KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Sc- gotta say this is one of the better exchanges we have had around here in some time, thanks.Reading your responses - 1. thank you for the bolded. Not much drives me crazy as quickly as that.
I'm guilty of doing it - call me out when i do because most often I don't mean "you" directly towards anyone. Sometimes, not often
I think I can answer a couple of your questions this way: I don't believe either side wants a long term slow of the flow of immigrants, so that is a core departure in our thinking when we are talking about this issue - you believe the GOP when they say they want to stop it. The big bucks made is bipartisan, so my belief is this is more of a political game that ebbs and flows a little, but ultimately is what they want, again - because of $. Yes, I agree with you that the Ds role in this has become to position themselves as pro-immigration (increase the flow) and the Rs are currently presenting themselves as wanting to be tough on the border (decrease flow). BUT, because of the money involved (which this part we seem to agree on), I don't think a slow of flow like Trump was after would be "allowed" long term - ie, the dems would block it from starting, or the next D president would stop production of the wall - something. Spinning the wheels like we are, and playing this game so nothing really happens to the overall flow of immigrants long term. I am just making numbers up here, but let's say overall the powers that be are OK with an average of 1M immigrants a year, they will play this game and let the GOP slow the flow to 300K a year for a little, but then it's going to be 2M for a bit when the Ds get in control. Again, just making up numbers to show my general thinking, and again - my belief is that the GOP doesn't truly want it at that 300K level as a long term solution because they are going to lose a ton of profits. Everybody needs to get paid, and each of those feeds different industries that feed off these immigrants - ie big AG benifits from more workers, and the PIC is tied to deportations and other things, so they benefit when we clamp down on the immigrants. Everybody pockets getting lined, no long term solutions.
and you aren't totally wrong because when Bush or GW could have done something did they? Obama? but Trump actually was going to attack it hard and the Democrats filed lawsuits and fought him every day and when Biden got in, suspended the border projects and relaxed security and rules/restrictions and illegal numbers have soared
that's today's reality
IMO a couple things point to this being the case for me:
1. Nothing is done to speed up these applications clear the backlog. There is a benefit to have people here illegal for long stretches - industries can pay them less or don't have to pay benefits, industries I mention profit when they are arrested or deported as well. This is why the "game" is just to speed up and slow the flow of immigrants, but nothing is ever done to speed up the process to focus on legal immigration.
and I disagree with anyone being here illegally and it shouldn't be tens and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars trying to sort through it all while they all live here illegally when in the end they'll just stay here illegally anyway regardless of a stupid court ruling that doesn't bind them
2. Nothing is ever done or seriously suggested to punish the practice of hiring these people on a large scale. IMO the best way to stop having so many illegals and others coming here would be to crack down severely on businesses hiring them - no jobs and opportunity, and the desire to come here largely goes away. This is why commish and I have said politicians like DeSantis are fine pointing the finger at the D states and sending people to NYC and MV, but he would probably never try to get rid of the ones in his state working the industries.
this is true - crack down HARD and stop giving all Govt anything to illegals. No cell phones, stuff like that. Unacceptable when so many US citizens struggle daily and we treat illegals better
we'll see how Desantis manages it all - but it IS telling that all the cities that fight for illegals being here hates them being here when they get to their communities huh ?
As to the voting part, what I have in mind is the immigrant vote from people who crossed, became citizens and then vote. I think when they talk about the Ds wanting these votes, they are basically just referring to the vote from the Mexican, Central American, and South American demographics. What they are suggesting is the Ds are buying their votes by letting them in - they are just so grateful for that they will largely vote D. It's being shown that is either not the case as much or at least that tide is changing. They vote with their wallet and on other topics just like everybody else. I am not suggesting that there are large numbers of illegal immigrants trying to or able to vote.
articles like this points to how illegal numbers impact voting
How removing unauthorized immigrants from census statistics could affect House reapportionment
If unauthorized U.S. immigrants aren't counted, 3 states could each lose a seat they otherwise would have had and 3 others each could gain one.www.pewresearch.org
What I saw during Trumps 4 years is a large rejection of his ideas of the border in general. I could be wrong, but the rejection of the Wall is one aspect, but it was combined with the way he spoke of them and their countries and his policy of separating families which people found cruel. I felt it was presented as a package deal: Wall + separating families + remain in Mexico. Would the opposition to the wall been as strong it was separate from those other things? Dunno.
My guess is a less devisive politician could sell the idea of the Wall and maybe frame it in a different way to make it more palatable to the public.
Thanks for the article link, I will read that a little later when it's less chaotic.
In the meantime- is the main beef with our immigration system for the seeking asylum that is being exploited at a higher % vs immigrants coming from other places in the world? When I read yours and others posts it very much feels like a sentiment that the people coming in from the south are largely doing it wrong, and the people from everywhere else are doing it right. I see it as largely both are going through ways we have set up and allow as legit pathways (gotaways aside, I agree that's an issue), and once we let them in they should be treated the same - they aren't illegal they are immigrants here legitimately until proven otherwise in their hearing. I am trying to understand another POV.
No, it's not a 1:1, but I view it similar to the exploitable tax system. Who is more at fault- the people gaming the system within its rules and framework, or the people allowing those rules to remain and not changing them or enforcing them effectively?