2020 US Election (Part One)

[Farm Boy]

I just see the US spiralling into insanity and/or civil war

I don't think your vantage is very good. Into? When, exactly, have you expected us to be sane? Still not as good at war amongst ourselves as central Europe, as you put it, seems to be. Always room to take lessons, I suppose.

The conversation on this has been interesting. I've gotten to listen to a bevy of Republicans tacking green on NPR with the latitude they have to move currently. We'll see if anything comes of it. Washington is turdflinging over everything to do with money at the moment(hardly surprising as the conversation is formulating on Twitter and that's really all that format excels at), including infrastructure repair in Puerto Rico and Texas, Georgia/Iowa/Nebraska up next. What we are, is slow. You got that point right. Way slower than hysterics on the internet, and probably way too slow for the issue, but hey. How easy you think it is for me to convince anyone, anyone at all, about the necessity of the fantastic expense we discussed when it came to burn downs and ~33% 5 year cycling setaside a while back? Can't say I'm remarkably impressed anywhere I look on that.

 

[Broken_Erika]

But then this means the wall isn't actually solving the problem of illegal immigration. It misses visa overstays, and it misses people who are smuggled through legal ports of entry. It misses people who come in by land through Canada.

It's also easily defeated - by ropes, by ladders, by tunnels, just like the current fences and walls are. Or by obtaining a tourist visa and then overstaying it. Or by obtaining a visa to Canada and coming in through that undefended border.

So, it targets a small portion of total illegal immigration and can be gotten around pretty easily. Why is this a good idea again? To me it looks like an unnecessary expense that doesn't actually solve any problems.

The solution is obvious. Cancel all Visas* and seal all borders. Permanently.
#Maga4ever!
*MasterCard is obviously superior! 'Cause it starts with an "M".

 

[Arakhor]

Are you claiming that illegal immigration is not a problem needing a solution? Is anyone here claiming that?

If no one here is claiming that, why are you acting all excited that someone might be claiming that it is?

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that while the number of illegal immigrants in the US as a whole is relatively small (less than 10% certainly), they are a more prominent percentage in the bordering states. And iirc of those only California is a sanctuary state (?).

 

[Lexicus]

If no one here is claiming that, why are you acting all excited that someone might be claiming that it is?

The "problem-->solution" rhetoric elides the fact that I believe illegal immigration is a problem, and he believes illegal immigrants are a problem. I doubt he has ever met one though he has probably eaten food prepared by one. The solution to illegal immigration is change the law so there aren't illegal immigrants. The solution to illegal immigrants is...well...Trump's starting to carry it out.

 

[onejayhawk]

The solution is obvious. Cancel all Visas* and seal all borders. Permanently.
#Maga4ever!
*MasterCard is obviously superior! 'Cause it starts with an "M".

Don't laugh. We've done it.

I think that while the number of illegal immigrants in the US as a whole is relatively small (less than 10% certainly), they are a more prominent percentage in the bordering states. And iirc of those only California is a sanctuary state (?).

How is 10% a small amount? If you had said 1% or 2%, no problem. Around 3%, you hit 10,000,000. It's more than that.

The "problem-->solution" rhetoric elides the fact that I believe illegal immigration is a problem, and he believes illegal immigrants are a problem. I doubt he has ever met one though he has probably eaten food prepared by one. The solution to illegal immigration is change the law so there aren't illegal immigrants. The solution to illegal immigrants is...well...Trump's starting to carry it out.

I'll put you down as illegal immigration is not a problem. That's one.

J

 

[Kyriakos]

Don't laugh. We've done it.


How is 10% a small amount? If you had said 1% or 2%, no problem. Around 3%, you hit 10,000,000. It's more than that.

J

I said "relatively" small, cause that is roughly the critical percentage in (non fully fascist) euro countries. Eg in Greece it was larger than that with the Syrian crisis (possibly still is, tbh, but maybe not now. And i seriously doubt it is lower than 5% anyway).

 

[Broken_Erika]

Don't laugh. We've done it.

J

Mastercard FTW!

 

[Tristan_C]

I just see the US spiralling into insanity and/or civil war, slowly but surely. drifting even further right if anything.

Oh yes totally further to the right. Totally. Right.

We'll establish a UBI, nationalize health care, and weaponize the government's police and spy apparatus against Republican politicians and those who vote for them, and all the while the npcs will be beating their chests about the country moving right.

Can someone advocate for unlimited massive immigration and then wonder why there are rising ideological divisions and civil unrest? Indeed, what a mystery.

 

[Tristan_C]

Has any Democrat ever proposed having no border enforcement ?

Pretty much daily, Jorge Ramos was the one this morning.

 

[Lexicus]

and weaponize the government's police and spy apparatus against Republican politicians

Omg yes please , it's about time we got some equal-opportunity oppression after decades of the police and intelligence services only messing with leftists.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Are you claiming that illegal immigration is not a problem needing a solution? Is anyone here claiming that?

Julian Castro is.
https://medium.com/@JulianCastro_63280/putting-people-first-e0f765cee00c

Rubio tried to make immigration his signature issue until the Republicans removed his brain and installed the Rubiobot cybernetic drive in its place. McCain also tried to make immigration one of his signature issues, but FOX News and talk radio lost their minds over that so he quietly gave up on it.

