@no1marauder saidFirst, we all agree that immigration is necessary, if for no other reason we are making less babies. No argument there.
You make things "simple" by lying about other people's positions. By now, you and everyone else here knows I don't support an "open border" but you can't help claiming it because dealing with my actual position seems an impossible lift for you.
I'll state it one more time:
In times like this in a country with an aging population and a shortage of workers, Immigratio ...[text shortened]... er than pretending other people want "open borders" or ranting about their non-existent "communism"?
But your elusive next statement....just hold on here. You are saying let people come in if there is no reason not to? If there are 100 trying to cross on Monday, but we have a law (which we should) that limits the amount we take in to 49, what would you do if there is no good reason to deny either one of them. Marauder, would you tell the unlucky 51 to go home? Note that as you make this statement, that you fail to mention how many we should let in. We have 12M under Biden right now....that we know of.
You are the worst at closing your points. You leave out the most obvious important elements. Tell us how many we should let in annually.
@AverageJoe1
And did we resolve this question yet, you must have missed it while researching.
""Marauder. Theoretically, of course, as you cannot leave your nexis, would you feel comfortable carrying a sign down the street which says something to the effect that we should let people who are citizens of other countries walk across our border and take up a life in the USA?
Like, 'Open Our Borders!', or "Let Everyone Come In Who Wants To!"
352d
@averagejoe1 saidI don't respond to every one of your stupid questions esp. when you continue to lie about my positions - which I made clear yet AGAIN in the post following that idiotic statement of yours.
@AverageJoe1
And did we resolve this question yet, you must have missed it while researching.
""Marauder. Theoretically, of course, as you cannot leave your nexis, would you feel comfortable carrying a sign down the street which says something to the effect that we should let people who are citizens of other countries walk across our border and take up a life in the USA?
Like, 'Open Our Borders!', or "Let Everyone Come In Who Wants To!"
352d
@averagejoe1 saidProbably could handle 5 million or so annually based on prior waves of immigration, the stats which I already showed you.
First, we all agree that immigration is necessary, if for no other reason we are making less babies. No argument there.
But your elusive next statement....just hold on here. You are saying let people come in if there is no reason not to? If there are 100 trying to cross on Monday, but we have a law (which we should) that limits the amount we take in to 49, what wou ...[text shortened]... ts. You leave out the most obvious important elements. Tell us how many we should let in annually.
352d
@averagejoe1 saidI quoted this in the "Headlines about the Border" thread but I'll repeat it here (it's from the Cato Institute):
First, we all agree that immigration is necessary, if for no other reason we are making less babies. No argument there.
But your elusive next statement....just hold on here. You are saying let people come in if there is no reason not to? If there are 100 trying to cross on Monday, but we have a law (which we should) that limits the amount we take in to 49, what wou ...[text shortened]... ts. You leave out the most obvious important elements. Tell us how many we should let in annually.
"It is important to start with the basic legal framework for U.S. immigration. Unlike most other areas of law familiar to Americans, all immigration is presumptively illegal unless immigrants prove that they fall within a few narrow exceptions based on U.S. sponsorship or selection, and most exceptions have hard numerical limits.2"
"Prior to the 1920s, the legal framework was reversed: nearly all immigration was
presumptively legal unless the government found that an immigrant fell within a category specifically barred.3 Today, the only immigrants who can immigrate permanently from abroad without numerical limits are the spouses, minor children, and parents of adult U.S. citizens,4 and even they have more potential bars to obtaining legal permanent residence than ever.5
The result is that the United States has allowed a much lower rate of permanent legal immigration as a percentage of its population than in the years before the Immigration Act of 1924 (Figure 1).6 On average, from 1820—when the records begin—to 1924, the country allowed an average annual rate of immigration equal to about 2/3 of a percent of its population. This would be the equivalent of nearly 2.2 million people today, triple the number of new legal permanent residents in 2020, and more than double any year in the last decade.
In several years before 1925, the rate hit 1.5 percent of the population, which today would be nearly 5 million immigrants. In 2019, the rate had fallen 80 percent from those peaks, and it has plummeted even lower since the pandemic. Moreover, more than half of new immigrants in recent years have adjusted to permanent residence after they had already entered the United States either illegally or with temporary statuses, meaning that the rate of new immigrants from abroad is lower still."
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU01/20210428/112515/HHRG-117-JU01-Wstate-BierD-20210428.pdf Pages 2-3
This country is far richer than it was in the 1800s, so 2.2 million seems low. Given the economic and social conditions that apply now esp. our aging population and worker shortage - I think the top end number of 5 million is feasible.
@no1marauder saidYou don’t respond to any of my not-stupid questions. They are meant to corner you, and they do.
I don't respond to every one of your stupid questions esp. when you continue to lie about my positions - which I made clear yet AGAIN in the post following that idiotic statement of yours.
The question required only a yes or a no, but you give us a full paragraph in lieu thereof. Why not a yes or no? You skirtin’ are ‘ya?
352d
@averagejoe1 saidIn your drunken mind, I guess.
You don’t respond to any of my not-stupid questions. They are meant to corner you, and they do.
But no one who actually reads my posts is going to believe your lies about my positions; I've never said I supported an "open border" and you know it.
@no1marauder said5,000,000 perfectly vetted people, who WILL CARRY THEIR OWN WEIGHT.
Probably could handle 5 million or so annually based on prior waves of immigration, the stats which I already showed you.
Hey Marauder, do you know that 12M future Democratic voters who are here since Biden compromise the number of people who, if they made up a US state, would be the SEVENTH largest state in the union.
Silly me, I am just not liking your numbers. I don’t like your 5 million, either.
@no1marauder said5M admitted aliens sure sounds like Marauder is a bit free with giving away our country.
In your drunken mind, I guess.
But no one who actually reads my posts is going to believe your lies about my positions; I've never said I supported an "open border" and you know it.
Marauder pontificates a lot, but leaves out little nuggets like the fact that 90% of these people would not qualify for asylum. Look it up.
@no1marauder said“Feasible”, what does that mean, when you figure that our support of aliens is staggering billions?? Feasible usually means if everything works out perfectly, that we can pull something off which would not work otherwise. If you make it perfect, Pollyanna, could you start by having them quit defecating in our parks and in peoples yards.?
I quoted this in the "Headlines about the Border" thread but I'll repeat it here (it's from the Cato Institute):
"It is important to start with the basic legal framework for U.S. immigration. Unlike most other areas of law familiar to Americans, all immigration is presumptively illegal unless immigrants prove that they fall within a few narrow exceptions based on U.S. ...[text shortened]... esp. our aging population and worker shortage - I think the top end number of 5 million is feasible.
Feasible: likely to work all things remaining equal. They ain’t. Equal, that is.
352d
@averagejoe1 saidI've already showed you that immigrants are more likely to hold a full time job than native born citizens.
“Feasible”, what does that mean, when you figure that our support of aliens is staggering billions?? Feasible usually means if everything works out perfectly, that we can pull something off which would not work otherwise. If you make it perfect, Pollyanna, could you start by having them quit defecating in our parks and in peoples yards.?
Feasible: likely to work all things remaining equal. They ain’t. Equal, that is.
"Feasible" doesn't mean what you think; it means "possible or practical to do", The level of immigration I outlined is certainly possible and practical; it was done before in the US when the country was far less advanced.
Your bigoted idea that some people aren't equal to others goes against the very founding principles of our nation.
352d
@averagejoe1 saidFar from "giving away", given the economic benefits of immigration, it would greatly improve the country.
5M admitted aliens sure sounds like Marauder is a bit free with giving away our country.
Marauder pontificates a lot, but leaves out little nuggets like the fact that 90% of these people would not qualify for asylum. Look it up.
For ignorant and bigoted reasons you seem to want to make our nation poorer than it needs to be.
I took your advice and "looked it up":
"Asylum has been granted in about 40% of the nearly 700,000 asylum cases that have been decided since 2000."
https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-what-percentage-of-immigrants-are-granted-asylum-in-the-u-s/20640989/[WORD TOO LONG].
And that's with our asylum law being unduly restrictive.
@averagejoe1 saidI wonder why you assume every immigrant will be a Democratic voter.
5,000,000 perfectly vetted people, who WILL CARRY THEIR OWN WEIGHT.
Hey Marauder, do you know that 12M future Democratic voters who are here since Biden compromise the number of people who, if they made up a US state, would be the SEVENTH largest state in the union.
Silly me, I am just not liking your numbers. I don’t like your 5 million, either.
Is the Republican party that much of an enemy to immigrants?
Is the idea of people coming here to better their and their families' lives soooooooooooooooo offensive to the GOP? It used to be called the "American Dream".
352d
@AverageJoe1
Why don't you bitch to your local repub congressmen, THEY are the ones stopping the bill endorsed by both parties in the senate. Tell me again why repubs not wanting to deal with the border is Biden's fault.
Oh, I forgot, you just hate Biden more than we hate Trump. You hate Biden more than you want to have your congressmen even TALK about the deal worked up by Biden AND republicans.
So tell me again how much you want the border issue resolved, you talk about it every turn.