The 2024 election vividly demonstrates the impact of politics. Immigration laws haven't improved because the issue is too politically advantageous. Trump convinced Republicans to reject a prime opportunity to address immigration: fixing the asylum system, giving the executive authority to 'shut the border,' and securing funding for border security. All of this was sidelined due to political maneuvering. This pattern has persisted for over 20 years. People generally don't notice because the issue isn't usually this blatant, but now that it's obvious, what is their reaction? It seems that almost everyone who is 'anti-immigration' here (@Astrodome for example - nothing against you Astrodome, just an example) supports the Republicans' inaction. Clearly, politics reigns supreme, and while I can somewhat understand that perspective (win first, action later), it ultimately shows that they aren't serious about making progress or they naively believe Trump will deliver real change.
It believe there are threads on enforcing the law and securing the border. This one, as far as I can tell, is about stoking hatred and racism for political gain -- something Trump has done quite well, to put it mildly.
Wouldn’t shock me. 9/11 hijackers were here legally when the US military put them through flight school. The Jan 6 capital hill attackers were all likely here legally as well. It seems very common for the people who attack the freedoms of the United States to be those who are here legally and benefited earlier on in their lives from our country.
I didn't know we were debating In that case... preserving culture for a large country like America is a Big Deal for many people. We're both second gen Americans who grew up on both sides of the assimilation/melting pot frame. We also benefited when the US relaxed immigration quotas in the 70s for Asian nations. It's natural to have people who benefited from the current uh... Hierarchy to want to preserve that way of life, but there are many who dislike former social contracts of assimilation and view it more as a construct to further oppressor/oppressed relationships much like how they view African Americans and Hispanic Americans as colonialized/oppressed and label them Historically Disadvantaged for places that use quotas in hiring and admissions. Why bring that up? Because even if there is fundamental agreement to things like illegal immigration or expanding legal immigration, how either side thinks fundamentally about race, entitlements, welfare and social justice has downstream effects. Border states who don't like illegal immigrants stealing or driving uninsured aren't necessarily racists but are labeled as such because illegals don't have a voice by virtue of their status and are always considered the oppressed. A simple Reagan blanket amnesty program didn't and doesn't address this. The current progressive post modern wave won't either...It makes it worse.
Sorry wasn’t challenging your post just stating that it is what the point I was making. But if you want a debate. Reagan’s blanket amnesty doesn’t change culture and won’t do much to address uncertainties and fears. That is a much longer process and not necessarily one that can be addressed through legislation. A program like that though addresses several practical matters. A compromise also that includes a heavy amount of increase in border security and immigration enforcement may assuage some of the concerns. Pushing for a closed border and mass deportation isn’t practical. It will be costly, difficult to enforce and lead to very negative economic consequences.
Just to be clear, my take isn't closed borders or mass deportations and I don't think anyone here has advocated for it. Even Trump doesn't advocate wholesale closing of borders and mass deportations of all illegals, if only just for those from shithole countries. At the minimum, laws should be enforced. The selective cherry picking by any sitting president is doing a disservice to the public as it's punting the rot further into the future. How much longer of a process do you think we need if you're proposing a "reboot" of a 40 year old policy? Liberalism and conservatism has changed at least twice since that time which makes the Practicality angle moot. If the topic is about laws and reform, then this would be as good as any thread to dive further into ideas or immigration policies from other countries. In many of those studies, letting in any and all immigrants isn't the problem but rather integration. As much as I like cheaper fast food and vegetables, lowering basic wages with under the table labor is pretty Faustian if you ask me. I guess we take that for granted like the little Asian kids fastening multiple screws onto hard to repair iphones. Oh and by Faustian, I guess good ol progressive bleeding heart politicians could actually do something about that right? But what about their "blind trusts" and insider trades?!?!? What to do. What. To. Do... Call it a day with blanket amnesty and punt the issue another 40 years?
I don't think it would be so horrible as you think. I can remember a time when we had largely native workforce and kids did entry level jobs like working at the grocery store, food service or landscaping. Skilled trades were in demand and paid a good wage. I had a part time job when I was 11 ..... that doesn't happen today mainly because there is no opportunity & California is trying to pay people $25hr for people to do the crap kids did back then. And then the 80's came along and no one wanted their kids to be plumbers, carpenters or electricians rather they wanted their kids to be doctors and lawyers and bankers. What we've ended up with is a pansy ass generation of 20 somethings that thinks they deserve a living wage for serving a shitzy cup of coffee and expect a tip for handing it to you thru the drive thru window.
What you really have to understand is that neither party wants to solve this problem. They both want more people in this country - legal or otherwise, they really don't care. All that they care about is the bottom line and that is more people to spread the burden of a $35T debt upon. That's why I don't buy the Feds bullshit about controlling inflation being their priority - Its not if politicians want to continue spending like they have - inflation is the only way the debt can be managed - making those dollars already spent worth less (worthless). Just think about every time our gubmint sends a billion dollars somewhere .... it costs every single American $3.02 (1b/331.4m) or every taxpayer $6.06. (1b/164,997,000). Yeah, the OP has a point that there is a lot of fearmongering about "illegal immigrants" .... but it's an easy demographic to demonize. I will just say this - most of us will make statements like "I like my dog better than people" .... and I don't disagree with them. I can think of no question where the proper answer is "more people." We don't need more people .... we could do with a hell of a lot fewer. More people just means more consumption, more need for space and more pollution. You are getting duped by both sides of the political isle into believing they give a damn. They don't, all they care about is how much they can spend and skim off the top.
