How big is immigration an issue on people's minds (USA and elsewhere)?

[Archon8]

Resolving the problem without electing a annoying prick like Donald Trump ?

There would not have been a resolution without Trump, the only other option was Kamala Harris, and she denied being named the border czar under Biden.

She came off as completely incompetent in that interview. She did absolutely nothing as Vice President, but we were supposed to believe she would actually do something about the border as President? Doesn't work like that, if you suck at your current job we're not going to give you a promotion.

 

[Snowygerry]

Yes in the US you are somewhat short on options, for you the solution is likely to completely reform the political system and elect less millionaires.

Have you considered going into politics yourself ?

Traditionally the "conservative" (liberal) position is to take control of the government of your state yourself, lamentations about the deep state are best left to lefties

 

[Archon8]

Yes in the US you are somewhat short on options, for you the solution is likely to completely reform the political system and elect less millionaires.

Have you considered going into politics yourself ?

I don't engage in class warfare, I don't care how much wealth someone has or doesn't have. Trump has the collection of qualities I want in a leader, so I was glad to vote for him. I lack interest in "reforming the political system."

I have met with various congressmen and other elected leaders in my area to lobby on behalf of veterans, but I have absolutely no interest in political office myself.

 

[Zardnaar]

I feel like there's broad, universal agreement that legal immigration is a good thing. The question is how bad of a problem illegal immigration is, and the conservative/Trump position is that it is a problem worth resolving and preventing. I'm unclear of what the liberal position is, is it open borders?

People are turning on legal migration as well. At least at levels seen in last 20 years.

 

[Snowygerry]

Why do want a leader ? Is not the Libertairian position to accept no authority but your own ?

Does it follow that I reject all authority? Far from me such a thought. In the matter of boots, I refer to the authority of the bootmaker; concerning houses, canals, or railroads, I consult that of the architect or the engineer. For such or such special knowledge I apply to such or such a savant. But I allow neither the bootmaker nor the architect nor savant to impose his authority upon me. I listen to them freely and with all the respect merited by their intelligence, their character, their knowledge, reserving always my incontestable right of criticism and censure.

Authority of the bootmaker - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Archon8]

Why do want a leader ? Is not the Libertairian position to accept no authority but your own ?

Maybe, I don't know. I'm not a libertarian, I'm an economic conservative, and the Republican Party represents my interests in that capacity.

 

[Akka]

I feel like there's broad, universal agreement that legal immigration is a good thing.

No. There is a common dogma about it, and a "racist" stigma attached to disagreeing with it, which push lots of people to pretend they only care about illegal immigration - because that one should be impossible to defend, though that doesn't actually prevent people from doing just that - despite them disliking even the legal one. It's mostly about the "quantity" and "quality" though - few people care when immigration is small and about wealthy, educated migrants. Lots more care when the numbers are large and about poor and uneducated migrants.
Nothing groundbreaking, but the clash comes from said stigma which tends to make the issue pretty polarizing.

 

[Gorbles]

You're the one who brought it up.

shrugs

I don't think you understand what I was bringing up at all. It's all good.

Lots more care when the numbers are large and about poor and uneducated migrants.

Why? Because they're used as a scapegoat? Because people attach a "stigma" to their existence?

This all feeds back into politics, and the political positions of each of us here. See, I don't care about poor and uneducated migrants affecting my life negatively because, well, they don't. They have, empirically, zero impact on my life. My taxes have not changed one iota due to immigration in any demonstrable way. Meanwhile, council budgets are shrinking. The educational budget is shrinking. The NHS' budget is frequently criticised, with privatisation being increasingly floated as as a "solution". This has nothing to do with immigration - it's happening irrespective of immigration.

So tell me: why am I supposed to care?

 

[Farm Boy]

That's a tough question to answer for a liberal man. Self interest being the only coin usually means they just need bought or they aren't coming.

Almost as hard as for "show me" fellas that aren't smart enough understand evidence that isn't tangible or differentiate is from ought.

Like with the US catching up to Europe's mental decay with the food dye. Popular that it was banned, total ignorance(and pandering to it(buying them))on display. Why would other issues be different? Nationalities themselves, aren't.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Just going to ignore that fact that we're still having hundreds of thousands of kids a year, which means each year whatever age you accept that someone starts occupying space in society has a new generation of kids aging into said population. That's a rolling figure, just like immigration.

There is no obvious reason why I should consider births when the thread title is about immigration not about births.

And alluding to a population increase due to births without considering that they are offset by deaths is disingenuous.

But then you'd chuck any instant red herring sentence in you can to derail a sensible discussion.

 

[Farm Boy]

The NHS' budget is frequently criticised, with privatisation being increasingly floated as as a "solution". This has nothing to do with immigration - it's happening irrespective of immigration.

Trying to be more charitable than the last observation, which I stand by nonetheless.

Many of the poorest suburbs of Cook County(where Chicago is), a political bastion so large and blue it holds the rest of its gerrymandered state in thrall, saw absolutely massive increases in property taxes in 2024(82% median increase in Harvey for example). The reason given was commercial real estate taking a bath and causing a shortfall in tax revenues. Which is probably proximally true. But when confronted by the increases, the elected officials answered with a party line(all the politicians in power are from one party). That line was essentially, "the entire way we fund government with property taxes is regressive and unfair, but the political opposition won't lets us restructure everything, so its basically their fault this is unfair." And that's in a gerrymandered state where one party holds all the power, referring to problems in an area they're dominant in rather than one they hold in thrall.

