Respectful discussion and debate with Trump supporters requested: Topic # 1 Undocumented immigration (1 Viewer)

[Dr Oadi]

Im guessing nobody responded to this drivel because this guys on most peoples ignore list?  Damn, need to update mine.

What a well thought out original rebuttal. You sir madam or non cis gendered person have changed my views on this topic 180°.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Again I ask: in terms of benefit to the rest of us, what's the difference?

We uphold the rule of law, we allow ourselves to extend our welcome to a wider audience, unless one presumes there is no limit to the immigration we can absorb.

And perhaps rather than playing your game I should ask, and this is the crux, what is the benefit gained through the illegality.

 

[timschochet]

DW began with the premise that legal immigrants are a benefit to society, but then stated that he saw no benefit to undocumented immigrants. 

I fail to see any difference in terms of benefits. Actually undocumented immigrants cost us less as they are less likely to take full use of social services. They are also, statistically, less likely to commit felonies. By any real measure, they are among the least costly, most contributing elements of our society. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Perhaps I misunderstood.  It appeared to me that you asked if there was reason to believe Steve Jobs could not have made his advances if his family had not immigrated.  Without Steve Woczniak Apple is never formed.  That seemed relevant.   It's early and Mardi Gras.  I'm sure I misread. 

No, actually I was responding to an irrelevant hypothetical offered as a distraction.  After my response I then bit some on the hypothetical and perhaps I should not have.  we are now discussing the irrelevancy of whether if circumstances were hypothetically otherwise than they are would history have hypothetically, or could it have hypothetically come out the same.

 

[Henry Ford]

In a country founded on the rule of law it means everything. Also society and its resources and laws need time to adjust and to absorb immigrants.  Excessive immigration from one region can easily lead to societal problems.  many countries have been split into civil war when the subcultures are not  integrated into the main culture.  this happens when there is a critical mass of folks in an area to maintain language, religion, and culture.

You believe in the poetry on the Statue of Liberty.  I believe in the Motto E Pluribus Unum. 

Everything you want you can have without the illegal element except our Country having its policies dictated by others.

I believe I can prove that you in particular cannot have everything you want in this country without illegal immigrants. 

For lo, the breasts of Salma Hayek were for a time undocumented in these United States. 

 

[timschochet]

We uphold the rule of law, we allow ourselves to extend out welcome to a wider audience, unless one presumes there is no limit to the immigration we can absorb.

And perhaps rather than playing your game I should ask, and this is the crux, what is the benefit gained through the illegality.

It's not a game. There is much to be gained from these people as I've stated. 

But- I agree with you about the rule of law. Which is why I want every person who broke the law coming here to pay a suitable fine. (It is, after all, a misdemeanor). 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

It's not a game. There is much to be gained from these people as I've stated. 

But- I agree with you about the rule of law. Which is why I want every person who broke the law coming here to pay a suitable fine. (It is, after all, a misdemeanor). 

You are aware that misdemeanants are put into jail every day.  You seem to think that a misdemeanant is not a criminal worth worrying about.  you try to minimize the crime by saying its only a misdemeanor.  Well I would say that it is above a civil  violation, it is above a petty offense, it is, in fact, all the way up to a misdemeanor for which we imprison people. In the range of civil and regulatory violations, to petty offenses, then misdemeanors, and then felonies misdemeanors are not small matters. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

DW began with the premise that legal immigrants are a benefit to society, but then stated that he saw no benefit to undocumented immigrants. 

I fail to see any difference in terms of benefits. Actually undocumented immigrants cost us less as they are less likely to take full use of social services. They are also, statistically, less likely to commit felonies. By any real measure, they are among the least costly, most contributing elements of our society. 

You rely heavily on that one study that I have raised questions about in the past only to have you fail to respond. It may be that your study is accurate, it may not be.  I note that it did not pry apart illegal and legal immigration.  Also, while it speaks to government resources, it does not speak to private resources well, the costs of unpaid hospital bills or insurance matters absorbed by others.  It does not go in depth to lost schooling opportunities for citizens. It fails to account for the impact of crime which is greater than financial alone, and it ignores the incredible number of fugitives from justice we have.  until those fugitives are accounted for we only have a partial accounting.  As for them being les likely to commit felonies, they are I believe les likely to be convicted of felonies both because they can flee across borders and because illegal victims under report things.  Still there is an appeal to the argument that most have substantial incentive to comply with the law so though neither you or I know this to be true I more or less accept that it is so.  What I do not accept is that they commit crimes at a lesser rate than legal immigrants who also seem to show greater respect for the law than do native born folks.  

