Trump to destroy the lives of 800,000 American children, and is too much of a coward to own it.

[Cutlass]

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday ordered an end to the Obama-era program that shields young undocumented immigrants from deportation, calling it an “amnesty-first approach” and urging Congress to pass a replacement before he begins phasing out its protections in six months.

As early as March, officials said, some of the 800,000 young adults brought to the United States illegally as children who qualify for the program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, will become eligible for deportation. The five-year-old policy allows them to remain without fear of immediate removal from the country and gives them the right to work legally.

Mr. Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who announced the change at the Justice Department, both used the aggrieved language of anti-immigrant activists, arguing that those in the country illegally are lawbreakers who hurt native-born Americans by usurping their jobs and pushing down wages.

Rest of story here.

Trump has Sessions take the lead on something that he had been talking about, to distance himself from it a bit. Because Sessions is a well known racist who has opposed all immigration his whole adult life. In doing this they chose to make the US a poorer and weaker place, just to throw a bone to their racist core of supporters.

This act is vicious and evil and there is no possible justification for it.

 

[Ryika]

I find it hard to make sense of that whole story, seems very weird for somebody from a country where we have mandatory id cards that would prevent this whole situation in the first place.

What exactly does Trump think to gain from it, and why does he amend the original statement with...

Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do). If they can't, I will revisit this issue!

? Is that just an attempt to save face after he saw the initial reactions, or is there something I'm missing?

And why exactly does the New York Times quote Mark Zuckerberg as if he were some sort of authority?

 

[Cutlass]

Trump throwing it at Congress, and he threw it at the state of California as well, is just misdirection. An attempt to shift the blame, no different than letting Sessions make the announcement. He knows a Republican Congress won't act on immigration. There is literally nothing to be gained by Congressional Republicans in doing so. Which is why Obama, and don't forget that GW Bush also tried to get immigration reform through a Republican Congress, could not get anything done. Congressional Republicans are simply unwilling to act on the issue.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

And why exactly does the New York Times quote Mark Zuckerberg as if he were some sort of authority?

A recurring problem in current American Journalism I'm afraid. Find a celebrity who has vaguely mentioned something about the subject, and get them to make a completely meaningless statement. It must be good for google key-word searches or something. The news networks are worse (CNN, MSNBC, FOX), because they'll try to have a celebrity have an unofficial debate with actual authorities on the subject. One of my favorites was when CNN had Michael Moore on to debate actual doctors on the subject of American medicine, solely on the basis that he did that one health care docudrama that one time.

 

[Zelig]

Zuckerberg isn't really a celebrity, he's founder and CEO of one of the most powerful companies in the world.

As long as you're going to allow modern-day robber barons, doesn't make much sense to pretend their opinions don't matter.

Not really just a Zuckerberg thing anyway:
https://www.geekwire.com/2017/trump...-immigration-program-tech-industry-not-happy/
https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/5/16240068/tech-silicon-valley-immigration-travel-ban-h1b-daca

 

[plarq]

The grand scheme was laid in Reagan's era. This is basically wage suppression by importing guest workers (low end from Mexico and Central America, high end from China and India), and the important part is to delay green card for those guest workers as long as possible so they can't argue against their employers, or they will risk losing status and deportation.

 

[civver_764]

HUGE win for American workers!

DACA is a terrible program which condones and rewards illegal immigration, and is unconstitutional to boot. Trump should have ended it day one.

This will not harm America. This will result in higher wages and more jobs for Americans.

Also most DACA recipients are in their 20s, not children.

 

[metalhead]

Most economists say this is bad, but I'm sure you know better.

Can you explain the mechanism by which this will create jobs and drive up wages, or is that merely an article of faith?

 

[warpus]

How will this lead to higher wages? I don't see the connection

 

[Zelig]

HUGE win for American workers!

DACA is a terrible program which condones and rewards illegal immigration, and is unconstitutional to boot. Trump should have ended it day one.

This will not harm America. This will result in higher wages and more jobs for Americans.

Also most DACA recipients are in their 20s, not children.

You forgot the sarcasm tag.

 

[Ryika]

Less competition for jobs drives wages down, not up.

Please explain further, this sounds interesting.

 

[civver_764]

Can you explain the mechanism by which this will create jobs and drive up wages, or is that merely an article of faith?

It's pretty self-evident. Illegal immigration adds more supply to the labor market without increasing the demand for labor, which results in a lower price for that labor. Getting rid of that extra supply will drive the price of labor back up.

 

[plarq]

How will this lead to higher wages? I don't see the connection

If we follow that Reagan's illegal immigration policy was part of wage depression, then deportation will bring wage rise?

