Warning: WH seeks to limit/deport immigrants using ACA and other gov. services

[BRUTE]

Trump and the press seem more like two chemical compounds reacting with each other than manipulation in the conscious sense that word evokes.

[jacob]

Here we go again:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1S91UR

[George the original one]

Remember "why can't we get immigrants from good countries"? Back at the time of the "shithole countries" quote? Yeah, turns out Trump isn't interested in the good countries either. He continues to push for limiting ALL immigration, not just eliminating illegal immigration.

[FIRE 2018]

A police chief in red state Texas said it best. When ICE was going to start making deportation arrests, the local police would not be involved. As the chief stated

" We arrest crooks, we don't arrest cooks "

[Campitor]

I don't agree with deporting someone who has legally made it into the US regardless if they use public assistance within 5 years. But public assistance should be limited and not an open ended ticket to early retirement for those of sound mind and body.

And while I agree with not arresting "cooks", I do agree with preventing illegal immigration and border crossings. Keep importing cooks and you'll make it harder for existing cooks to find a job since those employment opportunities are finite despite the ubiquity of restaurants. You're unintentionally harming low wage earners by allowing a massive influx of low skilled undocumented workers. How does hiring illegals help legal low wage earners? And how is it fair to the existing illegals working low wage jobs to allow more low skilled workers in that directly compete for their jobs?

And It's so odd that a community that is "ERE", which believes in husbanding resources and using assets judiciously, can't see the irony of supporting unrestricted immigration that puts a strain on finite resources. And with the wave of mandated benefits and the raising of the wage floor, low skilled workers will experience greater difficulty getting hired since most business will be forced to cut back on staff or resort to automation. Advocating for unrestricted low wage immigration (legal or illegal) is no different than packing 100 people on a boat rated for 40 passengers.

The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Wages and Employment Opportunities of Black Workers; A Briefing Before The United States Commission on Civil Rights Held in Washington, DC:

1. There has been a significant rise in U.S. immigration, both legal and illegal, over the past four decades. Experts at our briefing testified that immigrant workers now make up approximately one-seventh of the American workforce, and they estimated that illegal workers account for one-third of the total immigrants now in the U.S. [Approved (4-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot and Kirsanow voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against; Commissioner Taylor did not vote.]
2. Illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to increase the supply of low-skilled, low-wage labor available in the U.S. labor market. [Approved (5-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against.]
3. About six in 10 adult black males have a high school diploma or less, and black men are disproportionately employed in the low-skilled labor market, where they are more likely to be in labor competition with immigrants. [Approved (4-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Heriot, Kirsanow and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against; Commissioner Gaziano abstained.]
4. The average worker with a high school degree or less earns less today, adjusted for inflation, than someone with a similar education earned thirty-five years ago. [Approved (5-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against.]
5. Illegal immigration to the United States in recent decades has tended to depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men. Expert economic opinions concerning the negative effects range from modest to significant. Those panelists that found modest effects overall nonetheless found significant effects in industry sectors such as meatpacking and construction. [Approved (5-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against.]
6. To be sure, factors other than illegal immigration contribute to black unemployment. The problem cannot be solved without solving the problems of the high school dropout rate, high rates of family instability, and low job-retention rates. Moreover, halting illegal immigration is not a panacea even for the problem of depressed wage rates for low-skilled jobs. If upward pressure is brought to bear on low-skilled wages, increasing globalization of the economy may result in some of these jobs simply being exported to other countries. Still, the effect of illegal immigration on the wages of low-skilled workers, who are disproportionately minority members, is a piece of the puzzle that must be considered by policymakers in formulating sound immigration policy. [Approved (5-1): Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against.]
7. Data collection and analysis of the effects of illegal immigration are necessary to develop sound public policy. Much of the data on this question is currently limited by the fact that it does not distinguish clearly between legal and illegal immigration. [Approved (5-1: Chairman Reynolds and Commissioners Gaziano, Heriot, Kirsanow, and Taylor voted in favor; Commissioner Yaki voted against.]

