4merper4mer Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 Just now, GG said: I'll take, "Because those countries adapt their immigration laws in line with economic needs?" for $100. US immigration laws haven't changed in nearly 3 decades despite the huge need for low skill labor. Plus it is a long swim from anywhere to New Zealand. What has Ardern done to make sure the Salvadoran kids aren't drowning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, joesixpack said: How many migrant farm laborers do you know? Maids? Construction laborers? None, a lot, and a lot. What the !@#$ do you think "trades" means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, GG said: I'll take, "Because those countries adapt their immigration laws in line with economic needs?" for $100. US immigration laws haven't changed in nearly 3 decades despite the huge need for low skill labor. Have a look at this article: http://insidestory.org.au/how-many-migrants-come-to-australia-each-year/ Especially noteworthy: Quote If 800,000 new migrants were arriving each year without being offset by a large number of people also leaving, then we would definitely notice dramatic differences in everyday terms. It would put significant strain on schools, hospitals, roads, public transport, housing and other services and infrastructure. By contrast, in the US, we've taken in a MILLION people a year on average from 2000-2016. What kind of impact has THAT had on our country's resources? Yeah. We need a change in immigration policy. That number needs to be halved at the very least. 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: None, a lot, and a lot. What the !@#$ do you think "trades" means? Laborers aren't tradesmen. More often than not, they do the menial work on the jobsite: hauling stuff, cleaning up, digging. And maid is now a trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 6 minutes ago, joesixpack said: And this right here is the root of the problem. This is why the penalties for hiring illegals need to be draconian, to the point of potentially bankrupting such businesses. It just can't be tolerated. There are many roots and almost all of them fake giving a crap about the individuals involved. And by individuals I mean both the migrants and the US citizens that may be directly or indirectly harmed by their migration. In fact the main root to all of this on either side is that individuals are yet again defined as part of a group. Granted some of that is done because of volume and legitimate expediency, but if we're being honest most of it is done in an effort to exploit to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said: There are many roots and almost all of them fake giving a crap about the individuals involved. And by individuals I mean both the migrants and the US citizens that may be directly or indirectly harmed by their migration. In fact the main root to all of this on either side is that individuals are yet again defined as part of a group. Granted some of that is done because of volume and legitimate expediency, but if we're being honest most of it is done in an effort to exploit to an end. Look, I understand that there are some legitimate asylum seekers out there. People who have a government that is actively persecuting them (see: Syrian Christians, Soviet Jews back in the 70s-80s). Those people deserve a shot. Coming here to simply improve your economic outlook isn't asylum-seeking, and should be treated differently, and with many more obstacles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Have a look at this article: http://insidestory.org.au/how-many-migrants-come-to-australia-each-year/ Are you that special type of an idiot who provides links that contradict your theories? The main point of the article is that Australia has a formal plan in place to allow temporary workers. What is the USA's equivalent? Do you want me to bring up your position in the debates from 2007 when GOP scuttled a plan that would have formalized a guest worker program similar to what you're lauding Australia for? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 minute ago, GG said: Are you that special type of an idiot who provides links that contradict your theories? The main point of the article is that Australia has a formal plan in place to allow temporary workers. What is the USA's equivalent? Do you want me to bring up your position in the debates from 2007 when GOP scuttled a plan that would have formalized a guest worker program similar to what you're lauding Australia for? Let's hear your plan, then. More specifically, I'd like to know how you would intend to assure that "guest workers" under any proposal you support would leave when their guest worker status is up. That's my main issue with any of these ideas. Australia, from what i've read is VERY strict on border control and visa enforcement issues. Much stricter than we are. Would you be supportive of no-tolerance enforcement if a "guest worker" program was created to ease some of these supposedly critical labor shortages? How would you deal with employers in violation under this kind of a program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 10 hours ago, HappyDays said: I'm changing my tactic in this thread. I'll take you all at your word that you are genuinely concerned about child trafficking victims. That we can't know for sure which adults are lying about the children they're traveling with. Luckily there's an easy solution: https://dnacenter.com/blog/long-take-get-dna-paternity-test-results/ Paternity test results take 1-2 days and they cost a maximum of $500. Let's say we ran it on 20,000 adult men. That would cost at most a total of $10 million, or 0.00025% of the US federal budget in 2017. We all agree that separating parents from their children is wrong. We all agree that even if the parents are wrong for illegally crossing the border, the children don't deserve to be punished with forced separation from the only family they know. So who here would support a policy that ended zero-tolerance family separation and replaced it with state funded paternity tests? Interesting thought. Expect that it is only solving a portion of the problem, as it seems that only a portion (less than 50% - based on piecing together info from various articles) of the children in the detention centers that have been apprehended were brought into the system along with an adult/adults. And as, again piecing together from various articles, it appears that asking for asylum at a border check point rather doesn't result in the adults & children getting separated, it would seem that the most efficient route to allow the families to stay together would be to have them come into the system there. Could probably increase the resources available at the check points more efficiently than adding the DNA collection. (The DNA collection itself rendering issues as 1st time illegal immigration violations are only misdemeanor offenses, but my understanding is that typically only those charged with felonies are required to provide samples in most states. I'd expect the ACLU would take significant issue with it.) Would require a change to the law to happen, so it won't happen. Cool that you are trying to "think outside the box" and find a reasonable solution. Expect that the true solution will necessarily include GG's point that we'd be better served by helping Central & Southern American countries improve their own domestic conditions and that when they improve, so will our illegal immigration problem. And the final thought on this, for this post anyway, is that we don't know what percentage of the asylum seekers (that are actually families looking