|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 06 2017 00:29 Sermokala wrote:
Not all conservatives are as diehard on immigration or as hyperbolic as daunt and danglers are today for some odd reason. I would say the moderate third would be happy with the DADC and a lot more would okay with a guest worker visa. What gets a lot of republican from supporting immigration is a sense that amnesty is needed or even preferable. I don't see any problem with creating a second class citizenship status where they can stay and work legaly but with much reduced rights until they go through a citizenship process. If they associate with gangs or commit a felony then they should be deported but it's not worth the cost to get rid of them repetitively for no reason and I think most conservatives can see that.
Educating their children and making them proper citizens shouldn't be a bipartisan argument. Neither should giving citizenship to graduates of American University's.
I'd say a lot of the problem for conservatives supporting more sensible immigration policies is that district setups mean they're more worried about a primary from the right than a general election loss; so they have to accomodate the crazy right wing in order to stay in power.
and oif course it's very hard to get elected on "sensible policy". actual sensible policiy is boring and unfun; it doesn't win elections. emotions win elections; and fear is a great emotion for that.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Illegal immigrants who are model citizens and pay their taxes certainly deserve to be given a genuine path to citizenship. It's more or less an acknowledgement of the fact that they already live here and there is no better option than to legally formalize a de facto reality.
Taking new people and offering to educate them in the US? Fuck no, that shouldn't be an obvious widely acknowledged fact. F1 student visas should not be thrown around anywhere near as willy nilly as they are. The effect of them is often less so to bring the most talented people from abroad to the US but to get cheaper academic grunts because Americans are too bitchy about wanting "fair labor" and a "living wage." And that is a genuine problem in many ways.
|
On September 06 2017 00:50 Sermokala wrote:
The idea would have to be a step up from what they are now but probably remove a lot of the bill of rights from say normal citizenship. They shouldn't vote or be allowed to have guns but the simple ability to report a crime or give testimony shouldn't come with the risk of being deported.
Welfare general shouldn't be an issue with how many children they normally produce (that sounds a lot worse than I mean but you get the idea) would fight a lot of the demographic issues the systems run into without them.
Edit union and labor rights are sticky I feel as many came to do jobs that would fall under the minimum wage. Unions are an aside to this as the point shouldn't be to price them out of the reason they want guest worker status in the first place.
Unionization is a problem that would be solved simply by the form of visa they have. Seasonal work isn't ever going to unionize. I would prefer any immigrant labor bill of rights be silent on the matter and just allow people to unionize as they always do.
On September 06 2017 01:01 LegalLord wrote:
Illegal immigrants who are model citizens and pay their taxes certainly deserve to be given a genuine path to citizenship. It's more or less an acknowledgement of the fact that they already live here and there is no better option than to legally formalize a de facto reality.
Taking new people and offering to educate them in the US? Fuck no, that shouldn't be an obvious widely acknowledged fact. F1 student visas should not be thrown around anywhere near as willy nilly as they are. The effect of them is often less so to bring the most talented people from abroad to the US but to get cheaper academic grunts because Americans are too bitchy about wanting "fair labor" and a "living wage." And that is a genuine problem in many ways.
Colleges generally accept overseas students to provide their classes with a more "worldly experience" and I don't think that should change. But schools should have restrictions in place for how much more they can charge these immigrant students. Because I know some private universities are throwing those things around as cash grabs.
|
On September 05 2017 22:55 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2017 22:34 xDaunt wrote:On September 05 2017 22:30 Danglars wrote:On September 05 2017 22:15 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It's rather ironic that when xDaunt asks a question, he recieves a wide variety of answers dicussing the question, the meaning of the question, the politics and means and viability of the question and of poltics and policies, all in good faith. Meanwhile when someone asks xDaunt a yes and no question, he pointedly refuses to answer or skirts around the question. He did get his answer: the left cannot even posit in theory the goal of ending illegal immigration and absolute border control with a sane immigration policy. All attempts to answer different questions or ask the questioner on related topics gave rise to the actual answer. If we don't actually have the same goals, is it any wonder that the policies meant to come close to achieving those goals are radically different? Bingo. Hey, aren't you the guys who say it is unfair to characterise "the right" as some sort of entity, and yet here you are characterising "the left" with your own perceptions. In the end though, the pair of you think it clever to admit to posing a bogeyman strawman question and when everyone answers with thoughtful comments on the nature of the question and how it relates to wider politics and the function of the country, the only thing you can come up with is "but the left!" and" Bingo". Tell me Danglers, how do you propose to achieve your own "the goal of ending illegal immigration and absolute border control with a sane immigration policy"?
