Can We Have An Honest Immigration Discussion?

[formerroomate99]

Jan 19, 2018 14:25:14 GMT -5 resolution said:

Jan 19, 2018 12:48:54 GMT -5 bean29 said:

Does it need to go away, or does it need to be changed? I really don't know that much about it. What harm is there in an honest discussion?

Why do I see so little about birthright citizenship too? I think that needs to change, but I am sure my DH strongly disagrees with me. And changing it, and then having children of illegal immigrants in the same position today's DACA recipients are in does not seem like a good option either. Reading that China and Russia are facilitating their citizens to come here on visas and have their babies so that they have birthright citizenship concerns me though. What other countries are doing it, and what kind of risk does that put us at?

I think eliminating birthright citizenship puts us in the danger of creating a permanent underclass. However I could support something to end citizenship tourism, like requiring the parents to reside in the US for a certain length of time in order for the child to become a citizen by birth. The main problem is I don't trust the politicians to mess around with citizenship requirements, because who knows what we would end up with?

Why don't we start with not giving illegal immigrants perks that legal immigrants don't get?  One of my foreign born classmates in grad school had a kid while she was still in school.  Once her visa was up, she and her daughter still had to go home and her daughter could come back and become a citizen when she was 18.  But if my classmate had been here illegally, her daughter would get to stay here forever, and my classmate would likely get to stay too.  Does this make sense to you?  

[zibazinski]

I’m okay with them returning too if they’re healthy and not going to become a drain on society.

[bean29]

Jan 21, 2018 18:30:27 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Jan 19, 2018 14:25:14 GMT -5 resolution said:

I think eliminating birthright citizenship puts us in the danger of creating a permanent underclass. However I could support something to end citizenship tourism, like requiring the parents to reside in the US for a certain length of time in order for the child to become a citizen by birth. The main problem is I don't trust the politicians to mess around with citizenship requirements, because who knows what we would end up with?

Why don't we start with not giving illegal immigrants perks that legal immigrants don't get?  One of my foreign born classmates in grad school had a kid while she was still in school.  Once her visa was up, she and her daughter still had to go home and her daughter could come back and become a citizen when she was 18.  But if my classmate had been here illegally, her daughter would get to stay here forever, and my classmate would likely get to stay too.  Does this make sense to you?  

It is not my understanding that there are different "classes" of citizenship.  I would imagine that you classmate chose to go home.  If she had chosen to overstay her visa, her/her child would have been = to the undocumented immigrant you described.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 21, 2018 13:38:25 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jan 20, 2018 8:54:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The bottom line is that Democrats believe Americans are too stupid, too immoral, or racistsexistbigothomophobexenophobebigotedsexist and/or rapists and pedophiles to vote right, so they want to use immigration to change the culture. They want population replacement. That is their goal. Everything else in this discussion is a distraction.

Again, you trying to explain what Dems think is like me trying to explain why my beagle used to like to eat dried turds.

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 21, 2018 16:25:35 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

yes, master? sorry, it's common practice on politics threads to provide a link to support an opinion you're introducing. sorry to put you out. wow.

i had assumed that she was talking about taxation.  but now, i am not sure at all, given the topic.

[chiver78]

Jan 21, 2018 21:46:32 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jan 21, 2018 16:25:35 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

yes, master? sorry, it's common practice on politics threads to provide a link to support an opinion you're introducing. sorry to put you out. wow.

i had assumed that she was talking about taxation.  but now, i am not sure at all, given the topic.

I assumed nothing, honestly. I just figured that she put up a blank comment without a link, I'd call her on it. last I've seen, there still isn't a link to what she waxed poetic was so amazing. 

[zibazinski]

Ken provided one. I read some of it. It’s not as easy as the print on the documents would imply.

[hurley1980]

I've been to the Caymen Islands, and it is beautiful! But it is also ridiculously small! The entire population of all 3 islands is less than 100k people and the total land is only about 100 miles. Of course they have to be strict on immigration! There's not much room, and not an abundance of jobs. Comparing their immigration policies to ours seems like comparing an apple to a pickup truck.

[tallguy]

But as long as you can pay enough they'll let you stay.  Is that what we're trying to get to? 

[Miss Tequila]

Jan 20, 2018 15:47:13 GMT -5 Poptart said:

Jan 19, 2018 12:10:39 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

It needs to go back to the way it was. You need to be healthy and not become a public charge. Plus, you need to be here legally. Go through the immigration process the way others did before you. 

