Jump to content
If you posted something on 21 Feb 21, it likely didn't stick during the server migration. -DFRESH ×

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Waingro said:

I think it's a good idea. Since you asked, here's how.

The federal government can do more than one thing at a time. Securing our southern border should be a priority. A physical barrier (like Trump's wall) sometimes makes sense, in other places it makes no sense. Security is a layered process, whether it's your house, the vault at work, or the border. There's room to improve for sure, but as it is now, border crossings have declined 76 percent from 2000 to 2018. So I wouldn't say ceasing all policy actions for illegal immigrants, until we get the border fully secured, would be a good course of action. That also discounts the fact that 44% of illegal immigrants arrived here legally, but overstayed their visa. In short, the wall is largely a boogeyman, leveraged by Tucker Carlson to whip up fear.

This proposed legislation is an eight-year path. Four for DACA recipients. That sounds very reasonable to me. I'd absolutely want to grant citizenship for those who are willing to work hard and color within the lines for eight years.

FDNYOldGuy and nsplayr have compelling arguments for this as well.

No offense, but no... the Federal government can't. If we announce tomorrow that all illegal immigrants in the US will be given citizenship in 3-4 months, does that increase or decrease the incentive for people to enter the country illegally?

It would increase it exponentially. With an already porous border system, you're going to add more folks who weren't here otherwise, but figure "why the hell shouldn't I try?" You really think Border Patrol is equipped/prepared for that? Also, do you think the incoming Administration has the guts to turn away anyone who is caught coming across in that timeframe?

As for the 44% number, that's from the Center for Migration Studies of New York's study. It could be valid, but it's using DHS data calculated from the ACS survey that only asks 2 million households. We could have asked the entire population during this year's Census, but as we're all aware, Democrats objected to including that question.

I'm against all illegal immigrants, overstays or those that cross the border.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As entertaining as this thread is, the casual suggestions jokingly thrown about where we just simply start killing illegal border crossers doesn't seem so joking and casual when it comes up like 10 di

You mean Democrat voting surge?

Moose, the weapon in question is DA/SA and the defense argued that it was stolen while in SA mode and the light trigger pull of 4.4 lbs contributed to the gun “accidentally discharging.”  Anytime the

Posted Images

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

LMK if you want to actually read the book itself & discuss!

I disagree with that characterization and in fact think the opposite is true; China and India are trying desperately to become richer & more like Western nations in terms of per capita income and purchasing power, and the entire point of Yglesias' book is that if/when that happens, America will inevitably decline in importance unless we get significantly richer (very hard to do), or significantly bigger (easier than you might imagine).

I would very much like America to remain the #1 nation in the world for the rest of my lifetime and ideally for my daughter's entire lifetime as well. After that, I'll have long been made dust again, so GL to everyone who remains haha!

A world order where China is on top will not be as good, especially for us as Americans. A nativist, small-minded, bunker mentality of closing America and stagnating ain't gonna keep us #1 IMHO because China et al will very likely continue to grow and get richer and honestly that's a good thing. Ending dire poverty around the world is good. But, let's allow them to do so while still keeping our relative power and let's do it through something both conservatives and liberals used to agree on - growth.

Totally valid shot and putting the book in the Audible queue to be able to respond with comments based on reading the source material.

My first impression from reading the reviews (from mostly conservative / nationalist leaning sites acknowledged) and the limited wiki entry on it is that it shows the position from the Left / Administrative-Planners that people are interchangeable widgets you just plug and play into societies and thru the magic of our ideals / values it will all work out.

Not true, look at major European cities now and you see what mass uncontrolled migration into advanced economies that don't need large amounts of unskilled labor.

Tents Cities on the streets of Paris and gangs of fighting age males formed in major cities 

From Paris

39CF3C7500000578-3882218-image-a-57_1477

Chechen gangs:

Inside brutal Chechen drug wars where ‘maniac’ gangs barbecue rivals and terrorise streets with Kalashnikovs – The Sun

Just opening your doors to the world is not a solution, there has to be a place for them to go into our economies, our societies and a destination culture that while accommodating does not bend itself to meet the new arrivals but allows them to bend to fit in with us, of late too many in our society want the opposite, that's a recipe for balkanization and increasing division.

