Why Shouldnt DACA Illegal Aliens Be Deported

[alang1216]

Perhaps we are suffering from compassion overload. Illegal aliens are pushing this issue to the point of being excessive to the point I don't care anymore.

Or perhaps some people are using immigration fears to separate the electorate into opposing camps?

 

[protectionist]

I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US.

NOW you have >>

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1325

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

 

[protectionist]

One million in a country of 300 million.

Right. Already over 320 million and RAPIDLY CLIMBING at an exponential rate in a county that was already crowded enough and full when it only had 200 million in it. Why don't you invite some more in, Jackass! Where is all that concern for environment and resources you have any other time?

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

17. Influx of terrorists (ex. ISIS with "Syrian refugees")

 

[protectionist]

Wrong and wrong. The population of the United States would be shrinking if not for immigration. I'm a city type so as far as I'm concerned there's plenty of room here.

As a geographer and planner, I correct you. The optimum population of the USA, relative to resource base is about 30 million. We passed that mark in 1860.

Had we stayed at that population, then like Canada (with a pop about 30 million), we would have been EXporting oil, and making lots of money from it, instead of running up a huge debt & deficits.

Instead, for decades, we have been IMporting 2/3 of our oil. # 1 supplier ? >> Canada

 

[danielpalos]

The illegal aliens commonly referred to as DACA (Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals) have become a major impasse between Democrats and Republicans.

DACA is an executive order that was illegally enacted byBarrack Obama, and that alone couldshould define deportation as the proper action. In addition to Obama's recklessness (to boost Democrat VOTES), the DACA people did come here illegally, and like all other illegal aliens, fit the description of th 17 "Harms of Immigration", just as much as those who came here as adults. In fact, since thy will live longer, they are MORE of a harm than the adult arrivees.

So to PROTECT the American people (always the # 1 responsibility of government) from these many long-lasting harms, shouldn't ALL illegl aliens be deported ? Should we be puting empathy for the DACAs oer protection of the American people, in contradiction to the protecive immigration laws that our ancestors provided fr us ? I think not.

Sure the deportations could result in family separations, but that is a problem that is caused by those who came here illegally, not th American people. Also, recent studies are now showing that there are very few fmiy separations from deportations, wih families sticking together and all going back to the old country, together as a unit.

Some major points have been overlooked in th DACA discussions. One is that the DACAs ar overwhelmingly Hispanic, and Hispanics tend to vote Democrat (which is why Democrats fight so fiercly for them). So keeping them in th US has adverse political effects on Republicans.

The other points are firmly embedded in the 17 points of Harms of Immigration * which if polls are correct, show how ignorant Americans are about immigration - to support something so harmful to them.

* Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

Red herrings are a right wing specialty.

First, create a problem with your socialism on a national basis, and then claim we need more socialism on a national basis.

Immigration is not tourism. We would have more tourism with a simpler visa program.

 

[alang1216]

I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US.

NOW you have >>

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VIII > § 1325

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

I think our laws recognize that a one-year old is not capable of criminal behavior.

 

[alang1216]

Wrong and wrong. The population of the United States would be shrinking if not for immigration. I'm a city type so as far as I'm concerned there's plenty of room here.

As a geographer and planner, I correct you. The optimum population of the USA, relative to resource base is about 30 million. We passed that mark in 1860.

Had we stayed at that population, then like Canada (with a pop about 30 million), we would have been EXporting oil, and making lots of money from it, instead of running up a huge debt & deficits.

Instead, for decades, we have been IMporting 2/3 of our oil. # 1 supplier ? >> Canada

Then you're not a very good geographer or planner. There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.

 

[protectionist]

Yes, yes--Hell Yeah, you have it explained perfectly The money goes out of our "economy" and in to theirs. But it's just the money. It has another component. The WORK. The work stays here. It has already been done. We get the work, they get the "money".

You think that is a bad thing? Seriously? OK, then look at it in another way. We get the PRODUCTIVITY, they get the increase in money supply.

I mean you understand that the Federal Reserve just cranking out the dollars is not a good thing, right? More dollars, same amount of goods, or works, or resources. Whatever, it don't make a shit. Well then why can't you understand the taking out dollars, "poof", disappearing them in to some far off foreign land, while at the same time creating more "work", or goods, or resources here is an awesome thing.

Damn, like Japan printing a boatload of counterfeit money and dropping it in the US economy. Damn near the same thing as the money immigrants "bomb" the countries where their families are. It was considered an act of war back then, now you act like those receiving countries are winning the lottery.

Now, here is how that whole immigrant workers increasing pay works. Let's say you are a bricklayer. Your employer hires an immigrant worker to haul the bricks and make the cement. You used to haul the bricks and make the cement. He makes less than you. Now you have more time to lay bricks. Your employer get's paid by the brick. Now he can pay you more, pay the immigrant, and still profit from the increased, wait for it, PRODUCTIVITY. You did get that, "profit more", right?