You mean when Europeans came and took land that did not belong to them? I think people like you are woefully uneducated when it comes to immigration and how the system works. In 2017 it was reported that immigration services was working on applications for green cards from 1997! I have a client who just got her green card- she applied in 1992. 

White people tend to forget that they are also immigrants, do you know where the term WASP came from? Did you forget how Italians were treated when they set foot in the US, and how about the Irish? Yeah, they totally turned the US into a shithole, right? 

Some of you people have real selective memories. 

I have said all along that the Indians did themselves a great disservice when they welcome the white man. Can we not learn from our mistakes and realized that maybe, just maybe, letting everyone into our country is not the smartest thing?

[dondub]

Anyone emigrating to an island where the highest point is 60' above sea level would need to have their head examined as part of the immigration rules.

[zibazinski]

Why shouldn’t you have to prove that you won’t be a drain on society? You used to have to prove you were healthy and could support yourself.

[engineerdoe]

Jan 22, 2018 14:28:32 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Why shouldn’t you have to prove that you won’t be a drain on society? You used to have to prove you were healthy and could support yourself.

You do have to prove that for a Green Card.  www.uscis.gov/greencard/green-card-processes-procedures

Although I believe there are some Green Card/Visas that don't allow you to work too.

[thyme4change]

Jan 21, 2018 21:43:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jan 21, 2018 13:38:25 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Again, you trying to explain what Dems think is like me trying to explain why my beagle used to like to eat dried turds.

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

[tallguy]

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jan 21, 2018 21:43:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

So you two are suggesting that Will Rogers had it right?   

[busymom]

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jan 21, 2018 21:43:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

   It's because he's screwing it up in so many categories.  Instead of annoying people on one issue, he's chosen to annoy as many people as possible.  On the positive side, IF he does choose to run for another term, it'll make him easier to defeat.  

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 14:28:32 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Why shouldn’t you have to prove that you won’t be a drain on society?

i like that standard.

does Trump meet it?

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jan 21, 2018 21:43:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

so, what would you say united the TEA Party?

[dondub]

Skin color?

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 17:04:52 GMT -5 dondub said:

Skin color?

arthritis?

[tallguy]

So anyway, what was our conclusion?  That we can have an honest immigration discussion as long as the OP is not part of it?     

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 17:25:39 GMT -5 tallguy said:

So anyway, what was our conclusion?  That we can have an honest immigration discussion as long as the OP is not part of it?     

well, maybe that and a handful posters that actually believe that crap.

[hurley1980]

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jan 21, 2018 21:43:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i think you could do considerably better at that.  after all, a Beagle is a fairly simple creature with simple needs and motivations.  Democrats are about as widely varied as a "group" can be.  some are horrible racists that want to secede from the union and have a whites only South.  some want to emancipate society from capital and have a Marxist paradise.  and everything in-between.

to ascribe singular attributes to a group this diverse is an exercise in serial stupidity.

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

I saw this at the women's march this past weekend too.  So many signs about different issues.  It just seemed like everyone was mad about something but not always about the same issue.  It was rather confusing!

[happyhoix]

Jan 22, 2018 18:27:30 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

I saw this at the women's march this past weekend too.  So many signs about different issues.  It just seemed like everyone was mad about something but not always about the same issue.  It was rather confusing!

The bad news for Trump is they are blaming him for all of it.

When you're an unpopular president, that happens.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 18:27:30 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

Jan 22, 2018 15:21:18 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

When I went to the anti-Trump rally when he pardoned Joe Arpio, the signs were all over the place - signs about racial equality, signs about sexual harassment, signs showing concern over Betsy Devoss and vouchers, signs over taxation, sign about immigration, signs about Russia, signs about Trump not manufacturing in USA, signs about him golfing too much, signs about Joe Arpio being pardoned, signs about the wall, signs about Muslims, signs about Mexicans, signs about healthcare (in general, and Medicaid specific), signs about the wealth gap, signs about the environment and the EPA, signs about tweeting, the list goes on and on.

It is a problem for the democrats. The only thing unifying them right now is a general discontent with the way things are going.

I saw this at the women's march this past weekend too.  So many signs about different issues.  It just seemed like everyone was mad about something but not always about the same issue.  It was rather confusing!

anger is an energy.  when focused, it can rock planets.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 22, 2018 18:51:55 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jan 22, 2018 18:27:30 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

I saw this at the women's march this past weekend too.  So many signs about different issues.  It just seemed like everyone was mad about something but not always about the same issue.  It was rather confusing!

The bad news for Trump is they are blaming him for all of it.