Putting aside the other arguments against Yglesias' idea, the vast majority of these people arrive with skills that qualify them for positions (manual labor, food processing, farm labor, etc...) in industries very soon to be automated

Reference this Boston Robotics model:

As quickly as physical media disappeared in the realm of music, movies, books, etc... human labor is about to do so in multiple industries.  Bringing people in who are likely to become unemployable in the next 15-20 years is not a wise long term move.  

Edited by Clark Griswold
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Clark. Immigrants bring much more than their labor. They bring their norms, cultures, and values, and some of these may be directly at odds with what America currently values. Might be good, might be bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Prozac said:

Really dude? I hear a lot of people with sentiment like this lately. If you think China has surpassed us in anything, or that we are a corrupt as Brazil or as frozen by bureaucracy as India, you’ve obviously never travelled. Is China a potential threat to be taken seriously? Absolutely. But they still have a hard time landing airplanes with less than 15 miles of spacing in Shanghai. They need the Germans to engineer their civil projects and the Russians to build anything approaching a reliable jet engine. And while the CCP has largely consolidated power lately, there are growing cracks in their political system as newly wealthy citizens begin to question stagnant growth and a questionable monetary policy. There’s a reason anyone with money in China is snapping up real estate in North America. So, no, China is nowhere close to being the leader of the world order. Stop with the “let’s just throw in the towel now” attitude. You sound like a shill for the CCP. 

When did I say anything about corruption?  And traveling makes you an geopolitical expert on...nothing, of course.  

Anyway....I just watched the best country on earth elect a “dude” that can’t finish a thought verbally without inventing a new word or being a walking advertisement for dementia.  So you see, my quip was more in tune to our state of woke affairs.  Not theirs.
 

Yeah, too late, Dude. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The challenge isn't just limited to labor issues, but social ones as well, and the social issues often lead to discrimination/racism against the immigrants.

We've seen discrimination/racism pretty much every time there was an influx of immigrants. Chinese, Italians, Irish, Jews, Muslims, Mexicans, Hispanics to make a few, all faced racism/discrimination, even if they were here legally. Those international districts in cities aren't just there because that group wanted to be together, but often had to for mutual support to make a living due to housing or job discrimination.

And that doesn't even touch the history of slavery and people of african descent in our country.

Many times our government just looked the other way (or even participated in the discrimination) until it was forced to address the issue, or another, more hated/feared group started coming in that took on the brunt of discrimination (hey, let's throw the Japanese in internment camps, but those Germans and Italians are okay...)

Say what you want up the whole woke movement, but there are racial issues that have been simmering on the back burner for a while that need addressing, but it's nothing really new in our country's history, just new labels and terms, and perhaps more exposure given the internet which makes it harder to ignore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Plus15 said:

When did I say anything about corruption?  And traveling makes you an geopolitical expert on...nothing, of course.  

Anyway....I just watched the best country on earth elect a “dude” that can’t finish a thought verbally without inventing a new word or being a walking advertisement for dementia.  So you see, my quip was more in tune to our state of woke affairs.  Not theirs.
 

Yeah, too late, Dude. 

The republic has hit rock bottom because you have to live under a (gasp) democratic administration for the next four years? Yep, you’re right. It’s definitely the end of the United States as we know it. Better get out while you can.....dude. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been reading/following/studying a lot of the migration crises in Europe lately due to my job and it's interesting to me in some of the slightly different ways they frame the problem. 

One thing they often do not discuss in the US that I've seen discussed here is the consequences on the country migrants are coming from when they leave. In short, the people that take the risk to migrate are often more affluent in society, else they wouldn't have the means to attempt the journey, even though they often lose their wealth in doing so. These people are often skilled in their crafts and when they leave a country, it further accelerates that societies collapse. Generally, the societies best problem solvers are bailing on it before the problems are solved. The impending collapse accelerates the migration and it reciprocates until a state collapse is imminent, creating a massive humanitarian crises for those who can't leave, and often a security crises for everyone else. 

