EPTWhat y'all are saying the "win" is, is essentially highlighting what a problem human trafficking is, by just doing it. You're saying it's cool to kidnap some folks, because the point of the kidnapping is to get people to talk about how kidnapping is a problem. I dunno, maybe I'm just fucking stupid, but I feel like there's about a dozen easier ways to initiate that conversation than by doing the thing you're trying to allege is the problem. Whatever happens after that, you're on the moral low ground, period.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3777
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
What y'all are saying the "win" is, is essentially highlighting what a problem human trafficking is, by just doing it. You're saying it's cool to kidnap some folks, because the point of the kidnapping is to get people to talk about how kidnapping is a problem. I dunno, maybe I'm just fucking stupid, but I feel like there's about a dozen easier ways to initiate that conversation than by doing the thing you're trying to allege is the problem. Whatever happens after that, you're on the moral low ground, period. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18826 Posts
On September 19 2022 01:36 NewSunshine wrote: It's sadistic to do what the Republicans have done here, they used legal migrants to the US to take a cheap shot at the Democrats and are gonna spit them out when they're done. Plain and simple. What y'all are saying the "win" is, is essentially highlighting what a problem human trafficking is, by just doing it. You're saying it's cool to kidnap some folks, because the point of the kidnapping is to get people to talk about how kidnapping is a problem. I dunno, maybe I'm just fucking stupid, but I feel like there's about a dozen easier ways to initiate that conversation than by doing the thing you're trying to allege is the problem. Whatever happens after that, you're on the moral low ground, period. Relatedly, the idea that folks like Abbot and DeSantis have exhausted all avenues for addressing border problems such that they now have license to do the work of coyotes is absolute nonsense. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On September 18 2022 19:01 BlackJack wrote: I'm not sure why there is an insistence on using words like forced, kidnapped, trafficked. There's videos on youtube where they interview the migrants and they say they know where their buses are going and that it's voluntary. If the criticism here is based on a premise that doesn't exist then it's not a good criticism. There's 3 parties here 1. The xenophobic and racist Republicans that want to ship off their migrants from their overwhelmed border communities 2. The cities and their leaders where the migrants are being sent. Like Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot who says Chicago will continue to accept the migrants with open arms 3. The migrants themselves who obviously wouldn't mind a free bus ride away from the racist old Republicans border communities and to a progressive city like Chicago that will welcome them with open arms So again, how is this not a win-win-win? Every party benefits. I really don't see the issue. I can see an argument to be made where the mayor of Chicago is actually full of shit and she just wants to be able to say they will accept the migrants with open arms without actually having to accept them with open arms. Like if she doesn't want them in her city any more than the racist Republicans want them in their city. It would explain why some have been bussed out of Chicago to the suburbs. Wait a minute... Greyhounds are not especially expensive. I think subsidizing your undesirables leaving to other towns is a little creepy but if they really wanted to go to LA or Chicago or whatever, and the only thing stopping them was the cost of a bus ticket, then sure! Buy them bus tickets, I don’t care that much. But hold on a moment. I’m supposed to believe that a bunch of people who made it from Venezuela to San Antonio, facing hardships I can scarcely even imagine, are sitting there thinking “gosh, I’d love to move to Chicago but I just can’t figure out how I would get there!”? Then the governor rounds up a busload of them, many undocumented and afraid of government scrutiny, and says “here’s a bus ticket if you want it” with no hint of coercion? I mean come on. I don’t know anything about Lori Lightfoot and I don’t care very much. But there’s two things that could be said here which don’t actually have that much to do with each other: 1) We should have a compassionate response to refugees and asylum seekers from places devastated by war, drug cartels, etc. and provide them with food, housing, and whatever else they need until they can figure out a life here. 2) We should treat people living and working amongst us as community members regardless of their immigration status, rather than treating them as second-class citizens who can be deported any time anyone decides they dislike them enough to call ICE about it. In the former case a program like that obviously needs advance warning. Refugees from e.g. Afghanistan often need language classes, cultural