Humanitarian crisis at US border (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

Just looked at my likes again. I have received 6 likes from this thread. The most recent was just now, but I had 5 this morning, well before Commish posted, so I don't know where he got 2 from.

Who gives a ####? I have to assume you're the reason there isn't a dislike button on here because the interwebs would crash if there was.

 

[matttyl]

Just looked at my likes again. I have received 6 likes from this thread. The most recent was just now, but I had 5 this morning, well before Commish posted, so I don't know where he got 2 from.

Because I was looking at the number of posts as I said in my comment.

I wrote, "I'm getting an awful lot of likes for my posts."

And he said "You have two "liked" posts in this thread".

 

[timschochet]

Just looked at my likes again. I have received 6 likes from this thread. The most recent was just now, but I had 5 this morning, well before Commish posted, so I don't know where he got 2 from.

Because I was looking at the number of posts as I said in my comment.

I wrote, "I'm getting an awful lot of likes for my posts."

And he said "You have two "liked" posts in this thread".

It's great to be popular!

 

[Sarnoff]

Here's another one of those threads where Tim is out of his mind level of off base / ignorant.... But will post double the next person.... Convinced that words > facts.

The fact that he thinks terrorists infiltrating thru a porous Mexican border is BS just shows how absolutely positively definitively CLUELESS the guy is.

Seriously dude... Give it up.

An error occurredYou have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 

[Kal El]

So what to do about the children?

 

[Stinger Ray]

Tim, If you want more likes post this.....

I'm done posting in this thread...I'm wrong as usual.

 

[matttyl]

So what to do about the children?

If you let them in and give them food and shelter, it will only lead to more and more coming. This will, no doubt lead to older children, young adults, and then older adults doing the same. Are you going to turn a young child away with their mother and a guy who claims to be the father with them? This will then become a likely gateway for criminals and terrorists to get into the country.

There is no easy answer here.

 

[Kal El]

So what to do about the children?

If you let them in and give them food and shelter, it will only lead to more and more coming. This will, no doubt lead to older children, young adults, and then older adults doing the same. Are you going to turn a young child away with their mother and a guy who claims to be the father with them? This will then become a likely gateway for criminals and terrorists to get into the country.There is no easy answer here.

Then the problems lies with what's driving them to leave, I guess. But trying to fix that is going to be nearly impossible.

 

[StrikeS2k]

So what to do about the children?

If you let them in and give them food and shelter, it will only lead to more and more coming. This will, no doubt lead to older children, young adults, and then older adults doing the same. Are you going to turn a young child away with their mother and a guy who claims to be the father with them? This will then become a likely gateway for criminals and terrorists to get into the country.There is no easy answer here.

There actually is......

 

[[icon]]

What about the starving children around the world?

Shoot the lock off your own wallet there, ghandi.

 

[[icon]]

I'm getting an awful lot of "likes" for my posts,

You have two "liked" posts in this thread

In his defense, I can see how he'd think that's a lot of likes for his posts

SIG.

 

[Kal El]

So what to do about the children?

If you let them in and give them food and shelter, it will only lead to more and more coming. This will, no doubt lead to older children, young adults, and then older adults doing the same. Are you going to turn a young child away with their mother and a guy who claims to be the father with them? This will then become a likely gateway for criminals and terrorists to get into the country.There is no easy answer here.

There actually is......

How? Sending them back is pretty much sentencing them to a shorter life, and opening up the floodgates would destroy the system.

 

[timschochet]

What about the starving children around the world?

Shoot the lock off your own wallet there, ghandi.

The h comes after the d, Einstien.

 

[timschochet]

So what to do about the children?

If you let them in and give them food and shelter, it will only lead to more and more coming. This will, no doubt lead to older children, young adults, and then older adults doing the same. Are you going to turn a young child away with their mother and a guy who claims to be the father with them? This will then become a likely gateway for criminals and terrorists to get into the country.There is no easy answer here.

