The only sources I've been able to find are out of date and therefore irrelevant to your contention. If you can find a current source, I'd love to read it.
I mean 2 minutes on google... https://thehill.com/opinion/immigra...-immigration-will-only-lead-to-more-gridlock/ Good article actually - shows that a big problem is the court system as well is just overwhelmed. 11 million illegal immigrants in this country, with 2/3 from visa overstays. But let's not kid ourselves, we're talking about 2.5% of the population.
The pandemic caused a depression of entry (land and plane) and then a correction to that. I think it will likely trend back to avg.
All are well known by those that pay close attention. I came to the conclusion a few years back that the political parties involved do not want to solve the "illegal immigration" problem for selfish political reasons.
There is simple fix to this issue and that's to deport those who overstay their visa. Problem is, neither side wants to do a damn thing to solve this issue because every one of these people is a new consumer and a contributor to the tax base - even if they aren't directly paying taxes. It's all about having enough people to prop up the federal debt. In reality, having more people at our saturation point is a negative. More people are simply more competition for resources which are not infinite - imagine the cost of housing when you have 30 million fewer people .... We need them like we need a hole in our heads. That's not to say we shouldn't do the humane thing and allow those with a legitimate request to asylum in or those who go thru the vetting process entry on a limited basis. Just that "We the people" really have no need for more people .... politicians on the other hand ....
No, it is just very difficult to take action against someone until they have been in contact with law enforcement. There is not some magic immigration field that sucks up visa overstays and border crossers and brings them into immigration court. Just like all criminals, you cannot take action against them until and unless you catch them. Yes. Especially so because many states (generally those that vote for Democrats) refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities (even going so far as to forbid it by statute). You don't need to convince me that we are not doing enough to enforce immigration laws. That isn't the vetting process though. Mostly it is that we don't deport people. Those we do deport, we tend to take a long time to do so, and in the meantime we say feel free to roam around the country, show up in this courtroom in 18 months.
Criminals are still criminals before they come in contact with law enforcement, and there are means to catch them. But since you say illegals are not illegal until they come into contact with law enforcement, I am not sure what you are proposing. Conservatives want a smaller gov't at the federal level, but then they want to push immigration enforcement on to local police. They decry cities not doing enough but then they try to cut the money going to cities and push for more money going to rural and suburban areas. Police shouldn't be forced to do the fed's jobs. If people want more done, they can raise taxes and ask for more money to go into ICE who can then work to track down those who overstay their visa and raid farms of of businesses employing illegal immigrants. Truth is, most conservatives are happy to have their cheaper fruit, and have cheaper construction costs. Most illegals are in fact employed by conservatives after all.
If you click on the link you provided, you'll see that the referenced 2:1 ratio is from an article written in 2019.
Guys like Commodore are just worried that their portfolios might suffer as the WSJ and the financial press are always telling them that there might not be enough desperate job seekers to fill positions without raising wages or working conditions. Meanwhile one of my nieces who just had a second young child is concerned as her husband has just been told down around Lake Jackson that he will have to start doing 7 day per week compulsory overtime for the next three months.
LOL Nobody cared about the lots of wealthier Venezuelans who got visas and booked flights to Florida and Texas where they overstayed their visas and applied for asylum which was granted like has been done for Cubans. Now, however that the poorer Venezuelans are pouring in after walking up from Venezuela it is a problem. Of course virtually none are political refugees just fleeing the horrible economy caused largely by our very severe economic sanctions. It is getting so bad that the US will probably have to abandon the fantasy that Guido is the real president of Venezuela.
The whole approach to immigration reminds me so much of the approach to domestic crime. Why address any sort of root causes when it is so beneficial financially for the prison industry and such a boon for conservative politicians who can use it as a reliable electoral card. See the frankly bafoonish attempt of current conservative darlings Abbott and DeSantis to use the issue.
It's actually over a 10 year period and doesn't refer to the month by month border encounters but rather the total number of illegals living in the US. The right has been complaining about this issue long long before 2019.
Understood, but you should probably stop parroting incorrect information. Treating outdated information as if it were current is intellectually dishonest. Visa overstays should absolutely be addressed, but in your opinion, what are some realistic solutions?
When you presented the data, you failed to disclose that it was from 2019. Instead, you implied it was current.
2019 is current - that's 3 years past. The 11 million illegal immigrants in this country didn't all just pop in the last few years. I think you are trying to find reasons to dismiss it.
The world has changed dramatically since 2019, especially with respect to the number of visa overstays. If you're claiming that data from 2019 is current, then you're being intellectually dishonest. Frankly, you're undermining your point by being dishonest about it. It has enough merit to justify a discussion, but when you make false claims about it, you shift the attention from the topic to your false claims.
So you are saying that of the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the US - that the majority are no longer visa overstays? You haven't presented a source to contradict the data I have shared - yet I am being intellectually dishonest?
I'm saying that currently, visa overstays no longer outnumber border crossings 2:1. If you need a source for that blatantly obvious statement, then you're being intellectually dishonest. Further, I don't need a source to contradict your data. It's common sense that it's outdated. To deny that is intellectually dishonest.