If you want to speak of costs what costs the xenophobia created or enhanced by illegal immigration, what cost assisting the rise of Donald Trump?

 

[RCon]

We uphold the rule of law, we allow ourselves to extend our welcome to a wider audience, unless one presumes there is no limit to the immigration we can absorb.

And perhaps rather than playing your game I should ask, and this is the crux, what is the benefit gained through the illegality.

timschochet believes there is benefit in the illegality itself.  Specifically, he believes that businesses should be able to pay workers under the table and below minimum wage, in order to keep those businesses running "efficiently" and keep prices low.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I believe I can prove that you in particular cannot have everything you want in this country without illegal immigrants. 

For lo, the breasts of Salma Hayek were for a time undocumented in these United States. 

I had as much access to her breasts when she was in Mexico as when she is here which is to say only as a spectator.  Dirty pool using Salma against me.  BTW, spectacular as her jugs are I am a leg man.  The scene in that film with Antonio Banderas were she is walking down the street in a short dress and causes a car accident is maybe the hottest thing ever filmed.  Spectacular legs.

Don't mistake me, I am for immigration, fairly generous immigration, legal, and from around the world more or less proportionally to world population. I am for guest worker programs, generous ones.  In these programs I am one who believes that we can have allowances for disproportionate numbers from our contiguous neighbors.  I welcome students.  I just think we get to control these flows.  I don't believe we or any country can have these matters forced on them and remain sovereign.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

timschochet believes there is benefit in the illegality itself.  Specifically, he believes that businesses should be able to pay workers under the table and below minimum wage, in order to keep those businesses running "efficiently" and keep prices low.

I believe you are correct.  I would like to have him say so.  

 

[Cowboysfan8]

I believe you are correct.  I would like to have him say so.  

He already has. Low priced fruit for the country at the expense of the best possible education for America children in the border states is A-ok 

 

[The Commish]

DW began with the premise that legal immigrants are a benefit to society, but then stated that he saw no benefit to undocumented immigrants. 

I fail to see any difference in terms of benefits. Actually undocumented immigrants cost us less as they are less likely to take full use of social services. They are also, statistically, less likely to commit felonies. By any real measure, they are among the least costly, most contributing elements of our society. 

You rely heavily on that one study that I have raised questions about in the past only to have you fail to respond. It may be that your study is accurate, it may not be.  I note that it did not pry apart illegal and legal immigration.  Also, while it speaks to government resources, it does not speak to private resources well, the costs of unpaid hospital bills or insurance matters absorbed by others.  It does not go in depth to lost schooling opportunities for citizens. It fails to account for the impact of crime which is greater than financial alone, and it ignores the incredible number of fugitives from justice we have.  until those fugitives are accounted for we only have a partial accounting.  As for them being les likely to commit felonies, they are I believe les likely to be convicted of felonies both because they can flee across borders and because illegal victims under report things.  Still there is an appeal to the argument that most have substantial incentive to comply with the law so though neither you or I know this to be true I more or less accept that it is so.  What I do not accept is that they commit crimes at a lesser rate than legal immigrants who also seem to show greater respect for the law than do native born folks.  

I don't think I've ever seen an actual study.  You guys have a link?  Most of the time it's supposition and the convenient picking of data points to prove a point (both ways by the way).  If there's an actual study I'd like to see it....TIA.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

He already has. Low priced fruit for the country at the expense of the best possible education for America children in the border states is A-ok 

I suspect he has not said so, but rather this is a pickle your questioning of him has placed him in.  If he has said so, well, there is little mutual ground for he and I to forge an understanding.  That's why I poked at him by suggesting support for illegal immigration has been the fertile ground from which Donald trump has sprung.  It will make him crazy because it fits his philosophies and observations but it is not something he has put together yet.

 

[Henry Ford]

I had as much access to her breasts when she was in Mexico as when she is here which is to say only as a spectator.  Dirty pool using Salma against me.  BTW, spectacular as her jugs are I am a leg man.  The scene in that film with Antonio Banderas were she is walking down the street in a short dress and causes a car accident is maybe the hottest thing ever filmed.  Spectacular legs.

Don't mistake me, I am for immigration, fairly generous immigration, legal, and from around the world more or less proportionally to world population. I am for guest worker programs, generous ones.  In these programs I am one who believes that we can have allowances for disproportionate numbers from our contiguous neighbors.  I welcome students.  I just think we get to control these flows.  I don't believe we or any country can have these matters forced on them and remain sovereign.

