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
    2,985
    Reaction score
    3,022
    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.
     
    Why does anyone think a person would confess not having legal immigrant status to someone at a hospital? What good are these stats, when they will just say no, I am not here illegally?
     
    If you mean that if there was no people, then sure, no people means no climate issues.

    The populations that are suffering the most from climate issues contribute the least to the causes of climate issues.

    Population is actually one of the smallest causes of climate issues. Burning fossil fuels is the single biggest cause and everything trails it by the length of a galaxy. Like it or not, accept it or not, the biggest cause of climate issues starts and ends with burning fossil fuels.
    And who burns fossil fuels?
     
    if all these illegals are voting like the right claims, wouldn't Texas be blue by now? lol
    In general, I'd say, if they would be allowed to vote, they'd probably vote Republican: religious, not keen on abortion, or LGBTQ+, and despite the protests that are televised, immigrants, especially those who do manual labor, don't like other immigrants; they are competition after all.
     
    60% Latino voters lean Democrat. less than 40 percent lean Republican.
    so i disagree.

    The first question that comes to mind is, says who?

    Then, you have to ask yourself the question: how would people who just crossed the border would vote? And not the people 2-3 generations in?

    And further, you'd have to determine who defines themselves as "latino".

    Yet again, "latino" is not a block, or a monolith.
     


    I don't think "waiving certain requirements" is the same as "waiving the vetting process".

    The 7M number (didn't see 9M), as far as I can tell, comes from this paragraph:
    Dos, in concurrence with OHS, waived in-person interviews for approximately 7.1 million applicants for nonimmigrant visas from FY 2020 through FY 2023.

    Not that I think waving certain requirements is right... I just really dislike FUD.
     
    And who burns fossil fuels?
    The wealthiest societies burn the vast majority of fossil fuels, and the poorest societies suffer the most from it. About 1/3 of the world's population burns the majority of fossil fuels, so even if you decreased global population by half, there would not be enough of a reduction in the burning of fossil fuels to stop the climate change caused by burning fossil fuels.

    Climate change is not because of overpopulation. It's because of shortsighted, unenlightened fear driven obsession with wealth and power hoarding. We could solve climate change if about 5% of the population would stop sabotaging efforts to solve climate change.
     
    The first question that comes to mind is, says who?

    Then, you have to ask yourself the question: how would people who just crossed the border would vote? And not the people 2-3 generations in?

    And further, you'd have to determine who defines themselves as "latino".

    Yet again, "latino" is not a block, or a monolith.
    all i said was if the illegals voted like the Republicans claimed they did on a massive scale, the state would be blue. people who just crossed the border don't vote. that's the whole point i was making.. maybe you should re read it . there are no polls showing Trump has majority of the latino vote. majority latino vote dem, that's fact
    I'm sorry you didn't like the word latino. do you group them all as Mexicans?
    you can use the word Hispanic, or whatever you prefer, but the results will be the same .
     
    The wealthiest societies burn the vast majority of fossil fuels, and the poorest societies suffer the most from it.

    Who burns it, to what extent, and for what purpose, that's a different discussion. The point is, what @Krodwhodat said is right, human population is the biggest cause of accelerated climate change, because human population burns fossil fuels.
     
    all i said was if the illegals voted like the Republicans claimed they did on a massive scale, the state would be blue. people who just crossed the border don't vote.
    Really, it can't be this hard...
    What I am saying is, if illegals could vote, they'd probably align more with Republicans because of religious reasons, anti-abortion views, and general dislike of LGBTQ.

    Illegals are illegal because they cross the border illegally, no?
    And if you are born here, then you are not illegal, no?

    that's the whole point i was making.. maybe you should re read it . there are no polls showing Trump has majority of the latino vote. majority latino vote dem, that's fact
    I'm sorry you didn't like the word latino. do you group them all as Mexicans?
    you can use the word Hispanic, or whatever you prefer, but the results will be the same .

    FFS.
     
    The point is...human population is the biggest cause of accelerated climate change, because human population burns fossil fuels.
    Do you want to depopulate the human population, do you want to phase out the burning fossil fuels, or do you want to keep burning fossil fuels which will lead to depopulation of the human population?

    You and Krod's argument is a lame "guns don't kill people, people kill people" fallacy that avoids and distracts from the actual inherent cause of climate change.

    Humans can populate the planet without burning fossil fuels.

    Fossil fuels cannot be burned without causing climate change that threatens the survival of humans and other living things.

    It sounds like you and Krod think we should start killing 100's of millions of people or letting 100's of millions of people die, because that's the only logical solution to what the two of you claim is the real problem.
     
    Really, it can't be this hard...
    What I am saying is, if illegals could vote, they'd probably align more with Republicans because of religious reasons, anti-abortion views, and general dislike of LGBTQ.

    Illegals are illegal because they cross the border illegally, no?
    And if you are born here, then you are not illegal, no?



    FFS.
    but they don't. the polls say otherwise. have you looked it up?
     
    60% Latino voters lean Democrat. less than 40 percent lean Republican.
    so i disagree.
    Yep. The attached shows affiliation. There are substantial unaffiliated, but if half of the unaffiliated in each state go with each party, they don't get to 50% in any state.


    It seems Arizona is the only state where they get close at about 46%.
     

    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.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom