What The Hell Do You Have To Lose

[Ricky LIbtardo]

Even the L.A. Times is running op-ed's making fools of the libtardos.

They tossed American born minorities under the bus to secure a voting block, kicked unions in the head but still demanded campaign contributions, and created a political crisis in our country for one goal only, Socialism.

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

What scares the hell out of libtardos?

The truth, and the fact Trump was right when he asked Blacks and Latinos who are citizens, What The Hell Do You Have To Lose???????

Of course our sweet little snowflakes don't have the balls to read this. It's not a safe space.


What the 'Dreamer' fight is really about

 

[mudwhistle]

Even the L.A. Times is running op-ed's making fools of the libtardos.

They tossed American born minorities under the bus to secure a voting block, kicked unions in the head but still demanded campaign contributions, and created a political crisis in our country for one goal only, Socialism.

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

What scares the hell out of libtardos?

The truth, and the fact Trump was right when he asked Blacks and Latinos who are citizens, What The Hell Do You Have To Lose???????

Of course our sweet little snowflakes don't have the balls to read this. It's not a safe space.


What the 'Dreamer' fight is really about

Obama didn't have the courage to deal with this when he had a majority.
He intentionally put it off till 2011.....and just created an unconstitutional nightmare.

 

[Ricky LIbtardo]

Even the L.A. Times is running op-ed's making fools of the libtardos.

They tossed American born minorities under the bus to secure a voting block, kicked unions in the head but still demanded campaign contributions, and created a political crisis in our country for one goal only, Socialism.

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

What scares the hell out of libtardos?

The truth, and the fact Trump was right when he asked Blacks and Latinos who are citizens, What The Hell Do You Have To Lose???????

Of course our sweet little snowflakes don't have the balls to read this. It's not a safe space.


What the 'Dreamer' fight is really about

Obama didn't have the courage to deal with this when he had a majority.
He intentionally put it off till 2011.....and just created an unconstitutional nightmare.

Fake News will fan the flames of racism as usual and the shithole shitshow will continue as nothing gets done.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

Seriously? Do you truly not understand the difference between wanting something for political reasons and something one wants for ethical reasons having political consequences? It seems by the nature of your assertion that you might well not for what Democrats have been doing is pleading for a legislative solution that effects an end to "saga," as you put it and that is equitable to DACA people, who, quite frankly, have been little other than every bit as much contributors to the U.S. as are native-born Americans.

• Education and employment profiles of DACA people
• FACT CHECK: Are DACA Recipients Stealing Jobs Away From Other Americans?
  
• These 15 statistics will teach you what you need to know about DACA
  
• DREAMers are less likely to be incarcerated than nativeborn Americans with the same age and education. DACAineligible illegal immigrants and all other legal immigrants are even less likely to be incarcerated. The incarceration rate for DREAMers is closer to that of native-born Americans because they came here at a younger age and are more assimilated into American culture.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

 

[nat4900]

Obama didn't have the courage to deal with this when he had a majority.
He intentionally put it off till 2011.....and just created an unconstitutional nightmare.

ATTA boy, MudFace.....when all else fails, BLAME OBAMA!!!!................LOL

 

[Ricky LIbtardo]

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

Seriously? Do you truly not understand the difference between wanting something for political reasons and something one wants for ethical reasons having political consequences? It seems by the nature of your assertion that you might well not for what Democrats have been doing is pleading for a legislative solution that effects an end to "saga," as you put it and that is equitable to DACA people, who, quite frankly, have been little other than every bit as much contributors to the U.S. as are native-born Americans.

• Education and employment profiles of DACA people
• FACT CHECK: Are DACA Recipients Stealing Jobs Away From Other Americans?
  
• These 15 statistics will teach you what you need to know about DACA
  
• DREAMers are less likely to be incarcerated than nativeborn Americans with the same age and education. DACAineligible illegal immigrants and all other legal immigrants are even less likely to be incarcerated. The incarceration rate for DREAMers is closer to that of native-born Americans because they came here at a younger age and are more assimilated into American culture.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Read the fucking article and the corresponding surveys, snowflake.