No matter how you try to spin it. No matter how much your bias draws you to the conclusion that immigrants cost the US, you are wrong. It is hard to find an economist that would support your position. And history doesn't support it either. When immigration increases productivity, and wages, increase along with that increase. It has been proven time and time again. And perhaps more importantly, when we restrict immigration too aggressively, our economy tanks as productivity declines and creativity and ingenuity drop.

YOU are the spinner, and YOU are wrong. Too may words. Too little logic.

Aliens taking money out of the US (rather than Americans spending it here) DEPRIVES US businesses of $138 Billion/year in sales$$$$, and US employees being deprived of all the benefits$$ that would go to them from all those sales. It weakens our economy by just that much. No amount of wordy posts can change that.
This is not a debateable issue.

On a smaller scale, it's like having your neighbor come over to your house, and remove your belongings (TV, stereo, computer, etc) every month for years, and reinsert it all into HIS house. Get it ?


So if you're OK with this scenario, I'll be that neighbor and remove your stuff, and take it to my house. Cool with you ? (so it would seem) I could use another TV set.

 

[protectionist]

Then you're not a very good geographer or planner. There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.

You could take my Geography class if you like (City University of New York) Only problem is, you'll flunk it.

 

[protectionist]

I think our laws recognize that a one-year old is not capable of criminal behavior.

No. but we are capable of recognizing that kids who break laws (with or without intent), aren't the same as kids who don't. (as you tried to say in Post # 56) >> Your words >> " I haven't seen anything that says the DACA kids are any worse than any other kids in the US."

 

[protectionist]

Red herrings are a right wing specialty.

First, create a problem with your socialism on a national basis, and then claim we need more socialism on a national basis.

Immigration is not tourism. We would have more tourism with a simpler visa program.

Right wing is not promoting "socialism" - you can go back to sleep now. Dreams work better that way.

 

[alang1216]

Then you're not a very good geographer or planner. There is no definition of 'optimum' and it certainly changes with the level of technology.

You could take my Geography class if you like (City University of New York) Only problem is, you'll flunk it.

I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something. I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.

 

[danielpalos]

Red herrings are a right wing specialty.

First, create a problem with your socialism on a national basis, and then claim we need more socialism on a national basis.

Immigration is not tourism. We would have more tourism with a simpler visa program.

Right wing is not promoting "socialism" - you can go back to sleep now. Dreams work better that way.

Applied capitalism, all the way, right wingers!

 

[Winston]

Yes, yes--Hell Yeah, you have it explained perfectly The money goes out of our "economy" and in to theirs. But it's just the money. It has another component. The WORK. The work stays here. It has already been done. We get the work, they get the "money".

You think that is a bad thing? Seriously? OK, then look at it in another way. We get the PRODUCTIVITY, they get the increase in money supply.

I mean you understand that the Federal Reserve just cranking out the dollars is not a good thing, right? More dollars, same amount of goods, or works, or resources. Whatever, it don't make a shit. Well then why can't you understand the taking out dollars, "poof", disappearing them in to some far off foreign land, while at the same time creating more "work", or goods, or resources here is an awesome thing.

Damn, like Japan printing a boatload of counterfeit money and dropping it in the US economy. Damn near the same thing as the money immigrants "bomb" the countries where their families are. It was considered an act of war back then, now you act like those receiving countries are winning the lottery.

Now, here is how that whole immigrant workers increasing pay works. Let's say you are a bricklayer. Your employer hires an immigrant worker to haul the bricks and make the cement. You used to haul the bricks and make the cement. He makes less than you. Now you have more time to lay bricks. Your employer get's paid by the brick. Now he can pay you more, pay the immigrant, and still profit from the increased, wait for it, PRODUCTIVITY. You did get that, "profit more", right?

No matter how you try to spin it. No matter how much your bias draws you to the conclusion that immigrants cost the US, you are wrong. It is hard to find an economist that would support your position. And history doesn't support it either. When immigration increases productivity, and wages, increase along with that increase. It has been proven time and time again. And perhaps more importantly, when we restrict immigration too aggressively, our economy tanks as productivity declines and creativity and ingenuity drop.

YOU are the spinner, and YOU are wrong. Too may words. Too little logic.

Aliens taking money out of the US (rather than Americans spending it here) DEPRIVES US businesses of $138 Billion/year in sales$$$$, and US employees being deprived of all the benefits$$ that would go to them from all those sales. It weakens our economy by just that much. No amount of wordy posts can change that.
This is not a debateable issue.

On a smaller scale, it's like having your neighbor come over to your house, and remove your belongings (TV, stereo, computer, etc) every month for years, and reinsert it all into HIS house. Get it ?


So if you're OK with this scenario, I'll be that neighbor and remove your stuff, and take it to my house. Cool with you ? (so it would seem) I could use another TV set.

Your argument is stupid. You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE. It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders. Who does that, outside the sellers? My wife spends way too much money with wish.com. She sends it to China. Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day. Do you complain about that? And of course there is tourism. I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country. And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries. Do you complain about that?

