Immigration is completely out of control (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SystemShock

    Uh yu ka t'ann
    Joined
    May 17, 2019
    Messages
    2,760
    Reaction score
    2,724
    Location
    Xibalba
    Offline
    A couple of days ago, one of the main US-MX border points of entry was blocked by 1000's of migrants demanding entry into the country, which caused chaos for those who lawfully cross the border on business, for work, or for delivery of goods, both ways.

    Lawful border crossings are getting progressively worse across the border, and drug cartels are finding it easier to move product, as the CBP has to transfer personnel and efforts to the processing of migrants.

    It's not different on MX's South border. Yesterday, ~5000 migrants stormed into Chiapas all the way to the INM building (INM is immigration) running over fences, barricades, and elements of the National Guard. They are now taking over an ecological park in Tapachula, Chiapas, which it's going to be severely affected, as it's been the case with just about everywhere migrants squat.

    Unfortunately, Juan Trump (that's Donald Trump's pet name for the President of México) was bamboozled by his "friend" Donald into making MX a "lobby" for migrants trying to reach the U.S.

    Many people would argue that migrants are "good for the economy", but that is not always the case. Billions of dollars leave the U.S. economy every year, because migrants send money from the U.S. to other countries to support families there. The biggest destinations are India and MX, to the tune of 100 billion dollars in 2023 alone, according to the Bank of México (kind of like the MX version of the Fed). These billions of dollars do not circulate in the U.S. economy.

    Speaking of inflation, the past year, the U.S. dollar has lost ~20% of its value against the MX peso. One of the main reasons for it, is the amount of money being sent to MX from the U.S. And MX is the U.S. 2nd largest trading partner.

    Gregg Abbott is a lot of things, but I don't blame him for his attempts at curbing the hordes of people demanding entry into the U.S., even the busing of migrants to other States, making some put their money where their mouth is, like the Mayor of NYC, who was so welcoming of migrants, until he he got a taste, then went crying to the federal government for more money, while the shelters were at full capacity; shelters which BTW serve the NYC poor as well.

    And please, no one mention a wall. There is a wall. A wall can be climbed; a wall can be dug under.; holes can be punched through walls.
     
    Your projection use to frustrate me, now it has just become comical. You will literally believe whatever your party tells you and then when it is proven to be wrong (we could name a few) you act like it never happened and then just project on the Rep.

    Granted, most of the time the Rep are too blame as well since they are really just working for the same people and for the same money.
    No matter what she toes the Democrat Party line.
     
    So, it can be done as long as the burden of proof is met? You all just told me that it was impossible because it was against the law? Sounds like it can be done if the burden of proof is met that immigration is detrimental to the US.

    Good luck. I've got my popcorn ready. lol
     
    You referring to H.R.2? The bill without a single democrat co-sponsor? Were democrats even invited to participate in the creation of that? The democrats in the Senate worked with Republicans to craft a bill that gave both sides things that they wanted. THAT is how you get legislation done. Why won't the republicans in the House do the same.
    Jim said the Republicans haven't taken immigration seriously and I pointed out they had already passed a bill. I'm not sure why they didn't work with Democrats in the House on the bill.

    It's funny that you would reference the Senate bill as how you get things done. That bill was such a disaster that as soon as the details were made public even the establishment's favorite Republican Senator withdrew his support in McConnell

    That bill was negotiated with establishment Republicans who represent the money machine and the military industrial complex. They don't represent what their voters want and that was shown to be the case by the Senate bill failing immediately.

