Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9874
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Jun 19, 2018 10:59 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:
I think a better policy would be to say to the people "hey, we know that you had help from the coyotes (smugglers). If you were to have any information that leads to an arrest, we could grant you a green card, and if you don't cause any problems, that could be extended to resident alien..."

Again, that policy might make sense if the goal was to make immigration as humane and straightforward as possible. But when the goal is to eliminate as much of it as possible (and keep those who do enter in as vulnerable a position as possible so as to benefit from paying them as little as possible), something like that will never happen.


Actually, I was thinking in terms of eliminating as much as possible in as humane a manner as possible while ensuring that the ones who do come in are the ones most willing to work with established institutions. The immigrants turn on the coyotes, the coyotes disappear, illegal immigration is reduced by 80% (made up number), versus the current catching of 40% of immigrants (also made up).

I mean, my ideal version of immigration would involve a massive expansion for student visas, and an overhaul of the H1-B visa program to also allow for more blue-collar workers and elimination of the lottery system. Plus, bring in the Iraqis who put their families lives on the line in order to work for the US government; whatever happened to them? I mean, if anyone deserves to be in the US, it's them...

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:08 pm UTC

The massive abuses of the H1-B program is the number one reason I voted for Trump. Quite frustrated nothing has happened about it. Fortunately the companiesbI do work with are finally realizing that hiring cheap engineers from India doesn't make up for the experience us engineers they were trying to replace have. Wages are finally starting to come back to what they were.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:38 pm UTC

trpmb6 wrote:
The massive abuses of the H1-B program

Which abuses would those be? Real ones, or ones fed to you by the same propaganda mill that led you believe refugees could just report to an embassy for asylum so the ones coming to the border must be lying?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

gd1
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gd1 » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:40 pm UTC

We're leaving the UN human rights council.

At this point, I'm not sure whether I'm more shocked by Trump for causing it or his supporters for defending it.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 5993
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:41 pm UTC

Just be shocked by both.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Yablo » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:49 pm UTC

natraj wrote:yes, a temporary, planned visit to a country where you have a defined length of stay and are heading home to the country you feel safe returning to at the end is completely comparable to living in a place where you actively fear for your life and do not have a ready and viable place to leave to, you sure did make a great point there yablo.

Well, thanks for either not really reading my post before commenting on it or willfully misreading it. It really helps the dialogue. The first part of my post (where I said I wouldn't risk my family's safety unnecessarily just to evade a law) was completely separate from the second (where I said I made certain I knew where my embassy was and how to get there in case something went down).

anyway i actually don't care one whit what's legal because laws without ethics don't mean much to me. in the not too distant past it was illegal for my family to sit down at white people restaurants and y'all would have been exactly the type of people arguing well! they broke LAWS, OBVIOUSLY we need to throw the book at them. it has been illegal to fight segregation, slavery, internment camps, actual genocide in this country, so the fact that people crossing the border are committing a misdemeanor - - cuz it is a misdemeanor that y'all are getting all het up about and insisting that it's, like, 100% k impossible to do anything BUT throw them in jail forever and rip their families apart for the legal equivalent of unpaid parking tickets -- for some reason doesn't move me.

You do realize that 1) no one is being jailed anywhere close to forever just for being here illegally and 2) housing children temporarily while parents/guardians/people-who-paid-to-use-them-as-an-immigration-shield are being processed does not constitute "ripping families apart," right?

Is taking children from their parents a desirable consequence? No, and literally no one is saying parents deserve to have their children taken from them for sneaking across the border. Is leaving children in jail with their parents desirable? Of course not.

There are really only three solutions if we want to avoid separating children from the adults who come here illegally. Either we immediately send entire families back without anything resembling a fair immigration process, we just shrug and let them go because they were clever enough to break the law with children in tow, or we build separate not-really-jail family facilities to house them all while the immigration proceedings are going. The first might get some support from the faction of Conservatives I prefer not to identify with. The second is absolutely ridiculous and just begging to have the problem balloon exponentially. The third would be extremely expensive (though maybe less expensive than a border wall), and it would still suffer from the same problem as the second option as far as encouraging illegal immigration further.
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.

duodecimus
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 12:25 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby duodecimus » Tue Jun 19, 2018 11:59 pm UTC

What if an immigrating parent hears that border patrol takes their children and put them into American orphanages/camp/prison and goes 'at least they'll be able to eat twice a day'.

