Humanitarian crisis at US border (1 Viewer)

[The Commish]

And I didn't answer your question because it's a whole other topic and completely irrelevant to this one. Just like the people who bring up the homeless when defense spending is discussed- one's got nothing to do with the other.

Explain how child poverty and homelessness for our citizens is a "whole other topic and completely irrelevant" to child poverty and homelessness of these kids being dumped on the border.

If ultimately these children will benefit rather than detract from us, then of course it makes sense whatever the initial cost.

This is only true if the system gets fixed. A fact you continue to ignore in order to keep your world view.

 

[timschochet]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

2. No I am arguing that these children will be a net benefit based on the system in place.

 

[Jayrod]

I can't read this topic anymore....it puts tim's neck in too much danger.

 

[Pots]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

Except in this case, you want to remodel an illegally smuggled aircraft carrier from another country and neglect the American aircraft carriers that also need the funding for remodeling.

 

[timschochet]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

Except in this case, you want to remodel an illegally smuggled aircraft carrier from another country and neglect the American aircraft carriers that also need the funding for remodeling.

Think of it as the Red October- its defecting. I want to keep it and make use of it. You want to send it back. I'm Jack Ryan!

 

[timschochet]

I can't read this topic anymore....it puts tim's neck in too much danger.

At least it's not red!

 

[The Commish]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

2. No I am arguing that these children will be a net benefit based on the system in place.

How on earth do you know what the total number will be? Nevermind, doesn't matter....I have no more gas to burn through all the strawmen. You don't believe that taking on my water than we can off load is a bad thing and it doesn't really matter what physics tells you. There's not much else to discuss. Just don't suffocate in the sand....or do for all I care.

 

[timschochet]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

2. No I am arguing that these children will be a net benefit based on the system in place.

How on earth do you know what the total number will be? Nevermind, doesn't matter....I have no more gas to burn through all the strawmen. You don't believe that taking on my water than we can off load is a bad thing and it doesn't really matter what physics tells you. There's not much else to discuss. Just don't suffocate in the sand....or do for all I care.

Gee thanks.

And there's PLENTY to discuss. For instance:

1. Why are these children coming to our borders?

2. How many are going to come?

3. What will be the long term impact of chasing them away, and what will be the long term impact of letting them stay?

None of this has been resolved yet.

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

 

[Greggity]

We need to bounce all these people out of here. If the current administration had any leadership they would make this a priority to secure our borders....

 

[The Commish]

1. Because they're a tiny number compared to the whole. It's as if the navy asked you for the funds to remodel one aircraft carrier, and you replied that it couldn't be done until we had the funds to remodel EVERY aircraft carrier. Based on your logic, no spending can ever be justified.

2. No I am arguing that these children will be a net benefit based on the system in place.

How on earth do you know what the total number will be? Nevermind, doesn't matter....I have no more gas to burn through all the strawmen. You don't believe that taking on my water than we can off load is a bad thing and it doesn't really matter what physics tells you. There's not much else to discuss. Just don't suffocate in the sand....or do for all I care.

Gee thanks.

And there's PLENTY to discuss. For instance:

1. Why are these children coming to our borders?

2. How many are going to come?

3. What will be the long term impact of chasing them away, and what will be the long term impact of letting them stay?

None of this has been resolved yet.

You continue to miss the forest for the trees and you will continue to do so, which is why I made the comment I did. None of this matters until the systemic problems are fixed but you keep beating that drum.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

 

[StrikeS2k]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

 

[Al O'Pecia]

Good call...

It's ended. There will still be some illegal immigration, but not at anything close to previous levels ever again. The Mexican economy is getting stronger, and people have less reason to come. Many of those who have opposed amnesty and/or a path to citizenship in the past have argued, "Let's get the border under control first, THEN we'll deal with it." The border is as under control as it's ever going to be.

 

[The Commish]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

What exactly is the framework you want to work under in this "discussion" tim? Do you want to talk about what SHOULD happen or do you want talk about what WILL happen because of politics or do you want to talk about the system under which these things are happening and why they are happening? What?

I get the sense you want to talk about what will happen in the system with no systemic change. That's really not a "discussion" most here are wanting to have because of how defunct the system is. Most here want to talk about how to fix the obvious systemic problem we have, but then your response is "well, the system is what it is". That's an approach that has lead to a significant contribution to the problem.

 

[timschochet]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

well i live in the real world where money doesnt grow on trees ...i have to work hard for my money and pay more and more taxes to help pay the way for people who legally have no business being here...my family has many war veterans who have served to be in this country and earned the right to call it home....what have these illegals done to serve this country? What blood have they shed ? Who have they buried because they died for America?

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

well i live in the real world where money doesnt grow on trees ...i have to work hard for my money and pay more and more taxes to help pay the way for people who legally have no business being here...my family has many war veterans who have served to be in this country and earned the right to call it home....what have these illegals done to serve this country? What blood have they shed ? Who have they buried because they died for America?

Interesting. So would you be in favor of allowing illegal immigrants who have served in the military to become citizens?

 

[StrikeS2k]

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

Serious question. Do you think your POV is out of step with the majority of people HERE, or the majority of people in the U.S.?

 

[Loan Sharks]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

My opinion is I really like the new avatar of a person whose head is opened up and is filled with beautiful posies instead of a brain, it suits you.

 

[timschochet]

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

Serious question. Do you think your POV is out of step with the majority of people HERE, or the majority of people in the U.S.?

On this issue? Both.

 

[timschochet]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

My opinion is I really like the new avatar of a person whose head is opened up and is filled with beautiful posies instead of a brain, it suits you.

Do you not know where that's from? It's pretty famous.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

Serious question. Do you think your POV is out of step with the majority of people HERE, or the majority of people in the U.S.?

On this issue? Both.

So, if you had to try to quantify, by what percentage would you say you're in the minority? 80-20, 70-30? What do you think?

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

well i live in the real world where money doesnt grow on trees ...i have to work hard for my money and pay more and more taxes to help pay the way for people who legally have no business being here...my family has many war veterans who have served to be in this country and earned the right to call it home....what have these illegals done to serve this country? What blood have they shed ? Who have they buried because they died for America?

Interesting. So would you be in favor of allowing illegal immigrants who have served in the military to become citizens?

if they served in our military absolutely

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

well i live in the real world where money doesnt grow on trees ...i have to work hard for my money and pay more and more taxes to help pay the way for people who legally have no business being here...my family has many war veterans who have served to be in this country and earned the right to call it home....what have these illegals done to serve this country? What blood have they shed ? Who have they buried because they died for America?

Interesting. So would you be in favor of allowing illegal immigrants who have served in the military to become citizens?

if they served in our military absolutely

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

 

[timschochet]

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

Serious question. Do you think your POV is out of step with the majority of people HERE, or the majority of people in the U.S.?

On this issue? Both.

So, if you had to try to quantify, by what percentage would you say you're in the minority? 80-20, 70-30? What do you think?

Oh well less than 20%. I'm in favor of a return to pre-1920s immigration policies. I doubt even most Latino Americans would go along with that one. It's basically me, the editors at Reason magazine, and some of the older contributors to the Cato Institute. Probably around 1% to be honest. But even that's 3 million people. Could I come up with 3 million people who agree with me on this? I doubt it.

 

[RCon]

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

"Mostly"? How many illegals have served in the military versus the number who have attended college?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

Wat? So you're saying the dream act was originally for military types but they added the college part later? Because I don't know how else to interpret an "expansion" of the act to include college. Is that what you're suggesting?

 

[timschochet]

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

Wat? So you're saying the dream act was originally for military types but they added the college part later? Because I don't know how else to interpret an "expansion" of the act to include college. Is that what you're suggesting?

The original idea was only for military yes. I think by the time they had reached the actual proposal stage it included the college part. But when I read articles about it several years back it was only on the military part; that's my recollection.

When objections came up a few years back I posted here that the Dream Act should be restricted to military, because I thought that opponents would have a more difficult time arguing against that idea.

 

[Mark Davis]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation?

Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.

This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

Under what set of circumstances are they not a net drain? We have plenty of numbers out there on costs, from what President Obama is asking for a temporary fix, to the average cost of education, to paying for their healthcare needs, to pretty much caring for the kids into their adulthood. Tell me when we get to the positive cash flows there.

Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the kids too. I feel sorry for kids that are born into horrible situations in North Korea, Somalia,Afghanistan, etc. There are millions of political and economic refugees around the world who have just as compelling of a case. Why are we treating these children differently because they are being taken by criminal organizations to our border? If the morally right thing is to take them all in, why not tell China we will accept any North Koreans that come across? Where does it stop? Why just Central America, what about the kids born in the Mexican towns controlled by the drug cartels? Should they come as well?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

Wat? So you're saying the dream act was originally for military types but they added the college part later? Because I don't know how else to interpret an "expansion" of the act to include college. Is that what you're suggesting?

The original idea was only for military yes. I think by the time they had reached the actual proposal stage it included the college part. But when I read articles about it several years back it was only on the military part; that's my recollection.

When objections came up a few years back I posted here that the Dream Act should be restricted to military, because I thought that opponents would have a more difficult time arguing against that idea.

Prove the bolded. I've been following the attempts to pass the Dream Act for a decade or more and this is the first I've heard of this. Please, for once, provide documentation that proves your assertion.

 

[The Commish]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

You answer my questions with this question?

 

[avoiding injuries]

Why is it politically incorrect to want a border fence? I haven't heard a good argument against it, and before I got older, I always assumed there was one in place. I remember crossing the border with my family from CA to Mexico for the day in the mid 80's and the fences and security are vivid memories.

Put me in the camp to be in favor of the national guard securing the border right away and a fence to be constructed. That post that Al O'pecia posted from 2012 eliminates most of Tim's credibility on this subject. No offense, Tim.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Why is it politically incorrect to want a border fence? I haven't heard a good argument against it, and before I got older, I always assumed there was one in place. I remember crossing the border with my family from CA to Mexico for the day in the mid 80's and the fences and security are vivid memories.

Put me in the camp to be in favor of the national guard securing the border right away and a fence to be constructed. That post that Al O'pecia posted from 2012 eliminates most of Tim's credibility on this subject. No offense, Tim.

It just seems like a really long damn fence to me. I think long stretches of fencing with intermittent but completely saturated guards on the border should do the trick. But people have been begging for this for a long time, GOP presidents included.

 

[timschochet]

Good to know. That's what the Dream Act was mostly about, BTW. (Though it was also expanded to include illegals who attended college. FWIW, I was opposed to that expansion.)

Wat? So you're saying the dream act was originally for military types but they added the college part later? Because I don't know how else to interpret an "expansion" of the act to include college. Is that what you're suggesting?

The original idea was only for military yes. I think by the time they had reached the actual proposal stage it included the college part. But when I read articles about it several years back it was only on the military part; that's my recollection. When objections came up a few years back I posted here that the Dream Act should be restricted to military, because I thought that opponents would have a more difficult time arguing against that idea.

Prove the bolded. I've been following the attempts to pass the Dream Act for a decade or more and this is the first I've heard of this. Please, for once, provide documentation that proves your assertion.

No. You're always challenging me on minor crap like this. That's how I remember hearing about the Dream Act. Obviously it is not now limited to military, so I don't see what possible difference it makes. I was glad to know that Buated Knuckles would be in favor of it if it HAD been limited to the military.

 

[timschochet]

That post that Al O'pecia posted from 2012 eliminates most of Tim's credibility on this subject. No offense, Tim.

None taken, but I don't know what you're referring to.

 

[timschochet]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

You answer my questions with this question?

I'm sorry I thought I answered your questions already. I thought you wanted to make your own point about changing the system.

 

[timschochet]

I think it would also be helpful if we discussed the current situation of the children as an emergency crisis, and not in terms of an overall discussion of illegal immigration.

How would it be helpful? Most of the people engaged in this thread think they should be sent home. What else is there to discuss?

Some of them are being sent home; some are not. The point is that, as usual when we discuss/argue this topic, what YOU want to have happen rarely ever does. So why not deal with the reality of the situation? Frankly, and I know this will come as a shock to some of you, I'm not even sure the correct move is simply to take these children in. I'd like to think it is, but I'm concerned about the repercussions. This is not like the ordinary flow of illegals which is tied to the economic demands of this country. This is a different thing altogether.

Sorry Tim. I'm not abandoning my morals and what I think is right for the sake of political theater, like you and Obama. I'm not a politician. The sad thing is that you think it's ok for politicians to do things that aren't right. It's just "the game" to you. But it's destroying this country.

I don't speak for anyone but myself, as my sig reads. I am certainly not going to defend Obama. He doesn't represent me on this issue.This is no game to me. I accept when you state that your views on this are based on your moral convictions. So are mine.

I have friends who i have helped out by either lending them money or letting them stay at my house ,as long as they helped pay the bills, and almost every time i got screwed because i ended up paying everything and not getting paid back. I would love to be able to let all my friends in need stay at my house for free while i paid the bills ,or give them all my savings, but after awhile i would be broke and then it would be me who had no place to live....do you see where im going with this?

Of course I see where you're going. Your logic is unassailable- so long as one agrees with your initial premise, which is that these children will be a net drain on our system. I don't share that premise.

Under what set of circumstances are they not a net drain? We have plenty of numbers out there on costs, from what President Obama is asking for a temporary fix, to the average cost of education, to paying for their healthcare needs, to pretty much caring for the kids into their adulthood. Tell me when we get to the positive cash flows there. Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the kids too. I feel sorry for kids that are born into horrible situations in North Korea, Somalia,Afghanistan, etc. There are millions of political and economic refugees around the world who have just as compelling of a case. Why are we treating these children differently because they are being taken by criminal organizations to our border? If the morally right thing is to take them all in, why not tell China we will accept any North Koreans that come across? Where does it stop? Why just Central America, what about the kids born in the Mexican towns controlled by the drug cartels? Should they come as well?

I thought I already answered this. Refugee children will grow up to be adults. As adults they are likely to be the best of Americans. That's where their contribution comes in. Of course if one child grows up to be an Einstein it pays for every immigrant in our history, but we don't need that. Hard working patriotic Americans is more than enough, IMO. Well worth the investment. In addition, taking them in would send a message to the rest of the world: we are still different here. We are the greatest nation in the history of the world because we are the only one that has a history of seeking out immigrants and refugees. We want them; we don't turn them away. Again, the impact of such a message to the world, the dramatic effect it would have in renewing our prestige as the greatest nation, is well worth the minor cost of taking in these children.

Finally, as to your question where does it stop? If I had my way it wouldn't. But the reality is one case at a time.

Those of my religion were turned away from this country when they fled mass murder. They came in desperate creaky boats which were not allowed to land on our shores. Sometimes the boats sank, killing everyone aboard. Other times the boats were sent back by American officials to Europe, where the passengers were sent to the death camps. Maybe we can make up for a little of that horror now.

 

[The Commish]

OK Commish, please tell me what you would do (1) with this immediate problem of these children and (2) what you would do, long term, to fix the system. I know what Sarnoff and Strike would do. Do you agree with them? Or do you have another solution in mind?

I'm done, at least for the moment, expressing my own POV. I acknowledge that it is radical and certainly out of step with the majority of people here. But I would like to hear other opinions.

You answer my questions with this question?

I'm sorry I thought I answered your questions already. I thought you wanted to make your own point about changing the system.

If you did, I still have no clue what context you want to "discuss" this topic in. You hop all over the place picking and choosing different criteria for different situations. In one post you're talking about "ideal" in another you're criticizing for not being pragmatic. It's quite the site.

 

[Christo]

So how many are bunking with tim now?

 

[Mark Davis]

Under what set of circumstances are they not a net drain? We have plenty of numbers out there on costs, from what President Obama is asking for a temporary fix, to the average cost of education, to paying for their healthcare needs, to pretty much caring for the kids into their adulthood. Tell me when we get to the positive cash flows there. Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the kids too. I feel sorry for kids that are born into horrible situations in North Korea, Somalia,Afghanistan, etc. There are millions of political and economic refugees around the world who have just as compelling of a case. Why are we treating these children differently because they are being taken by criminal organizations to our border? If the morally right thing is to take them all in, why not tell China we will accept any North Koreans that come across? Where does it stop? Why just Central America, what about the kids born in the Mexican towns controlled by the drug cartels? Should they come as well?