I regularly encounter liberal/Democratic Massachusetts and Connecticut white guys up here who are nevertheless all too happy to talk about the "immigration problem" by saying things like "I'm no fan of Trump... but something does need to be done about the border" in a very matter-of-fact way. To me that's a sign that a focus on immigration is a losing issue for the Democrats. A Hispanic Democrat leaning into the blatantly anti-Hispanic "Build The Wall" with "Path to Citizenship" is sailing into a headwind for sure.

 

[Tristan_C]

Omg yes please , it's about time we got some equal-opportunity oppression after decades of the police and intelligence services only messing with leftists.

Hah, unlike some people, those bastards actually did collude with Russian agents.

 

[El_Machinae]

Took me a bit to figure out why the idea of a remittance tax so instinctively offended me. Like, it triggered a disgust instinct. Honestly, that repulsion surprised me. Because, on its face, I can see how the idea developed.

I figured it out. Charity is one of my favorite topics, and one of the current ideas under examination is whether giving people money directly was the most bang for the buck effective method of delivering a benefit.

And honestly, I cannot think of a dollar that is more respected than a dollar that is turned by a family member. You are not answering to shareholders, you are not answering to bureaucrats, you're answering to someone who loves you enough to travel far away and spend some of their earnings on you.

I view remittances within the 'give directly' family of charity efforts. I also don't like regressive taxes in general, which this would obviously be. Long-term, we want to grow the economy of our trading partners. I don't yet have sufficient data to show that direct donations to people is the most efficient donation, but I'm pretty hostile to the idea of getting in the way of the experiment until we know.

 

[Lexicus]

Took me a bit to figure out why the idea of a remittance tax so instinctively offended me. Like, it triggered a disgust instinct. Honestly, that repulsion surprised me. Because, on its face, I can see how the idea developed.

I doesn't surprise me, I have to figure most decent people would react with disgust to a proposal to steal money from some of the poorest people in the country.

 

[Gori the Grey]

El Mac often takes the long way round in his moral reasoning, but it's worth following him on the trek, I find.

 

[El_Machinae]

I doesn't surprise me, I have to figure most decent people would react with disgust to a proposal to steal money from some of the poorest people in the country.

At first I thought it was just a combination of meanness and being regressive. But it wasn't, I think that remittances could easily be one of the most amazing forms of foreign aid out there.

Could be. The jury is still out, because we've only recently started to truly examine effectiveness of different types of foreign aid

Conservatives often like to brag about how generous the United States is when it comes to foreign aid. Now, I don't begrudge anybody their individual donations. But when people plug stats, they are often including stats that include remittances. And then bragging as if the entire populace is generous

 

[El_Machinae]

It's also a good opportunity to point out the hypocrisy of the alt right.

They claim to be against immigrants because of the idea that immigrants drive down labor wages to the benefit of the corporatist.

So, of course the idea of a regressive tax punishing someone who out competes local labor, who's also just a regular working stiff trying to help the family, will appeal to them.

 

[Berzerker]

There were 34,710 visas issued in total in February 2019.

There were 76,103 apprehensions at the border in February 2019.

Yeah there's an emergency. Your study is probably out-of-date, and I have to wonder about its methods anyway. It claims the illegal immigrant population declined from 11 to 10 million into 2017, but these figures are from the Census survey, so it's not a measure of the number of illegals, but rather a measure of how many illegals were willing to divulge their status. It's about as reliable as survey data on penis size.

We started building more walls under Bush around 2006-7 and thats when we began seeing a sharp decline in apprehensions along the southern border. The media used the successful results of building walls to oppose building walls.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...sitors-to-u-s-who-overstay-deadline-to-leave/

Most visas are given to tourists, business folk, students, and guest workers. If any of these enter the country more than once and overstay again they're counted twice. That's more common with people on business trips I suspect, they plan on leaving and dont bother trying to renew their visa. And some do leave on time but data collectors miss it and they get counted as an overstay. Of course some people coming in across the southern border illegally get caught more than once.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...sitors-to-u-s-who-overstay-deadline-to-leave/

As border apprehensions have declined, estimates show a growing proportion of the undocumented population legally entered the country on visas but overstayed the time limits on those visas. A Center for Migration Studies report estimates that 44 percent of those in living in the U.S. illegally in 2015 were visa overstays. That’s up from an estimated 41 percent in 2008.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/

But then this means the wall isn't actually solving the problem of illegal immigration. It misses visa overstays, and it misses people who are smuggled through legal ports of entry. It misses people who come in by land through Canada.

It's also easily defeated - by ropes, by ladders, by tunnels, just like the current fences and walls are. Or by obtaining a tourist visa and then overstaying it. Or by obtaining a visa to Canada and coming in through that undefended border.

So, it targets a small portion of total illegal immigration and can be gotten around pretty easily. Why is this a good idea again? To me it looks like an unnecessary expense that doesn't actually solve any problems.

Canada's the biggest source of overstays, I doubt that many just moved in for good. Its true walls can be bypassed, but the number of apprehensions along the southern border began going down when Congress and Bush funded more wall construction around ports of entry. The wall cant prevent visa overstays, it can reduce the number of people crossing the desert.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm inclined to agree remittance taxes suck. Do we have a better track record of punishing people who hire under minimum benefits/wages? Or rather, is this one of those things where we should actively seek to acquire labor from out of state in order to minimize the cost of acquiring the time of people who work with their hands? I'm not following properly on the hypocrisy angle. I thought one of the distinguishing factors of the alt right was picking up some parts of protectionism to fill the vacuum left by the dual party adoption of pro-capital class-labor-antagonistic policy in favor of (sub)urbanite professionalism/corporatism. That whole top-20% of the middle class and up sort of thing?