Refugees
- Thread starter TheOriginalHappyGoat
- Start date
If we had to, we could accommodate quite a lot of people. The lower 48 has enough arable land to feed about 700 million people, although the cost of meat (which uses land much less efficiently) would go up dramatically as the population worked toward that number.
But there's no issue with room. There's only an issue with making sure the flow is orderly enough for the economy to absorb people with minimum disruption.
I don’t have a number in mind nor studied it. I think we need immigrants for various reasons in America. Legal immigration plays into this and accomodates the needs of our society. I don’t think we apply the rules of who comes and who don’t very well. I mean, the doctor that gave us Bin Laden is locked up. He was free and we didn’t do anything to bring him here..... how do you turn your back on someone like that?
I would expect legal immigration to take into consideration the number we can “absorb” and account for illegal immigration numbers.
You are being gaslighted. Illegal border crossings have dropped exponentially since the 1990s.
Probably because we have quadrupled the number of border patrol agents and built 700 miles of fencing.
The only place you can now illegally cross is way the hell out in the middle of harsh desert.
And yet you'd believe it's an epic crisis. Bullshit.
You are letting people control the narrative that aren't using facts. It's what the Nazis did. Do better.
http://www.businessinsider.com/border-crossings-arrests-trump-historic-low-data-charts-2018-4
A few points about the graph. First, that is not a graph tracking the number of illegal immigrants that are entering the U.S., it is a graph tracking the number of apprehensions. Now, reason could follow that the more people being apprehended would indicate that more people are coming across. Then again, there are other factors that could impact apprehensions as well.
Also, the majority of that graph is covering a time period leading up to the recession in 2008 and its recovery. Now we are reminded all the time that the slow recovery from the recession is due to just how catastrophic and historic the recession was. So the incentive to walk here decreases a bit. Additionally, that graph indicates that we apprehended somewhere north of 12 million people attempting to cross our border in the decade before 2008. 12 million apprehended. What percentage of the illegal population do you believe we actually catch? Now I know some of those figures would include people who were caught multiple times. But let's say that for every one we catch, one probably gets through. So in the decade before 2008, we conservatively had around 12 million people illegally take residence in the U.S. Then the economic downturn happened. I would argue that some fencing and a few extra guards along a thousand mile long border had less to do with the decrease in immigration than the economic downturn did. With the economy looking to be heating up again, we should start to see an increase in illegal immigration again.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/04/10/illegal-immigration-to-america-is-rising-again
IT CERTAINLY looked like a “Trump effect.” Within weeks of Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House in January 2017, the number of people caught crossing America’s southern border illegally fell to a 17-year low of 11,127. John Kelly, then secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), attributed the drop to Mr Trump’s executive orders on immigration. Elaine Duke, the department’s deputy secretary, gave credit to better enforcement of immigration laws. Mr Trump hailed it as “a historic and unprecedented achievement”.
If such an effect did exist, it appears to have been short-lived. On April 5th, the DHS announced that Border Patrol agents apprehended 37,393 people in March, an increase of more than 200% on the previous year. The number of unaccompanied children caught entering illegally jumped by 300%, and the number of families detained while attempting the journey surged by nearly 700%.
Granted, that is a smaller sample than even you provided, but I would be willing to bet that the ebb and flow of illegal immigration also mirrors the ebb and flow of the U.S. economy. The recession and recovery from the same is probably more attributable to the decline in illegal immigration then any new enforcement provisions.If such an effect did exist, it appears to have been short-lived. On April 5th, the DHS announced that Border Patrol agents apprehended 37,393 people in March, an increase of more than 200% on the previous year. The number of unaccompanied children caught entering illegally jumped by 300%, and the number of families detained while attempting the journey surged by nearly 700%.
And the Democrats say they are not for an open border because they would like to put more guards at the door. The problem is that they want to continue to leave all of the windows unlocked and open with a fresh baked pie beckoning the hungry. They don't want a secure border, they want a game where getting in equals citizenship. That is in effect an open border because all it requires is to keep trying until you get in.
FWIW, that is why I am not for Trump's wall. I want e-verify and onerous penalties on businesses who hire illegals. If there are no benefits and no jobs for illegals, you do not have to deport and turn away. They will stop coming and leave on their own. Then you have a system where the U.S. decides who comes in and in what numbers.
It's absolutely amazing how you understand the liberal mind better than any actual liberal, despite how much effort actual liberals put into explaining the liberal mind to you. It's a wonder why anyone bothers to form any opinions at all on the left. We should just come to you, and ask you what we think, and you can fill us in.
Is that all you got on that? Seriously, how have I misrepresented the Democrats position. Rockfish posted an article yesterday that said Democrats were not for open borders because they wanted to pass a bill to throw more money at border policing. With the people who actually make it past that barrier though....
Additionally, this argument coming from you of all people is rich.
I quoted the relevant part of your post. If you can't be bothered to read your own words, I don't know how I'm supposed to respond to you.
Last edited:
If they get here (past our border measures), we welcome them. That is pretty much how I framed the Democrat's position. And I believe that your position is representative of them.
There are next to zero illegal immigrants who cannot claim that they are fleeing the things you mention. If stuff was good there, they would not be trying to get here. So de facto open borders.
Ah, I understand now. You are incapable of grasping the difference between compassion for people we interact with, and some nebulous concept of "open borders." My bad for thinking you had that ability.
I do not lack compassion for them. They are fleeing a really crappy situation and are looking for a better life. I can appreciate that. There are multitudes of people who come from poor circumstances looking for a better life. Some people go the hard route and put in effort at school, work multiple jobs, and struggle against all odds to just barely scrape by and make ends meet. And some people living in the same area sell their neighbors drugs and steal from them. They all face the same struggles and they have the same motivations. Some just choose to follow the rules set out by society and some take a shortcut.
I don't believe in setting up and maintaining a system that rewards those who take the shortcut.
If the GOP was not blocking that, would you have?
Make no mistake, I do not lay this all at the feet of Democrats. The Republican Party has made sure to wink at border enforcement as well. The CoC needs their cheap labor after all.
I didn't say you lacked compassion. I said you can't distinguish between compassion and some strange liberal "open borders" caricature. And now, you can't even understand that.
Do you not even listen to what liberals say? Or are you just another Hack or Quixote or VPM, who only imagines liberals are the cartoon version you see on right wing media? WTF, man? Why can't you respond to what we say with honesty and integrity? I thought you were better than this.
Not only do his posts lack integrity, it's essential to his cartoonish view that we "libs" are just lying when we say we don't support open borders.
When I hear someone bloviating about "open borders" I stop listening. It's impossible to reason with that.
In hindsight, the Dem Senate ****ed those two years up beyond all recognition. I guess they figured they'd have more time? Or something? I dunno.
The President didn't want to spend all his political capital. I am a bit rougher on Obama in this regard than some, he didn't lead. Being a facilitator is nice, but sometimes one has to lead. As Trump is seeing, at other times one has to facilitate and not just go to the whip. You know the old saw about teams hiring the next coach to offset the shortcomings of the previous?
Yeah, whoever is to blame, those two years couldn't have seen more progress than they did. And I shouldn't say they were wasted. Things got done. But too much capital was spent on one specific thing, and others fell by the wayside.
Compassion is an emotion. Open borders is a policy. If you say that your compassion compels you to open your arms to those fleeing that kind of environment who end up on our doorstep and say "Welcome", then you are, in effect, saying that we should have an open border. If you want some kind of acknowledgement that you are a compassionate person, here you go, you are compassionate. But that does not have anything to do with actual policy.
If you are saying that you wish we could take them all in, I understand that. Maybe we are having two different conversations. I wish that the government could give us all $1 million cash when we retire. If you ask, "What should we do with Social Security" and I answer, "If it were me and you made it to retirement age, I would say, good job. Here's a million dollars. And then we can figure out how to make that work afterwards" what would you say my view on Social Security was? And when you say, "well your position is to just throw a million at everyone who retires" and I say, "that is not my position, you just don't understand my compassion for the working man."
Well what the **** is your position Goat. You literally quoted Bruce and I asking what you would do and your response was this:
When these families from Central America trying to escape violence and death showed up at our southern border, I would do this: I would say, "Congratulations on surviving the journey. Welcome to the promised land. Welcome to America. America welcomes you."
If all you are trying to do is show that you are a nice person, ok. Cool, you are a swell guy. That is not what is being asked though. It is like ****ed up parenting where the kids want candy at midnight. One parent looks to the other and ask what they think and the other parent says, "Well I think we should be able to eat what we want, when we want." And the other parent says, "Ok, well give them the candy then?" "No dumbass, I was just sympathizing with their want for sweets." Awesome, that is not what I asked you though. I am trying to have a discussion about what we should do in practical application and you are talking about feelings. Not only that, you specifically reference a question about what we should do, give an answer, and then say that is not really your answer.
So again, I get you want to help. What is your true solution. Not what you wish we could do, what should we do? I think you guys on here are much like the Democratic Party, you do want open borders but you play this game because the overwhelming majority of people in this country do not and you have spent a bunch of time arguing that is not what you want.
Who is this “left” that you speak of? Because me and all my leftie friends have NEVER advocated for that position. I haven’t met a single leftie that has advocated for that. Ever.
Reasonable controls on immigration and a pathway to citizenship for those already here shouldn’t be a hard thing to do. The gang of 8 did it- but that was too “soft” on immigration for the hard right faction in the House.
Meanwhile, families are being torn apart, and the vitriol is rising.
This should be a simple fix. Both side won’t get everything they want- but it’s doable.
And two magical years that they could have done a whole bunch of things that they supposedly want to do. Instead they spent all of their political capital on a health plan that nobody wanted.
This is just like the continual facebook memes of the Obama years, "Obama is coming to take your guns". Nevermind he never once introduced any legislation even close to that.
You hate the GOP=racist thought, so here, I will stipulate that as many Democrats want open borders as Republicans who want a return to Jim Crow. You give me the percentage here, I'll agree. How much more accommodating can I be?
Congratulations for continuing to not understand, despite apparently having the capacity to frame the different possible reactions.
U
Does the term "open borders" bother you?
Fine, Democrats want our border protection to be like a broken condom. We know our boyfriend wants it there but we are totally cool with poking a hole in it (sanctuary cities and catch and release) because we really think it would be neat-o to have a baby. But we are committed to contraception because we buy it and have him wear it.
Does the term "open borders" bother you?
Fine, Democrats want our border protection to be like a broken condom. We know our boyfriend wants it there but we are totally cool with poking a hole in it (sanctuary cities and catch and release) because we really think it would be neat-o to have a baby. But we are committed to contraception because we buy it and have him wear it.
Lol, ok. And you guys accuse CoH of being squishy....
Your guys new wunderkind wants to completely de-fund ICE.
What is that if not a a roundabout way of advocating for open borders?
If you go back and look, the Democrats only enjoyed 60 votes in the senate for a very short time. Franken wasn’t seated until July of ‘09 and Kennedy died a month and a half later in August. Kennedy’s replacement wasn’t seated until a month later in September and Scott Brown won that seat and was seated in Feb ‘10.
A few points about the graph. First, that is not a graph tracking the number of illegal immigrants that are entering the U.S., it is a graph tracking the number of apprehensions. Now, reason could follow that the more people being apprehended would indicate that more people are coming across. Then again, there are other factors that could impact apprehensions as well.
Also, the majority of that graph is covering a time period leading up to the recession in 2008 and its recovery. Now we are reminded all the time that the slow recovery from the recession is due to just how catastrophic and historic the recession was. So the incentive to walk here decreases a bit. Additionally, that graph indicates that we apprehended somewhere north of 12 million people attempting to cross our border in the decade before 2008. 12 million apprehended. What percentage of the illegal population do you believe we actually catch? Now I know some of those figures would include people who were caught multiple times. But let's say that for every one we catch, one probably gets through. So in the decade before 2008, we conservatively had around 12 million people illegally take residence in the U.S. Then the economic downturn happened. I would argue that some fencing and a few extra guards along a thousand mile long border had less to do with the decrease in immigration than the economic downturn did. With the economy looking to be heating up again, we should start to see an increase in illegal immigration again.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/04/10/illegal-immigration-to-america-is-rising-again
IT CERTAINLY looked like a “Trump effect.” Within weeks of Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House in January 2017, the number of people caught crossing America’s southern border illegally fell to a 17-year low of 11,127. John Kelly, then secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), attributed the drop to Mr Trump’s executive orders on immigration. Elaine Duke, the department’s deputy secretary, gave credit to better enforcement of immigration laws. Mr Trump hailed it as “a historic and unprecedented achievement”.Granted, that is a smaller sample than even you provided, but I would be willing to bet that the ebb and flow of illegal immigration also mirrors the ebb and flow of the U.S. economy. The recession and recovery from the same is probably more attributable to the decline in illegal immigration then any new enforcement provisions.
If such an effect did exist, it appears to have been short-lived. On April 5th, the DHS announced that Border Patrol agents apprehended 37,393 people in March, an increase of more than 200% on the previous year. The number of unaccompanied children caught entering illegally jumped by 300%, and the number of families detained while attempting the journey surged by nearly 700%.
And the Democrats say they are not for an open border because they would like to put more guards at the door. The problem is that they want to continue to leave all of the windows unlocked and open with a fresh baked pie beckoning the hungry. They don't want a secure border, they want a game where getting in equals citizenship. That is in effect an open border because all it requires is to keep trying until you get in.
FWIW, that is why I am not for Trump's wall. I want e-verify and onerous penalties on businesses who hire illegals. If there are no benefits and no jobs for illegals, you do not have to deport and turn away. They will stop coming and leave on their own. Then you have a system where the U.S. decides who comes in and in what numbers.
The numbers are what they are....there were 304k apprehensions last year...the lowest since it was tracked in 1970....in the mid 2000s it was over a 1.5 million per year....and in the 80s and 90s it was often even higher.
This is a totally manufactured issue...it once was an issue....but it hasn't been for a decade. The economy rebounded several years ago......yet crossings continued to drop. Mainly driven by demographic realities in Mexico:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/democrats-immigration-not-a-crisis/563855/
https://www.hcn.org/articles/us-mexican-border-trump-us-mexico-border-crisis-debunked-in-6-charts
If one wishes to obsess over a policy that is basically meaningless to our larger nation...that's because you've either been duped into believing there is a huge invasion of people....or you have alterior motives. I won't participate in this charade.
Where we differ is in accepting reality. I don't like Kim being head of North Korea, but I ain't about to suggest we launch a major offensive to oust him. The reality has been that a lot of people have lived here a mighty long time. The solutions to that part of the problem have not been good. I don't support stopping people with "paper's please" on street corners, or on buses, or anywhere else. Now I don't mind various attempts to stop employers from hiring. But as I pointed out, when Georgia tried a crackdown that had a whole lot of food go to waste because there was no one there to harvest the food.
There is a certain reality that we have to abide by. We aren't committing to a land war in Asia no matter how much I hate Kim, we aren't rounding up and shipping out 5 million people.
Then don't participate. We aren't changing the world here. There will be a tomorrow whether you or I participate in any of these threads.
What we are doing is picking data to support our positions and then screaming at each other. And we all think we are right and the other people are morons. We're at the contempt phase of the impending dissolution of our marriage.
https://www.womansday.com/relationships/dating-marriage/a53790/contempt-and-divorce/
I am not even really talking about the people that are already here, I am talking about those still coming. I think those that are here will have to present themselves and make an argument for why they should stay. Some will have a more compelling argument than others. But before I worry about the water in the boat, I want to plug the holes that let more water in.
We could also decide what to do on all of it together but I frankly do not trust the Democrats to negotiate that honestly, so here we are.