There actually is......

How? Sending them back is pretty much sentencing them to a shorter life, and opening up the floodgates would destroy the system.

Feeding a few hundred starving children, or even a few thousand, is not going to "open up the floodgates." In fact, how we treat illegal immigrants, good or bad, has very little impact on the level of illegal immigration to this country.

The key to illegal immigration is economic opportunity. If people are happy with the economic conditions they are living in, they won't risk all to come here. On the other hand, if they are starving, they will come here no matter what walls you put up, no matter how many restrictions you try to enforce. That's what the Strikes and Icons of the world don't seem to understand and never will. There are only two ways to decrease the number of illegal immigrants:

1. If economic conditions in this country become terrible, people won't want to come. I don't think anyone would prefer this "solution", however.

2. Increase free trade. Lower tariffs even more than they are. Stop subsidizing our producers, and allow trade and open immigration to flourish. If you do this, you will, over time, dramatically improve the economic conditions of both the United States and our southern neighbors. And after a while you'll stop noticing any burdensome aspects of immigration because the positives will be so strong they will be obvious to everyone. (And in fact there will be less immigrants in general because the economies of Latin America will be so much better as a result.)

 

[[icon]]

UPDATE:

timschochet 42

Kal El 10

[icon] 8

matttyl 8

The Commish 7

 

[timschochet]

UPDATE:

timschochet 42

Kal El 10

[icon] 8

matttyl 8

The Commish 7

Damn proud of those numbers. And now it's 43. You know who else is associated with 43? Troy Polamalu, that's who!

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

Here's another one of those threads where Tim is out of his mind level of off base / ignorant.... But will post double the next person.... Convinced that words > facts.

The fact that he thinks terrorists infiltrating thru a porous Mexican border is BS just shows how absolutely positively definitively CLUELESS the guy is.

Seriously dude... Give it up.

An error occurredYou have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 

[Gawain]

timschochet, on 19 Jun 2014 - 4:01 PM, said:1. If economic conditions in this country become terrible, people won't want to come. I don't think anyone would prefer this "solution", however.

2. Increase free trade. Lower tariffs even more than they are. Stop subsidizing our producers, and allow trade and open immigration to flourish. If you do this, you will, over time, dramatically improve the economic conditions of both the United States and our southern neighbors. And after a while you'll stop noticing any burdensome aspects of immigration because the positives will be so strong they will be obvious to everyone. (And in fact there will be less immigrants in general because the economies of Latin America will be so much better as a result.)

How long has NAFTA been in effect? That must be why we don't see any illegals from Mexico any more.

 

[The Commish]

damn....I made someone's sig WOOT!

 

[Sarnoff]

Maybe indentured servitude is the answer. We can feed and educate them. And have companies pay for it. Then we can compete directly with china

I don't know if you meant this as shtick or not, but I'm coming around to this idea.

Let's round these people up, and ship them off to a large reservation in the desert. Nevada maybe? Big fenced in compound, a few hundred miles to a side. Put them all in there. Let the big corporations... Nike, McDonalds, the Gap, etc., bid on their labor. They can manufacture cheap products for the domestic marketplace at a rate that protects our national economic security from influence by outside countries.

Meanwhile, they get to live in a place without fear from drug cartels or mass murder. However, they will never be US citizens (except possibly by military service). They make stuff for us, they get to live in peace with the reservation, and we don't dilute the homeland.

Win-win-win.

 

[timschochet]

timschochet, on 19 Jun 2014 - 4:01 PM, said:1. If economic conditions in this country become terrible, people won't want to come. I don't think anyone would prefer this "solution", however.

2. Increase free trade. Lower tariffs even more than they are. Stop subsidizing our producers, and allow trade and open immigration to flourish. If you do this, you will, over time, dramatically improve the economic conditions of both the United States and our southern neighbors. And after a while you'll stop noticing any burdensome aspects of immigration because the positives will be so strong they will be obvious to everyone. (And in fact there will be less immigrants in general because the economies of Latin America will be so much better as a result.)

