|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 27, 2017 18:16:35 GMT
Speaking of alternative facts... Can you please give me a list of these things "he's fucked up"? Youre such a ideologue its laughable. Typical sheep from MA. No, that's a hypothetical. He's hasn't fucked up royally yet - this trade war he's hinting at could be a big problem. So far he's gotten into a pointless discussion about inaugural attendance, and speaking of sheep - would you admit that there are much greater issues to worry about rather than how many people showed up at the inaugural? It was into blue state territory for the most part, so no surprise it was poorly attended. Not a big deal until he made it big deal. Stupid. Absolutely he gets distracted. Who the fuck cares how many people are at the inaugural? The media sure as hell does. Im equally as confident that he is working his ass off to get things done...which he is. As for Mexico, as I said to San, we've got Mexico by the short hairs. They need the United States FAR more than we need them. So does the rest of the world. You don't turn your back on the biggest economy in the world over a few billion dollars. America first.
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 27, 2017 18:17:26 GMT
If you're concerned at all about the cost of illegals, the wall (and realistic surveillance) and sanctuary cities are the problem. I have yet to see anyone logically argue the rationale for illegally ignoring laws in order to protect illegals from the law. They know where to go once they get here. Any shortage of low-wage workers can be fixed through legal immigration and vetting of those very same people. No, the solution to illegals is to nail the businesses that hire them. Take away the incentive to come here and they won't come here. The incentive is... that they can come here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2017 18:20:20 GMT
Whatever bro. No one ever wins a political argument, so it's a waste of time. You choose to see things your way, and I'll continue to see things the right way. Yes, by the far right way. Ha I'm pretty much right down the middle. My main reason for voting Trump was because he'll be tough on terror and immigration. I also believe that some people need and deserve the government's help and I don't mind paying my fair share. But the system's been so abused we need someone to take a hard line and fix it. He can do that.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 27, 2017 18:21:39 GMT
No, the solution to illegals is to nail the businesses that hire them. Take away the incentive to come here and they won't come here. The incentive is... that they can come here. There is almost anywhere you can go in the world, you could probably sneak into North Korea, they probably have the most secure border in the world. The reason people DON'T sneak into North Korea, because it sucks there. You keep people out by taking away their reason to come.
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 27, 2017 18:25:21 GMT
The incentive is... that they can come here. There is almost anywhere you can go in the world, you could probably sneak into North Korea, they probably have the most secure border in the world. The reason people DON'T sneak into North Korea, because it sucks there. You keep people out by taking away their reason to come. The United States does nothing to prevent illegals from coming. The ones they do catch the release on a "you're going to appear before a magistrate in three weeks, right?" promise. Not only that, the border is porous, the Border Patrol is under-funded and under-staffed, and illegals are welcomed in over 200 cities in the country. Fix these things and whoever else gets into this country is welcome by me because they worked hard as fuck to get here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2017 18:28:55 GMT
Sportsnut for President
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 27, 2017 18:41:57 GMT
There is almost anywhere you can go in the world, you could probably sneak into North Korea, they probably have the most secure border in the world. The reason people DON'T sneak into North Korea, because it sucks there. You keep people out by taking away their reason to come. The United States does nothing to prevent illegals from coming. The ones they do catch the release on a "you're going to appear before a magistrate in three weeks, right?" promise. Not only that, the border is porous, the Border Patrol is under-funded and under-staffed, and illegals are welcomed in over 200 cities in the country. Fix these things and whoever else gets into this country is welcome by me because they worked hard as fuck to get here. Yes, the border should be secure, however most illegals don't arrive by crossing the Mexican border illegally. You get a visitors visa, enter the country entirely legally and simply don't leave when that visitor's visa expires.
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 27, 2017 18:48:49 GMT
The United States does nothing to prevent illegals from coming. The ones they do catch the release on a "you're going to appear before a magistrate in three weeks, right?" promise. Not only that, the border is porous, the Border Patrol is under-funded and under-staffed, and illegals are welcomed in over 200 cities in the country. Fix these things and whoever else gets into this country is welcome by me because they worked hard as fuck to get here. Yes, the border should be secure, however most illegals don't arrive by crossing the Mexican border illegally. You get a visitors visa, enter the country entirely legally and simply don't leave when that visitor's visa expires. Can you find me a source for this? I know overstaying visas is a big problem, but I've never seen your point before. "It is estimated that there are approximately 720,000 Mexicans who cross the border each year illegally. Approximately half of these are caught by border control." (WaPo) If this is true, then mathematically I dont think your statement can be true. And again, if you can't drive, can't get a job, can't get housing or benefits from the state/municipality, these people won't stay. Some places want illegals and spending our money on them, I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by kelvana33 on Jan 27, 2017 18:49:08 GMT
Majority of the immigrants that came over decades ago worked hard to make this country great. Now the majority come here to exploit the system we have in place. No handouts to illegals, and if citizens need government assistance, you can get it for up to six months and you'll be assigned a worker who will help you get a job. If there are no jobs, especially in the shit bombed cities, well, I see tons of city/state property that needs to be painted or power washed, or streets that need to be cleaned. End the free handout system and these assholes won't have as much incentive to come here.
Build the wall, half towers manned by agents and technology that will let the agents know when someone is trying to get past the wall.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 27, 2017 19:11:46 GMT
Yes, the border should be secure, however most illegals don't arrive by crossing the Mexican border illegally. You get a visitors visa, enter the country entirely legally and simply don't leave when that visitor's visa expires. Can you find me a source for this? I know overstaying visas is a big problem, but I've never seen your point before. "It is estimated that there are approximately 720,000 Mexicans who cross the border each year illegally. Approximately half of these are caught by border control." (WaPo) If this is true, then mathematically I dont think your statement can be true. And again, if you can't drive, can't get a job, can't get housing or benefits from the state/municipality, these people won't stay. Some places want illegals and spending our money on them, I don't get it. The National Review is pretty conservative, here is and article from them. www.nationalreview.com/article/424879/immigration-fighting-last-war-mark-krikorian
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 27, 2017 21:25:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Jan 28, 2017 0:14:21 GMT
Trump was playing checkers while Neito was playing Chess. Manufacturers who buy products from Mexico are going to raise prices on consumers to pay for the new tax slapped on Mexican imports. Ryan has already said we will pay for the wall. Now come again with who will pay for the wall ? Now the cost of yearly immigration expenses, billions of dollars, in Texas could go down if, BIG IF, the wall can prevent illegals coming in. That could be a big burden coming off state taxes. So far the wall in California is not preventing lowering immigration costs. But then you have to find people that are willing do farming, landscaping and irrigation jobs etc. That cheap labor has to be replaced. All those supposed "scummy" Mexicans that are willing to do those types of jobs now might be gone. The farming industry in central and northern California would suffer. So yah we'll see. If you're concerned at all about the cost of illegals, the wall (and realistic surveillance) and sanctuary cities are the problem. I have yet to see anyone logically argue the rationale for illegally ignoring laws in order to protect illegals from the law. They know where to go once they get here. Any shortage of low-wage workers can be fixed through legal immigration and vetting of those very same people. I am all for anything that cuts taxes and costs. But that had better include military cuts and corporate welfare cuts.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 18:49:44 GMT
