One example, for all of those who claim their own predecessors "came here legally" - for the first 300 years of the country, all immigration was legal, because there were no laws governing immigration.
For those whose forebears came more recently, a surprising number of Republican politicians and mouthpieces actually have relatives who would be considered to have immigrated illegally, or to have "not assimilated" by continuing to speak their native tongue, or to have benefited from chain migration. Tomi Lahren's great great grandfather forged his immigration papers, Tucker Carlson's great grandfather left behind the "failing country" of Italy, and Steven Miller's great grandfather's initial immigration application was denied due to "ignorance".
Just curious, if all immigration was legal for the first 300 years, how does that make the claims false when they claim their ancestors did it legally?
It doesn’t make it false, it makes it meaningless.
I’ll agree it’s meaningless. But that’s because it’s a meaningless response to a meaningless counterpoint made every day. The counterpoint of “well your ancestors immigrated here too” is also completely meaningless, which is the only time anyone ever says “well my ancestors did it legally.” How this country ran 300 years ago isn’t that relevant to policies we should be making today. It was an entirely different country that was constantly at war and expanding and constantly abusing many different peoples. So bringing up what someone’s ancestors did from 300 years ago is irrelevant when it comes to policies of today. So not surprising that it is answered with an equally meaningless response.
It doesn’t say 300 years ago; it said the first 300 years. This includes the early 20th century. Some of the people complaining the hardest about immigrants are within two or three generations away from this within their own families.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Almost all these politicians are descendent of immigrants. Yet the real owners of the US and Canada our First Nations people continue to have very little voice in this matter...
Almost all these politicians are descendent of immigrants. Yet the real owners of the US and Canada our First Nations people continue to have very little voice in this matter...
Almost all these politicians are descendent of immigrants. Yet the real owners of the US and Canada our First Nations people continue to have very little voice in this matter...
the answer to this is always "get over it".
Also “that was a long time ago and things are different now”.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
The victors re-write history, right Emancipation Park?
We'd be a better continent if we just owned up to our poor track record of treating First Nation peoples and moved to immediately rectify the problems. Talk is cheap and thats all any of the politicians do.
So he doesn’t really know if his wife and daughter were separated? He “heard” from family members? Where? Texas? Did they get visitation? Maybe someone should go and see and report back? Oh yea, access is denied. Maybe Sarah Huckabee can fill us in? Something smells and it ain’t my feet.
Please also note he said he was not in favor of his wife going to the US. He couldn’t understand why she’d put her daughter through this. Sounds like the mom put her child in danger and knew it against the fathers wishes. Who’s at fault here?
Where have I heard that before?
Oh yeah, Bill Clinton's Administration where Janet Reno ordered a kid to be deported to Cuba.
No, Janet Reno enforced an order of the court after it was litigated. You really don’t understand our concept of government, do you?
And most normal people would blame the parents for putting those kids in that situation.
The counter-argument to this though is that not all of these parents are trying to illegally immigrate. Many come seeking asylum from oppressive governments like Guatemala. Since Trump is obviously against that sort of thing, those people should just be turned away, not detained.
And those countries all have US embassies where asylum can be obtained.
Heather Cox Richardson, a professor at Boston University, posted an article of Face book that addresses these issue. Keys points in bold:
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that
the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter
illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration
problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want
illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and
infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican
immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling
criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with
Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but
from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The
story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's
first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited
immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those
countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually
prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically
curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for
the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848
until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without
restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge
American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after
1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were
(unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged
immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The
Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the
Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made
destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor
white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath).
The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the
border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to
regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker
policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that
migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But
employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American
workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million
illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have
officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from
labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive,
President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program
in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional
reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War
and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota
system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously
discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened
immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration
levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black
immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration,
arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority.
They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use
the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect
of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision
had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their
families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward
Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap
on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest
worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers
were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended
on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to
be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986,
Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million
Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on
employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the
problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning
the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then,
migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number
leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily
guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect,
which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove
Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But
this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While
about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United
States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten
years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much
more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.)
And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good
enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really
about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around
2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are
separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees.
They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for
asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to
stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is
possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no
deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
And most normal people would blame the parents for putting those kids in that situation.
The counter-argument to this though is that not all of these parents are trying to illegally immigrate. Many come seeking asylum from oppressive governments like Guatemala. Since Trump is obviously against that sort of thing, those people should just be turned away, not detained.
And those countries all have US embassies where asylum can be obtained.
Heather Cox Richardson, a professor at Boston University, posted an article of Face book that addresses these issue. Keys points in bold:
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that
the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter
illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration
problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want
illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and
infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican
immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling
criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with
Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but
from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The
story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's
first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited
immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those
countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually
prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically
curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for
the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848
until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without
restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge
American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after
1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were
(unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged
immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The
Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the
Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made
destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor
white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath).
The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the
border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to
regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker
policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that
migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But
employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American
workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million
illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have
officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from
labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive,
President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program
in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional
reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War
and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota
system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously
discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened
immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration
levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black
immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration,
arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority.
They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use
the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect
of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision
had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their
families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward
Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap
on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest
worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers
were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended
on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to
be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986,
Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million
Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on
employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the
problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning
the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then,
migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number
leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily
guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect,
which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove
Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But
this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While
about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United
States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten
years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much
more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.)
And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good
enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really
about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around
2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are
separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees.
They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for
asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to
stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is
possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no
deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
And most normal people would blame the parents for putting those kids in that situation.
The counter-argument to this though is that not all of these parents are trying to illegally immigrate. Many come seeking asylum from oppressive governments like Guatemala. Since Trump is obviously against that sort of thing, those people should just be turned away, not detained.
And those countries all have US embassies where asylum can be obtained.
Heather Cox Richardson, a professor at Boston University, posted an article of Face book that addresses these issue. Keys points in bold:
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that
the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter
illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration
problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want
illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and
infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican
immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling
criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with
Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but
from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The
story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's
first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited
immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those
countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually
prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically
curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for
the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848
until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without
restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge
American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after
1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were
(unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged
immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The
Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the
Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made
destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor
white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath).
The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the
border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to
regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker
policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that
migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But
employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American
workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million
illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have
officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from
labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive,
President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program
in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional
reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War
and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota
system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously
discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened
immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration
levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black
immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration,
arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority.
They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use
the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect
of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision
had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their
families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward
Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap
on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest
worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers
were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended
on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to
be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986,
Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million
Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on
employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the
problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning
the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then,
migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number
leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily
guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect,
which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove
Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But
this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While
about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United
States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten
years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much
more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.)
And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good
enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really
about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around
2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are
separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees.
They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for
asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to
stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is
possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no
deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,926
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
I see this again and again but it never fails to amaze me that the average conservative American has really no idea what a “far left” viewpoint is. Anything left of Mitt Romney seems to be beyond their ken.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
Come on, man.
You should re read what I wrote. I said posts that have links. Once again what's your solution to the immigration issue?
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
Come on, man.
You should re read what I wrote. I said posts that have links. Once again what's your solution to the immigration issue?
I did re-read it. I quoted your exact words. Nobody is interested in unsubstantiated, broad sweeping generalizations ungrounded in logic or facts.
The immigration issue is a tough one. The point of the problem is at the border, but the root of the problem is back in the potential immigrants' home country: strife with problems that developed countries have helped create given the level of exploitation which exists there in various forms.
In the state of Washington, I see many Mexican people each year as I travel to the Gorge to attend DMB. My experience with them is they are very family oriented, very friendly, and hard working. If properly vetted I'm not sure why Hispanic/Mexican people wouldn't be considered valuable additions to any country? The white people I see driving around in trucks with other white people in the back of those trucks sitting in old sofas appear to be much bigger candidates for hindering the country's progress.
