Lets the band of South American migrants in!

CYDdharta

Fortunately Mexico has stopped them along its southern border with Central America and requested the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to establish shelters.  I guess you'll just have to pay reasonable wages.

US And Mexico Reach Agreement on Huge Migrant Caravan

piloteer

Damm! That just ruined my entire schpiel. 

George_Horse

Are you insane? It would be right and proper to let ALL of them in? No vetting, and no background checks? It is people like you that are the reason Trump is president, your absurd ideas will DESTROY the foundations of this country for which it was built upon.  Keep them out! First check them before even considering giving them citizenship.

piloteer

"@George_Horse

The real criminals are the domestic workers of the US, and their demand for minimum wages. This group of people has grown to 5,000 people, and the majority of them have made over the Mexican border, so there you go "@CYDdharta. I think it is the responsibility of the people of the southwestern United States to meet them at the border and help bring them in.

piloteer

By the way "@George_Horse, I'm not in the habit of voting for national socialists, so trump is not my fault!

MayCaesar

@George_Horse ;

There used to be the time when this country let everyone in with no background checks. Only in year 1921, during the rule of arguably the worst president in the US history Woodrow Wilson, was the first temporary (that ended up remaining permanently) "emergency" immigration restriction imposed.

The foundations of this country assumed open borders - a country open for everyone fleeing oppression of strict governments and churches was the very essence of the idea behind the American independence.

The ones who founded this country would be horrified to see how restrictive the system has become, assuming total control over the border and instituting excessively long and expensive background checks. Wilson, Roosevelt and then Bush used national emergencies to build such a wall of restrictions, that once the most welcoming country in the world turned into one of the more skeptical ones as a result.

I feel like the US started loosing their roots around the time Lincoln won the civil war and used it as an argument towards consolidation of federal powers and removal of state powers - and by the beginning of the post-WW2 era, with horrible violations of human rights such as internment camps, it lost all connection to what it was originally about. Now it is just another powerful centralized government exerting its will on its people however it pleases, and who those people can be in the first place is also fully controlled by it.

---

I am not necessarily for borders open wide with no control - but then I also do not claim to fully promote the foundations of the United States of America. To claim it would be a fallacy. I am a libertarian, but I prefer to be a pragmatic one, rather than an idealistic one - as were the Founding Fathers, who just happened to live at a different time and have different ideas of how the world works. In the future, I believe, open borders will be necessary - but at present, some other problems need to be addressed first, such as the overgrown government putting its roots everywhere and holding everything and everyone in its grasp.

That said, the US is still doing better in this regard than almost every other country in the world. For all the criticism I threw at the US in this post, the overwhelming majority of other countries deserve it tenfold.

George_Horse

piloteer said:

By the way "@George_Horse, I'm not in the habit of voting for national socialists, so trump is not my fault!

Is Trump a reincarnation of Hitler? Trump Supporters are National Socialists?

TTKDB

@piloteer:

Do you maybe have a probable issue with the immigration laws?

The illegal immigration issue has continued t XXXo be a festering mess that the country as a whole has been dealing with since former President Ronald Reagan legalized the 2.7 million illegal immigrants that were in the United States illegally back in 1986/87 I believe? 

Now the numbers are anywhere between 11-20 plus million illegal immigrants? 

Now you have 300 sanctuary cities giving aid to those same illegal immigrants?

I'm curious, how might the rest of the legalized citizens, and the citizens born in this country, of those same cities maybe view that concept? 

Wouldn't those above questions make for some great poll, survey, or study questions in regards to the illegal immigration conversation? 

TTKDB

Correction:

The illegal immigration issue has continued to be a festering mess that the country as a whole has been dealing with since former President Ronald Reagan legalized the 2.7 million illegal immigrants that were in the United States illegally back in 1986/87 I believe?  

piloteer

"@George_Horse ;
Yes!

piloteer

"@TTKDB

How might the truly naturalized citizens (native Americans) view the legitimacy of your concept of "legalized citizens"?

TTKDB

@piloteer

Are you a click bait question poser? 

piloteer

"@TTKDB

I'm not gonna lie, I'm not sure what that is.

TTKDB

@piloteer:

Click bait is when you set up a forum with a point of view:

"Let the band of South American migrants in!

They're 3,000 strong and growing. Once they get over the Mexican border, I'm sure their numbers while grow drastically. I call upon the citizens of the southwestern United States to meet them at the border and help bring them in. The cost of domestic labor in this country is vomit inducing. I would like to hire some of these people under the table. I have friends who attend churches who would help these people find shelter, medical care, teach them english and self defense, and help them apply for citizenship." 

I responded with my statements.

You addressed this single point of view about (legalized citizens)

And didn't address the rest of the statement.

And then you response was this;

"How might the truly naturalized citizens (native Americans) view the legitimacy of your concept of "legalized citizens?

It looks like you're trying to set responders up with a baiting question, and then the true intention question comes out? 

That's my understanding of what click baiting is. 

piloteer

My true assertion was stated in my resolution. My gripe is with minimum wage laws, and the idea of "legal status" in the US. I represent no political organizations and my only intention is a call for basic human decency. Other gripes that have been brought up were vetting the migrants. To that, I would say that the process of vetting is a long and costly process, and the cost would fall on the taxpayers. As a taxpayer, I have a huge gripe with that.

 I've looked into it a little, and my understanding of click baiting is to try and lure people into clicking on links to other sites. I promise I won't be doing that on this thread. "@TTKDB, as far as your statements, if I have not addressed them properly, I invite you to itemize them and present them to all of us, and I will do my best to address them.

CYDdharta

piloteer said:

"@TTKDB

How might the truly naturalized citizens (native Americans) view the legitimacy of your concept of "legalized citizens"?

They aren't the only "truly naturalized citizens".  Most immigrants to come to the US have come in by following the laws of the land.

piloteer

As of right now. The caravan has increased in size to 7,200, or more. As long as they reach the American border, the US has to take them in if any of them claim to be oppressed in their homelands. The reason the US must take them in is because of US law. I am calling on the good people of Texas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to help bring them in. Thank You for doing the right thing.