[FIRE 2018]

In the USA we have 2 parties in Congress that have different viewpoints. One supports immigrants , the other party does not.

[jacob]

@Campitor - Having illegal immigrants with no/less rights in the labor pool lowers the rate of labor. I believe this is exactly why congress will never enact a comprehensive immigration reform. It's simply too good of a business to be able to hire workers-without-rights who can be deported at-will. Sure this harms low wage workers-with-rights, but it is really profitable for the businesses who employ illegal labor. There's a lot of money to be made particularly in the food, service, and construction industries by not fixing the problem... and these guys lobby hard! Naturally, it has, therefore not been fixed, and likely it will not be fixed. The problem now is that illegal labor has been so ingrained in those industries that they now depend on it. It would be hard to unroll this problem which has become structural even if money wasn't an issue. When some local police chief says he's not going to assist ICE, he's probably acting on orders from the mayor who is taking his cue from the local meat-packing plant or large real estate developer, say.

But that's besides the point of this thread. The issue here are legal immigrants who for one reason or another, perhaps because ACA was mandatory, used public assistance and now risk deportation because while they followed the rules, the rules were retroactively changed. Such shenanigans are a risk for anyone who is not naturally born here. Hence the warning ...

In any case, it looks like round 2 above didn't amount to anything either. Much of it seems intended to psych-out and discourage immigrants rather than actually change the rules. That's not to say that so much hot air is not having an effect. See e.g. medicalxpress for https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-07- ... irths.html

[Campitor]

In the USA we have 2 parties in Congress that have different viewpoints. One supports immigrants , the other party does not.

Untrue - Democrats were deporting immigrants and for immigration reform that limited immigration it just wasn't covered in the same negative light. Everyone is so eager to ignore and forget the deportation and immigration policies of their party when they happen to be a member of that tribe. To state that Republicans are anti-immigration and Democrats are not is revisionist history. I didn't vote for Trump and I voted for Obama. I was critical of the republicans and their unsubstantiated attacks on Obama and also critical of how George W. Bush pushed the envelope of executive privilege. Our politics will never get better until we're completely honest about how we throw stones at glass houses.

Democrats:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtJ4x1ycsPk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fFvZkFEn-o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lps-As9djiw
Repbulicans:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1a8iieGUw-E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l16tPdgQzYk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtcLWrt9NeI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ednq_vKPdQE

Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965

The Hart–Celler Act was widely supported in Congress. Senator Philip Hart introduced the administration-backed immigration bill which was reported to the Senate Judiciary Committee's Immigration and Naturalization Subcommittee.[12] Representative Emanuel Celler introduced the bill in the United States House of Representatives, which voted 320 to 70 in favor of the act, while the United States Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18.[12] In the Senate, 52 Democrats voted yes, 14 no, and 1 abstained. Among Senate Republicans, 24 voted yes, 3 voted no, and 1 abstained.[13] In the House, 202 Democrats voted yes, 60 voted no and 12 abstained, 118 Republicans voted yes, 10 voted no and 11 abstained.[14] In total, 74% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans voted for passage of this bill. Most of the no votes were from the American South, which was then still strongly Democratic. During debate on the Senate floor, Senator Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. ... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset."[15]....The proponents of the Hart–Celler Act argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. President Johnson called the bill "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions."[21] Secretary of State Dean Rusk and other politicians, including Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix.[22] However, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed following the passage of the law.[23][24] Specifically, the Hart–Celler Act allowed increased numbers of people to migrate to the United States from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. The 1965 act, however, imposed the first cap on immigration from the Americas. This marks the first time numerical limitations were placed on legal immigration from Latin American countries including Mexico.[25]

[Campitor]

@Jacob et al

For the record. I'm 100% against deporting anyone who has made it to our shores legally regardless of any government assistance obtained legally. And perhaps the same pressures that causes a mayor to caution a police chief on immigration detention is the same force behind the Grand Bloviator's deportation of immigrants who have obtained legal government assistance.

