Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[Serious] Let's solve the illegal immigration crisis

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Protist View Post

    Pretty glib response. Not everything that is bad is a crisis, as bad as it is. And it could be argued that our immigration policies greatly contribute to human trafficking.
    I wouldn't argue with your second point much. Though a proper guest worker program, which we really do need, wouldn't solve the problem entirely.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Protist View Post

      Hard for me to believe that current democrats are thinking that far ahead. Both parties seem pretty short-sighted overall.
      When it comes to power consolidation, you better believe they are thinking about it.

      Comment


      • Is the argument against the wall just the cost? Like, if we could have a wall on the southern border magically appear instantly at no cost, would the no-wall people still be against it?

        If we could have all the existing fence/wall/barrier on the southern border magically removed at no cost, would the no-wall people be for it?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Protist View Post

          I object to a giant national monument to American stupidity.
          You must do a lot of objecting!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Protist View Post

            Sure. By not having a more streamlined system for legal immigration and instead trying to "seal the border" it created a system encouraging human trafficking as a way of entering the county. The so-called "war on drugs" created similar systems for organized crime.
            Hmm. The law of unintended consequences you might say.

            Comment


            • I saw an interesting question posed the other day: if it were guaranteed that no illegal immigrant would receive public assistance, would people be opposed to more lax immigration policies? Put aside the terrorism or foreign interference issues for now.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Protist View Post

                I think that's not very common and not something on congressional democrats' radar when forming their positions.
                True on the first part, but false on the second. Democrats aren't idiots, they plan ahead as well as anyone. Republicans are doing it too, and those visions often conflict. So simply dismissing either party or their sub-groups as short-sighted is naive. These things have a way of growing. It will absolutely become a data point on why illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote in broader and broader elections. Why shouldn't illegals be allowed to vote for their sheriff or judge or city councilman or state rep or federal rep? If they are a part of the community, shouldn't they have a say in who serves them?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by KUGDI View Post

                  True on the first part, but false on the second. Democrats aren't idiots, they plan ahead as well as anyone. Republicans are doing it too, and those visions often conflict. So simply dismissing either party or their sub-groups as short-sighted is naive. These things have a way of growing. It will absolutely become a data point on why illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote in broader and broader elections. Why shouldn't illegals be allowed to vote for their sheriff or judge or city councilman or state rep or federal rep? If they are a part of the community, shouldn't they have a say in who serves them?
                  My argument for not giving illegals the right to vote in any elections is that it incentives them to become legal. Same thing with not giving them any public assistance.

                  That's the goal, in my eyes anyway... more legal immigrants, fewer illegal immigrants.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by KUGDI View Post
                    I saw an interesting question posed the other day: if it were guaranteed that no illegal immigrant would receive public assistance, would people be opposed to more lax immigration policies? Put aside the terrorism or foreign interference issues for now.
                    Will they still use the ER as their primary care physician helping to drive up health care costs? Will their kids still attend tax payer funded public schools further straining and already strained system? Will they still take up massive amounts of housing, driving rents up, and exacerbating the housing crisis resulting in more U.S. citizens living on the street? Will the Dems still use this as an excuse to call for rent control and limiting a landowner's free use of their property? Will they still have anchor babies who can later be used to migration chain in family members under the guise of "family reunification?"

                    There are many studies that show that illegal aliens are a net zero (or may even be a net positive) on the economy under certain measures, but most of those studies leave out some or all of the "hidden" costs that I've pointed out above. The bottom line is that they committed a crime in coming here (See Title 8, Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, or Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act), have ZERO right to be here, and so they should not be here.

                    So in answer to your question, no, that would not make a difference to me.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X