Ideas and policy vs. people and personality

[mcmurtry66]

Marv, I like a lot of your ideas and you've convinced me that we need more BP, drones, etc. but a physical barrier of some sort also seems like a commonsense part of the solution. Some of your sentences, like the above, appear to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

Regarding the larger immigration picture, I think it would behoove the U.S. to help Mexico and the Central American nations to become more stable, prosperous economies. I have no idea how to do that effectively.

Merge mls with liga mx. then we can have relegation and bring good will to both countries. Invite more tourism etc. sportswashing son. It works.

This has been a good thread. Good discussion. And Marv you are too absolute. It’s like better helmets for football. Well they don’t prevent concussions! No but they help. Just like a wall.

Anyway. Good discussion. Another master class from COH

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Calling these migrants “asylum seekers” is the craziness

I can see it now. Take the Migrant application, use a black sharpie to mark out Migrant and write Asylum. Problem solved, DC fixes another problem for us stupid Merikan's. We should be so proud of this wonderfully successful stunt... I mean fix.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Marv, I like a lot of your ideas and you've convinced me that we need more BP, drones, etc. but a physical barrier of some sort also seems like a commonsense part of the solution. Some of your sentences, like the above, appear to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

Regarding the larger immigration picture, I think it would behoove the U.S. to help Mexico and the Central American nations to become more stable, prosperous economies. I have no idea how to do that effectively.

We do agree there. We need to stop central America from being a hell hole.

You may be right about the perfect being the enemy of the good. But let me ask this, and I will seriously think about your answer in context of that point, how much money are you willing to spend for good? We know the wall will cost a lot to build, and our current maintenance is high and will dramatically increase. So we build the wall, pay the maintenance, and still hire these new agents and high tech equipment. How good does the good have to be to warrant that?

I said well above, I no longer support a Mars mission. It was/is my favorite idea for a government project. We can't afford it. I would much rather give to Mars than build a wall, one is a sign of progress and innovation (positive things) the other is a giant "closed" sign. Not a lot of pride and technological marvel there.

How much, in light of funding Ukraine, helping Israel, problems looking in Social Security and Medicare, do we want to spend to stop the woman with 3 children from walking in and applying for asylum here?

 

[mcmurtry66]

do we want to spend to stop the woman with 3 children from walking in and applying for asylum here?

kind of a broader question but are these the type of people we want in america? and i don't say that to be a jerk but pulling in two million presumably uneducated people a year eventually will have consequences will it not? sure it will help grow soccer in this country, which i like, but it is changing the composition. at this point there are apparently nearly 20 million illegals in the country. at what point does adding these types of people become a drain? and before i get slammed as whatever our gov already distinguishes what they view as adding people of value via the EB-5 program etc.

and maybe they do. maybe they'll do the jobs no one seems to want to at the moment. but i don't know. presumably at some point they'll exceed even those gigs

 

[BradStevens]

We do agree there. We need to stop central America from being a hell hole.

You may be right about the perfect being the enemy of the good. But let me ask this, and I will seriously think about your answer in context of that point, how much money are you willing to spend for good? We know the wall will cost a lot to build, and our current maintenance is high and will dramatically increase. So we build the wall, pay the maintenance, and still hire these new agents and high tech equipment. How good does the good have to be to warrant that?

I said well above, I no longer support a Mars mission. It was/is my favorite idea for a government project. We can't afford it. I would much rather give to Mars than build a wall, one is a sign of progress and innovation (positive things) the other is a giant "closed" sign. Not a lot of pride and technological marvel there.

How much, in light of funding Ukraine, helping Israel, problems looking in Social Security and Medicare, do we want to spend to stop the woman with 3 children from walking in and applying for asylum here?

On your last point, I think the point of border security and immigration in general is that we can't afford to have immigration of poorer, unskilled people beyond a certain point at the same time as we are continuing to build out a comprehensive welfare state. I think immigration policy and welfare policy have to be linked, and they are inversely proportional.

So maybe the way to put it is: can we afford NOT to have a wall? Because I want a welfare state, although I'm willing to change my mind on the size.

But I agree with you, that I don't want a "closed" sign on the country, and I don't think even the majority of the Republicans do, either.

Don't give up on Mars!!!!

 

[Univee2]

We do agree there. We need to stop central America from being a hell hole.

You may be right about the perfect being the enemy of the good. But let me ask this, and I will seriously think about your answer in context of that point, how much money are you willing to spend for good? We know the wall will cost a lot to build, and our current maintenance is high and will dramatically increase. So we build the wall, pay the maintenance, and still hire these new agents and high tech equipment. How good does the good have to be to warrant that?

I said well above, I no longer support a Mars mission. It was/is my favorite idea for a government project. We can't afford it. I would much rather give to Mars than build a wall, one is a sign of progress and innovation (positive things) the other is a giant "closed" sign. Not a lot of pride and technological marvel there.

How much, in light of funding Ukraine, helping Israel, problems looking in Social Security and Medicare, do we want to spend to stop the woman with 3 children from walking in and applying for asylum here?

Barsoom beckons . . .

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

kind of a broader question but are these the type of people we want in america? and i don't say that to be a jerk but pulling in two million presumably uneducated people a year eventually will have consequences will it not? sure it will help grow soccer in this country, which i like, but it is changing the composition. at this point there are apparently nearly 20 million illegals in the country. at what point does adding these types of people become a drain? and before i get slammed as whatever our gov already distinguishes what they view as adding people of value via the EB-5 program etc.

and maybe they do. maybe they'll do the jobs no one seems to want to at the moment. but i don't know

There is a reason that we bring those type people in, and more importantly, a reason why we make them a manageable number every year. Mass Chaos is not leadership nor humane.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

On your last point, I think the point of border security and immigration in general is that we can't afford to have immigration of poorer, unskilled people beyond a certain point at the same time as we are continuing to build out a comprehensive welfare state. I think immigration policy and welfare policy have to be linked, and they are inversely proportional.

So maybe the way to put it is: can we afford NOT to have a wall? Because I want a welfare state, although I'm willing to change my mind on the size.

But I agree with you, that I don't want a "closed" sign on the country, and I don't think even the majority of the Republicans do, either.

Don't give up on Mars!!!!

But these people aren't eligible for social welfare. Even if they aren't reporting in to apply for asylum but are trying to live here under the radar, they can't get into those programs. And while I disagree with Heritage on open borders, we can make all aid contingent to time in country for legal immigrants. We can say legal immigrants aren't eligible for 5 years (as an example) which is what it is for Green Card, as I understand it.

All the restaurants I know are screaming for unskilled labor. We certainly have a shortage.

 

[BradStevens]

But these people aren't eligible for social welfare. Even if they aren't reporting in to apply for asylum but are trying to live here under the radar, they can't get into those programs. And while I disagree with Heritage on open borders, we can make all aid contingent to time in country for legal immigrants. We can say legal immigrants aren't eligible for 5 years (as an example) which is what it is for Green Card, as I understand it.

All the restaurants I know are screaming for unskilled labor. We certainly have a shortage.

The bussed immigrants to Chicago aren't eligible for a lot of social welfare either. And yet under 10,000 is costing the city a lot. Ditto NYC. And there is no guarantee that future Congress's won't make them eligible--it's hard not to when you see pictures of children living on the streets in tents.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

kind of a broader question but are these the type of people we want in america? and i don't say that to be a jerk but pulling in two million presumably uneducated people a year eventually will have consequences will it not? sure it will help grow soccer in this country, which i like, but it is changing the composition. at this point there are apparently nearly 20 million illegals in the country. at what point does adding these types of people become a drain? and before i get slammed as whatever our gov already distinguishes what they view as adding people of value via the EB-5 program etc.

and maybe they do. maybe they'll do the jobs no one seems to want to at the moment. but i don't know. presumably at some point they'll exceed even those gigs

I am not arguing for open borders. Many of the people I am speaking of are coming in to apply for asylum. They come in and turn themselves in and apply. It would be great if they applied in Mexico, but it isn't happening. These are the people I'm not as worried about. If they are going to seek out a government official to apply, they aren't a "threat". The main concern is we lack resources to handle the amount coming in. And we know that many of them are not going to be granted. So we are stuck holding them until they are officially turned down. Hence why I want more judges and lawyers in the system.