How long has NAFTA been in effect? That must be why we don't see any illegals from Mexico any more.

NAFTA has tons of exceptions to free trade. Overall it's been good, not nearly good enough.

 

[Kal El]

timschochet, on 19 Jun 2014 - 4:01 PM, said:

1. If economic conditions in this country become terrible, people won't want to come. I don't think anyone would prefer this "solution", however.

2. Increase free trade. Lower tariffs even more than they are. Stop subsidizing our producers, and allow trade and open immigration to flourish. If you do this, you will, over time, dramatically improve the economic conditions of both the United States and our southern neighbors. And after a while you'll stop noticing any burdensome aspects of immigration because the positives will be so strong they will be obvious to everyone. (And in fact there will be less immigrants in general because the economies of Latin America will be so much better as a result.)

How long has NAFTA been in effect? That must be why we don't see any illegals from Mexico any more.

NAFTA has tons of exceptions to free trade. Overall it's been good, not nearly good enough.

I'm pretty sure NAFTA is why a lot of people are leaving those countries to come here.

 

[quickhands]

What's the problem with building a big wall?

Seems like a much cheaper way than paying a ton of police to patrol everywhere. Probably more effective too.

Because that's not what we're about. And because it would seriously impact our trade and relations with Mexico and Latin America in general. And because it would be viewed, correctly, as racist (since there is no talk of a wall on our northern border.)

To keep all of those Canadian orphans from spilling across the border?

Christo, it is my firm belief that if we faced a similar crisis on our Canadian border, nobody would be talking about a wall. The common response would be "OMG, how can we help those poor children? Tell me where I can send money to help."

Tim its my firm belief that if they were coming from france we would be accepting.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

What's the problem with building a big wall?

Seems like a much cheaper way than paying a ton of police to patrol everywhere. Probably more effective too.

Because that's not what we're about. And because it would seriously impact our trade and relations with Mexico and Latin America in general. And because it would be viewed, correctly, as racist (since there is no talk of a wall on our northern border.)

To keep all of those Canadian orphans from spilling across the border?

Christo, it is my firm belief that if we faced a similar crisis on our Canadian border, nobody would be talking about a wall. The common response would be "OMG, how can we help those poor children? Tell me where I can send money to help."

Tim its my firm belief that if they were coming from france we would be accepting.

What if they were just 18-22 year old girls from Sweden, how would we react then?

 

[Insein]

just understand no one is denying them the right from coming here legally. Walk to the border office and fill out some forms

Wow. And you people are seriously complaining that Tim doesn't live in reality?

Reality is, those are the rules in place. And if they're not followed, it shouldn't be a surprise that they're not allowed to stay.

If it were as simple as "filling out some forms" you dont think there would be a line around the block for that? Its a bit more complicated now then it was in 1900.

 

[Rove!]

Canadian border presents a risk too...

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/03/18/Terror-suspect-arrested-near-Canadian-border/9161395153576/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/trail/etc/canada.html

 

[timschochet]

The border patrol union has some classy membership:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/14/border-patrol-mocks_n_5495316.html

The union representing U.S. Border Patrol agents appeared to mock immigrant children in a tweet on Saturday morning.

New annual job rating areas: Babysitting, Diaper changing, Burrito Wrapping, Cleaning Cells, Law Enforcement, What's that? #low morale

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I don't disagree with you about the problems involved Ka El, but what is to be done? Are we really going to take Icon's advice and not feed these children and send them packing? Is that who we are? I'd be ashamed if our government did that, wouldn't you?

You guys keep raising other questions:

What to do about illegal immigration?

Shouldn't we build a fence?

What about the starving and malnourished children already here?

What about the starving children around the world?

If we feed these children, what do we do with them afterwards?