I agree we do get to control these flows, just as we get to control speed limits and the measurements of the widgets that go in car safety devices and zoning laws and all sorts of other things. 

But people speed, improper widgets get used, people run businesses in a residential area, and immigrants come who don't have our permission. Sometimes they stay. When they get famous like Hayek or Michael J. Fox we don't give it a second thought. It doesn't make us not  a sovereign nation. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I don't think I've ever seen an actual study.  You guys have a link?  Most of the time it's supposition and the convenient picking of data points to prove a point (both ways by the way).  If there's an actual study I'd like to see it....TIA.

Tim has linked it often.  I believe it is from 2007 or 2009.I have reviewed it.  Though much work went into it I believe its conclusions far exceed its methodology.  I am fairly certain Tim has it bookmarked.  I bet if you PM him he will produce it again.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I agree we do get to control these flows, just as we get to control speed limits and the measurements of the widgets that go in car safety devices and zoning laws and all sorts of other things. 

But people speed, improper widgets get used, and immigrants come who don't have our permission. Sometimes they stay. When they get famous like Hayek or Michael J. Fox we don't give it a second thought. It doesn't make us not  a sovereign nation. 

One, I would apply the same standards to non-citizens regardless of whether they give me wood or make me laugh. One standard for all.  And two, I agree a few leaks does not impugn our soveriengty, but a flow of millions does.  One is the error rate built into human endeavors, the other is acceptance that we are not in charge and our law is meaningless and without consequence.

Frankly when Reagan made his amnesty there were many who argued that this was an invitation to a future of defiance of our borders.  Those folks have thus far proved to be correct.  

 

[Henry Ford]

One, I would apply the same standards to no-citizens regardless of whether they give me wood or make me laugh.  And I agree a few leaks does not impugn our soveriengty, but a flow of millions does.

Do you believe we should deport Salma Hayek and Michael J. Fox and refuse to allow them re-entry because they broke immigration laws?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

BTW, if Fox or Hayak are currently here illegally I will volunteer to apprehend them, cuff her, and prosecute them and then personally escort her back to her country.  in the mean time I will happily keep her in my personal custody.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Do you believe we should deport Salma Hayek and Michael J. Fox and refuse to allow them re-entry because they broke immigration laws?

I do.

 

[jonessed]

Do you believe we should deport Salma Hayek and Michael J. Fox and refuse to allow them re-entry because they broke immigration laws?

They are US citizens now.  I don't think we can deport them.

 

[Henry Ford]

I do.

Well, that's a level of consistency that's very respectable.  I believe that after decades of contributing to our society they should be allowed to remain. I have no wish to deport a 55-year-old man with early onset Parkinson's Disease.

 

[Henry Ford]

They are US citizens now.  I don't think we can deport them.

But they shouldn't be by the rules many believe in. That's sort of the point. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Well, that's a level of consistency that's very respectable.  I believe that after decades of contributing to our society they should be allowed to remain. I have no wish to deport a 55-year-old man with early onset Parkinson's Disease.

Nor do I have that wish.  Of course I realize that there are many heartrending examples one can find.  I am not one for making policy based upon heartrending examples since as a logical matter I realize that there are heartrending counter examples and heartrending matters that did not arise due to the matters that did.

 

[jonessed]

But they shouldn't be by the rules many believe in. That's sort of the point. 

Perhaps they should have been deported earlier, but I don't think they should be deported now.  It's a bit late.

 

[Henry Ford]

Perhaps they should have been deported earlier, but I don't think they should be deported now.  It's a bit late.

Yes.  Yes, I believe most people believe there's a point at which it's too late.  When that is is usually a point of contention. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Well, that's a level of consistency that's very respectable.  I believe that after decades of contributing to our society they should be allowed to remain. I have no wish to deport a 55-year-old man with early onset Parkinson's Disease.

Also, I do know that in spite of their crimes they have been made citizens, or so I believe, and I also believe there to be medical exceptions or exemptions to some of our immigration laws.  I think discretion is a good thing, but that it should be built into th elaw, not left to the hands of lawbreakers.  

Also, I think Michael can get wonderful treatment in Canada and throughout the British Commonwealth where I presume he can travel freely.  its not like Montreal, London and Sidney are second or third world Cities.  This is not open heart surgery in the 1960's that may have only been available here and in South Africa.

