Total Posts:92|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What should be done about illegal immigrants?

Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Obviously not unconditional amnesty. This is absolute worst thing we can do, far worse than deporting them all. This sends the wrong message in every conceivable way. Unconditional amnesty is not tolerance or kindness. It's incentivizing more illegal immigration because you're freely rewarding an illegal act. You're encouraging more breaking of the law. And it's not good for immigrants; we don't have the resources or infrastructure to endlessly welcome immigrants, so by taking in so many, all we're doing is creating racially divided ghettos that exacerbate racial tensions and conflict.

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.

59% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats say that undocumented immigrants living in the US should be able to stay in the country legally if they can meet certain requirements. This is my position as well.

In other words, then, I support conditional amnesty. Illegal immigrants currently living here can do four years of military service or civil sector work in exchange for citizenship. This benefits all parties involved. They get work, food, a place to stay, and citizenship, while we gain a legal labor pool and higher revenue from taxes which can be redirected toward public goods (immigration is also vital to the survival of Social Security). Their time in the military/the civil sector will also foster greater assimilation and integration of immigrants and thereby reduce racial tensions; at the very least, it increases the likelihood that they will learn English.

(On that note, while I do not believe learning English should be mandatory, I do believe the government should provide free programs for those who wish to do so).

After this is done for illegals currently in the country, I would push to make the application process for immigrants easier and more accessible.

If these two things are done, then I would concede to cracking down almost completely on all cases of future illegal immigration.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 1:06:32 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
By the way, even though immigration is not primarily an economic issue, it does have definite economic benefits. Aside from the obvious revenue and the survival of programs like social security (speaking of which, please raise the age of retirement), nearly 60% of immigrants are of working age, compared to under 40% of native-born Americans. Furthermore, immigrants are more likely to start a business (http://www.kauffman.org...) and participate in the labor market (http://www.bls.gov...)
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:
Obviously not unconditional amnesty. This is absolute worst thing we can do, far worse than deporting them all. This sends the wrong message in every conceivable way. Unconditional amnesty is not tolerance or kindness. It's incentivizing more illegal immigration because you're freely rewarding an illegal act. You're encouraging more breaking of the law. And it's not good for immigrants; we don't have the resources or infrastructure to endlessly welcome immigrants, so by taking in so many, all we're doing is creating racially divided ghettos that exacerbate racial tensions and conflict.

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.

59% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats say that undocumented immigrants living in the US should be able to stay in the country legally if they can meet certain requirements. This is my position as well.

In other words, then, I support conditional amnesty. Illegal immigrants currently living here can do four years of military service or civil sector work in exchange for citizenship. This benefits all parties involved. They get work, food, a place to stay, and citizenship, while we gain a legal labor pool and higher revenue from taxes which can be redirected toward public goods (immigration is also vital to the survival of Social Security). Their time in the military/the civil sector will also foster greater assimilation and integration of immigrants and thereby reduce racial tensions; at the very least, it increases the likelihood that they will learn English.

(On that note, while I do not believe learning English should be mandatory, I do believe the government should provide free programs for those who wish to do so).

After this is done for illegals currently in the country, I would push to make the application process for immigrants easier and more accessible.

If these two things are done, then I would concede to cracking down almost completely on all cases of future illegal immigration.

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants. Detect and locate the people who overstay their visas, then throw them out of the country and don't let them back in. Build a massive system to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing the border; arm the system with lethal weapons to deter would-be crossers.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 5:11:01 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:
Obviously not unconditional amnesty. This is absolute worst thing we can do, far worse than deporting them all. This sends the wrong message in every conceivable way. Unconditional amnesty is not tolerance or kindness. It's incentivizing more illegal immigration because you're freely rewarding an illegal act. You're encouraging more breaking of the law. And it's not good for immigrants; we don't have the resources or infrastructure to endlessly welcome immigrants, so by taking in so many, all we're doing is creating racially divided ghettos that exacerbate racial tensions and conflict.

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.

59% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats say that undocumented immigrants living in the US should be able to stay in the country legally if they can meet certain requirements. This is my position as well.

In other words, then, I support conditional amnesty. Illegal immigrants currently living here can do four years of military service or civil sector work in exchange for citizenship. This benefits all parties involved. They get work, food, a place to stay, and citizenship, while we gain a legal labor pool and higher revenue from taxes which can be redirected toward public goods (immigration is also vital to the survival of Social Security). Their time in the military/the civil sector will also foster greater assimilation and integration of immigrants and thereby reduce racial tensions; at the very least, it increases the likelihood that they will learn English.

(On that note, while I do not believe learning English should be mandatory, I do believe the government should provide free programs for those who wish to do so).

After this is done for illegals currently in the country, I would push to make the application process for immigrants easier and more accessible.

If these two things are done, then I would concede to cracking down almost completely on all cases of future illegal immigration.

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants. Detect and locate the people who overstay their visas, then throw them out of the country and don't let them back in. Build a massive system to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing the border; arm the system with lethal weapons to deter would-be crossers.

Seems like you agree with me except with an even more liberal concession at first.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Deport them.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:19:01 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants.
Already tried and failed that for decades.

Going to have to swap these around. Enforce first, amnesty later.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:23:52 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:19:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants.
Already tried and failed that for decades.

Going to have to swap these around. Enforce first, amnesty later.

How would that work?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:25:06 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:23:52 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:19:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants.
Already tried and failed that for decades.

Going to have to swap these around. Enforce first, amnesty later.

How would that work?

Who knows? We have never been able to do it.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:40:26 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:25:06 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:23:52 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:19:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants.
Already tried and failed that for decades.

Going to have to swap these around. Enforce first, amnesty later.

How would that work?

Who knows? We have never been able to do it.

Well, that sound sketchy. I'd rather look at something we can actually do and just haven't done.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:43:58 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:
Obviously not unconditional amnesty. This is absolute worst thing we can do, far worse than deporting them all. This sends the wrong message in every conceivable way. Unconditional amnesty is not tolerance or kindness. It's incentivizing more illegal immigration because you're freely rewarding an illegal act. You're encouraging more breaking of the law. And it's not good for immigrants; we don't have the resources or infrastructure to endlessly welcome immigrants, so by taking in so many, all we're doing is creating racially divided ghettos that exacerbate racial tensions and conflict.

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.

59% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats say that undocumented immigrants living in the US should be able to stay in the country legally if they can meet certain requirements. This is my position as well.

In other words, then, I support conditional amnesty. Illegal immigrants currently living here can do four years of military service or civil sector work in exchange for citizenship. This benefits all parties involved. They get work, food, a place to stay, and citizenship, while we gain a legal labor pool and higher revenue from taxes which can be redirected toward public goods (immigration is also vital to the survival of Social Security). Their time in the military/the civil sector will also foster greater assimilation and integration of immigrants and thereby reduce racial tensions; at the very least, it increases the likelihood that they will learn English.

(On that note, while I do not believe learning English should be mandatory, I do believe the government should provide free programs for those who wish to do so).

After this is done for illegals currently in the country, I would push to make the application process for immigrants easier and more accessible.

If these two things are done, then I would concede to cracking down almost completely on all cases of future illegal immigration.

Build a wall. Then paint a line in front of wall. Shoot whoever crosses line. People quit crossing line.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
FrankyG170
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:46:42 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:25:06 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:23:52 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:19:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 3:41:52 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

Amnesty, but then enforce our laws more stringently for future illegal immigrants.
Already tried and failed that for decades.

Going to have to swap these around. Enforce first, amnesty later.

How would that work?

Who knows? We have never been able to do it.

Never TRIED to do it.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:49:53 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:43:58 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:
Obviously not unconditional amnesty. This is absolute worst thing we can do, far worse than deporting them all. This sends the wrong message in every conceivable way. Unconditional amnesty is not tolerance or kindness. It's incentivizing more illegal immigration because you're freely rewarding an illegal act. You're encouraging more breaking of the law. And it's not good for immigrants; we don't have the resources or infrastructure to endlessly welcome immigrants, so by taking in so many, all we're doing is creating racially divided ghettos that exacerbate racial tensions and conflict.