These are all good questions, and I've tried to answer them. But none of them are pertinent to the IMMEDIATE issue: there are starving children on our border, begging us to feed and shelter them. Can we turn them away? Most of you here are Christians. Can you turn them away?

I can. I can turn them away. Give the job to me since you don't have the stomach to face reality and to do what needs to be done. Somebody has to cull the herds. At some point the lifeboat is full and you cannot take on another soul without sinking the boat and dooming everyone inside. Compassion un-tempered by sense is lunacy. You are a lunatic. You can congratulate yourself on your high minded compassion which of course is paid for by the labor of others, but in the end all you do is forestall problems until they become far worse.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

What's the problem with building a big wall?

Seems like a much cheaper way than paying a ton of police to patrol everywhere. Probably more effective too.

Because that's not what we're about. And because it would seriously impact our trade and relations with Mexico and Latin America in general. And because it would be viewed, correctly, as racist (since there is no talk of a wall on our northern border.)

And there goes the last bit of credibility the word "racist" had.

If you put a wall on our southern border, and not on our northern border, how can anyone NOT regard that as racially motivated?

To me, and probably everyone else here, it's not a race issue. It's an issue of where is the problem the worst? Pretty much any country with an issue of people jumping borders into it are going to step up patrols along said border. In our case, we share land boundaries with a grand total of two other nations. A nation with 6 others surrounding it, yet having trouble with only one, is going to step up patrols near that nation.

Ka El, I don't believe you are a racist. And I don't believe that most people in this forum, and most of those who disagree with me on this issue, are racist. I already acknowledged that earlier in the thread. You guys have your reasons for being on the opposite side of this issue from me; I disagree with your reasons, but I respect them and they are not illegitimate.

But that being said, this whole issue is imbued with racism, and I don't think you can deny that racism informs a lot of the people who take a strong stance for putting up walls on our southern border. Certainly I can guarantee you that a strong majority of Latinos in this country see it this way.

I've noticed repeatedly over the years your offensive habit of speaking for minority groups as if they cannot speak for themselves and as if they are homogeneous. This is one of the most racist things I have witnessed in years. The presumption of you that you should speak so. Of course you only do it to falsely try to gather weight for your failed arguments and you give the habit no thought, but why should you when you are so clearly blinded by your condescending racism.

Go ahead, continue to treat the other races as children in need of the help of their benevolent father.

 

[pizzatyme]

We can't become the orphanage for Central and

South America.

oh yes we can. And we should.

And put them to work?

Eventually. After they've been raised and educated.

Would you mind coming back to reality to have this discussion?

I am deadly serious. Any child that manages to get here, I don't care from where, we have a MORAL DUTY to take them in, adopt them, educate them. We have may very well have enough private charities to handle this (the Catholic Church is especially good when it

comes to Latinos) but if we don't, then the taxpayer should pay for it.

Tim, you are incredibly wrong here IMO. First you say a wall is racially motivated. I disagree. I think of the US economy as a fragile entity and then consider it under attack by illegal aliens flooding our borders, I'd put a wall wherever this was occurring. It just happens to come from the South.

And to say we should take in all refugees regardless of where they come from? So if we are suddenly flooded with tens of millions from India, Africa, and China we should just take them in, feed them, and educate them?

We aren't equipped to handle our own poor today let alone millions of illegals.

Please step back to reality.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I don't disagree with you about the problems involved Ka El, but what is to be done? Are we really going to take Icon's advice and not feed these children and send them packing? Is that who we are? I'd be ashamed if our government did that, wouldn't you?

You guys keep raising other questions:

What to do about illegal immigration?

Shouldn't we build a fence?

What about the starving and malnourished children already here?

What about the starving children around the world?

If we feed these children, what do we do with them afterwards?

These are all good questions, and I've tried to answer them. But none of them are pertinent to the IMMEDIATE issue: there are starving children on our border, begging us to feed and shelter them. Can we turn them away? Most of you here are Christians. Can you turn them away?

I can. I can turn them away. Give the job to me since you don't have the stomach to face reality and to do what needs to be done. Somebody has to cull the herds. At some point the lifeboat is full and you cannot take on another soul without sinking the boat and dooming everyone inside. Compassion un-tempered by sense is lunacy. You are a lunatic. You can congratulate yourself on your high minded compassion which of course is paid for by the labor of others, but in the end all you do is forestall problems until they become far worse.

I wonder what Tim`s cut off point is ? When would Tim say enough is enough? Does he even have one? Is it when the country has been so saturated they are camped out on his lawn?

 

[Norman Paperman]

So what to do about the children?

Teach the children well.

 

[Kal El]

So what to do about the children?

Teach the children well.

Ok, good start. Now what about seeing to it that they are at least provided for until they are no longer in our care?

 

[Norman Paperman]

So what to do about the children?

Teach the children well.

Ok, good start. Now what about seeing to it that they are at least provided for until they are no longer in our care?

Feed them on your dreams, the one they fix, the one you'll know by.

 

[pizzatyme]

So what to do about the children?

Teach the children well.

Ok, good start. Now what about seeing to it that they are at least provided for until they are no longer in our care?

Feed them on your dreams, the one they fix, the one you'll know by.

Don't you ever ask them whyIf they told you, you would cry

So just look at them and sigh

And know they love you.

 

[The Commish]

I don't think there are MILLIONS of homeless and malnourished children in this country.

You can't be serious

1.7 million is not "millions". It's still way too many though. And I shouldn't have written that about malnourished.But by repeating only this sentence you took me out of context. The important point, which I made directly after, is that there shouldn't be any of either.

Why did you choose to only user 1.7 million as your number when your comment was about both homeless and malnourished? I'm taking YOU out of context?

I commented on this sentence specifically because your foundation is off....as is evidence of this statement. The premise that follows matters in the context of how dire our child homelessness/malnutrition is in this country. The point being, if we are indeed the greatest country in the world, then why are we failing our children so blatantly and what makes ANYONE think we can handle illegal immigrants in addition to the kids we are already showing we can't handle. It makes zero sense.

None of that is to say what we "should" or "shouldn't" be doing. It's addressing what we " can" and "can't" do. At some point you need to hop down out of your ivory tower and realize the realities we are facing as a country and begin to address things from a position of feasibility vs ideology.

We can feed and shelter all of the children in this country, and we can feed and shelter all of the children on our border. It is NOT a question of "can't." If we're not doing it, then we're choosing not to do it. And I can't find any justification for that, frankly.

Have you ever researched why we aren't doing more in this country for our own?

Was this ever answered? I'm guessing no

 

[jamny]

What started this mess? Was it a new law or a decision to ignore an existing one?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Nearly everything you have said in this thread indicates that you are fine with Mexico taking this dump all over us, so it's natural to assume that you'd love to lay down and let them do it all over your face and chest.

I'm confused. In this analogy, children = feces, yes?

Not quite.

 

[jonessed]

What started this mess? Was it a new law or a decision to ignore an existing one?

No new laws.

 

[Jayrod]

Tim is California-style liberalism at its finest. Take care of everyone with a hand out, the consequences be damned. The main problem with that is that it starts with children and then the floodgates open and it becomes aid to anyone willing to shout loud enough....and then you are broke.

Ever hear of the story about the goose that laid the golden egg? That is the US. Once you gut the goose, no more golden eggs and everyone suffers. EVERYONE. We HAVE to keep things under control and despite the OMG, think of the children!!!! reasons, there must be something done about border security or eventually Canada is going to be having these same discussions.

 

[CBusAlex]

Nearly everything you have said in this thread indicates that you are fine with Mexico taking this dump all over us, so it's natural to assume that you'd love to lay down and let them do it all over your face and chest.

I'm confused. In this analogy, children = feces, yes?

Not quite.

Only the brown children?