When you're an unpopular president, that happens.

he is -4% in the first (2) surveys done since the shutdown (Gallup and Rasmussen).  it should be noted that those are 3 day surveys, so they actually cover 1 day before the shutdown.  this will likely undo all of the gains he made in December for the tax overhaul.

[tallguy]

Somebody will probably do a thread on it, but Trump's first-year approval rating is ten points lower than any of his predecessors since this polling began.  And it is in the bottom ten of any year for any president since 1945, again when polling presumably began.  Let's see now....  Truman had the Korean War, Carter had the Iranian hostage crisis, Bush had the Great Recession, Nixon had Watergate.  Trump had what, a strong economy and a booming stock market, both of which had been going on for seven+ years?  Should we play, "Which does not belong on this list?"  Or rather, which is not an excuse to be on this list?  Which then leads to the question, "Who is REALLY on their way to being the worst president in history?"
link 


Ten Lowest Yearly Job Approval Averages, 1945-2018

         Year in office        Dates of year         Approval average

Truman         6   Jan 20, 1950-Jan 19, 1951   38.6

Trump          1    Jan 20, 2017-Jan 21, 2018   38.4

Carter          4    Jan 20, 1980-Jan 19, 1981   37.6

Carter          3    Jan 20, 1979-Jan 19, 1980   37.4

G.W. Bush    6    Jan 20, 2006-Jan 19, 2007   37.3

G.W. Bush    7    Jan 20, 2007-Jan 19, 2008   33.3

G.W. Bush    8    Jan 20, 2008-Jan 19, 2009   29.8

Truman        8    Jan 20, 1952-Jan 19, 1953   29.7

Truman        7    Jan 20, 1951-Jan 19, 1952   26.5

Nixon           6    Jan 20-Aug 9, 1974             25.4

GALLUP

[djAdvocate]

i am watching a long YouTube video right now, but one of the things i want to look up is Harding's accomplishments.  i am betting when i do that i find that he got more done his first year than Trump.

edit:

Warren Harding passed the federal child welfare program, the first of its kind. He managed to lower taxes, increased the tax base, raised tariffs to create employment and he also managed to successfully negotiate with striking workers in mining and railroad companies, particularly the crisis in Blair Mountain and the Great Railroad Strike in 1922.

sounds vaguely familiar.  Trump still has a way to go to catch the worst president in the last century.

[formerroomate99]

Jan 21, 2018 19:14:44 GMT -5 bean29 said:

Jan 21, 2018 18:30:27 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Why don't we start with not giving illegal immigrants perks that legal immigrants don't get?  One of my foreign born classmates in grad school had a kid while she was still in school.  Once her visa was up, she and her daughter still had to go home and her daughter could come back and become a citizen when she was 18.  But if my classmate had been here illegally, her daughter would get to stay here forever, and my classmate would likely get to stay too.  Does this make sense to you?  

It is not my understanding that there are different "classes" of citizenship.  I would imagine that you classmate chose to go home.  If she had chosen to overstay her visa, her/her child would have been = to the undocumented immigrant you described.

Bullshit.  According to the dream act, the children of illegal immigrants get to stay, while the children of legal immigrants have to leave.  Those are the current rules.    Choosing to overstay her visa would not do a thing for the status of my friend's daughter.  

And the fact that my friend had a kid WHO WAS BORN HERE did not help her stay here.  Children of illegal immigrants that are born here (anchor babies) are used to blackmail the government into letting the whole family stay.  Children of legal immigrants are sent packing and are not allowed to come back until they are 18.   

DOES THIS SEEM FAIR TO YOU?  

[chiver78]

Jan 23, 2018 9:45:27 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Jan 21, 2018 19:14:44 GMT -5 bean29 said:

It is not my understanding that there are different "classes" of citizenship.  I would imagine that you classmate chose to go home.  If she had chosen to overstay her visa, her/her child would have been = to the undocumented immigrant you described.

Bullshit.  According to the dream act, the children of illegal immigrants get to stay, while the children of legal immigrants have to leave.  Those are the current rules.    Choosing to overstay her visa would not do a thing for the status of my friend's daughter.  

And the fact that my friend had a kid WHO WAS BORN HERE did not help her stay here.  Children of illegal immigrants that are born here (anchor babies) are used to blackmail the government into letting the whole family stay.  Children of legal immigrants are sent packing and are not allowed to come back until they are 18.   

DOES THIS SEEM FAIR TO YOU?  

I call bullshit on some of your details. where were the children of the legal vs illegal immigrants born? children born here are citizens, whether you agree with that interpretation or not.