I've spotted this as well. Pretty hypocritical when everyone seems to give them a much greater benefit of the doubt.
|
United States41989 Posts
If I'm understanding your argument correctly LegalLord, you're saying that the desirable situation is an academic bottleneck where the American labour market lacks sufficient skilled graduates to fulfill the market's need for productive labour, thus creating a bidding war which drives up the compensation of the American graduates. And that by expanding the bottleneck through allowing international students to study here the barrier for entry that companies must overcome to hire skilled graduates is lowered, which is a bad thing.
I've worked with a good number of international students in graduate and doctoral programs, most of whom are from the Middle East oddly enough. I can't think of any of them who wouldn't be a great addition to the country. And I can think of some pretty good reasons not to send the chemical and nuclear engineers back to the Middle East.
Right now we have a positive feedback loop where the jobs for the best and the brightest are in America so the best and the brightest come to America and create more jobs for the best and the brightest in America. That's a good thing. Don't fuck with the good thing.
|
So for the "dreamers", it isn't the same issue as with normal illegal immigrants, right? Instead of these being people who compete with unskilled rural residents for things that will be automated within the next 20 years, they are competing with a wide range of demographics since they are just kids and will likely go on to do a variety of things. According to my observations, these dreamers do indeed tend to do a lot of the same work as their parents, at least at first. I've known lots of families where the teenage kids help their fathers with landscaping or painting or construction etc. In that regard, these dreamers are definitely competing with the "working" (rofl) class people who tend to worshipped.
However, I still don't quite see why, from a country-health perspective, we don't want dreamers competing with the lower class. In a lot of ways, dreamers are not much different than a poor family having a couple more kids. These kids would then go on to grow up to compete with these unskilled workers in the same way a dreamer would. Just like dreamers, plenty of rural/lower class people escape into more prosperous areas. But many don't. I think about the idea that this is essentially just another way to increase competition at the bottom, and how it feels wrong to defend "our" unskilled workers against ones that might be better. But at the same time, by that logic, there's no reason to defend "our" anything against anyone in that way. By my own logic, a country would always be best served by having as competitive a work force as possible. By my logic, H1B should be unlimited and used for any job. Fuck that. I honestly have a hard time seeing where I draw a line.
I'd be curious to see some studies on what kinds of people these dreamers are. In my experience, they have basically been Americans by any measure while also still having very heavy Mexican cultural influences. They all speak fluent English and Spanish but certainly have strong Mexican and American cultural values. Proud and happy to be American (and largely consider themselves American), while also being proud of their family and heritage.
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid.
|
United States41989 Posts
On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid.
Americans as a people tend to be super keen on heritage. I get people telling me about how Scottish or Irish they are all the time. But in the case of the Dreamers, they do continually get told that they're not Americans. If, as you say, they don't identify with America, that's not too surprising.
|
On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid.
As someone who is a 5 generation Swedish American, so far removed that my last name is Irish, I call bullshit on this. My relatives from Sweden still visit us and we import food to have the as close to the same Christmas dinner my grandfather had in the 1920s. Its nearly 100 years later. Pride in your national heritage is pride in your family and what traditions they decided to keep, not the land itself.
|
|
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
The academic job market itself is a bottleneck - or perhaps more appropriately, a pyramidal structure. There are far more academic students than there are academic positions. Part of the problem is the decline of corporate and national non-academic R&D, part of the problem is that academia itself is a one-track system where professorships are the best path forward. But each academic in academia needs a lot of grunts; this is meant to be a system where you train them akin to an apprenticeship but it really looks more like grunt making. However, what happens is that since the labor is cheap, it is often done without regards to the benefit of the students - pricing the US aspiring students out of the market towards more lucrative opportunities.
The "lack of skilled labor" in the US is generally an argument made out of horseshit. What is generally lacking is American labor that wants to work for shit salaries under shit conditions. Developing a two-tier system where you can have internationals work for pennies (for universities and companies) just creates a situation that prices Americans out of the market.
My experience with internationals - largely MidEast, Asian, African, and Indian (few from Europe, honestly) - is mixed. Very broadly and racistly, I would rank them as MidEast > African > Asian >> Indian. I very much believe that if 50-90% of those internationals were to be purged from the system and replaced by talented American students, it would be a genuinely better system with proper incentives for encouraging high quality students to develop high tier talent for the country's skilled labor needs. As it stands now though, it is mostly a university and corporate welfare program.
|
On September 06 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid. As someone who is a 5 generation Swedish American, so far removed that my last name is Irish, I call bullshit on this. My relatives from Sweden still visit us and we import food to have the as close to the same Christmas dinner my grandfather had in the 1920s. Its nearly 100 years later. Pride in your national heritage is pride in your family and what traditions they decided to keep, not the land itself.
This is not exactly typical. Consider how many people who identify as Christian don't go to church. That's more so what I am talking about, or at least is what I have seen a lot. For many dreamers, the extent of their Mexican culture is speaking Spanish and hanging out with their cousins often.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
No, Hillary. You paved the way for that attack and blamed everyone and anyone for your own tone-deaf incompetence.
|
I will pay money for both Clinton and Sanders to stop feeding the beast that is constantly re-litigating the 2016 election. This time the guilt is all on Clinton, because I thought we were done.
|
No one faults Sanders for playing tough when the race was still competitive. The totally valid critique (and what made be stop supporting him) was when he ramped up his attacks as he was mathematically eliminated. Once he was hoping for delegates to go rogue, and did everything he could to convince them to, he lost a lot of dignity and definitely helped Trump without any payout. What he did for Trump did not have a benefit after he was mathematically eliminated.
|
On September 06 2017 01:28 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid. As someone who is a 5 generation Swedish American, so far removed that my last name is Irish, I call bullshit on this. My relatives from Sweden still visit us and we import food to have the as close to the same Christmas dinner my grandfather had in the 1920s. Its nearly 100 years later. Pride in your national heritage is pride in your family and what traditions they decided to keep, not the land itself. This is not exactly typical. Consider how many people who identify as Christian don't go to church. That's more so what I am talking about, or at least is what I have seen a lot. For many dreamers, the extent of their Mexican culture is speaking Spanish and hanging out with their cousins often.
You don’t need to go to church to be Christian. Most church leaders will tell you that, especially non-Catholics. I’m not really sure you get to regulate who defines themselves at what if you don’t even understand how those groups define themselves.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
So for the "dreamers", it isn't the same issue as with normal illegal immigrants, right? Instead of these being people who compete with unskilled rural residents for things that will be automated within the next 20 years, they are competing with a wide range of demographics since they are just kids and will likely go on to do a variety of things. According to my observations, these dreamers do indeed tend to do a lot of the same work as their parents, at least at first. I've known lots of families where the teenage kids help their fathers with landscaping or painting or construction etc. In that regard, these dreamers are definitely competing with the "working" (rofl) class people who tend to worshipped.
However, I still don't quite see why, from a country-health perspective, we don't want dreamers competing with the lower class. In a lot of ways, dreamers are not much different than a poor family having a couple more kids. These kids would then go on to grow up to compete with these unskilled workers in the same way a dreamer would. Just like dreamers, plenty of rural/lower class people escape into more prosperous areas. But many don't. I think about the idea that this is essentially just another way to increase competition at the bottom, and how it feels wrong to defend "our" unskilled workers against ones that might be better. But at the same time, by that logic, there's no reason to defend "our" anything against anyone in that way. By my own logic, a country would always be best served by having as competitive a work force as possible. By my logic, H1B should be unlimited and used for any job. Fuck that. I honestly have a hard time seeing where I draw a line.
I'd be curious to see some studies on what kinds of people these dreamers are. In my experience, they have basically been Americans by any measure while also still having very heavy Mexican cultural influences. They all speak fluent English and Spanish but certainly have strong Mexican and American cultural values. Proud and happy to be American (and largely consider themselves American), while also being proud of their family and heritage.
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid.
As I mentioned a bit earlier, sometimes their contributions do good for the country. A lot of Mexican immigrants do the grunt work for small businesses that can't afford their American expensive counterparts so they actually help grow the country.
My problem is more with when they crowd up already overcrowded fields with people and do what always happens when supply of labor far outstrips demand: a savage race to the bottom in living conditions. If, for example, there simply wasn't much construction work around the country that needed to be done and millions of construction workers sitting through spells of underemployment, damn straight I would oppose illegal immigrant labor in the field. As it stands, there is plenty of work that needs doing and they fulfill a need.
|
This is called feeding your base, but expecting adults to do the grunt work for you. This detail should have been in the speech.
|
On September 06 2017 01:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 01:28 Mohdoo wrote:On September 06 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid. As someone who is a 5 generation Swedish American, so far removed that my last name is Irish, I call bullshit on this. My relatives from Sweden still visit us and we import food to have the as close to the same Christmas dinner my grandfather had in the 1920s. Its nearly 100 years later. Pride in your national heritage is pride in your family and what traditions they decided to keep, not the land itself. This is not exactly typical. Consider how many people who identify as Christian don't go to church. That's more so what I am talking about, or at least is what I have seen a lot. For many dreamers, the extent of their Mexican culture is speaking Spanish and hanging out with their cousins often. You don’t need to go to church to be Christian. Most church leaders will tell you that, especially non-Catholics. I’m not really sure you get to regulate who defines themselves at what if you don’t even understand how those groups define themselves.