And your analogy is stupid too. No goods are being sent abroad, just dollars. And as I have pointed out, that is a GOOD THING. It means less dollars here competing for the same amount of goods. It as if you were buying a car, negotiated a good price, and then some immigrant comes along and offers the dealer more. How would you feel about that?

 

[protectionist]

Your argument is stupid. You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE. It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders. Who does that, outside the sellers? My wife spends way too much money with wish.com. She sends it to China. Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day. Do you complain about that? And of course there is tourism. I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country. And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries. Do you complain about that?

And your analogy is stupid too. No goods are being sent abroad, just dollars. And as I have pointed out, that is a GOOD THING. It means less dollars here competing for the same amount of goods. It as if you were buying a car, negotiated a good price, and then some immigrant comes along and offers the dealer more. How would you feel about that?

I'm wasting my time talking to an imbecile like you. Remittances$$ have nothing to do with auction bidding. Do you think you're going to come in here and snow people ? You're an ass. You have no idea what I'm talking about.

Yes, of course I complain about money being sent to China. And Mexico, And India, etc. >> Remittances. 21st century imperialism. So America being pillaged for its wealth is a good thing for America, huh ? And I suppose you'd think 10th century Brits were ecstatic about being plundered by Vikings, and having their wealth taken from them. Is there a doctor in the house ? I mean really.

And my offer to pillage your house (TV, computer, stereo, DVD player, etc) is still open.

 

[protectionist]

I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something. I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.

Technology or no technology, population scenarios scarcely have changed over 160+ years. I notice you failed to answer my point about Canada population vs US population, and Canada oil exports and our US imports of them, which continued for decades, (during many changes of technology). Nice try, but you're flunking grandly.

 

[Winston]

Your argument is stupid. You are complaining that those immigrants are not spending their money HERE. It as if you are at an auction and complaining that there are not enough bidders. Who does that, outside the sellers? My wife spends way too much money with wish.com. She sends it to China. Millions of dollars are sent to China by Americans every single day. Do you complain about that? And of course there is tourism. I suppose we should outlaw that, damn people taking money away from here and spending it in some foreign country. And don't even get me started about all the money the military spends in those foreign countries. Do you complain about that?

And your analogy is stupid too. No goods are being sent abroad, just dollars. And as I have pointed out, that is a GOOD THING. It means less dollars here competing for the same amount of goods. It as if you were buying a car, negotiated a good price, and then some immigrant comes along and offers the dealer more. How would you feel about that?

I'm wasting my time talking to an imbecile like you. Remittances$$ have nothing to do with auction bidding. Do you think you're going to come in here and snow people ? You're an ass. You have no idea what I'm talking about.

Yes, of course I complain about money being sent to China. And Mexico, And India, etc. >> Remittances. 21st century imperialism. So America being pillaged for its wealth is a good thing for America, huh ? And I suppose you'd think 10th century Brits were ecstatic about being plundered by Vikings, and having their wealth taken from them. Is there a doctor in the house ? I mean really.

And my offer to pillage your house (TV, computer, stereo, DVD player, etc) is still open.

Pull your head out of your ass and learn something.

Opinion: Why remittances are good for America - CNN

 

[alang1216]

One million in a country of 300 million.

Right. Already over 320 million and RAPIDLY CLIMBING at an exponential rate in a county that was already crowded enough and full when it only had 200 million in it. Why don't you invite some more in, Jackass! Where is all that concern for environment and resources you have any other time?

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

17. Influx of terrorists (ex. ISIS with "Syrian refugees")

I'm sure you'd flunk me but maybe I should teach the class and your students might learn something. I noticed you reponded to my first sentence but failed to answer my second one.

Technology or no technology, population scenarios scarcely have changed over 160+ years. I notice you failed to answer my point about Canada population vs US population, and Canada oil exports and our US imports of them, which continued for decades, (during many changes of technology). Nice try, but you're flunking grandly.

If you are what you say you are you'd know it is under-developed economies that export raw materials to the 1st world economies that utilize them. On the other hand, as frac'ing technology improves, the US is becoming an exporter of energy.

Did the US become stronger or weaker during the 19th and 20th centuries when our population expanded dramatically?

 

[protectionist]

Pull your head out of your ass and learn something.

Opinion: Why remittances are good for America - CNN

CNN. HA HA HA.

When do I get to remove all that stuff from your house (with your blessing) ?

 

[protectionist]

If you are what you say you are you'd know it is under-developed economies that export raw materials to the 1st world economies that utilize them. On the other hand, as frac'ing technology improves, the US is becoming an exporter of energy.

Did the US become stronger or weaker during the 19th and 20th centuries when our population expanded dramatically?

Canada, with their small population, has been the # 1 supplier (by a wide margin) of oil to the US, and its large population, for decades. You haven't addressed this...and you won't.


Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($138 Billion/year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

17. Influx of terrorists (ex. ISIS with "Syrian refugees")