Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course. The refuting of the premise requires only the existence of a single example. It does not require an encyclopedic point by point demolition of Trump's idiocy.
In fact though the only discussion worth having is a point by point one. And many of these things will have to decided virtually on a case by case basis.
As I stated only a set of limit Libertarians goes for open borders. And I and virtually any thinking being knows that is not workable. And Trump by now is well aware that deporting the present illegal immigrant population is unworkable. He has in fact set up to run from that and do something different. He has no idea what...but something different.
No, you're just wrong and lazy. You didn't watch his immigration speech,
which has more details than anyone has ever talked about.
If she thinks all people have a "right" to immigrate to this country (and presumably they must then be allowed in) lets see how many Hillary is willing to sponsor and be responsible for their support and care --- personally, without the use of taxpayer money.
While I think we should allow immigration, it needs to be controlled immigration or we will become a 3rd world country. We can't let in more than we can deal with. They need to come here legally, have support when they get here and work towards becoming a citizen. Birth right citizenship should be abolished. One of your parents should be a citizen in order for you to be born a citizen like it is in all but one other country in the world. If a woman comes from mexico and delivers a baby here that baby is a US citizen. If a woman from the US goes to Mexico and delivers a baby that baby is NOT a Mexican citizen. If mexico doesn't have birthright citizenship for us we should not have it for Mexicans.
While I think we should allow immigration, it needs to be controlled immigration or we will become a 3rd world country. We can't let in more than we can deal with. They need to come here legally, have support when they get here and work towards becoming a citizen. Birth right citizenship should be abolished. One of your parents should be a citizen in order for you to be born a citizen like it is in all but one other country in the world. If a woman comes from mexico and delivers a baby here that baby is a US citizen. If a woman from the US goes to Mexico and delivers a baby that baby is NOT a Mexican citizen. If mexico doesn't have birthright citizenship for us we should not have it for Mexicans.
You are misinformed. Mexico is a birth right citizenship country as is virtually everywhere in the western hemisphere. The rest of the world is not but the Americas are almost all jus soli.
A change is a practically impossible. The Constitution requires a very large majority...perhaps as high as 75% to amend it. Not going to happen.
I'm not voting because I don't think either Trump or Hillary are necessarily right. I don't like that this poll was made into a Stalin/Hitler... I mean, Clinton/Trump poll. It's a complex issue that should be explored though.
Firstly, I'm not anti-immigration. I do believe people should "assimilate" in the sense that they understand that the culture they're moving too will not change for them. Nor do I believe mass immigration is a good idea. Immigration should be slow and controlled. I am not opposed to temporarily accepting refugees. But why does Hillary want to accept refugees?
Despite what Breitbart's flashy headlines and BS content say, it's actually likely not an anti-US view. Quite the opposite. Sort of. See, Americans are having fewer children. There are many reasons for this, but it's a fact regardless. Immigrants from Latin American and the Middle East/Africa on the other hand have more kids more often. The thing is, a negative or static birth rate can cause problems. Static is at least sustainable; this is why the traditional American family is a working dad, stay at home mom, a son who plays football, and a girl whom all the boys like (to dad's dismay). It's a replacement level family. The 1950s were propaganda central (the Soviet Union did it and we needed to keep up). But it's true. If you want a sustainable economy, birth rate needs to be stable. If you want it to grow, you need a positive birth rate. This will result in more works. Growth can happen too quickly too.
To keep it short, I'll just get right to the main point. A welfare system needs a positive birth rate. Americans aren't having enough kids, so the social security system can't keep up as the large population of older people rapidly deplete the money that was in the system. This is a problem for those kids now. Unfortunately, this problem is completely unsustainable. A constant need for growth will always be necessary due to the massive and unexpected spike in birth rate that happened in the 1950s (somehow, that's also the millennials fault I'm sure... ). Immigrants are a bandaid to that problem that no one is willing to really talk about. Hillary most likely wants immigrants to sustain our system.
Personally, I'd rather a better solution. I support the existence of a welfare system, but how it's funded sometimes needs to change. What's offered might need to change, even if that's unpopular. I say close the borders a bit. Bring in fewer migrants and work to get the Americans we have working. Create stability and invest in our selves rather than the world. Basically, listen to Bernie. At least a little. You don't need to accept all of his ideas, but understand that his version of progressive style government is better than that of Hillary's. Bernie recognizes the problem that open borders creates for a social democratic system, which we are. Not as much as European countries, which are suffering the same problem, but worse since they've already tired "Hillary's" solution (it's not her solution; it's been tried and it didn't work). I'm not naive enough to think a vote for Trump is the solution. Best case scenario, that is a delay in what's to come. But who knows what will happen in November.
Point being, we need to revise our ideals. I'm not opposed to a globally economy. But, it should be made up of independent nations capable of handling themselves. A good trade network between nations is great. Like I said, I really feel we missed out when Hillary was chosen over Bernie, which I do think would have happened anyway even if Hillary didn't' say "**** you" to democarcy and play favorites with the DNC.
I HRC Policy is anther attempt by Democrats to change the rules to win at all cost. Giving Immigrants instant Citizenship is actually direct violation of all Immigration Laws. In normal cases the Immigrant must be Naturalized and be in this country for 7 years until citizenship can e passed.
Obama by Executive order is waiving all of the requirements including taking a Citizenship test. I know a certain Cuban Man who studied for the test for years and working on hi English. This man was proud he not Only passed the test, he did his 7 years without incident.
The danger is the President and Ms. Clinton views will over run the US Infrastructure . In the same breath they are stealing jobs from Americans who need jobs. Example your working poor in the inner city.
I'm not voting because I don't think either Trump or Hillary are necessarily right. I don't like that this poll was made into a Stalin/Hitler... I mean, Clinton/Trump poll. It's a complex issue that should be explored though.
Firstly, I'm not anti-immigration. I do believe people should "assimilate" in the sense that they understand that the culture they're moving too will not change for them. Nor do I believe mass immigration is a good idea. Immigration should be slow and controlled. I am not opposed to temporarily accepting refugees. But why does Hillary want to accept refugees?
Despite what Breitbart's flashy headlines and BS content say, it's actually likely not an anti-US view. Quite the opposite. Sort of. See, Americans are having fewer children. There are many reasons for this, but it's a fact regardless. Immigrants from Latin American and the Middle East/Africa on the other hand have more kids more often. The thing is, a negative or static birth rate can cause problems. Static is at least sustainable; this is why the traditional American family is a working dad, stay at home mom, a son who plays football, and a girl whom all the boys like (to dad's dismay). It's a replacement level family. The 1950s were propaganda central (the Soviet Union did it and we needed to keep up). But it's true. If you want a sustainable economy, birth rate needs to be stable. If you want it to grow, you need a positive birth rate. This will result in more works. Growth can happen too quickly too.
Point being, we need to revise our ideals. I'm not opposed to a globally economy. But, it should be made up of independent nations capable of handling themselves. A good trade network between nations is great. Like I said, I really feel we missed out when Hillary was chosen over Bernie, which I do think would have happened anyway even if Hillary didn't' say "**** you" to democarcy and play favorites with the DNC.
I find the ideal of your post missing the mark. Right know we have 12 million Illegal Immigrants here in this country stealing American Citizens Benefits. America does need more 3rd would Immigrants. Most of them barely knows what is America. Never mind where is St. Louis Mo.
Unless we developed more Industry in the US (Trump Plan) and Closedown the outsourcing to Mexico and SE ASIA we will have more people on welfare. I do see theses 3rd Word Immigrants contributing to America.
Mark my word, these Immigrants will be a long term Burden to the US Tax Payer!
We are not the Savior of the World. These third world Countries must take responsibility of their own citizens. What happen to shielding a little blood for your freedom . Its not just a American Concept.
We see the corruption everyday where the US pumps Millions in to SA and the Money goes to the leadership, not the improving of their people.
I HRC Policy is anther attempt by Democrats to change the rules to win at all cost. Giving Immigrants instant Citizenship is actually direct violation of all Immigration Laws. In normal cases the Immigrant must be Naturalized and be in this country for 7 years until citizenship can e passed.
Obama by Executive order is waiving all of the requirements including taking a Citizenship test. I know a certain Cuban Man who studied for the test for years and working on hi English. This man was proud he not Only passed the test, he did his 7 years without incident.
The danger is the President and Ms. Clinton views will over run the US Infrastructure . In the same breath they are stealing jobs from Americans who need jobs. Example your working poor in the inner city.
There is no proposal for instant citizenship on the table from either Obama or Clinton.
The Obama EOs simply provide a time limited permission to remain the US to a limited set of illegal aliens. It provides only temporary legalization but nothing permanent and no citizenship.
At least get your facts straight.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is thr Real Deal!