However, economics have some irreversibility mechanism built-in, just like physics. When businesses have been adapted to the lower wages, they will refuse to hire people for higher wages, therefore, they would simply close down, causing the demand and price to contract instead of expansion.

Of course, long term effect would be a higher wage and lower labor supply.

 

[metalhead]

It's pretty self-evident. Illegal immigration adds more supply to the labor market without increasing the demand for labor, which results a lower price for that labor. Getting rid of that extra supply will drive the price of labor back up.

Wait, adding supply doesn't create demand? You sure you really want to go with that?

Ending DACA affects legal immigration, so your post doesn't even make sense. The whole point was that DACA recipients in essence made a certain class of immigrants legal. So your entire premise is inapplicable to DACA.

 

[Kyriakos]

We have ID cards - had them since forever. It doesn't make sense to attend school/uni if you aren't even a citizen, cause you may be deported if found.
I think the logical solution would be to let states legislate themselves (ie each state can do whatever, with the federal entity giving incentives for whatever) and therefore if the popular view of state citizens is to not deport they can legalize those people (which is the only way to allow them to lead a normal life) or deport them if the popular support is for that. Maybe have it be some increased support (eg >60% of the state vote in a referendum) to do either.

I am sure that there will just be more trolling and no solution, though, cause that is how things need to be to play people against people.

 

[civver_764]

Wait, adding supply doesn't create demand? You sure you really want to go with that?

Dude it's well documented that immigration depresses wages, ESPECIALLY for low-skilled workers, the poor Americans you claim to care so much about. There's really no arguing on this point.

DACA made it legal immigration, so your post doesn't even make sense. The whole point was that DACA recipients in essence made a certain class of immigrants legal. So your entire premise is inapplicable to DACA.

ANY immigration will have this effect. DACA is even worse because it incentivizes people to ignore our laws and come here illegally.

 

[warpus]

It's pretty self-evident. Illegal immigration adds more supply to the labor market without increasing the demand for labor, which results in a lower price for that labor. Getting rid of that extra supply will drive the price of labor back up.

Got a case study of this phenomenon leading to higher wages in the past?

If it's so self-evident, it's bound to have happened in the past, whether it was in the U.S. or somewhere else. So let's see the documentation

 

[sophie]

We have ID cards - had them since forever. It doesn't make sense to attend school/uni if you aren't even a citizen, cause you may be deported if found.
I think the logical solution would be to let states legislate themselves (ie each state can do whatever, with the federal entity giving incentives for whatever) and therefore if the popular view of state citizens is to not deport they can legalize those people (which is the only way to allow them to lead a normal life) or deport them if the popular support is for that. Maybe have it be some increased support (eg >60% of the state vote in a referendum) to do either.

I am sure that there will just be more trolling and no solution, though, cause that is how things need to be to play people against people.

Not possible legally as the constitution grants absolute control over immigration and border controls to the Federal government. You'd need a constitutional amendment to allow states to decide their own immigration policy. Not that that would be at all desirable given states are not allowed/supposed to have border checks between each other. It would just create an enormous bureaucratic nightmare. I do agree we should have a national id system (Not a social security number/card though!)

 

[metalhead]

Dude it's well documented that immigration depresses wages, ESPECIALLY for low-skilled workers, the poor Americans you claim to care so much about. There's really no arguing on this point.

ANY immigration will have this effect. DACA is even worse because it incentivizes people to ignore our laws and come here illegally.

You don't appear to understand the issue very well. DACA only applied to children brought here prior to 2008. There is no incentive to new migrants because they wouldn't qualify for the program. You're commenting on this from a place of complete ignorance.

Also, why would immigrants be bad for the economy, but domestically-born people be good for the economy? That claim makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, that all immigration is bad for the economy. It's pretty basically understood that population growth is a driver of economic growth. Trying to rewrite that basic truth is idiocy.

 

[sophie]

Also they have to have been younger than 16 when they arrived, and no older than 31, and had a GED or be presently in school (or have been honorably discharged from the military) and had never been convicted of a felony. Seems like a pretty hare-brained scheme for any migrant workers trying to sneak their kid in so their kid (and not them) could someday in the future maybe secure a work visa that may or may not be extended indefinitely.

You're better off just sneaking into the country and having a baby on US soil. But that too doesn't really do anything to ensure permanent residence status for the parents. I mean, this is the primary argument for why illegal immigration/refugees are bad for the economy, right? You're just letting in a bunch of un-acclimatized, unskilled, unmotivated, uneducated workers who would contribute productively to the country? DACA vets its applicants against any of this being the case.