I wish the old "clean up corruption in your country or we will drop a missile on your lap and let the next person try" worked. It doesn't. But the real solution, the solution that solves everything, is to make people happy to stay home. If anyone knows how to do that, we solve everything. Aid doesn't help, they just steal it.

Has anyone heard that Russians are appearing at the border?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/20/americas/russian-migrants-mexico-united-states-intl-latam/index.html

Also Ukrainians.

I want the border secure, I'm just not sure how the wall fits into that effectively. There may be very specific areas that can use a wall. Areas we have manpower nearby that can respond, and slowing down people makes a huge difference. But the thing I wish people would answer is, with a wall, don't we need agents close enough to respond very quickly to corral anyone getting over/under/through?

 

[mcmurtry66]

Hence why I want more judges and lawyers in the system.

yeah it does seem that way. we need more to process or more restrictive policies as a deterrent. i don't know. i don't know much about any of this stuff. maybe it could operate like social security disability. you don't need to be a lawyer to represent people on social security disability claims. file your application. get denied. request reconsideration. then go to a 45 minute hearing with a rep who doesn't have to be a lawyer. process way more people that way - faster, even tho of course social security disability system is largely broken, but still

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The bussed immigrants to Chicago aren't eligible for a lot of social welfare either. And yet under 10,000 is costing the city a lot. Ditto NYC. And there is no guarantee that future Congress's won't make them eligible--it's hard not to when you see pictures of children living on the streets in tents.

Right, too many are coming in. That's why I think refugee status and refugee camps are a solution over asylum (and would get the UN to shoulder some of this from the money we already send the UN). There are huge costs to paying for them in urban areas (or even in smaller towns). I know others complain, I have no issues with refugee camps. They are much more cost effective, and for any applying for amnesty, the judges and lawyers can be stationed on-site.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Barsoom beckons . . .

You caught me, I really just want humans to stay the heck away.

 

[Univee2]

You caught me, I really just want humans to stay the heck away.

Too late.

We’re bringing back a Banth for you, on our next trip.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Too late.

We’re bringing back a Banth for you, on our next trip.

"Next" trip?

I must admit that it saddens me that China may well beat the US to my home.

 

[Univee2]

"Next" trip?

I must admit that it saddens me that China may well beat the US to my home.

Deep, deep state …….

 

[snarlcakes]

Regarding the larger immigration picture, I think it would behoove the U.S. to help Mexico and the Central American nations to become more stable, prosperous economies. I have no idea how to do that effectively.

Follow the El Salvador method. Make Bitcoin legal tender. Argentina might be next 🤞

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I want them stopped, but they have a right to apply for asylum. No matter what, to handle the entire nation of Venezuela we need more courts to process far faster. We need that wall or no wall. The priority for me is to stop terrorists, we both know some people are going to get through. I would rather stop terrorists, second are people planning on living here illegally, then asylum seekers.

I suggested creating a points system and asylum seekers get points for applying elsewhere, or lose points for applying here. That is how I would tackle that part. If you enter the US, the death squad better be 10 feet behind you.

I assume you are aware of how Canada handles immigration.

And they criticize us for being cruel.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I assume you are aware of how Canada handles immigration.

And they criticize us for being cruel.

I don't know, it appears if you are in Canada and want to apply for asylum, you go online.

Where to claim asylum? - UNHCR Canada

help.unhcr.org

Immigration and asylum are different. Canada allows more immigrants, at least by it's pop size, than we do. I saw an article that last year for the first time in a long time Canada got younger because of it's increased immigration.

The article below says organized crime is smuggling asylum seekers to Canada.

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-talks-with-canada-about-high-number-asylum-requests-2024-02-20/