What if you are physically unable to meet the needs of your children in your home environment? Would you be willing to give them up to the most prosperous land in the world, known around the world as land of the free, and never see them again?

Because that's the thing. Having your kids taken from you when you are sure/convinced that they will soon die anyway isn't a deterrent.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3284
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:02 am UTC

Yablo wrote:If I did feel the need to leave the United States and seek asylum, I would do so legally, and I certainly would never put my wife or son through a dangerous wilderness run to cross a border illegally when I have the option to do it safely and legally instead.

I hope you don't have to. That if you have to, that this legal approach is safer. That if you do have the safe and legal approach available, its use is obvious and easily accessible to you. And that at no point are you promised (regardless of how it turns out) an alternative to solve the wait you'd have to endure in the inevitable go-slow of any officially sanctioned process which not only yourself but thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands…) of other consciencious and gratification-defering emigrants would at this point be trying to use.

Hindsight is all well and good, but refugees of all levels and distinctions are making difficult decisions all the time and not all of them (and few of those that bring themselves to your attention in the way being discussed) are going to have made ones that you totally approve of. But you also cannot say that you'd risk succumbing to <RANDOM_CATASTROPHE> in all possible future scenarios, beyond the range of foreseeability. So do you really want to condemn all your potential future selves to either be hit by disaster as the threat you are trying to escape catches up with you as you patiently queue (or sit calmly at home, waiting for the letter of acceptance that may never come) or to be treated as a bad person because you took the only actual solution you could see that lets you actually escape the volcano-powered tsunami of zombie laser-toting velociraptors?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6258
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ucim » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:38 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The immigrants turn on the coyotes, the coyotes disappear,
The immigrants turn on the coyotes, the coyotes turn on the rest of the family of the immigrants, and it stops right there. But it won't be us, right?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:52 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
trpmb6 wrote:
The massive abuses of the H1-B program

Which abuses would those be? Real ones, or ones fed to you by the same propaganda mill that led you believe refugees could just report to an embassy for asylum so the ones coming to the border must be lying?


I gave you a very real, very personal, example. Literally. Right there in the same post.

If you can't read everything I write then stop quoting me.

But to elaborate on my original post.

Companies in India and even Russia have been abusing the H1-B program. These companies are Infosys and Infotech (India) and progresstech (Russia). These companies send low skilled, young engineers to America on H1-B visas to do the work engineers here in America are seeking work for and able to perform. There is absolutely no reason for them to be here other than to reduce wages. Definitely not uncommon to see them at third the wage of an American engineer.

Fortunately, as I noted, most companies are coming around and realizing that paying someone for 100 hours of work that could be done in 33 hours at one third the rate doesn't make much difference. The amount of rework performed never made it profitable.

Now I am a huge free trade advocate. And I am sure someone will throw a red card at me here (yay world cup right?). To that end, I have no problem with a company overseas developing a product which competes with whatever I may be developing. What I do have a problem with is though, is companies abusing our immigration system to place employees here - while Americans are experiencing flattened wages, etc.

There is also a small problem of intellectual property transfer. Have you ever trained someone else that was less experienced than you? Someone who made less money than you? Only to find out that you were being replaced by that very person? That in itself is humiliating. But then you find out that 2 months after you finished training said person that they've returned to India with their dowry payment, quit the company and started working for an Indian startup. Oh, and then IT discovers that said person also downloaded a large amount of IP onto a flash drive and noone knew until he was back in India. But there is nothojng that can be done so the company just moves along.

H1B was meant for unskilled labor that Americans didn't want to do. Like picking oranges in California's orchards. Not things requiring advanced degrees.