Much of the literature floating the EU now, predicates that any refugee admittance programs should be based on the connotation that there is a plan to eventually return the refugee to their home country, so as to prevent that collapse. This often means negotiating with despised governments/terrorists/etc... To ensure their security. 

It also begs the question, is accepting economic refugees in the US the best thing we can actually do for these people? Or would taking a better interest in our southern neighbors with economic aid and humanitarian assistance go further? How many of these people WANT to be an American and how many just want to live in an afluent society, but really don't desire to leave home? There's a subtle difference there. Being an American should be about internalizing our values/morals/beliefs/etc... Not just about living our lifestyle/having money/property/cars/etc....

If migrants are only really interested in the latter than it's possibly better we adjust our strategy to one that is focused on garnering security in Central and South America. That may mean working with dictators. But that may be for the greater good. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

No offense, but no... the Federal government can't. If we announce tomorrow that all illegal immigrants in the US will be given citizenship in 3-4 months, does that increase or decrease the incentive for people to enter the country illegally?

It would increase it exponentially. With an already porous border system, you're going to add more folks who weren't here otherwise, but figure "why the hell shouldn't I try?" You really think Border Patrol is equipped/prepared for that? Also, do you think the incoming Administration has the guts to turn away anyone who is caught coming across in that timeframe?

As for the 44% number, that's from the Center for Migration Studies of New York's study. It could be valid, but it's using DHS data calculated from the ACS survey that only asks 2 million households. We could have asked the entire population during this year's Census, but as we're all aware, Democrats objected to including that question.

I'm against all illegal immigrants, overstays or those that cross the border.

 

Again...there are multiple other legalization options between "deport them all" and "make everyone a citizen".

They can even be tailored to circumstance.  You don't have to give the dude who crossed the Rio Grande yesterday the same deal as the Dreamer brought over when they were six months old.

Quote

One thing they often do not discuss in the US that I've seen discussed here is the consequences on the country migrants are coming from when they leave. In short, the people that take the risk to migrate are often more affluent in society, else they wouldn't have the means to attempt the journey, even though they often lose their wealth in doing so. These people are often skilled in their crafts and when they leave a country, it further accelerates that societies collapse. Generally, the societies best problem solvers are bailing on it before the problems are solved. The impending collapse accelerates the migration and it reciprocates until a state collapse is imminent, creating a massive humanitarian crises for those who can't leave, and often a security crises for everyone else. 

If this is the case...should we be encouraging as much immigration as possible from China?

Edited by pawnman
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, Kiloalpha said:

In my hometown, there were plenty of entry-level jobs that high school kids and local folks just couldn't get because they were hiring illegals for way less. They cratered the local construction industry, putting all of the skilled craftsmen out of a job.

So, to me, this is two of us looking at the same problem and seeing different causes/solutions. Even more so, it's like a balloon; when you squeeze one point, it causes problems in another.

Sure, illegal immigration allows for cheaper labor and, potentially, the situation could be changed if you stopped illegal labor (although, honestly, I don't think that's truly possible, but for the sake of argument...), so you see the illegals as the issue. I see this as a more inherent flaw of free market/unfettered capitalism.

Those high school kids/local folks value their work at a higher rate than the market is paying, so they won't take the jobs for what they're willing to pay. More so, you have BUSINESS OWNERS that are choosing to hire that lower labor (because it means higher profits to them because they don't pay taxes/benefits/vacation/etc.), as well as END CONSUMERS that are voting with their wallets to only pay for that lower labor because it costs less, so it's the free market working as it's "intended." If the high schooler's/craftsman's skills were that badly needed, they'd be the go-to. The illegals that come here and work off the books, longer hours for lower wages without any labor protections, are willing to work "harder" than the high school kids and locals, and are being rewarded for it by consumer dollars paying them over higher priced options.

The situation could be fixed by cutting immigration, or it could be fixed by requiring business owners stricter adherence to labor laws, paying higher wages, and by the end consumers voting with their wallets to pay for "All American" legal labor. 

On 1/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, Kiloalpha said:

Not to mention a study from the state found that ER costs would drop by nearly half in my hometown if they didn't have to recoup costs for illegal immigrants who use it as a doctor's office and never pay.