for a better life) are truly displaced due to persecution / fear of death staying in their native lands and what percentage are merely seeking a better life. If we default to letting people claiming without proof that they are asylum seekers jump the line, so to speak, we will greatly increase the number of asylum seekers at our southern border. We REALLY need to fix the entire system and have needed to do so since at minimum the early '00's. Sorry for this rambling a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 31 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Australia, from what i've read is VERY strict on border control and visa enforcement issues. Much stricter than we are. Border control? Who does Australia share a border with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 21 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Let's hear your plan, then. More specifically, I'd like to know how you would intend to assure that "guest workers" under any proposal you support would leave when their guest worker status is up. That's my main issue with any of these ideas. Australia, from what i've read is VERY strict on border control and visa enforcement issues. Much stricter than we are. Would you be supportive of no-tolerance enforcement if a "guest worker" program was created to ease some of these supposedly critical labor shortages? How would you deal with employers in violation under this kind of a program? Appreciate you throwing in strawmen arguments when you are asking for a solution. Just the way that you framed your argument means you aren't interested in finding a solution. The same thing happened in 2006/2007 around the fake "amnesty" outrage. And of course, just as many predicted a golden opportunity to address the problem was missed and things got progressively worse. The real solution has to be a multi pronged approach where migration is tackled in concert with investments in the CA countries. Nothing tangible will happen until you remove the incentive to flee **** hole countries. The next thing you do is formalize the guest worker program. If you legalize it, then workers won't be bringing entire families over because there's zero incentive to do so. Contrary to popular belief, most foreign workers would prefer to stay at home or to return home if they didn't live in crappy environments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Azalin said: Border control? Who does Australia share a border with? I believe Gondor shares a border with them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 Just now, westside said: I believe Gondor shares a border with them. There goes the last of my coffee..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 20, 2018 Author Share Posted June 20, 2018 Seeking amnesty is not a crime, child abuse this though. Don't think for a second people won't sue, press for charges and demand investigations. Quote Remember, no one is talking (yet) about prosecuting federal employees; we are talking about gaining access to the children and investigating their condition. That we are even talking about these scenarios should underscore how outrageous is the policy and how morally deficient are the politicians, primarily the president, who permit it to go on. When we get down to arguing about who has authority to stop child abuse directed by the president and his attorney general, we truly are in a different universe. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/06/20/its-this-simple-report-the-abuse/?utm_term=.2b0f3e377c3a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 10 minutes ago, GG said: Contrary to popular belief, most foreign workers would prefer to stay at home or to return home if they didn't live in crappy environments. Great! Then let's facilitate their doing so. Shut the border down, initiate a guest worker program with VERY tight controls, and be done with it. 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Seeking amnesty is not a crime, child abuse this though. Don't think for a second people won't sue, press for charges and demand investigations. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/06/20/its-this-simple-report-the-abuse/?utm_term=.2b0f3e377c3a Washington Post. Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 If it's child abuse to not have kids accompany their parents in to prison, then there are much more serious instances of child abuse in the country. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Seeking amnesty is not a crime, child abuse this though. Don't think for a second people won't sue, press for charges and demand investigations. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/06/20/its-this-simple-report-the-abuse/?utm_term=.2b0f3e377c3a Are you finally coming around to the opinion that selling children into sex slavery is wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 20 minutes ago, Azalin said: Border control? Who does Australia share a border with? No land border, but they've got enough of a migrant problem to have these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_immigration_detention_facilities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 DNA tests, and TB tests and fingerprinting should be enforced here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 17 minutes ago, DC Tom said: If it's child abuse to not have kids accompany their parents in to prison, then there are much more serious instances of child abuse in the country. I would argue we’re protecting the children from child endangerment from parents that would try to smuggle them across the border. Now I didn’t say it was a good argument, just an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 20, 2018 Share Posted June 20, 2018 6 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: The UN Human Rights Council, like the U.N. and many other multinational agreements, treaties, and all of human interaction—is messy. Work together to fix it. Be a grown up country. Don’t just take your ball and sulk off and call names. International diplomacy requires engaged conversation, even when others are making statements we believe are absurd. To whoever said this was being duscussed in that global conspiracy thread, sorry I missed it. I don’t engage in the conspiracy stuff that dominates many here, and centers in that thread. Schumer and his gang by the way are fools. He is right that Trump could fix this with a flick of his wrist, but he could support any bill to fix it too. Either way, fix it and take the moral high ground. Ist ad he and Trump wallow in the muck. When you have a house which is need of repairs, let's say the house needs a new roof, exterior paint, new windows, a new boiler, and updated electric and pluming, but the bones of the house are sturdy and the foundation is strong, you do the work to fix the house. However, if a house has been consumed by fire, the framing charred, the building gutted and irreparably damaged, the best way to salvage any value is to tear the house down, and rebuild from scratch. The United Nations Human Rights Council falls firmly into the latter. Our continued membership served only to provide the group with it's last shred of legitimacy, providing cover for the human rights abuses of the worst government actors on the planet. After many years of working through attempted reforms, and having those reforms rejected wholesale, it is simply better for us to leave as a gesture to the world that we will no longer provide cover for their atrocities. https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-were-leaving-the-so-called-human-rights-council-1529449869 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts