ilovefuzz.com

Gone Fission wrote:Why not just expel all American citizens? They are responsible for a higher proportion of anti-cop and violent crime than undocumented immigrants and green card holders. Just seems reasonable if we really care about protecting cops and reducing violent crime.

Again, this is idiotic. US citizens are citizens of the country and cannot be removed. The point is we should not have to expel resources - and lose lives - any more than we already do by citizens of the US that allowing more people with violent and criminal records into the country only makes the safety of citizens and cops - not sure why you guys keep focusing on that solely - that much more difficult.

Benn Roe wrote:

Faldoe wrote:Even if it were 99% the point is if there are ways to lower the exposure of law enforcement - and American citizens - from violence by people that in the USA illegally those ways should be utilized. There are also people - also undocumented or not - that are killed by people in this country illegally. In this case, part of that discussion should be about SB 54 and whether it is a just and effective measure.

The amount of resources necessary to (and the collateral damage that would result from) putting in place the infrastructure to completely prevent people from entering the country illegally would be astronomical; much more than the $5 to 6 billion Trump wants to squander on a largely symbolic and ineffectual wall. To spend these resources in an effort to solve a problem that effectively doesn't exist (as per your suggestion, protecting American citizens from violent illegal immigrants) would be beyond stupid. The problem is violence, not immigration, so take steps to address the problem. CA SB 54 actually is one such step because it helps ensure cooperative witnesses in investigations of violent crimes, and keeps resources from being diverted to rounding up and deporting a body of almost entirely harmless and productive people.

I didn’t say I was in favor of the wall. It seems we have a problem which I touched on in an above post regarding being able to differentiate two illegal immigrants, one not committing crimes and one that is. SB 54 may aid in stopping inquires and deportations of the former but it also stifles law enforcement from pursuing in the latter in cooperation with ICE - that is a problem. And like so much in our politics and legislation, we can’t seem to craft something that is tailored to address both scenarios effectively.

Gone Fission wrote:Why not just expel all American citizens? They are responsible for a higher proportion of anti-cop and violent crime than undocumented immigrants and green card holders. Just seems reasonable if we really care about protecting cops and reducing violent crime.

And where would we all go? who the fuck would want us? Antarctica? even there we would start a war with all the penguins..

Seems like a great strategy, an invite to negotiate and an insult all in the same Tweet:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... own-enters

"I am in the White House waiting for the Democrats to come on over and make a deal on Border Security. From what I hear, they are spending so much time on Presidential Harassment that they have little time left for things like stopping crime and our military!"



(Also, "Presidential Harassment" is a great band name.)

What a baby.

Chankgeez wrote:(Also, "Presidential Harassment" is a great band name.)

Most important result of this.

Faldoe wrote:

Gone Fission wrote:Why not just expel all American citizens? They are responsible for a higher proportion of anti-cop and violent crime than undocumented immigrants and green card holders. Just seems reasonable if we really care about protecting cops and reducing violent crime.

Again, this is idiotic. US citizens are citizens of the country and cannot be removed. The point is we should not have to expel resources - and lose lives - any more than we already do by citizens of the US that allowing more people with violent and criminal records into the country only makes the safety of citizens and cops - not sure why you guys keep focusing on that solely - that much more difficult.

This may sound cruel but there are greater forces at work that have a greater impact than the death of a cop or US citizens at the hands of folks who came to the country illegally (or more often STAYED illegally). Commercial markets are international in nature and the cost/reliability of labor impacts margins which impact the competitiveness of products/services. The illegal immigration issue is tied to labor and the competitiveness of the US worldwide. China is pushing hard into South America (see how many times the Chinese president has visited LA vs Trump) and they can offer goods/services cheaper than the US. Nearly every SA country has more trade now with China than the US. This influence/power can creep into Central America and Mexico. If the US can no longer compete in the Western Hemisphere, where can it compete? Cheap labor has been and will continue to be a big driver for economic success. If the US can’t get that Mexican cheap (and motivated) labor what will drive growth? Many say if costs go up Americans will pay more, so what? But will foreign customers pay more? No. What will foreigners then need the dollar for? Oil? Now that the US’s footprint is shrinking in the Middle East will Saudi break ties with US/Britain and no longer support the US dollar? That would crash the US dollar and make the cost of living skyrocket in the US. What will the debt/gdp ratio be? 300%? 400%? What happens to social programs/infrastructure/stability? The US has to be pragmatic in its approaches. Trump is a populist who wants to tell people what they want to hear. The wall sounds simple and reasonable. And it is. But what does he plan on doing when farms start filing for bankruptcy and the world on the other side of the wall begins to move along without the US? Build a wall around China? Germany? Russia? What slogans will help the US then? Maybe we can export slogans.

