Trump on 60 Minutes

[abaris]

It is unfortunate, and if the children don't have any other kind of citizenship then I might feel differently, but usually you inherit your parent's citizenship, so it's not like they can't all move back to where the parents originally came from.

To whatever shithole that is?

I may be wrong, since I obviously don't know you, but going by all you said here, you're a highly qualified specialist being employed by a british company. Otherwise you wouldn't still be paid in pounds. Is that about right?

To me it seems, you don't understand what the absence of any or all of these parameters mean. And what frightens me just a little bit, you also don't seem to care. Correct me if I'm wrong.

It also seems as if you spend little time on reflecting what actually made you a desirable immigrant. How few people even have the chance of achieving that kind of status, since they were unlucky enough to be born into a piss poor family on the ass end of the world.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Whose fault is it when another country doesn't provide its own citizens with decent social services and economic opportunities? Of course all third-world nationals would rather live in prosperous countries with generous social services! But resources are not unlimited, even in first world countries. Every nation must take care of its own vulnerable and unfortunate citizens first. Low-skill impoverished foreign nations divert those resources away from the schools, community organizations and social services that should be attending to the needs of its most vulnerable citizens. You put the oxygen mask on yourself first before you assist others. That's basic common sense.

Sure we could increase the social safety net to include non-citizens but that also comes at the expense of other things - like foreign aid, scientific research, policing, workplace safety inspection, sanitation, national parks, space program, pensions, medical research, infrastructure, etc. Needs are unlimited.

[The Grand Nudger]

Who said anything about increasing the social safety net?  Non citizens aren't eligible.  Meanwhile, illegals and their employers pay billions in payroll taxes for benefits they are not eligible to receive.

Tell granny to thank Jesus next time she cashes that ss check.  No, not the white one from heaven, the one she wants to deport. Good going though, Neo, on selling the scarcity narrative. Just what is it that -you- think people are stealing from hard working americans? What are we, the wealthiest and most lavishly consuming nation on earth, running out of? Ways to mask our xenophobia, perhaps?

Whomevers fault it is that their shithole countries are shitholes is irrelevant, because regardless of who's fault that might be, it's no one's fault but our own if we insist on shipping them back there for reasons™.

[abaris]

Whose fault is it when another country doesn't provide its own citizens with decent social services and economic opportunities? Of course all third-world nationals would rather live in prosperous countries with generous social services! But resources are not unlimited, even in first world countries.

I guess it's the first time I call you idiot. But these last days you really deserved that badge of honor. Together with the band of ignorance.

You might wanna look up how much food our overfed society throws away on a daily basis. Just for starters. Then you might look at other resources. There's more than enough for all of us getting along just fine.

But I forget whom I'm talking to. Sharing resources, what a preposterous thought for a good christian.


But that's only scratching the surface. Here's another preposterous thought. Not bombing the shit out of them or exploiting their resources for a pittance to turn them into our own commodities would help also.

[Neo-Scholastic]

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." That usually doesn't work out so well for anyone except for the powerful.

[abaris]

delete

[Tiberius]

I'm not sure that fairness is the route you want to take when discussing illegals situation vs, for example, your own.  I get it, you paid for your ticket, it makes you angry to see other people on the ride, people who didn't.  

It doesn't make me angry, it just strikes me as unfair, especially when people talk about complete amnesty for all illegals. There are probably a lot of illegal immigrants who should get amnesty, but all of them? Doesn't that show a sort of weakness; we're effectively saying "if you can get here, you can stay here". It would effectively be an open border.

Right, so any practical concern is not your concern.  What you're interested is that they broke the law, by being here.  Fucking criminals. You know, the racists think the same thing, they just phrase it differently "they took our jobs!" Clearly poor people do have the luxury, since there's not enough illegals to do the work they do n the first place. People compete over them. As to what trumps our law......I've got jokes, if you're gonna set me up like that, lol. In any case, we -don;t- bend over backwards for them..we exploit and oppress them....I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that your lack of sympathy and refusal to acknowledge or discuss the actual state of affairs is awfully helpful in that regard.

