• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

U.S. Border and Immigration

Norman Alexander said:
No he didn't.
Click to expand...

Take it up with the AP they say he did.

"The White House is telling lawmakers that President Joe Biden is preparing to sign off on an executive order that would shut down asylum requests at the U.S.-Mexico border once the average number of daily encounters hits 2,500 between ports of entry, with the border reopening only once that number declines to 1,500, according to several people familiar with the discussions.

The impact of the 2,500 figure means that the executive order could go into immediate effect because daily figures are higher than that now."

https://apnews.com/article/biden-immigration-executive-order-asylum-border-7cd0b0f28e298036ad1fc6b0c78961e1
 
The figures are daily averages over the course of a week. All the people insisted on anonymity to discuss an executive order that is not yet public.
Click to expand...

Oh dang, Captain Skeptical will be here shortly to skepti-police anyone who believes what the AP article linked by ponderingturtle has to say because they used unnamed sources. Any minute now...
 
ponderingturtle said:
Take it up with the AP they say he did.

"The White House is telling lawmakers that President Joe Biden is preparing to sign off on an executive order that would shut down asylum requests at the U.S.-Mexico border once the average number of daily encounters hits 2,500 between ports of entry, with the border reopening only once that number declines to 1,500, according to several people familiar with the discussions.

The impact of the 2,500 figure means that the executive order could go into immediate effect because daily figures are higher than that now."

https://apnews.com/article/biden-immigration-executive-order-asylum-border-7cd0b0f28e298036ad1fc6b0c78961e1
Click to expand...


No, really, they didn't.

I highlighted the part you are ignoring.

Another way they could have said it is "the president will keep granting asylum" until the numbers hit 2500 average daily encounters.
 
zorro99 said:
President will issue an EO on border enforcement today since republicans refuse to act.
Click to expand...


That's a lie. The house passed an immigration bill in May of last year, the Democrat led Senate refused to take it up.
 
You said:
ponderingturtle said:
Specifically he shut down giving anyone asylum.
Click to expand...
Then you quoted AP:
ponderingturtle said:
Take it up with the AP they say he did.

"The White House is telling lawmakers that President Joe Biden is preparing to sign off on an executive order that would shut down asylum requests at the U.S.-Mexico border once the average number of daily encounters hits 2,500 between ports of entry, with the border reopening only once that number declines to 1,500, according to several people familiar with the discussions.

The impact of the 2,500 figure means that the executive order could go into immediate effect because daily figures are higher than that now."

https://apnews.com/article/biden-immigration-executive-order-asylum-border-7cd0b0f28e298036ad1fc6b0c78961e1
Click to expand...

Biden is actually throttling the flow, not stopping it. And the full text of the EO is even more complicated than that. NB. I did not say I agreed with Biden's actions, nor that it is a good thing. But let's not feed the redneck trolls here with inaccuracies.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Bogative said:
Oh dang, Captain Skeptical will be here shortly to skepti-police anyone who believes what the AP article linked by ponderingturtle has to say because they used unnamed sources. Any minute now...
Click to expand...

You are finally beginning to learn how to evaluate evidence with a more critical approach. Well done. Keep it up.
 
Last edited:
Cosmic Yak said:
I also saw the comment you expressed to Norman Alexander, that "your opinion blows goats".
Click to expand...

gabeygoat said:
I don't know why anyone really engages with Bogative. It's just basic Klan recruiting from the 1920s. It's dangerous but boring.
Click to expand...

I understand your feelings on this subject. Can you show me on the doll where Norman Alexander's opinions touched you?
 
Norman Alexander said:
You said:
Then you quoted AP:

Biden is actually throttling the flow, not stopping it. And the full text of the EO is even more complicated than that. NB. I did not say I agreed with Biden's actions, nor that it is a good thing. But let's not feed the redneck trolls here with inaccuracies.
Click to expand...

It isn't throttling it is stopping it for as long as high demand keeps up.
 
ponderingturtle said:
It isn't throttling it is stopping it for as long as high demand keeps up.
Click to expand...

I think it is safe to say that is effectively throttling. ;)

I think it won't make much difference. South and Central American refugees are now coming in via the Canadian border in increasing numbers, for example. And the international flight route has always been where most "illegals" come in anyway. Even sealing the southern border entirely is just closing a door while leaving all the windows open. The numbskull state of Texas has yet to come to that realisation.
 
NYT morning newsletter
Not as intendedBy David Leonhardt
The modern idea of asylum stems from World War II. It is meant to protect people fleeing political oppression — Jews during the Holocaust, dissidents from the Soviet empire, Iranians after the revolution and, in recent years, Muslim Uyghurs, Afghans, South Sudanese and Ukrainians.

But asylum has expanded far beyond its original intent. Today, many migrants claim asylum even though they are not at risk of being persecuted. They instead want to move to the U.S. — understandably enough — because it is a richer, politically freer and less violent place than much of the world.

After migrants arrive at the U.S. border and request asylum, the federal government allows many to remain in the country while their cases are considered. The process can take years, partly because the system is overwhelmed and doesn’t employ enough border agents and immigration judges to decide cases quickly.

The situation has become self-reinforcing, giving more migrants reason to come to the U.S. As my colleague Miriam Jordan has explained:

It is not just because they believe they will be able to make it across the 2,000 mile southern frontier. They are also certain that once they make it to the United States they will be able to stay.

Forever.

And by and large, they are not wrong …

Most asylum claims are ultimately rejected. But even when that happens, years down the road, applicants are highly unlikely to be deported. With millions of people unlawfully in the country, U.S. deportation officers prioritize arresting and expelling people who have committed serious crimes and pose a threat to public safety.

Two decades ago, the typical way that people tried to enter the U.S. without legal permission was to evade border agents. Today, the typical way is to surrender to agents and request asylum.

It’s true that migrants typically face difficult circumstances at home, but that alone doesn’t explain the recent surge. The 1970s and ’80s offer a telling comparison: Global poverty was far higher then than now, and much of Latin America was convulsed by political violence. Yet the number of people who tried to cross the U.S. border was far lower than in recent years.

The recognition of the asylum loophole (along with other factors, like social media and affordable airfares) is a major reason.

As a result, the U.S. now has an immigration system that permits many more entrants than Congress intended — and many more than Americans support.

Polls show that most Americans consider illegal immigration to be a serious problem and favor tougher border security. Mayors and governors, who are dealing with the costs and turmoil associated with the surge, are also unhappy. As Noah Smith, who’s generally pro-immigration, recently wrote on Substack, “Americans like immigrants, but they strongly dislike the idea of giving up popular democratic control over immigration.”
Click to expand...
 
gabeygoat said:
I don't know why anyone really engages with Bogative. It's just basic Klan recruiting from the 1920s. It's dangerous but boring.
Click to expand...
Highlighted, i agree with, its basically just, other folks suck. I won't go quite as far as saying he's basically in line with the second Klan. But, yes, the rhetoric is just nut picking.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
That's about right. We can improve upon that Bayesian prior by looking at incarceration rates.
Click to expand...

Incarceration rates are only a proxy for criminality rates, and they are not a perfect proxy. Once can commit a crime and not be incarcerated. One of the easiest ways for a criminal to avoid incarceration is to simply leave the area where the crime occurred. And that's easier to do if you don't have established roots in that area, which illegal immigrants may be less likely to have. So there may be a disparity between incarceration rates and criminality rates between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants/citizens.

tl;dr: incarceration rate comparisons may not translate to criminality rate comparisons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom