Author Topic: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?  (Read 1545 times)

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« on: April 10, 2019, 01:51:19 PM »
Is the US full and should it close its boarders to immigration?
Is Immigration necessary to a healthy economy?
Is immigration as big a problem as so many people make it out to be?

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2019, 02:28:57 PM »
No.
Yes.
No.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2019, 02:39:06 PM »
Is the US full and should it close its boarders to immigration?

The US is not "full" but we have to accept a level of additional environmental damage, health consequences, legal consequences and economic consequences if we continue to accept illegal immigrants without any reasonable plans to incorporate them into our society.

We should always have had control over immigration, and never permitted illegal immigration to create rights entitlements.  So we should close our border to illegal immigration, and continue to support legal immigration.

Quote
Is Immigration necessary to a healthy economy?

Technically it's not, but it certainly makes it easier.  Immigrants and illegal immigrants each are filling economic roles that we have under supplied in our own work force.  There's no reason we couldn't focus more of our students into tech and science and out of social sciences.

Similarly, using illegal immigrants to do work below the threshold of the legal minimums we require be paid to our own citizens is the direct result of bad policy choices.

Quote
Is immigration as big a problem as so many people make it out to be?

Bigger.  Most people are just lying about it for politics.  Immigration without any rational ability to control it, or plan on how you're going to integrate the immigrants is nothing but a permanent plan for strife, hard ship and abuse. 

List out the best 100 things about this country that have made it a more desirable place to live than the country from whence people came.  Pick out the best things about our social structure, tolerance, equality, justice.  How many of those things do the people coming in believe in, are we undercutting what makes us special? 

How many immigrants who don't believe in female equality are too many?  How many that don't believe in gay rights are too many?  How many that don't believe in the very concept of capitlism that they are coming to take advantage of is too many?

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2019, 03:05:41 PM »
Seems to me that immigration has always been a hot button throughout history and I think much of the fear associated with migration has in hind sight been unfounded.
I'm finding it difficult to get a clear picture on the problem of legal immigration.

If the Us closed its boarders to immigration I wonder what would it look like in 10 years. 

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2019, 06:05:14 PM »
The current economic model absolutely requires growth, without which credit would eventually dry up and the system would crash... If not through natural population increase, and if not through productivity gains that slightly outstrip the economic growth, then net immigration would be required.

Now, I have no boarders, but if I did, they might be open to immigrants, but they might want to close themselves to immigration... :P

As for whether it's a problem?  It's no more a problem than it ever was. There have always been chicken littles running around on the topic, but the world never has ended...

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2019, 06:14:02 PM »
Quote
Pick out the best things about our social structure, tolerance, equality, justice.  How many of those things do the people coming in believe in, are we undercutting what makes us special? 

Historically, and today, a primary motivator for people to come here is because they crave those things. They are just finding less tolerance, equality, and justice extended to them.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2019, 06:39:10 PM »
Craving and believing in are different things.  I also don't think it's acceptable to work on an article of faith that economic migrants are coming here because they want to live in societies with gay rights and female equality.  In fact, modern immigration is pretty much a mandatory exercise in importing the culture of the immigrant up to and including not requiring them to learn English and specifically endorsing cultural variance on important civil rights.

What you think is true, was only true when we endorsed a melting pot and the acceptance that American culture is superior to the culture one was leaving behind.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2019, 09:53:24 AM »
Is the US full and should it close its boarders to immigration?
Is Immigration necessary to a healthy economy?
Is immigration as big a problem as so many people make it out to be?

I heard someone say something the other day that I thought was interesting: if you can’t, or are unwilling to articulate the number of immigrants, or even a range that would be an acceptable number per year, you're not really part of the conversation and just kicking ideological tires. It’s amazing how many people can't/won't engage in that direct point.

You also left out the word controlled vs uncontrolled. Depending on which type of immigration you’re asking about, the first two are answered inversely, the third is “yes” regardless of the type of immigration.

DonaldD

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2019, 04:35:14 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ScottF:
Depending on which type of immigration you’re asking about, the first two are answered inversely
How does the type of immigration change the answer to the question "Is the USA full?"

rightleft22

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2019, 05:35:00 PM »
Its possible that controlled immigration is not a problem while uncontrolled (illegal) immigration is a problem while the question of the USA being full suggests a better question is required.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2019, 07:47:20 PM »
Bingo

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #11 on: April 11, 2019, 07:53:15 PM »
Two thirds plus of the US is unoccupied. It's national parkland, somewhere people are grazing cows, or just literally empty.

This idea that the US is "full" sounds insane to me. Okay, there aren't enough schools and hospitals to manage the population.

Here's an idea. Why not use all of those evil immigrants, with their rapey construction skills, to build the hospitals and schools needed?

We could even import the white professionals needed to staff them from Europe.

Lol.

Republicans care about demographics. End of. If they thought the poor dudes coming over the border believed in trickle down economics, it'd be a different story.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #12 on: April 11, 2019, 11:15:32 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2019, 10:16:52 AM »
Two thirds plus of the US is unoccupied. It's national parkland, somewhere people are grazing cows, or just literally empty.

This idea that the US is "full" sounds insane to me. Okay, there aren't enough schools and hospitals to manage the population.

Here's an idea. Why not use all of those evil immigrants, with their rapey construction skills, to build the hospitals and schools needed?

We could even import the white professionals needed to staff them from Europe.

Lol.

Republicans care about demographics. End of. If they thought the poor dudes coming over the border believed in trickle down economics, it'd be a different story.

Just because it's unoccupied doesn't mean the land isn't being fully used. That being said, there's still plenty of physical space.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2019, 12:49:19 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Supporting unlimited legal immigration is A. an honest answer, so thanks and B. the path to ruin for any sovereign state worth immigrating to in the first place.

cherrypoptart

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2019, 01:01:16 PM »
All this depends on what kind of standard of living we want.

Does selective immigration where we brain drain other countries for their best and brightest increase our standard of living? I'd say undoubtedly.

Does massive virtually unrestricted immigration increase our standard of living? We used to worry about teacher to student ratios. Does practically unlimited immigration make those ratios better or worse? With selective immigration we can bring teachers in. With open borders we probably aren't bringing in enough teachers to keep up with the new students. We could go down the laundry list of quality of life issues and mostly they'd be improved more with selective immigration and at least some would see declines with unlimited immigration while a few might see improvement.

Are we full? I think worst case if the only habitable land on Earth were America we could fill our country with the entire population of the Earth and survive. So we're not full. But what would our standard of living be? That's the question. And another is how much are we willing to lower our standard of living to lift up that of millions of other people? Let's say on a hundred point scale ours would go down 3 points with 30 million illegals but theirs would go up by 60 or more. Is that worth it? Some say absolutely, and some say no thanks. It's up to you. Obviously if unlimited immigration raised our standard of living it probably wouldn't be such an issue. We haven't really seen that being the case in Europe though. And of course part of it is politics, not just how many more doctors and lawyers and scientists we can put out there, which is great but that has to be balanced with how many more socialists get elected and how likely that is to turn us into Venezuela instead of Finland. As Trump would say, not good.

« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 01:11:26 PM by cherrypoptart »

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2019, 02:08:57 PM »
I'm not sure if this is a sidetrack or not, but if I may observe, the same quarters that seem to be more supportive of either unlimited immigration, or else at least letting many more people in to the U.S. than are allowed now, seem to be the same types of people who have long railed against the so-called "overpopulation problem", urging people not to have many children, and condemning places like China and India for their billion+ population sizes. But if the U.S. had an unlimited immigration policy, would there be any doubt that its population would amount to a billion in not too long? Putting aside even quality of life considerations, doesn't this basically amount to the same (for America) as if everyone started having 5-10 children each? How can the urge for small families jive with the desire to import enormous amounts of people?

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2019, 02:11:59 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Supporting unlimited legal immigration is A. an honest answer, so thanks and B. the path to ruin for any sovereign state worth immigrating to in the first place.

More of less. The modern economy has little use for an unlimited labor pool with legal stipulations on where(OSHA), how(OSHA, overtime, full-time/part-time), and under what circumstances that labor that can be used(OSHA), and the rates they can be compensated at(minimum wage). And also ignores the other addons to "cost of employment" including unemployment insurance, additional (tax/financial) burdens undertaken by the employer not evident to the employee, etc.

Simply put: It costs a lot to legally employ somebody in the United States in the Modern regulatory environment we enjoy. Those costs also tend to make us not particularly competitive on the global marketplace. As such, there are obvious demographics that have little to no "market utility" within the borders of the US, and allowing those populations into the US is only going to serve to weigh down the economy due to increased demands on tax-payer supported infrastructure and social services.

All this depends on what kind of standard of living we want.

Does selective immigration where we brain drain other countries for their best and brightest increase our standard of living? I'd say undoubtedly.

The Cultural/Assimilation aspect of it cannot be ignored completely either. What do we want our country to culturally resemble in 100 years? What "culture" issues are we willing to bend on? What issues are we not willing to compromise on? This does get into very sticky and cumbersome issues very quickly, but a legally biased immigration system has been in force for over 50 years now. Not all nations are created equal in the eyes of the current immigration system, and it's current configuration favors the 3rd world over Europe and other advanced economies.

Even though economic reality is that the 3rd world has limited offerings. Or that entire matter that the 3rd world also boasts many of the "cultural issues" that people here in the US consider to be highly toxic and are trying to expunge from our Society. Even as they continue to advocate for the immigration of even more people from populations that are even worse about that subject matter than the people within our borders right now. If you're going to try to play "social engineer" things, don't go about it half-assed and backwards.
 
Quote
Does massive virtually unrestricted immigration increase our standard of living? We used to worry about teacher to student ratios. Does practically unlimited immigration make those ratios better or worse? With selective immigration we can bring teachers in. With open borders we probably aren't bringing in enough teachers to keep up with the new students. We could go down the laundry list of quality of life issues and mostly they'd be improved more with selective immigration and at least some would see declines with unlimited immigration while a few might see improvement.

Forget teacher/student. Try Doctor/Patient or even Nurse/Patient ratios. The Media's been harping on the matter for decades that we have a critical shortage of medical practitioners in this country, and it's getting worse in the rural areas in particular. Education is important as well, as it has the additional benefit of (allegedly) resulting in the need for less (intensive) medical care as the level of education increases. Of course, that could be the result of better educated people generally having better paying jobs, which enables them to afford more routine/preventative care so their need for more intense medical interventions is a consequence of "better maintenance" for lack of a better term coming to mind.

Quote
Are we full? I think worst case if the only habitable land on Earth were America we could fill our country with the entire population of the Earth and survive. So we're not full.

I think I crunched those on here before, at urban population densities that have already been achieved, we could accommodate the population of the entire planet in just a handful of (smaller) states if Earth's population ever became so inclined as to undertake a civil engineering project on that scale. It doesn't even have to the United States where such a massive construction project was undertaken, it could literally be built anywhere.

[quote[But what would our standard of living be? That's the question. And another is how much are we willing to lower our standard of living to lift up that of millions of other people? Let's say on a hundred point scale ours would go down 3 points with 30 million illegals but theirs would go up by 60 or more. Is that worth it? Some say absolutely, and some say no thanks. It's up to you. Obviously if unlimited immigration raised our standard of living it probably wouldn't be such an issue. We haven't really seen that being the case in Europe though. And of course part of it is politics, not just how many more doctors and lawyers and scientists we can put out there, which is great but that has to be balanced with how many more socialists get elected and how likely that is to turn us into Venezuela instead of Finland. As Trump would say, not good.[/quote]

Those get into some "interesting" sci/tech meets sociology questions. And it comes with a whole slew of seemingly paradoxical issues. By current technical and economic capabilities, it is feasible to achieve. China has actually demonstrated this a large extent. However, China is the only place on earth with "the right mix" of things to make something like that happen at present, and unfortunately for China, they have a (social/)corruption issue running in parallel to that so while they did manage to build a lot of said physical infrastructure, it wasn't built particularly well.

Urbanization going forward does need to be encouraged, but at the same time, we need to get better at how we do it. Building vertical is still extremely expensive compared to building horizontal. There also remain social impacts of high-density urban environments that even now aren't fully understood.

The "urban disconnect from reality" aspect is yet another issue that would require some degree of attention as well, but that one becomes increasingly difficult as time goes on. A recent anecdotal example for me would be one of my sisters sharing a meme on Facebook, which had good intentions, but it had problems. It said the following:

Quote
The Razor Blade is sharp, but cannot cut a tree; the axe is strong, but can't cut the hair.
Everyone is important according to his/her own unique purpose.
Never look down on anyone, unless you're admiring their shoes.

I'm sure a few people in here already spotted "the problem" with the example the writer provided. I wouldn't be surprised if a few others didn't.

Axes are bladed tools. Being a bladed tool, it has a cutting edge. Any properly maintained cutting edge can cut hair. As late as WW2, service members(and/or Lumberjacks) shaving with axes or hatchets were actually fairly common.

In fact, it was a common test for the quality of the blade(or its care), as it would be examined visually for obvious defects, and subsequently tested against skin/hair to see if it could cut hair. If it couldn't, the blade needed sharpening.

But as most people born after the mid 20th century have only really dealt with disposable razors(which you don't sharpen), and most don't work with bladed tools which could be sharped(most power tools also have disposable attachments), "Axe lore" has waned in the general population. So you end up with meme posts which try to convey a deep message, only to fail at it in certain circles because they didn't bother to understand what it was they were comparing against.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 02:20:33 PM by TheDeamon »

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2019, 02:12:38 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?


TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2019, 02:19:04 PM »
I'm not sure if this is a sidetrack or not, but if I may observe, the same quarters that seem to be more supportive of either unlimited immigration, or else at least letting many more people in to the U.S. than are allowed now, seem to be the same types of people who have long railed against the so-called "overpopulation problem", urging people not to have many children, and condemning places like China and India for their billion+ population sizes. But if the U.S. had an unlimited immigration policy, would there be any doubt that its population would amount to a billion in not too long? Putting aside even quality of life considerations, doesn't this basically amount to the same (for America) as if everyone started having 5-10 children each? How can the urge for small families jive with the desire to import enormous amounts of people?

There are leftist environmental groups that are opposed to immigration to the United States because of the resulting development that would be required. A few of them even ran ad campaigns back during the Obama Admin when he was working on immigration reform as I recall, they were opposed because of the projected population growth. So they're out there.

That said, immigration grows the population without "growing the population" so in some respects, its basic economics and trying to avoid the fate of Japan for example. Yes, the population of the United States grows as a consequence of the immigrants coming to America, but it doesn't change the global population. all it did is change where the population is. And as we need/want a younger population base that is larger than the population of senior citizens, the only way to reconcile small family unit sizes is through immigration and population movement.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2019, 02:50:43 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?

More effective at... what? My moral stance on immigration is that of the ultimate individualist philosophy. No individual should have their opportunity limited by a group or government. A true global free market demands that labor freely cross borders. I'm not talking about instant citizenship. There can be a process, and it doesn't have to offer free government housing. H1B and other guest worker visa can fill the bill. As such, there really wouldn't be any illegal hiring - or at least no worse than is currently true for birthright citizens.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2019, 03:21:59 PM »
Supporting unlimited legal immigration is A. an honest answer, so thanks and B. the path to ruin for any sovereign state worth immigrating to in the first place.

Which is why the US was such a hellhole until the late 19th century.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2019, 03:28:18 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?

Is your suggestion that it be illegal to hire illegals?  Then in what way are they possibly contributing to the economy?

It would be absolutely ruinous to import a permanent under class unlimited in size that can't legally work and essentially lives off those that do (ie the citizens).  If you added, automatic deportation when accessing any public service, including schools, hospitals and welfare, then the idea you espouse (ie ruining employers) could be workable.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2019, 03:33:41 PM »
Not to speak for LR, but the typical rational is that if they knew they couldn't work illegally (because those employers won't take the risk) they will go through the LEGAL channels, or go elsewhere / stay put.

Instead of a physical barrier against breaking the law, you eliminate the desire/reward for breaking the law.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2019, 04:36:44 PM »
D.W., the idea that they are coming to work is an old characterization.  By being granted entry and access to services, including free healthcare, education, potentially housing  and other welfare and the right to have any child born automatically be a US citizen who can never be deported, we've provided a massive incentive package without regard to the "ability to work." 

Unless you deal with the entire incentive package all LR's doing is punishing Americans for the crimes of non-Americans, while paying lip service to the idea of disincentivising the behavior.  In fact, the prohibition on working, while it would be "inhumane" not to provide services, doubles or even triples down on the incentives.

"Come to America, you won't have to work and the state will take care of you."  In what way is that not an incentive?

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2019, 06:44:03 PM »
D.W., the idea that they are coming to work is an old characterization.  By being granted entry and access to services, including free healthcare, education, potentially housing  and other welfare and the right to have any child born automatically be a US citizen who can never be deported, we've provided a massive incentive package without regard to the "ability to work."

Most illegal immigrants can get good quality education and medical care in their home country.  Housing usually isn't available to illegal immigrants.  Those illegal immigrants who aren't asylum seekers are nearly universally seeking to work illegally and are often migrant workers - working seasonal construction or farming and then returning to their home country.

Also 'undocuemented immigrants' have a unemployment rate that is lower than the US rate as a whole,

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/forbrn.nr0.htm/Labor-Force-Characteristics-of-Foreign-Born-Workers-Summary

As to 'anchor babies' - see this discussion.  I'd be willing to support a change in birth citizenship laws - they appear to be a motivator though only for a very small minority of immigrants who stay in the US - they seem more a motivation for legal and illegal immigrants who only temporarily visit the US.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/06/lindsey-graham/illegal-immigrants-anchor-babies-birthright/
 
Quote
Unless you deal with the entire incentive package all LR's doing is punishing Americans for the crimes of non-Americans, while paying lip service to the idea of disincentivising the behavior.  In fact, the prohibition on working, while it would be "inhumane" not to provide services, doubles or even triples down on the incentives.

See above, you seem to have a view of illegal immigration that is entirely at odds with what actually happens.

Quote
"Come to America, you won't have to work and the state will take care of you."  In what way is that not an incentive?

That is contrary to reality - they are only eligible for emergency care and generally would get better care in their home country.  Education in their home country is generally comparable.  They are generally ineligible for housing benefits and seek to avoid interaction with the government as much as possible to avoid discovery.  Illegal immigrants who stay are generally motivated by the superior income they can make compared to what they could earn in their home country.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #26 on: April 13, 2019, 12:09:41 PM »
Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?

Is your suggestion that it be illegal to hire illegals?  Then in what way are they possibly contributing to the economy?

It would be absolutely ruinous to import a permanent under class unlimited in size that can't legally work and essentially lives off those that do (ie the citizens).  If you added, automatic deportation when accessing any public service, including schools, hospitals and welfare, then the idea you espouse (ie ruining employers) could be workable.

No one is trying to say that.

What we're saying is that there is an obvious need for labor in the country. Illegals are coming in and filling it.

Now, I've heard and understand the arguments.

"Americans could do this. It drives down median wage."

And I agree. They could. It would. It'd drive up prices for certain things, but of course you're right.

The point here is attacking the problem at the source. Even if it hurts good old fashioned white small business owners. Or even big business owners!

*They're* the ones getting the benefits from paying minimum or, more usually, less, to their workers. They're the ones not having to pay payroll tax when they slip the cash under the table.

I guarantee if the US made it a policy to hunt down and shut down businesses that hire illegals, within a few months we'd see a remarkable decrease of illegals crossing the border. Because even if they got here, where are they gonna work?

If we did that it really would help Americans because we'd be running on a real economy again that had to take into account actual economic realities without the influx of cheap underpaid labor.

But nah dawg we'll keep defending the businesses who shamelessly take advantage of desperate people and keep on blaming the dude in a crappy country who wants to give his family a better life.

Gotta build that that wall!

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #27 on: April 14, 2019, 06:49:25 PM »
Is the US full and should it close its boarders to immigration?
I’ll assume this was asked jokingly. It’d be sad if this was a serious question.

Is Immigration necessary to a healthy economy?
The question is, is illegal immigration necessary to a healthy economy? I get it, you have to make out like there’s no difference between illegal and legal immigration to frame this for ideological and moral superiority reasons but there is a huge difference between legal and illegal immigration. I don’t know anyone opposed to legal immigration so that question is irrelevant.

Is illegal immigration necessary for a healthy economy? I would imagine southern democrats used to make this exact case by asking the same question about slavery prior to the civil war. Having lost that war, illegal immigrants are essentially the democrat’s slave replacements. But, just like slavery, the answer is no, we don’t need either. Not economically nor morally.

Is immigration as big a problem as so many people make it out to be?

Again, you pretend legal and illegal immigration are the same. Illegal immigration is a huge problem. Please Google for information and get informed. Legal immigration is not a problem.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #28 on: April 14, 2019, 07:39:00 PM »
Quote
I don’t know anyone opposed to legal immigration so that question is irrelevant.


Really? Asylum seekers are legal immigrants. Never hear anybody complain about H1B visa holders? A lot of people would prefer that we never accept immigrants, except Northern Europeans.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #29 on: April 15, 2019, 01:30:45 AM »
Quote
I don’t know anyone opposed to legal immigration so that question is irrelevant.


Really? Asylum seekers are legal immigrants. Never hear anybody complain about H1B visa holders? A lot of people would prefer that we never accept immigrants, except Northern Europeans.

As a former H1B visa holder myself (although I’m sure most of my colleagues wouldn’t be aware of it), I’ve literally never heard anyone complain about, much less comment on H1B immigrants. I also know zero people who prefer that the US never accept immigrants. Are you proposing this is something relatively common? If so, it should be easy to demonstrate/show.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #30 on: April 15, 2019, 05:28:08 AM »
As a former H1B visa holder myself (although I’m sure most of my colleagues wouldn’t be aware of it), I’ve literally never heard anyone complain about, much less comment on H1B immigrants. I also know zero people who prefer that the US never accept immigrants. Are you proposing this is something relatively common? If so, it should be easy to demonstrate/show.

Truck Drivers, and the organizations that support them, not to be confused with the trucking companies who employ the Truck Drivers.

Trucker's had been complaining for decades about compensation rates having been flat since the early 1990's, it didn't really start to change until about 4 years ago. The single biggest contributor to helping forestall the driver shortage (and resulting pay increases) up until then? H1B Visas. It wasn't even a change in H1B rules that ultimately caused rates to go up, that was a combination of new DOT Regulations and a wave of Driver Retirements(in part a response to the new regs) outstripping the ability to replace those drivers, even with H1B.

Wages were low, the "OTR" Lifestyle was particularly rough, as most modern conveniences don't lend themselves well to a sleeper cab. (Although 4G, and now 5G rollout made a big difference on many fronts)  And generally speaking, for the amount of time/effort put into the job, many other menial labor jobs often paid better all things considered, had better hours, and more time at home. Especially if you were a brand new driver with no experience.

But while that's a problem for an American looking to get into Truck Driving, that's "not a problem" for a H1B Visa holder. Even better for the employer, because the H1B is their ticket into the US, they're inclined to tolerate a whole lot more use and abuse than their American Counterparts are.

And for a trucking company to be H1B eligible, all they have to do is demonstrate that they're offering "a competitive wage" (pay rates were dirt cheap), that they had positions open(easy enough for the large operations, keep more trucks in inventory and licensed than you have "qualified drivers"), and that you were unable to fill those positions for more than a year. There are large trucking companies out there that are almost entirely comprised of immigrant workers at this point. Not the largest ones(Swift, Werner, Schneider, etc) those still are predominately US Citizens operating them although even then you'll see the occasional immigrant in the mix, they're typically not H1B though. But there are a few other operations out there that there is a good chance that if you see someone climb out of the cab, they're going to be "an obvious immigrant."

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #31 on: April 15, 2019, 09:31:52 AM »
Biggest complaint on H1B is cheap labor rather than necessity. I'm not sure why it should be necessity driven. I don't like artificial manipulation of supply to keep the price of something artifically high. The first group that truck drivers complained about were the Irish.

LetterRip

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #32 on: April 15, 2019, 09:59:05 AM »
Biggest complaint on H1B is cheap labor rather than necessity. I'm not sure why it should be necessity driven. I don't like artificial manipulation of supply to keep the price of something artifically high. The first group that truck drivers complained about were the Irish.

The reason is because US labor isn't mobile - other countries are unlikely to let US manual laborers relocate; and house loans, etc. make it extremely difficult to relocate even if other countries were willing.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #33 on: April 15, 2019, 07:18:18 PM »
Quote
I don’t know anyone opposed to legal immigration so that question is irrelevant.


Really? Asylum seekers are legal immigrants. Never hear anybody complain about H1B visa holders? A lot of people would prefer that we never accept immigrants, except Northern Europeans.

Asylum seekers are legal if their claims of asylum are valid. The majority of those claims are denied. If people enter the US legally and have valid asylum claims, then no, I have not seen anyone opposed to them entering the US. What people oppose are illegal entry into the country and allowing invalid asylum claims. You must stop pretending that an asylum claim is a free pass to ignore the law.

No, I don’t inow anyone that complained about H1B visa holders. They did, however, complain about abuse of the H1B system. Again, you conflate what is legal, valid, immigration with systemic abuses and pretend they’re the same thing.

“A lot of people”, right then. Who is this “lot of people”? Just how many are there? 10? A million?

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #34 on: April 15, 2019, 09:13:01 PM »
“A lot of people”, right then. Who is this “lot of people”? Just how many are there? 10? A million?

Fair criticism.

Shock poll: Americans want massive cuts to legal immigration

Quote
The survey asked respondents what level of overall legal immigration they would like to see.

A stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year, while another 19 percent said it should be 250,000 to 500,000. Combined, they make up a majority looking for a cut of at least 50 percent over current annual levels. Another 18 percent said they want to see 500,000 to 1 million.

That sure sounds like a dislike for legal immigration to me. You don't have to read too many comments on that article to find people advocating for no immigration of any kind.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #35 on: April 15, 2019, 09:41:13 PM »
“A lot of people”, right then. Who is this “lot of people”? Just how many are there? 10? A million?

Fair criticism.

Shock poll: Americans want massive cuts to legal immigration

Quote
The survey asked respondents what level of overall legal immigration they would like to see.

A stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year, while another 19 percent said it should be 250,000 to 500,000. Combined, they make up a majority looking for a cut of at least 50 percent over current annual levels. Another 18 percent said they want to see 500,000 to 1 million.

That sure sounds like a dislike for legal immigration to me. You don't have to read too many comments on that article to find people advocating for no immigration of any kind.

According to wiki, there are roughly 1,000,000 legal immigrants/year already, although they allude to a "change of status" thing going on for up to 600,000 of them where they were already in the country legally?

Generally speaking, I think about 1 in 300 is a reasonable benchmark for assimilation and avoidance of ghettos. So I'm fine with a million-ish and maybe a bit more (given there are over 300 million people in the US). That said, Wiki claims we have over 37 Million legal immigrants in the country already. That's almost equivalent to the entire population of Canada.

Another issue present with the cited survey is the matter of illegal immigrants and how they've skewed perception re: immigrants in general, so addressing that issue is likely to result in an increase in "public permissiveness" for legal immigration.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2019, 08:12:50 AM »
Quote
That sure sounds like a dislike for legal immigration to me. You don't have to read too many comments on that article to find people advocating for no immigration of any kind.
Wut? Wantng to have a limited immigration is not the same as no immigration of any kind. In two posts you went from only Northern European to absolutely none. It’s like you just say whatever random thought you’ve been given.

How many legal  immigrants per year are the right amount? Also, how many illegal immigrants do you thinking’s should be allowed in?


TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2019, 09:13:36 AM »
I've already answered how many legal immigrants should be allowed in. Everyone who can pass a standard, meaning background checks etc, and with an eye toward a manageable flow. There's nothing that suggests that the amount of legal immigration that we currently have is any kind of an issue, which largely consists of students looking to continue after their studies here - meaning they already have a familiarity with the culture. I wouldn't be averse to charging a fee for entry, I'd rather see the cash go to our coffers than to organized crime to smuggle people in. I'd prefer barriers to quotas. One might even have an entry test that is the basis of citizenship classes done prior to arrival, to jump start assimilation. It's a form of merit-based immigration, but not one that demands you have special skills, but that you have a work ethic and attitude appropriate to our values.

I'd prefer to stop illegal immigration, through a combination of effective employer checks and penalties as well as allowing more legal ways to enter the country as guest workers. I'd like to penalize under the table employment - especially at the individual level - whether it be illegals or just Americans who are doing landscaping and housecleaning - for example. I'd like to make it easier for someone to be able to hire for those jobs legally, rather than the mountain of paperwork and regulation that currently occurs.

I'd like to see asylum requests made without the person having to wade across the Rio Grande, through an embassy in their home country. This would help alleviate the human crisis at the border.

For Northern Europeans, I was referring to the administration. Also green card limits by country, which favors smaller nations like those in Europe vs India or China. It's not possible to find any polling data that breaks down attitudes to immigration based on country of origin, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence. Nobody is getting yelled at in the street to speak English if they are speaking German or Dutch.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #38 on: April 17, 2019, 06:33:49 PM »
Quote
The survey asked respondents what level of overall legal immigration they would like to see.

A stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year, while another 19 percent said it should be 250,000 to 500,000. Combined, they make up a majority looking for a cut of at least 50 percent over current annual levels. Another 18 percent said they want to see 500,000 to 1 million.

That sure sounds like a dislike for legal immigration to me. You don't have to read too many comments on that article to find people advocating for no immigration of any kind.

So that's how people that dislike immigration sound ...

I've already answered how many legal immigrants should be allowed in. Everyone who can pass a standard, meaning background checks etc, and with an eye toward a manageable flow.

An eye toward a manageable flow. Sounds like you think there should be some controls on immigration, while simultaneously calling out those that want the exact same thing.

SMH

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2019, 10:13:44 AM »
Quote
The survey asked respondents what level of overall legal immigration they would like to see.

A stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year, while another 19 percent said it should be 250,000 to 500,000. Combined, they make up a majority looking for a cut of at least 50 percent over current annual levels. Another 18 percent said they want to see 500,000 to 1 million.

That sure sounds like a dislike for legal immigration to me. You don't have to read too many comments on that article to find people advocating for no immigration of any kind.

So that's how people that dislike immigration sound ...

I've already answered how many legal immigrants should be allowed in. Everyone who can pass a standard, meaning background checks etc, and with an eye toward a manageable flow.

An eye toward a manageable flow. Sounds like you think there should be some controls on immigration, while simultaneously calling out those that want the exact same thing.

SMH

So you don't understand the difference between a quota and a barrier. I'm not surprised.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2019, 03:01:03 PM »
Some good discussion here. I said this before, though.

"I guarantee if the US made it a policy to hunt down and shut down businesses that hire illegals, within a few months we'd see a remarkable decrease of illegals crossing the border. Because even if they got here, where are they gonna work?"

And I didn't see anyone, least of all our beloved right leaning members, respond.

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

Is there a reason why we shouldn't switch priorities from defending a 2k mile indefensible border to just punishing the people who hire them? Like, shutting down their business punishing. Wouldn't this also get what you want?

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2019, 03:02:19 PM »


So you don't understand the difference between a quota and a barrier. I'm not surprised.

I see. A "manageable flow" when someone else wants, it is a barrier. When you want it, it's a quota.  It's all about who wants it, ain't it? :o

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2019, 03:17:34 PM »
A quota is a number. Like, no more than 200,000 people. A barrier is "you must demonstrate basic competency in English".

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2019, 05:27:35 PM »

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2019, 05:42:58 PM »

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

FWIW, I was trying to stay out of it.

Quotas can be "a barrier to entry" for a position or location just as easily as anything else. Depending on what the criteria for selection that is used.

More generally speaking in regards to Legal vs illegal immigration, I'd personally favor "barrier" to be used in the more literal context of efforts to prevent illegal crossings, for which a border wall is a good example.

Quotas are a barrier as well, they just exist in a more abstract form.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #45 on: April 18, 2019, 05:56:42 PM »

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

Here!

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #46 on: April 18, 2019, 05:58:47 PM »
A quota is a number. Like, no more than 200,000 people. A barrier is "you must demonstrate basic competency in English".

So when a stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year. That’s a barrier. When you say something like no more than 200,000 a year, thats a quota.

Are you sure you got this right?

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #47 on: April 18, 2019, 09:56:32 PM »
A quota is a number. Like, no more than 200,000 people. A barrier is "you must demonstrate basic competency in English".

So when a stunning 35 percent said the level should be fewer than 250,000 a year. That’s a barrier. When you say something like no more than 200,000 a year, thats a quota.

Are you sure you got this right?

You make a good point that the survey doesn't ask how you get to those levels. Nevertheless, that is the system we have now for our immigration policy.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2019, 11:23:31 AM »
Some good discussion here. I said this before, though.

"I guarantee if the US made it a policy to hunt down and shut down businesses that hire illegals, within a few months we'd see a remarkable decrease of illegals crossing the border. Because even if they got here, where are they gonna work?"

And I didn't see anyone, least of all our beloved right leaning members, respond.

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

Is there a reason why we shouldn't switch priorities from defending a 2k mile indefensible border to just punishing the people who hire them? Like, shutting down their business punishing. Wouldn't this also get what you want?

Sorry for the delay, here's some of what I've said before about the idea that by punishing American citizens - and only American citizens - we could somehow stop illegal immigration:

D.W., the idea that they are coming to work is an old characterization.  By being granted entry and access to services, including free healthcare, education, potentially housing  and other welfare and the right to have any child born automatically be a US citizen who can never be deported, we've provided a massive incentive package without regard to the "ability to work." 

Unless you deal with the entire incentive package all LR's doing is punishing Americans for the crimes of non-Americans, while paying lip service to the idea of disincentivising the behavior.  In fact, the prohibition on working, while it would be "inhumane" not to provide services, doubles or even triples down on the incentives.

"Come to America, you won't have to work and the state will take care of you."  In what way is that not an incentive?

Or this time:

Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?

Is your suggestion that it be illegal to hire illegals?  Then in what way are they possibly contributing to the economy?

It would be absolutely ruinous to import a permanent under class unlimited in size that can't legally work and essentially lives off those that do (ie the citizens).  If you added, automatic deportation when accessing any public service, including schools, hospitals and welfare, then the idea you espouse (ie ruining employers) could be workable.

DJQuag

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Is Trump Administration right about immigration?
« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2019, 06:51:28 PM »
Some good discussion here. I said this before, though.

"I guarantee if the US made it a policy to hunt down and shut down businesses that hire illegals, within a few months we'd see a remarkable decrease of illegals crossing the border. Because even if they got here, where are they gonna work?"

And I didn't see anyone, least of all our beloved right leaning members, respond.

Crunch? Seriati? TheDeamon? ScottF?

Is there a reason why we shouldn't switch priorities from defending a 2k mile indefensible border to just punishing the people who hire them? Like, shutting down their business punishing. Wouldn't this also get what you want?

Sorry for the delay, here's some of what I've said before about the idea that by punishing American citizens - and only American citizens - we could somehow stop illegal immigration:

D.W., the idea that they are coming to work is an old characterization.  By being granted entry and access to services, including free healthcare, education, potentially housing  and other welfare and the right to have any child born automatically be a US citizen who can never be deported, we've provided a massive incentive package without regard to the "ability to work." 

Unless you deal with the entire incentive package all LR's doing is punishing Americans for the crimes of non-Americans, while paying lip service to the idea of disincentivising the behavior.  In fact, the prohibition on working, while it would be "inhumane" not to provide services, doubles or even triples down on the incentives.

"Come to America, you won't have to work and the state will take care of you."  In what way is that not an incentive?

Or this time:

Unlimited legal immigration is the only moral stance, to me. I don't care if the outcome is reduced wages or greater difficulty for native born Americans. Citizenship classes help teach American values, laws, and customs. Legal workers don't get exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Why don't you think ruinous fines for employers that do illegal hiring wouldn't be more effective?

Is your suggestion that it be illegal to hire illegals?  Then in what way are they possibly contributing to the economy?

It would be absolutely ruinous to import a permanent under class unlimited in size that can't legally work and essentially lives off those that do (ie the citizens).  If you added, automatic deportation when accessing any public service, including schools, hospitals and welfare, then the idea you espouse (ie ruining employers) could be workable.

All due respect, how many illegal immigrants do you know? How many have you talked to?

I grew up in Arizona. I knew a whole lot. They wanted to work and take care of their families, even if it took working three jobs. Every last one.

Anecdotal, I know. Still. This idea that they're flooding the border for their kids to get citizenship is asinine.

If immigrants are such an awful thing, then taking down a few American business owners in order to stop that sounds good to me. If the damage those immigrants are doing is so bad, surely it benefits the country? After all, they are wilfully breaking the law to make money. And by that, I mean the business owners paying less then minimum wage and skipping payroll taxes.

Immigrants don't move to the US for the welfare. They move there for the work.

Remove the work, you will reduce immigration. Seems pretty simple to me.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2019, 06:56:08 PM by DJQuag »