No, practical concerns matter, and I've said that there are circumstances where illegals should get amnesty, however I don't see it in all cases. I am interested in the fact that they broke the law, why wouldn't I be? We have laws for a reason, and immigration laws are there to prevent mass-migrations of people and control the population, among other things. Government has to handle the growth of the nation; that can be done by predicting birth / death rates and controlling immigration. The fact of the matter is, these people *are* criminals, whether you like it or not, and I think if you want to effectively pardon them and give them amnesty, you have to have a good reason for doing it. So far in this thread, nobody has given a good reason why we should.

I don't really care if racists think the same thing; that doesn't change whether my argument is right or not, because I'm not making it based on race. Ironically I am an immigrant who took an American's job, but then I have a right to that job as a resident with a work permit.

OK, so maybe there aren't enough workers for the jobs; that doesn't explain the unemployment rate. Are those jobs taken by illegals factored into that at all?

I'm not saying we are bending over backwards for them, I'm saying we shouldn't be. Amnesty for all illegal immigrants is most certainly bending over backwards for them. Who is the "we" that is exploiting and oppressing them by the way?

You don't "disagree" with my point about racism.  It's not up for agreement. You'd simply rather not acknowledge it. Get back to me when that canadian border wall comes up, and british illegals are stopped on suspicion of being illegal.

Of course I can disagree with your point about racism. Your point was that we shouldn't deport illegal immigrants "because we're not a bunch of racist shitlords who think that getting rid of brown people will make it magically better for us?". I don't think I ever argued that "getting rid of brown people" will make it magically better, or even that getting rid of illegals would make it better. My point was that it shouldn't be a factor.

At some point you have to face facts, there are more illegal immigrants coming across the southern border than there are from the north. Does that mean it's ok to stop and demand papers from Mexicans? Hell no. That's not what I've argued at all. There are far more ways to detect and find illegal immigrants that stopping random people in the street.

Yeah, fucking abusers, their crushing poverty is irrelevant.  They have no right, no right I say!

Yes, their poverty is irrelevant. The only relevant fact is that they are in the country illegally. I'm sorry that they are poor; I don't want anyone to be in poverty, but at the same time, poverty is not an excuse for criminal behavior unless the situation is life or death. As I've already said, if the situation was one of life or death, then I support amnesty via the refugee programs.

I could quote you, but I shouldn't have to. As to this other question you'd rather discuss.....didn't I already answer that question? I mean, you're arguing with my answer up above so it seems like I did.

Yes you did answer it; thank you.

Oh boy........this is the part where I tell you that the reasoning behind the process is bigoted reasoning, and you deny that plainly apparent fact.

Is *my* reasoning bigoted though? I don't deny that there are racist people who think we should deport all Mexican immigrants, or illegal immigrants. However there is a difference between saying we should deport illegal immigrants because they are Mexican, and saying we should deport illegal immigrants because they are here illegally.

My reasoning is the latter, not the former. I think there are good reasons to support the latter too.

Tiberius

What's the problem with it? That chart shows you all the possible ways you can get a visa / green card, it's bound to be complicated.

Its not supposed to represent a single person's route through the system.

Once you have a path defined, following it is long but not complicated. You fill out the forms they tell you to, gather the evidence they ask for, and send them in.

Looks like a "what" question to me.

That was a question about the chart, which was a red herring in the first place because it attempts to show every possible immigration path in one diagram, something which is going to be complicated whatever country you apply it to. Most routes aren't going to apply to any illegal immigrants in the first place. So in short, there isn't a problem with the chart, at least not in the sense that Minimalist thought there was.

It is when a racist militia is cavorting around our borders to stop illegals and keep them secure.  Obviously, this is only relevant to what Min and I are talking about, which is the real world, and not immigration to and from your mental safe space. No, Tibs, you don't want to discuss this stuff with me. You want to divorce it from reality, and I'm not interested in that, as I keep saying.

