5 ms·

That isn't true, because of how many undocumented immigrants come in and these numbers remain positive. Nobody is filtering out the undocumented, and yet here

That isn't true, because of how many undocumented immigrants come in and these numbers remain positive. Nobody is filtering out the undocumented, and yet here we are, still net gaining from their existence in the US. Further, no one is asking you to make that tradeoff, it is not at the expense of lower runs of our society, because immigrants are the lower runs of our society, at least they are right now, due to how we treat them. Also, why are native people better or more deserving than the immigrants to a better life? You say it's not a tradeoff you're willing to make, but why not? People are people, regardless of where their birth town is. Why do you value natives higher than non-natives, despite the clear indications that the non-natives are of a net benefit to you over the natives? You want to keep America small, its economy small, and its people worse off, all because you believe there's a false tradeoff. That's a problem. To put this another way, if there "magically" were no tradeoff at all, if the "lower runs of American native society" weren't "negatively impacted", would you change your position?

mieseratte 7y ago
> That isn't true, because of how many undocumented immigrants come in and these numbers remain positive. The articles you cite are specific to legal immigrants. > Finally, why are native people better or more deserving than the immigrants to a better life? The nation-state exists in service of its citizens, not the wider world. > despite the clear indications that the non-natives are of a net benefit to you over the natives I come from a family of legal immigrants. Not the long-winded "trace my family to the Mayflower" way, but in the "my family speaks another language" way. I have no argument against legal immigration that selects for what our society most needs. Open borders are a free for all that throws our lower rungs to fend for themselves.
- diminoten 7y ago
  ...I don't think you understand what an open border means, and if you're getting hung up on the "legality" of it, an open border would literally make immigration legal. If you have no argument against legal immigration, then you have no argument against an open border, as it changes the policy, making immigration generally legal in its various forms. Further, a nation-state's service to its people is a geographic and societal one. Once more people enter into the geographic area and participate in the society governed by the state, those people become its citizens, in every relevant sense. Additionally, you are admitting to agreeing with the idea that "Americans are more deserving humans to non-Americans" and that is xenophobic, literally the textbook definition. It's funny to me that you think the Wikipedia article titled, "The Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration" is about legal immigrants. Open borders is not a "free for all", and I hate to break this to you, but our lower rungs already do fend for themselves. Allowing more immigrants into this country would in no way further their dire straits, and in many ways it'd likely help them, as a larger poor population would increase votes for programs and infrastructure to support poor people.
  - mieseratte 7y ago
    > I don't think you understand what an open border means, and if you're getting hung up on the "legality" of it, an open border would literally make immigration legal. You're conflating the societal value of legal immigrants, which is itself questionable at times (H1-B abuse) with those of illegal immigrants which further depress wages. > "Americans are more deserving humans to non-Americans" and that is xenophobic I never made a statement of who is deserving of anything. I've pointed out that nation-state exists to serve its present-day citizens, not hypothetical future citizens as you are saying. > It's funny to me that you think the Wikipedia article titled, "The Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration" is about legal immigrants. How could I forget the one article in your deluge. It's a great article: >> Immigrants, legal and illegal, are more likely to pay taxes than they are to use public services. Illegal immigrants are not eligible for most public services and live in fear of revealing themselves to government authorities. Households headed by illegal immigrants use less than half the amount of federal services that households headed by documented immigrants or citizens make use of. Illegal immigrants are a benefit because they cannot access services that they pay for. They're a net benefit because we allow their exploitation. > but our lower rungs already do fend for themselves. Exactly, so let's make it worse for them by further depressing wages! They're already suffering, what's a little more?
    - diminoten 7y ago
      Poor Americans are not suffering because of immigration, undocumented or otherwise. Undocumented immigration does not suppress wages. Undocumented immigrants would be able to climb out of poverty if they weren't being persecuted by the federal government, so the fact that they can't use services they pay for is a problem, not a solution, as these services are intended to push people up and out of poverty (to the extent that they work, admittedly). And yes, you did actually say you prefer American people over not Americans, and yes, the viewpoint you are expressing is not only xenophobic, but also not grounded in the many many facts I've provided. What is it really? Do you fear things different from you? Do you think of "your team" as the one that hates immigration, so you feel the need to support that view? Do you think you and your kind are superior than the people who want to live here? What is the actual reason? Trying to cherry pick statistics won't get that true reason out there so maybe just say it. Dang doesn't like it when these conversations get combative and protracted, so I'm going to stop replying. I do wish we could continue, and I think you should summarize your position in your final reply, because it's important to get this stuff out there, and honestly I think at this point the only really "wrong" thing you've done is not fully consider the consequences of your position.