Here's a potential solution: maybe you guys could work out some trades? Maybe instead of fantasy football... you guys play fantasy country and find some weak owner (country) to trade a big, massive clump of overrated white guys for some Hispanic people with massive upsides?
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
Come on, man.
You should re read what I wrote. I said posts that have links. Once again what's your solution to the immigration issue?
I did re-read it. I quoted your exact words. Nobody is interested in unsubstantiated, broad sweeping generalizations ungrounded in logic or facts.
The immigration issue is a tough one. The point of the problem is at the border, but the root of the problem is back in the potential immigrants' home country: strife with problems that developed countries have helped create given the level of exploitation which exists there in various forms.
In the state of Washington, I see many Mexican people each year as I travel to the Gorge to attend DMB. My experience with them is they are very family oriented, very friendly, and hard working. If properly vetted I'm not sure why Hispanic/Mexican people wouldn't be considered valuable additions to any country? The white people I see driving around in trucks with other white people in the back of those trucks sitting in old sofas appear to be much bigger candidates for hindering the country's progress.
Here's a potential solution: maybe you guys could work out some trades? Maybe instead of fantasy football... you guys play fantasy country and find some weak owner (country) to trade a big, massive clump of overrated white guys for some Hispanic people with massive upsides?
I'll take Chile; that country makes some kick ass wine.
And most normal people would blame the parents for putting those kids in that situation.
The counter-argument to this though is that not all of these parents are trying to illegally immigrate. Many come seeking asylum from oppressive governments like Guatemala. Since Trump is obviously against that sort of thing, those people should just be turned away, not detained.
And those countries all have US embassies where asylum can be obtained.
Heather Cox Richardson, a professor at Boston University, posted an article of Face book that addresses these issue. Keys points in bold:
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that
the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter
illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration
problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want
illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and
infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican
immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling
criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with
Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but
from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The
story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's
first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited
immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those
countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually
prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically
curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for
the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848
until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without
restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge
American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after
1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were
(unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged
immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The
Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the
Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made
destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor
white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath).
The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the
border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to
regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker
policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that
migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But
employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American
workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million
illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have
officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from
labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive,
President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program
in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional
reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War
and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota
system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously
discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened
immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration
levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black
immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration,
arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority.
They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use
the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect
of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision
had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their
families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward
Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap
on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest
worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers
were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended
on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to
be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986,
Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million
Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on
employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the
problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning
the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then,
migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number
leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily
guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect,
which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove
Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But
this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While
about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United
States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten
years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much
more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.)
And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good
enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really
about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around
2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are
separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees.
They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for
asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to
stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is
possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no
deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
You do realize that the crime rate from immigrants is lower than native born, right? Of course you don’t.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
I’m still waiting on a link. Please post your links, Please.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
Come on, man.
You should re read what I wrote. I said posts that have links. Once again what's your solution to the immigration issue?
Separating toddlers & infants from parents is not the answer so just take that off the table ..
Yep parents are being deported without their children holy fuck I’m sick thinking about this fucking ugly mess created by this idiot racist human, i can’t believe they actually did this on purpose it’s evil and if you support this man we are no longer friends I’d rather be with an animal than with Baffoon supporter !!!!!
jesus greets me looks just like me ....
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,926
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
Are you just making shit up as you go?
"bitching?" You call having strong feelings and opinions about atrocious treatment of children as "bitching"?
As for no solutions- I and others her have made suggestions.
Isn't like a big part of your economy built on "immigrants"?
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
Number one don'tcompare me to him. You far left liberals love twisting peoples words to fit your agenda. You also conveniently ignore posts that have links to back up non far left liberal views. I see it over and over again in this thread. LOL I asked the question what is your solution?
Fair enough and my apologies. Comparisons are a) unfair, b) personal and against the rules. My bad.
Solutions (yet again):
If the person is seeking political asylum (it's amazing how this keeps getting overlooked) help them make that tradition. I think that is a FAR more reasonable solution than whisking their kids off, don't you.
End the stupid fucking drug war. (I know I use the F word too often lately but the drug was really is fucking stupid.) The drug war is not working. It is creating more criminals. Decriminalize/ legalize ALL drugs. That's right, all. Users will use, legal or not. This is well known.
Have the U.S. spend less money on an offensive military, maintain a good defensive military and use some of the money saved to develop programs to help other countries become strong and independent. But no, Americans don't think like that. Look how we solve our own problems with crime. Do we get to the root of the problem of why there is so much crime? No, that's too logical. We go the lazy route and build more prisons (and develop a larger prisoner work force. Hmmm.)
Educate the American voting population so that we will stop electing clueless Bozos who don't have a clue. Problems are only exacerbated by incompetent elected officials.
I've said all this before a number of times. Please don't ask again. Thank you.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
And most normal people would blame the parents for putting those kids in that situation.
The counter-argument to this though is that not all of these parents are trying to illegally immigrate. Many come seeking asylum from oppressive governments like Guatemala. Since Trump is obviously against that sort of thing, those people should just be turned away, not detained.
And those countries all have US embassies where asylum can be obtained.
Heather Cox Richardson, a professor at Boston University, posted an article of Face book that addresses these issue. Keys points in bold:
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that
the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter
illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration
problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want
illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and
infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican
immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling
criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with
Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but
from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The
story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's
first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited
immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those
countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually
prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically
curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for
the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848
until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without
restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge
American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after
1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were
(unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged
immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The
Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the
Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made
destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor
white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath).
The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the
border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to
regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker
policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that
migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But
employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American
workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million
illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have
officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from
labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive,
President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program
in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional
reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War
and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota
system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously
discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened
immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration
levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black
immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration,
arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority.
They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use
the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect
of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision
had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their
families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward
Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap
on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest
worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers
were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended
on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to
be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986,
Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million
Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on
employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the
problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning
the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then,
migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number
leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily
guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect,
which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove
Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But
this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While
about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United
States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten
years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much
more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.)
And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good
enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really
about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around
2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are
separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees.
They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for
asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to
stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is
possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no
deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
the criminals and rapists are what cause this problem. People fear that along with the good people that cross the border the criminals will also be allowed and were allowed under the previous administration. That's why the drugs and crime from the gangs increased. We have to make sure the immigrants entering are not criminals or terrorists. Once again, I agree that immigrants have been conveniently allowed into the country when needed. I would love to hear what you all would do to bring in immigrants without our countries economy collapsing? There is so much bitching about it but no solutions.
You do realize that the crime rate from immigrants is lower than native born, right? Of course you don’t.
Comments
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Trump began his presidential campaign by calling Mexican immigrants criminals and rapists, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that the new policy of separating children from their parents will deter illegal immigrants. Then, today Trump tweeted that our immigration problems come from Democrats, who "don’t care about crime and want illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country." Trump is tangling up our long history of Mexican immigration with a new, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, and then blaming Democrats for coddling criminals.
Let's untangle this mess:
First, problems with Mexican immigration stem not from Democratic softness on crime, but from a bipartisan 1965 law that reworked America's immigration laws. The story behind the 1965 law is this: Congress had passed the nation's first comprehensive immigration law in 1924. That law limited immigration according to quotas assigned to each country. Those countries were heavily weighted toward western Europe, virtually prohibiting immigration from Asia and Africa, and dramatically curtailing it from southern Europe.
That law did not monitor immigration from Latin America at all, for the simple reason that from the time the current border was set in 1848 until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without restrictions. Laborers, especially, came from Mexico to work on the huge American farms that dominate our agricultural sector, especially after 1907, when the Japanese workers who had been taking over those jobs were (unofficially) kept out of the country. Then the government encouraged immigration during WWI, to help increase production.