Trump recently has said mass deportations of all illegals. For “shithole countries” it was banning all immigration from them. In theory all laws should be enforced all the time but this is completely impractical whether it comes to speeding or immigration and a state where all laws are enforced all the time by dentition would be a police state. This is why I’ve said that most laws including immigration need to be closer to matching the actual supply and demand curve. Our immigration laws as is are as out of touch as Prohibition was. Practicality is how much can the laws actually be enforced including how much do people really want to enforce them. We don’t have the resources to enforce them and any don’t want to enforce them. Not just progressives chanting “No Human is Illegal” but many Rightwing business interests are looking the other way regarding immigration law. Policies like immigration are always evolving policies and the makeup, economy and culture of this country changes. So yes they should be revisited every few decades. What we’ve seen recently is largely a failure of policy with laws and policy that are actually making the issue worse.
If you really want to see racism and fear mongering -- wait for the rare occasion when a black man is killed by either a police officer or a white male. We'll see protests, non stop media coverage, funerals covered on live TV... The truth hurts, libs. Hypocrisy exposed.
Sure when I did stuff like that and worked my way up from dishwasher to sous chef from junior year in high school to Junior year in college. After that though I said I would never work food service again. They still are. Except this isn’t just a California problem. Texas and Florida have the same issues. Most young people have no interests in working service industry jobs in those states either and if the idea was to attract more young Americans to work those jobs it wouldn’t take a state mandating higher salaries those businesses would have to pay much more in hourly wages whih would be passed on to the consumer. Not just that but also coders and other IT professionals. I’m a child of the 80’s but society and the economy has changed quite a bit since the 80’s. Also in the 80’s there was already a lot of immigrant labor. I learned Spanish from people who were washing dishes and doing prep work in kitchens. Whether we have a pansy ass generation or not it’s not going to change that labor is a resource that follows supply and demand. We have under 4% unemployment even with millions of people here illegally. It’s not like there is a massive pool of American citizens that are desperate to work jobs that many of those illegals are doing. Inflation is also a persistent problem. Because of supply and demand illegals working for lower wages than Americans would accept actually is a check on inflation. Im not making theoretical or ideological arguments as an architect I’ve seen first hand how even the threat of stricter enforcement affects a project when immigrant labor suddenly disappears. Also as a business owner the labor market as is is tight here and have had to rethink projects based on if I can get the labor (drafters) to do them.
I'm sure he doesn't mean all the people from non-shithole countries who are here illegally because they have overstayed their visa
You touched on a lot here. For the interest of this thread, I'll focus only on immigration. I agree that effectively neither party wants to solve our broken immigration system. When you dig down deeper, that's essentially because there are enough extremists on both sides to prevent any compromise solution. And when you dig even deeper, this is factually mostly because of the extremism on the right side gaining more power and refusing any compromise attempts over the last decade. The bipartisan solution on the table is a golden opportunity, even though it's flawed, to move the needle forward in concrete ways. There was a path forward until the extremist (Trump) torpedoed it again. If Trump wins the election, this same version isn't going to pass. There will very likely be enough Democrats that oppose this current bipartisan immigration bill to kill it from moving forward with Trump as POTUS (they are willing to take the hit with Biden, but not with Trump). Furthermore, Trump and the MAGA Republicans have said the bill is crappy, so they will move it further to the right—IOW, it would be less of a bipartisan bill, dooming it. The naive folks that think Trump winning will get Congress to finally pass the bill will finally realize it's not going to happen, and in their zest to support Trump, they passed on a golden opportunity to move the needle forward. History and current behavior show me immigration reform will NEVER happen until we reject and vote out extremism.
If Trump deports millions like he promised to, it would be devastating to the economy, both in the short term and long term. In February 2024, the CBO reported that the surge in immigrants (including illegal immigrants) that has already occurred will be a huge gift to the economy, contributing an estimated $7 trillion boost to the US GDP over the next decade.
Since this is about immigrants in general: In May 2024, a working paper concluded "immigrants raise wages and boost the employment of US-born workers." There has been a long-held fear that immigrants create economic problems for current workers, but that is not the case. “Immigration, thanks to native-immigrant complementarity and college skill content of immigrants, had a positive and significant effect between +1.7% to +2.6% on wages of less educated native workers, over the period 2000-2019 and no significant wage effect on college educated natives,” according to research by Giovanni Peri and Alessandro Caiumi, economists at the University of California, Davis. “We also calculate a positive employment rate effect for most native [U.S.-born] workers.” The National Bureau of Economic Research published the research.
I would say that the consistent Republican negative messaging on immigration is the reason for the 62% That being said, the poll doesn't ask do you think illegals are criminals so while you like laughing at your "rayciss" joke it doesn't apply here
I really wish people would stop saying "Messcans do jobs we don't want to do". Hispanics do jobs we CAN'T DO. All the new homes being built in Houston are being built by Hispanics. Those are good jobs. MAGAs know this. All the business owners understand this and they want to keep this workers coming here.