Again, like above, we see the same problem but have different opinions on how to fix it. I think this is a more a problem with our healthcare system than with a sick or injured person being at fault because they need medical care. ERs MUST, by law, see every patient that comes in. If an illegal doesn't have an SSN, then they can't be traced to pay the bill. But, if universal healthcare was a thing, then chances are a lot of those ER visits would be doctor's office visits and not be such a costly burden on the system. Obviously, there are more pieces to this argument, but I'll keep it short for brevity's sake.

On 1/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, Kiloalpha said:

My great-grandfather saved up for years to afford to come to the US by himself... where he worked his ass off to apply for citizenship for his wife and kids. He didn't send his pregnant wife into the US, or down to Mexico where she waddled across to have a kid in the US, thus granting him citizenship in the process. He paid for it in sweat and blood.

Same for my ancestors. While I'm certain instances like the pregnant lady coming over just to have the anchor baby do happen and there are folks working the system, I think a lot of it is also the "boogeyman" narrative that is played hard by anti-immigration folks. A lion's share of the immigrants are exactly what you (and most of us) hope to have: Law abiding people that want to come here to work hard, be an integral part of society, and be a part of the American Dream to give their kids a better life than they've had. Are there some that ruin that picture? Hell yeah. But, that's human nature and any group of people (immigrants, men, women, right, left, up, down, and even the damn Air Force) are no different. Do we all know pilots/coworkers/leaders/men/women/whatever that shouldn't be flying/are terrible leaders/are terrible people/etc. and give the rest of us a bad name? I've been in the AF for a cup of coffee in time, but I can say I see that. Just as I see it in the FD. It's life.

I just hate to shut the door to everyone because there are some people that are going to take advantage. We don't get to choose who we pop out of and where, so not everyone is fortunate enough to be born in the status of life/country/situation that they wish to live in. A vast majority of immigrants I've run into in my life, legal or not, just want to have a better life for their children and will do what they can to make that happen. As a parent, I can't blame them. 

On 1/17/2021 at 1:22 PM, Kiloalpha said:

Bottom line, we need eVerify mandated and enforced nationwide. We need a consistent and broad guest worker program. We need strong border security. We need a reformed and accessible legal immigration system that allows people the ability to gain citizenship.

Agreed. We might not fully agree in the details or the exact way to go about it, but at least we're discussing it like civil adults. We need some more of that in this country right now.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a three building roofing job finished a few weeks ago by a crew from Acapulco of all places..in the northern tier...They were using some safety equipment and were paid OK..Two others I watched were OSHA nightmares...peaked roof, no safety, 30 feet down.  The interesting one ..no safety balanced half way across an aluminum extension ladder, at least 30 ft up.  They get the jobs by working cheap, working hard and long and blowing off safety and taxes.  The PROBLEM is that no locals will DO roofing.  The trades up here are screaming for help.  Does it come from south of the border or not?  There has to be a way to finesse this besides building some dumbo barrier... Meanwhile my cousins tell me the streets of Cali are filled with homeless...When you have the rich next to the dirt poor these things will happen..  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Alpharatz said:

I had a three building roofing job finished a few weeks ago by a crew from Acapulco of all places..in the northern tier...They were using some safety equipment and were paid OK..Two others I watched were OSHA nightmares...peaked roof, no safety, 30 feet down.  The interesting one ..no safety balanced half way across an aluminum extension ladder, at least 30 ft up.  They get the jobs by working cheap, working hard and long and blowing off safety and taxes.  The PROBLEM is that no locals will DO roofing.  The trades up here are screaming for help.  Does it come from south of the border or not?  There has to be a way to finesse this besides building some dumbo barrier... Meanwhile my cousins tell me the streets of Cali are filled with homeless...When you have the rich next to the dirt poor these things will happen..  

The problem isn't noone will do it. The problem is noone will do it for what Americans have been accustomed to paying, or as.you eluded.to, without the protections and safety a US worksite garuntees. We devalued our own labor for these skills. If you offered a dude 6 figures to build roofs I'm sure you'd elicit all types of volunteers. Instead we want that for less than half.