I might not have an answer, and I certainly am not going to be able to come up with one that's actually fair if I did. But I can still tell you that the party line answer was a total load of self-serving crap that doesn't even deign to seriously consider government or people in control of it to have any meaningful ability or duty to attempt to fix the problems they help create rather than to tell people they must endure them.

 

[Lexicus]

Glazier's fallacy.

Who do you think was destroying those windows in that parable. The Fae?

You have either failed to understand your Bastiat, or you are simply providing a demonstration of just how racist the anti-immigrant side of this "discussion" is.

I feel like there's broad, universal agreement that legal immigration is a good thing. The question is how bad of a problem illegal immigration is, and the conservative/Trump position is that it is a problem worth resolving and preventing. I'm unclear of what the liberal position is, is it open borders?

If you really believed this, then the "solution" to the "problem" of illegal immigration would be legalizing it. But since you are racists who think immigrants are destroying the country simply by being of inferior race, you instead watch people being shackled on the tv and it makes you happy.

 

[Archon8]

If you really believed this, then the "solution" to the "problem" of illegal immigration would be legalizing it. But since you are racists who think immigrants are destroying the country simply by being of inferior race, you instead watch people being shackled on the tv and it makes you happy.

I should be irritated that you have obviously ignored all my posts about the economic effects of mass immigration, and the links of studies and people like Cesar Chavez saying the same thing. Instead, I kind of feel bad for you. One of the most rewarding things in my life has been to learn about the beliefs of others and why they hold them, and to adjust mine accordingly until I held a collection of views that I considered optimal. It's a lifelong endeavor. But I just can't imagine feeling any of my opinions are so unassailable in their logic that anyone who disagreed must be a racist. I greatly encourage you to meet some conservatives and get to know them, and be enlightened that even if you disagree with them, you will more often than not find them to be decent, intelligent people who want what is best for their country.

 

[banzay13]

I should be irritated that you have obviously ignored all my posts about the economic effects of mass immigration, and the links of studies and people like Cesar Chavez saying the same thing. Instead, I kind of feel bad for you. One of the most rewarding things in my life has been to learn about the beliefs of others and why they hold them, and to adjust mine accordingly until I held a collection of views that I considered optimal. It's a lifelong endeavor. But I just can't imagine feeling any of my opinions are so unassailable in their logic that anyone who disagreed must be a racist. I greatly encourage you to meet some conservatives and get to know them, and be enlightened that even if you disagree with them, you will more often than not find them to be decent, intelligent people who want what is best for their country.

It's called Westworld supremacy

 

[Lexicus]

Cesar Chavez

Oh, the guy who supported legalizing immigration and giving amnesty to undocumented workers? Keep his name out of your mouth, gringo.

It's a lifelong endeavor.

Obviously not, since you used the past tense in the previous sentence.

I greatly encourage you to meet some conservatives and get to know them, and be enlightened that even if you disagree with them, you will more often than not find them to be decent, intelligent people who want what is best for their country.

Lmao, nope, the opposite. The more conservatives I meet, the more sympathy I feel for Lenin, Stalin, and Mao.

 

[Archon8]

Oh, the guy who supported legalizing immigration and giving amnesty to undocumented workers? Keep his name out of your mouth, gringo.

Instead of insulting people, dedicate your efforts to reading and learning.

Chavez, the UFW and the “Wetback” Problem | Duke Human Rights Center at the Franklin Humanities Institute

June 13, 2014 I began my research at Wayne State University’s Reuther Library in Detroit, MI, where I looked at the United Farm Workers’ files for documents regarding the

humanrights.fhi.duke.edu

From the article:

Cesar Chavez was, in fact, deeply hostile toward “wetbacks,” as he (and many others of this time) called them. He was relentless in his efforts to halt immigration from Mexico and was active in pursuing the deportation of those already here. Chavez claimed that undocumented workers were driving down wages, and crucially, being used as strikebreakers. Both complaints had merit, of course. Mexican immigrants were routinely used to break strikes; their desperate situation often led them to take whatever work they could get, even if it meant clashing with the UFW’s goals. And certainly, all of these dynamics played a role in wage depression.

 

[Ordnael]

The more conservatives I meet, the more sympathy I feel for Lenin, Stalin, and Mao.

You feel sympathy for mass murderers!? Each one of these names has an holocaust of forgotten people under their belt!

 

[Senethro]

You feel sympathy for mass murderers!? Each one of these names has an holocaust of forgotten people under their belt!

Forgotten people, made into non-citizens, finding themselves on the wrong land? Subject to mass state violence?

Are conservatives arguing for or against such things with regards to immigration policy?

 

[Lexicus]

Instead of insulting people, dedicate your efforts to reading and learning.

Chavez, the UFW and the “Wetback” Problem | Duke Human Rights Center at the Franklin Humanities Institute

June 13, 2014 I began my research at Wayne State University’s Reuther Library in Detroit, MI, where I looked at the United Farm Workers’ files for documents regarding the

humanrights.fhi.duke.edu

From the article:

Did you even read what you posted? The article argues that these early stances against undocumented people were a mistake and contributed to the UFW's ineffectiveness.

Anyway, a more complete take on this can be found here:

Cesar Chavez’s nuanced views on undocumented workers & immigration

Critics of Cesar Chavez resurrect 50-plus-year-old film clips where he used words like “illegal” or even “wetback.” Dolores Huerta observes Chavez considered himself a Chicano who came of age politically in the 1950s and ‘60s. “That’s just how Chicanos talked in those days,” she says. In later years

ufw.org

 

[Lexicus]

You feel sympathy for mass murderers!? Each one of these names has an holocaust of forgotten people under their belt!

Your boos mean nothing. I've seen what makes you cheer.