    Can you point out the part of the senate border bill that grants amnesty to all illegal immigrants?
    I said that's the Democrats endgame for Immigration. I'm aware that's not in the bill. The Senate bill was a smokescreen for more money for wars to try to make the public think they care about the US border.
    Really? And what happened? Republicans negotiated with them a bill that gave republicans much of what they wanted, and gave the democrats the Ukraine aide they wanted, and then after the Golden Cow told them not to pass it, they voted against the bill that they negotiated....and then turned around, and advanced a stand-alone Ukraine aid bill. So, the Senate is likely to pass a stand-alone Ukraine aid bill, and the republicans get none of the border stuff they wanted in return, because of Trump being unwilling to let them have something to campaign on. It will be interesting to see if any of the republicans who refused to pass this bill that THEY negotiated because of Trump end up losing their seats. It would be karma for them to give up something that they could campaign on, something that the republicans love to scream about, and end up losing their jobs because of it.
    It was clear that as soon as the details were public that the bill didn't meet what voters wanted. It's all about Ukraine and feeding the military industrial complex and also helping Isreal which is killing Biden politically.
     
    Jim said the Republicans haven't taken immigration seriously and I pointed out they had already passed a bill. I'm not sure why they didn't work with Democrats in the House on the bill.

    Oh, you know why. Because doing that would have meant having to give up some concessions, which they weren't willing to do.

    It's funny that you would reference the Senate bill as how you get things done. That bill was such a disaster that as soon as the details were made public even the establishment's favorite Republican Senator withdrew his support in McConnell

    Please tell me that isn't what you ACTUALLY believe. McConnell was in full support of it long after the details were made public (you don't really believe that McConnell didn't know what was in the bill until it was released to the public, do you?), and only changed his tune once Trump came out and told them not to pass it. He LITERALLY said in a meeting that they couldn't advance the bill because "the candidate" wanted to run on immigration.

    I said that's the Democrats endgame for Immigration. I'm aware that's not in the bill. The Senate bill was a smokescreen for more money for wars to try to make the public think they care about the US border.

    Ok, so that isn't really relevant at all to the discussion of this bill, is it?

    It was clear that as soon as the details were public that the bill didn't meet what voters wanted. It's all about Ukraine and feeding the military industrial complex and also helping Isreal which is killing Biden politically.

    The public? The people who don't even know what is actually in the bill, and who are only going on what they were told by their leaders? How long would I have to search to find someone complaining that the bill allows 5,000 people a day to run free into our country before the government does anything?
     
    The same thing is happening all over the world and years of mishandling and medling by first world powers and made worse by climate change, have lead to the current situation. You see it with african and middle eastern refugees in Europe and central and south american refugees in the US. Even Australia and India/Korea is seeing an influx of refugees.

    This situation IS going to get worse in the years to come. When people cant feed their children or is faced by threats due to war or drought/heat then they will try to survive by leaving and trying to find a safe place for their families. This is only the beginning of a much larger migration wave we will see during the next 10-20 years. Building walls won't solve that - desperate people will resort to desperate solutions.

    No single nation can solve this. More than a billion people are living in areas that potentially will be unliveable in 30 years. Where should they go?

    Can't speak for Africa, but Mexico, C.A., and S.A. countries fork things up very well on their own. Blaming 1st world countries is a cope out, it's white guilt.

    Mexico gained its independence from Spain over 2 centuries ago. In those 2 centuries, Mexico has managed to lose half its territory and systematically squander its natural resources (everyone of the biggies expropriated) amid greed and corruption. It's now a tradition that ex-presidents move to countries without extradition. Heck, Mexicans are supposed to be the people of the corn, and it has to be exported.

    And to make things even more fun, the current president and his MORENA party are setting up the country for a possible military dictatorship. The 2024 elections will be lots of fun for me, on 2 fronts.

    You'll find similar stories all over C.A. and S.A.
     
    Last edited:
    I think issues like this need to be quantified better for people like me. I tend to be strongly pro-immigration overall. I think having different people enter our country assimilate with core American values but adding their own cultural spin on things makes things better for us. It's also good economics especially with our own declining birth rate... those are my inherent biases.

    I also am sensitive to nativist movements in the US that are fed by racist narratives and I reflexively push back against anything that gives of that feel. Rhetoric like "spoiling the blood of our nation" is repulsive to me and my natural instinct is to act contrary to that.