Surveys suggest that most are not in school; fewer than 5% have graduated from college. Those employed earn a median hourly wage of $15.34, which means they are forced to compete on the lower end of the wage ladder. Only about a tenth of 1% of DACA youth serve in the U.S. military — fewer than 900 total.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Trump was right, Democrats don't really want a DACA fix, they want the saga to continue for political reasons which are creating more problems for everyone.

Seriously? Do you truly not understand the difference between wanting something for political reasons and something one wants for ethical reasons having political consequences? It seems by the nature of your assertion that you might well not for what Democrats have been doing is pleading for a legislative solution that effects an end to "saga," as you put it and that is equitable to DACA people, who, quite frankly, have been little other than every bit as much contributors to the U.S. as are native-born Americans.

• Education and employment profiles of DACA people
• FACT CHECK: Are DACA Recipients Stealing Jobs Away From Other Americans?
  
• These 15 statistics will teach you what you need to know about DACA
  
• DREAMers are less likely to be incarcerated than nativeborn Americans with the same age and education. DACAineligible illegal immigrants and all other legal immigrants are even less likely to be incarcerated. The incarceration rate for DREAMers is closer to that of native-born Americans because they came here at a younger age and are more assimilated into American culture.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Read the fucking article and the corresponding surveys, snowflake.

Surveys suggest that most are not in school; fewer than 5% have graduated from college. Those employed earn a median hourly wage of $15.34, which means they are forced to compete on the lower end of the wage ladder. Only about a tenth of 1% of DACA youth serve in the U.S. military — fewer than 900 total.

Read the fucking article and the corresponding surveys, snowflake.

Read the webpages on which are found the article and so-called "corresponding surveys," fool. Also, I suggest you read the following:

• Merriam-Webster's dictionary, most notably the entries for survey/research and editorial.
  
• Critical Thinking Skills For Dummies -- While one need not be a dummy to find value in the "For Dummies" series of publications, in your case the "for dummies" aspect fits to a tee, which why it's where I suggest you commence your sojourn to develop some measure of perspicacity.
  
• Logic for Dummies -- Individuals disinclined to spend money on a text about logic can obtain good introductory logic content at Logically Fallacious, thus avoiding having to spend money instead read and master the content found

Why:

1. The article you reference is an editorial. One knows it is because at the top of the LA Times webpage where it appears it is clearly classified as such.
   
   
   
   
   
2. The "survey" to which it links is yet another editorial.
   
   
   
   
   
   In the WaPo editorial one finds the following sentence: " A recent survey for several pro-dreamer groups, with participants recruited by those groups, found that while most dreamers are not in school, the vast majority work." Upon clicking on the hyperlinked words "a recent survey," one is taken to the following page:
   
   
   
   
   
   There is in the WaPo editorial no link to other surveys pertaining to the employment and wage-earning characteristics of DREAMers. [1]

So, exactly what survey did you read as a result of having read the article you referenced?

Additionally, I suggested you read then content noted above because you need to learn the skills needed to execute a far more rigorous degree of circumspection about the "popular" content you do indeed read, and goes equally for things you read that align with your own orthodoxy and things you read that do not do so.

Note:

1. The link is for a Center for American Progress survey. The Newsweek article I linked in post 4 also references it, and upon clicking on the link for it, one is taken to the same non-existent survey. I don't know where be found the survey, and insofar as you, not I, are the one whose position relies on what that survey found, I'm not going to look for it for you. For all I know, the Center for American Progress may have retracted the survey and its results.

Surveys suggest that most are not in school; fewer than 5% have graduated from college.

Read the content to which I linked. The documents to which I linked do at least exist, and even if they move to new web addresses (but not if they are retracted/deleted), I, unlike the writers and editors of those editorials you bid me to read, provide document titles that one can at least copy and paste them into Google's search field, or one's own browser address bar, to readily find them.

I'm not going to summarize the content in post 4's document to which linked that is titled "
Education and employment profiles of DACA people." The title identifies quite clearly the nature of information one can expect to find there.

