Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump cut legal migration by 50%. Unfortunately that increases asylum and illegal entries. It’s not going to stop.
Illegal entries didn’t increase under Trump, apprehension did. Big difference.
Quote:
A public health rule, invoked by President Donald J. Trump at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020 to seal the border, has remained in place under the Biden administration. Over the last 12 months, the Border Patrol has carried out more than one million expulsions of migrants back to Mexico or to the migrants’ home countries. Agents used the public health rule to expel migrants they encountered 61 percent of the time and to expel families 26 percent of the time.
You don't have to be a judge to know that people seeking asylum need to apply at a port of entry and not just try to walk across the border which is why its illegal.
Thats not true and not sensical, if you are fleeing from harm, you think the actual law is that you have to come in through points of entry that are 100's of miles apart? How would that make any sense?. I think the confusion for a lot of people is that there are 2 sets of rules governing asylum seekers, we have international conventions that specify a floor for the minimum a country should do, in these rules you have things like "country of first refuge" meaning only mexicans would qualify for asylum, anyone landing or transiting through mexico should apply for asylum at mexico. We also have our asylum laws in which we dont make a country of first refuge distinction, in which we do have avenues for economic hardships, violence, things that are not part of international law.
I am all for changing our asylum laws to meet whatever the majority of our population agrees with, I mean I think we should be in the top percentile of countries taking refugees in but I am not going to bat for that, what I will vote against is being inhumane in order to discourage asylum seekers, I would vote against anything that makes the local authorities police immigration which discourages people from reporting crime and makes them vulnerable.
Thats not true and not sensical, if you are fleeing from harm, you think the actual law is that you have to come in through points of entry that are 100's of miles apart? How would that make any sense?. I think the confusion for a lot of people is that there are 2 sets of rules governing asylum seekers, we have international conventions that specify a floor for the minimum a country should do, in these rules you have things like "country of first refuge" meaning only mexicans would qualify for asylum, anyone landing or transiting through mexico should apply for asylum at mexico. We also have our asylum laws in which we dont make a country of first refuge distinction, in which we do have avenues for economic hardships, violence, things that are not part of international law.
I am all for changing our asylum laws to meet whatever the majority of our population agrees with, I mean I think we should be in the top percentile of countries taking refugees in but I am not going to bat for that, what I will vote against is being inhumane in order to discourage asylum seekers, I would vote against anything that makes the local authorities police immigration which discourages people from reporting crime and makes them vulnerable.
What's not true? Anyone attempting to enter the US for whatever reason needs to do it through a port of entry. You can't just walk in wherever you want. Period.
Even if Trump had cut legal immigration during his term that had nothing to do with the number of illegal aliens and bogus asylum seekers currently crashing our border because neither of those two groups would have qualified for legal immigration anyway as they are the poor, unskilled and uneducated. Bogus asylum seekers are liars anyway and that would have denied them entry into our country to as they wouldn't have had a valid claim.
Thats not true and not sensical, if you are fleeing from harm, you think the actual law is that you have to come in through points of entry that are 100's of miles apart? How would that make any sense?. I think the confusion for a lot of people is that there are 2 sets of rules governing asylum seekers, we have international conventions that specify a floor for the minimum a country should do, in these rules you have things like "country of first refuge" meaning only mexicans would qualify for asylum, anyone landing or transiting through mexico should apply for asylum at mexico. We also have our asylum laws in which we dont make a country of first refuge distinction, in which we do have avenues for economic hardships, violence, things that are not part of international law.
I am all for changing our asylum laws to meet whatever the majority of our population agrees with, I mean I think we should be in the top percentile of countries taking refugees in but I am not going to bat for that, what I will vote against is being inhumane in order to discourage asylum seekers, I would vote against anything that makes the local authorities police immigration which discourages people from reporting crime and makes them vulnerable.
Nonsense. So you want to protect lawbreakers so they will report on other lawbreakers? It's not true anyway. These illegals wouldn't report anything anyway. Nothing should stop us from enforcing our immigration laws internally or at the border.
I live in LA and i see liberals like that all day every day
"I believe in compassion"
and then they go run back to their gated HOA enclosed behind a wall/fence to keep the poor people out.
These liberals have all the compassion in the world for foreigners even if here illegally but none for their fellow Americans who have to bear the brunt of this mess in so many ways. Liberals just deal in emotion they have no common sense or logic.
Thats not true and not sensical, if you are fleeing from harm, you think the actual law is that you have to come in through points of entry that are 100's of miles apart? How would that make any sense?. I think the confusion for a lot of people is that there are 2 sets of rules governing asylum seekers, we have international conventions that specify a floor for the minimum a country should do, in these rules you have things like "country of first refuge" meaning only mexicans would qualify for asylum, anyone landing or transiting through mexico should apply for asylum at mexico. We also have our asylum laws in which we dont make a country of first refuge distinction, in which we do have avenues for economic hardships, violence, things that are not part of international law.
I am all for changing our asylum laws to meet whatever the majority of our population agrees with, I mean I think we should be in the top percentile of countries taking refugees in but I am not going to bat for that, what I will vote against is being inhumane in order to discourage asylum seekers, I would vote against anything that makes the local authorities police immigration which discourages people from reporting crime and makes them vulnerable.
well, you certainly sound like a very kind person, but this thread is about ILLEGAL immigrants, not asylum seekers or refugees.
