The President Trump Immigration Thread

[SheepDog4Life]

I wasn't thinking of the wall being ineffective. More like until the wall is completed there remain broad avenues open for the the illegal alien invaders. Kind of like building a dam and expecting it to perform its job before completion.

Gotcha! I took it wrong.

Between the wall and pressure on Mexico to halt the caravans, it appears something has been successful (ignoring Mar-May 2020 due to coronavirus).

 

[BugI02]

You must have old google. Google corrects mine automatically now.

So, you're saying your spelling error is harmless, because it does no damage to your search intentions? What percentage of misspellings does Google fix, 99%?

 

[foszoe]

Exactly!

So, you're saying your spelling error is harmless, because it does no damage to your search intentions? What percentage of misspellings does Google fix, 99%?

 

[NKBJ]

Google probably censors out more than it corrects.

 

[jamil]

It is, however, functionally indistinguishable from defending doing nothing. The Gorshkov quote and the criticism stand

Bull****. I'm kinda skeptical of the wall. Walls can be breached. People are resourceful. It's a deterrent in that it would likely slow the flow. How effectively? I think it's a fair question to ask. It's not comprehensive. Personally, I think it can be effective in strategic places. I doubt we need a continuous wall clear across the entire ***damn border. Maybe using technology would be more effective. It wouldn't bother me if the Federal government cracked down on sanctuary cities and states, since immigration and border control are explicitly matters for the US government.

That's not nothing. I want a solution, not something that's largely symbolic. Anyway, it's ****ing retarded to argue that people who don't want YOUR solution actually want NO solution. That is absolutely cockrubish bull****. I'd like a solution to solve the issue of illegal immigrants. I'm just skeptical of yours.

 

[BugI02]

I can only assume that you would not have deployed the Sturmovik because it wasn't better than the ME109, exactly the kind of thinking the Gorshkov quote is meant to call out. I know you have a major woody over the use of an emergency declaration, but be honest. How long do you think it will take 535 people who are paid to argue, and angle for political gain while studiously avoiding any kind of recorded vote, to actually do anything to solve the problem. The last comprehensive immigration reform enacted was in Reagan's time, I believe - and the other side never obeyed the rules. The last attempt to update it was , what, 15 years ago? And that took four fish below the waterline.

If an advocated course of action will result in no action during my remaining lifetime, I think I can fairly criticize that course as defending doing nothing

 

[jamil]

I can only assume that you would not have deployed the Sturmovik because it wasn't better than the ME109, exactly the kind of thinking the Gorshkov quote is meant to call out. I know you have a major woody over the use of an emergency declaration, but be honest. How long do you think it will take 535 people who are paid to argue, and angle for political gain while studiously avoiding any kind of recorded vote, to actually do anything to solve the problem. The last comprehensive immigration reform enacted was in Reagan's time, I believe - and the other side never obeyed the rules. The last attempt to update it was , what, 15 years ago? And that took four fish below the waterline.

If an advocated course of action will result in no action during my remaining lifetime, I think I can fairly criticize that course as defending doing nothing

I"m not gonna look that up, but I think I understand the point your making. My reply to that is you're only assuming one of many actions I might take on Sturmovik vs ME109.

You want the whole ***damn wall. I think that's a mostly one ideological solution to a multifaceted practical problem. This isn't Sturmovik vs ME109. Or hell, I dunno anything about either. So maybe it is. But I doubt it proves the point that "don't just stand there, do ANYTHING" is a wise move.

I'm fine with 535 people arguing about which solutions are best. You and I aren't the only people who have an opinion on what's the best way to handle illegal immigration. The problem isn't solved because our society has a great schism. We have widely differing opinions about how to order our society. And you're essentially arguing for the same mechanism that they want. Total authority for one side to have its way. I think you've resolved that this is going to be the way it is anyway, so you might as well fight for that stick. What you're talking about after that is armed conflict. I don't think we're there yet. We're getting pretty close to the edge though.

 

[foszoe]

If only we governed by ecumenical councils instead of Congress...

 

[BugI02]

You mean governed by people like Red Francis? No thanks

 

[T.Lex]

A few days ago, Trump said he would, by executive order, pave a "road to citizenship" for at least some illegal aliens.

His handlers - the PR people - then walked that back.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...o-citizenship-for-dreamers-idUSKBN24B35E?il=0

 

[nonobaddog]

A few days ago, Trump said he would, by executive order, pave a "road to citizenship" for at least some illegal aliens.

His handlers - the PR people - then walked that back.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...o-citizenship-for-dreamers-idUSKBN24B35E?il=0

Maybe that "road to citizenship" should lead back to their own -hole countries.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Maybe that "road to citizenship" should lead back to their own -hole countries.

There is and has been for a long time a "road to citizenship". How about just enforcing that? No need for an EO. No need for new laws. Just follow (and enforce) the existing immigration law.

 

[T.Lex]

There is and has been for a long time a "road to citizenship". How about just enforcing that? No need for an EO. No need for new laws. Just follow (and enforce) the existing immigration law.

There's a significant legal hurdle for the last 10-15 years or so, as I understand it, related to any "benefit" received by an illegal alien. Almost anything counts, so it is almost impossible to not have received a benefit. The only way around it is litigation that can be a 50-50 shot at best, with a significant penalty for losing.

And that applies even if the illegal alien came as a kid and had no choice but to receive the benefit.

So, there's a significant disincentive to start down that path. That's why DACA was engineered.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

There's a significant legal hurdle for the last 10-15 years or so, as I understand it, related to any "benefit" received by an illegal alien. Almost anything counts, so it is almost impossible to not have received a benefit. The only way around it is litigation that can be a 50-50 shot at best, with a significant penalty for losing.

And that applies even if the illegal alien came as a kid and had no choice but to receive the benefit.

So, there's a significant disincentive to start down that path. That's why DACA was engineered.

And yet untold thousands (likely millions) have managed to follow these procedures in the past. Why is it different now?

 

[OakRiver]

And yet untold thousands (likely millions) have managed to follow these procedures in the past. Why is it different now?

I managed it just fine.

People behave based on incentives. The long immigration process, which you cannot receive public assistance, combined with permissive states that refuse to work with ICE and provide housing, healthcare, education, employment opportunities and other social support systems and an unwillingness to tackle the issue from DC means that the incentive is not to follow the law.

The purpose of this inaction is to change the facts on the ground, and make it so that anything short of a path to citizenship, and pseudo open borders, is all but impossible.

 

[T.Lex]

And yet untold thousands (likely millions) have managed to follow these procedures in the past. Why is it different now?

I managed it just fine.

People behave based on incentives. The long immigration process, which you cannot receive public assistance, combined with permissive states that refuse to work with ICE and provide housing, healthcare, education, employment opportunities and other social support systems and an unwillingness to tackle the issue from DC means that the incentive is not to follow the law.

The purpose of this inaction is to change the facts on the ground, and make it so that anything short of a path to citizenship, and pseudo open borders, is all but impossible.

Let me be clear: I'm specifically not talking about legal immigration. I'm talking about people who came (or were brought) without the proper visa (or overstayed a limited duration visa) or consular registration. Oak, we've only interacted virtually, but I don't really think you swam the Atlantic to enter illegally.

I believe there was a program that started under Reagan and proceeded through Clinton (maybe even the first term of GWB) that called for a civil fine and proof of non-criminality that would provide a path to citizenship. I don't know how many people participated, but I understand it was popular and effective.

That law sunsetted.

Even in states that are not "permissive" and cooperate with ICE, there are benefits that could make people eligible for removal (deportation).

Particularly if there was a misunderstanding and the person got an SSN as a child, and assumed they were legal (for rational reasons), they lived their life as a US citizen, including some of the benefits appurtenant to that. And that now makes them subject to deportation.

People do behave based on incentives, and fear. Incentivizing productive immigrants is part of our economy. The fear of deportation keeps the underground economy going.

 

[OakRiver]

Let me be clear: I'm specifically not talking about legal immigration. I'm talking about people who came (or were brought) without the proper visa (or overstayed a limited duration visa) or consular registration. Oak, we've only interacted virtually, but I don't really think you swam the Atlantic to enter illegally.

I believe there was a program that started under Reagan and proceeded through Clinton (maybe even the first term of GWB) that called for a civil fine and proof of non-criminality that would provide a path to citizenship. I don't know how many people participated, but I understand it was popular and effective.

That law sunsetted.

Even in states that are not "permissive" and cooperate with ICE, there are benefits that could make people eligible for removal (deportation).

Particularly if there was a misunderstanding and the person got an SSN as a child, and assumed they were legal (for rational reasons), they lived their life as a US citizen, including some of the benefits appurtenant to that. And that now makes them subject to deportation.

People do behave based on incentives, and fear. Incentivizing productive immigrants is part of our economy. The fear of deportation keeps the underground economy going.

Popular or not, such a legislative provision encourages people to flout immigration law, pay a fine (I would be interested to know whether the fine was cheaper than the immigration process) and have a path to citizenship, while receiving benefits that legal immigrants may not enjoy. Again, the system is providing the wrong incentive.

I do have some sympathy for those who were brought here as minors, and may not be aware of their illegal status within the United States, and I feel that there has to be better discussion around those individuals. I don't have much sympathy for those people who overstay a visa/visa waiver.

In larger terms, I would be in favor of updating the law for citizenship, so that being born in the United States is no longer sufficient, but instead that at least of one your parents must be a US citizen to qualify for citizenship. This is no different to many other countries (Ireland, the UK, France, Germany, Spain).

It is not merely a fear of deportation that keeps the underground economy going. There are also employers who will hire illegal immigrants, knowing that the chances of getting caught, and the penalties for getting caught, are not sufficient to stop them hiring people off the books. Start imposing more serious fines, and federal jail time for repeat offenders, and that will change.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

What is the over/under for the first new mass caravan arriving at our southern border?

1/20/21?

 

[drillsgt]

What is the over/under for the first new mass caravan arriving at our southern border?

1/20/21?

Yep they are already forming in Honduras.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Migrant caravan demands Biden administration 'honors its commitments'