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.

59% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats say that undocumented immigrants living in the US should be able to stay in the country legally if they can meet certain requirements. This is my position as well.

In other words, then, I support conditional amnesty. Illegal immigrants currently living here can do four years of military service or civil sector work in exchange for citizenship. This benefits all parties involved. They get work, food, a place to stay, and citizenship, while we gain a legal labor pool and higher revenue from taxes which can be redirected toward public goods (immigration is also vital to the survival of Social Security). Their time in the military/the civil sector will also foster greater assimilation and integration of immigrants and thereby reduce racial tensions; at the very least, it increases the likelihood that they will learn English.

(On that note, while I do not believe learning English should be mandatory, I do believe the government should provide free programs for those who wish to do so).

After this is done for illegals currently in the country, I would push to make the application process for immigrants easier and more accessible.

If these two things are done, then I would concede to cracking down almost completely on all cases of future illegal immigration.

Build a wall. Then paint a line in front of wall. Shoot whoever crosses line. People quit crossing line.

Waste of money and far too inhumane.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:10:17 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

We have immigration law for specific reasons, and we should not give amnesty from the law to criminals to disobey it. Our rule of law, as we are a Constitutional Republic, is not a matter of emotional disdain or ethics, but a matter of hard grounded law based upon what we perceive as freedoms that are allotted and freedoms that are detracted.

Mexico, which is where most illegal immigrants hail from, is a developing world economy that has seen their poverty decrease tremendously while building up its own infrastructure and becoming a world economy.

It's not inhumane, or is it unjust, to send back illegal immigrants who knowingly violated our laws. They must go back.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:18:16 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

Are alarm systems in grocery stores inhumane too?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:35:25 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
No matter what America thinks of itself in its vastly bloated opinion of self importance on this planet of nations; historically, it has done an abysmally horrid botch job at exporting American cultures and values abroad. Vietnam, Iraq, Central America....hundreds of venues historically with the same predictable results.

Even more fantastic is how similarly inept America has become at indoctrinating American values into current immigrants already living here domestically. Until America can get its sht together, the country should temporarily stop all immigration until it can at the very least get back to some semblance of order it had when our grandfathers came here, and were required to learn the language and culture. America needs to make a choice between culture preservation, or becoming a global cultural toilet for anyone willing to stand in a welfare line as an undocumented immigrant.

Americans need to make a referendum choice. Is American culture worth preserving? Or should we all start learning how to speak Chinese? Because the current dominant global culture population wise, and soon to be economic wise, is not America...or Mexico for that matter.

Think about that next time you actively push for more globalization, and less nationalism.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:36:32 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:10:17 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

We have immigration law for specific reasons, and we should not give amnesty from the law to criminals to disobey it. Our rule of law, as we are a Constitutional Republic, is not a matter of emotional disdain or ethics, but a matter of hard grounded law based upon what we perceive as freedoms that are allotted and freedoms that are detracted.

All law is based on ethics.

Mexico, which is where most illegal immigrants hail from, is a developing world economy that has seen their poverty decrease tremendously while building up its own infrastructure and becoming a world economy.

Um...Mexico is barely a stable state, and we could do a lot to curb illegal immigration by supporting a stronger regime there.

It's not inhumane, or is it unjust, to send back illegal immigrants who knowingly violated our laws. They must go back.

"They must go back because the law says" is not a convincing argument.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:37:16 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:18:16 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

Are alarm systems in grocery stores inhumane too?

Coming into the country violates exactly 0 property rights.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:44:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:35:25 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
No matter what America thinks of itself in its vastly bloated opinion of self importance on this planet of nations; historically, it has done an abysmally horrid botch job at exporting American cultures and values abroad. Vietnam, Iraq, Central America....hundreds of venues historically with the same predictable results.

Even more fantastic is how similarly inept America has become at indoctrinating American values into current immigrants already living here domestically. Until America can get its sht together, the country should temporarily stop all immigration until it can at the very least get back to some semblance of order it had when our grandfathers came here, and were required to learn the language and culture. America needs to make a choice between culture preservation, or becoming a global cultural toilet for anyone willing to stand in a welfare line as an undocumented immigrant.