First of all, Illegals are a huge strain on the infrastructure. Since they do not make a living wage they descend upon charities like hosts of locusts leaving little for American citizens in need. They often do not pay taxes or if they do, they are making too little money to sufficiently fund hospitals, roads and other infrastructure. They typically live very tightly compacted, sometimes a dozen living in a one bedroom apartment. This causes extreme wear and tear on housing, roads and utilities.
Illegals deprive poor Americans of affordable housing. Where Illegals go ONLY Illegals live typically. They swarm over low rent housing fast as it becomes available and poor Americans have no where affordable to live as a result.
Remittances by Illegals are almost equal to our economy crushing trade deficit. When you add in that Illegals seek out imported products over American products, then their impact is to double the trade deficit. This costs the economy jobs and is quickly bleeding the economy dry.
The lack of a living wage and the necessity of sending money means Illegals can rarely afford health care and they will then use the ER as a clinic. This clogs up ERs and patients needlessly suffer, even die due to the overload. It can also lead to minor epidemics as treatment is delayed and communicable diseases are passed on to more people before someone infected becomes ill enough to seek medical treatment.
Illegals have a seriously negative impact on almost every aspect of American society and provide no benefit. Some claim they pay taxes, but that’s a red herring. Sure they pay a SMALL amount of taxes, but an American working the same job would have not only paid those same taxes, they’d paid more because the wages would have been higher. Few Illegals actually pay income tax. Millions receive more money than they paid in. Illegals REDUCE our tax base.
Then there’s the lie about doing jobs Americans wouldn’t do. Somebody did those jobs before Illegals came in and somebody would do them after Illegals go. There are millions of Americans on disability right now simply because there is no work they can do. It’s not that they cannot work, it’s that they cannot work in an economy drowning in Illegals and guest workers. Send the Illegals home and millions come off disability and back into the work force. There are jobs for legal immigrants, students, people coming out of institutions and people first entering the work force again.
Wondering why European liberals never support illegal immigrants? They know they cannot have a welfare state and an open border (for lack of a better description) at the same time.
well, you certainly sound like a very kind person, but this thread is about ILLEGAL immigrants, not asylum seekers or refugees.
First of all, Illegals are a huge strain on the infrastructure. Since they do not make a living wage they descend upon charities like hosts of locusts leaving little for American citizens in need. They often do not pay taxes or if they do, they are making too little money to sufficiently fund hospitals, roads and other infrastructure. They typically live very tightly compacted, sometimes a dozen living in a one bedroom apartment. This causes extreme wear and tear on housing, roads and utilities.
Illegals deprive poor Americans of affordable housing. Where Illegals go ONLY Illegals live typically. They swarm over low rent housing fast as it becomes available and poor Americans have no where affordable to live as a result.
Remittances by Illegals are almost equal to our economy crushing trade deficit. When you add in that Illegals seek out imported products over American products, then their impact is to double the trade deficit. This costs the economy jobs and is quickly bleeding the economy dry.
The lack of a living wage and the necessity of sending money means Illegals can rarely afford health care and they will then use the ER as a clinic. This clogs up ERs and patients needlessly suffer, even die due to the overload. It can also lead to minor epidemics as treatment is delayed and communicable diseases are passed on to more people before someone infected becomes ill enough to seek medical treatment.
Illegals have a seriously negative impact on almost every aspect of American society and provide no benefit. Some claim they pay taxes, but that’s a red herring. Sure they pay a SMALL amount of taxes, but an American working the same job would have not only paid those same taxes, they’d paid more because the wages would have been higher. Few Illegals actually pay income tax. Millions receive more money than they paid in. Illegals REDUCE our tax base.
Then there’s the lie about doing jobs Americans wouldn’t do. Somebody did those jobs before Illegals came in and somebody would do them after Illegals go. There are millions of Americans on disability right now simply because there is no work they can do. It’s not that they cannot work, it’s that they cannot work in an economy drowning in Illegals and guest workers. Send the Illegals home and millions come off disability and back into the work force. There are jobs for legal immigrants, students, people coming out of institutions and people first entering the work force again.
Wondering why European liberals never support illegal immigrants? They know they cannot have a welfare state and an open border (for lack of a better description) at the same time.
+ 1
It never ceases to amaze me that the same crowd who cannot shut up about living wages, jobs for Americans, fixing the schools, free or low cost college, and an ever-expanding social welfare state also support a chaotic policy that undermines each and every one of those goals.
They never have a response regarding any of that stuff. The truth is that deep down inside, a lot of open borders proponents believe that the undocumented should be able to have their cake and eat it too. "Victims" to lavish their liberal largesse to. Money just grows on trees. Scarcity isn't a thing to them. The QoL of Americans impacted by them isn't a concern to them. I actually don't blame migrants/undocumented folks for trying to come here/coming here. I do blame the government for allowing our border and entry/stay controls to be a farce. Our asylum laws need revisiting too. If they consider Mexico too unsafe to be seeking asylum there then they don't have a credible claim of seeking it at all due to safety.
See, you kinda prove my point. No one (here) knows the optimum amount of immigrants and yet they argue and moan over them incessantly regardless of whether we truly need more or fewer of of them. It seems pointless when no one is working with relevant facts.
apparently, the optimum number of legal immigrants annually is 1MM, plus about 200K H1B's. Because that's what Congress has passed and the Administration allows.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Period. 