My experience with H1B visas is very personal. And as I said, the number one reason I voted Trump. Number two being Clinton's use of a private email server. Every end user with a security clearance knows that would land us in jail.
Last edited by trpmb6 on Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:01 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 5993
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:59 am UTC

So "abuse" means hiring people who are going to offset other labor? So, basically, you are against immigration.

Seriously, why do you see H1B's as a problem and not the fact that our economy is failing to create opportunity for people to make full use of their abilities? Seriously, Trump has made the fucking problem worse by giving a massive tax cut to corporations, who are using their power to make larger, less efficient corporations who see labor as a necessary evil - reducing opportunity, and making it easier to replace you with cheap immigrants.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:04 am UTC

"But her emails" has become a laughable parody of itself with each new Trump scandal, and here you are someone who believed it.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:08 am UTC

No. The whole fucking point of immigration is to supplement your own population to fill the holes. It would be really shitty of a country to say, "yes, let's destroy the entire IT labor market and drop their wages in half by introducing a new labor force." Immogration policy is literally there to slow the change in market forces to prevent a massive disruption. As emerging markets prop up you have to protect your own market.


Also, go ahead and make your "this is socialism disguised as capitalism" remark. It doesn't really matter. Once all global markets equalize immigration becomes less of an issue.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 5993
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:09 am UTC

Skilled labor is expensive because it is scarce. We are filling in the holes.
Last edited by Thesh on Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:09 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:09 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:"But her emails" has become a laughable parody of itself with each new Trump scandal, and here you are someone who believed it.


We literally got a "dont do this or you will be prosecuted" email after the conclusion. So yeah. I will stand by that.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:13 am UTC

Thesh wrote:Skilled labor is expensive because it is scarce. We are filling in the holes.


Can you for once read my posts? Do you think I am just making this shit up? I gave you a direct example!

They replaced skilled labor with unskilled labor that took 3 to 5 times as long to get the job done! Not to mention the law itself says you can't replace American Labor.

Thank God they got burned.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1711
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:18 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Probably not a coincidence that every rich and well off country develops fairly strict immigration limitations.


This line of argument assumes that your goal is to increase the power and wealth of the United States and its citizens specifically, rather than to, say, achieve the maximum possible reduction in the number of people living in poverty, regardless of what nationality those people happen to hold.

That's a pretty bloody big assumption, and one that I suspect isn't being made by everyone in this thread, hence the arguing at cross-purposes.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:18 am UTC

Btw I got scolded the other day for sending a released Peter strozk email that had classified markings over an unclassified system. I guarantee you they take that shit serious.
Only reason I'm not in trouble was I was able to point to the IG report. But I had to fill out a bunch of BS afterwards.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 5993
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Thesh » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:20 am UTC

So, again, large corporations are inefficient, therefore we should ban immigrants? Seriously, the only reason any company in America sponsors immigrants is because it's cheaper than the American labor they would otherwise have to pay. If it wasn't immigrants, it would be college graduates, or code monkeys fresh out of vocational school. You just find foreigners to be a convenient target to blame your problems on.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

iamspen
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby iamspen » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:39 am UTC

Thesh wrote:So, again, large corporations are inefficient, therefore we should ban immigrants? Seriously, the only reason any company in America sponsors immigrants is because it's cheaper than the American labor they would otherwise have to pay. If it wasn't immigrants, it would be college graduates, or code monkeys fresh out of vocational school. You just find foreigners to be a convenient target to blame your problems on.


What you've laid out here is what I might call a reasonably defendable position, one which we can have a nuanced and intelligent conversation about.

What we're getting instead is a argument that because his company is fucking cheap and stupid, we should therefore have internment camps for toddlers.

This is an insanely monstrous argument that we're having now. I don't understand how anybody can argue in favor of these things andv think they maintain a shred of decency, humanity, or legitimacy. This is, without a doubt, the most disgusting mainstream political position I have encountered in my adult life and people who defend these camps should be socially ostracized as much as possible.

