27 ms·

And what defen is saying is that the actual debate is about "illegal" immigrants. Not all immigrants. I have absolutely no idea where the idea that Trump does

And what defen is saying is that the actual debate is about "illegal" immigrants. Not all immigrants. I have absolutely no idea where the idea that Trump doesn't want legal immigrants in the country came from; as that's certainly not true.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gotchange 10y ago
Ann Coulter is the defacto Trump advisor on immigration and she can't hide her preference for either only or predominantly white immigration and if that untenable for some reason, just limit it to absolute minimum. So, it is not just about illegal immigration, this is just a red herring for what it really is at stake here.
- chrishacken 10y ago
  > Ann Coulter is the defacto Trump advisor on immigration But is she really? Source?
btown 10y ago
I do believe that idea comes from Trump himself... http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/24/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-election-2016/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/24/politics/donald-trump-muslim-b...
soundwave106 10y ago
It's more than just immigration, it's trade too, as mentioned in the OP. I work for a multinational contract manufacturing company; we currently have plants and employees in (among many other nations) Mexico (full of the Mexicans Donald Trump threatened to build a wall around) and Malaysia (which is majority Islam, of whom Donald Trump threatened to ban from the USA). So, yes, this result is quite... interesting... to me. Hopefully Trump is more bluster than action here. I'll be honest, the problem with the current wave of anti-globalization (eg Brexit and Trump, also count France's Le Pen among others) is that I can't see the solutions being advocated doing any good economically for those who are advocating it. If anything, it may make things worse. Of course, a lot of what is driving these movements is more cultural anxiety and has less to do with pure economic factors, which in my opinion makes this a lot more challenging to resolve.
- chrishacken 10y ago
  > I work for a multinational contract manufacturing company; we currently have plants and employees in (among many other nations) Mexico (full of the Mexicans Donald Trump threatened to build a wall around) and Malaysia (which is majority Islam, of whom Donald Trump threatened to ban from the USA). So, yes, this result is quite... interesting... to me. Hopefully Trump is more bluster than action here. Those are certainly valid concerns, but can you explain to me how legal work visas don't address that? (Serious question.)
  - pyre 10y ago
    - If Muslims aren't allowed to immigrate, then they won't be issued any legal work visas, so legal work visas don't solve anything here. - If Trump renegotiates, or kills NAFTA, legal works visas of Canadians and Mexicans are affected (maybe even revoked). Saying "legal work visas" is meaningless in this context.
  - soundwave106 10y ago
    Legal work visas don't address the trade angle. It's unclear to me how Trump as president will affect both our global suppliers and our global customers, particularly the trade across borders. It may end up being nothing, but to me it is an uncertainy. Businesses generally don't like uncertainty. Plus, if we took Trump's primary bluster 100% literally (that "ban all the Muslims" talk), no one from our Malaysia plant who is Islam could visit corporate headquarters for any reason, work visa or not. Such of course could end up being complete bluster, it probably is to be honest. Again, though, there's the uncertainty.
georgespencer 10y ago
> I have absolutely no idea where the idea that Trump doesn't want legal immigrants in the country came from; as that's certainly not true. He probably got it from Trump himself on one of the many occasions when Trump has talked about it. It seems plausible that he wants a c. 30% drop in net legal immigration.[1] This is also a cornerstone of the Brexit "movement" (if you can really call a loose coalition of people without degrees in low income areas a movement). They want to cap or limit immigration, despite not being exposed to it in any meaningful way. (40% of inner-London's population is "foreign born", which suggests that a disproportionately high number of the UK's migrants live here -- a city which almost unanimously voted to stay in the EU.) [1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/18/us/politics/trump-legal-immigration.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/18/us/politics/tr...
- tekknik 10y ago
  The "uneducated" argument is beyond played out now. One does not become "enlightened" and align some common set of views by simply getting a degree. If this is true then it's not called education, it's called brainwashing.
  - georgespencer 10y ago
    > The "uneducated" argument is beyond played out now. You cannot equivocate on this point. When considered in the aggregate, leave voters are less educated than remainers. You can read whatever you want into that, but to say it's "played out" sounds like you're disputing it. > One does not become "enlightened" and align some common set of views by simply getting a degree. Nobody said anything about enlightenment or aligning around a common set of views simply by getting a degree. > If this is true then it's not called education, it's called brainwashing. Actually, no, it's probably called education. It's impossible to quantify, but it's axiomatic that traversing through to most classical forms of higher education has the effect of opening one's eyes to a broader range of viewpoints and beliefs than one might have previously been exposed to. Education isn't about specific points of view or pieces of information, but about philosophy, critical thinking, and communication. For the many thousands of Brexit voters who feel duped by the economic aftermath and winding-back on promises made by the leave side, a little education on critical thinking and the outright, literal lies of the media they consume would probably have led to them voting differently, and feeling happier about it.
naters 10y ago
Regardless, nostrademons' point still stands. Over 50% of US farm workers are undocumented immigrants[1], and 1 in 10 farm workers in California are undocumented migrant workers[2]. That's a very sizable chunk of the labor pool. [1] http://articles.extension.org/pages/9960/migrant-farm-workers:-our-nations-invisible-population http://articles.extension.org/pages/9960/migrant-farm-worker... [2] http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/01/29/464758284/activists-demand-a-bill-of-rights-for-california-farm-workers http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/01/29/464758284/act...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

gotchange 10y ago

Ann Coulter is the defacto Trump advisor on immigration and she can't hide her preference for either only or predominantly white immigration and if that untenable for some reason, just limit it to absolute minimum. So, it is not just about illegal immigration, this is just a red herring for what it really is at stake here.

chrishacken 10y ago
> Ann Coulter is the defacto Trump advisor on immigration But is she really? Source?

btown 10y ago

I do believe that idea comes from Trump himself... http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/24/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-election-2016/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/24/politics/donald-trump-muslim-b...

soundwave106 10y ago

It's more than just immigration, it's trade too, as mentioned in the OP. I work for a multinational contract manufacturing company; we currently have plants and employees in (among many other nations) Mexico (full of the Mexicans Donald Trump threatened to build a wall around) and Malaysia (which is majority Islam, of whom Donald Trump threatened to ban from the USA). So, yes, this result is quite... interesting... to me. Hopefully Trump is more bluster than action here. I'll be honest, the problem with the current wave of anti-globalization (eg Brexit and Trump, also count France's Le Pen among others) is that I can't see the solutions being advocated doing any good economically for those who are advocating it. If anything, it may make things worse. Of course, a lot of what is driving these movements is more cultural anxiety and has less to do with pure economic factors, which in my opinion makes this a lot more challenging to resolve.

chrishacken 10y ago
> I work for a multinational contract manufacturing company; we currently have plants and employees in (among many other nations) Mexico (full of the Mexicans Donald Trump threatened to build a wall around) and Malaysia (which is majority Islam, of whom Donald Trump threatened to ban from the USA). So, yes, this result is quite... interesting... to me. Hopefully Trump is more bluster than action here. Those are certainly valid concerns, but can you explain to me how legal work visas don't address that? (Serious question.)
- pyre 10y ago
  - If Muslims aren't allowed to immigrate, then they won't be issued any legal work visas, so legal work visas don't solve anything here. - If Trump renegotiates, or kills NAFTA, legal works visas of Canadians and Mexicans are affected (maybe even revoked). Saying "legal work visas" is meaningless in this context.
- soundwave106 10y ago
  Legal work visas don't address the trade angle. It's unclear to me how Trump as president will affect both our global suppliers and our global customers, particularly the trade across borders. It may end up being nothing, but to me it is an uncertainy. Businesses generally don't like uncertainty. Plus, if we took Trump's primary bluster 100% literally (that "ban all the Muslims" talk), no one from our Malaysia plant who is Islam could visit corporate headquarters for any reason, work visa or not. Such of course could end up being complete bluster, it probably is to be honest. Again, though, there's the uncertainty.

georgespencer 10y ago

> I have absolutely no idea where the idea that Trump doesn't want legal immigrants in the country came from; as that's certainly not true. He probably got it from Trump himself on one of the many occasions when Trump has talked about it. It seems plausible that he wants a c. 30% drop in net legal immigration.[1] This is also a cornerstone of the Brexit "movement" (if you can really call a loose coalition of people without degrees in low income areas a movement). They want to cap or limit immigration, despite not being exposed to it in any meaningful way. (40% of inner-London's population is "foreign born", which suggests that a disproportionately high number of the UK's migrants live here -- a city which almost unanimously voted to stay in the EU.) [1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/18/us/politics/trump-legal-immigration.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/18/us/politics/tr...

tekknik 10y ago
The "uneducated" argument is beyond played out now. One does not become "enlightened" and align some common set of views by simply getting a degree. If this is true then it's not called education, it's called brainwashing.
- georgespencer 10y ago
  > The "uneducated" argument is beyond played out now. You cannot equivocate on this point. When considered in the aggregate, leave voters are less educated than remainers. You can read whatever you want into that, but to say it's "played out" sounds like you're disputing it. > One does not become "enlightened" and align some common set of views by simply getting a degree. Nobody said anything about enlightenment or aligning around a common set of views simply by getting a degree. > If this is true then it's not called education, it's called brainwashing. Actually, no, it's probably called education. It's impossible to quantify, but it's axiomatic that traversing through to most classical forms of higher education has the effect of opening one's eyes to a broader range of viewpoints and beliefs than one might have previously been exposed to. Education isn't about specific points of view or pieces of information, but about philosophy, critical thinking, and communication. For the many thousands of Brexit voters who feel duped by the economic aftermath and winding-back on promises made by the leave side, a little education on critical thinking and the outright, literal lies of the media they consume would probably have led to them voting differently, and feeling happier about it.

naters 10y ago

Regardless, nostrademons' point still stands. Over 50% of US farm workers are undocumented immigrants[1], and 1 in 10 farm workers in California are undocumented migrant workers[2]. That's a very sizable chunk of the labor pool. [1] http://articles.extension.org/pages/9960/migrant-farm-workers:-our-nations-invisible-population http://articles.extension.org/pages/9960/migrant-farm-worker... [2] http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/01/29/464758284/activists-demand-a-bill-of-rights-for-california-farm-workers http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/01/29/464758284/act...