Immigrants do Washington (DC) (1 Viewer)

[el caliente]

Apparently immigrants are a problem, at least that’s what the Mayor of DC is saying. Well technically the Mayor’s problem is the Governors of Texas and Arizona are bussing folks to DC.

I understand the complaint, but at the same time, I don’t blame the Governors for doing what they are doing. They have said that immigrants aren’t welcome, and DC has taken the opposite approach by saying that it will be a “Sanctuary City”.

Inundate DC with as many immigrants until it’s such a problem for politicians that the bend (but don’t break) MO is done away with, and one decision has to be made before the Nations Capital becomes a squatters village, and politicians are sharing an Uber with immigrants.

 

[MT15]

We actually need more labor in this country. There are tons of jobs going unfilled. Especially in the service industries. What do you think we should do about that?

 

[el caliente]

We actually need more labor in this country. There are tons of jobs going unfilled. Especially in the service industries. What do you think we should do about that?

Amnesty baby!

Why not?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Apparently immigrants are a problem, at least that’s what the Mayor of DC is saying. Well technically the Mayor’s problem is the Governors of Texas and Arizona are bussing folks to DC.

I understand the complaint, but at the same time, I don’t blame the Governors for doing what they are doing. They have said that immigrants aren’t welcome, and DC has taken the opposite approach by saying that it will be a “Sanctuary City”.

Inundate DC with as many immigrants until it’s such a problem for politicians that the bend (but don’t break) MO is done away with, and one decision has to be made before the Nations Capital becomes a squatters village, and politicians are sharing an Uber with immigrants.

So... instead of giving them a chance to contribute to the workforce and earn citizenship, you want to use them as pawns to fork with a Democratic city.

 

[el caliente]

So... instead of giving them a chance to contribute to the workforce and earn citizenship, you want to use them as pawns to fork with a Democratic city.

I would like both of those things to happen. They don’t need to be mutually exclusive.

 

[MT15]

I would like both of those things to happen. They don’t need to be mutually exclusive.

Well, they kinda do actually. Hard to work when you’re being bussed around the countryside.

 

[el caliente]

Well, they kinda do actually. Hard to work when you’re being bussed around the countryside.

I am aware that they work. I’m also aware that many of them pay into the systems which they will never benefit from (unless they are made citizens).

Adding Up the Billions in Tax Dollars Paid by Undocumented Immigrants

Undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollars each year in taxes. In spite of their undocumented status, these immigrants—and their family members—are adding value to the U.S. economy, not only as taxpayers, but as workers, consumers, and entrepreneurs as well.

www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

However the ones being bussed into DC aren’t the ones working, are they? These are the folks caught at the boarder who don’t have a job yet. They are in the perfect position for AZ and Texas to send them to DC. They haven’t had a chance to utilize those states resources, and they haven’t had a chance to get a job (so no disruption to workforce).

Those states don’t want them, so let the “Sanctuary” cities like DC have them. DC is a prime location to send them because the government has to recognize the “problem”. They have to act because it is no longer in someone else’s back yard. Texas and AZ are merely sharing the wealth (or in this case the immigrants) with DC.

In the end I am pro-amnesty. Our immigration system is a mess.

 

[SystemShock]

Typical GOP brilliance: catch illegal immigrants at the border, bus them deep into the U.S. way past any immigration check.

They could save some gas by busing them to a sanctuary State that's closer, like Florida.

 

[el caliente]

Typical GOP brilliance: catch illegal immigrants at the border, bus them deep into the U.S. way past any immigration check.

They could save some gas by busing them to a sanctuary State that's closer, like Florida.

They are actually giving these immigrants the option of DC or NYC.

Why send them to Florida though when Florida isn’t a “Sanctuary” state? As of early 2019, there are seven sanctuary states, according to the Center for Immigration Studies. Those states are: California, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, NM, Oregon, and VT.

Besides, sending them anywhere other than DC allows politicians to turn a blind eye to the problem (and the influx of immigrants is a problem). Sending them to DC puts those in power in an uncomfortable proximity to the problem, where they have to figure out the problem.

 

[SystemShock]

Why send them to Florida though when Florida isn’t a “Sanctuary” state?

It certainly is a haven for Cubans.

Sending caught illegal border crossers to DC, further into U.S. territory, is petty and stupid, but AZ and TX are going to AZ and TX.

