3 ms·

Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)

Dig1t 1y ago
This is a legit good question, someone who walks across the border is extremely unlikely to be able to afford cancer treatment. There’s a near infinite supply of needy people in the world. What is the legitimate, rational argument for allowing them all to come here and receive aid and treatment? Even if you decide you’re not going to “allow” it, if the incentives still exist, like California’s free healthcare for illegal immigrants, they will still come because the benefits are worth the risk.
intermerda 1y ago
What an insanely cruel thought lacking any semblance of basic decency and humanity. Is there really no cure for MAGA mind virus?
- cempaka 1y ago
  The problem is that they've been convinced the reason everything in our lives is increasingly shitty is down to hordes of 6-year-olds with leukemia who've crossed the border for free medical care. It couldn't be more obvious that this is a scapegoating operation being pushed by the ultra-wealthy who are gaining from widening precarity and exploitation. But a "solution" that involves just inflicting a bunch of harm to the powerless is inherently more appealing than wresting control from the powerful, which will involve real work & sacrifice.
rekttrader 1y ago
I bet you’re real fun at parties.
- jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
  I bet he either doesn't get invited to parties, or doesn't voice these views at parties.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child Where? I see it calling out presumed ICE agents “in civilian clothing,” making arrests in “the hallway” of a courthouse (in violation of “a federal court ruling that the new ICE courthouse arrest policy is unlawful and unconstitutional”), allegedly violating “the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution — which guarantee due process and prevent unlawful seizures” while laying bare that this administration has given up on arresting the “violent criminals” we were promised in campaign world.
southernplaces7 1y ago
Aside from the article not suggesting that, even if it did, so what? I'd like to assume that the federal bureaucracy of one of the absolute wealthiest and most powerful nations in human history can manage to avoid economic disaster if it defers some half-reasoned regulatory deportation policy for little kids who are possibly too sick to travel. Basic humane considerations and decency really do have a place in how you enforce laws, and their existence makes a difference that can affect any of us at any time.
- jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
  Right, that was my point, but in the end I didn't feel like it was worth the effort making it; this person is either a troll or a lunatic.

Dig1t 1y ago

This is a legit good question, someone who walks across the border is extremely unlikely to be able to afford cancer treatment. There’s a near infinite supply of needy people in the world. What is the legitimate, rational argument for allowing them all to come here and receive aid and treatment? Even if you decide you’re not going to “allow” it, if the incentives still exist, like California’s free healthcare for illegal immigrants, they will still come because the benefits are worth the risk.

intermerda 1y ago

What an insanely cruel thought lacking any semblance of basic decency and humanity. Is there really no cure for MAGA mind virus?

cempaka 1y ago
The problem is that they've been convinced the reason everything in our lives is increasingly shitty is down to hordes of 6-year-olds with leukemia who've crossed the border for free medical care. It couldn't be more obvious that this is a scapegoating operation being pushed by the ultra-wealthy who are gaining from widening precarity and exploitation. But a "solution" that involves just inflicting a bunch of harm to the powerless is inherently more appealing than wresting control from the powerful, which will involve real work & sacrifice.

rekttrader 1y ago

I bet you’re real fun at parties.

jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
I bet he either doesn't get invited to parties, or doesn't voice these views at parties.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child Where? I see it calling out presumed ICE agents “in civilian clothing,” making arrests in “the hallway” of a courthouse (in violation of “a federal court ruling that the new ICE courthouse arrest policy is unlawful and unconstitutional”), allegedly violating “the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution — which guarantee due process and prevent unlawful seizures” while laying bare that this administration has given up on arresting the “violent criminals” we were promised in campaign world.

southernplaces7 1y ago

Aside from the article not suggesting that, even if it did, so what? I'd like to assume that the federal bureaucracy of one of the absolute wealthiest and most powerful nations in human history can manage to avoid economic disaster if it defers some half-reasoned regulatory deportation policy for little kids who are possibly too sick to travel. Basic humane considerations and decency really do have a place in how you enforce laws, and their existence makes a difference that can affect any of us at any time.

jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
Right, that was my point, but in the end I didn't feel like it was worth the effort making it; this person is either a troll or a lunatic.