training, and employment assistance in addition to the obvious food, clothing, and housing, and that’s all stuff you need to set up in advance. They may be perfectly smart and capable and eager to fit in, but for a while they often need someone kind of like a social worker that they can call about what Americans mean by such and such idiom or body language, or how to write a resume, etc. Somebody you picked up off the street in San Antonio might not be in the same boat. Maybe they’ve got a place to live, maybe some work lined up. Are they desperate enough they would actually want to get on a bus to some other city with nothing but the personal effects they can carry, and try to make things work in a new town? Maybe, that’s pretty extreme though. On the other hand, if the cops pick them up and say “hey we know you’re undocumented. But rather than calling ICE, we thought you’d be a good fit for this program the governor is starting…” they’re probably gonna do whatever they’re told and say whatever they think will cause the least trouble. Then because it’s 2022 the governor sends along a camera crew because he wants some good reaction shots of those oh-so-smug virtue signaling liberals who realize they’re going to have to eat their words about immigrants being human beings or whatever. Do I have the caricature more or less right there? Anyway now you’ve got a bunch of human beings stepping off a bus in a strange city where they don’t know anybody, they’ve got no place to live, no way to make money, and they may or may not have enough for their next meal. In short, they’re homeless. If they were already homeless where they were before, you’ve just pushed some of San Antonio’s homeless population into Chicago’s homeless population, and presumably they’ll be dealt with the same way any other homeless person in Chicago would be. (Maybe not, because of the cameras, but that’s all the “sanctuary city” thing actually promises.) If they weren’t homeless, you’ve just ripped somebody from their community where they had a place to live and made them homeless in Chicago (on weather alone, not the place I’d pick if I had to be homeless). So no, I’m having trouble seeing a scenario here that I would celebrate as a “win.” | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10497 Posts
https://time.com/6211993/greg-abbott-migrants-buses-texas-dc-new-york/ Fifteen migrants who spoke to TIME in Del Rio and Washington said they were thrilled for the option of free transportation, and were surprised to learn that Abbott’s intentions were less about accommodating them than inconveniencing his political opponents. “It’s great that he helped us,” says Oliver, a 26-year-old migrant, in an interview conducted at his arrival in Washington on July 26. https://us.cnn.com/2022/08/19/us/texas-migrants-bus-washington-dc-new-york/index.html Many, like Figueroa, are happy to leave Texas. The buses stop at several cities along the way to the Northeast, allowing migrants to disembark to reunite with friends and family in other locations. In Washington DC, Figueroa and her husband will meet with their friends. "They want to go on the buses," said Valeria Wheeler, the executive director of Mission: Border Hope, a non-profit organization which serves the border community in Eagle Pass. "No one has been forced." The migrants themselves don't seem to be complaining. As is typical these days, it's others getting offended on their behalf over the horrors of having to endure such an arduous journey as a free air-conditioned bus ride which I'm sure makes the trek through Central America to get here in the first place seem like a cake walk. Nobody should be surprised here. Of course these mayors and governors can't just come out and say "stop sending migrants here, we don't want them and we don't have room for them." That's completely against their brand. So they have to try to channel their whining through invented narratives that migrants are being kidnapped/trafficked without any evidence. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13926 Posts
On September 18 2022 19:01 BlackJack wrote: I'm not sure why there is an insistence on using words like forced, kidnapped, trafficked. There's videos on youtube where they interview the migrants and they say they know where their buses are going and that it's voluntary. If the criticism here is based on a premise that doesn't exist then it's not a good criticism. There's 3 parties here 1. The xenophobic and racist Republicans that want to ship off their migrants from their overwhelmed border communities 2. The cities and their leaders where the migrants are being sent. Like Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot who says Chicago will continue to accept the migrants with open arms 3. The migrants themselves who obviously wouldn't mind a free bus ride away from the racist old Republicans border communities and to a progressive city like Chicago that will welcome them with open arms So again, how is this not a win-win-win? Every party benefits. I really don't see the issue. I can see an argument to be made where the mayor of Chicago is actually full of shit and she just wants to be able to say they will accept the migrants with open arms without actually having to accept them with open arms. Like if she doesn't want them in her city any more than the racist Republicans want them in their city. It would explain why some have been bussed out of Chicago to the suburbs. Wait a minute... If I tell a bunch of black people to get on the bus and that there will be jobs and houses for them on the other side of their trip north. there better be jobs and houses on the other side of that trip or I'm guilty of kidnapping them. Thats what the KKK did and what Desantis did. There is an insistence on using those words because they are accurate to what happened. Desantis contracted in another state for more than $12k a head to move human bodies across the country. They were promised food jobs and shelter waiting for them on the other side. They were given wrong information about how to keep their documents current with their new situation, they were not given food on the trip, there was no jobs or shelter waiting for them on the other side of the trip. They were given a comical map of a line between san Antonio and a spot in the Atlantic Ocean that was smaller than the line being drawn. These people were selected specifically because they were legally protected asylum speakers that had to walk from Venezuela to San Antonio. Right-wingers insist that these people were illegal immigrants that were then kicked out after 48 hours. They were instead shipped by the republican governor activated national guard so they could be in a facility that has been set up from Katrina to help out refugees. De santis called fox news and only fox news about when and that they would be arriving. These aren't critisms they are facts. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
If the Republicans had done nothing at all the situation at hand would've been "handful of legal immigrants manage to go through legal channels and become US citizens." But I guess that's not interesting enough when you live or die by how much people hate immigrants. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
On September 19 2022 06:38 NewSunshine wrote: They were thrilled to get on the bus because they were lied to. There wasn't a home and a job already laid out for them like was implied, and in DeSantis's case at least they're getting a free flight before then being deported, despite taking all the legal channels. So how they felt about getting on the bus or plane is kind of irrelevant. They're being used by the Republicans to jack up their racist fear-mongering that illegal immigrants are an impending threat to America's destruction. And the sad thing is: For 12k$ per person, you could probably set up a home and a job for them. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
DeSantis set aside $12M just so that Florida could be an interventionist in national immigration policy. That should be illegal as fuck. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On September 19 2022 05:26 BlackJack wrote: You can speculate all you want but if you actually want to provide some evidence that people are being coerced or forced onto buses then I'm all ears. So far every news source says the migrants have been grateful and happy for the free rides. https://time.com/6211993/greg-abbott-migrants-buses-texas-dc-new-york/ https://us.cnn.com/2022/08/19/us/texas-migrants-bus-washington-dc-new-york/index.html The migrants themselves don't seem to be complaining. As is typical these days, it's others getting offended on their behalf over the horrors of having to endure such an arduous journey as a free air-conditioned bus ride which I'm sure makes the trek through Central America to get here in the first place seem like a cake walk. Nobody should be surprised here. Of course these mayors and governors can't just come out and say "stop sending migrants here, we don't want them and we don't have room for them." That's completely against their brand. So they have to try to channel their whining through invented narratives that migrants are being kidnapped/trafficked without any evidence. Seems like we’ve switched from the Desantis stunt to Abbott’s bus thing. So on that: If LA started a program where they’d give homeless people free bus tickets to San Diego, San Diego would be understandably peeved. The entire premise of the program is that programs to take care of homeless people are expensive, but if you pay a little for bus tickets you can shift that off your own ledger onto someone else’s. It’s a negative sum policy, obviously not universalizable, and I see no reason to praise the politician who came up with it. Nor would it expose some hypocrisy if San Diego’s mayor has made a bunch of public statements about how we should be compassionate and take good care of the homeless. But the homeless people who got the free ticket to San Diego might be happy enough about it. But also, they’re not just drains on public monies, they’re human beings with lives. How many people are there really that are going to happily climb on a bus to a completely new city with nothing but what they can carry on, and the only thing that was stopping them before was the price of the bus ticket? Without any form of coercion how many takers is LA actually gonna get? Just because you’re homeless doesn’t mean you don’t have any attachments. If they’re not giving you *any* way to survive on the other side of that trip, what’s in it for you? You’re still homeless, but now you don’t know anybody, you don’t know your way around, you don’t know where you can and can’t go without getting harassed by cops. The people who *do* take the free ticket might know somebody in San Diego, or be really eager to leave LA for some reason, but selfishness aside this policy probably won’t really solve LA’s homeless problem, either. By analogy the Desantis thing is closer to if I kidnapped a homeless person and dumped them on Leonardo DiCaprio’s front lawn with a bunch of cameras watching the whole thing. Leo certainly might feel obligated to take good care of the homeless person dumped on his lawn. Maybe this will wind up being the best thing that ever happened to him. This plan still makes me look like a piece of shit, especially if my whole purpose is to please my fans with antipathy for both homeless people and Leonardo DiCaprio. | ||
|
TLSK
3 Posts
| ||
|
TLSK
3 Posts
| ||
|
TLSK
3 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10497 Posts
On September 19 2022 06:52 ChristianS wrote: Seems like we’ve switched from the Desantis stunt to Abbott’s bus thing. So on that: If LA started a program where they’d give homeless people free bus tickets to San Diego, San Diego would be understandably peeved. The entire premise of the program is that programs to take care of homeless people are expensive, but if you pay a little for bus tickets you can shift that off your own ledger onto someone else’s. It’s a negative sum policy, obviously not universalizable, and I see no reason to praise the politician who came up with it. Nor would it expose some hypocrisy if San Diego’s mayor has made a bunch of public statements about how we should be compassionate and take good care of the homeless. But the homeless people who got the free ticket to San Diego might be happy enough about it. But also, they’re not just drains on public monies, they’re human beings with lives. How many people are there really that are going to happily climb on a bus to a completely new city with nothing but what they can carry on, and the only thing that was stopping them before was the price of the bus ticket? Without any form of coercion how many takers is LA actually gonna get? Just because you’re homeless doesn’t mean you don’t have any attachments. If they’re not giving you *any* way to survive on the other side of that trip, what’s in it for you? You’re still homeless, but now you don’t know anybody, you don’t know your way around, you don’t know where you can and can’t go without getting harassed by cops. The people who *do* take the free ticket might know somebody in San Diego, or be really eager to leave LA for some reason, but selfishness aside this policy probably won’t really solve LA’s homeless problem, either. By analogy the Desantis thing is closer to if I kidnapped a homeless person and dumped them on Leonardo DiCaprio’s front lawn with a bunch of cameras watching the whole thing. Leo certainly might feel obligated to take good care of the homeless person dumped on his lawn. Maybe this will wind up being the best thing that ever happened to him. This plan still makes me look like a piece of shit, especially if my whole purpose is to please my fans with antipathy for both homeless people and Leonardo DiCaprio. Yeah maybe not many would want to get on the bus voluntary. Which is exactly how many have gotten on the bus. 2 million border encounters in the last year, how many as a percent have taken up the offer of free bus rides? maybe 1%? Less than that? I'm not sure why we need the homeless analogy. Is it negative-sum when you zoom out? Yes. But why should LA care about that? If they are successful at shifting them on to San Diego's ledger then good for them. If San Diego's mayor wants to pretend there isn't a homelessness problem in SoCal and dismiss the LA Mayor's concerns as uncompassionate whining then it absolutely makes them a hypocrite if they start whining when the homeless people show up in their town. We disagree on that one. Will it solve the larger problem? Probably not, but at least we see some action of Biden's officials meeting to address the issue and leaders declaring federal emergencies. Which seems to be more than what was happening when the immigration crisis was only affecting the red states. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
On September 19 2022 07:35 TLSK wrote: Not really, but why would you anyway? They are illegal immigrants. The idea of people like DeSantis isn't to encourage a lot more to come, like your suggestion would. Not to mention there is no legal way for them to work. No, they are not. They are legal asylum seekers. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13926 Posts
He was warned about the issue with his dry foot doctrine with cubans and gave Amnesty twice to all illegal immigrants. It would be great if we could do immigration reform anyday now but we've got half the country who just want to make things worse. | ||