History will puke at the thought of these people.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:04 am UTC

trpmb6 wrote:But then you find out that 2 months after you finished training said person that they've returned to India with their dowry payment


:roll:
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:11 am UTC

trpmb6 wrote:I gave you a very real, very personal, example. Literally. Right there in the same post.
If you can't read everything I write then stop quoting me.
But to elaborate on my original post.
Companies in India and even Russia have been abusing the H1-B program. These companies are Infosys and Infotech (India) and progresstech (Russia). These companies send low skilled, young engineers to America on H1-B visas to do the work engineers here in America are seeking work for and able to perform. There is absolutely no reason for them to be here other than to reduce wages. Definitely not uncommon to see them at third the wage of an American engineer.

Fortunately, as I noted, most companies are coming around and realizing that paying someone for 100 hours of work that could be done in 33 hours at one third the rate doesn't make much difference. The amount of rework performed never made it profitable.

Now I am a huge free trade advocate. And I am sure someone will throw a red card at me here (yay world cup right?). To that end, I have no problem with a company overseas developing a product which competes with whatever I may be developing. What I do have a problem with is though, is companies abusing our immigration system to place employees here - while Americans are experiencing flattened wages, etc.

There is also a small problem of intellectual property transfer. Have you ever trained someone else that was less experienced than you? Someone who made less money than you? Only to find out that you were being replaced by that very person? That in itself is humiliating. But then you find out that 2 months after you finished training said person that they've returned to India with their dowry payment, quit the company and started working for an Indian startup. Oh, and then IT discovers that said person also downloaded a large amount of IP onto a flash drive and noone knew until he was back in India. But there is nothojng that can be done so the company just moves along.

H1B was meant for unskilled labor that Americans didn't want to do. Like picking oranges in California's orchards. Not things requiring advanced degrees.

My experience with H1B visas is very personal. And as I said, the number one reason I voted Trump. Number two being Clinton's use of a private email server. Every end user with a security clearance knows that would land us in jail.

Your real anecdotal example is actually very hard to prove. Wages have been flat in the US for decades, and nobody knows why. Smart money* is on the decline of unions, and the rising power of psuedomonopolistic companies seeking rents. Aka, they are using their power to slow wage growth.

*They aren't confident either. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... arket.html There's tons of links out there, but nobody can prove it.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:49 am UTC

trpmb6 wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:"But her emails" has become a laughable parody of itself with each new Trump scandal, and here you are someone who believed it.


We literally got a "dont do this or you will be prosecuted" email after the conclusion. So yeah. I will stand by that.

The point is that security for multiple people in the Trump administration has been found to be as bad or worse. Comey himself was using Gmail some of the time. Not to mention the utter hypocrisy of whining about Clinton when tens of millions of emails went missing from the Bush Whitehouse.

Anyway I don't really care about her emails or your racist explanation for your salary woes (programming was always going to collapse eventually, if not from cheaper foreign workers then from all the kids going through "learn to code" programs that will flood the domestic labor market). There are literally toddler camps.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-governm ... -shelters/

Trump administration officials have been sending babies and other young children forcibly separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border to at least three "tender age" shelters in South Texas, The Associated Press has learned.

Lawyers and medical providers who have visited the Rio Grande Valley shelters described play rooms of crying preschool-age children in crisis. The government also plans to open a fourth shelter to house hundreds of young migrant children in Houston, where city leaders denounced the move Tuesday.

Since the White House announced its zero tolerance policy in early May, more than 2,300 children have been taken from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border, resulting in a new influx of young children requiring government care. The government has faced withering critiques over images of some of the children in cages inside U.S. Border Patrol processing stations.

Decades after the nation's child welfare system ended the use of orphanages over concerns about the lasting trauma to children, the administration is standing up new institutions to hold Central American toddlers that the government separated from their parents.