That the problem is structural doesn't absolve people from turning a blind eye to their party's bad immigration policies or inaction. And just because a problem is structural doesn't mean we have to cheer bad policy spoken by our political affiliates. I don't understand how people can be blind to how this type of political bias creates the framework that allows Trump to deport legal immigrants.

[FIRE 2018]

Viewpoint on profitable to employ illegal labor is on point. Business 101- minimize expense, maximize production and profits and maximize shareholder returns.

[Campitor]

@ FIRE 2018

Deporting legal immigrants using legally obtained assistance maximises provider profits - immigrants paying into a system but afraid to use those resources increases net revenues. The deportation policy is inexcusable and reprehensible.

[Seppia]

The issue I see personally is that today, the world is so polarized on immigration that it is kinda useless to have “my own view”.
It has become (world wide, as this was and is a massive talking point in Europe as well) a “pick your side” topic.

Personally, I know the “send them back” is not something I will ever be able to be a part of.
Populists all over the globe (so today’s GOP, Italy’s Lega, Poland ruling party, Hungary’s Orban party, france’s Front National, UK’s UKIP etc) have so blatantly embraced racism that even if I am 100% for controlling immigration, I cannot help but support the opposite side.

I believe we are living potentially dangerous times, and it’s important to pick a side even if we don’t agree 100%

[jennypenny]

But what about people in those parties who don't like the 'send them back' crowd and are fighting to regain control of their party? You give up potential allies by insisting that people choose one side or the other.

There have been a few similar comments lately. M741 made a some comment about us being a few coin flips away from fascism. Only someone who isn't old enough to remember the late 60s and early 70s would say that. Fatalistic attitudes contribute to the increasing polarization and only make the situation harder to rectify. It makes me sad.

I'll come back when Trump is over, assuming I'm not still labeled a racist simply for being a member of the GOP.

[FIRE 2018]

Same song and dance in several countries - appeal to the base of voters, lots of immigrant bashing. But in the USA you can thank an immigrant that

Cooks your food in a fine dining restaurant
Cleans your hotel room and your bathroom
Cuts your grass
Does pumbing, electrical, roofing work around your home or business
Works directly for you
The fruits, veggies, meat, seafood that you eat was picked or cleaned by an immigrant
Works in meatpacking plant, commercial bakeries, dairy plants, chicken farms so we can eat food to make us healthy or obese
Day care to watch our kids while we work
Pumps your gas

The majority of immigrants have the same goals. Work hard and bring prosperity to their families and support the local economy. America was always and will be great. Unless Congress does not change the political asylum laws, then migrants will continue to come in search for better lives.

[Ego]

The problem with this tread and this issue in general is that legal and illegal immigration gets muddled by everyone.

Almost everyone wants to set up a system that attracts high skill immigrants like @jacob to the U.S. That system is complex and political rhetoric plays a very big role. Look at the title of this thread and reread @jacob's posts in it. They give us a glimpse into the chilling effects this rhetoric has on someone who knows the system extremely well. Now imagine what it does to the next young @jacob in Denmark or Sergey Brin in Russia or Muneeb Ali in Pakistan. They are taking their skills elsewhere.

By using this issue to fire up their bases, both political parties are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Perhaps the best argument yet for a sane middle ground candidacy. This is a sad turning point for the nation.

[Seppia]

But what about people in those parties who don't like the 'send them back' crowd and are fighting to regain control of their party? You give up potential allies by insisting that people choose one side or the other.

Are they really?
I try to get information from as many sources as possible, but I haven’t seen any prominent GOP member raise his voice and clearly express his disgust.
It’s silence at best.

Plus, the risk in engaging with some views is that the “moderate” position keeps shifting to the right.
When you try to find a compromise with an extremist, you’ll slowly be dragged closer to their point of view.

There have been a few similar comments lately. M741 made a some comment about us being a few coin flips away from fascism. Only someone who isn't old enough to remember the late 60s and early 70s would say that. Fatalistic attitudes contribute to the increasing polarization and only make the situation harder to rectify. It makes me sad.

I'll come back when Trump is over, assuming I'm not still labeled a racist simply for being a member of the GOP.