|
Taelshin
Canada418 Posts
@acrofales Sorry your analogy was terrible. Not interested in debating legal, illegal with you. I've been readily informed that no human being is illegal. @ChristianS Your LA vs San Diego example does not work, its a good attempt but it is not the situation that is happening here. But you were right about one thing, LA sending it's homeless to SD definitely wouldn't solve LA's homeless problem, They'd have to change the policy's for that. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On September 19 2022 07:45 BlackJack wrote: Yeah maybe not many would want to get on the bus voluntary. Which is exactly how many have gotten on the bus. 2 million border encounters in the last year, how many as a percent have taken up the offer of free bus rides? maybe 1%? Less than that? I'm not sure why we need the homeless analogy. Is it negative-sum when you zoom out? Yes. But why should LA care about that? If they are successful at shifting them on to San Diego's ledger then good for them. If San Diego's mayor wants to pretend there isn't a homelessness problem in SoCal and dismiss the LA Mayor's concerns as uncompassionate whining then it absolutely makes them a hypocrite if they start whining when the homeless people show up in their town. We disagree on that one. Will it solve the larger problem? Probably not, but at least we see some action of Biden's officials meeting to address the issue and leaders declaring federal emergencies. Which seems to be more than what was happening when the immigration crisis was only affecting the red states. I don’t think finding negative sum ways to shift your problems onto others is praiseworthy. Even less so if you’re barely even addressing your own problem and mostly just making a publicity stunt out of it. And without knowing what specifically the smug liberals said it’s hard to know what you’re saying they’re hypocrites about. In the Martha’s Vineyard case the MV residents might have said a week ago “you should take care of the needy in your community.” Then the governor of Florida went and found a bunch of needy in Texas and flew them to Martha’s Vineyard, and their response was to… take care of them? While saying Florida and Texas are being assholes? I’m not seeing the hypocrisy. I don’t think you have to look that hard for evidence rich liberals talking about compassion don’t put their money where their mouth is, but for the present discussion maybe it would be more valuable to ask why exactly you’ve got an ax to grind on immigration. What problems is it causing, exactly? Are immigrants using public resources without paying taxes because they’re undocumented? Are they “taking our jobs”? We’re getting these vague references to “overwhelmed border communities” but overwhelmed by… what? Trump would probably say “crime” or “drugs” but those claims are frequently poorly substantiated. Not to say those communities don’t have crime or drug problems, but when the proposition is “let’s have Border Patrol brutalize asylum seekers more and maybe my kids won’t have drug problems” it’s both shameless and unlikely to achieve the desired effect. But maybe there are a bunch of asylum seekers who have good cases, but they wind up languishing in border towns for years before getting approved. And maybe it would be better if we dedicated some resources to processing their cases, approving them, and setting them up with assistance in different towns across the country instead of languishing in border towns waiting for their cases to be heard. Something tells me that’s not the outcome you’re hoping for, but if not then what? | ||
KwarK
United States42663 Posts
On September 19 2022 08:19 Taelshin wrote: @Wombat The problem is 1/2 the country pushing open borders, Pretending it has no consequences. Then being outraged when they actually have to deal with the consequences. I know it sounds bad, and it is. @acrofales Sorry your analogy was terrible. Not interested in debating legal, illegal with you. I've been readily informed that no human being is illegal. @ChristianS Your LA vs San Diego example does not work, its a good attempt but it is not the situation that is happening here. But you were right about one thing, LA sending it's homeless to SD definitely wouldn't solve LA's homeless problem, They'd have to change the policy's for that. Nobody is pushing open borders. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States42663 Posts
On September 19 2022 08:46 NewSunshine wrote: Ah, the open borders strawman. Good to have you back. Because the only options are either the insanely exclusionary system we currently have, or no system whatsoever. That lays a good groundwork for an honest good faith discussion. Also the idea that the pro-labour working class movement is somehow pro-immigration of unskilled labour, despite the deeply protectionist roots of left wing ideology, while the neo-liberal capitalist class are somehow threatened by the idea of undercutting native labour. It's a fucking weird straw man. Like who the fuck do they think benefits from illegal immigration? | ||
| ||