As for DC politicians "turning a blind eye to the problem", how exactly are they turning a blind eye? What exactly is it that you want DC politicians to do: move TX to the Canadian border? And who are these "DC politicians" you are talking about?

 

[el caliente]

It certainly is a haven for Cubans.

Indeed Florida is a haven for Cubans, however the State hasn’t declared themselves a “Sanctuary” state, so adding more immigrants to the mix would become a bigger problem. Heck Long John Ron DeSantis has even banned “Sanctuary” cities in the state so that the problem doesn’t become a burden on their system.

That’s why they should be sent to DC. Rather than politicians like AOC or Harris going to the border and crying about the situation, have the situation go to their front door, and see if they can fix the issue.

 

[SystemShock]

Indeed Florida is a haven for Cubans, however the State hasn’t declared themselves a “Sanctuary” state,

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck... because they don' call themselves a "sactuary" State, doesn't mean they don't act like it.

Did you know that Florida is also a haven for money launderers?

That’s why they should be sent to DC. Rather than politicians like AOC or Harris going to the border and crying about the situation, have the situation go to their front door, and see if they can fix the issue.

Ah... so "DC politicians" is a euphemism for Alejandra Ocasio-Cortez and Kamala Harris. Of course...

So, again, what is it that you expect "DC politicians" to do? It is already illegal to cross the border, for whatever reason, without going through a process.

 

[el caliente]

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck... because they don' call themselves a "sactuary" State, doesn't mean they don't act like it.

Did you know that Florida is also a haven for money launderers?



Ah... so "DC politicians" is a euphemism for Alejandra Ocasio-Cortez and Kamala Harris. Of course...

So, again, what is it that you expect "DC politicians" to do? It is already illegal to cross the border, for whatever reason, without going through a process.

Walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, says it’s not a “sanctuary” state, so why send them there when other states/cities openly embrace being labeled “Sanctuary” states/cities.

If someone is traveling in to town and needs a place to stay, it’s more logical to send them to the home with ample space (and openly welcomes visitors) rather than to the home that says it doesn’t want any visitors.

As for AOC and Harris, they can be replaced with Kennedy and Cruz. All these politicians who have used the problem at the border as a major talking point to getting them elected should now actually do something to address the problem rather than just speak to the problem.

Pass a DREAM Act worth a damn. Give Amnesty like Reagan. Just do something other than the status quo because the status quo hasn’t solved any problems.

What does Mexico do with immigrants coming from Guatemala, El Salvador, etc.? Are they welcoming, and offer social services and amnesty?

 

[SystemShock]

Walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, says it’s not a “sanctuary” state,

... says the duck

so why send them there when other states/cities openly embrace being labeled “Sanctuary” states/cities.

What do you understand a "sanctuary city" to be?

If someone is traveling in to town and needs a place to stay, it’s more logical to send them to the home with ample space (and openly welcomes visitors) rather than to the home that says it doesn’t want any visitors.

Bad analogy.
TX and AZ have waaaaaay more space than DC. Illegal immigrants aren't tourists.

As for AOC and Harris, they can be replaced with Kennedy and Cruz.

Riiiiiiiight.

Pass a DREAM Act worth a damn. Give Amnesty like Reagan. Just do something other than the status quo because the status quo hasn’t solved any problems.

Give credit to Obama when credit is due. Thanks, Oh-Bama!!

What does Mexico do with immigrants coming from Guatemala, El Salvador, etc.? Are they welcoming, and offer social services and amnesty?

That depends.... right now it's a mess since Lopez Obrador forked things up because his "friend" Trump bamboozled him into enacting bad policy.

 

[el caliente]

... says the duck


What do you understand a "sanctuary city" to be?


Bad analogy.
TX and AZ have waaaaaay more space than DC. Illegal immigrants aren't tourists.

Riiiiiiiight.



Give credit to Obama when credit is due. Thanks, Oh-Bama!!


That depends.... right now it's a mess since Lopez Obrador forked things up because his "friend" Trump bamboozled him into enacting bad policy.

The duck is indeed saying that calling Florida a “Sanctuary” state is not accurate. The duck also provided the link with reference to what states are “Sanctuary” states, and what being a “Sanctuary” state/city means. So no, Florida is not a duck.