The Depression, when the bottom fell out of the economy, coupled with the Dust Bowl, when the bottom fell out of the western plains, made destitute westerners turn on Mexican migrants, (as well as on their poor white neighbors, as John Steinbeck wrote about in The Grapes of Wrath). The government rounded up Mexicans and shipped them back over the border.
World War II made migrant laborers vital again, and to regularize the system, the US government in 1942 started a guest worker policy called the "Bracero" Program. It was supposed to guarantee that migrant workers were well treated, paid, and housed adequately. But employers happily hired illegal as well as legal workers, and American workers complained. President Eisenhower returned about a million illegal workers in 1954 under "Operation Wetback," only to have officials readmit most of them as braceros. Under pressure both from labor and from reformers who recognized that the system was exploitive, President Kennedy initiated the process that ended the Bracero program in 1964.
The end of that system coincided with congressional reworking of the 1924 immigration act. In the midst of the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement, Congress wanted to end the racial quota system of immigration and replace it with one that did not so obviously discriminate against Asia and Africa. The 1965 Hart-Celler Act opened immigration to all nations, setting a general cap on total immigration levels. But southern congressmen, appalled at the idea of black immigration, introduced a provision that privileged family migration, arguing that "family unification" should be the nation's top priority. They expected that old-stock immigrants from western Europe would use the provision to bring over their relatives, which would keep the effect of the 1924 law without the statute. But, of course, their provision had the opposite effect. It was new immigrants who wanted to bring their families; not old ones. So immigration began to skew heavily toward Asia and Latin America.
At the same time, Hart-Celler put a cap on Latin American immigration for the first time, just as the guest worker program ended. The cap was low: 20,000, although 50,000 workers were coming annually at that point. And American agribusiness depended on migrant labor. Workers continued to come as they always had, and to be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986, Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million Mexicans who were living in the United States and by cracking down on employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then, migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.
Since 1986, US politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect, which grew in the 1990s when NAFTA flooded Mexico with US corn and drove Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But this "problem" is hardly either new nor suddenly catastrophic. While about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United States, most of them- 78%- are long-term residents, here more than ten years. Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This is a much more stable ratio than undocumented immigrants from any other country.) And since 2007, the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United States has declined by more than a million. The Mexican economy is good enough that more Mexicans are leaving America these days than coming.
So undocumented Mexican "criminals and rapists" are not really the issue at hand.
What is happening right now at America's southern border is not really about Mexicans at all. It is a relatively new issue, which began around 2014. The people now arriving at our border, where children are separated from their parents, are generally from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, where "warlike levels of violence" are creating refugees. They are not sneaking over the border, they are refugees applying for asylum, which is legal in the United States. And while we are trying to stop them by taking their children, researchers say that, while it is possible to discourage economic migrants-- like most Mexicans-- no deterrent will stop migrant refugees, for they are fleeing death.
And is there data to show that immigrants make up more of the crime than people born in the US?
To me your post sounds like:
I agree- that's exactly what it sounds like.
I asked the question what is your solution?
Well no shit they 'ignore posts that have no links to back up non far left liberal views'.
Why the f**k would anyone entertain a figment of someone's imagination? Bring something legitimate to the table and then discuss- not some hokey pokey view of the world developed over a few Coors at the landfill shootin' shit.
Come on, man.
I did re-read it. I quoted your exact words. Nobody is interested in unsubstantiated, broad sweeping generalizations ungrounded in logic or facts.
The immigration issue is a tough one. The point of the problem is at the border, but the root of the problem is back in the potential immigrants' home country: strife with problems that developed countries have helped create given the level of exploitation which exists there in various forms.
In the state of Washington, I see many Mexican people each year as I travel to the Gorge to attend DMB. My experience with them is they are very family oriented, very friendly, and hard working. If properly vetted I'm not sure why Hispanic/Mexican people wouldn't be considered valuable additions to any country? The white people I see driving around in trucks with other white people in the back of those trucks sitting in old sofas appear to be much bigger candidates for hindering the country's progress.
Here's a potential solution: maybe you guys could work out some trades? Maybe instead of fantasy football... you guys play fantasy country and find some weak owner (country) to trade a big, massive clump of overrated white guys for some Hispanic people with massive upsides?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©