 

[timschochet]

I suspect he has not said so, but rather this is a pickle your questioning of him has placed him in.  If he has said so, well, there is little mutual ground for he and I to forge an understanding.  That's why I poked at him by suggesting support for illegal immigration has been the fertile ground from which Donald trump has sprung.  It will make him crazy because it fits his philosophies and observations but it is not something he has put together yet.

Sorry I had to drive my daughters to school. 

It doesn't drive me crazy at all. In fact, that fertile ground for populism and xenophobia is something I've worried about for over 20 years, ever since Prop 187 passed in California in 1994. I knew that eventually it would raise its ugly head in national politics. But I didn't then, and don't now, have a solution to that because I profoundly reject your solution. 

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Well, that's a level of consistency that's very respectable.  I believe that after decades of contributing to our society they should be allowed to remain. I have no wish to deport a 55-year-old man with early onset Parkinson's Disease.

BTW, I believe they can continue to contribute to our society as I believe our society and our country to not be contiguous.  I believe in this day and age our society extends well beyond our borders and is growing everyday thanks to modern communication.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Sorry I had to drive my daughters to school. 

It doesn't drive me crazy at all. In fact, that fertile ground for populism and xenophobia is something I've worried about for over 20 years, ever since Prop 187 passed in California in 1994. I knew that eventually it would raise its ugly head in national politics. But I didn't then, and don't now, have a solution to that because I profoundly reject your solution. 

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

That is currently serves to do so does in no way indicate that it is necessary to achieve that function.

Refresh my recollection, 187 was no public benefits to illegals, was it not?  some of us non-Californians may appreciate the refresher. 

 

[timschochet]

In any case, I recognize that my personal views on this issue are extreme as compared to the majority. I don't need to continue to defend them in this thread as I have done so extensively elsewhere in the forum. My point in starting this thread was to have a reasonable discussion with Trump supporters about the practicality and results of our President's ideas about this issue, not mine. 

 

[jon_mx]

Do you believe we should deport Salma Hayek and Michael J. Fox and refuse to allow them re-entry because they broke immigration laws?

Pretty sure hot chicks are exempted. 

 

[Cowboysfan8]

Sorry I had to drive my daughters to school. 

It doesn't drive me crazy at all. In fact, that fertile ground for populism and xenophobia is something I've worried about for over 20 years, ever since Prop 187 passed in California in 1994. I knew that eventually it would raise its ugly head in national politics. But I didn't then, and don't now, have a solution to that because I profoundly reject your solution. 

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

Nm

 

[timschochet]

That is currently serves to do so does in no way indicate that it is necessary to achieve that function.

That's true, but my position is that it is necessary. 

Here is my argument in simple terms DW: it is good for our society to have minimum wage laws because they promote economic stability. But minimum wage creates a gap in our labor force at the bottom end. So a labor force willing to break the law and work for less than the minimum wage is necessary. 

Now we could do away with this necessity by doing away with minimum wage, but that would be bad for our society as a whole. So in order to keep the good of a minimum wage, we are forced to accept a certain amount of lawlessness. 

 

[timschochet]

Who is Rich?

Sorry Rich Conway. He's knows my thinking on this issue as we have argued/discussed it many times. 

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

In any case, I recognize that my personal views on this issue are extreme as compared to the majority. I don't need to continue to defend them in this thread as I have done so extensively elsewhere in the forum. My point in starting this thread was to have a reasonable discussion with Trump supporters about the practicality and results of our President's ideas about this issue, not mine. 

Well then I apologize for derailing the intended discussion for I am no Trump supporter.  I will leave them to speak to the issue from their viewpoints and from his, as thus far articulated. 

 

[Cowboysfan8]

Sorry Rich Conway. He's knows my thinking on this issue as we have argued/discussed it many times. 

Yep. I'm a little slower than usual this morning

 

[timschochet]

Well then I apologize for derailing the intended discussion for I am no Trump supporter.  I will leave them to speak to the issue from their viewpoints and from his, as thus far articulated. 

No need to apologize. Your views are, as always, intelligent and insightful. 

 

[Politician Spock]

That's true, but my position is that it is necessary. 

Here is my argument in simple terms DW: it is good for our society to have minimum wage laws because they promote economic stability. But minimum wage creates a gap in our labor force at the bottom end. So a labor force willing to break the law and work for less than the minimum wage is necessary. 

Now we could do away with this necessity by doing away with minimum wage, but that would be bad for our society as a whole. So in order to keep the good of a minimum wage, we are forced to accept a certain amount of lawlessness. 

