President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Uncle Ted]

Merit based has always been a head-scratcher for me. We are short on low-end labor, not skill positions. Also, a doctor in Honduras has a little better position than a laborer, and is likely not living in abject poverty. I'd think it's the people who scrape by day to day trying to find a way to feed their families that would be a priority if we do something so anti-capitalist as to limit and score immigrants.

The dems are always bitching about wages being too low. The GOP'ers are always bitching about not having enough cheap (slave) labor to do their crap jobs. And there is Bernie Sanders... I don't always get what he is bitching about.

If poverty is increasing and if wages are going down, I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive waged down even lower than they are now." -Senator Bernie Sanders.

http://time.com/4170591/bernie-sande...conservatives/

[Uncle Ted]

Fewer than how many are currently coming in legally. Read the articles.

And you can't see how it would be less? It's pretty basic: we will only allow x number of people and they must work in IT, engineering or whatever. It's not that hard to set the parameters they want based on the government's current biases.

and applying for citizenship is a completely different thing. I get annoyed by the ignorance of people to think there are only illegals and citizens. There is such a thing as legal residents who are not citizens. That is what we are talking about here. This isn't about changing the laws that govern applying for citizenship.

My assertion was that you can't say that a merit based system would let less people in. You can adjust the parameters to let more or less. So yeah, I don't see how it would be less using that algorithm...

let x = <number of people that the US wants to allow to immigrate>
let y = <number of people that have immigrated so far>

while (x < y) {
[adjust the merit parameters so more qualify for immigration a bit]
[sleep for a bit]
}

[falafel]

This is a little old, but still made me laugh.

Embedded Tweet

[Uncle Ted]

It seems drumpf was even surprised about the supreme court's ruling...

Embedded Tweet

I am not going to comment until my liberal friends chime in.

Embedded Tweet

I wonder if drumpf will get another supreme court pick by the end of his second term.

[Uncle Ted]

This is a little old, but still made me laugh.

Embedded Tweet

[creekster]

That ACLU tweet exemplifies one of the problems. It is not the Supreme Court's role to "stand up" to xenophobia. Its role is to determine constitutionality and other legal issues. The people and Congress and the President need to be the ones that stand up to xenophobia.

[BlueK]

That ACLU tweet exemplifies one of the problems. It is not the Supreme Court's role to "stand up" to xenophobia. Its role is to determine constitutionality and other legal issues. The people and Congress and the President need to be the ones that stand up to xenophobia.

I'm not in favor of this travel ban. I think it's pretty arbitrary as far as which countries it focuses on, it's unneeded and doesn't really do much outside of Trump's political need to please his base. Not to mention, we've never had a terrorist attack originating from one of the countries it targets. However, Saudi Arabia for example, where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from is not included.

But that said, I can totally understand the reasoning of the Court in this particular case. It is also the third revision of the original executive order, so a lot of the teeth have been taken out of it anyway. It's dumb policy, but it's hard to argue that this version is Unconstitutional.

[PaloAltoCougar]

I concur, BlueK. Probably the right decision, but the ban is truly a stupid idea. If it were a significant deterrent to terrorism, then the ban might be worth the ill will it will engender among Muslims generally and certainly among the ISIS-recruiter-types. But it doesn't provide a deterrent at all (laughable to think those who are focused on our destruction will be deterred even slightly, much less foiled, by this dumb move). It's similar to Trump's wall--provides the appearance of protection but at an absurd cost and with no deterrent on the real evildoers. Trump was right, though--I'm tired of this kind of winning.

[Commando]

I don't know how anyone can say a merit based system would let fewer people in. (Fewer than what, BTW? Fewer than an open border? Well, duh.) It really boils down to the parameters used. If they want more people immigrating in the parameters could just be adjusted so it is easier to apply for citizenship. If the math don't work then use new math, man.

Do you understand the immigration system at all? I mean really on a rudimentary level, or do you think it's just people streaming across the border unchecked and that's who we're stuck with? And do you think citizenship is at all relevant? It's easy to apply for citizenship and there are no restrictions, quotas, or limitations- just the bare eligibility requirements-- it's residency that's the problem, which is the prerequisite. Paring residency down to job-based applications is madness. Especially the points-based thing he is pushing where you score higher priority for speaking English, etc. this is basically ethnic engineering to be honest. So you can't apply for your kids, spouse, or elderly parents? How are you just towing the Trump line so blindly and claiming to be neutral?

[Commando]

Re: the travel ban, a few of my colleagues who are more tuned into SCOTUS decisions and make their hay by understanding the court and its tendencies were not surprised by the decision, based on the scope of the questions they were examining and precedent. Of course I tend to agree with the dissent, which just seems like common sense-- you have a president who was talking all that shit for so long and then switched up the rationale when he got taken to court. Anti-muslim animus is clearly propelling this policy- not some bullshit fake concern for security-- especially when the countries affected have traditionally presented very little danger to the U.S. Just my .02. I'm not screaming the sky is falling since this can be quickly erased by the next president, but the powers of the executive are once again just growing and growing. It'll be great when Trump's out, but this is bad for when the next crazy person takes office. We don't anticipate anybody crazier, but I've really been unpleasantly surprised by the depth of the moral floor of this country lately.

[Uncle Ted]

Do you understand the immigration system at all? I mean really on a rudimentary level, or do you think it's just people streaming across the border unchecked and that's who we're stuck with? And do you think citizenship is at all relevant? It's easy to apply for citizenship and there are no restrictions, quotas, or limitations- just the bare eligibility requirements-- it's residency that's the problem, which is the prerequisite. Paring residency down to job-based applications is madness. Especially the points-based thing he is pushing where you score higher priority for speaking English, etc. this is basically ethnic engineering to be honest. So you can't apply for your kids, spouse, or elderly parents? How are you just towing the Trump line so blindly and claiming to be neutral?

No, not really... why do all you lawyers have to make everything so damn complicated? Use the K.I.S.S. principle.

As for speaking English wasn't that Obama's idea first?.. I don't think Drumpf can claim that one for himself:

"We need to be able to secure our border ... And we need to make sure that the millions of people who are here, many who've been here for a decade or more, and have American kids and for all practical purposes are part of our community, that they pay a fine, they pay any penalties, they learn English, they get to the back of the line, but they have a capacity to legalize themselves here."

http://nj1015.com/poll-should-all-im...learn-english/

[frank ryan]

Do you understand the immigration system at all? I mean really on a rudimentary level, or do you think it's just people streaming across the border unchecked and that's who we're stuck with? And do you think citizenship is at all relevant? It's easy to apply for citizenship and there are no restrictions, quotas, or limitations- just the bare eligibility requirements-- it's residency that's the problem, which is the prerequisite. Paring residency down to job-based applications is madness. Especially the points-based thing he is pushing where you score higher priority for speaking English, etc. this is basically ethnic engineering to be honest. So you can't apply for your kids, spouse, or elderly parents? How are you just towing the Trump line so blindly and claiming to be neutral?

He’s also breaking with his sacred Libertarian party line. Ted has gone full on altright.

[Uncle Ted]

He’s also breaking with his sacred Libertarian party line. Ted has gone full on altright.

#FakeNews Frank... As I explained to BK I would all for the Libertarian Party taking over on the immigration issue. You need to become a better student of my posts. Stop slacking off, man.

[Uncle Ted]

lol. Ted doesn't realize that the entire premise of this meme is bullshit. The 1996 'law' Clinton signed authorized screening for trafficking, which wasn't even a consideration in how Trump went about it- he clearly, as we've gone over here ad nauseam, was never enforcing any previously passed law that addressed family separation, but enacted a policy that included family separation as a happy coincidence. And the "Obama enforced it for two terms" is just meme fodder they are counting on nobody fact checking.

ACTUALLY, Obama didn't separate families at the border, Ted. I'm sure I've mentioned no fewer than five times that he started the 'family detention centers' that human rights activists have been trying to shut down. The one in Dilley, TX is in full operation. Google "baby jail." Or don't pay attention to anything I post and keep thinking what you are determined to think. Whatever's more comfortable for you.

You need to reply to my postings so I can see these... but ACTUALLY:

Obama DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson: I Freely Admit We Detained Children, "It Was Necessary"

On Fox News Sunday, former DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson said that under the Barack Obama administration, they did detain some children alone and some families together, two policies for which Donald Trump has been widely blamed.


Johnson told host Chris Wallace that they "thought it was necessary at the time," and that it is still is.


"Without a doubt the images, and the reality, from 2014, just like 2018, are not pretty," Johnson said. "We expanded it, I freely admit it was controversial, we believed it was necessary at the time, I still believe it is necessary to remain a certain capability for families."
[...]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...necessary.html

I still have faith in you that you are the still the expert on immigration around here.

[Commando]

No shit they detained children. Do you not remember the influx of unaccompanied minors in 2013 that all the dumbasses blamed on DACA, even though it had nothing to do with that other than the common subject of children?

Thanks for your confidence as not only the 'expert in immigration,' but a person who actually reads the articles that you post which you think buttress your own points but actually torpedo them.


Jeb Johnson is the Czar of Family Detention. He clearly says in the article they kept unaccompanied minors from Central America in detention but detained families together. That doesn't talk about family separation in case you still haven't read it.