Immigration is completely out of control (9 Viewers)

MT15 said:

Well, then there is no problem. Asylum seekers are NOT illegal immigrants. Seeking asylum is legal and protected by law. The people you quote are all conflating the two things. And they do it on purpose to get you all riled up.

It is true that the asylum system needs to be reformed, but that is up to Congress not the Administration.

Click to expand...

No problem huh?




Most of the people who claim asylum don't have legitimate asylum claims.

SaintForLife said:

No problem huh?

Most of the people who claim asylum don't have legitimate asylum claims.

Click to expand...

But the system is set up that way - BY CONGRESS - that everyone deserves a hearing. So yes, as I said, the asylum system needs to be fixed but that has to come from CONGRESS.

It would be good to reflect on why everyone you are quoting is lying about asylum seekers as illegal immigrants. They are not the same thing. They know that. They are counting on you not knowing that.

SaintForLife said:

Click to expand...

So?

Once again, this is a congressional matter. You should be focused on Congress not Biden.

SaintForLife said:

I didn't say specifically what he said. I pointed to the video in which he did say" we would immediately surge to the border all the people who are seeking asylum."

Click to expand...

You made the claim "The Biden immigration policy is open borders. This is what he called for as a candidate"
The video isn't evidence of your claim.

We seem to be living in times of unprecedented mass migration. Images of people from Africa crammed into unseaworthy boats desperately trying to cross the Mediterranean, asylum seekers crossing the Channel into Britain, and “caravans” of migrants trying to reach the Mexico-US border all seem to confirm fears that global migration is spinning out of control.

A toxic combination of poverty, inequality, violence, oppression, climate breakdown and population growth appear to be pushing growing numbers of people from Africa, Asia and Latin America to embark upon desperate journeys to reach the shores of the wealthy west.

All of this results in the popular idea of a “migration crisis” that will require drastic countermeasures to prevent massive waves of people arriving in the future, apparently exceeding the absorption capacity of western societies and economies.

Despite this, however, there is no scientific evidence to sustain the claim that global migration is accelerating. International migrants account for about 3% of the world population, and this percentage has remained remarkably stable over the past half a century.

Likewise, refugee migration is much more limited than political rhetoric and media images suggest. About 10% of all international migrants are refugees, representing 0.3% of the world population. While refugee flows fluctuate strongly with levels of conflict, there is no evidence of a long-term increasing trend.

About 80-85% of refugees remain in regions of origin, and that share has also remained rather stable over the past decades. And there is no evidence that illegal migration is spinning out of control – in fact, the large majority of migrants who move from the global south to the global north continue to move legally. For instance, nine out of 10 Africans move to Europe legally, with passports and papers in hand.

The evidence also turns common understandings of the causes of migration on its head. The conventional view is that south-to-north migration is in essence the outgrowth of poverty, inequality and violence in origin countries – hence the popular idea that poverty reduction and development are the only long-term solutions to migration.

However, this assumption is undermined by evidence showing that migration rises as poor countries become richer. This is because increasing levels of income and education, alongside infrastructure improvements, raise people’s capabilities and aspirations to migrate.

Instead of the stereotypical “desperate flight from misery”, in reality migration is generally an investment in the long-term wellbeing of families and requires significant resources.

Poverty actually deprives people of the resources required to move over long distances, let alone to cross continents.……..

But this hasn’t been a natural process. It is instead one that has been encouraged by decades of policies geared towards economic and labour market liberalisation, which have fuelled the growth of precarious jobs that local workers won’t take.

Politicians from left to right know this reality, but they don’t dare admit it out of fear of being seen as “soft on immigration”.

They choose instead to talk tough and revert to acts of political showmanship that create an appearance of control, but that in effect function as a smokescreen to conceal the true nature of immigration policy.

Under this current arrangement, more and more migrants are allowed in, and the employment of undocumented workers is widely tolerated as they fill in crucial labour shortages.

Politicians have turned a blind eye as proven by almost laughably low levels of workplace enforcement.……

SaintForLife said:

No problem huh?

Most of the people who claim asylum don't have legitimate asylum claims.

Click to expand...

Isn't it odd that after 2020, "encounters" was redefined to be apprehensions, inadmissible, and expulsions, whereas before they had different categories.

See below for an example:

Optimus Prime said:

We seem to be living in times of unprecedented mass migration. Images of people from Africa crammed into unseaworthy boats desperately trying to cross the Mediterranean, asylum seekers crossing the Channel into Britain, and “caravans” of migrants trying to reach the Mexico-US border all seem to confirm fears that global migration is spinning out of control.

A toxic combination of poverty, inequality, violence, oppression, climate breakdown and population growth appear to be pushing growing numbers of people from Africa, Asia and Latin America to embark upon desperate journeys to reach the shores of the wealthy west.

All of this results in the popular idea of a “migration crisis” that will require drastic countermeasures to prevent massive waves of people arriving in the future, apparently exceeding the absorption capacity of western societies and economies.

Despite this, however, there is no scientific evidence to sustain the claim that global migration is accelerating. International migrants account for about 3% of the world population, and this percentage has remained remarkably stable over the past half a century.

Likewise, refugee migration is much more limited than political rhetoric and media images suggest. About 10% of all international migrants are refugees, representing 0.3% of the world population. While refugee flows fluctuate strongly with levels of conflict, there is no evidence of a long-term increasing trend.

About 80-85% of refugees remain in regions of origin, and that share has also remained rather stable over the past decades. And there is no evidence that illegal migration is spinning out of control – in fact, the large majority of migrants who move from the global south to the global north continue to move legally. For instance, nine out of 10 Africans move to Europe legally, with passports and papers in hand.

The evidence also turns common understandings of the causes of migration on its head. The conventional view is that south-to-north migration is in essence the outgrowth of poverty, inequality and violence in origin countries – hence the popular idea that poverty reduction and development are the only long-term solutions to migration.

However, this assumption is undermined by evidence showing that migration rises as poor countries become richer. This is because increasing levels of income and education, alongside infrastructure improvements, raise people’s capabilities and aspirations to migrate.

Instead of the stereotypical “desperate flight from misery”, in reality migration is generally an investment in the long-term wellbeing of families and requires significant resources.

Poverty actually deprives people of the resources required to move over long distances, let alone to cross continents.……..

But this hasn’t been a natural process. It is instead one that has been encouraged by decades of policies geared towards economic and labour market liberalisation, which have fuelled the growth of precarious jobs that local workers won’t take.

Politicians from left to right know this reality, but they don’t dare admit it out of fear of being seen as “soft on immigration”.

They choose instead to talk tough and revert to acts of political showmanship that create an appearance of control, but that in effect function as a smokescreen to conceal the true nature of immigration policy.

Under this current arrangement, more and more migrants are allowed in, and the employment of undocumented workers is widely tolerated as they fill in crucial labour shortages.

Politicians have turned a blind eye as proven by almost laughably low levels of workplace enforcement.……

Everything politicians tell you about immigration is wrong. This is how it actually works | Hein de Haas

Escaping poverty, violence and the climate crisis are factors, but the main driver is rich societies demanding cheap labour, says migration scholar Hein de Haas

www.theguardian.com

Click to expand...

I have so many problems with that article.
The writer should spend some time in Tapachula, Chiapas.

V Chip said:

Isn't it odd that after 2020, "encounters" was redefined to be apprehensions, inadmissible, and expulsions, whereas before they had different categories.

See below for an example:

Click to expand...

Why was the definition of encounters changed and who changed it? What were the criteria previously?

MT15 said:

Once again, this is a congressional matter. You should be focused on Congress not Biden.

Click to expand...

I remember you criticizing Trump for immigration when he was President.

SaintForLife said:

I remember you criticizing Trump for immigration when he was President.

Click to expand...

Yes, I criticized him for the way he used the executive to separate toddlers and small children from their parents. That was Stephen Miller and Jeff Sessions’ idea, but Trump signed off on it.

I didn’t criticize him for basic immigration law, because that is Congress’ responsibility.

MT15 said:

Yes, I criticized him for the way he used the executive to separate toddlers and small children from their parents. That was Stephen Miller and Jeff Sessions’ idea, but Trump signed off on it.

I didn’t criticize him for basic immigration law, because that is Congress’ responsibility.

Click to expand...

You are ignoring for Biden that Presidents have discretionary power about how immigration is enforced. You criticized Trump about that, but you avoid it for Biden by acting like he has no power on immigration and acting like it's all left to Congress.

SaintForLife said:

You are ignoring for Biden that Presidents have discretionary power about how immigration is enforced. You criticized Trump about that, but you avoid it for Biden by acting like he has no power on immigration and acting like it's all left to Congress.

Click to expand...

Nope, just pointing out that the real solution has to come from Congress, and Rs have recently ducked addressing it. Biden is using his discretion. He has sent troops to the border recently, and he is currently working out an agreement with Mexico. In fact, Lindsey Graham criticized Biden for sending troops to the border, proving that it doesn’t matter what Biden does Rs will find a way to criticize him for it.

If Biden had separated kids from their parents I would have criticized him for that as well. Anyone who does something that cruel should be criticized.

I‘m also aware that R media tend to play up the caravans and border crossings in an election season and then it will suddenly go away after the election. It’s a common pattern here.

This is the kind of pot-stirring that the right is doing. It’s not honest.

SaintForLife said:

Why was the definition of encounters changed and who changed it? What were the criteria previously?

Click to expand...

It was changed during COVID, and with an agreement from Mexico:

For decades, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has released the number of arrests at the United States-Mexico border. But that changed two years ago as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and new agreements signed with the Mexican government.

In March 2020, the federal agency announced that it would add another category to the total number of apprehensions – the number of expulsions.

The combined statistics were then called “encounters.”

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, there were a total of around 4,450,240 encounters from January 2021 to October 2022.

Click to expand...

Also, from the same link:

But “encounters” also includes the people who are allowed to stay in the U.S. as they apply for asylum or a humanitarian visa for reasons such as political persecution or fleeing human trafficking.

Migrants and asylum seekers often try to enter multiple times and are counted separately each time.

For example, in August 2022, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol revealed that over 22% of encounters are people who had at least one prior encounter in the previous 12 months.

The report further reveals that only 36% percent of the encounters with people from Mexico and northern Central America are unique encounters – and only 35% percent for those from Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua.

It is hard to know, with the current counting system, just how many unique individuals interacted with agents at the border. What is certain is that because of multiple counts of the same individuals, the total number is less than the 4.2 million new undocumented immigrants that Cruz claims have entered the U.S. since the start of the Biden administration.

Click to expand...

In addition to counting the same people multiple times, the number of total encounters overestimates the number of individuals because of another reason: the huge number of expulsions that are used in counting the total number of encounters.

Enacted in 2020 to reduce the spread of COVID-19, “Title 42” – a provision of U.S. public health law – allows U.S. law enforcement officers to immediately deny entry to asylum seekers.

Under Title 42, around 51% of the people encountered are immediately expelled or put into deportation proceedings. After being sent back, some may try again to have their asylum cases heard, and are counted one more time as “encountered.”

According to the Biden administration, 1.3 million people were expelled last year. Among the total encounters, the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol reported that over 1 million people were denied entry under Title 42 alone in each of the last two fiscal years.

The large numbers of expulsions clearly show that the U.S. does not have open borders, as frequently proclaimed by conservative politicians.

Click to expand...