5 ms·

Illegal immigration is a problem whether you want to admit or or not. Just allow the amount of legal immigrants needed. Saying illegal immigration is not a prob

Illegal immigration is a problem whether you want to admit or or not. Just allow the amount of legal immigrants needed. Saying illegal immigration is not a problem is just as much of a smokescreen as saying immigrants are "the" problem.

komali2 10mo ago
Ah, well if it's a problem, it should be trivially easy for you to illustrate how exactly it's a problem, using hard facts and numbers. I earnestly invite you to do so!
- hellojesus 10mo ago
  It's a problem insofar as it exists and is illegal. I'm no fan of the current administration, but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws. That seems problematic to me for an executive branch. I have no problem with uncapped migration, but to flat out refuse to enforce the law is a bit ridiculous. What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome. As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight. Americans complain that illegals are taking their jobs, but they're only taking the ones that aren't filled by US laborers. And US laborers can't legally compete with illegals if illegals are being paid less than minimum wage. A single, simple, straight-forward law could fix all those issues with the stroke of a pen.
  - mrguyorama 10mo ago
    >but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws. The Biden admin tried to pass the single most restrictive immigration law the US has ever seen with bipartisan support from all but the most progressive democrats. Please tell me, who killed that bill? >As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight Speaking of laws not being enforced, republicans have spent 30 years bitching about immigration while utterly refusing to enforce existing laws punishing primarily republican owned businesses for hiring illegal immigrants and suppressing wages. Gee, surely they care about fixing things right? Even Trump's admin is still refusing to enforce those laws. Desantis spent five minutes suggesting he might finally enforce such laws and was immediately stopped by republicans >That seems problematic to me for an executive branch. So you voted for an executive branch that demonstrably violates all sorts of laws, refuses to punish friends for violating laws, and pardons literal war criminals or literal scammers if they donate enough. Good job. Please tell me how pardoning the guy from Nikola Motors is enforcing the law and a good use of the executive branch. >What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome. Again, democrats love nothing more than passing laws in congress and there is ample evidence of that. It is republicans who have spent 50 years OPENLY not doing their jobs in congress. They are the ones saying, openly, that congress not passing anything is an intended outcome. They are the ones saying that preventing democrats from doing anything at all is intended. Democrats, despite such bad faith, still cross the aisle and pass things republicans want, because the US system requires bipartisanship as a feature. When the illegal migrant laborers come to cash their checks every week, those checks carry the signature of republican families. If you've ever bought potatoes that come from a Maine farm, they were picked by migrant labor, overseen by angry and lazy republicans who do nothing but bitch about migrant labor while smoking weed with the local cops, and choosing to hire that exact labor. LePage made zero effort to enforce laws on the book to stop those very republicans from using migrant labor. Why hire the politicians that have a demonstrated history of making no attempt to solve the problem, voted in by the people causing the problem in the first place? Meanwhile here in Maine, bulk asylum migration is pretty much the only reason why Lewiston is a functioning and thriving City, and migrants from former french colonies in africa are the only people who can still speak french and carry that culture after the KKK spent the early part of the 1900s stamping out my french ancestry and culture.
    - hellojesus 10mo ago
