Protesters in SoCal block buses carrying supposed illegals

There is no contradiction--I don't even see where you could possibly see one. Your argument also does not address any of the points I raised. Furthermore, including immigration, US population growth is only 0.7%, and over the past decade the trend in population growth has been downward. There is absolutely no reason to fear overpopulation. Your argument is fear mongering and nothing more.

 

Its hard for the government to pressure the parent or guardian if they can not get into contact with them.

http://dorothyandrews.weebly.com/uploads/9/0/4/5/9045467/the_pros_and_cons_of_illegal_immigrants.doc

 

The first paragraph you posted stated

while the second then states

You don't see the contradiction? Illegal aliens are not future generations of Alabamians. Those Alabamians are in fact legal immigrants and citizens. The author of your link is a very poor writer.

So if we were to bring in the billions that wish to come, that wouldn't be overpopulating? If they all showed up on our doorstep tomorrow, what then? You have yet to address any of my points, it seems you think they are rather dismissive.

 

Not hard at all. Just drive to their residence. The argument that they can't be contacted is incredibly weak.

That evidence isn't very convincing. It states that the "failure to appear" rate is not actually tracked, and the claim most do not show up is derived from "others" whom the writer spoke with who are unknown, and who agreed "unofficially."

Regardless, none of this justifies the actions taken in Murrieta. Even if 100% of these kids didn't show up to trials, they still need a place to stay while the conflict is worked out, and they are still kids who are probably confused and afraid at what is going on.

 

The first paragraph says that immigration frees up American labor to work in areas where it is more suited to. The second argues that making life harder for undocumented immigrants will actually make life worse for legal citizens of Alabama in the future. There is absolutely no contradiction, and the argument is perfectly coherent. You just interpreted "future generations of Alabamians" to mean "illegal aliens" which the author did not state in any way whatsoever. The author is not a poor writer, you are a simply poor reader.

Billions of people will be coming home to America? Really? Such nonsense speaks for itself. So far you have not even comprehended my points, so once you accomplish that then we can continue the discussion.

 

Do you really think that a guardian of an illegal minor is really a guardian that can be trusted? Most guardians are part of the coyote system, these kids are given phone numbers for contacts, how does the US screen these guardians? How do the parents prove these are their children? And my argument is weak?

So the Assistant Secretary for the federal Administration for Children and Families (which includes ORR) was quoted by the AP and that is just a claim derived by "others"? SMFH

Sure it does, the people of Murieta have that right as does any other community. Some of these kids know exactly what they are doing. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/guatemalan-boy-left-better-life-died-alone

 

You better check yourself. If you don't see the contradiction, that's fine, I do. I pointed it out, how are future Alabamians going to be poorer if their wages are not affected by not having illegals here or by having them here? Those Alabamians will be doing the same thing, then as they are now, in fact their wages may increase over time, and their children will move into those lower paying jobs.

Do you think every poor person wouldn't jump at the opportunity to come to the USA?

So far you have yet to attempt to refute my points. Your dismissive attitude speaks volumes.

 

Trust has nothing to do with it. Parents who abuse children are not to be trusted, yet there is no problem bringing them and the kids in for a court hearing regarding custody. You don't have to trust people to contact them successfully. Your argument is completely irrational.

The Assistant Secretary was quoted as completely debunking your claim, saying "Most of the estimated 8,000 children caught this year will be deported." The article then attempts to debunk the secretary's claim by citing what "others" with no official authority have said. You didn't even understand your own article, which suggests to me you just did a quick google search to back up your nonsense and posted it without even paying attention. How dishonest.

One example of a kid that knows what he is doing hardly counts as evidence for the larger issue. And again, even if all the kids knew what they were doing, that doesn't change the fact that they need a place to stay while everything is sorted out. People, especially children, regardless of where they are from, must be treated humanely.

And what right is that?

 

"We" know at sometime, some of these children are going to become dependents not on the
<Doom> Federals <Darth Vadar breath sounds> as much as the people of Murietta.
Who is going to pay the 10K to educate these children?
The Murietta Unified School Board ?
The State of California ?
Don't look for the <Doom> Federals <Darth Vadar breath sounds> to clean their mess.
The locals are "right" to refuse the bill / costs offered to them.

Imagine, the best military in the world, the best surveillance systems in the world, and
America cannot guard its' borders.


Moi

r > g

No
Why Not Bus Them There ​

 

How the (*)(*)(*)(*) can you contact them if they are no longer living where they stated they did? Are the addresses verified by HHS or DHS when they release these kids? Are the parents verified that they are the parents? IS it not easy to change a phone number or give a false address? Illegals do it all the time.

That really looks like it was debunked.

Keep being dismissive.

OK, so what. Murietta simply didn't want them in their neck of the woods, and they have that right to deny them as they did.

 

What you pointed out was not a contradiction. The first paragraph said the presence of undocumented workers is beneficial to the economy. The second said discouraging immigration of these workers will actually harm the economy. The article also said that wages are not depressed by having undocumented workers here working. That is not the same as saying wages are not affected. You only saw a contradiction because you misread the argument and conflated the meaning of words.

I do not think every poor person would want to or have the means to immigrate to the United States, no.

Your points are based on a misreading of my argument, so they have no relevance.

 

These SA don't have the money to legally get a visa for under $600, yet the pay can pay a coyote over $5K? You don't think some person in the Sudan wouldn't sell everything he had for a plane/boat ticket? Most claim illegals come here for opportunity, isn't that what the poor want?

And there's that dismissive claim gain.

 

Please offer evidence that the guardians these children are being placed with are doing the things you claim. All I am seeing is hyperbolic fear mongering.

Also, you are being completely dishonest and quoting the article out of context. The EOIR, ORR, and DHS did not agree, unofficially, that the no-show rate is greater than 65 percent. Quoting from the article, "Others" from those groups offered that opinion. For all we know, some random worker biased against immigrants was asked who has really no authority or knowledge of the situation. I am sorry, but any reasonable person would conclude the evidence here is weak.

Murrieta does not have a right to block buses containing undocumented immigrants from reaching a border patrol station. They have a right to protest, of course. But that doesn't mean the protest itself was sensible or just. Your immaturity in response to my questions speaks volumes.

 

Dishonest? Its in the same (*)(*)(*)(*)ing paragraph and stated word for word.

you want to talk about being dishonest, lets look at your link. Your claimed paragraphs (link to article Why Is Immigration Illegal Anyway?, Benjamin Powell and Art Carden say are based on the authors statement of

Where he is simply backing up his opinion.

Which goes to what I stated

Your link is limited specifically to Farm Workers.

Immaturity? Murreita has every right to do what they did, so does any other community.

 

I will take that as a concession.

Most of the poor people you are worried about could sell everything they own and still not have the equivalent of $600. And believe it or not, not everyone in the world thinks America is amazing and wants to come here.

In fact, based on polling data from Gallup, the vast majority of people do not want to immigrate to the United States, so your billions claim is absurd.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...evealing-map-of-who-wants-to-move-to-the-u-s/


The reality is that 138 million people said they would like to move to the United States. When you factor that many may not actually follow through with it due to familial ties, and those that cannot afford the journey, the number is much less. The point is that fears about the entire world moving to the United States are absurd. Less than 2% of the global population wants to move to the U.S.

Yes, when your argument is based on a misreading of mine, I will dismiss it and point out your mistake. Please do not respond if you do not plan on having a serious discussion.

 

That's what I thought. No evidence, just an immature emoticon.

You quoted a sentence leaving out the most important part. Your partial quote suggests that those organizations all stated something, when in reality only a few people who work there suggested it.

I'm sorry, but you've got typos in there and I don't really know what you are trying to say.

Nope, there is no constitutional right to prohibit the government from enforcing immigration laws.

 

You do realize that your links simply talk about the population of said countries and not specifically about the poor in those countries, right? I mean, we already have over 10% of Mexico here and another 5 - 6% want to come?

Change the visa standards to open immigration that was being discussed and your claims now become fallacy.

My argument was based on the reading of your link, something you didn't seem to comprehend since you quoted a secondary link from the author.

A serious discussion? I'm still waiting for you to be serious instead of dismissive.

 

There was not a single argument in your entire post, just immature use of emoticons and empty assertions. I do not engage with people when they refuse to have an honest discussion. It is a waste of time. You have yet to refute anything I have said, so I leave this discussion knowing my points still stand. Good bye.

 

Do you not think the #2 in charge of an organization is representative of the organization? Keep coming up with excuses to be dismissive.

typos? The portion you quoted form your original link isn't even your author, it is a quote from another article, where in the original author backed up his opinion with what you quoted, which is pretty much the same as what I stated and you dismissed. You can play stupid now all you want.

Transporting illegals to another site is not enforcing immigration laws. The processing of illegals is part of the process, however, if they are being transported to a community for processing, that community has every right to protest; if there protest causes the buses to turn around then so be it.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...751266-f0b4-11e3-914c-1fbd0614e2d4_story.html

So the questions I posed that were classified as "fear mongering" somehow ring of concern by others who are actually caring for these kids.

Instead of being dismissive and running away, you should have been able to simply answer my questions, admitting their is a concern for it, as I also showed

So again, there must be some evidence of my claim. I digress, it too was dismissed and claimed as not serious enough.

Yep - - Good Bye

 

Why do you hate Americans? Do your parents know how much you hate this country?

 

Yeah. They do. Their protest is sensible and just. Once an illegal alien is embedded in your community he or she will not leave. So it is best to keep them out.

 

We own the country. I think it is time for massive deportations. I think we should round up every illegal alien and dump them across the border. I would also recommend we do the same for the Democratic leadership.

 

The migrants on the bus were detained undocumented immigrants (many of them children) and were being taken to a processing center. They were not being released anywhere. There were so many children overcrowding facilities in Texas that the only humane thing to do was to move them to less crowded facilities. The protest was based on xenophobic nonsense and a lack of knowing what the buses were actually doing. There was nothing sensible and just about it.

I happen to believe that a developed country such as the United States should not treat foreign people as pigs, but perhaps you think not all humans deserve the same basic dignity.

 

Do that and destroy much of the agricultural sector in the United States, in addition to tearing up families and communities. That is without mentioning how horrible the U.S. would look around the globe, as well as the serious damage it would cause to relations with Mexico, Central, and South America. Can you imagine how much hatred it would likely incite in Latino Americans and citizens of the countries effected? The social and economic costs of deportation that you seek are immense and far worse than keeping them here.