5 ms·

Seems quite biased, considering they call for "Congress [to] significantly reduce the number of people subject to deportation by—for example—creating a pathway

Seems quite biased, considering they call for "Congress [to] significantly reduce the number of people subject to deportation by—for example—creating a pathway to citizenship for undocumented people, dramatically [reduce] the grounds of removability that are based on criminal legal involvement, and [enact] a statute of limitations on deportations" Some people might argue that we should be dedicating our scarce housing resources towards expanding the number of legal immigrants with high value skills, not uneducated illegal immigrants, and that illegal immigrants deserve to be deported for entering the country illegally.

trasz 4y ago
Housing is scarce because of investors buying it and then effectively wasting it, not because there are too many people.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- RHSeeger 4y ago
  You're oversimplifying with that statement. There are many reasons why housing is scarce, and that is only one of them. - Existing homeowners trying to prevent denser/more housing - Regulations and codes that make building much more expensive - (As you noted) existing housing being wasted as an investment and I'm sure there's much more.
turtledove 4y ago
This is a false dichotomy, how we allocate housing is the wrong framing. The problem is that that housing is in any way a scarce resource. Solve that problem instead.
- ceeplusplus 4y ago
  Those are two separate issues which both can be solved independently. We can simultaneously overturn SFH zoning and also aggressively deport illegal immigrants.
  - turtledove 4y ago
    We could, or we could not deport humans and solve housing and probably be even better off...
    - ceeplusplus 4y ago
      Those illegal immigrants are here at the cost of the wages of legal citizens. If no legal citizens wanted to work for farmers, two things would happen, wages would go up (a lot), and investment in automation would go up. Both of those things are positives for the US economy and average unskilled US citizen. Food prices will go up, but I don't think they'll go up as much as you think as labor has never been the biggest component of farming costs. People don't have a right to live in the US just because they decided to walk across the border illegally.
      - turtledove 4y ago
        > Those illegal immigrants are here at the cost of the wages of legal citizens. No they aren't. This is xenophobic claptrap. Or at least it isn't self evident they are, and you've failed to provide any evidence they are.
        teakettle42 4y ago
        From your other comments, it seems like you believe that housing prices are subject to supply and demand; is that accurate? As in, failure to build enough supply for demand has driven up prices? Do you also believe that labor is subject to the same forces of supply and demand?
        turtledove 4y ago
        Only if we let it. A workers coop doesn't engage in a labor market, it pays everyone an equal portion of the company's profit. And I'm pretty sure we could absorb a lot more labor and have a stronger safety net for the folks who currently need to work three jobs to make ends meet. Closing borders really only tackles a high level symptom. If we're not excited to have more help building society, we're doing something wrong.
tomjakubowski 4y ago
Undocumented immigrants provide a significant and grossly disproportionate chunk of construction labor in the United States. If you kick them out, the housing shortage only gets worse.
- bruceb 4y ago
  Or to but it another way, wages would rise for Americans and legal immigrants in construction, especially those who have been involved with the justice system and have a record.
  - kelnos 4y ago
    Or more likely, costs would rise for people in search of those services, and the extra profit would be pocketed by the management and shareholders of the construction companies.
  - WalterGR 4y ago
    Why would they rise?
    - bruceb 4y ago
      Less supply means higher wages. Just like in tech. It also means people who might not get hired before, such as those with criminal records, would be more likely to get a job.
      - WalterGR 4y ago
        In theory. I meant: specifically for the roles in construction that would become available. These are not high-paying jobs and they lack the benefits that we’ve come to appreciate, such as care or compensation upon loss of life or limb. Since the cost to the employer would increase, what would be the effect on wages? Further, my understanding is that the employers of day-labor off-the-table construction work don’t much care about arrest records.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lelandbatey 4y ago
You're ignoring the very next line which states "why" they make this particular recommendation, a recommendation that they're pretty consistent about making throughout the rest of the document: > "While those reforms do not address surveillance itself, they are the most direct way to undercut ICE surveillance authority." This website, https://americandragnet.org/ https://americandragnet.org/ , seems dedicated to curtailing dragnet surveillance in the USA. The facts around that surveillance are so disturbing that I'm amazed we can sit around and talk about deportation when it's a just a side show compared to the surveillance. The facts that they're laying out: - ICE is tracking your address, your home moves, and your driving habits (or at least, they're doing so for ~75% of people in the USA) - ICE is hijacking government functions like our DMVs and our utility companies without oversight in order to find out who you are, where you live, who you live near, etc. in order to detain and deport... well, I'll leave the who up to you, but if you're not uneasy with the start of that sentence, I doubt any way of ending it will either. It's not the deportations that are concerning; it's the paths we're taking to get there.

trasz 4y ago

Housing is scarce because of investors buying it and then effectively wasting it, not because there are too many people.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
RHSeeger 4y ago
You're oversimplifying with that statement. There are many reasons why housing is scarce, and that is only one of them. - Existing homeowners trying to prevent denser/more housing - Regulations and codes that make building much more expensive - (As you noted) existing housing being wasted as an investment and I'm sure there's much more.

turtledove 4y ago

This is a false dichotomy, how we allocate housing is the wrong framing. The problem is that that housing is in any way a scarce resource. Solve that problem instead.

ceeplusplus 4y ago
Those are two separate issues which both can be solved independently. We can simultaneously overturn SFH zoning and also aggressively deport illegal immigrants.
- turtledove 4y ago
  We could, or we could not deport humans and solve housing and probably be even better off...
  - ceeplusplus 4y ago
    Those illegal immigrants are here at the cost of the wages of legal citizens. If no legal citizens wanted to work for farmers, two things would happen, wages would go up (a lot), and investment in automation would go up. Both of those things are positives for the US economy and average unskilled US citizen. Food prices will go up, but I don't think they'll go up as much as you think as labor has never been the biggest component of farming costs. People don't have a right to live in the US just because they decided to walk across the border illegally.
    - turtledove 4y ago
      > Those illegal immigrants are here at the cost of the wages of legal citizens. No they aren't. This is xenophobic claptrap. Or at least it isn't self evident they are, and you've failed to provide any evidence they are.
      - teakettle42 4y ago
        From your other comments, it seems like you believe that housing prices are subject to supply and demand; is that accurate? As in, failure to build enough supply for demand has driven up prices? Do you also believe that labor is subject to the same forces of supply and demand?
        turtledove 4y ago
        Only if we let it. A workers coop doesn't engage in a labor market, it pays everyone an equal portion of the company's profit. And I'm pretty sure we could absorb a lot more labor and have a stronger safety net for the folks who currently need to work three jobs to make ends meet. Closing borders really only tackles a high level symptom. If we're not excited to have more help building society, we're doing something wrong.

tomjakubowski 4y ago

Undocumented immigrants provide a significant and grossly disproportionate chunk of construction labor in the United States. If you kick them out, the housing shortage only gets worse.

bruceb 4y ago
Or to but it another way, wages would rise for Americans and legal immigrants in construction, especially those who have been involved with the justice system and have a record.
- kelnos 4y ago
  Or more likely, costs would rise for people in search of those services, and the extra profit would be pocketed by the management and shareholders of the construction companies.
- WalterGR 4y ago
  Why would they rise?
  - bruceb 4y ago
    Less supply means higher wages. Just like in tech. It also means people who might not get hired before, such as those with criminal records, would be more likely to get a job.
    - WalterGR 4y ago
      In theory. I meant: specifically for the roles in construction that would become available. These are not high-paying jobs and they lack the benefits that we’ve come to appreciate, such as care or compensation upon loss of life or limb. Since the cost to the employer would increase, what would be the effect on wages? Further, my understanding is that the employers of day-labor off-the-table construction work don’t much care about arrest records.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lelandbatey 4y ago

You're ignoring the very next line which states "why" they make this particular recommendation, a recommendation that they're pretty consistent about making throughout the rest of the document: > "While those reforms do not address surveillance itself, they are the most direct way to undercut ICE surveillance authority." This website, https://americandragnet.org/ https://americandragnet.org/ , seems dedicated to curtailing dragnet surveillance in the USA. The facts around that surveillance are so disturbing that I'm amazed we can sit around and talk about deportation when it's a just a side show compared to the surveillance. The facts that they're laying out: - ICE is tracking your address, your home moves, and your driving habits (or at least, they're doing so for ~75% of people in the USA) - ICE is hijacking government functions like our DMVs and our utility companies without oversight in order to find out who you are, where you live, who you live near, etc. in order to detain and deport... well, I'll leave the who up to you, but if you're not uneasy with the start of that sentence, I doubt any way of ending it will either. It's not the deportations that are concerning; it's the paths we're taking to get there.