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

Health, Fitness, Insurance, ...
FIRE 2018
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2019 7:32 am
Location: Florida

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

Post by FIRE 2018 » Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:20 am

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
Posts: 6215
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

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

Post by jennypenny » Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:51 am

Seppia wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:33 am
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.
Seppia wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:33 am
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.
Last edited by jennypenny on Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

ffj
Posts: 1930
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

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

Post by ffj » Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:00 am

@Ego

Well said. We have lost all balance in the immigration question. We could easily pass almost every resolution Trump wants, which is nothing more than Democrat talking points ten years ago, if we had a centrist Democrat able to beat him in 2020. Unfortunately, I don't see any centrists running and the fringe candidates that are still in the running I don't think have a chance. It's going to get worse before it gets better. The Democrats have really screwed this opportunity up as they have had years to prepare for this upcoming election. Maybe once they are defeated in 2020, they can rebuild into something akin to their classical roots, and not reactionaries to anything Trump. Certainly I could be wrong about all of this though.

Maybe I am a simple person but to me it boils down to a few fundamental questions:

How many people can we legally accommodate into this country each year?

What should the make-up of that immigration pool be? This will help determine the number of people allowed.

What are our needs as a country and which demographics will most easily fulfill those needs? And are there ways to fulfill those needs without full citizenship? I don't see why Mexican's can't work here legitimately and legally through work visa's for example.

And why can't we enforce our laws against illegal activity across the board with full support from all party's? It's ultimately in the best interest of our nation.

I am not naive, I know there are a thousand contentious issues with the above questions, but even those questions assume everybody is on board with national sovereignty and the right of Americans to determine their path going forward. Unfortunately that is not the case in todays climate.



@Jenny

Same here about the doxxing. I quit another forum in large part because of that fear as the people I was conversing with had no problem using such tactics. I put myself out there on this forum because I believe as a whole the quality, integrity, and intelligence of the people who participate here are much higher than the general population. If that were to change I would ghost myself very quickly. Kudos to Jacob for maintaining a sane forum.

FIRE 2018
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2019 7:32 am
Location: Florida

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

Post by FIRE 2018 » Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:28 am

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
Posts: 6215
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

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

Post by jennypenny » Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:38 am

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.

bigato
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

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

Post by bigato » Sun Jul 21, 2019 11:59 am

Do you guys think that dropping the two parties model would help? Although it seems to be a tendency of our times, since in my country there are a lot of parties and yet people are clustering into polarizing views, driven by populism from both sides, left and right.

FIRE 2018
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2019 7:32 am
Location: Florida

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

Post by FIRE 2018 » Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:22 pm

Bigato,

Reasons the USA has a two party system.

The U.S. Constitution created the 2 party system.
Americans share few of the same basic ideals principles and beliefs.
The nation has sharp political divisions based on economic class, social status, and national origin.
Much of American election law is written to discourage non major party candidates.

prognastat
Posts: 1000
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 8:30 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

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

Post by prognastat » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:32 am

First past the post systems seem to trend towards a 2 party system so as long as this is the voting system I don't think there will be a change in the current way things are in the US nor do either of the two parties have any interest in changing the system as it would only lessen their power.

@Seppia
I also don't think accusing people of racism is a useful strategy. It isn't going to win people over to your side from the supposed racists and will rather push them farther away. Don't see how this will effectively further your goals politically if you believe your side has the right answers. The only thing it will do is make you feel self satisfied, but that doesn't really achieve much of use. I would say a not insignificant reason Trump won last time around is because the people you are calling racist were growing tired of being called racists and felt Trump was a big middle finger back at those people.

George the original one
Posts: 4746
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

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

Post by George the original one » Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:53 pm

ffj wrote:
Sat Jul 20, 2019 6:17 pm
Do legal immigrants get deported for utilizing government benefits? Seems that question needs to be answered before we get into ethics of something that may or may not be happening or whether it is legitimately anticipated down the road.
No, however the current administration has actively taken every step possible to get there. For instance, if you're an immigrant who recently married a US citizen, the process to get your green card is molasses and that's by WH policy. "Send them back" is another manifestation of this.