 

[Kal El]

So what to do about the children?

Teach the children well.

Ok, good start. Now what about seeing to it that they are at least provided for until they are no longer in our care?

Feed them on your dreams, the one they fix, the one you'll know by.

Thought I recognized the lyric, only too late.

 

[D_House]

Although a certain poster has turned this thread into something else, the OP is about a specific problem with respect to an increase in unaccompanied children from violence-torn areas showing up at the Southern border...

I think it's fair to ask what role Mexico should play in addressing this situation, although they are struggling in dealing with their own drug trade violence.

But I don't see why anyone would have a problem with the US helping these kids out until it's safe for them to return home. Seems like a refugee type situation. Although admittedly I've not been keeping up with current events much lately so I don't know how accurate the article in the OP is regarding the issue.

 

[timschochet]

The lifeboat is nowhere near full, guys. Plenty of seats left.

 

[timschochet]

I don't disagree with you about the problems involved Ka El, but what is to be done? Are we really going to take Icon's advice and not feed these children and send them packing? Is that who we are? I'd be ashamed if our government did that, wouldn't you?

You guys keep raising other questions:

What to do about illegal immigration?

Shouldn't we build a fence?

What about the starving and malnourished children already here?

What about the starving children around the world?

If we feed these children, what do we do with them afterwards?

These are all good questions, and I've tried to answer them. But none of them are pertinent to the IMMEDIATE issue: there are starving children on our border, begging us to feed and shelter them. Can we turn them away? Most of you here are Christians. Can you turn them away?

I can. I can turn them away. Give the job to me since you don't have the stomach to face reality and to do what needs to be done. Somebody has to cull the herds. At some point the lifeboat is full and you cannot take on another soul without sinking the boat and dooming everyone inside. Compassion un-tempered by sense is lunacy. You are a lunatic. You can congratulate yourself on your high minded compassion which of course is paid for by the labor of others, but in the end all you do is forestall problems until they become far worse.

I wonder what Tim`s cut off point is ? When would Tim say enough is enough? Does he even have one? Is it when the country has been so saturated they are camped out on his lawn?

We won't be close to this in my lifetime, or that of my great grandchildren, so it's a moot point.

 

[The Commish]

The lifeboat is nowhere near full, guys. Plenty of seats left.

So it's a conscious choice by the US to sit and watch while our own are drowning? I'll ask a third time....have you researched why our own are homeless and severely malnourished?

 

[jonessed]

The lifeboat is nowhere near full, guys. Plenty of seats left.

So when does your first adoption go through?

 

[timschochet]

Tim is California-style liberalism at its finest. Take care of everyone with a hand out, the consequences be damned. The main problem with that is that it starts with children and then the floodgates open and it becomes aid to anyone willing to shout loud enough....and then you are broke.

Ever hear of the story about the goose that laid the golden egg? That is the US. Once you gut the goose, no more golden eggs and everyone suffers. EVERYONE. We HAVE to keep things under control and despite the OMG, think of the children!!!! reasons, there must be something done about border security or eventually Canada is going to be having these same discussions.

Actually my beliefs about immigration stem from libertarianism, not liberalism. It was one of the essential elements that attracted me to the libertarian movement back in the day: free trade and open immigration. It remains, for me, a core ideal. As for feeding and taking care of hungry children who arrive at our doorstep, since when did that become a liberal idea? I thought it was simply a humane response.

 

[timschochet]

The lifeboat is nowhere near full, guys. Plenty of seats left.

So it's a conscious choice by the US to sit and watch while our own are drowning? I'll ask a third time....have you researched why our own are homeless and severely malnourished?

There are lots of reasons why we have homeless. Actually I have read a bit on this subject. But rather than guess at your point, why don't you just spell it out? I'll be happy to respond.

 

[timschochet]

The lifeboat is nowhere near full, guys. Plenty of seats left.

So when does your first adoption go through?

My house is full. The nation is not.