I’ve never said any of that, sorry jp but I’m not accepting your statement above.
The only thing I’m saying is that, I believe, disgusting positions such as the ones we’ve seen recently (the tweets, the “send them back” chants) should be met by GOP voters with a “either this stops immediately or I’m voting dem, as I don’t want to be associated with this shit”.

I usually lean conservative here in Italy, but have been voting center left precisely for this reason: Salvini’s ignorance and racism are a deal breaker for me.

[FIRE 2018]

In regards to Seppia comment on GOP leaders are silent. The reason all are silent is that our leader and GOP Senate are Republican led. Pro business, anti union , anti immigrant, to name a few. You piss off your party then you can kiss your next election good bye. Immigrants and migrants are very profitable to the USA. Employers can pay them less, to do the same work, productivity is up along with profits, to enrich the shareholders and increase stock prices. A number of US citizens like myself have our investments tied into the stock market and even though I don't always agree with Trump and his policies , my investments have grown twofold under his reign and allowed me to FIRE. A former Mexican President Vicente Fox said in an interview several years ago that Mexicans that live and work in the USA send $60 BILLION dollars annually back home to support their families and the Mexican economy. President Bush (jr) even said that immigrants are here doing jobs you and me would not do. He comes from Texas where any day it feels like you are in Mexico. And the best part of the USA of the land of many immigrants- lots of great ethnic food!!

[jennypenny]

Are they really?

You’re not going to hear from Republicans who feel like I do any more than you’re going to hear from centrist Democrats — both are being drowned out by the insanity at the far edges of their parties. Centrist and/or nuanced positions don’t make for good TV or twitter memes.

Most of my Democratic friends want the same immigration policy I do (secure border + open immigration policy), but they get shouted down by their party too. They are fearful of speaking up and being called intolerant/racist. The immigration issue has devolved into a reductionist ‘open borders vs. closed borders’ — neither of which is workable.

I’ve never said any of that, sorry jp but I’m not accepting your statement above.
The only thing I’m saying is that, I believe, disgusting positions such as the ones we’ve seen recently (the tweets, the “send them back” chants) should be met by GOP voters with a “either this stops immediately or I’m voting dem, as I don’t want to be associated with this shit”.

I did say I was considering voting Dem even before the latest uproar over a different issue here.

That said, I think forcing people to ‘choose a side’ is a big part of the current problem and is driving people toward extremes. Picking one flavor of crazy over another doesn’t solve the problem. IMO the bravest thing a person can do in this environment is to stand their ground in the center and refuse to be pigeonholed into positions they find untenable.

Personally, I refuse to be cowed into taking a position I disagree with just to prove I disagree with a different position. It's playground-level political behavior that doesn't reflect the nuance in my positions or the years of experience I have with political issues. Sadly, the current tenor — both on the forum now and off — is that people must choose a side or others will assume the worst about them. Since my identity is known to some people here, I increasingly feel the urge to bow out before someone decides my centrist position is akin to racism and doxxes me. It's a shame, not because my contributions are so valuable but because IMO it's never good when people decide that silence is the best course of action.

[FIRE 2018]

Ffj,

Good questions.

But one item that is being discussed but no plan to fix by our elected officials in Washington. And has nothing to do with migrants/ immigrants living here in the USA with most doing an honest days work and supporting the local economy and sending back $$ home to support their families. If the laws in Congress do not change the laws in regards to migrants seeking political asylum then our great nation will continue to welcome people from all lands of the world. I'm glad the plan POTUS had to restrict ALL people coming from certain countries was squashed like a rotten eggplant.

[jennypenny]

Another part of the problem is that with only two choices, the groups have to include a lot of diverse positions. When they don't (like now) you end up with a lot of disaffected people. I run into the same problem with the abortion issue. In the Gabbard thread I referred to myself as pro-life, but my views on the subject are quite centrist. I have many friends/family who hold almost the same beliefs -- no elective late term, no interference in medical choices, easier access to morning-after pill -- but self-label as pro-choice. None of us are accurately represented by the current narrowing incarnations of the pro-choice and pro-life labels. It's a frustrating trend across the board.