I am not in charge of any sort of regulatory commission, but I won't hesitate to point out that people tend to, due to their own weakness as individuals, grasp onto labels that give feelings of community (Christian because their families are Christian etc), virtue or power. They don't invest much of their time or energy into doing much more than "yay, I'm a part of this group".
On September 06 2017 01:34 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
So for the "dreamers", it isn't the same issue as with normal illegal immigrants, right? Instead of these being people who compete with unskilled rural residents for things that will be automated within the next 20 years, they are competing with a wide range of demographics since they are just kids and will likely go on to do a variety of things. According to my observations, these dreamers do indeed tend to do a lot of the same work as their parents, at least at first. I've known lots of families where the teenage kids help their fathers with landscaping or painting or construction etc. In that regard, these dreamers are definitely competing with the "working" (rofl) class people who tend to worshipped.
However, I still don't quite see why, from a country-health perspective, we don't want dreamers competing with the lower class. In a lot of ways, dreamers are not much different than a poor family having a couple more kids. These kids would then go on to grow up to compete with these unskilled workers in the same way a dreamer would. Just like dreamers, plenty of rural/lower class people escape into more prosperous areas. But many don't. I think about the idea that this is essentially just another way to increase competition at the bottom, and how it feels wrong to defend "our" unskilled workers against ones that might be better. But at the same time, by that logic, there's no reason to defend "our" anything against anyone in that way. By my own logic, a country would always be best served by having as competitive a work force as possible. By my logic, H1B should be unlimited and used for any job. Fuck that. I honestly have a hard time seeing where I draw a line.
I'd be curious to see some studies on what kinds of people these dreamers are. In my experience, they have basically been Americans by any measure while also still having very heavy Mexican cultural influences. They all speak fluent English and Spanish but certainly have strong Mexican and American cultural values. Proud and happy to be American (and largely consider themselves American), while also being proud of their family and heritage.
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid. As I mentioned a bit earlier, sometimes their contributions do good for the country. A lot of Mexican immigrants do the grunt work for small businesses that can't afford their American expensive counterparts so they actually help grow the country. My problem is more with when they crowd up already overcrowded fields with people and do what always happens when supply of labor far outstrips demand: a savage race to the bottom in living conditions. If, for example, there simply wasn't much construction work around the country that needed to be done and millions of construction workers sitting through spells of underemployment, damn straight I would oppose illegal immigrant labor in the field. As it stands, there is plenty of work that needs doing and they fulfill a need.
If illegally low pay is what keeps a small business alive, are we as a country helped by this small business staying alive? Or is that business only serving to take income away from a business that is managed better? What if a better business owner is able to expand, hire a skilled worker, and improve the country more than the shitty small business owner who can't even get by without tax fraud?
|
On September 06 2017 01:37 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 01:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:28 Mohdoo wrote:On September 06 2017 01:24 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:13 Mohdoo wrote:
One thing I will point out is that I do think dreamers tend to be WAY overly proud of their Mexican heritage. If you grew up here, and never spent any formative years of your life in Mexico, you aren't Mexican. They might not be legally American either, but people being proud to be "from" somewhere they've never actually been is extremely stupid. As someone who is a 5 generation Swedish American, so far removed that my last name is Irish, I call bullshit on this. My relatives from Sweden still visit us and we import food to have the as close to the same Christmas dinner my grandfather had in the 1920s. Its nearly 100 years later. Pride in your national heritage is pride in your family and what traditions they decided to keep, not the land itself. This is not exactly typical. Consider how many people who identify as Christian don't go to church. That's more so what I am talking about, or at least is what I have seen a lot. For many dreamers, the extent of their Mexican culture is speaking Spanish and hanging out with their cousins often. You don’t need to go to church to be Christian. Most church leaders will tell you that, especially non-Catholics. I’m not really sure you get to regulate who defines themselves at what if you don’t even understand how those groups define themselves. I am not in charge of any sort of regulatory commission, but I won't hesitate to point out that people tend to, due to their own weakness as individuals, grasp onto labels that give feelings of community (Christian because their families are Christian etc), virtue or power. They don't invest much of their time or energy into doing much more than "yay, I'm a part of this group".
We have vastly different opinions on what weakness is.
|
Searching comfort in groups doesn't make you weak, not leaving the group despite disagreeing with its ideas/dogma does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