There are other ways to fill gaps without resorting to lawlessness. I believe there should be exceptions to minimum wage. A high school kid who has no living expenses doesn't need to paid a living wage. Thus if minimum wage is a living wage (as it should be to meet its intended purpose), those who don't need a living wage should able to work as an exception to it. School kids are an easy example, but there are some adults who don't need a living wage either. These exceptions can be easily written into law so that we aren't resorting to a system of lawlessness.  

ETA: Like DW, I'm not a Trump supporter either.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

In any case, I recognize that my personal views on this issue are extreme as compared to the majority. I don't need to continue to defend them in this thread as I have done so extensively elsewhere in the forum. My point in starting this thread was to have a reasonable discussion with Trump supporters about the practicality and results of our President's ideas about this issue, not mine. 

Is there room in this forum for people that aren't necessarily "Trump supporters", people that think he's done some really dumb things since being sworn in...things they don't agree with but are still holding out hope that he can somehow someway do some good things for our country?

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I feel bad for all the people who have gone through the system and became Americans the right way...all that time and money spent ...its not fair

maybe we should give them all the money back that they paid .....my co-worker from England  spent 30 thousand dollars getting his wife and 2 kids legal

Tim?

 

[The Commish]

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

Wait..what?  I thought you were the "free trade" guy   What do you mean by "this issue"?

Also, can you post the link to the study you provided DW?  TIA.

 

[RCon]

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

I really don't understand your positions here, as they seem to be contradictory.  You argue that we need illegal immigration (to keep prices low).  You also argue that we should open our borders completely such that all immigration is legal.  Aren't those two positions mutually exclusive?

 

[jonessed]

Is there room in this forum for people that aren't necessarily "Trump supporters", people that think he's done some really dumb things since being sworn in...things they don't agree with but are still holding out hope that he can somehow someway do some good things for our country?

We have increasingly become a binary country. Anyone in the grey is marginalized almost as much as the opposite spectrum.

I blame Steve Harvey.

 

[Politician Spock]

Sorry I had to drive my daughters to school. 

It doesn't drive me crazy at all. In fact, that fertile ground for populism and xenophobia is something I've worried about for over 20 years, ever since Prop 187 passed in California in 1994. I knew that eventually it would raise its ugly head in national politics. But I didn't then, and don't now, have a solution to that because I profoundly reject your solution. 

Rich is correct, I have stated unequivocally that undocumented immigration is necessary to keep prices low. But I would prefer a more legal solution to this issue. 

I could say that it is unequivocally necessary that businesses fail to pay taxes to keep prices low. What's the difference?

Labor costs and tax costs are just two different lines on the P&L report. If breaking the law for one is good because it keeps prices low, then breaking the law for other lines is good as well because it keeps prices low. 

 

[timschochet]

Is there room in this forum for people that aren't necessarily "Trump supporters", people that think he's done some really dumb things since being sworn in...things they don't agree with but are still holding out hope that he can somehow someway do some good things for our country?

There's room for everybody. 

And seriously, all thinking people should have this attitude IMO- like you I certainly hope that President Trump will do good things and sill congratulate him when he does. But we may disagree on what this "good things" actually are. 

 

[timschochet]

Tim?

I'm not sure what response you'd like me to offer. As has been pointed out, there is no line for many undocumented people. What they do has no effect on your friend. 

 

[timschochet]

I really don't understand your positions here, as they seem to be contradictory.  You argue that we need illegal immigration (to keep prices low).  You also argue that we should open our borders completely such that all immigration is legal.  Aren't those two positions mutually exclusive?

My second argument about open borders is a dream that I know we will never achieve. The first argument therefore is one based on pragmatism. 

 

[RCon]

My second argument about open borders is a dream that I know we will never achieve. The first argument therefore is one based on pragmatism. 

But the point is, your dream goal actually obliterates your pragmatic goal.  If we had fully open borders, you're suggesting that we'd no longer be able to keep prices low.  So which is it?  Do we need low prices, which require illegal, below-minimum-wage workers, or should all workers be legal?

 

[timschochet]

Wait..what?  I thought you were the "free trade" guy   What do you mean by "this issue"?

Also, can you post the link to the study you provided DW?  TIA.

Not sure I understand your question. I believe in free trade. I believe in minimum wage. 

I have cited various studies in the past. Here is an article by HA Goodman (the Bernie supporter, back when he was sane!) which provides a reasonable summary: 

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/203984-illegal-immigrants-benefit-the-us-economy

on my phone so I hope that will suffice.