Obviously TX and AZ have more space than DC (I never said that they didn’t). I am saying those two places have said that they don’t want immigrants, and they will be stringent on their immigration laws. DC on the other hand is more accommodating of immigrants, so send the immigrants there.

What was Mexicos policy with immigrants before, and what is it now? Is Mexico rolling out the welcome wagons and offering up social services to these folks? Is the country in a rush to give these immigrants amnesty? Are the schools and other infrastructure not being taxed with unexpected users?

I am all about amnesty. Let the people have access to the systems that they pay into. Allow the census to report all citizens so social programs and such aren’t maxed out by unexpected users. Sadly, without these folks being on politician’s doorsteps it will never happen. No meaningful change will occur, but this will continue to be a problem for not just the states of Texas and Arizona, but for everyone else.

 

[SystemShock]

The duck is indeed saying that calling Florida a “Sanctuary” state is not accurate. The duck also provided the link with reference to what states are “Sanctuary” states, and what being a “Sanctuary” state/city means. So no, Florida is not a duck.

Which link is that?

Also, I asked you what you understood a sanctuary city to be. Because it looks like you don't understand what it is. A sanctuary city (or county, State, whatever) is not one that welcomes all illegal immigrants and throws social services and financial aid at them. A sanctuary city is one that limits assistance to immigration authorities in their pursue of undocumented/illegal aliens. The reason behind it is, again, not to throw social services and financial aid at them as soon as they hit land (like it was with Cubans), but rather, not cooperate with the immigration authorities in pursuing people who have been living the U.S. for years and are already a contributing part of the community they live in.

As for Florida, they are very much doing the same thing when it comes to Cubans.

Obviously TX and AZ have more space than DC (I never said that they didn’t).

You did say they were sending them to a place with more space.

I am saying those two places have said that they don’t want immigrants, and they will be stringent on their immigration laws.

I think you mean they don't want poor. brown/black immigrants.

DC on the other hand is more accommodating of immigrants, so send the immigrants there.

No, it isn't.

What was Mexicos policy with immigrants before, and what is it now? Is Mexico rolling out the welcome wagons and offering up social services to these folks? Is the country in a rush to give these immigrants amnesty? Are the schools and other infrastructure not being taxed with unexpected users?

I don't know what MX's policy has to do with anything. Like any other country, MX has policies in place for people who want to migrate to MX. However, MX is also in the situation that the overwhelming majority of people who cross the MX South border don't want to stay in MX; they just want to be allowed to cross MX to make it into the U.S. which creates a number of issues in many different ways.

I am all about amnesty. Let the people have access to the systems that they pay into. Allow the census to report all citizens so social programs and such aren’t maxed out by unexpected users. Sadly, without these folks being on politician’s doorsteps it will never happen. No meaningful change will occur, but this will continue to be a problem for not just the states of Texas and Arizona, but for everyone else.

That "maxed out social programs", much like the "open borders" rhetoric, is BS.

And those people being sent to DC are not at those politicians' doorsteps either, lest you think they shove them all inside the Capitol, or in the neighborhood politicians live; many of them don't even live in DC.

For the record, I am not all about amnesty. U.S. or MX, I want the borders tight and the law followed. But what AZ and TX are doing is childish, petty, stupid, and counterproductive... hint: they can go back to TX and AZ from DC.

 

[el caliente]

Which link is that?

Also, I asked you what you understood a sanctuary city to be. Because it looks like you don't understand what it is. A sanctuary city (or county, State, whatever) is not one that welcomes all illegal immigrants and throws social services and financial aid at them. A sanctuary city is one that limits assistance to immigration authorities in their pursue of undocumented/illegal aliens. The reason behind it is, again, not to throw social services and financial aid at them as soon as they hit land (like it was with Cubans), but rather, not cooperate with the immigration authorities in pursuing people who have been living the U.S. for years and are already a contributing part of the community they live in.

As for Florida, they are very much doing the same thing when it comes to Cubans.

You did say they were sending them to a place with more space.

I think you mean they don't want poor. brown/black immigrants.


No, it isn't.

I don't know what MX's policy has to do with anything. Like any other country, MX has policies in place for people who want to migrate to MX. However, MX is also in the situation that the overwhelming majority of people who cross the MX South border don't want to stay in MX; they just want to be allowed to cross MX to make it into the U.S. which creates a number of issues in many different ways.