I also do not take exception with the assertion that 5% or fewer have graduated from college. I don't because (1) for the point I was making, it's irrelevant, (2) for the point Hanson attempted to make, it's irrelevant, and (3) the age range of the DACA-eligible population is 15-32. It's safe to say that of that population none, or nearly so, between the ages of 15 and 20 have graduated from college. One can safely say that of just about any subset of the entire U.S. population and of the U.S. population as a whole. Examining the age distribution of the population of DACA enrollees, one finds that something just over 66% of them are 25 or younger.

​

There is also the matter that DACA-enrollees/-eligible folks have a median household income of ~$48K, it's not surprising that many do not go to college. (Click on this sentence for detailed information about the U.S. median household income, which varies by locality (states and within states). The most recently reported U.S. median household income is ~$57.6K/year. The average U.S. household income in 2014 was about $73K.)

Surveys suggest that most are not in school; fewer than 5% have graduated from college.

Were one, you Ricky LIbtardo in particular, to read the study I cited rather than assuming I didn't read the article linked in the OP, one'd know, as of August 2017, exactly how many DACA people are in school and what share of the whole DACA community they comprise.

That most DREAMers are not in school is (1) not surprising and (2) indicative of little that is germane to the normative question of whether DREAMers should be permitted to remain in the U.S. Most people in nearly any population, or population subset, comprised of 15-31 year olds are not in school. Additionally, of the people who are in school at four-year colleges/universities, 86% to 89%, depending on whether the school is public or private, are 25 or under.

It thus stands to reason that inasmuch as DACA enrollees/DACA-eligible individuals are not different from the general population as go educational aspirations, and insofar as, in general, people between 15 and 18 years-old are not in college because they haven't graduated from high school, and 15% or fewer of the people who do go to college do so between the ages of 18 and 25, it's no surprise that most DACA people aren't in school. Most people who are in the age cohort applicable to DACA enrollees and DACA-eligible people also aren't in school.

______________________________________________________________________________________


As go some specific statements in Dr. Hanson's editorial:

Democrats are demanding the preservation and institutionalization of the DACA program....To get their way, they are counting on either favorable public opinion or threats to shut down the government.

Well, duh....Those are the only tools available to a party that lacks control of the WH and Congress.

I'm a bit surprised Hanson wrote that. It's the sort of thing that "Captain Obvious" would say thinking that "his" reader would construe that such a disempowered has any other alternative.

Democrats are demanding the preservation and institutionalization of the DACA program. One day soon, they will likely demand its expansion....Democrats are so focused on the 800,000 Dreamers because they're politically photogenic....Setting aside the reality of the Dreamer pool, the Democrats' method of fighting for DACA suggests that they are broadly in favor of letting immigration dysfunction continue apace.

AFAIK, the Democrats have indicated they are amenable to denying DACA inclusion to future minor illegal immigrants to the U.S.; however, they of a mind to allow those who are here and eligible/enrolled under the current DACA policy to stay and obtain permanent residency or citizenship. Essentially, from what I can tell, the Democratic position consists of forgiving current DACA people for the transgressions of their parents who brought them here and denying any such concession to future individuals who arrive illegally in the as a consequence of having accompanied their parents.

Also, as far as I can tell and insofar as there are but some 700K to 1.4M DACA people, there is little direct political value, other than being seen as broadly compassionate, to insisting on permitting current DACA people to stay in the U.S.

Why else would they refuse to give President Trump any significant concessions in the DACA negotiations — no wall, no end to chain migration, no cessation of visa lotteries?

Insofar as the DREAMer policy that was enacted was indeed enacted, what about acquiescing to the "grandfathering" of currently enrolled/eligible DACA people and not expanding the eligibility of it or offering it to future migrants isn't a concession?

After all, Trump himself called on Congress to craft non-deportation protections for DACA people. Designing and enacting those protections does not require one to predicate them on anything else. When you need a plan for accomplishing a task, "T," you have determined needs to be accomplished, do you predicate and confound developing and implementing that plan on/with other things when "T" can performed without regard to and impact on whatever else one may or may need to do?

Now, I realize that perhaps you might, but I can assure you that rational people do not deliberately (attempt to) confound mutually independent tasks and create dependencies where none exist inherently.

Democrats once used to talk about ending outright illegal immigration.

WTH does "ending outright illegal immigration" even mean? To the extent they condone there being any laws that limit the terms by which on can be in and remain in the U.S. and while those laws are in force, there are likely going to be people who violate them; thus the only way to end illegal immigration is to eliminate the laws that define terms by which people can reside in the U.S. I don't know of any Democratic Congress members or Presidents who've proposed repealing all immigration laws. Do you?

A new generation of progressive Democrats has recalibrated mass illegal immigration as a godsend. Over the last 20 years, it has vastly expanded the Latino vote...Many pre-Trump Republicans favored illegal immigration too, although for different reasons: They worried more about obtaining workers rather than future constituents and voters. The Chamber of Commerce/Wall Street wing of the GOP thus ignored the issue for the last half-century.

The fact of the matter is that illegal immigrants cannot register to vote and no rigorous, credible and soundly structured studies into the mater of fraudulent voting have found that fraudulent voting of an noteworthy volume has occurred in any recent election.

It may be that Democrats have some measure of forbearance toward illegal immigrants in general and to illegal immigration in general; however, your claim with which I took exception is that their reason for doing so is political. Of what political value to representatives and parties are people who cannot vote? Little to none. Similarly, the GOP didn't much care about the political value of illegal immigrants. It cared about condoning its rich, thus influential, business-owning constituency's desire for labor, a desire that was going unmet among the extant U.S. populace at the time. Quite simply, legal or illegal, if an employer has a job that can be filled by anyone who show's up for work and doesn't expire while working, the residency status of the worker is of little import.

Now, however, a newly ascendant conservative base objects to illegal immigration for many of the same reasons Democrats did historically. One exception, of sorts, is that even most hard-liners [who matter, not the nitwits on USMB and elsewhere] do not wish suddenly to deport all 10 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally, at least those who have not committed crimes, are not on public assistance, are fully employed and are willing to pay fines and to learn English to obtain green cards....The Dreamer debate is therefore an easy one for the many Beltway Republicans not truly committed to fixing our immigration system. They're all too happy to extend de facto amnesties and won't face much backlash for doing so.

With regard to this political consequence of the position Republicans take on illegal immigration in general, Hanson is, IMO, likely right. I don't have any research to support thinking he's right, but neither did he present any.

As of 2015, 46.6 million people living in the United States were not born here. That is the highest number in American history — about four times greater than the number of immigrants living in any other nation on Earth.

Be that as it may, given that count data/figures are not fitting metric for evaluating qualities found in multiple discrete populations when the populations compared are of materially different sizes. It's beyond me why he used a count metric to support an assertion that calls for proportional metrics to support it. Perhaps, as with many others as goes their demonstrated thinking on immigration matters, he allows pathos to vanquish logos?

An irate public has had it with open borders.

The U.S. does not have open border. The presence of the existing border fencing, immigration statutes accompanied by funding for ICE demonstrates as much. I won't deny that a material share of the citizenry will attest to being "fed up" with open borders for I have seen plenty evidence that is the case. What I also have observed is that the open borders with which they're fed up are in fact not open borders.

_______________________________________________________________________________________


The fact of the matter is that I did read Dr. Hanson's editorial, and I did read the WaPo editorial to which he linked for the purpose of citing a nonexistent survey. While I respect Hanson's credentials as a classicist -- he is indeed a well renowned expert on ancient Western civilizations -- his essay on why the Democrats cleave to the positions they have re: DACA people and policy -- for political expediency -- are malarky. Could he be correct that political expediency is the reason Democrats hold their current views as they do? It could be, but the argument Hanson in his editorial provides for thinking so does not hold water because so many of the premises he uses to support that conclusion are not accurate/true.