President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[byu71]

No.

I wasn't accusing, just wondering. I also agree with you on anyone who doubts the on site crowd size being reported being in lala land. I also appreciate CNN spending so much time making it clear Donald is full of crap on this one. I mean it is critical to the welfare of the nation.

[PaloAltoCougar]

...

I am quite surprised you blame the slaughter that is happening and has happened in Syria on Trump policies. Let's see has he been in office a week yet?

Maybe you meant to say President Obama's

No, what I meant by "Trumpian" (and not Trump's) policy is the growing trend here and in Europe to put up walls, whether physical or legal, that keep out everyone. Such overly broad policies do far more harm to innocent people trying to escape the ravages of war than the ones we're trying to keep out.

And I understand the desire to do everything you can to protect family, but top analysts have found that waterboarding and torture do more harm than good, and not simply because those policies enrage/incite the enemy. Rather, many of the torture victims say anything to stop the torture, thereby providing us with lousy information that diverts resources. And part of the problem is that Trump and his supporters' bloodlust for torture seems motivated more by revenge than by a genuine search for good intel.

[BlueK]

Are you in favor of open borders? How about automatic citizenship for those who entered the country illegally?

Not what he said.

[Topper]

No, what I meant by "Trumpian" (and not Trump's) policy is the growing trend here and in Europe to put up walls, whether physical or legal, that keep out everyone. Such overly broad policies do far more harm to innocent people trying to escape the ravages of war than the ones we're trying to keep out.

And I understand the desire to do everything you can to protect family, but top analysts have found that waterboarding and torture do more harm than good, and not simply because those policies enrage/incite the enemy. Rather, many of the torture victims say anything to stop the torture, thereby providing us with lousy information that diverts resources. And part of the problem is that Trump and his supporters' bloodlust for torture seems motivated more by revenge than by a genuine search for good intel.

That Trump's stated objectives may be acceptable but his means are not is well-stated. Hoping his nominees and appointees filter out his baser instincts is our primary hope for a sane approach.

[byu71]

No, what I meant by "Trumpian" (and not Trump's) policy is the growing trend here and in Europe to put up walls, whether physical or legal, that keep out everyone. Such overly broad policies do far more harm to innocent people trying to escape the ravages of war than the ones we're trying to keep out.

What about the wall Israel put up? Were and are you against that one?

I wonder about the trade off. Suppose we let in 150,000 immigrants from Syria. I don't think it would be wild to say maybe 50 of them are terrorists. Let's say they manage to kill 200 americans. I would think a true humantarian would say the saving or helping of 149,950 lives are worth the monetary costs and the lives of 200 Americans.

[Commando]

I wasn't accusing, just wondering. I also agree with you on anyone who doubts the on site crowd size being reported. I also appreciate CNN spending so much time making it clear Donald is full of crap on this one. I mean it is critical to the welfare of the nation.

Ok. There is so much nuance that gets ignored when immigration is politicized. I, and many others like me, are for immigration reform. That will seal the porous border more than anything. Our country has created a culture of unlawful crossings from Mexico because our economy requires that particular labor force. That is why they're here. I don't like when that segment of the population is dehumanized or referred to as "illegals." Part of the reason, other than security, that the border needs to be sealed are humanitarian concerns; people die in the desert every day because they are coming here doing what they need to do for their families. A lot of them are taken advantage of and held for ransom to their families by 'coyotes,' children are coerced into becoming unwilling drug mules or sold into the illicit sex trade, and some just plain collapse in the desert never to be heard from again. So that we can have lettuce and tomatoes that are not cost prohibitive, ultimately.

So-- I believe a path to citizenship that includes paying a fine, background check, etc. is in order. I don't want to hear any garbage talking points about "coming in through the front door" when that door has been cemented over for the past 30 years. (Visa quotas make a sibling family petition about a 20+ year wait if you filed today as a Mexican). I think our country has been pretty capricious when it comes to deciding who gets to live here. Cubans have flourished, for example, while Mexicans and Central Americans have had to live in the shadows and be institutionally stigmatized. There's no ongoing value to criminalizing people we need here -- unless that value lies in some sort of evil motive like keeping a slave labor class to keep production costs down. Something tells me that's it, though.

[Uncle Ted]

I wouldn't characterize it that way at all. I agree with Trump on a few things. A Trumpologist is someone who takes some crazy indefensible thing Trump has said or done and rationalizes it or defends it, either explicitly or implicitly. For example, creekster completely mischaracterized what Steven Peck wrote in the article and thereby mocked Peck's criticism of Trump. You do this yourself. A lot.

e.g., Elon Musk is a complete Trumpologist...

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38753819

"Simply attacking him will achieve nothing. Are you aware of a single case where Trump bowed to protests or media attacks?"

[Commando]

What about the wall Israel put up? Were and are you against that one?

I wonder about the trade off. Suppose we let in 150,000 immigrants from Syria. I don't think it would be wild to say maybe 50 of them are terrorists. Let's say they manage to kill 200 americans. I would think a true humantarian would say the saving or helping of 149,950 lives are worth the monetary costs and the lives of 200 Americans.

I think we've let in about 10,000 so far and exactly zero have been terrorists who have killed zero people. So that 50 number is a bit wild.

[byu71]

I think we've let in about 10,000 so far and exactly zero have been terrorists who have killed zero people. So that 50 number is a bit wild.

I said SUPPOSE we let in 150,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

Now if you want to call 50 a bit wild, go ahead it is just an opinion.

[byu71]

Not what he said.

I don't think you needed to chime in. He seems to be able to answer for himself quite well. If I were accusing him of something, I wouldn't have put the question marks.

[Topper]

Ok. There is so much nuance that gets ignored when immigration is politicized. I, and many others like me, are for immigration reform. That will seal the porous border more than anything. Our country has created a culture of unlawful crossings from Mexico because our economy requires that particular labor force. That is why they're here. I don't like when that segment of the population is dehumanized or referred to as "illegals." Part of the reason, other than security, that the border needs to be sealed are humanitarian concerns; people die in the desert every day because they are coming here doing what they need to do for their families. A lot of them are taken advantage of and held for ransom to their families by 'coyotes,' children are coerced into becoming unwilling drug mules or sold into the illicit sex trade, and some just plain collapse in the desert never to be heard from again. So that we can have lettuce and tomatoes that are not cost prohibitive, ultimately.

So-- I believe a path to citizenship that includes paying a fine, background check, etc. is in order. I don't want to hear any garbage talking points about "coming in through the front door" when that door has been cemented over for the past 30 years. (Visa quotas make a sibling family petition about a 20+ year wait if you filed today as a Mexican). I think our country has been pretty capricious when it comes to deciding who gets to live here. Cubans have flourished, for example, while Mexicans and Central Americans have had to live in the shadows and be institutionally stigmatized. unless that value lies in some sort of evil motive like keeping a slave labor class to keep production costs down. Something tells me that's it, though.

I beg to differ that our economy requires this cheap labor, but rather two groups profit from the cheap labor.

First, large business owners prefer paying under the table, below prevailing wages to persons who are not in a position to complain.

Second, labor unions who have seen their numbers plummet want the laborers to fill the union halls and trust funds.

(The third group is the Democratic Party that desires to obtain another captive group of voters a la the African American voters).

There is nothing inherent in our labor force requiring this cheap labor which primarily operate in the agricultural, construction and hotel service industry.

[Commando]

I said SUPPOSE we let in 150,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

Now if you want to call 50 a bit wild, go ahead it is just an opinion.

No need to yell, I read it correctly the first time. 150,000 divided by 10,000 is 15. 50 divided by 15 is 3.3. Had 3 people of the 10,000 we currently have turned out to be terrorists you would be dead on with that '50' number. So, it's not really just my opinion, it's more just math. (Somebody tell me if my math is off.)

[Commando]

I beg to differ that our economy requires this cheap labor, but rather two groups profit from the cheap labor.

First, large business owners prefer paying under the table, below prevailing wages to persons who are not in a position to complain.

Second, labor unions who have seen their numbers plummet want the laborers to fill the union halls and trust funds.

(The third group is the Democratic Party that desires to obtain another captive group of voters a la the African American voters).

There is nothing inherent in our labor force requiring this cheap labor which primarily operate in the agricultural, construction and hotel service industry.

Really? Farms prefer to compete by hiring regular white guys? You learn something new every day! *Sure they could get by, but the vacuum of capitalism does not allow it.

[Topper]

Really? Farms prefer to compete by hiring regular white guys? You learn something new every day! *Sure they could get by, but the vacuum of capitalism does not allow it.

You wrote it was necessary for our economy. We have artificially lower prices by influxing lower, cheaper but illegal labor. It is necessary to retain cheaper costs of certain items such as foodstuffs, home construction and hotel rooms. That is not necessary but a preference for lower costs.

[BlueK]

You wrote it was necessary for our economy. We have artificially lower prices by influxing lower, cheaper but illegal labor. It is necessary to retain cheaper costs of certain items such as foodstuffs, home construction and hotel rooms. That is not necessary but a preference for lower costs.

The illegal labor comes because there is a demand for it and there is no legal way for them to come in. Provide a legal avenue for it to eliminate the problems that come from having a black market for their labor. It's not that hard and it allows market forces to work. Right now current laws are about slamming the door shut to lower end immigrant labor and immigrant labor to certain countries especially just because the government knows better than the market does. That is nothing other than government central planning in the labor market. Conservatives are supposed to be philosophically opposed to such a thing, but amazingly they think it's ok when it comes to immigration.