"The thought that they are going to be putting such little kids in an institutional setting? I mean, it is hard for me to even wrap my mind around it," said Kay Bellor, vice president for programs at Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which provides foster care and other child welfare services to migrant children. "Toddlers are being detained."
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Isaac Hill
Systems Analyst????
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:35 pm UTC
Location: Middletown, RI

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Isaac Hill » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:08 pm UTC

iamspen wrote:This is an insanely monstrous argument that we're having now. I don't understand how anybody can argue in favor of these things andv think they maintain a shred of decency, humanity, or legitimacy. This is, without a doubt, the most disgusting mainstream political position I have encountered in my adult life and people who defend these camps should be socially ostracized as much as possible.

History will puke at the thought of these people.
Didn't you read the last few pages of thread? Liberals were less angry when Obama did something less something less horrible, and are therefore hypocrites who can be dismissed. Outrage must scale linearly with horribleness, not exponentially, or your opponents are correct.

trpmb6 wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:"But her emails" has become a laughable parody of itself with each new Trump scandal, and here you are someone who believed it.


We literally got a "dont do this or you will be prosecuted" email after the conclusion. So yeah. I will stand by that.
Did you get the e-mail about not using uncleassified smartphones around classified documents after Trump staffers used their flashlight apps to read classified documents at Mar-a-Lago?

Trump wants to start a Space Force, probably so he can go down in the history books as someone who started a new branch of the military. Giving him that in exchange for abolishing ICE might be worthwhile.

As for Trump damaging America for decades to come, that's more from his walking away from agreements like the Paris Accord and Iran deal. Why bother working with America on anything if the next President can just scrap it? Even if a future President is beloved worldwide, there's always the chance that the next one will be another Trump. Best case scenario is America will always have to pay up front before others will uphold their ends of bargains to ensure we don't go back on our word.
Alleged "poems"
that don't follow a rhyme scheme
are not poetry

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8077
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zohar » Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:27 pm UTC

I feel the need to mention Trump literally said he doesn't want immigrants from countries with people of color and we should bring in more immigrants from Scandinavian countries. So those of you saying his policies aren't motivated by racism and aren't intended to bring in white people are at the very least misinformed.

trpmb6 wrote:I've personally benefited quite a bit thanks to his policies. So it really is no surprise I would support a lot of what he has done.

There are many examples of rich people who have benefited from his tax law and still oppose him, so yeah - it kind of does surprise me that people would still support him, even when they benefit from his actions.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 2:39 pm UTC

Yeah that's only unsurprising if we also include the unspoken assumption that you don't care about other people.

I don't care how much you benefit from an immigration attitude that puts babies in cages. If you are not vehemently opposed to that policy, you have no place in civil society.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:04 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Yeah that's only unsurprising if we also include the unspoken assumption that you don't care about other people.

I don't care how much you benefit from an immigration attitude that puts babies in cages. If you are not vehemently opposed to that policy, you have no place in civil society.

Isn't support for immigration inversely correlated to racial anxiety among the white population? As white people feel anxious, imaginary or real, about their rung on the ladder, they turn inward?

Trpmb6 and tyndmyr are misinformed about the imaginary immigration corner they are backed into. They don't want immigrants, and are trying to square that with being nonbad people.
For example, they are against catch and release (aka illegal immigrants are free until they show up to an immigration court date). For example, you could put an ankle monitor on the parents, and move on. Cheaper and faster than jailing parents.
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/19/62106538 ... the-border
Except it doesn't have the benefit of terrorizing parents and children. Which itself has no basis in fact. There's no evidence to show that if you separate families, and broadcast it to Central America, that illegal immigration will decrease.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:20 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Probably not a coincidence that every rich and well off country develops fairly strict immigration limitations.


This line of argument assumes that your goal is to increase the power and wealth of the United States and its citizens specifically, rather than to, say, achieve the maximum possible reduction in the number of people living in poverty, regardless of what nationality those people happen to hold.

That's a pretty bloody big assumption, and one that I suspect isn't being made by everyone in this thread, hence the arguing at cross-purposes.


In practice, most countries seem to optimize for their national interest first. Oh, sure, they might also prioritize the well being of other citizens, but it's generally not entirely equal.