      I'm late on this reply; have been solo parenting while the spouse was out of town, but I wanted to say thank you for the detailed response. Also, I understand why you presume I voted for the republican candidate during the most recent presidential election, but I assure you I did not. Trump's interview with Bloomberg Business solidified beyond any doubt that he was a fool that had no idea how tarrifs worked. I am equally dissatisfied with the lack of enforcement against employers of illegal migrants and agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment. My initial response was to point out that somehow Trump has quelled the rush of migrants without new legislation as a reference against what Biden's administration seemed not to be able to do. But you make a very good point about the unreasonable unwillingness of republicans to pass legislation that would likely have dramatically helped the situation. Thanks again.
      - throaway123213 10mo ago
        Ive gotten the same response, knee jerk reactions that regurgitate CNN talking points and assumptions that im a Trumpist. Im a lifelong NDP / Green Party supporter. lol..
        hellojesus 10mo ago
        I understand why it happens, and I am a registered republican, but that's mostly because I align most with small government and low regulatory environments philosophically. In practice, my voting record is probably some random smattering of blue, red, and green. I vote for the candidate I think is best, and I try to evaluate all candidates based on their positions before looking at their party affiliation. But also I live in the Portland, OR metro area so my vote is pretty much irrelevant.
        throaway123213 10mo ago
        Well, then you should be voting for the party which will change the voting system.
      - 10mo ago
- pfannkuchen 10mo ago
  See: demographic projections. Europeans are projected to numerically lose control of America, which in a democracy is equivalent to losing control functionally. It’s very convenient for a lot of people to pretend this doesn’t matter at all, and many or even most Europeans have at this point been brainwashed through childhood conditioning to not be able to go there even in their thoughts, lest they become the deepest evil, according to their conditioning. But, in a sane world, anything pre-1945, the statement “Europeans are projected to lose control of America within single digit decades” would spur a panic. Let me guess, I’m just a horrible immoral person and I’m not allowed to think about this, right? Do you have any arguments besides that one?
  - noduerme 10mo ago
    I think it was a mistake of the left to brainwash white kids to think of themselves as belonging to a group of evil oppressive colonizers - precisely because a few decades of that type of over-the-top racial "justice" schooling has led (inevitably, and even understandably) to the white nationalist backlash we're seeing today. What should have happened was to stick with the individualist, civil rights notion that all men and women are created equal. Full stop. Your complaint about the brainwashing is valid to a point, as no one should be raised having guilt for being born of a particular race/ethnicity, and in fact people should take pride in their heritage. However, you do not explain why you think it matters whether a majority of the US remains of European stock, (by which I guess you mean not mixed race as well). And this is where your argument is transparently, well, racist. Because to explain that, you would probably need to denigrate other races. I think you could make an argument that Europeans should stay a majority in Europe, on the basis that it is Europe. But America is not Europe, and never was. Europeans were a minority throughout the Americas when they showed up, and they will be a minority here again, and I don't see a big problem with that. [edit] Just to add, there was nothing "sane" about the way Europeans conducted themselves either on the continent or here, especially in the decade prior to 1945. Also, prior to 1945, there was no general notion of "European", but rather many smaller nationalities. From 1941, it was a widely held idea that people of German descent for instance were a threat to America and should be deported. In the 19th century, a lot of people thought the same about the Irish, and you would have had to replace "European" with "English" in your statement to get some sort of nativist reaction.

komali2 10mo ago

Ah, well if it's a problem, it should be trivially easy for you to illustrate how exactly it's a problem, using hard facts and numbers. I earnestly invite you to do so!

hellojesus 10mo ago
It's a problem insofar as it exists and is illegal. I'm no fan of the current administration, but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws. That seems problematic to me for an executive branch. I have no problem with uncapped migration, but to flat out refuse to enforce the law is a bit ridiculous. What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome. As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight. Americans complain that illegals are taking their jobs, but they're only taking the ones that aren't filled by US laborers. And US laborers can't legally compete with illegals if illegals are being paid less than minimum wage. A single, simple, straight-forward law could fix all those issues with the stroke of a pen.
- mrguyorama 10mo ago
  >but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws. The Biden admin tried to pass the single most restrictive immigration law the US has ever seen with bipartisan support from all but the most progressive democrats. Please tell me, who killed that bill? >As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight Speaking of laws not being enforced, republicans have spent 30 years bitching about immigration while utterly refusing to enforce existing laws punishing primarily republican owned businesses for hiring illegal immigrants and suppressing wages. Gee, surely they care about fixing things right? Even Trump's admin is still refusing to enforce those laws. Desantis spent five minutes suggesting he might finally enforce such laws and was immediately stopped by republicans >That seems problematic to me for an executive branch. So you voted for an executive branch that demonstrably violates all sorts of laws, refuses to punish friends for violating laws, and pardons literal war criminals or literal scammers if they donate enough. Good job. Please tell me how pardoning the guy from Nikola Motors is enforcing the law and a good use of the executive branch. >What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome. Again, democrats love nothing more than passing laws in congress and there is ample evidence of that. It is republicans who have spent 50 years OPENLY not doing their jobs in congress. They are the ones saying, openly, that congress not passing anything is an intended outcome. They are the ones saying that preventing democrats from doing anything at all is intended. Democrats, despite such bad faith, still cross the aisle and pass things republicans want, because the US system requires bipartisanship as a feature. When the illegal migrant laborers come to cash their checks every week, those checks carry the signature of republican families. If you've ever bought potatoes that come from a Maine farm, they were picked by migrant labor, overseen by angry and lazy republicans who do nothing but bitch about migrant labor while smoking weed with the local cops, and choosing to hire that exact labor. LePage made zero effort to enforce laws on the book to stop those very republicans from using migrant labor. Why hire the politicians that have a demonstrated history of making no attempt to solve the problem, voted in by the people causing the problem in the first place? Meanwhile here in Maine, bulk asylum migration is pretty much the only reason why Lewiston is a functioning and thriving City, and migrants from former french colonies in africa are the only people who can still speak french and carry that culture after the KKK spent the early part of the 1900s stamping out my french ancestry and culture.
  - hellojesus 10mo ago
    I'm late on this reply; have been solo parenting while the spouse was out of town, but I wanted to say thank you for the detailed response. Also, I understand why you presume I voted for the republican candidate during the most recent presidential election, but I assure you I did not. Trump's interview with Bloomberg Business solidified beyond any doubt that he was a fool that had no idea how tarrifs worked. I am equally dissatisfied with the lack of enforcement against employers of illegal migrants and agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment. My initial response was to point out that somehow Trump has quelled the rush of migrants without new legislation as a reference against what Biden's administration seemed not to be able to do. But you make a very good point about the unreasonable unwillingness of republicans to pass legislation that would likely have dramatically helped the situation. Thanks again.
    - throaway123213 10mo ago
      Ive gotten the same response, knee jerk reactions that regurgitate CNN talking points and assumptions that im a Trumpist. Im a lifelong NDP / Green Party supporter. lol..
      - hellojesus 10mo ago
        I understand why it happens, and I am a registered republican, but that's mostly because I align most with small government and low regulatory environments philosophically. In practice, my voting record is probably some random smattering of blue, red, and green. I vote for the candidate I think is best, and I try to evaluate all candidates based on their positions before looking at their party affiliation. But also I live in the Portland, OR metro area so my vote is pretty much irrelevant.
        throaway123213 10mo ago
        Well, then you should be voting for the party which will change the voting system.
    - 10mo ago
pfannkuchen 10mo ago
See: demographic projections. Europeans are projected to numerically lose control of America, which in a democracy is equivalent to losing control functionally. It’s very convenient for a lot of people to pretend this doesn’t matter at all, and many or even most Europeans have at this point been brainwashed through childhood conditioning to not be able to go there even in their thoughts, lest they become the deepest evil, according to their conditioning. But, in a sane world, anything pre-1945, the statement “Europeans are projected to lose control of America within single digit decades” would spur a panic. Let me guess, I’m just a horrible immoral person and I’m not allowed to think about this, right? Do you have any arguments besides that one?
- noduerme 10mo ago
  I think it was a mistake of the left to brainwash white kids to think of themselves as belonging to a group of evil oppressive colonizers - precisely because a few decades of that type of over-the-top racial "justice" schooling has led (inevitably, and even understandably) to the white nationalist backlash we're seeing today. What should have happened was to stick with the individualist, civil rights notion that all men and women are created equal. Full stop. Your complaint about the brainwashing is valid to a point, as no one should be raised having guilt for being born of a particular race/ethnicity, and in fact people should take pride in their heritage. However, you do not explain why you think it matters whether a majority of the US remains of European stock, (by which I guess you mean not mixed race as well). And this is where your argument is transparently, well, racist. Because to explain that, you would probably need to denigrate other races. I think you could make an argument that Europeans should stay a majority in Europe, on the basis that it is Europe. But America is not Europe, and never was. Europeans were a minority throughout the Americas when they showed up, and they will be a minority here again, and I don't see a big problem with that. [edit] Just to add, there was nothing "sane" about the way Europeans conducted themselves either on the continent or here, especially in the decade prior to 1945. Also, prior to 1945, there was no general notion of "European", but rather many smaller nationalities. From 1941, it was a widely held idea that people of German descent for instance were a threat to America and should be deported. In the 19th century, a lot of people thought the same about the Irish, and you would have had to replace "European" with "English" in your statement to get some sort of nativist reaction.