As you mentioned this ties into the cultural problem we created by devaluing skilled trades as well. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pawnman said:

Again...there are multiple other legalization options between "deport them all" and "make everyone a citizen".

They can even be tailored to circumstance.  You don't have to give the dude who crossed the Rio Grande yesterday the same deal as the Dreamer brought over when they were six months old.

If this is the case...should we be encouraging as much immigration as possible from China?

I mean, I'm pretty sure you don't mean this, but no, a collapsed China would not benefit us. Encouraging top Chinese talent to leave at a controlled pace would though. You could probably make a case study on what the effects of operation paperclip created on East Germany after WW2 and get a rough idea. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2021 at 1:31 PM, Clark Griswold said:

Totally valid shot and putting the book in the Audible queue to be able to respond with comments based on reading the source material.

Just so you know, MattY has a face for radio and a voice for print if ya know what I mean. He's incredibly annoying to listen to IMHO even though he's a successful podcast host (The Weeds), so try not to be turned off if you listen to the book on Audible haha...I know I would be! I like his work but I literally hate his voice.

On 1/17/2021 at 1:31 PM, Clark Griswold said:

My first impression from reading the reviews (from mostly conservative / nationalist leaning sites acknowledged) and the limited wiki entry on it is that it shows the position from the Left / Administrative-Planners that people are interchangeable widgets you just plug and play into societies and thru the magic of our ideals / values it will all work out.

Just opening your doors to the world is not a solution, there has to be a place for them to go into our economies, our societies and a destination culture that while accommodating does not bend itself to meet the new arrivals but allows them to bend to fit in with us, of late too many in our society want the opposite, that's a recipe for balkanization and increasing division.

I'm not sure that characterization is fair but making sure folks are integrated is an important aspect of successful immigration. Luckily the USA is pretty uniquely great at that! We're a creed-based nation with barely any truly "native" population and we're already a successful multiracial, multi-ethnic democracy despite some bumps along the way. All of that is not true of China, India, Russia, or even most European countries.

I genuinely believe that I, as a European-American with some recent immigrant roots on one side as well as some pretty lengthy American heritage on the other, am no more "American" than the Chinese/Ethiopian/Russian/South African/etc. person who's relatively right off the boat, living here and working hard. That's part of what makes America great and it can be a huge strength if we would just be more up front about embracing it.

On 1/17/2021 at 1:31 PM, Clark Griswold said:

Bringing people in who are likely to become unemployable in the next 15-20 years is not a wise long term move.  

I guess I just don't share the Luddite view that technology will destroy all human labor or the need for human labor. Just like all technologies in the past, new technologies will supplant some jobs while creating others and very likely making us all richer, live longer, and prosper more at the same time. The idea that immigrants are uniquely vulnerable to this centuries-long phenomenon is also spurious at best.

FWIW, this is an even more impressive Boston Dynamics video. Look out stage performers...robots are coming for ya!

 

Edited by nsplayr
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As impressive as these videos are, I find these robots truly creepy. I say kill them with fire. 

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

FWIW, this is an even more impressive Boston Dynamics video. Look out stage performers...robots are coming for ya!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Prozac said:

As impressive as these videos are, I find these robots truly creepy. I say kill them with fire. 

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords!

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords!

4uc36g.jpg

3 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Just so you know, MattY has a face for radio and a voice for print if ya know what I mean. He's incredibly annoying to listen to IMHO even though he's a successful podcast host (The Weeds), so try not to be turned off if you listen to the book on Audible haha...I know I would be! I like his work but I literally hate his voice.

I'm not sure that characterization is fair but making sure folks are integrated is an important aspect of successful immigration. Luckily the USA is pretty uniquely great at that! We're a creed-based nation with barely any truly "native" population and we're already a successful multiracial, multi-ethnic democracy despite some bumps along the way. All of that is not true of China, India, Russia, or even most European countries.

I genuinely believe that I, as a European-American with some recent immigrant roots on one side as well as some pretty lengthy American heritage on the other, am no more "American" than the Chinese/Ethiopian/Russian/South African/etc. person who's relatively right off the boat, living here and working hard. That's part of what makes America great and it can be a huge strength if we would just be more up front about embracing it.

I guess I just don't share the Luddite view that technology will destroy all human labor or the need for human labor. Just like all technologies in the past, new technologies will supplant some jobs while creating others and very likely making us all richer, live longer, and prosper more at the same time. The idea that immigrants are uniquely vulnerable to this centuries-long phenomenon is also spurious at best.

FWIW, this is an even more impressive Boston Dynamics video. Look out stage performers...robots are coming for ya!

Copy all and forewarning taken on la voz de Yglesias 

I think we used to be WAY WAY WAY better at integration of immigrants when we a different country, I'll just say it before rich privileged white people began to hate their culture, ancestors and heritage then lashed out, blame, mock, ridicule and undercut much less rich and not privileged white people.  We did not constantly churn over our differences and flagellate ourselves or certain groups of our country for historical wrongs committed by people who looked like them.  The Melting Pot was better than the Salad Bowl approach to a multi racial country, just my two cents.

As to my view on technology, I would counter that it's not Ludditism but realism about is about to happen.  It's not just manual or unskilled labor; skilled labor, knowledge workers and content creators are also about to get a visit from the AI Bobs, case in point this AI generated article example:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/08/robot-wrote-this-article-gpt-3

There may or may not be places for us in the future, we'll see.  I just dread this future meeting with my AI boss

4uc5od.jpg

Edited by Clark Griswold
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

I just hate to shut the door to everyone because there are some people that are going to take advantage.

I understand the feeling but it's time to take a break, not a permanent cessation, just a pause.  We did so after the large infuxes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries to give time for assimilation and stabilization, it's time for that pause again.

Money doesn't fix everything but it fixes a lot, the labor classes in this country during the first three years of Trump's administration averaged year over year gains of about 4% in income, enough to grow their wages above the inflation rate and caused a slight but perceptible trend in decreasing the anti-social ills plaguing their communities, we need to keep that up.  

A tight labor market encourages labor participation, encourages technical innovation as labor is expensive and lessens the need for an intrusive and ineffective centralized welfare system.  It also provides a dignified and important place for the least among us, the dignity of work and the need for purpose can not be understated in creating and maintaining a healthy society.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, pawnman said:

Again...there are multiple other legalization options between "deport them all" and "make everyone a citizen".

They can even be tailored to circumstance.  You don't have to give the dude who crossed the Rio Grande yesterday the same deal as the Dreamer brought over when they were six months old.

If this is the case...should we be encouraging as much immigration as possible from China?

I agree there are multiple options when it comes to actually choosing who stays and who goes.

My point in that post you quoted was simply that we need to have a stable number of folks who are going to be in that gray area before we implement any decisions. If we start hashing out/implementing an amnesty plan without focusing on border security first, I promise you we'll see more visa overstays and more border crossings. We're already seeing a new caravan coming up from Central America, and they're reportedly doing so because they know Biden is favoring amnesty and increasing the number of refugees admitted. It's common sense.

Bottom line, you have to have a stable border security apparatus to seal the perimeter, and then start implementing plans for amnesty or deportation.

It's going to be hard enough to determine information about the individuals in question. We have no way to tell when they arrived in the country, and we don't have any information regarding their criminal histories. So it sounds great to say "we'll take all the people who arrived here at 6 months old," but what if that 35yr old guy is telling the Feds he got here at 6 months... when he really walked across last week? Who's telling the truth?

As a bonus, any case denied amnesty is going to be litigated to all hell, and you know the Feds will just rubber stamp people in response. Instituting an amnesty plan is going to be a clusterfuck of epic proportions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

Sure, illegal immigration allows for cheaper labor and, potentially, the situation could be changed if you stopped illegal labor (although, honestly, I don't think that's truly possible, but for the sake of argument...), so you see the illegals as the issue. I see this as a more inherent flaw of free market/unfettered capitalism.

Those high school kids/local folks value their work at a higher rate than the market is paying, so they won't take the jobs for what they're willing to pay. More so, you have BUSINESS OWNERS that are choosing to hire that lower labor (because it means higher profits to them because they don't pay taxes/benefits/vacation/etc.), as well as END CONSUMERS that are voting with their wallets to only pay for that lower labor because it costs less, so it's the free market working as it's "intended." If the high schooler's/craftsman's skills were that badly needed, they'd be the go-to. The illegals that come here and work off the books, longer hours for lower wages without any labor protections, are willing to work "harder" than the high school kids and locals, and are being rewarded for it by consumer dollars paying them over higher priced options.

I don't see how this is a free market/capitalism issue, but I feel like we'll just talk in circles about that.

Those high school kids/local folks were making a wage at the equilibrium of supply and demand in their area. What illegal immigration did is add in a ton of supply (workers) who are willing to work for incredibly low wages due to no overhead/taxation, while keeping the demand (# jobs available) around the same.

That type of change forces the supply curve to shift hard, which in-turn reduces the price of labor across the board. Couple that with a cost of living that's about the same or higher, and you've just KO'd a large chunk of people in the area who a) no longer have a job and b) are now forced to work for wages so low they can hardly afford to live there anymore.

Business owners are choosing to hire illegals because they'd be economically stupid if they didn't. Their competitors definitely will, and the market/government isn't exactly punishing them for doing so... so why not? That doesn't make it right, however.

Also, the American consumer writ large doesn't know that their Chinese food is made by Hondurans, or their french fries are salted by Mexicans. They genuinely don't. Illegal immigration primarily helps businesses, which in turn helps the consumer (through competition of costs among peers). But let's not act like every time you walk in for a cheap burger you're making a choice to pay the illegal in back. You just go where the food is good and the prices are cheap. There's no ethical question of who cooked it for you. It would make for an interesting experiment if you did have to know before your purchase, however.

20 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

The situation could be fixed by cutting immigration, or it could be fixed by requiring business owners stricter adherence to labor laws, paying higher wages, and by the end consumers voting with their wallets to pay for "All American" legal labor.

Yep, see above.

20 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

Again, like above, we see the same problem but have different opinions on how to fix it. I think this is a more a problem with our healthcare system than with a sick or injured person being at fault because they need medical care. ERs MUST, by law, see every patient that comes in. If an illegal doesn't have an SSN, then they can't be traced to pay the bill. But, if universal healthcare was a thing, then chances are a lot of those ER visits would be doctor's office visits and not be such a costly burden on the system. Obviously, there are more pieces to this argument, but I'll keep it short for brevity's sake.

Fair, healthcare is another topic for another day. However, ponder this. If we had universal healthcare... then that same cost burden of non-payment would still exist, only moved now from the ER to a doctor's office, would it not? They still won't pay the bills, you're just shifting the cost burden onto doctor's offices (and the taxpayer) under a socialized system. You wouldn't solve anything other than reducing the demand at the ER, but maybe that was your point.

20 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

Same for my ancestors. While I'm certain instances like the pregnant lady coming over just to have the anchor baby do happen and there are folks working the system, I think a lot of it is also the "boogeyman" narrative that is played hard by anti-immigration folks.

Idk man, it's an industry. https://apnews.com/article/d4c42c5311ba8a6661855cadd12f0fed

I also have a ton of anecdotal evidence that says otherwise with regards to working the system.

20 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

A lion's share of the immigrants are exactly what you (and most of us) hope to have: Law abiding people that want to come here to work hard, be an integral part of society, and be a part of the American Dream to give their kids a better life than they've had. Are there some that ruin that picture? Hell yeah.

I'd like to think you're right, and I hope that number is at least more than 50%. But the reality is that we don't know what we don't know.

In my opinion the only fair way forward would be to have the illegal immigrants either repatriate back to their countries or sign up for a Federal guest worker program, and after x number of years of good behavior/paying their taxes (and subsequent interviews by the government), they can apply for citizenship. Something like that.

20 hours ago, FDNYOldGuy said:

A vast majority of immigrants I've run into in my life, legal or not, just want to have a better life for their children and will do what they can to make that happen. As a parent, I can't blame them.

Agreed. We might not fully agree in the details or the exact way to go about it, but at least we're discussing it like civil adults. We need some more of that in this country right now.

I know, this is just a terrible issue morally. But there's no way to make everyone happy. We can't make everyone an American citizen, and based on some of the fucked ethics in other countries... we shouldn't.

But we can agree that immigrants are the reason our nation is awesome, and we should do the best we can to make sure the right people get in, and the wrong people stay out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

I agree there are multiple options when it comes to actually choosing who stays and who goes.

My point in that post you quoted was simply that we need to have a stable number of folks who are going to be in that gray area before we implement any decisions. If we start hashing out/implementing an amnesty plan without focusing on border security first, I promise you we'll see more visa overstays and more border crossings. We're already seeing a new caravan coming up from Central America, and they're reportedly doing so because they know Biden is favoring amnesty and increasing the number of refugees admitted. It's common sense.

Bottom line, you have to have a stable border security apparatus to seal the perimeter, and then start implementing plans for amnesty or deportation.

It's going to be hard enough to determine information about the individuals in question. We have no way to tell when they arrived in the country, and we don't have any information regarding their criminal histories. So it sounds great to say "we'll take all the people who arrived here at 6 months old," but what if that 35yr old guy is telling the Feds he got here at 6 months... when he really walked across last week? Who's telling the truth?

As a bonus, any case denied amnesty is going to be litigated to all hell, and you know the Feds will just rubber stamp people in response. Instituting an amnesty plan is going to be a clusterfuck of epic proportions.

I don't deny we need border security.  I'm just saying, we don't have to wait years to implement it before we work on the other parts of the problem.  Hell, set a date: "You must prove you were living in the US/working in the US/had a kid enrolled in a US school prior to Jan 1, 2016 to be eligible".  

I absolutely support border security.  I just don't think it's all-or-nothing, and I think you'll get much better traction if you also attack the other half of the problem.  Bush Jr. tried to do that, and congress fucked him on it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

...or sign up for a Federal guest worker program, and after x number of years of good behavior/paying their taxes (and subsequent interviews by the government), they can apply for citizenship. Something like that.

This is quite literally a big part of Biden’s immigration plan in a nutshell.

As I’ve said a bit before, I’m even more of an immigration maximalist than your typical Democrat. If I were King for a day I’d sign into law the “Mas Trabajo Por Los Todos Act of 2021” and get some smart folks to translate that into Chinese, Vietnamese, French, et al so everyone knows that the USA is open for business and ready for many new workers and eventually citizens.

But I’m perfect willing to take steps in the right direction. Expanded refugee entries, expanded guest worker program, pathway to citizenship, vigorous enforcement of E-Verify and better & smarter border security all sound great...just like they did back when W got pretty close to passing the exact same stuff back in 2007.

Edited by nsplayr
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites



I don't deny we need border security.  I'm just saying, we don't have to wait years to implement it before we work on the other parts of the problem.  Hell, set a date: "You must prove you were living in the US/working in the US/had a kid enrolled in a US school prior to Jan 1, 2016 to be eligible".  

I absolutely support border security.  I just don't think it's all-or-nothing, and I think you'll get much better traction if you also attack the other half of the problem.  Bush Jr. tried to do that, and congress ed him on it.


There's an indirect cost as well.

To check if someone is eligible, you need people to process and evaluate/verify the paperwork. So either ICE gets a plus up in budget and manning, or a plus up in budget and contracts out the work, or it'll take a while to adjudicate. The more immigrants you need to check, the more it costs. Not that I agree with the following option, but this is probably why "blanket" legalization of anyone in the country could be appealing, it's the cheapest option upfront, and would require no budget debates or tax increases to fund the option.

This is in addition to anything for border security.

Either way, DoD budget is probably going to take a hit as we move forward...
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/18/2021 at 8:54 PM, nsplayr said:

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords!

Finished listening to One Billion Americans.

Not convinced of his argument and don't support it, shocking I know. 

Mainly I found it naïve and assuming, in that the problems that would accompany a policy of rapid mass migration could be solved with the central planner solutions he proposes. 

That pretty much sums up my main critique of his book, there is SO MUCH DETAIL he goes into that could be discussed and not all of his ideas are bad, but no thanks.  I would recommend it for a Nationalist / Conservative looking to see how the other side is thinking and what is behind their ideas.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...