Black Lives Matter calls for public participation in the Democratic nomination process

eclipsenow · Jul 26, 2024

BPPLEE said:
Harris thinks that it should not be a crime to enter our country illegally, that people here illegally should have free healthcare and education, and a path to citizenship, she supports defunding the police, she supports ending the filibuster in order to pass the green new deal, she has her own radical plan to fight climate change that we can’t afford, on and on she is too far to the left to win the general election under normal circumstances but we’re not under normal circumstances

Do you have sources for all those claims?
Also - do you have good arguments for why all those things are bad?

Imagine oil was leaking across the border and people were scooping it up and refining it into stuff that helped the economy - and Donald Trump protested about illegal oil coming into the country!

That's basically what's happening here.

And I thought Conservatives valued individual liberty, and saw human beings as economic participants able to contribute to the economy? I thought it was meant to be the Left that saw people as a "problem" that needed "more managing?" Are the Conservatives here sure they understand the value of extra human labour in an economy?

“Research shows that illegal immigrants increase the size of the U.S. economy, contribute to economic growth, enhance the welfare of natives, contribute more in tax revenue than they collect, reduce American firms' incentives to offshore jobs and import foreign-produced goods, and benefit consumers by reducing the prices of goods and services. Economists estimate that legalization of the illegal immigrant population would increase the immigrants' earnings and consumption considerably, and increase U.S. gross domestic product.

Most scientific studies have shown that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natives and legal immigrants. Sanctuary cities—which adopt policies designed to avoid prosecuting people solely for being in the country illegally—have no statistically meaningful impact on crime. Research suggests that immigration enforcement has no impact on crime rates.”

Illegal immigration to the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Oh no! I quoted Wikipedia! (More academic thinkers might have to do due diligence read the sources themselves. The less academic can just shout “But you can’t trust Wikipedia!” to their heart’s content.)

How many BILLIONS will it cost for Donald Trump to weaponize immigration to increase his personal power (Executive Creep) by bringing in the military to conduct immigration sweeps, remove people to massive camps, and eventually deport them to other countries? America would be losing good workers that prove to be extremely compliant people - and paying an arm and a leg to do it! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot economically, and then bragging about it!

BPPLEE · Jul 26, 2024

eclipsenow said:
Do you have sources for all those claims?
Also - do you have good arguments for why all those things are bad?

Imagine oil was leaking across the border and people were scooping it up and refining it into stuff that helped the economy - and Donald Trump protested about illegal oil coming into the country!

That's basically what's happening here.

And I thought Conservatives valued individual liberty, and saw human beings as economic participants able to contribute to the economy? I thought it was meant to be the Left that saw people as a "problem" that needed "more managing?" Are the Conservatives here sure they understand the value of extra human labour in an economy?

“Research shows that illegal immigrants increase the size of the U.S. economy, contribute to economic growth, enhance the welfare of natives, contribute more in tax revenue than they collect, reduce American firms' incentives to offshore jobs and import foreign-produced goods, and benefit consumers by reducing the prices of goods and services. Economists estimate that legalization of the illegal immigrant population would increase the immigrants' earnings and consumption considerably, and increase U.S. gross domestic product.
Most scientific studies have shown that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natives and legal immigrants. Sanctuary cities—which adopt policies designed to avoid prosecuting people solely for being in the country illegally—have no statistically meaningful impact on crime. Research suggests that immigration enforcement has no impact on crime rates.”

Illegal immigration to the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Oh no! I quoted Wikipedia! (More academic thinkers might have to do due diligence read the sources themselves. The less academic can just shout “But you can’t trust Wikipedia!” to their heart’s content.)

How many BILLIONS will it cost for Donald Trump to weaponize immigration to increase his personal power (Executive Creep) by bringing in the military to conduct immigration sweeps, remove people to massive camps, and eventually deport them to other countries? America would be losing good workers that prove to be extremely compliant people - and paying an arm and a leg to do it! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot economically, and then bragging about it!

I saw this when you posted it before. We have many more asylum seekers than illegal immigrants the last few years and if illegal immigrants are so crucial to the economy surely we can figure out a way to have them return legally.

eclipsenow · Jul 26, 2024

So that would be a firm "No." You do not have good arguments for wasting tens of billions to create giant, military run, Soviet-styled internment camps. You do not have a clearly articulated motivation as to why this is all necessary in the first place. And you do not know how to explain how losing millions of potential hard-working, law-abiding, compliant citizens - just grateful to be in a safe country - even makes economic sense in the first place. Interesting!