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 876
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

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

Post by Mister Imperceptible » Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:05 pm

jennypenny wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:38 am
I was on a date recently and the woman brought up abortion criminalization legislation and was expressing indignation. She pressed for my opinion and I told her that it seemed highly unlikely to me that Christian conservatives could ever be convinced that abortion is not unethical, while it also seemed highly unlikely that those who believe in a woman’s right to choose could ever support legislation to make abortion the equivalent of murder. I said that making abortion fully legal/not criminal would preserve a woman’s sovereignty, and defunding Planned Parenthood or making it funded by private charities only would stop the argument from those opposed to abortion from feeling that they are subsidizing immorality and irresponsibility. Each would be free from the other and to exercise their own choices.

The woman exploded in a fit and left the restaurant right there. No opinion was acceptable but her own. Abortion must be legal and Planned Parenthood must be a free service provided by the government. (She did not thank me for picking up the tab.)

I related this story to a guy at work and he called me a chicken shit and said abortion was murder. No opinion was acceptable but his own.

Framing every issue as either/or, whether it be abortion, immigration, etc. has been a very effective strategy implemented by the elites to divide and conquer. The corporate media is complicit in the strategy. There is no desire by the elites to see the rhetoric toned down, because then we could actually focus on solving problems that they do not want to see solved.

ffj
Posts: 1930
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

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

Post by ffj » Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:17 pm

@George

Maybe I just view this stuff through a different lens, but if he hasn't built a single mile of fence or effectively done anything to stop illegal immigration, then how in the hell is he going to deport legal citizens? For using government services to which they were legally entitled? Think about what it would require for that to happen.

Now I can see this perceived threat used as a scare tactic to influence behavior, I'll let you decide what is ethical or not, but these vague articles filled with innuendo are scare tactics in and of themselves. And again, I'll let you decide what is ethical or not.

I just don't see a whole lot of clarity on this.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 4957
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

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

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:38 am

@MI:

Who brings up the topic of abortion on a date? Wow, that's even worse than the old guys who tell me their PSA numbers and their net worth in the same sentence.

I think the main problem with political discourse is that it is increasingly running further and further behind reality. Like pretty soon candidates will have to dress up in costumes representing which former era they would like to re-enact if elected. Meanwhile, in some lab in China...

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 11161
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

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

Post by jacob » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:12 am

http://internations.org does an annual survey of called Expat Insider. The word expat suggests some freedom of choice in terms of where to live. Expats don't think of themselves as immigrants, emigrants, or refugees. Rather they tend to be highly mobile, highly educated, and high income/value generators wherever they live. Because of that they basically have the ability to exercise some choice and pick the country they want to live in because many countries are willing to adopt them.

As far as my lens goes, this is it.

As late as 2014, the USA ranked 5th in the world in the expat survey. It was considered the land of opportunity. Yet since 2016, it has dropped precipitously and is now near the bottom ranking 47th out of 68 or so. The UK is now in the bottom 10 for similar reasons (BREXIT).

The loss of so-called political stability accounts for most of this ranking loss. Total ranking loss for the US would have been worse insofar the survey hadn't added a new category of internet connectivity, where the US is ranked #10.

Again, we're talking the opinions of mobile and educated immigrants/visa-holders that are generally making above or much above median salaries and who have the choice of working in several different countries. So not desperate people at the border nor immigrants with a one-shot chance to turn their student visa into a green card to escape where they're living or work a few years in a foreign country to send money back to establish a nest egg. Expats are simply leaving, staying away, and telling their colleagues about it when they no longer feel welcome. It makes sense that they would be proactive about their choices. Metaphorically, if politicians are pouring gasoline on their adopted home, they are not the ones to wait around to confirm an actual fire as far as their risk analysis goes. I have no desire to be a case study or be a newspaper feature article of someone whose innate optimism was run over by the system.

Also, I think the damage extends beyond people simply staying away. If we look at it in terms of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, what the WH administration is doing is compromising the bottom of the Maslow hierarchy of needs pyramid hitting non-citizens' sense of safety and belonging/desire to be part of this country. I can't help but think that this might adversely affect the higher Maslow levels like esteem and self-actualization, that is, creative work and meaningful contributions [to the economy/country/world]. That has certainly been the case for me. Since 2016 I have spent much more time than I would otherwise have looking at real estate in other countries; how to rearrange my financial matters to make it easier to leave in case it became important; and generally selling off my stuff and getting ready to move just in case.

I think the conflation between legal and illegal immigrants is a real problem in this debate. Extend this to expats and also to refuges and the confusion is complete. Scapegoating is a big part of populism. Racism was brought up above, but I don't think that most people being accused of racism actually feel racist. They feel no personal animosity towards individuals from other countries or with another skin color (The typical cringe worthy "I have friends who are black" come to mind as an expression of good-will, albeit embarrassingly oblivious) but what goes unseen (like the broken window fallacy) is the consequences of supporting policies that are structurally racist, such as the travel ban, the detention centers, the calls for wall building, the delay of processing. To someone abstracting the personal consequences from the political rhetoric, there's little difference. Therein lies the calls for "Flight93"-style votes, especially from those with a European background. We've seen or at least been severely indoctrinated in terms of what such structural policies can lead to and thus take it far more seriously than the American voter who has a completely different image of what WWII was about---"the good guys coming to the rescue" (the general US self-image of US foreign policy in the 20th century) not a battle against nationalism + populism turned fascism so that it never happens again which is how Eurasia sees it. It's just that many Europeans have a very aggressive immune system when it comes to such things, while most Americans do not. It's conceivable that Americans have to learn this lesson for themselves. Fair enough. It's not up to the world to tell a country what to do (at least not since the treaties of Westphalia), but at least some individuals have the option to opt out of participating.

I think this is why it has come to the point where it is now and why expats disfavor the US now.

Note: There's also the economic dimension between the tension between capital and labor which add further complications and expresses itself in the re-emergence of socialism on the left and nationalism on the right or some combination of the two that goes perpendicular to the typical left--right axis. I'm not going to expound on that here since it would further complicate the situation and possibly cause this thread to explode. Regardless, I'm aware of it.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 4957
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

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

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:42 am

I agree that there is good reason for the U.S. drop in ranking, but the reasons why, for instance, Bahrain is number 1 might also merit some looking into. One thing to be the ex-pat enjoying drinks at sunny cafe. Another thing to be the ex-pat cleaning the cafe toilets.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 4173
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

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

Post by Ego » Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:29 pm

jacob wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:12 am
Since 2016 I have spent much more time than I would otherwise have looking at real estate in other countries; how to rearrange my financial matters to make it easier to leave in case it became important; and generally selling off my stuff and getting ready to move just in case.
This from a European who is married to an American, has lived in the US for most of his adult life and knows the country very well. Now imagine what is going through the head of a machine learning algorithm developer from India, a stem cell engineer from Taiwan or a world-renowned bacteriophage researcher from Chile.
ffj wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:17 pm
Now I can see this perceived threat used as a scare tactic to influence behavior, I'll let you decide what is ethical or not, but these vague articles filled with innuendo are scare tactics in and of themselves. And again, I'll let you decide what is ethical or not.
Bombastic threats from the top have benefits and costs. They make a Salvadorian refugee reconsider the journey to the US but also make the world-renowned Chilean bacteriophage researcher reconsider coming to work for a US biotech company.

Weigh the short-term benefits of deterring Salvadorians with the long-term costs of deterring the Chilean. Of course, that assumes someone is actually taking into account the best interest of the country. It assumes that the statements are not made for short-term political gain regardless of the long-term costs.

Now consider the statement, “We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers, the forgotten people. Workers. We’re going to take care of our workers.”

You may shrug and say, meh, he doesn't really mean it, he's just riling up his base and provoking the media. And you may be right.

Jacob's reaction seems reasonable to me. If I were the Chilean I would look elsewhere.

IlliniDave
Posts: 2535
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

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

Post by IlliniDave » Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:03 pm

jennypenny wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:51 am
... 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 ...
I agree pretty strongly with this--well put. Really, I have no choice but to be me, and starting in 2015 it started "costing" me friends (have to question whether they really were friends to begin with). The widespread acceptance of logical fallacy (often by people who present themselves as the best of critical thinkers) is stunning to me. It's a good thing I'll probably wind up holed up in the woods somewhere. 8-)

bigato
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:43 pm

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

Post by bigato » Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:38 pm

Come live in South America you all, let's found Eretown!

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 11161
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

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

Post by jacob » Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:41 pm

Any complex situation will ultimately coalesce into just two sides if deemed serious enough, but not everyone deems it "serious enough" at the same time/level. Therein lies the challenge and risk of navigating world history in real wall-clock time. Those who are old enough probably remember GWB post 9/11 telling the world that you're either with us or you're with the terrorists at a point in time when that situation from the US POV was rather black and white whereas the rest of the world had some^H^H^H^Ha lot of sympathy but ultimately saw a complex situation with somewhat more nuance + the sentiment of "I'm not gonna get into this shitshow". Well, what do you do in such a situation? The current situation is perceived similarly except the shoe is now on the other foot. Remembering what was felt then by them and what is felt now by us might allow for some empathy/reaching across the aisle or talking things out before "getting into this".

ffj
Posts: 1930
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

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

Post by ffj » Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:38 pm

@Ego

Oh I agree with your assessment to a large degree and who am I to tell someone like Jacob what he should be feeling? I wouldn't but I don't think it is disrespectful to point out that maybe a lot of these fears are unwarranted and that various actors are purposefully misrepresenting positions. In my mind that should help alleviate some anxiety.

But I like to flip those hypothetical questions around. For each bacteriophage researcher that chooses to go elsewhere should he not want to stay in his own country, how many Central Americans with no skills also stay home because of tougher rhetoric? I don't know. And how many unskilled workers do we have to absorb to land one highly skilled practitioner should the rhetoric change? What is one bacteriophage researcher worth compared to X number of unskilled workers?

I once worked with a guy whose father owned one the largest gun stores in the U.S.; I'm talking mega sales in all 50 states. This is during the Obama years when every month Obama would lecture us about limiting our 2nd Amendment rights ( exaggerating a little here but perceptions matter). I once asked what him and his father thought about Obama and if they disliked him and I'll never forget his response: "Are you kidding me? We should erect a statue of Obama in front of our store. He has driven sales through the roof. He is the best gun seller we have ever had."

I bring this up because Trump is doing the same thing with his rhetoric in regards to illegal immigration. We are on pace to exceed one million illegal apprehensions for 2019 with a huge surge in "family units" attempting a crossing. Coincidence? Or are the crossers also playing a rhetoric game? Will Trump end up importing more illegal crossers unintentionally than he prevents from entering? And what cost do legal petitioners incur because of the illegal activity? How many people are driven away because the line-cutters ruin the process for them? Maybe there are some bacteriophage researchers in that group as well.

George the original one
Posts: 4746
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

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

Post by George the original one » Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:03 pm

ffj wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:17 pm
Maybe I just view this stuff through a different lens, but if he hasn't built a single mile of fence or effectively done anything to stop illegal immigration, then how in the hell is he going to deport legal citizens? For using government services to which they were legally entitled? Think about what it would require for that to happen.
He has already tried to circumvent due process and he will continue to do so. Look at the current case where he tried shutting down the legal way to seek asylum and is now railing against the judge who declared his action illegal.

Post Reply