    However, I can also accept that logically there's some limit that we can logistically handle well. That if you get too many people immigrating it puts a strain on local resources. And that part of the assimilation process itself requires immigrant communities to interact and mingle with the existing population and not remain insular, which if you have a large movement becomes easier and easier -- it's a balance between keeping cultural identity and adopting norms and traditions of the new home and there's probably some number where that tilts to strongly away.

    So to me it comes down to numbers and dollars, and long term solutions. I don't need a firm number like we can accept X number of refugees per year.... but I do need some sort of indicator that our infrastructure is being strained. So my question would be what are those indicators, and what are the thresholds.

    And I will say that this is also very much a free market issue, in that there's supply and demand. There is a demand for cheap labor especially with unemployment under 4%. And there's a supply problem with many people feeling like their home country is so bad that they're willing to risk everything to come to the US. So, the answer would need to include controlling demand and within reason controlling supply (the US has a poor record in making things better for foreign nations, so not sure if there's a good answer here).

    What do you consider core American values? I have to tell you: a lot of people who want to enter the U.S. resent white people in the U.S. They want the benefits, with none of the white.

    Supply and demand: there are companies that specialize in bringing labor from MX. That's all legal, involving H-2A and H-2B visas, taxes are paid, everything is good... but the people who enter the country illegally, they are mostly part of the informal economy.
     
    Last edited:
    if it's such a crisis, trump and the republicans shouldn't have killed that bill.

    The only reason why they killed that bill was because trump wants the issue to campaign on, republicans don't want Biden to get the credit for fixing the border and they don't want to cause Biden's poll numbers to go up.

    Republican senator Lankford was threatened by a far right commentator that he would be destroyed if he kept working on that bill or got it passed.

    This is just more garbage by republicans. If they honestly wanted to do something about the border they wouldn't have put trump first and killed the bill.

    Republicans have bought into the garbage hook, line and sinker.
    I guess you can't forget about Republicans for even a second.
     
    You know what's funny? Many uber-liberals want to leave the U.S. , and some actually do, because of what's happening in the country, but want immigrants to come here. Go figure.
     
    Can't speak for Africa, but Mexico, C.A., and S.A. countries fork things up very well on their own. Blaming 1st world countries is a cope out, it's white guilt.

    Mexico gained its independence from Spain over 2 centuries ago. In those 2 centuries, Mexico has managed to lose half its territory and systematically squander its natural resources (everyone of the biggies expropriated) amid greed and corruption. It's now a tradition that ex-presidents move to countries without extradition. Heck, Mexicans are supposed to be the people of the corn, and it has to be exported.

    And to make things even more fun, the current president and his MORENA party are setting up the country for a possible military dictatorship. The 2024 elections will be lots of fun for me, on 2 fronts.

    You'll find similar stories all over C.A. and S.A.


    No it is not. It is a known fact that mercenaries has been a part of several coups in south and central America during the last 80 years. Just like the Wagner group has been i Africa.

    Big multinational companies have hired their own people to ensure access to ressources and prevent unwanted legislation - by violent means if necessary if the powers in those countries could not be bought. It is very much a 2 sided thing. If not for the money - and in some cases actual millitary help aka "advisors" paid by those who want to "protect their interests" - many dictators would never have been able to gain power and more actual democracies may have survived,.
     
    No it is not. It is a known fact that mercenaries has been a part of several coups in south and central America during the last 80 years. Just like the Wagner group has been i Africa.
    Which coups in Central and South America, and which mercenary groups?

    Big multinational companies have hired their own people to ensure access to ressources and prevent unwanted legislation - by violent means if necessary if the powers in those countries could not be bought. It is very much a 2 sided thing. If not for the money - and in some cases actual millitary help aka "advisors" paid by those who want to "protect their interests" - many dictators would never have been able to gain power and more actual democracies may have survived,.
    Which big multinational companies, where?
     
    Which coups in Central and South America, and which mercenary groups?


    Which big multinational companies, where?
    Salvador Allende - Chile for one..

