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.
Huh? Talk about a overly simplistic answer. How about it depends on the country and the context? You act like we live in a world where everything is black and white.
Republicans have waged wars in the middle east in support of nation building. But wars cost a helluva lot more than almost any alternative. In wasted lives and treasure.
How bout mexico, c.a., africa, places we havent waged wars? You cant deflect to “bad american”
So, we need maybe a million new immigrants to bring more young people into our country and repopulate dying towns. Great, that has nothing to do with how we determine how many of the potential 3 billion illegal aliens or refugees of the world who want to come here and will go to great lengths to make it and risk their lives.
The dems felt so bad about the man and his son who died trying to swim into America. I was sad too, but if we make it easy to sneak in billions will come and more will die.
Why is a growing population automatically a good thing? Millions more each year requires vast amounts of resources in the form of water (which is increasingly scarce in some locales), farmland being given over to development, air quality via more cars, trucks etc, and then throw in the social costs of absorbing multitudes who don't speak English into our schools and communities and all of the added cost that entails, not to mention so many of them can't otherwise support themselves.
I live in Vermont. Our population is flat and our quality of life is rather high. Why should we want large increases in our population?
I totally agree with you! We don't need to increase our population but decrease it and stabilize it for all of the reasons you stated.
As a person who usually votes for Democrats in most elections, I watched the candidates for President try to outdo each other with compassion for migrants. From what I can tell most of them think America should have an open border for people who are suffering and live in poverty all over the world.
I think about 3 billion people around the world live in poverty and most also live in places where they suffer from political and religious persecution. It is tough out there for citizens of the world. Especially in Southeast Asia, Latin America, and Africa.
Right now millions of people are doing everything they can to make it to our Southern Border. An ever-increasing number are coming from Africa and flying to countries in Latin America that don't require a Visa to visit. From there they are making their way slowly to our border, risking their lives. Countless people are coming from Central America and places like Haiti and Cuba.
I FEEL SORRY FOR ALL OF THEM. But should we only let in those people who can make it to our border? How about the billion-plus suffering people from Asia and Africa who can't come up with the money to make it to our Southern Border? Don't they deserve to come here too?
How many suffering world citizens should we let into America each year? How about 10 million, 20 million, 50 million? (But don't you know that would be a fraction of the total who would come here if they could?) How are we going to pay for the welfare and language programs that will be needed to get these fine migrants up to speed in America?
Again, this question is for Democrats who support the liberal candidates who want to eliminate our border patrol and be generous to the world's poor.
Who said they were for open borders and want to eliminate border patrol? I didn't hear every single thing everyone said, but I obviously didn't hear what you heard.
Who said they were for open borders and want to eliminate border patrol? I didn't hear every single thing everyone said, but I obviously didn't hear what you heard.
They want anyone that says the magic word asylum let in, and then when those asylum claims are eventually denied they don't want then deported. They also otherwise don't want even those with criminal records deported. How is this not the same as wanting open borders?
The problem with liberals is they think with their heart instead of their brain. They have compassion which is great. But you can't run a government on compassion without compromising many things in your country.
Unfortunately people love to use racism as a way to counter those who actually know that we can't just continue to let people in. If a white person says we can't he/she is a racist. If somebody black or brown says the same thing they are a trader to their people.
As a person who usually votes for Democrats in most elections, I watched the candidates for President try to outdo each other with compassion for migrants. From what I can tell most of them think America should have an open border for people who are suffering and live in poverty all over the world.
I think about 3 billion people around the world live in poverty and most also live in places where they suffer from political and religious persecution. It is tough out there for citizens of the world. Especially in Southeast Asia, Latin America, and Africa.
Right now millions of people are doing everything they can to make it to our Southern Border. An ever-increasing number are coming from Africa and flying to countries in Latin America that don't require a Visa to visit. From there they are making their way slowly to our border, risking their lives. Countless people are coming from Central America and places like Haiti and Cuba.
I FEEL SORRY FOR ALL OF THEM. But should we only let in those people who can make it to our border? How about the billion-plus suffering people from Asia and Africa who can't come up with the money to make it to our Southern Border? Don't they deserve to come here too?
How many suffering world citizens should we let into America each year? How about 10 million, 20 million, 50 million? (But don't you know that would be a fraction of the total who would come here if they could?) How are we going to pay for the welfare and language programs that will be needed to get these fine migrants up to speed in America?
Again, this question is for Democrats who support the liberal candidates who want to eliminate our border patrol and be generous to the world's poor.
I've never voted for a Democrat for president, but will be doing so in 2020. I am also for compassion, but I know we can only take in so many people before it causes serious problems. I find myself about halfway between conservative and liberal talking points on refugees. I think its good to help, but we can't fix everyones problem and we risk creating our own if we overextend our generosity.
I've never voted for a Democrat for president, but will be doing so in 2020. I am also for compassion, but I know we can only take in so many people before it causes serious problems. I find myself about halfway between conservative and liberal talking points on refugees. I think its good to help, but we can't fix everyones problem and we risk creating our own if we overextend our generosity.
So you'll be voting for open borders in 2020.
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.