I'm all for penalties on businesses. It would be amusing to see Trump start with his own.A few points about the graph. First, that is not a graph tracking the number of illegal immigrants that are entering the U.S., it is a graph tracking the number of apprehensions. Now, reason could follow that the more people being apprehended would indicate that more people are coming across. Then again, there are other factors that could impact apprehensions as well.
Also, the majority of that graph is covering a time period leading up to the recession in 2008 and its recovery. Now we are reminded all the time that the slow recovery from the recession is due to just how catastrophic and historic the recession was. So the incentive to walk here decreases a bit. Additionally, that graph indicates that we apprehended somewhere north of 12 million people attempting to cross our border in the decade before 2008. 12 million apprehended. What percentage of the illegal population do you believe we actually catch? Now I know some of those figures would include people who were caught multiple times. But let's say that for every one we catch, one probably gets through. So in the decade before 2008, we conservatively had around 12 million people illegally take residence in the U.S. Then the economic downturn happened. I would argue that some fencing and a few extra guards along a thousand mile long border had less to do with the decrease in immigration than the economic downturn did. With the economy looking to be heating up again, we should start to see an increase in illegal immigration again.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/04/10/illegal-immigration-to-america-is-rising-again
IT CERTAINLY looked like a “Trump effect.” Within weeks of Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House in January 2017, the number of people caught crossing America’s southern border illegally fell to a 17-year low of 11,127. John Kelly, then secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), attributed the drop to Mr Trump’s executive orders on immigration. Elaine Duke, the department’s deputy secretary, gave credit to better enforcement of immigration laws. Mr Trump hailed it as “a historic and unprecedented achievement”.Granted, that is a smaller sample than even you provided, but I would be willing to bet that the ebb and flow of illegal immigration also mirrors the ebb and flow of the U.S. economy. The recession and recovery from the same is probably more attributable to the decline in illegal immigration then any new enforcement provisions.
If such an effect did exist, it appears to have been short-lived. On April 5th, the DHS announced that Border Patrol agents apprehended 37,393 people in March, an increase of more than 200% on the previous year. The number of unaccompanied children caught entering illegally jumped by 300%, and the number of families detained while attempting the journey surged by nearly 700%.
And the Democrats say they are not for an open border because they would like to put more guards at the door. The problem is that they want to continue to leave all of the windows unlocked and open with a fresh baked pie beckoning the hungry. They don't want a secure border, they want a game where getting in equals citizenship. That is in effect an open border because all it requires is to keep trying until you get in.
FWIW, that is why I am not for Trump's wall. I want e-verify and onerous penalties on businesses who hire illegals. If there are no benefits and no jobs for illegals, you do not have to deport and turn away. They will stop coming and leave on their own. Then you have a system where the U.S. decides who comes in and in what numbers.
I'm saying I'm not going to participate in arguing on what should be done differently.....when it should be clear to just looking at the data trends that what we've been doing over the last 2 decades is working. At what point should we declare success?
But that doesn't fire up the base of the #NewGOP that is convinced there is a unchecked migrant invasion pouring across the border. Data is irrelevant when the politics is driven by emotion and xenophobia.
Wasn't that when we spent all the political capital on health care? It was important to get accomplished, but would have been nice to get some other things done too. We will know better next time.
Nobody wanted? An awful lot of people want it now that the Republicans continue to do everything they can to destroy it.
I think we all know by now the one thing that doesn't fire up the base is a fact.I'm saying I'm not going to participate in arguing on what should be done differently.....when it should be clear to just looking at the data trends that what we've been doing over the last 2 decades is working. At what point should we declare success?
But that doesn't fire up the base of the #NewGOP that is convinced there is a unchecked migrant invasion pouring across the border. Data is irrelevant when the politics is driven by emotion and xenophobia.
People like Crazy seem to believe their anger is triggered by something the “libs” are saying or doing, and since they’re having an extreme reaction, we must be asserting an extreme position.
There must be some reason they’re having such an extreme reaction, but as Twenty has established, it isn’t because there’s an extreme problem, and as we “libs” keep pointing out, the claim that we’re advocating anything like open borders is absurd.
So why are so many Trump supporters having such an unhinged reaction to immigration? Hint: it’s not economic anxiety.