mieseratte 7y ago

> That isn't true, because of how many undocumented immigrants come in and these numbers remain positive. The articles you cite are specific to legal immigrants. > Finally, why are native people better or more deserving than the immigrants to a better life? The nation-state exists in service of its citizens, not the wider world. > despite the clear indications that the non-natives are of a net benefit to you over the natives I come from a family of legal immigrants. Not the long-winded "trace my family to the Mayflower" way, but in the "my family speaks another language" way. I have no argument against legal immigration that selects for what our society most needs. Open borders are a free for all that throws our lower rungs to fend for themselves.

diminoten 7y ago
...I don't think you understand what an open border means, and if you're getting hung up on the "legality" of it, an open border would literally make immigration legal. If you have no argument against legal immigration, then you have no argument against an open border, as it changes the policy, making immigration generally legal in its various forms. Further, a nation-state's service to its people is a geographic and societal one. Once more people enter into the geographic area and participate in the society governed by the state, those people become its citizens, in every relevant sense. Additionally, you are admitting to agreeing with the idea that "Americans are more deserving humans to non-Americans" and that is xenophobic, literally the textbook definition. It's funny to me that you think the Wikipedia article titled, "The Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration" is about legal immigrants. Open borders is not a "free for all", and I hate to break this to you, but our lower rungs already do fend for themselves. Allowing more immigrants into this country would in no way further their dire straits, and in many ways it'd likely help them, as a larger poor population would increase votes for programs and infrastructure to support poor people.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  > I don't think you understand what an open border means, and if you're getting hung up on the "legality" of it, an open border would literally make immigration legal. You're conflating the societal value of legal immigrants, which is itself questionable at times (H1-B abuse) with those of illegal immigrants which further depress wages. > "Americans are more deserving humans to non-Americans" and that is xenophobic I never made a statement of who is deserving of anything. I've pointed out that nation-state exists to serve its present-day citizens, not hypothetical future citizens as you are saying. > It's funny to me that you think the Wikipedia article titled, "The Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration" is about legal immigrants. How could I forget the one article in your deluge. It's a great article: >> Immigrants, legal and illegal, are more likely to pay taxes than they are to use public services. Illegal immigrants are not eligible for most public services and live in fear of revealing themselves to government authorities. Households headed by illegal immigrants use less than half the amount of federal services that households headed by documented immigrants or citizens make use of. Illegal immigrants are a benefit because they cannot access services that they pay for. They're a net benefit because we allow their exploitation. > but our lower rungs already do fend for themselves. Exactly, so let's make it worse for them by further depressing wages! They're already suffering, what's a little more?
  - diminoten 7y ago
    Poor Americans are not suffering because of immigration, undocumented or otherwise. Undocumented immigration does not suppress wages. Undocumented immigrants would be able to climb out of poverty if they weren't being persecuted by the federal government, so the fact that they can't use services they pay for is a problem, not a solution, as these services are intended to push people up and out of poverty (to the extent that they work, admittedly). And yes, you did actually say you prefer American people over not Americans, and yes, the viewpoint you are expressing is not only xenophobic, but also not grounded in the many many facts I've provided. What is it really? Do you fear things different from you? Do you think of "your team" as the one that hates immigration, so you feel the need to support that view? Do you think you and your kind are superior than the people who want to live here? What is the actual reason? Trying to cherry pick statistics won't get that true reason out there so maybe just say it. Dang doesn't like it when these conversations get combative and protracted, so I'm going to stop replying. I do wish we could continue, and I think you should summarize your position in your final reply, because it's important to get this stuff out there, and honestly I think at this point the only really "wrong" thing you've done is not fully consider the consequences of your position.