Trump was playing checkers while Neito was playing Chess. Manufacturers who buy products from Mexico are going to raise prices on consumers to pay for the new tax slapped on Mexican imports. Ryan has already said we will pay for the wall. Now come again with who will pay for the wall ? Now the cost of yearly immigration expenses, billions of dollars, in Texas could go down if, BIG IF, the wall can prevent illegals coming in. That could be a big burden coming off state taxes. So far the wall in California is not preventing lowering immigration costs. But then you have to find people that are willing do farming, landscaping and irrigation jobs etc. That cheap labor has to be replaced. All those supposed "scummy" Mexicans that are willing to do those types of jobs now might be gone. The farming industry in central and northern California would suffer. So yah we'll see. If you're concerned at all about the cost of illegals, the wall (and realistic surveillance) and sanctuary cities are the problem. I have yet to see anyone logically argue the rationale for illegally ignoring laws in order to protect illegals from the law. They know where to go once they get here. Any shortage of low-wage workers can be fixed through legal immigration and vetting of those very same people. OK, I had only have heard about sanctuary cities and my general impression was similar to yours, that they were havens for illegals. Learning more about it, it seems like that's NOT what the deal is, not at all. Real REAL general since there's WAY more to this than I first thought. So far from what I've learned, the cities, really the states, are basically saying that they don't want to do the job the federal government should be doing because it puts the onus on cities and towns on enforcing the immigration laws - they have no means to do it (that is, they don't have any agency SPECIFICALLY with the task of enforcing immigration). So - what is the means by which you find illegals? You just "happen" upon them and typically that's when the law gets involved. So let's say you have an illegal alien witness a crime and they are willing to testify in court, what the feds are saying is that once you find an illegal in any circumstance you have you have to report them. And these 'sanctuary cities' real problem is footing the bill for it - the cost of jailing them and all else. So there is also a concern that the immigrant community will no longer cooperate with the police if they know they will be deported. Or- they won't report crimes done to them such as robberies or rapes because they will be discovered as illegals. OK, so I can understand that someone might say 'tough shit' for them, you're here illegally, you got raped or robbed? Too bad, you can't take our resources (our cops) to protect you - and I get that, but on the other hand it also means that a criminal (who is probably also committing crimes against US citizens) to go free. Sanctuary cities? So far in my understanding they would not need to exist if they had immigration reform. So here's how I see how to do it. How do you identify the illegals? I think you have to be proactive about it - you can't sit around and wait for them to drop into your lap when they witness a crime, commit a crime or are a victim of a crime. You have to go get them. I think any idea along the lines of 'stop and frisk', like 'hey, he LOOKS like an illegal' isn't going to work. Odds are that you are going to stop a lot of legit US citizens and someone is going to have a beef with getting harassed and most importantly I don't think it will be efficient. So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. And the most important part - it should be the FEDERAL government who does this. I would argue that it's unfair for the states to pick up the tab for this, it penalizes the states closest to the border and those states that have cities big enough, or cities with an existing (legal) immigrant population. We could get the money for that should come from penalties put on businesses that hire illegals.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 18:52:42 GMT
being The crowd was proven to be smaller not only visually but by several other media outlets that were not corporate. CNN had nothing to do with Trumps claim being false not that I watch that scum hole channel. "I call domestic terrorists who are rotting the country from the inside" Not that I am against throwing out illegal immigrants from countries that hide or harbor terrorists, nor known criminals, drug peddlers, from Mexico or South America. But I would like to know were all of these domestic terrorists are in the US ? Are these the ones that were right under Dubyah's nose in 2000-2001 ? These assholes were born here, have ruined neighborhoods all over the country, walk around with their pants at their knees, shoot at anything, no intention of getting a job while they deal drugs and live off the government dime. Time to address them. Google some pics of Gary, Indiana, East Baltimore and parts of Chicago and Detroit. Drains on society is what they are, If I were Trump I'd look at sending in the military. If you have to snipe them as a form of crime fighting, I'm all for it. Know what? We actually agree on this - in the respect that it should be the federal government that does this, not the local governments.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 18:54:53 GMT
And really the best way to deal with illegal immigration is to have a national registry and citizen ID cards.
And having said that, what a fucking nightmare that would be.
It would cost a fortune, there would be fake id cards and last but certainly not least, it would be unconstitutional.
|
|
|
Post by kelvana33 on Jan 28, 2017 19:22:56 GMT
And really the best way to deal with illegal immigration is to have a national registry and citizen ID cards. And having said that, what a fucking nightmare that would be. It would cost a fortune, there would be fake id cards and last but certainly not least, it would be unconstitutional. I love how people are bitching about how much the wall will cost, who is going to pay for it. Who gives a shit? U.S has dished out 113 billion to illegal immigrants.
You want to come to this country for a better life? More power to you, but go about it the right way. I don't think that's a lot to ask. Try going to another country and see how much they help you out.
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 28, 2017 21:03:40 GMT
You have to go get them.I think any idea along the lines of 'stop and frisk', like 'hey, he LOOKS like an illegal' isn't going to work. Odds are that you are going to stop a lot of legit US citizens and someone is going to have a beef with getting harassed and most importantly I don't think it will be efficient. So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. And the most important part - it should be the FEDERAL government who does this. I would argue that it's unfair for the states to pick up the tab for this, it penalizes the states closest to the border and those states that have cities big enough, or cities with an existing (legal) immigrant population. We could get the money for that should come from penalties put on businesses that hire illegals. I would never have thought to hear a hardline Dem argue in favor of the mythical Republican Gestapo rounding up illegals? Are you sure about this? I don't like the idea. It has a very negative connotation to it. But let's clear something up here... Sanctuary cities are not monolithic. There are geo-political similarities between many sanctuary cities, but there are a few reasons for being sanctuary cities. But least of their reasoning is that "it costs too much to house them." Here are the primary reasons for sanctuary cities existing. 1. Because we have a policy of catch-and-release at the borders. According to location this is where it gets politically motivated. 2. Because certain cities think it's against civil rights to turn them over to the feds. 3. Because they actually DONT want to work with ICE/feds. We have a number of officers here, Im sure some could enlighten why some might not want the feds coming nosing around and picking up illegals. This is surprisingly not geographic, as it's happened in Kansas as well as Pennsylvania. 4. Because in some jurisdictions, govts dont want to be subject to detainment litigation from the illegal (and tie up money in the litigation). Amazingly suits have come forth that a detained immigrant was "over-held" for the crime originally committed, while waiting for ICE to come and get them. All of these things need to be and can be changed with reform.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 21:14:24 GMT
Someone please help me understand something. Why did Trump not mention Saudi Arabia as one of the countries that no immigrants are allowed? I mean he referenced 9/11 as to one of the reasons the military is over there fighting terrorist. Supposedly 15 of the 19 terrorist from that day were Saudi's. I understand to a degree what Trump is trying to do, but I really wish that he would've re-opened the whole 9/11 situation again before going to this extreme. Now, before someone accuses me of having a tin foil hat on & think I'm screaming conspiracy. I am not doing that, but I also 100% believe that the Bush administration had a lot to do with what happened. Whether they were behind it or not....? I can't say that, but I will say 2 things. 1) I think the Gov't knew about it in some form & ignored it; whether that was the NSA, or CIA doesn't matter.Someone knew. They wanted an excuse to go to war....again! 2) The whole 9/11 Commission was a complete joke & full of lies. Far too many questions are unanswered & too many Laws of Physics got destroyed that day & too many coincidences for my taste. I hope he keeps that promise & re-opens it again.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 21:36:57 GMT
Someone please help me understand something. Why did Trump not mention Saudi Arabia as one of the countries that no immigrants are allowed? I mean he referenced 9/11 as to one of the reasons the military is over there fighting terrorist. Supposedly 15 of the 19 terrorist from that day were Saudi's. I understand to a degree what Trump is trying to do, but I really wish that he would've re-opened the whole 9/11 situation again before going to this extreme. Now, before someone accuses me of having a tin foil hat on & think I'm screaming conspiracy. I am not doing that, but I also 100% believe that the Bush administration had a lot to do with what happened. Whether they were behind it or not....? I can't say that, but I will say 2 things. 1) I think the Gov't knew about it in some form & ignored it; whether that was the NSA, or CIA doesn't matter.Someone knew. They wanted an excuse to go to war....again! 2) The whole 9/11 Commission was a complete joke & full of lies. Far too many questions are unanswered & too many Laws of Physics got destroyed that day & too many coincidences for my taste. I hope he keeps that promise & re-opens it again. Absolutely. Apparently Saudi Arabia has several million 'get out of jail free' cards. If we should crack down on anyone, it should be them. That's not "supposedly" 15/19 of the jackers were Saudis - they WERE Saudis. And that Osama Bin Laden guy - what country was he from? Where do the terrorists get money from - Saudi Arabia.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 21:43:14 GMT
You have to go get them.I think any idea along the lines of 'stop and frisk', like 'hey, he LOOKS like an illegal' isn't going to work. Odds are that you are going to stop a lot of legit US citizens and someone is going to have a beef with getting harassed and most importantly I don't think it will be efficient. So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. And the most important part - it should be the FEDERAL government who does this. I would argue that it's unfair for the states to pick up the tab for this, it penalizes the states closest to the border and those states that have cities big enough, or cities with an existing (legal) immigrant population. We could get the money for that should come from penalties put on businesses that hire illegals. I would never have thought to hear a hardline Dem argue in favor of the mythical Republican Gestapo rounding up illegals? Are you sure about this? I don't like the idea. It has a very negative connotation to it. But let's clear something up here... Sanctuary cities are not monolithic. There are geo-political similarities between many sanctuary cities, but there are a few reasons for being sanctuary cities. But least of their reasoning is that "it costs too much to house them." Here are the primary reasons for sanctuary cities existing. 1. Because we have a policy of catch-and-release at the borders. According to location this is where it gets politically motivated. 2. Because certain cities think it's against civil rights to turn them over to the feds. 3. Because they actually DONT want to work with ICE/feds. We have a number of officers here, Im sure some could enlighten why some might not want the feds coming nosing around and picking up illegals. This is surprisingly not geographic, as it's happened in Kansas as well as Pennsylvania. 4. Because in some jurisdictions, govts dont want to be subject to detainment litigation from the illegal (and tie up money in the litigation). Amazingly suits have come forth that a detained immigrant was "over-held" for the crime originally committed, while waiting for ICE to come and get them. All of these things need to be and can be changed with reform. No, I don't like the idea of gestapo tactics in rounding up illegals. As far as your points - I don't believe that they are correct, at least from what I've read so far. But very clearly to me, media outlets and in particular FOX news has portrayed the subject of Sanctuary cities much differently than literally everything I've read so far. As far as I can see cutting off funding to Sanctuary cities is a plot to get something for free, to get the local governments to pay for the job that ICE should do.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 21:46:29 GMT
And really the best way to deal with illegal immigration is to have a national registry and citizen ID cards. And having said that, what a fucking nightmare that would be. It would cost a fortune, there would be fake id cards and last but certainly not least, it would be unconstitutional. I love how people are bitching about how much the wall will cost, who is going to pay for it. Who gives a shit? U.S has dished out 113 billion to illegal immigrants.
You want to come to this country for a better life? More power to you, but go about it the right way. I don't think that's a lot to ask. Try going to another country and see how much they help you out.
So Kels, let's say you go to some crime and you have a witness or victim who is an illegal, or for that matter you find a person for whatever reason is an illegal. What then? Are they arrested? And if not you personally, then who does the arresting and how are they dealt with? And who foots the bill for jailing them? I can answer that for you, if they are kept in your local lock up, obviously the bill goes to the local government.
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 28, 2017 22:31:33 GMT
I would never have thought to hear a hardline Dem argue in favor of the mythical Republican Gestapo rounding up illegals? Are you sure about this? I don't like the idea. It has a very negative connotation to it. But let's clear something up here... Sanctuary cities are not monolithic. There are geo-political similarities between many sanctuary cities, but there are a few reasons for being sanctuary cities. But least of their reasoning is that "it costs too much to house them." Here are the primary reasons for sanctuary cities existing. 1. Because we have a policy of catch-and-release at the borders. According to location this is where it gets politically motivated. 2. Because certain cities think it's against civil rights to turn them over to the feds. 3. Because they actually DONT want to work with ICE/feds. We have a number of officers here, Im sure some could enlighten why some might not want the feds coming nosing around and picking up illegals. This is surprisingly not geographic, as it's happened in Kansas as well as Pennsylvania. 4. Because in some jurisdictions, govts dont want to be subject to detainment litigation from the illegal (and tie up money in the litigation). Amazingly suits have come forth that a detained immigrant was "over-held" for the crime originally committed, while waiting for ICE to come and get them. All of these things need to be and can be changed with reform. No, I don't like the idea of gestapo tactics in rounding up illegals. As far as your points - I don't believe that they are correct, at least from what I've read so far. But very clearly to me, media outlets and in particular FOX news has portrayed the subject of Sanctuary cities much differently than literally everything I've read so far. As far as I can see cutting off funding to Sanctuary cities is a plot to get something for free, to get the local governments to pay for the job that ICE should do. Well, you said you wanted the Feds to "go get them". Your words not mine. As for as my points go, I didn't make them up, they're from a non-profit CJ report. Your last point is not the point at all, nor is it correct. It costs very little to hold a prisoner until ICE can come and get them. I listed several OTHER reasons, and they have nothing to do with funding.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 28, 2017 23:07:00 GMT
No, I don't like the idea of gestapo tactics in rounding up illegals. As far as your points - I don't believe that they are correct, at least from what I've read so far. But very clearly to me, media outlets and in particular FOX news has portrayed the subject of Sanctuary cities much differently than literally everything I've read so far. As far as I can see cutting off funding to Sanctuary cities is a plot to get something for free, to get the local governments to pay for the job that ICE should do. Well, you said you wanted the Feds to "go get them". Your words not mine. As for as my points go, I didn't make them up, they're from a non-profit CJ report. Your last point is not the point at all, nor is it correct. It costs very little to hold a prisoner until ICE can come and get them. I listed several OTHER reasons, and they have nothing to do with funding. Yes, the Feds need to go them by going after them through their employers. Quoting myself "So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. "
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Jan 29, 2017 0:16:35 GMT
Well, you said you wanted the Feds to "go get them". Your words not mine. As for as my points go, I didn't make them up, they're from a non-profit CJ report. Your last point is not the point at all, nor is it correct. It costs very little to hold a prisoner until ICE can come and get them. I listed several OTHER reasons, and they have nothing to do with funding. Yes, the Feds need to go them by going after them through their employers. Quoting myself "So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. " Seems kind of late in the process, wait for them to get here, get settled and get jobs before evicting them?
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Jan 29, 2017 0:36:17 GMT
Yes, the Feds need to go them by going after them through their employers. Quoting myself "So I think the only way to do it is to go after employers, go to the job sites and make sure the paperwork is in order. " Seems kind of late in the process, wait for them to get here, get settled and get jobs before evicting them? How else? If someone has a better idea, I'm all ears. And if it gets known, and it will if they enforce it, there will be a lot less incentive to come here. And again, this is all bullshit anyway. I can't believe anyone who has to sneak across the border is going to be one of the ones getting the really *good* jobs. What burns my ass is the H1B visas that they give out like candy. Those are good jobs, good engineering jobs that are going to foreigners because they say they can't hire them here. Any idea of how many software jobs are going to India? I mean every fucking software company I know of, that is worked for or worked with or have friends who work at other companies - all of them have teams in India. The software biz would be fucking booming - and I mean BOOMING if it weren't for that. My whole team is in India, 7 of them. That could be 7 American jobs. At the end of the day the people at the bottom, and I will consider the "bottom" all the way up to $200k, we're the ones who have gotten a fucking, taking a fucking and are now going to get fucked even more.
|
|