I thought I already answered this. Refugee children will grow up to be adults. As adults they are likely to be the best of Americans. That's where their contribution comes in. Of course if one child grows up to be an Einstein it pays for every immigrant in our history, but we don't need that. Hard working patriotic Americans is more than enough, IMO. Well worth the investment.In addition, taking them in would send a message to the rest of the world: we are still different here. We are the greatest nation in the history of the world because we are the only one that has a history of seeking out immigrants and refugees. We want them; we don't turn them away. Again, the impact of such a message to the world, the dramatic effect it would have in renewing our prestige as the greatest nation, is well worth the minor cost of taking in these children.

Finally, as to your question where does it stop? If I had my way it wouldn't. But the reality is one case at a time.

Those of my religion were turned away from this country when they fled mass murder. They came in desperate creaky boats which were not allowed to land on our shores. Sometimes the boats sank, killing everyone aboard. Other times the boats were sent back by American officials to Europe, where the passengers were sent to the death camps. Maybe we can make up for a little of that horror now.

What statistical data are you using to conclude that they are likely to be the best of Americans or that subset of people are more likely than others to have an Einstein type innovator? If there are studies concluding this and fiscal data showing it that is one thing. Or even statistical data showing IQ of said group to correlate it to that likelihood. To merely state it as fact as you have done here is misleading at worst, and naive at best.

From an economic side, per capita this population would cost a great deal more at a minimum until adulthood in the areas I outlined above. Those are economic facts. You and I can debate whether they are a net positive or negative beyond that point. There will be some people in the subset who become productive tax paying members of society and there will also be criminals who will cost us even more in terms of dollars and lives. Barring us having evidence to the contrary, why wouldn't we just assume that is a wash as opposed to any other subset of people? We have a finite amount of resources, who is to say the dollars we spend for them doesn't take away from someone at a poor inner city or rural school who fails to develop into the innovator they would have been otherwise? The fact is, we simply don't know. In an absence of that knowledge, why would we assume a certain subset is going to consist of an abnormal group of producers and high achievers?

Let me address your point of WWII events and America making things up in this way. If I misunderstood the comment, please correct me. I don't see America as needing to make up for things today. America has made plenty of mistakes in history, but in the whole I'd argue we've been a "net positive" to the world as a country. Particularly when it comes to that era in history. My dad is a WWII vet. He is 92 today and was one of only two of his initial group of twelve to survive the war. His entire generation gave everything they had in that struggle to end that conflict and the suffering brought by some of it's combatants. The ones that didn't pay with their lives paid with it in ways I hope we never know. My dad is a nice guy but he's tough. I've never seen the man cry. He can't bring himself to talk about many of the things he saw and the things he had to do in that war. If I ask specific questions, he will answer. It's clear though he doesn't like to discuss it and while I've always been interested it's not worth it for him to have to think of it. His generation paid an incredible price. Don't get me wrong, I don't discount the atrocities done to others during that war and I'm sure we can find instances of mistakes by America. But when we talk of that time in history, America to me has paid that bill in full.

 

[Mark Davis]

So how many are bunking with tim now?

I'm easy to hook with the bait.

 

[The Commish]

So how many are bunking with tim now?

I'm easy to hook with the bait.

Don't think he's talking about Tim's fishing. I think he's talking about Tim pounding his chest that this country should let them all in then flat out declining taking any of them in himself.

 

[timschochet]

So how many are bunking with tim now?

I'm easy to hook with the bait.

I wasn't fishing Mark.

I can't offer you statistics. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has ever studied what the children of refugees turn into. Certainly in this case, when they are no different from orphans, it's a unique situation. All I can do is offer my opinion based on immigrant history.

You should be proud of your father. What he and the rest of his generation did is magnificent. I can be critical of our policy toward refugees back then (and I am) without impugning what people like your dad did. My apologies if that came out wrong. Greatest respect.

 

[timschochet]

So how many are bunking with tim now?

I'm easy to hook with the bait.

Don't think he's talking about Tim's fishing. I think he's talking about Tim pounding his chest that this country should let them all in then flat out declining taking any of them in himself.

It's not a matter of "flat out declining". If I could afford it I would. I have contributed hundreds of dollars to groups that help out illegal immigrants, and I will continue to do so. I am in favor of tax money going toward taking care of these children, and I am willing to pay more taxes to do so. So disagree with me all you want, but please don't imply that I'm a hypocrite.