That "maxed out social programs", much like the "open borders" rhetoric, is BS.

And those people being sent to DC are not at those politicians' doorsteps either, lest you think they shove them all inside the Capitol, or in the neighborhood politicians live; many of them don't even live in DC.

For the record, I am not all about amnesty. U.S. or MX, I want the borders tight and the law followed. But what AZ and TX are doing is childish, petty, stupid, and counterproductive... hint: they can go back to TX and AZ from DC.

My pardon, I thought that I had linked the “sanctuary” state reference in my post regarding which states are/aren’t “sanctuary” states.

Please see attached:

Sanctuary States 2022

If those cities/states want to limit assistance to immigration authorities (in pursuit of immigrants), then that’s fine, seems like a great place for Texas and AZ to send their immigrants. Seems like the kind of place immigrants would want to go.

Why should TX and AZ be obligated to let these people stay in their states? What obligation do they have to these people?

I see no harm in Texas and AZ spending a fraction of their resources sending folks to DC or NYC. Those places want to aid immigrants, AZ and Texas don’t. By aiding immigrants they are allowing these people to use up more of their social services.
You can pretend that immigrants don’t tax the social system, that’s fine.

But they do.

Fact Sheet: Immigrants and Public Benefits

Are undocumented immigrants eligible for federal public benefit programs? Generally no. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, sometimes...

immigrationforum.org

Add to this cities such as SF, NYC, and LA offer healthcare to undocumented immigrants, this is part of the social services that I am saying immigrants are draining from the system.

This shouldn’t be that hard for you to figure out. Send these people to places that will help them, rather than keep them where they are not welcome.

The reason I ask about Mexico is because having grown up with migrants from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, Mexico’s immigration system is stiffer than what we have here in the states. Perhaps the US should follow Mexicos lead when it comes to immigration policy (if it makes sense).

What are you hombres and mujeres doing south of the boarder that keeps people pushing their way to the boarder?

Also, why are you against Amnesty?

 

[SystemShock]

My pardon, I thought that I had linked the “sanctuary” state reference in my post regarding which states are/aren’t “sanctuary” states.

Looks like you don't understand the point. As simple as I can say it, Florida doesn't call itself a sanctuary State, but they do the same thing that sanctuary States do (albeit just for Cubans).

Reminds me of an acquaintance that swore he wasn't gay, because he was a top exclusively
.

If those cities/states want to limit assistance to immigration authorities (in pursuit of immigrants), then that’s fine, seems like a great place for Texas and AZ to send their immigrants. Seems like the kind of place immigrants would want to go.

The illegal immigrants that are caught at the border are going to be processed the exact same way anywhere, no matter where they are sent.

Why should TX and AZ be obligated to let these people stay in their states? What obligation do they have to these people?

Who is saying anything about letting people stay?

I see no harm in Texas and AZ spending a fraction of their resources sending folks to DC or NYC.

Of course you don't.

Those places want to aid immigrants, AZ and Texas don’t. By aiding immigrants they are allowing these people to use up more of their social services.

Yet again , those places are self-proclaimed sanctuaries because they don't aid in the prosecution of people who are already integrated in their communities.

You can pretend that immigrants don’t tax the social system, that’s fine.

But they do.

Fact Sheet: Immigrants and Public Benefits

Are undocumented immigrants eligible for federal public benefit programs? Generally no. Undocumented immigrants, including DACA holders, are ineligible to receive most federal public benefits, including means-tested benefits such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, sometimes...

immigrationforum.org

Did you actually read the article?

This shouldn’t be that hard for you to figure out. Send these people to places that will help them, rather than keep them where they are not welcome.

No, send them back.

And stop it with the benevolent BS. AZ and TX are sending caught illegal immigrants to DC to "protest Biden's open border policy". It is a political stunt, it is childish, petty, and stupid

The reason I ask about Mexico is because having grown up with migrants from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, Mexico’s immigration system is stiffer than what we have here in the states. Perhaps the US should follow Mexicos lead when it comes to immigration policy (if it makes sense).

Stiffer how? How would the people you grew up with in the U.S. would know? As kids, did y'all sat around discussing immigration policies?

What are you hombres and mujeres doing south of the boarder that keeps people pushing their way to the boarder?

That misspelling says something, and I don't get what you are getting at.

Also, why are you against Amnesty?

I said I am not all for amnesty, not against it.