    On 11 September 1973, the military moved to oust Allende in a coup d'état supported by the CIA, which initially denied the allegations.[13][14] In 2000, the CIA admitted its role in the 1970 kidnapping of General René Schneider who had refused to use the army to stop Allende's inauguration.[15][16] Declassified documents released in 2023 showed that US president Richard Nixon, his national security advisor Henry Kissinger, and the United States government, which had branded Allende as a dangerous communist,[8] were aware of the military's plans to overthrow Allende's democratically-elected government in the days before the coup d'état.[17]

    The Guatemala civil war in which mercenaries employed by the American United Fruit Company had a prominent role


    Another CIA operation...
    In May 1961, the ruler of the Dominican Republic, right-wing dictator Rafael Trujillo, was murdered with weapons supplied by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).[32][33] An internal CIA memorandum states that a 1973 Office of Inspector General investigation into the murder disclosed "quite extensive Agency involvement with the plotters"


    I am sure that I can easily find plenty more examples. Most have become public knowledge after the information was declasified after a certain number of years
     
    Last edited:
    Oh, you know why. Because doing that would have meant having to give up some concessions, which they weren't willing to do.
    Possibly or the Democrats were only willing to comprise with the establishment Republicans in the Senate than the House Republicans. Those establishment Republicans in the Senate represent the deep state and not what their constituents want.
    Please tell me that isn't what you ACTUALLY believe. McConnell was in full support of it long after the details were made public (you don't really believe that McConnell didn't know what was in the bill until it was released to the public, do you?), and only changed his tune once Trump came out and told them not to pass it. He LITERALLY said in a meeting that they couldn't advance the bill because "the candidate" wanted to run on immigration.
    McConnell is an establishment Republican. Of course he knew what was in the bill, but the public reaction and Trump’s immediately killed the bill.

    The detail of the bill show what a joke it was. One example is that they made it to only the swampy DC courts would be adjudicating any disputes cutting out the normal processes.
    Ok, so that isn't really relevant at all to the discussion of this bill, is it?



    The public? The people who don't even know what is actually in the bill, and who are only going on what they were told by their leaders? How long would I have to search to find someone complaining that the bill allows 5,000 people a day to run free into our country before the government does anything?
    It's easy to find details of the bill.
     



    Rest of the post:

    -changed ICE priorities on who they can remove
    - said during campaign we should “surge the border with asylum seekers - they should come!”
    - His DHS Secretary has taken the position that just being in the U.S. illegally is not grounds for removal.
    - Mass catch and release on a scale the country has never seen.
    - Miniscule amounts of deportations - not following current Title 8 laws on the books. Little to no consequences for illegally crossing.
     
    I don’t think he is telling the truth. Can you back up his claims?

    I mean, his very first statement is a red flag. He mentions that Biden ended the national emergency declaration without mentioning that it was due to the pandemic, and it was ended when pandemic precautions ended. And Biden drug his feet about ending it, doing so well after almost every other pandemic precaution had been ended.
     
    I don’t think he is telling the truth. Can you back up his claims?
    Your new message board tactic. Make a vague claim and then ask me to prove it's wrong.

    If you think what he said isn't accurate then show how. Otherwise I'll assume you're full of shirt.

    I mean, his very first statement is a red flag. He mentions that Biden ended the national emergency declaration without mentioning that it was due to the pandemic, and it was ended when pandemic precautions ended. And Biden drug his feet about ending it, doing so well after almost every other pandemic precaution had been ended.
    Um it's a fact that Biden did that and it did cause more people to get into the country. He didn't get into the reason why Biden did it. That was in response to Biden claiming:

    “The only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican friends.”
     
    Make a vague claim and then ask me to prove it's wrong.
    What a weak response. You posted the claims, with zero proof. You either can back up your claims or you cannot. Obviously, you cannot. You are the one swimming in the brown stuff not me.
     
    Um it's a fact that Biden did that and it did cause more people to get into the country
    No, that isn’t a fact at all. Prove that more people came into the country after the emergency state was lifted.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom