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.
Looks like the migrant caravan has worked it's way out of the news cycle, much like an old sitcom. I read yesterday that the new president of mexico agreed with 3 central American countries to work on a program to easy poverty and bring new jobs to central America.
If one economic migrant gets into the US for every 1,000 still in central america, how much of the overall problem is solved?
We could easily double our population by putting out the welcome mat for a fast easy pass to economic asylum. So open borders will obviously fail and cause a collapse of our entitlements, roads, schools, hospitals, prisons, etc. I know we don't have open borders literally, but for years all you had to do was show up at the border with the right story, then disappear into the US as an illegal, not showing up for hearing, with next to zero chance of being deported. That's why there are 10k at our border with more coming.
The only logical solution is for the countries supplying the economic migrants to be improved, one way or another. I don't know the entire solution, but Trumps hard line on the border at least prompted 4 counties to come to an agreement. They wouldn't have felt the need to do that, if all they had to do is send all their poorest here.
There is a lot of debate on this thread that the caravan people are seeking asylum for the wrong reasons, a matter of poor economy is not a reason so I would pose this question.
If the US economy crashed worse than it did during the recession of 08, the illegal aliens, caravan asylum seekers and anyone else that came here seeking a better economic outlook either through hard work or handouts could go back home but where could we go? What country in the world would take in tens of thousands of poor down on their luck Americans and give them everything they needed?
If not one country would open its border to the American poor then why should we open our border?
There is a right way and a wrong way to immigrate and there are truly people that need asylum and fleeing a crashed economy is not a reason.
Americans would never leave. We would stay, suffer and fix it. Because we would have to. I don't think I've ever heard of American refugees or economic migrants.
We don't have any sort of dream country to go to, where we could get 10 times the pay for manual labor, food stamps, language training, use their emergency rooms, free lawyers. Could you imagine? It seems insane looking at it from that angle.
Maybe that is part of the reason the US is at the top economically. We have to solve our problems, so we do.
We could easily double our population by putting out the welcome mat for a fast easy pass to economic asylum. So open borders will obviously fail and cause a collapse of our entitlements, roads, schools, hospitals, prisons, etc. I know we don't have open borders literally, but for years all you had to do was show up at the border with the right story, then disappear into the US as an illegal, not showing up for hearing, with next to zero chance of being deported. That's why there are 10k at our border with more coming.
Everyone here knows I'm as hardline immigration as they come but to play devil's advocate, let's say we swung the doors wide open to Central America. We are not talking about densely populated countries. The entire population of Central America is about 40 million and not all would come here. USA is not really densely populated except certain areas. I do think it would be a heavy strain on us in the first few generations and there might need to be some changes made to social services but I wouldn't say "collapse".
Everyone here knows I'm as hardline immigration as they come but to play devil's advocate, let's say we swung the doors wide open to Central America. We are not talking about densely populated countries. The entire population of Central America is about 40 million and not all would come here. USA is not really densely populated except certain areas. I do think it would be a heavy strain on us in the first few generations and there might need to be some changes made to social services but I wouldn't say "collapse".
I know. But I like to see what an affect of an action would be if it were magnified.
If I saved $10 a day, I would save over 200k in my life. This shows where you should point to at least.
And there is a world of 7 trillion. 70% are poor. That's a lot of potential migrants. They are expensive. There's always going to be more people to line up.
You do have a point with numbers. But these relatively small numbers, don't arrive hitting the ground running. They don't read. They don't speak English. Their kids don't speak English and they are probably behind a couple grades. It's a burden, tax payers pay and it adds up.
How does helping 10k out of 40million help overall? Now I'm being a devils advocate.
Thanks for the debate, you picked out the weakness in my argument that I chose to leave out. I hate being wrong more than I hate losing an argument.
Last edited by FelixTheCat; 12-04-2018 at 07:49 PM..
Looks like the migrant caravan has worked it's way out of the news cycle, much like an old sitcom. I read yesterday that the new president of mexico agreed with 3 central American countries to work on a program to easy poverty and bring new jobs to central America.
If one economic migrant gets into the US for every 1,000 still in central america, how much of the overall problem is solved?
We could easily double our population by putting out the welcome mat for a fast easy pass to economic asylum. So open borders will obviously fail and cause a collapse of our entitlements, roads, schools, hospitals, prisons, etc. I know we don't have open borders literally, but for years all you had to do was show up at the border with the right story, then disappear into the US as an illegal, not showing up for hearing, with next to zero chance of being deported. That's why there are 10k at our border with more coming.
The only logical solution is for the countries supplying the economic migrants to be improved, one way or another. I don't know the entire solution, but Trumps hard line on the border at least prompted 4 counties to come to an agreement. They wouldn't have felt the need to do that, if all they had to do is send all their poorest here.
There's no agreement yet, Obrador said that the "agreement" has a 20 billion dollar price tag on it
Who cares? The migrants are in Mexico currently and Mexico is bearing the full cost of it. We aren't committing $20 billion. Not happening. It's a non-starter.
Mexico can reach an "agreement" and receive some help in caring for the migrants or they can reject the agreement and continue paying the full cost themselves. Just think how much this 10-day delay has saved us already.
Who cares? The migrants are in Mexico currently and Mexico is bearing the full cost of it. We aren't committing $20 billion. Not happening. It's a non-starter.
Mexico can reach an "agreement" and receive some help in caring for the migrants or they can reject the agreement and continue paying the full cost themselves. Just think how much this 10-day delay has saved us already.
The agreement is predicated upon us paying 20 billion dollars, I'm not sure why you want to argue that- did you read the article I linked?
The agreement is predicated upon us paying 20 billion dollars, I'm not sure why you want to argue that- did you read the article I linked?
I'm not arguing that - did you read my post? I'm saying we aren't going to agree to it and Mexico will simply have to choose between reaching agreement without that and receiving our assistance in hosting the migrants, or fail to reach an agreement and not receive our assistance in hosting the migrants. Either way, we aren't letting the migrants in and will close the border if they try to rush it.
And the $20 billion demand is plain silly. So Mexico is going to invest $20 billion in Mexico therefore that means USA should invest $20 billion in Central America? Where's the logic in that? That's like me saying I'm going to spend $30k to send my daughter to college so you should donate $30k to help other poor kids go to college.
Where can they go now? No one will currently accept Americans that are poor. Sure, plenty of places like Mexico and Belize and Costa Rica are all too happy to receive American ex-pat retirees but it's strictly a Bring Your Own Money deal. You can bring your fortune to their economy but you can't make your fortune from their economy.
There is the rub. There are so many that are pro caravan that cite the "huddled masses" poem as some type of law that requires the US to admit anyone but in reality if immigrants arrived at Ellis Island sick, without a sponsor to support them or without the money to support themselves they were not admitted.
The last thing we need today are more people that will get onto welfare with not intentions of ever getting off. Other countries do not allow people to become burdens on their welfare systems so why should America. And for those that say illegal aliens are not allowed to sign up for welfare maybe not but they find ways around the system plus if they get sick they go to the emergency room and their kids go to schools that are forced to educate them and in some cases feed them too.
Unfettered and illegal immigration is not good for anyone and the problems are compounded if the immigrant is poor.
That is why, like all the other countries, we need a rational immigration policy with merit at its core. You must be of a certain basic quality to be admitted. Here are the qualities I would like to see:
1) You MUST speak English fluently.
2) You must have enough money for you, or you and your family, to exist for 2 years with no job. So that would be somewhere in the range of 50 grand for a single person. Maybe 25 grand per person for a family.
3) You must have decent job prospects. Demonstrable skills. A record of independent existence.
4) You must support the American economic system of Capitalism. And you must be able to show support for the Constitution, free speech, individual rights, private property rights. So yes, some kind of Civics test, and it should be essay based.
5) You must have private health insurance.
6) You must contractually agree to be ineligible for any welfare program for 20 years.
7) You must agree to immediate deportation upon conviction for any non-trivial crime for 10 years. So you are a probationary pre-citizen for awhile.
Is this exclusionary, discriminatory, and prejudiced toward the best and brightest? ABSOEFFINGLUTELY. The Statue of Liberty is revoked. We no longer want huddled masses of useless people. That might have flown in a time when the country was young and we needed endless amounts of basically unskilled labor. That is no longer the case. WRETCHED REFUSE IS BARRED FROM ENTRY.
So, basically, acceptable immigrants are nice, educated, independent people who are not going to suck off the existing citizenry and vampire off their neighbors. Show me that you are independent and functional, show me that you can communicate with me in the de facto OFFICIAL language of my country, aka English, and guess what? You are welcomed in with open arms!
How about a Socialist paradise. How about England?
Quote:
You have to show that you are getting paid an appropriate salary
You may need to prove your knowledge of English
You have to prove that you have funds to support yourself upon arrival in the UK with a bank, or building society, statement
You have to show a valid passport, and show your travel history of the last 5 years
If you’ll be working with vulnerable people, you have to provide a criminal record certificate
From certain countries you need to also provide TB test results from an approved clinic.
So, seeing how it’s done in the nice “civilized” Western countries, it becomes obvious that allowing a mob of unknown illegals to “caravan” across our border and invade our country without going through a vetting process similar to Canada, Australia, and the UK is counterproductive to our rational self-interest. Barring entry is rational, correct, moral, and good. Citizenship must be earned. It is not a right for foreign nationals. And it is not guaranteed. Getting a “no” is a real possibility. So make sure you read the requirements. Speak English. Be Very Independent and Competent. Then you can come in and receive a warm, earned, welcome.
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.
