We don't need to prove to you simple economic theories. Supply and demand should be self exaplanatory in regard to the labor pool and wages of said labor.
Japan's growth has stagnated - their numbers don't look good - despite having an unemployment rate UNDER 3%. You simply do not know what you are talking about and have no understanding of macroeconomics
I am asking people who are for letting the caravan in, are you favor only letting Hispanic in or asian can get in on that? Because if that is the case I am sure there are 100 or so millions Chinese who want to have a shot at an American dream too. Should we inform them that it’s an open border time? Because they are certainly fit under asylum criteria, living under oppressive government.
I haven't actually seen many folks that are in favor of just letting them in. What I have seen is reasonable suggesting that they followed the law to come to a legal port of entry and applied for asylum. They should be allowed to do that because that is the law. Without reviewing each individual case, I have no idea which if any of the immigrants in the caravan should be allowed to stay in the United States. I'm also in favor of any Chinese who wish to apply for asylum and follow the law being allowed to apply for asylum.
I think what needs changing is the policy of allowing in anyone who applies for asylum and just assuming they'll show back up to court when the time comes. I think also anyone caught illegally entering the country should be barred from requesting asylum or something of that nature. I'm not sure exactly how you could do that so that legitimate asylum seekers wouldn't be punished by getting lumped in with the ocean of economic migrants posing as asylum seekers to exploit a loophole in the system but sometimes good people suffer due to the actions of those without scruples.
I don't disagree with all of it. But I think people applying for economic reasons will be turned down. Most asylum seekers show up for their hearings. Anything we can do to help increase the rate is fine.
That's a point of contention though, I've seen a lot of different numbers thrown out there for the rate at which those types of "asylum seekers" fail to show up to court between 20% on the low end and 90% on the high end, obviously the truth is somewhere in between but it doesn't really matter, I think it's a fundamentally flawed system. If the existence of that loophole causes an increase in those trying to exploit it, you'll have an increase in the rate of people not showing up to court, especially those that don't actually have a solid case who just used the loophole to get into the country. So even if the number WAS 20% and the other numbers were fake news, it would certainly increase from there with the volume of false applicants greatly increasing. I don't like the idea of detention centers, I don't like the idea of just releasing anyone who claims to be seeking asylum. We need to find something in between those 2 extremes.
You keep talking about what they should do. I'm talking about what we should do. You can't control how other people will behave, but you can control how you will react. So, yeah, maybe they could stay home and work to make life better there, maybe they can seek asylum in Mexico, maybe they could head south. I don't really know their situations to say with much authority what is the best decision for them. I do know our situation and I do have an infinitesimally small say in what we do. As to what we do, I say we either do what we've always done, or else run the process we always run to change how we do things. My preference is actually the latter, but we're not getting much real effort on that front in the federal government. In this case, I was forecasting based on the Calais experience and a hypothetical in which refugees remain a long time in Tijuana. I was not thinking of the border jumpers from a few days ago. Sorry to have triggered you. Btw, I need a link for the original plan where they were going to cross the border illegally. My fake news bubble won't let me see it.
posted this in the other thread but seeing as how it's an RL thread with only 200 views, this will probably get more attention here
Play ignorant all you want... you know damn well why they formed this mass of people. The reason was to rush the border. Pretend they are angels all you want but they are clearly massing to overwhelm the border gaurds. Deep down you know I am right and that is why it is you who are triggered. Keep refusing to see what is in front of you. Ignore the obvious pushing of women and children to the front lines as well. This was clearly orchestrated and it wasn't for asylum. You cannot claim asylum in any country, but if they want to, they can apply and get rejected in Mexico at a U.S. consulate. There are videos of migrants talking about their intentions to illegally enter if you seek them out There are also videos where they explain it is for economic reasons. Get your head out of the sand.
I'm not a fan of exponential growth and the overdevelopment it brings. If every city in the world grew exponentially, the strain on natural resources and infrastructure and the impact it has on the environment mean we would all be dead in a few decades. Understand cities need to have limitations , and as you saw with Harvey, overdevelopment will lead to more carnage no matter how many bayou's you think will stop it. That being said, can you tell me what % of illegals go into low construction jobs and menial labor? Or what % are exploited by big agro for seasonal farm work? What % are criminals? It's great you can pick and choose the construction industry as a shining example of what illegals can do, but you can't just have millions of unaccountable people and hope to build a nation off of that. When you cut on down illegals, you can increase legal limits where they can have the proper training necessary to start new projects in burgeoning sectors like a renewables and nuclear framework, infrastructure, housing, etc. Otherwise it's a middle east slave labor type situation in many ways, you just justify it differently. It's not rocket science, look past your anger at life to see the obvious.
No, they don't want the smarter Asians to take their middle class and white collar jobs. They only want the mexicans who can work as maids or do construction deals at half price and won't excel enough in school to beat out their kids. But they'll justify this by having diversity quotas. This is exactly what democrats are trying to do here.
Listen to yourself for a second. You seriously contend that Democrats as a group are conspiring to establish an underclass so they can all get cheap maids? Basically you contend the Dems are trying a coordinated end-around to reinstitute slavery under another name?
