Border crisis

[BashiChuni]

Don’t make us go to Veracruz again... -general scott

[Clark Griswold]

More on the incident and a Google Earth shot of where it occurred:

https://www.newsweek.com/mexican-soldiers-question-disarm-two-us-army-troops-apparent-confusion-about-1401939

Looks like rural / suburban area, where the river snakes and could be confusing, where oh I don't know a lighted 30' barrier would clearly mark the border and stop illegal crossing between both countries would be helpful....

[SurelySerious]

Biden to ask Congress on first day for legal status to 11 million illegal immigrants

[brabus]

36 minutes ago, Kiloalpha said:

Might as well give every living soul on the globe a US passport

The Dems would love that...more impressionable voters, they don’t give a fuck about the actual people or the security consequences, only increasing Pk of keeping their oligarch livelihood (to be fair, this mentality is on both sides).

Make the process to gain citizenship smoother (cut a lot of the “red tape”bureaucratic bullshit), but no free lunch...immigrate legally, work illegally at your own risk with min impact to society/resources, or fuck off. I feel for the good people who are illegally here trying to make a better life, working hard, and not sucking from the gov tit, so help them out by making the process easier/smoother, but don’t just hand them citizenship and all its benefits because, well I want your vote...

[pawnman]

33 minutes ago, brabus said:

The Dems would love that...more impressionable voters, they don’t give a fuck about the actual people or the security consequences, only increasing Pk of keeping their oligarch livelihood (to be fair, this mentality is on both sides).

Make the process to gain citizenship smoother (cut a lot of the “red tape”bureaucratic bullshit), but no free lunch...immigrate legally, work illegally at your own risk with min impact to society/resources, or fuck off. I feel for the good people who are illegally here trying to make a better life, working hard, and not sucking from the gov tit, so help them out by making the process easier/smoother, but don’t just hand them citizenship and all its benefits because, well I want your vote...

Agreed.  Make it faster, cheaper, and easier to cross the border legally, and punish people who do illegally.  And secure the border.  In some places maybe that's a wall.  In some places it's increased patrols.  In some places it's RPAs or manned aircraft.  But if it's easy and cheap enough to immigrate legally, you'll eliminate a lot of incentive for illegal immigration.

After that, I'm all for some kind of legal status for people who have been here for years.  Doesn't have to be citizenship...could be a visa, could be a temporary status, could be contingent on holding down a job or providing for their American citizen kids.  But the idea we're going to round up 11 million people and deport them is insane.  It would not only be a huge investment in time and effort, it would be a huge blow to parts of the economy when those workers disappear.

[Clark Griswold]

5 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Biden to ask Congress on first day for legal status to 11 22 million illegal immigrants

FIFY

Yale Study Finds Twice as Many Undocumented Immigrants as Previous Estimates | Yale Insights

If they are regularized, goodbye recent wage gains, hello race to the bottom of hourly wages for the working classes.

Next will be a massive importation of knowledge workers, foreign professionals, etc... good luck middle and upper-middle class America...

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

How anyone can think this is a good idea without securing the border effectively first... blows my mind.

Might as well give every living soul on the globe a US passport at this juncture.

That's the plan - "legalize" those here illegally to transmit to those thinking about it to come over without having to say it.  Overwhelm the system with numbers and change the facts on the ground.  When you add (eventually) 20+ million voters who heavily skew to one political party you have changed the game to make it now unwinnable for the other player.

When the Dems have power they use it, when the Repubs have power they tell us they will use it but do nothing...

1 hour ago, brabus said:

The Dems would love that...more impressionable voters, they don’t give a fuck about the actual people or the security consequences, only increasing Pk of keeping their oligarch livelihood (to be fair, this mentality is on both sides).

Make the process to gain citizenship smoother (cut a lot of the “red tape”bureaucratic bullshit), but no free lunch...immigrate legally, work illegally at your own risk with min impact to society/resources, or fuck off. I feel for the good people who are illegally here trying to make a better life, working hard, and not sucking from the gov tit, so help them out by making the process easier/smoother, but don’t just hand them citizenship and all its benefits because, well I want your vote...

Nope - we need a break from immigration, all immigration, for at least 1-2 generations (I would define that as 15 years per gen) to stabilize our labor market and not radically / quickly skew our demographics to alleviate growing internal division and enmity.

Big nations need a reasons to hang together and are inherently fragile internally; the conjunctive ideology holding them together may be morally right but it is not necessarily hardy or durable in the real world, proceed cautiously.