BTW - how is the government even going to know HOW to determine asylum status when so many of the public employees who know how things run have been fired under Project 2025?

Bradskii · Jul 26, 2024

eclipsenow said:
So that would be a firm "No." You do not have good arguments for wasting tens of billions to create giant, military run, Soviet-styled internment camps. You do not have a clearly articulated motivation as to why this is all necessary in the first place. And you do not know how to explain how losing millions of potential hard-working, law-abiding, compliant citizens - just grateful to be in a safe country - even makes economic sense in the first place. Interesting!

And nobody has even broached the subject of where they are going to be sent, how they are going to be sent and who is going to accept them. Do they just get dropped off on a beach somewhere? Some details would be handy.

A2SG · Jul 26, 2024

probinson said:
Is holding a gun to someone's head the only way that you think someone can be "forced"?

It was a metaphor.

Neither of us were there for the private conversations with the President, so we can't speak to what actually happened. From what I've heard, I don't think Biden was coerced against his will, I think he simply needed to be convinced or encouraged to step aside. I don't believe the decision was forced on him against his wishes.

You are, of course, free to believe otherwise. What would the internet be without a bunch of randos spouting opinions about stuff they have no direct knowledge of?

-- A2SG, myself included....

Pommer · Jul 27, 2024

A2SG said:
It was a metaphor.

Neither of us were there for the private conversations with the President, so we can't speak to what actually happened. From what I've heard, I don't think Biden was coerced against his will, I think he simply needed to be convinced or encouraged to step aside. I don't believe the decision was forced on him against his wishes.

You are, of course, free to believe otherwise. What would the internet be without a bunch of randos spouting opinions about stuff they have no direct knowledge of?

-- A2SG, myself included....

My take: he had the COVID and had time to watch his dismal performance in the debate, he was “sunsetting” badly. The downtime could have been crucial in him sounding out trusted colleagues to chart his next steps.

A2SG · Jul 27, 2024

Pommer said:
My take: he had the COVID and had time to watch his dismal performance in the debate, he was “sunsetting” badly. The downtime could have been crucial in him sounding out trusted colleagues to chart his next steps.

Sometimes, if you take the time to look at your actions from a different perspective, you see things you didn't, or couldn't, see in the heat of the moment.

I suspect that's what happened. Not that Biden was coerced against his will.

-- A2SG, after all, had he stood his ground on that, then the 25th Amendment would have to be invoked....

Bradskii · Jul 27, 2024

A2SG said:
Sometimes, if you take the time to look at your actions from a different perspective, you see things you didn't, or couldn't, see in the heat of the moment.

I suspect that's what happened. Not that Biden was coerced against his will.

-- A2SG, after all, had he stood his ground on that, then the 25th Amendment would have to be invoked....

I also think he was thinking short term to start with. That all he had to do was hit November and beat Trump. And a lot of people had that immediate aim. And thoughts about what was then to come weren't addressed. But 4 years is a long time. And the older you get, the greater the effect of each of those years. I know people in their mid 70's and with some of them you can see the decline. It's noticeable. They're different each year.

If he had hung in - and won, there is no doubt in my mind that he wouldn't have seen out the full term. And perhaps that came home to him. Looking at the long term. And realising that he didn't have those 4 years in him.

A2SG · Jul 27, 2024

Bradskii said:
I also think he was thinking short term to start with. That all he had to do was hit November and beat Trump. And a lot of people had that immediate aim. And thoughts about what was then to come weren't addressed. But 4 years is a long time. And the older you get, the greater the effect of each of those years. I know people in their mid 70's and with some of them you can see the decline. It's noticeable. They're different each year.

If he had hung in - and won, there is no doubt in my mind that he wouldn't have seen out the full term. And perhaps that came home to him. Looking at the long term. And realising that he didn't have those 4 years in him.

What it all comes down to is this: we all see what we want to see, and color it with our own opinions. Either you're inclined to give Biden the benefit of the doubt....or you're not. If not, then who knows what kind of nefarious motives can be imagined, right?

We certainly have seen some of those here. All I can say is, some people have wild imaginations.

-- A2SG, though, given the past few years in the political arena, we pretty much already knew that....