JereFuzz wrote:

Faldoe wrote:

Gone Fission wrote:Why not just expel all American citizens? They are responsible for a higher proportion of anti-cop and violent crime than undocumented immigrants and green card holders. Just seems reasonable if we really care about protecting cops and reducing violent crime.

Again, this is idiotic. US citizens are citizens of the country and cannot be removed. The point is we should not have to expel resources - and lose lives - any more than we already do by citizens of the US that allowing more people with violent and criminal records into the country only makes the safety of citizens and cops - not sure why you guys keep focusing on that solely - that much more difficult.

This may sound cruel but there are greater forces at work that have a greater impact than the death of a cop or US citizens at the hands of folks who came to the country illegally (or more often STAYED illegally). Commercial markets are international in nature and the cost/reliability of labor impacts margins which impact the competitiveness of products/services. The illegal immigration issue is tied to labor and the competitiveness of the US worldwide. China is pushing hard into South America (see how many times the Chinese president has visited LA vs Trump) and they can offer goods/services cheaper than the US. Nearly every SA country has more trade now with China than the US. This influence/power can creep into Central America and Mexico. If the US can no longer compete in the Western Hemisphere, where can it compete? Cheap labor has been and will continue to be a big driver for economic success. If the US can’t get that Mexican cheap (and motivated) labor what will drive growth? Many say if costs go up Americans will pay more, so what? But will foreign customers pay more? No. What will foreigners then need the dollar for? Oil? Now that the US’s footprint is shrinking in the Middle East will Saudi break ties with US/Britain and no longer support the US dollar? That would crash the US dollar and make the cost of living skyrocket in the US. What will the debt/gdp ratio be? 300%? 400%? What happens to social programs/infrastructure/stability? The US has to be pragmatic in its approaches. Trump is a populist who wants to tell people what they want to hear. The wall sounds simple and reasonable. And it is. But what does he plan on doing when farms start filing for bankruptcy and the world on the other side of the wall begins to move along without the US? Build a wall around China? Germany? Russia? What slogans will help the US then? Maybe we can export slogans.

I really don't get this. Sure, there are all kinds of issues that we should be addressing and have different kinds of impacts but we should be able to do that with multiple issues simultaneously. There seems to be this - largely implicit - notion that because there are other - or arguably "greater" - issues out there this one isn't an issue. It wasn't just this top that has been killed by illegal immigrants. Are US citizens also involved in death causing DUIs and gang related deaths? - Absolutely, but that doesn't mean we should ignore and prevent/deport people here illegally that only add to the work law enforcement has to deal with regarding it's own citizens.

The thing is that the problems you're describing aren't immigration problems. They're violent crime problems, and there's no reason they should be treated any differently than violent crimes committed by American citizens. Are there problems with law enforcement and the criminal justice system? Absolutely, but that conversation has nothing to do with immigration, except in so far as the lack of sanctuary status throughout much of the country impedes the process of taking violent criminals off the streets.

JereFuzz wrote:The wall sounds ... reasonable. And it is.

Wait, what?

Benn Roe wrote:

JereFuzz wrote:The wall sounds ... reasonable. And it is.

Wait, what?

I don’t agree with the wall but it is reasonable for people to think it would alleviate some problems. But ultimately, the system needs the labor and some negative consequences will come with it ...

I'm guessing Trump just listened to a lot of this during an early midlife crisis:

JereFuzz wrote:

Benn Roe wrote:

JereFuzz wrote:The wall sounds ... reasonable. And it is.

Wait, what?

I don’t agree with the wall but it is reasonable for people to think it would alleviate some problems. But ultimately, the system needs the labor and some negative consequences will come with it ...

There is nothing reasonable about the wall idea.
It's a supid idea thought up by stupid people. And what is worse is that most of the people against it are not against it because it's a supid idea or that it wound work but they think it is unjust and evil, making them more stupid than the people that want to build the thing. Maybe these wallists and wallenights might do better to ask things like why a wall? Why do they actually think it is needed. What is the actual cause for all these people they don't want coming here to come here? How much of the people they support have to do with the reason that theirwall is needed... And maybe the antiwallfolk might try to focus on why elwall won't work anyway vs y'all are evil and mean and inhumain...

And when I say supid I mean "willfully ignorant" because in the world we live in now where you can look something up on your motherfuckingfone...

except that they ARE racist, cruel, and evil. letting them drive us into empirical argement is to abrogate the high ground. should we also argue against white nationalists by saying that an ethnostate wouldn't be practical?