33 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Agreed.  Make it faster, cheaper, and easier to cross the border legally, and punish people who do illegally.  And secure the border.  In some places maybe that's a wall.  In some places it's increased patrols.  In some places it's RPAs or manned aircraft.  But if it's easy and cheap enough to immigrate legally, you'll eliminate a lot of incentive for illegal immigration.

After that, I'm all for some kind of legal status for people who have been here for years.  Doesn't have to be citizenship...could be a visa, could be a temporary status, could be contingent on holding down a job or providing for their American citizen kids.  But the idea we're going to round up 11 million people and deport them is insane.  It would not only be a huge investment in time and effort, it would be a huge blow to parts of the economy when those workers disappear.

Disagree - you are undermining the rule of law (what remains of it), one of the main reasons that makes our country a place people want to come here.  

I'll again disagree with you on the physical deportation of 11 million people, it's likely 22 million or more, it could be done but I understand why it is eschewed, but that doesn't mean we accommodate them. 

We either defend our borders, enforce our laws and protect our people or we are not a sovereign country anymore but something else.

[Clark Griswold]

First caravans forming and on the move

Migrant Caravan in Guatemala Pushes Through Border from Honduras — Heading to U.S.A. https://www.breitbart.com/border/2021/01/16/migrant-caravan-in-guatemala-pushes-through-border-from-honduras-heading-to-u-s-a/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Breckey]

First caravans forming and on the move

Migrant Caravan in Guatemala Pushes Through Border from Honduras — Heading to U.S.A. https://www.breitbart.com/border/2021/01/16/migrant-caravan-in-guatemala-pushes-through-border-from-honduras-heading-to-u-s-a/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What ever happened to the caravans in 2018? Seems they were forgotten about after the mid-terms.

[jazzdude]

I agree with Clark.

At the individual level, yes, streamlined immigration is great for the individual. And one individual immigrant usually doesn't have a significant impact, whether it's economically, socially, or politically. And it can be heartbreaking if they are denied entry (though it makes for great headlines)

However, a challenge exists at the nation level (or really, any established community with it's own norms). For a nation, mass or uncontrolled immigration causes a jobs problem; the market gets flooded with workers, driving down wages and potentially displacing citizens from jobs. Whether citizens get displaced from work, or legal immigrants can't find jobs, the nation will have to deal with people being out of work. On one extreme, you're dealing with maybe petty crime as people try to survive, on the other violent protests and riots.

It also brings a change to social norms. Many things we consider to be "American" aren't law, but really just social norms that we've tacitly agreed to (for example, the American brand of work ethic and individualism). Large population shifts change these social norms, which can lead to political changes.

A similar example would be Californians moving to Texas, or New Yorkers moving to Florida. They are free to move, the only barrier is the cost of the move (porous borders). But they bring their norms and customs with them to the new community, which changes that new community, both socially and politically, and can measurable shift life in that new community.

So once a community (whether it's a state, nation, or any other group with established norms) has established itself and its system is running, it can be difficult for the government (or whoever maintains the community norms) to maintain the order (economic, social, political) it has constructed when faced with large population shifts within the community.

So the immigration bureaucratic red tape is an effort by the government to balance opportunities to people from different countries, and with different skillsets. Sucks for the individual trying to immigrate in, but protects the national interests.

Unfortunately, this gets played as not having a heart or being incompassionate, but this completely sidesteps the discussion on how to absorb the extra population while maintaining our values, or debating when our values need to change.

[pawnman]

I disagree with the take that it'll depress wages.  We already have (according to the thread here), between 11 and 22 million illegal immigrants here.  That's 11 to 22 million people working below the already-low minimum wage.  With no recourse, fearing to report their employer because they'll be deported, fearing to file taxes, fearing to buy health insurance, car insurance, etc...

Make those people legal, and you immediately make gains by raising them to at least minimum wage.  Now they are competing for jobs on an even playing field with Americans, rather than undercutting them.  And you get them on the taxpayer rolls...for low wage jobs, they're probably not paying much...but their employers are also paying employment taxes on those millions of people.

The point of making it cheap, easy, and legal is that you get these people into the system.  Right now, they're still here, they're still coming, they're still undercutting the American labor market...and we're getting nothing for it in return.  

[Clark Griswold]

22 minutes ago, Breckey said:

What ever happened to the caravans in 2018? Seems they were forgotten about after the mid-terms.

Subsided and receded when it was demonstrated Trump and company were serious on trying to stop fraudulent and abusive claims of asylum with the Remain in Mexico policy, expansion of immigration court judges for speedier resolution of claims, some interior enforcement, some expanded border security efforts, etc... all for naught if Team Biden decides to allow de facto open borders.

[nsplayr]

I'm reading this book now and so far it's excellent. I support allowing far more immigrants into the United States and firmly believe it will make the country richer, stronger and better for everyone.

https://www.amazon.com/One-Billion-Americans-Thinking-Bigger-ebook/dp/B082ZR6827

TL;DR: The hypothesis is that America should try hard to stay #1 in the world, and growing the population significantly is one of the surest ways to stay on top. Policies that support families having as many children as they would like as well as policies that encourage more legal immigration can get us there. The benefits of doing this would greatly outweigh some of the problems that arise when a population is growing quickly, and America in particular knows how to solve those problems because we've grown quickly in the past.

Happy to discuss! 

Edited January 17, 2021 by nsplayr

[FDNYOldGuy]

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

How anyone can think this is a good idea without securing the border effectively first... blows my mind.

Might as well give every living soul on the globe a US passport at this juncture.

Our great great grandpas Giuseppe/Seamus/John/Klaus/Vladimir/whatever stumbled off a boat and got citizenship as long as they had a pulse prior to the Immigration Act of 1924. After that point, we set strict (and pretty arbitrary) immigration quotas from countries based on allowing 2% annually of whatever that particular immigrant population was in the country as of the 1890 census. And since then, illegal immigration has been an “issue” because we cut annual numbers of allowable legal immigration.

We need immigration. Our citizen population isn’t pumping out enough kids to be able to support an aging society, crumbling infrastructure, and ballooning costs/debt. We need more people to fill houses, pay taxes, and consume goods, or we risk a collapsed real estate market, much higher tax rates, and greatly diminished services.

Most immigrants aren’t doing jobs Americans want to do (landscaping/meat processing/cleaning/cooking/agriculture/etc.) or doing them for the low wages employers are willing to pay/the market supports. Anyone could probably have an all-legal roofing crew for 30-50% more cost; most will vote with their wallets and pay the cheaper rate with migrant labor. Most don’t think twice about inexpensive produce and would balk at paying what market price would be with legal labor. Most decry the loss of American manufacturing, yet have no problem buying that 69” TV from Walmart for $500 that could never be made and sold in the US for that amount.

We need immigration. We need cheap labor. We need an easier path to legal citizenship.

The fears today of immigrants stealing our jobs, changing our way of life, or diluting “American values” is no different than it was during any other time in civilization. The rhetoric in Gangs of New York rhymes a lot with today; we’ve just changed the ethnicity of folks we don’t want in the country. Had the Nativists been successful 150+ years ago, I’d gather a lot of us wouldn’t be in the country today. 

[Clark Griswold]

6 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

I'm reading this book now and so far it's excellent. I support allowing far more immigrants into the United States and firmly believe it will make the country richer, stronger and better for everyone.

https://www.amazon.com/One-Billion-Americans-Thinking-Bigger-ebook/dp/B082ZR6827

TL;DR: The hypothesis is that America should try hard to stay #1 in the world, and growing the population significantly is one of the surest ways to stay on top. Policies that support families having as many children as they would like as well as policies that encourage more legal immigration can get us there. The benefits of doing this would greatly outweigh some of the problems that arise when a population is growing quickly, and America in particular knows how to solve those problems because we've grown quickly in the past.

Happy to discuss! 

I've heard of this book and offer this NR and other reviews just to add to this thread:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/book-review-one-billion-americans-matt-yglesias-argues-for-mass-immigration/

https://newrepublic.com/article/159306/emptiness-matthew-yglesias-biggest-idea-billion-americans-book-review

https://quillette.com/2020/09/23/one-billion-americans-a-review/

From the Quillette review:

In the end, Yglesias’s path to preventing America’s decline is to make it more like India and China

No thanks.

[Clark Griswold]

This thread needs some humor

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nsplayr]

18 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

From the Quillette review:

In the end, Yglesias’s path to preventing America’s decline is to make it more like India and China

No thanks.

LMK if you want to actually read the book itself & discuss!

I disagree with that characterization and in fact think the opposite is true; China and India are trying desperately to become richer & more like Western nations in terms of per capita income and purchasing power, and the entire point of Yglesias' book is that if/when that happens, America will inevitably decline in importance unless we get significantly richer (very hard to do), or significantly bigger (easier than you might imagine).

I would very much like America to remain the #1 nation in the world for the rest of my lifetime and ideally for my daughter's entire lifetime as well. After that, I'll have long been made dust again, so GL to everyone who remains haha!

A world order where China is on top will not be as good, especially for us as Americans. A nativist, small-minded, bunker mentality of closing America and stagnating ain't gonna keep us #1 IMHO because China et al will very likely continue to grow and get richer and honestly that's a good thing. Ending dire poverty around the world is good. But, let's allow them to do so while still keeping our relative power and let's do it through something both conservatives and liberals used to agree on - growth.

[Plus15]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

 

A world order where China is on top will not be as good, especially for us as Americans.

Too late.

[Waingro]

5 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

How anyone can think this is a good idea without securing the border effectively first... blows my mind.

Might as well give every living soul on the globe a US passport at this juncture.

I think it's a good idea. Since you asked, here's how.

The federal government can do more than one thing at a time. Securing our southern border should be a priority. A physical barrier (like Trump's wall) sometimes makes sense, in other places it makes no sense. Security is a layered process, whether it's your house, the vault at work, or the border. There's room to improve for sure, but as it is now, border crossings have declined 76 percent from 2000 to 2018. So I wouldn't say ceasing all policy actions for illegal immigrants, until we get the border fully secured, would be a good course of action. That also discounts the fact that 44% of illegal immigrants arrived here legally, but overstayed their visa. In short, the wall is largely a boogeyman, leveraged by Tucker Carlson to whip up fear.

This proposed legislation is an eight-year path. Four for DACA recipients. That sounds very reasonable to me. I'd absolutely want to grant citizenship for those who are willing to work hard and color within the lines for eight years.

FDNYOldGuy and nsplayr have compelling arguments for this as well.

[Prozac]

1 hour ago, Plus15 said:

Too late.

Really dude? I hear a lot of people with sentiment like this lately. If you think China has surpassed us in anything, or that we are a corrupt as Brazil or as frozen by bureaucracy as India, you’ve obviously never travelled. Is China a potential threat to be taken seriously? Absolutely. But they still have a hard time landing airplanes with less than 15 miles of spacing in Shanghai. They need the Germans to engineer their civil projects and the Russians to build anything approaching a reliable jet engine. And while the CCP has largely consolidated power lately, there are growing cracks in their political system as newly wealthy citizens begin to question stagnant growth and a questionable monetary policy. There’s a reason anyone with money in China is snapping up real estate in North America. So, no, China is nowhere close to being the leader of the world order. Stop with the “let’s just throw in the towel now” attitude. You sound like a shill for the CCP. 

[Kiloalpha]

17 minutes ago, Waingro said:

I think it's a good idea. Since you asked, here's how.

The federal government can do more than one thing at a time. Securing our southern border should be a priority. A physical barrier (like Trump's wall) sometimes makes sense, in other places it makes no sense. Security is a layered process, whether it's your house, the vault at work, or the border. There's room to improve for sure, but as it is now, border crossings have declined 76 percent from 2000 to 2018. So I wouldn't say ceasing all policy actions for illegal immigrants, until we get the border fully secured, would be a good course of action. That also discounts the fact that 44% of illegal immigrants arrived here legally, but overstayed their visa. In short, the wall is largely a boogeyman, leveraged by Tucker Carlson to whip up fear.

This proposed legislation is an eight-year path. Four for DACA recipients. That sounds very reasonable to me. I'd absolutely want to grant citizenship for those who are willing to work hard and color within the lines for eight years.

FDNYOldGuy and nsplayr have compelling arguments for this as well.

No offense, but no... the Federal government can't. If we announce tomorrow that all illegal immigrants in the US will be given citizenship in 3-4 months, does that increase or decrease the incentive for people to enter the country illegally?

It would increase it exponentially. With an already porous border system, you're going to add more folks who weren't here otherwise, but figure "why the hell shouldn't I try?" You really think Border Patrol is equipped/prepared for that? Also, do you think the incoming Administration has the guts to turn away anyone who is caught coming across in that timeframe?

As for the 44% number, that's from the Center for Migration Studies of New York's study. It could be valid, but it's using DHS data calculated from the ACS survey that only asks 2 million households. We could have asked the entire population during this year's Census, but as we're all aware, Democrats objected to including that question.

I'm against all illegal immigrants, overstays or those that cross the border.

 

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

LMK if you want to actually read the book itself & discuss!

I disagree with that characterization and in fact think the opposite is true; China and India are trying desperately to become richer & more like Western nations in terms of per capita income and purchasing power, and the entire point of Yglesias' book is that if/when that happens, America will inevitably decline in importance unless we get significantly richer (very hard to do), or significantly bigger (easier than you might imagine).

I would very much like America to remain the #1 nation in the world for the rest of my lifetime and ideally for my daughter's entire lifetime as well. After that, I'll have long been made dust again, so GL to everyone who remains haha!

A world order where China is on top will not be as good, especially for us as Americans. A nativist, small-minded, bunker mentality of closing America and stagnating ain't gonna keep us #1 IMHO because China et al will very likely continue to grow and get richer and honestly that's a good thing. Ending dire poverty around the world is good. But, let's allow them to do so while still keeping our relative power and let's do it through something both conservatives and liberals used to agree on - growth.

Totally valid shot and putting the book in the Audible queue to be able to respond with comments based on reading the source material.

My first impression from reading the reviews (from mostly conservative / nationalist leaning sites acknowledged) and the limited wiki entry on it is that it shows the position from the Left / Administrative-Planners that people are interchangeable widgets you just plug and play into societies and thru the magic of our ideals / values it will all work out.

Not true, look at major European cities now and you see what mass uncontrolled migration into advanced economies that don't need large amounts of unskilled labor.

Tents Cities on the streets of Paris and gangs of fighting age males formed in major cities 

From Paris

Chechen gangs:

Inside brutal Chechen drug wars where ‘maniac’ gangs barbecue rivals and terrorise streets with Kalashnikovs – The Sun

Just opening your doors to the world is not a solution, there has to be a place for them to go into our economies, our societies and a destination culture that while accommodating does not bend itself to meet the new arrivals but allows them to bend to fit in with us, of late too many in our society want the opposite, that's a recipe for balkanization and increasing division.

Putting aside the other arguments against Yglesias' idea, the vast majority of these people arrive with skills that qualify them for positions (manual labor, food processing, farm labor, etc...) in industries very soon to be automated

Reference this Boston Robotics model:

As quickly as physical media disappeared in the realm of music, movies, books, etc... human labor is about to do so in multiple industries.  Bringing people in who are likely to become unemployable in the next 15-20 years is not a wise long term move.  

Edited January 17, 2021 by Clark Griswold

[dream big]

They’ll be Covid tested though right? Asking for a friend 

[jazzdude]

Agree with Clark. Immigrants bring much more than their labor. They bring their norms, cultures, and values, and some of these may be directly at odds with what America currently values. Might be good, might be bad.

[Plus15]

2 hours ago, Prozac said:

Really dude? I hear a lot of people with sentiment like this lately. If you think China has surpassed us in anything, or that we are a corrupt as Brazil or as frozen by bureaucracy as India, you’ve obviously never travelled. Is China a potential threat to be taken seriously? Absolutely. But they still have a hard time landing airplanes with less than 15 miles of spacing in Shanghai. They need the Germans to engineer their civil projects and the Russians to build anything approaching a reliable jet engine. And while the CCP has largely consolidated power lately, there are growing cracks in their political system as newly wealthy citizens begin to question stagnant growth and a questionable monetary policy. There’s a reason anyone with money in China is snapping up real estate in North America. So, no, China is nowhere close to being the leader of the world order. Stop with the “let’s just throw in the towel now” attitude. You sound like a shill for the CCP. 

When did I say anything about corruption?  And traveling makes you an geopolitical expert on...nothing, of course.  

Anyway....I just watched the best country on earth elect a “dude” that can’t finish a thought verbally without inventing a new word or being a walking advertisement for dementia.  So you see, my quip was more in tune to our state of woke affairs.  Not theirs.
 

Yeah, too late, Dude. 

[jazzdude]

The challenge isn't just limited to labor issues, but social ones as well, and the social issues often lead to discrimination/racism against the immigrants.

We've seen discrimination/racism pretty much every time there was an influx of immigrants. Chinese, Italians, Irish, Jews, Muslims, Mexicans, Hispanics to make a few, all faced racism/discrimination, even if they were here legally. Those international districts in cities aren't just there because that group wanted to be together, but often had to for mutual support to make a living due to housing or job discrimination.

And that doesn't even touch the history of slavery and people of african descent in our country.

Many times our government just looked the other way (or even participated in the discrimination) until it was forced to address the issue, or another, more hated/feared group started coming in that took on the brunt of discrimination (hey, let's throw the Japanese in internment camps, but those Germans and Italians are okay...)

Say what you want up the whole woke movement, but there are racial issues that have been simmering on the back burner for a while that need addressing, but it's nothing really new in our country's history, just new labels and terms, and perhaps more exposure given the internet which makes it harder to ignore.