In that case, I'm very much against any kind of racist militia doing what they are doing, but what they are doing is also illegal. Illegal immigration isn't solved by point at the militia and saying "look at those guys, they are bad people", it's solved by talking about the actual problem and coming up with a solution.

I do want to discuss stuff with you, but talking about a militia isn't relevant to the subject, which is solving illegal immigration.

Me, I think we need a freedom of movement agreement over here, it's embarrassing that the EU has that and we don't. We're a country full of immigrants who inexplicable hate and fear immigrants and immigration.

Now we're talking solutions.

That's a fine solution, but it only works because all countries within the EU cooperate in the same market and have representatives to make decisions for the EU itself. I don't think you can really compare the EU with America and it's surrounding nations. The EU is made up of a large number of small countries; honestly most US states are comparable with single EU countries at this point, and we do have freedom of movement...between the states.

A freedom of movement agreement over here would probably only work if Canada was involved, and several of the Latin American countries. It's a worthy suggestion though.

To whatever shithole that is?

Irrelevant because US immigration laws don't let you just come to America because your country is a shithole, unless you are a legitimate refugee seeking asylum. I get that many illegal immigrants come here because they don't like it in their own country, but that is their problem and not ours. There are paths you can follow to legally immigrate.

I may be wrong, since I obviously don't know you, but going by all you said here, you're a highly qualified specialist being employed by a british company. Otherwise you wouldn't still be paid in pounds. Is that about right?

No, that's not right. I came here because I married a US citizen, and while I worked for a UK company for a year and a half, I now work for a US company. The fact I'm a highly qualified specialist is irrelevant to my immigration path. In fact, we had to rely on other relatives to make financial support statements on my behalf because they don't even count my income as evidence that I won't become a burden of the state.

To me it seems, you don't understand what the absence of any or all of these parameters mean. And what frightens me just a little bit, you also don't seem to care. Correct me if I'm wrong.
[/quoet]

I do understand what the absence of those parameters means, but what I do not understand is why that should give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. The fact is, they came here illegally; that isn't my fault, your fault, or any American citizen's fault. There is no reason to give amnesty to every illegal immigrant; I think such a move would be reckless, and would set a dangerous precedent.

[quote]
It also seems as if you spend little time on reflecting what actually made you a desirable immigrant. How few people even have the chance of achieving that kind of status, since they were unlucky enough to be born into a piss poor family on the ass end of the world.

Again with the whole sob story rhetoric. Unless you can explain why people born in poor families in poor countries should have more rights than people who follow the legal process, you aren't exactly winning me over.

Do you think we should import every poor person into America? Or is it just the ones who manage to make it over here that deserve a pat on the back for defying the law? America already has a problem with poverty; I don't see why we need to increase it by taking in people just because they are poor. Refugees I understand; they have legitimate fear for their lives, but poverty is a global problem that isn't solved by just letting poor people immigrate to rich countries. I'd love that to be the solution but it's just not.

Who said anything about increasing the social safety net?  Non citizens aren't eligible.  Meanwhile, illegals and their employers pay billions in payroll taxes for benefits they are not eligible to receive.

Tell granny to thank Jesus next time she cashes that ss check.  No, not the white one from heaven, the one she wants to deport. Good going though, Neo, on selling the scarcity narrative. Just what is it that -you- think people are stealing from hard working americans? What are we, the wealthiest and most lavishly consuming nation on earth, running out of? Ways to mask our xenophobia, perhaps?

Whomevers fault it is that their shithole countries are shitholes is irrelevant, because regardless of who's fault that might be, it's no one's fault but our own if we insist on shipping them back there for reasons™.

Sure, they pay payroll taxes they can never receive, but what about other taxes like income tax, which Americans pay and which fund our government. The fact they pay payroll isn't a good thing; it's just a result of the system requiring that all companies take payroll tax out of paychecks, so it's not like they are doing it voluntarily. Filing taxes once a year though, is something which Americans have to do, and illegal immigrants cannot do it, so they don't have to pay.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Who said anything about increasing the social safety net?  Non citizens aren't eligible.  

In Chicago, they are. They get unemployment. They get housing vouchers. They get free public education, including breakfast and hot lunches for the kids. They use emergency rooms. I have a feeling that's true in quite a few cities.

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's see a citation for that Neo, just so we're clear on exactly what were talking about.

[The Grand Nudger]

It doesn't make me angry, it just strikes me as unfair, especially when people talk about complete amnesty for all illegals. There are probably a lot of illegal immigrants who should get amnesty, but all of them? Doesn't that show a sort of weakness; we're effectively saying "if you can get here, you can stay here". It would effectively be an open border.

Weakness? Is it, and why is that even relevant?  So what if it were an open border?  That'd cut down on all this bullshit we're tying ourselves into knots over, wouldn't it? 

No, practical concerns matter, and I've said that there are circumstances where illegals should get amnesty, however I don't see it in all cases. I am interested in the fact that they broke the law, why wouldn't I be? We have laws for a reason, and immigration laws are there to prevent mass-migrations of people and control the population, among other things. Government has to handle the growth of the nation; that can be done by predicting birth / death rates and controlling immigration. The fact of the matter is, these people *are* criminals, whether you like it or not, and I think if you want to effectively pardon them and give them amnesty, you have to have a good reason for doing it. So far in this thread, nobody has given a good reason why we should.

Yeah, we have laws for reasons, and those reasons aren't always good ones.  Case in point, our immigration laws are based in and have led to the sorts of shit you feel compelled to scrub from your discussions of them.  Have our immigration laws prevented a mass migration, in the case of mexican immigrants?  Doesn't seem so.  They've just ensured that the mass migration that happened in spite of them was as a shitty as possible for people on whom we depend.  Yeah, they;re criminals, the sorts of criminals whoe crime was seeking out the american dream.  Forgive me if I'm not exactly impressed with their designation as-such.  How about this for a reason..there's no reason not to...and ofc people have given you reasons, I gave you three.  Whether or not you think they're good reasons is your call.

I don't really care if racists think the same thing; that doesn't change whether my argument is right or not, because I'm not making it based on race. Ironically I am an immigrant who took an American's job, but then I have a right to that job as a resident with a work permit.

You should, Tibs.  You really should, because imagining that your support and opinions can be divorced from the reality in which they would be carried out is not only ignorant, it;s dangerous.  You don't have a right to any job, there is no such right.  

OK, so maybe there aren't enough workers for the jobs; that doesn't explain the unemployment rate. Are those jobs taken by illegals factored into that at all?

No jobs are taken by illegals.  They don't -take- anything.  They are given the jobs.  Our unemployment rate is easily explained by the fact that no one would take them if they had another option.  That the people who give these jobs out rely on an underclass created by our immigration laws.  

I'm not saying we are bending over backwards for them, I'm saying we shouldn't be. Amnesty for all illegal immigrants is most certainly bending over backwards for them. Who is the "we" that is exploiting and oppressing them by the way?

How is amnesty bending over bacjkwards?  Theyre the ones working shitty jobs as shadow people.  They;d still be working shitty jobs, they just wouldn;t be shadow people.  We are the we, Tibs  You eat food, I assume?  Where do you think it comes from?  The floors get swept in the building were we work.  Who do you think does that?   The houses that we live in get built......... What, exactly, is amnesty supposed to do that could be remotely considered bending over backward? Hell, we won;t even stop telling them to go home an being cunts in the general...we're still telling black people to go home.

Of course I can disagree with your point about racism. Your point was that we shouldn't deport illegal immigrants "because we're not a bunch of racist shitlords who think that getting rid of brown people will make it magically better for us?". I don't think I ever argued that "getting rid of brown people" will make it magically better, or even that getting rid of illegals would make it better. My point was that it shouldn't be a factor.

It doesn;t matter whether or not you argued it.  That's how we -do- it.  Your support for the fantasy based version of your principles will play itself out that way.  

At some point you have to face facts, there are more illegal immigrants coming across the southern border than there are from the north. Does that mean it's ok to stop and demand papers from Mexicans? Hell no. That's not what I've argued at all. There are far more ways to detect and find illegal immigrants that stopping random people in the street.

That;s a rich comment, coming from you, in regards to all of this.  How do you plan on catching illegals to deport if you don't stop them and ask for their papers?  

Yes, their poverty is irrelevant. The only relevant fact is that they are in the country illegally. I'm sorry that they are poor; I don't want anyone to be in poverty, but at the same time, poverty is not an excuse for criminal behavior unless the situation is life or death. As I've already said, if the situation was one of life or death, then I support amnesty via the refugee programs.

You seem to be basing this whole song and dance on their criminality.  What can I say.  Some criminals, some crime.  It's important to note that this sort of narrative setting is -exactly- how the racists do their work. Gotta get rid of all those rapists and "bad hombres", amiright?

Is *my* reasoning bigoted though? I don't deny that there are racist people who think we should deport all Mexican immigrants, or illegal immigrants. However there is a difference between saying we should deport illegal immigrants because they are Mexican, and saying we should deport illegal immigrants because they are here illegally.

My reasoning is the latter, not the former. I think there are good reasons to support the latter too.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Cath.  Do you think that whatever you intend will have some effect on how it's done?  

That was a question about the chart, which was a red herring in the first place because it attempts to show every possible immigration path in one diagram, something which is going to be complicated whatever country you apply it to. Most routes aren't going to apply to any illegal immigrants in the first place. So in short, there isn't a problem with the chart, at least not in the sense that Minimalist thought there was.

You must not have been looking at the same chart, lol.  The pathways to no and loops are endless.  If I was looking at that chart, I'd cross the border illegally too.  No point in pretending that  had a shot at it.  

In that case, I'm very much against any kind of racist militia doing what they are doing, but what they are doing is also illegal. Illegal immigration isn't solved by point at the militia and saying "look at those guys, they are bad people", it's solved by talking about the actual problem and coming up with a solution.

I do want to discuss stuff with you, but talking about a militia isn't relevant to the subject, which is solving illegal immigration.

What they're doing -isn't- illegal, lol.  If you want to talk about actual solutions and actual problems you can;t retreat into fantasyland everytime someone points out a problem with what you think government -should- do.  

Now we're talking solutions.

That's a fine solution, but it only works because all countries within the EU cooperate in the same market and have representatives to make decisions for the EU itself. I don't think you can really compare the EU with America and it's surrounding nations. The EU is made up of a large number of small countries; honestly most US states are comparable with single EU countries at this point, and we do have freedom of movement...between the states.

A freedom of movement agreement over here would probably only work if Canada was involved, and several of the Latin American countries. It's a worthy suggestion though.

A far sight better than proposing that we do things, in a vacuum, which lead to the racist and counterproductive shit that's done in service -of- them, imo.

Sure, they pay payroll taxes they can never receive, but what about other taxes like income tax, which Americans pay and which fund our government. The fact they pay payroll isn't a good thing; it's just a result of the system requiring that all companies take payroll tax out of paychecks, so it's not like they are doing it voluntarily. Filing taxes once a year though, is something which Americans have to do, and illegal immigrants cannot do it, so they don't have to pay.

It's not as if they'd owe anything, Tibs.......they'd get rebates and stimulus, but ofc...they can't, lol. Illegal immigrants, in case you weren't aware...aren't rolling in money and real assets. That probably has something to do with being an underclass. Shadow people. You know what though, you want them to "have to pay".........well gee, how could we make that a reality? Maybe, by removing their underclass status, by taking them out of the shadows we thrust upon them?