BPPLEE · Jul 27, 2024

eclipsenow said:
So that would be a firm "No." You do not have good arguments for wasting tens of billions to create giant, military run, Soviet-styled internment camps. You do not have a clearly articulated motivation as to why this is all necessary in the first place. And you do not know how to explain how losing millions of potential hard-working, law-abiding, compliant citizens - just grateful to be in a safe country - even makes economic sense in the first place. Interesting!

BTW - how is the government even going to know HOW to determine asylum status when so many of the public employees who know how things run have been fired under Project 2025?

And what is your plan? To do nothing. To continue to let millions come here until we are a third world country.

BCP1928 · Jul 27, 2024

BPPLEE said:
I saw this when you posted it before. We have many more asylum seekers than illegal immigrants the last few years and if illegal immigrants are so crucial to the economy surely we can figure out a way to have them return legally.

Why not just keep the asylum seekers whose claims prove out? For the rest we could expand the guest worker program. But that's a liberal approach. The conservatives want them all to be illegal, they're more exploitable that way.

BPPLEE · Jul 27, 2024

BCP1928 said:
Why not just keep the asylum seekers whose claims prove out? For the rest we could expand the guest worker program. But that's a liberal approach. The conservatives want them all to be illegal, they're more exploitable that way.

I’m sure many of the asylum seekers will be granted asylum.

essentialsaltes · Jul 27, 2024

BLM may be out, but...

'These numbers are insane': MSNBC panel stunned by massive sign-up of Harris volunteers

Kicking off the segment on Saturday, MSNBC's Symone Sanders-Townsend pointed out to her co-host Michael Steele that the Harris campaign has signed up a whopping 170,000 volunteers and has scheduled over 2,300 events in battleground states.

eclipsenow · Jul 27, 2024

BPPLEE said:
And what is your plan? To do nothing. To continue to let millions come here until we are a third world country.

No - but I would increase processing capabilities of the nation - and not GUT the civil service like Project 2025 plans to.
I would also look at using the CIA to (secretly) encourage concepts around a South and Central American union - so that their economies prospered, their policing became more transparent and democratic, and their peoples more prosperous and less likely to flee to the states. Generally speaking - democracies tend not to invade other democracies. *
Generally speaking - prosperous nations tend not to have a desperate population fleeing to their neighours.

*(Except for the same CIA's own dubious history in the 'dual state' - aka these days 'deep state' - activities undermining many South American nations and orchestrating coups etc. So using the CIA to encourage a true EU styled South American club of nations might atone for some of their guilt in past activities.)

DaisyDay · Jul 28, 2024

BPPLEE said:
I’m sure many of the asylum seekers will be granted asylum.

As they should be under international and our own national laws.

Remember, the House Republicans killed the bipartisan Senate border control act - because Donald told them to because he wanted to keep this as a campaign issue.

BPPLEE · Jul 28, 2024

DaisyDay said:
As they should be under international and our own national laws.

Remember, the House Republicans killed the bipartisan Senate border control act - because Donald told them to because he wanted to keep this as a campaign issue.

You mean the one that would let almost 5,000 people a day enter the country before taking any action?

DaisyDay · Jul 28, 2024

BPPLEE said:
You mean the one that would let almost 5,000 people a day enter the country before taking any action?

Campaign issue.

BPPLEE · Jul 28, 2024

DaisyDay said:
Campaign issue.

Bad bill. It might as well have been called The Invasion Authorization Act.

eclipsenow · Jul 28, 2024

BPPLEE said:
Bad bill. It might as well have been called The Invasion Authorization Act.

I know right? All those compliant hard workers that add to the economy and keep out of trouble. What an awful resource to have contributing to your society?

SimplyMe · Jul 28, 2024

BPPLEE said:
You mean the one that would let almost 5,000 people a day enter the country before taking any action?

Yes, instead of only 10,000 or 20,000 per day, it would limit it to 5,000. Additionally, likely about 99% would be removed from the country in a matter of days, when they are denied asylum, as opposed to staying for years because it takes that long for their cases to be heard.

Black Lives Matter calls for public participation in the Democratic nomination process

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Well-Known Member

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Gumby

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Gumby

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Gumby

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

'These numbers are insane': MSNBC panel stunned by massive sign-up of Harris volunteers​

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

'These numbers are insane': MSNBC panel stunned by massive sign-up of Harris volunteers