Roots of a counterproductive immigration policy

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Politics

MEMBERS

8 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

Politics Chatboard

Roots of a counterproductive immigration policy

by Cha Cha

Feb 3, 2017

<b>"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won’t do."</b>

"Trump’s executive order has unleashed chaos, harmed lawful U.S. residents, and alienated potential friends in the Islamic world. Yet without the dreamy liberal refusal to recognize the reality of nationhood, the meaning of citizenship, and the differences between cultures, Trump would never have gained the power to issue that order."

"Liberalism and nationhood grew up together in the 19th century, mutually dependent. In the 21st century, they have grown apart—or more exactly, liberalism has recoiled from nationhood. The result has not been to abolish nationality, but to discredit liberalism."

"German chancellor Angela Merkel’s August 2015 order to fling open Germany’s doors is the proximate cause of the de-democratization of Poland since September 2015, of the rise of M...See More

Comment

(12)

report post

view previous comments

Lulu On 2/04/17, long-time lurker wrote:

>There are families involved, often > innovative immigrants who have given more to their > communities than they have taken. >

I think this is what gives many of us pause, the complicating factors. I don't believe many of us have a problem with turning around someone trying to cross...See More

Feb 4, 2017

report post

EasTexSteve On 2/04/17, Lulu wrote:

> I think this is what gives many of us pause, the complicating factors. > I don't believe many of us have a problem with turning around > someone trying to cross the border illegally or deporting > undocumented criminals. Where it gets harder to know what to do is > when we're faced with law-abiding ...See More

Feb 5, 2017

report post

AW
> On 2/04/17, Lulu wrote:
>
>> I think this is what gives many of us pause, the
>> complicating
> factors.
>> I don't believe many of us have a problem with turning
>> around someone trying to cross the border illegally or
>> deporting undocumented criminals. Where it gets harder<...See More

Feb 5, 2017

report post

T.E.C. - Iowa If you have been here for years and we have not enforced our laws, there is a legal status for having a right to stay. It would take some time for me to find this!

However, LTL is now essentially saying, "If you can get here, not get caught, get a job, and contribute; you can stay!" Adding that extra does not change the insanity ...See MoreIf you have been here for years and we have not enforced our laws, there is a legal status for having a right to stay. It would take some time for me to find this!

However, LTL is now essentially saying, "If you can get here, not get caught, get a job, and contribute; you can stay!" Adding that extra does not change the insanity of this policy.

And about "I don't know that anyone is really suggesting that we open our borders." What a line of crap! Yes, this is advocating open borders, and it does so by default because you have no laws that you are enforcing. Just wait until there is a massive famine, war, or whatever in Central or South America, and you will discover the foolishness of this thinking.

On the other side of the coin, ETS wrote, "it's called standing in line and going through the process like everyone else wanting to come in legally." By the way, those who come here legally have often spent five to ten thousand dollars in legal bills. And now your response is "Oh, let them stay, because I cannot stand the harshness of enforcing the law." It is no wonder conservatives think some liberals are "bleeding hearts."

Again, this country, and the sanctuary cities in particular, are advocating and currently have open borders - that is, if you can get here you can stay!

A story: I once set at lunch with a group of college instructors. They discussed how they like the illegals because they like the ethnic food from their restaurants. One even said he like how cheaply he could get his lawn and garden work done. All I could think was, "You would not be so happy if the country was being flooded with Masters Degree college graduates who could compete for your job.

And therein is the annoying part of those who say "Oh, but they contribute!" Often they contribute by taking a job from an American Citizen or at the very least depress their wages. Yet, what I see from the "they contribute" crowd is a fantasy-like denial of the hard economic facts regarding what is happening. They are happy and blissful so long as it is not happening to them.

PS: You do not have to seal the borders the way some imagine. You simply start enforcing employment laws. Although this would have to be done in a way to avoid economic disruption, if you put the Americans who employ the illegals in jail, the problem would diminish very quickly. Those laws are already on the books!

Feb 5, 2017

report post

long-time lurker On 2/05/17, T.E.C. - Iowa wrote: > If you have been here for years and we have not enforced our > laws, there is a legal status for having a right to stay. It > would take some time for me to find this! > > However, LTL is now essentially saying, "If you can get here, > not get caught, get a job, and contribute; you can stay!...See MoreOn 2/05/17, T.E.C. - Iowa wrote: > If you have been here for years and we have not enforced our > laws, there is a legal status for having a right to stay. It > would take some time for me to find this! > > However, LTL is now essentially saying, "If you can get here, > not get caught, get a job, and contribute; you can stay!" > Adding that extra does not change the insanity of this policy. >

Not at all. I didn't say that and resent the implications. We have a president who has strongly implied and demonstrated that he will behave as a loose canon, implementing new and untested strategy on a whim. He seems perfectly willing to undermine existing laws, substituting crackdowns on new and un-vetted policies to stir contention. There are no assurances that he would not attempt to change policies and deport people who have been here lawfully for years. His administration has hinted strongly and he has stated that Muslims need to go. There have been suggestions of doubling the income threshold for HB1 visas. His administration has simultaneously made proposals, however informal that they would apply tests for people who are disabled, "wrong" religions, etc and remove them. The president defines anyone who reaches this shore as an "illegal immigrant."

I support sound border control. I support sound legal deportation practices. I do not support erratic, vague rantings of our impulsive child president and his supporters. I do not and will not support the tools of division that are allowing this disrespectful signature stamp and his buddy Bannon to exert pressure tests on our Constitution.

> And about "I don't know that anyone is really suggesting that > we open our borders." What a line of crap! Yes, this is > advocating open borders, and it does so by default because you > have no laws that you are enforcing. Just wait until there is > a massive famine, war, or whatever in Central or South > America, and you will discover the foolishness of this thinking.

I would like to see diplomacy and border control, but I don't trust this administrations ability to engage in diplomacy. I have seen small indications the administration seeks to undermine the American work force while strengthening profit avenues for his Wall St buddies. I have seen indication that this administration favors helping their Wall St buddies over the environment. If Trump actually would say and follow up with anything trustworthy and diplomatic, he might actually be able to work toward the goal of safety but he blatantly pushes division.

-ltl

> On the other side of the coin, ETS wrote, "it's called > standing in line and going through the process like everyone > else wanting to come in legally." By the way, those who come > here legally have often spent five to ten thousand dollars in > legal bills. And now your response is "Oh, let them stay, > because I cannot stand the harshness of enforcing the law." > It is no wonder conservatives think some liberals are > "bleeding hearts." > > Again, this country, and the sanctuary cities in particular, > are advocating and currently have open borders - that is, if > you can get here you can stay! > > A story: I once set at lunch with a group of college > instructors. They discussed how they like the illegals > because they like the ethnic food from their restaurants. One > even said he like how cheaply he could get his lawn and garden > work done. All I could think was, "You would not be so happy > if the country was being flooded with Masters Degree college > graduates who could compete for your job. > > And therein is the annoying part of those who say "Oh, but > they contribute!" Often they contribute by taking a job from > an American Citizen or at the very least depress their wages. > Yet, what I see from the "they contribute" crowd is a > fantasy-like denial of the hard economic facts regarding what > is happening. They are happy and blissful so long as it is > not happening to them. > > > PS: You do not have to seal the borders the way some imagine. > You simply start enforcing employment laws. Although this > would have to be done in a way to avoid economic disruption, > if you put the Americans who employ the illegals in jail, the > problem would diminish very quickly. Those laws are already > on the books! >

Feb 5, 2017

report post