Thesh wrote:So, again, large corporations are inefficient, therefore we should ban immigrants? Seriously, the only reason any company in America sponsors immigrants is because it's cheaper than the American labor they would otherwise have to pay. If it wasn't immigrants, it would be college graduates, or code monkeys fresh out of vocational school. You just find foreigners to be a convenient target to blame your problems on.


Immigration isn't super important to corporations. They're over-represented in areas such as farming, construction and service industries where they can work for tiny firms, avoid documentation and other difficulties. Large corporations tend to have more paperwork and documentation, and are less likely to skip I-9 forms or the like. Immigrants, legal or not, are far less likely to be in a professional environment overall. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/forbrn.pdf

H1-Bs are a thing, but they're a non-immigration visa. Sure, it still results in someone being allowed here, but it's not super related to the current border troubles. It's a parallel problem. It's also a highly regional problem. It might matter to the silicon valley, etc, but it's just not an issue for much of America. Coal mining jobs or farming jobs are not being taken by this program. So, it sort of makes sense that Trump cares a good deal less about this. The coal miners and farmers are folks he got backing from. Silicon valley, not so much.

The fundamental problem is related to the social safety net. If folks are allowed in freely, folks who need assistance are likely to make up a disproportionate amount. This is costly. So, our, and most other immigration systems are arranged to select the least costly/most beneficial immigrants. This is also true of countries such as Canada, who are perhaps less Trump-like in general.

Now, one potential solution that *would* allow fairly open immigration is to axe the safety net in general. Not really a lot of direct costs, then, and incentives are pretty well aligned. You can have either an expansive safety net and strict immigration, or very little safety net and open immigration, and either system ought to work out. Democrats and republicans have both picked an odd pair of the above, though.

sardia wrote:Your real anecdotal example is actually very hard to prove. Wages have been flat in the US for decades, and nobody knows why. Smart money* is on the decline of unions, and the rising power of psuedomonopolistic companies seeking rents. Aka, they are using their power to slow wage growth.

*They aren't confident either. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... arket.html There's tons of links out there, but nobody can prove it.


It's a common complaint among the slashdot crowd. Doesn't bother me so much, because, hey, libertarian. Competition is also for markets that I happen to be in, such as the tech industry. In fairness, I may be less worried because I'm confident that the quality of education provided to Indian, etc coders is vastly inferior to my own, so despite them being priced lower, it's not a huge threat.

sardia wrote:Trpmb6 and tyndmyr are misinformed about the imaginary immigration corner they are backed into. They don't want immigrants, and are trying to square that with being nonbad people.


Nah, I don't have anything against immigration. At most, illegal immigration is a problem. Given my preference, significantly improving the legal system would, I think, greatly reduce the weight of the illegal problem. Unfortunately, that's not in the cards for any party.

My arguing here is mostly to point out the level of partisanship and hyperbole from the left on this particular issue.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:31 pm UTC

They are building camps for babies. Being opposed to that isn't partisanship, it's being a halfway decent human being.

Forcibly removing children from one group and giving them to another (i.e. foster homes) is genocide.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:44 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:They are building camps for babies. Being opposed to that isn't partisanship, it's being a halfway decent human being.

Forcibly removing children from one group and giving them to another (i.e. foster homes) is genocide.


Nobody was opposed to Obama building child camps. That was humanitarian, not genocide.

This has come up over and over with the immigration issue. Obama deported a ton of people. Obama voted to build a fence to secure the border.

Now, if you're outraged at both, cool. That's consistent. But if you're only outraged at Trump, yeah, it's partisanship.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:45 pm UTC

it's funny that you think plenty of us weren't in fact opposed to both.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:46 pm UTC

I'm not a fan of the extra definitions of genocide. I'm still used to genocide as killing most of them.

FYI Joke poll on 538 that Republicans should consider.
Should we do terrible shit to children?
    Yes
    No
    Not sure
I'd like to add, "I can turn this into a great bargaining chip on immigration."
Given the compromise bill working through Congress, Republicans might actually get something out of this, which is a terrible precedent.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9874
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:51 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Forcibly removing children from one group and giving them to another (i.e. foster homes) is genocide.


If we are going that route, technically speaking as allowing in any group at all will affect the overall percentage of ethnic groups in a country, every immigration policy is genocide.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:52 pm UTC

those aren't "extra" definitions of genocide. genocide has, literally since the term was coined, encompassed a wide range of actions all of which were meant to target the destruction of a people / culture -- that doesn't solely mean killing. it can mean trying to wipe out language, forcing people to stop practicing their culture, stealing children from their families and giving them to other families not of their culture. that is and HAS ALWAYS BEEN the definition of genocide. it is a redefinition of genocide to reduce it solely to "killing". sorry if you want to make people more comfortable with genocide by redefining the term.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:52 pm UTC

Which extra definitions? Who do you think decided the original definition and why are they correct?

Tyndmyr, your false equivalences are extremely tiring. Yes, bad shit happened under Obama. Yes, we were opposed to it then too. No, it wasn't as bad or as widespread then as it has become in the past few months.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1651
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:53 pm UTC

So the trick is not to do terrible shit to children and tell the world about it but to identify some children about whom your opponents care and do terrible shit to them specifically, then threaten to make it worse / offer to mitigate it a bit while making demands.

I wonder how Liam Neeson and Mel Gibson feel about this.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:04 pm UTC

sardia wrote:I'm not a fan of the extra definitions of genocide. I'm still used to genocide as killing most of them.


I do think that calling it genocide is hyperbole.

The family splitting isn't great, obviously, but the goal here isn't permanent separation or eradication of a race or culture.

gmalivuk wrote:Tyndmyr, your false equivalences are extremely tiring. Yes, bad shit happened under Obama. Yes, we were opposed to it then too. No, it wasn't as bad or as widespread then as it has become in the past few months.


That's true. Trump's recent actions have spiked the number of immigrant kids being held by about 21%.

Still less than half of Obama's peak number of interred children.

So, not exactly equal, that's correct. I can't find any examples of the left accusing Obama of genocide for it.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:08 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:So the trick is not to do terrible shit to children and tell the world about it but to identify some children about whom your opponents care and do terrible shit to them specifically, then threaten to make it worse / offer to mitigate it a bit while making demands.

I wonder how Liam Neeson and Mel Gibson feel about this.

Please tell me this is not a even newer Trump policy. It's been a year and a half, and I'm having a hard time discerning The Onion from Trump thinking.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26355
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:11 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
sardia wrote:I'm not a fan of the extra definitions of genocide. I'm still used to genocide as killing most of them.


I do think that calling it genocide is hyperbole.

The family splitting isn't great, obviously, but the goal here isn't permanent separation or eradication of a race or culture.

gmalivuk wrote:Tyndmyr, your false equivalences are extremely tiring. Yes, bad shit happened under Obama. Yes, we were opposed to it then too. No, it wasn't as bad or as widespread then as it has become in the past few months.


That's true. Trump's recent actions have spiked the number of immigrant kids being held by about 21%.

Still less than half of Obama's peak number of interred children.

So, not exactly equal, that's correct. I can't find any examples of the left accusing Obama of genocide for it.
Deporting parents without their kids is permanently separating them. Failing to keep documentation about whose children you've got is likely to permanently separate them. The former head of ICE thinks many of these children will never be reunited with their parents.

But no I'm sure you're the real expert here. And your inability to find something definitely means it doesn't exist..
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:25 pm UTC

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-asy ... story.html

Article seems to indicate that Trump's change actually is causing an increase in those pursuing asylum by legal means. So the zero-tolerance policy is apparently working as intended.

That would be great (well, other than the abhorrent reason why they're doing this legally), but it seems the government is breaking both US and international law since they've started blocking these people from entering the United States to await processing. Hopefully they can get more funding to make that happen, though perhaps that's also working as intended...
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests