United States The United States and Immigration Policy

This is my first post on these boards.

Immigration. I am a Conservative (not a Republican, not a Libertarian, but a CONSERVATIVE). I believe that a nation (ANY nation) has not only the right, but the duty, to control immigration and emigration as well as any trade conducted over its borders (be they land, sea, or air).

We the people of these United States (through our elected representatives in Congress and the Presidency) have the absolute and unquestionable right to determine who will be allowed to enter our nation as guests and which of those guests will be allowed to remain as residents (at first) and citizens (later, after a process of assimilation).

I oppose the Open Border concept 100%. I believe that those who enter our country without the required documentation should be sent back. Exceptions include genuine refugees fleeing persecution and/or imminent violence/death, as well as (limited) stays for medical treatment (although NOT paid for by the state!).

The problem is that no one (in government) ever advocates for punishing the business owners who utilize illegal (undocumented) labor. This must be done if we are ever to fix this issue.

The camps? I think if we really tried, we could hold deportation hearings a whole lot faster and empty those places out rather quickly. But I agree, they are (as they are currently viewed) a national disgrace. Still, what can you do? Release the illegals to show up for future hearing? Yeah, right.

The whole thing is a mess, and what we should do is just SHUT IT ALL DOWN for a few years to get our house in order. But we can't. Or we won't. And we keep letting people in who refuse to go back home when their VISA expires.

That is on us. That is on our government. We should be keeping an eye on EVERYONE who is a guest in our country and if they overstay by ONE FREAKING DAY, I.C.E. should pick them up and put them a plane or ship back to wherever their home is.

Anyway. That is my thoughts on the subject.
 
@master arminas, that won't happen because the general situation isn't as stable as it would be. Given that the US -despite the current situation- is still better economically than their homes, people will want to move here.

... it's essentially the same dynamics as rural people heading towards the urban areas, if the place is better economically than their previous home, there is little to stop them from moving.
 
ShadowsOfParadox said:
there's been at least 60 miles of wall built, Border Patrol claims they'll have another 450 miles done by the end of 2020 or something

also some privately funded wall projects have been happening at the same time.
Click to expand...
Alright.

As for ICE with all the furor on it, wasn't there one about a Latino woman as part of the staff?

Though I get the impression from what I hear ICE employs Latino people which isn't suprising as it's a job and when you do the math where Latinos come from to immigrate legally it makes sense?
 
Punch Card Girl said:
I am quite sorry, Sir, but it does not appear that your dialect of English is within the bounds of my own diglossia.
Click to expand...

I mean, how specifically will they get to doing border security without having pictures or vids, possibly edited, to make them out to being unnecessarily brutal or just attacking those who want a better life and stuff

Think of that scene involving an illegal immigrant caravan in American Gods
 
CarlManvers2019 said:
I mean, how specifically will they get to doing border security without having pictures or vids, possibly edited, to make them out to being unnecessarily brutal or just attacking those who want a better life and stuff

Think of that scene involving an illegal immigrant caravan in American Gods
Click to expand...

Well, of course, the opposition will fake anything it wishes. But if society was healthier, it wouldn't matter.
 
Punch Card Girl said:
Well, of course, the opposition will fake anything it wishes. But if society was healthier, it wouldn't matter.
Click to expand...

Maybe it would help if it turned out “Border Security” was also “on the other side of the wall” because I’ve heard before that Mexicans do NOT like their country being some sort of stopgap
 
CarlManvers2019 said:
Maybe it would help if it turned out “Border Security” was also “on the other side of the wall” because I’ve heard before that Mexicans do NOT like their country being some sort of stopgap
Click to expand...

Mexico has quite strict immigration laws, you are quite correct. The problem is that they have ignored enforcing them for Central Americans passing through on their way to the United States.
 
I respect the United States' right to define and secure its borders. I don't respect the ideas of questionable effectiveness (at best) and often incendiary rhetoric perpetuated by this administration.

I'm not convinced a 2,000 mile long border would be fiscally prudent or effective as anything other than a symbol of inclusiveness that runs contrary to our legacy as a country that embraces immigrants founded by immigrants.

I'm also unconvinced that it is fiscally prudent or effective to attempt to round up and deport illegal immigrants who currently live in the USA, given that reports indicate they comprise an economic net-positive to the nation.

Moving forward, I think the US can and should exercise its right and responsibility to enforce border security and immigration law in morally and fiscally responsible ways. That includes ensuring that detention facilities should be forced to comport with human living conditions, if they need to exist in the first place. The right of immigrants to seek asylum should also be honored and not abrogated. I think we should also invest in rebuilding our South and Latin American neighbors to help them revitalize their countries so there's less incentive for people to flee in the first place.
 
ProphetOfTruth said:
Pardon? Are you referring to investiture in South/Latin America?
Click to expand...
It's called 'climate change fucking them over'. Most of those nations aren't that strong in the first place and having climate change shit on their parade will only cause them to completely collapse.
 
Aaron Fox said:
It's called 'climate change fucking them over'. Most of those nations aren't that strong in the first place and having climate change shit on their parade will only cause them to completely collapse.
Click to expand...

I don't follow (as pertains to what you quoted from me and what was initially said by @CarlManvers2019).

If you mean that the US investing in our South/Latin American neighbors would be us essentially pissing in the wind without simultaneously addressing climate change in a big way, then fair enough and I take your point.
 
ProphetOfTruth said:
If you mean that the US investing in our South/Latin American neighbors would be us essentially pissing in the wind without simultaneously addressing climate change in a big way, then fair enough and I take your point.
Click to expand...
That is what I mean. However, to do anything big on climate change you'll have to start investing in nuclear power like a madman with a very heavy 'damn the NIMBYs' mentality. Back those up with Natural Gas and renewables and you've got a solid energy grid for the more power-hungry carbon capture techs.
 
ProphetOfTruth said:
Pardon? Are you referring to investiture in South/Latin America?
Click to expand...

What I meant was, even if they chose to develop it through investments, the pay and economy may take awhile to improve their lives

I’d see it as tempting to go to an already developed nation with higher pay
 
Aaron Fox said:
That is what I mean. However, to do anything big on climate change you'll have to start investing in nuclear power like a madman with a very heavy 'damn the NIMBYs' mentality. Back those up with Natural Gas and renewables and you've got a solid energy grid for the more power-hungry carbon capture techs.
Click to expand...

Noted. I'm not a climatologist, which is at least as worth emphasizing as my recent admission in a different thread that I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that investing in nuclear energy is the most efficient and cost-effective choice of our current viable options. I'm aware that there's extreme risk, but the nuclear safety has come a long way since the days of Chernobyl, I gather. (Though, given how poorly we manage our network of physical infrastructure, perhaps I should be grateful we're not pockmarked with nuclear power plants.)

CarlManvers2019 said:
What I meant was, even if they chose to develop it through investments, the pay and economy may take awhile to improve their lives

I’d see it as tempting to go to an already developed nation with higher pay
Click to expand...

Well I doubt we could ever possibly completely remove the incentive for foreigners to emigrate to the USA (and we don't really wanna do that in the end anyway for both cultural and economic reasons), but I'm sure helping the success of their native countries would help stem the tide immensely.
 
Big Steve said:
As I recall, Chernobyl was literally a case of not only "Everything that could go wrong did", but "everything that could go wrong did and the operating crew actively did everything to make it even worse".
Click to expand...
That and was a byproduct of an old and flawed designed, rushed construction, Murphy's law in action, and all ran by a glory hound idiot who outright ignored Moscow's 'DO NOT DO' list (one of the major DO NOT items on that list is never start a combat shutdown test below a certain point, EVER). When you actually look into Chernobyl, it is an eye-opener.
 
We should probably cease this, we're starting to go from tangent to derail. And I have to get ready for work anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top