Americans need to make a referendum choice. Is American culture worth preserving? Or should we all start learning how to speak Chinese? Because the current dominant global culture population wise, and soon to be economic wise, is not America...or Mexico for that matter.

Think about that next time you actively push for more globalization, and less nationalism.

First, nationalism is a disgusting cancer on the soul of humanity.
Second, America is one of the best nations there is at assimilating immigrants.

https://www.americanprogress.org...
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:54:27 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:37:16 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:18:16 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

Are alarm systems in grocery stores inhumane too?

Coming into the country violates exactly 0 property rights.

If nobody, or no entity claims ownership of the land of the USA, then there exists no actual authority, jurisdiction, laws, or government. We might as well just throw in the towel as a nation.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 7:56:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:44:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:35:25 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
No matter what America thinks of itself in its vastly bloated opinion of self importance on this planet of nations; historically, it has done an abysmally horrid botch job at exporting American cultures and values abroad. Vietnam, Iraq, Central America....hundreds of venues historically with the same predictable results.

Even more fantastic is how similarly inept America has become at indoctrinating American values into current immigrants already living here domestically. Until America can get its sht together, the country should temporarily stop all immigration until it can at the very least get back to some semblance of order it had when our grandfathers came here, and were required to learn the language and culture. America needs to make a choice between culture preservation, or becoming a global cultural toilet for anyone willing to stand in a welfare line as an undocumented immigrant.

Americans need to make a referendum choice. Is American culture worth preserving? Or should we all start learning how to speak Chinese? Because the current dominant global culture population wise, and soon to be economic wise, is not America...or Mexico for that matter.

Think about that next time you actively push for more globalization, and less nationalism.

First, nationalism is a disgusting cancer on the soul of humanity.
Second, America is one of the best nations there is at assimilating immigrants.

https://www.americanprogress.org...
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org...

Your links left out how terrible it is at assimilating illegal immigrants.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:01:15 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:36:32 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:10:17 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

We have immigration law for specific reasons, and we should not give amnesty from the law to criminals to disobey it. Our rule of law, as we are a Constitutional Republic, is not a matter of emotional disdain or ethics, but a matter of hard grounded law based upon what we perceive as freedoms that are allotted and freedoms that are detracted.

All law is based on ethics.

Mexico, which is where most illegal immigrants hail from, is a developing world economy that has seen their poverty decrease tremendously while building up its own infrastructure and becoming a world economy.

Um...Mexico is barely a stable state, and we could do a lot to curb illegal immigration by supporting a stronger regime there.

They're growing at a faster rate than Western nations, and supporting a stronger regime happens to come back and bite us, as it's been evidenced in the Middle East and Africa.


It's not inhumane, or is it unjust, to send back illegal immigrants who knowingly violated our laws. They must go back.

"They must go back because the law says" is not a convincing argument.

Well, the law is the law. It's a convincing argument because, regardless of your beliefs about it, it is the law. We enforce the law, instead of nullifying it. It's simply a matter of the law being there in the first place, which is up to debate. For the time being, we have immigration law, and those who break it should be sent back.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:03:27 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 7:56:10 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:44:48 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:35:25 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
No matter what America thinks of itself in its vastly bloated opinion of self importance on this planet of nations; historically, it has done an abysmally horrid botch job at exporting American cultures and values abroad. Vietnam, Iraq, Central America....hundreds of venues historically with the same predictable results.

Even more fantastic is how similarly inept America has become at indoctrinating American values into current immigrants already living here domestically. Until America can get its sht together, the country should temporarily stop all immigration until it can at the very least get back to some semblance of order it had when our grandfathers came here, and were required to learn the language and culture. America needs to make a choice between culture preservation, or becoming a global cultural toilet for anyone willing to stand in a welfare line as an undocumented immigrant.

Americans need to make a referendum choice. Is American culture worth preserving? Or should we all start learning how to speak Chinese? Because the current dominant global culture population wise, and soon to be economic wise, is not America...or Mexico for that matter.

Think about that next time you actively push for more globalization, and less nationalism.

First, nationalism is a disgusting cancer on the soul of humanity.
Second, America is one of the best nations there is at assimilating immigrants.

https://www.americanprogress.org...
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org...

Your links left out how terrible it is at assimilating illegal immigrants.

No, actually, they didn't.

Though if you want to assimilate illegal immigrants, you should support my proposal all the more.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:05:51 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 8:01:15 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:36:32 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:10:17 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 7:00:49 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:56:47 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/26/2016 6:22:08 PM, Semiya wrote:
At 7/26/2016 5:49:50 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
Deport them.

Too inhumane

That's a matter of opinion.

Sending people back to a land where they'll almost certainly die, whether from terrorist activity or poverty, is definitely inhumane. That's not remotely subjective. Would you rather be an uncompromising ideologue and never get your way then?

We have immigration law for specific reasons, and we should not give amnesty from the law to criminals to disobey it. Our rule of law, as we are a Constitutional Republic, is not a matter of emotional disdain or ethics, but a matter of hard grounded law based upon what we perceive as freedoms that are allotted and freedoms that are detracted.

All law is based on ethics.

Mexico, which is where most illegal immigrants hail from, is a developing world economy that has seen their poverty decrease tremendously while building up its own infrastructure and becoming a world economy.

Um...Mexico is barely a stable state, and we could do a lot to curb illegal immigration by supporting a stronger regime there.

They're growing at a faster rate than Western nations, and supporting a stronger regime happens to come back and bite us, as it's been evidenced in the Middle East and Africa.

"Stronger" was a poor choice of words. Perhaps "stable." Mexico is still a democracy. Unlike the Middle East (where democracy is currently impossible) and Africa (where democracy is highly unlikely), democracy can succeed in Mexico.

Besides, our problems in the Middle East came from us *toppling* strong regimes and then bailing.


It's not inhumane, or is it unjust, to send back illegal immigrants who knowingly violated our laws. They must go back.

"They must go back because the law says" is not a convincing argument.

Well, the law is the law. It's a convincing argument because, regardless of your beliefs about it, it is the law. We enforce the law, instead of nullifying it. It's simply a matter of the law being there in the first place, which is up to debate. For the time being, we have immigration law, and those who break it should be sent back.

Appeal to authority is fallacious reasoning. Unjust laws may and should be broken.
1Percenter
Posts: 781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:17:47 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 1:06:32 PM, Semiya wrote:
By the way, even though immigration is not primarily an economic issue, it does have definite economic benefits. Aside from the obvious revenue and the survival of programs like social security (speaking of which, please raise the age of retirement), nearly 60% of immigrants are of working age, compared to under 40% of native-born Americans. Furthermore, immigrants are more likely to start a business (http://www.kauffman.org...) and participate in the labor market (http://www.bls.gov...)

What's the point in improving the national economy if the nation is sacrificed in the process? Why should I support a measure that works to secure an economic future for foreigners rather than my own offspring?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:21:34 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 8:17:47 PM, 1Percenter wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:06:32 PM, Semiya wrote:
By the way, even though immigration is not primarily an economic issue, it does have definite economic benefits. Aside from the obvious revenue and the survival of programs like social security (speaking of which, please raise the age of retirement), nearly 60% of immigrants are of working age, compared to under 40% of native-born Americans. Furthermore, immigrants are more likely to start a business (http://www.kauffman.org...) and participate in the labor market (http://www.bls.gov...)

What's the point in improving the national economy if the nation is sacrificed in the process? Why should I support a measure that works to secure an economic future for foreigners rather than my own offspring?

Broken windows are still a thing...apparently...
1Percenter
Posts: 781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:24:04 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.


Don't worry - we'll make sure the buses hauling them out of the country are all well air-conditioned.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2016 8:29:01 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/26/2016 8:24:04 PM, 1Percenter wrote:
At 7/26/2016 1:03:29 PM, Semiya wrote:

I would also oppose total deportation. Such an action is too heartless, too devoid of empathy for other people.


Don't worry - we'll make sure the buses hauling them out of the country are all well air-conditioned.

+1
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.