Will Democrats ever concede on immigration?

[The Great Zaganza]

It's the familiar pattern of US migration/integration that you are not a True American until there is a new minority you can reject collectively.

 

[Venom]

Let me guess: you and your friends and relatives would not be in that "skill group".

What matters more...average change in wages within your "skill group" over nearly two decades or the actual job you are working/searching?

I'm pretty sure most people mean the latter when they say immigration hurts native workers.

 

[theprestige]

It's the familiar pattern of US migration/integration that you are not a True American until there is a new minority you can reject collectively.

That's an interesting explanation for why American progressives are so enthusiastic about things like open borders, path to citizenship for illegals, and otherwise slow-playing immigration enforcement.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

That's an interesting explanation for why American progressives are so enthusiastic about things like open borders, path to citizenship for illegals, and otherwise slow-playing immigration enforcement.

without further explanation I consider this a non seqitor.

fact is that throughout US history, pretty much every identifiable group as been vilified as filthy foreigners who should not be allowed to live in the country and should never get to become citizens.

The idea that we are now in a special moment of excessive immigration is just Main Character Syndrome paired with "pulling up the ladder behind you" - nothing more.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Will T.rump have the Zyklon-B contract?

 

[Manopolus]

That's an interesting explanation for why American progressives are so enthusiastic about things like open borders, path to citizenship for illegals, and otherwise slow-playing immigration enforcement.

In the words of the immortal Ronald Reagan: "there you go again"

Meaning you seem to think that you can decide what other people's positions are, rather than refuting the actual positions they have. Don't get me wrong. I'm also aware that it's the whole right-wing media paradigm in a nutshell: Straw Manning. You're just copying what has been presented to you as the tribal way of doing things.

 

[theprestige]

In the words of the immortal Ronald Reagan: "there you go again"

Meaning you seem to think that you can decide what other people's positions are, rather than refuting the actual positions they have. Don't get me wrong. I'm also aware that it's the whole right-wing media paradigm in a nutshell: Straw Manning.

Sauce for the goose. Tell it to TGZ, if it bothers you so much.

 

[Manopolus]

Well, my main point is that I've not heard progressives argue for open borders. I'm not actually against the notion per se, although it would have to be done with something like the EU model, with the underdeveloped countries being explicitly developed through funding to prevent mere migration.

So... open borders? Not precisely bad, no. However, it would require substantially more organization than merely opening them and strict agreements with the bordering country. And it's not exactly in our best interest in the short term, either, although it could have long-term benefits. It would definietely require an investment without expecting an immediate return. It certainly wouldn't be a unilateral arrangement from our side.


But I never once passed over the border between France and Germany and thought "gee, I wish this involved having to do all sorts of paperwork and money before I could even consider it." I did pass that border once or twice when I was stationed in the western part of Germany, though (technically before the EU was in full effect, even).

So... not a bad thing, certainly, but perhaps not the best solution for the problems that exist. Even proposing it would be getting WAY ahead of ourselves to the point where it can't even really be a realistic goal. As it stands, there are WAY too many barriers that have to be solved before even considering it, some of which involve actually negotiating with the other country and getting them to agree with conditions that they're not required to agree with.

So. I've stated a position on open borders. I don't think it's particularly inconsistent with people that call themselves "progressive" although there is no single position on it that can be called "progressive" anyway. Progressivism isn't about border policy. It does like to chime in about the civil rights of those who already happen to be here, though.

 

[theprestige]

Well, my main point is that I've not heard progressives argue for open borders.

https://www.dsausa.org/blog/toward-a-left-position-on-immigration/

Now you have.

But I never once passed over the border between France and Germany and thought "gee, I wish this involved having to do all sorts of paperwork and money before I could even consider it." I did pass that border once or twice when I was stationed in the western part of Germany, though (technically before the EU was in full effect, even).

This is just silly. We're not talking about things like open borders between US states, or European nations participating in the Schengen arrangement. You know this. So why bring it up?

So... not a bad thing, certainly, but perhaps not the best solution for the problems that exist. Even proposing it would be getting WAY ahead of ourselves to the point where it can't even really be a realistic goal. As it stands, there are WAY too many barriers that have to be solved before even considering it, some of which involve actually negotiating with the other country and getting them to agree with conditions that they're not required to agree with.

And yet a significant and influential group of progressives is doing just that.

 

[Manopolus]

And yet a significant and influential group of progressives is doing just that.

I suppose that's entirely possible. I don't answer to them, though. Progressivisim isn't about border policy, as I said. It's not about veganism, either, although it probably does have more vegans than it does people having any particular opinion about open borders.

 

[theprestige]

I suppose that's entirely possible.

It's not possible, it's actual.

 

[theprestige]

I suppose that's entirely possible. I don't answer to them, though. Progressivisim isn't about border policy, as I said. It's not about veganism, either, although it probably does have more vegans than it does people having any particular opinion about open borders.

So you think it's perfectly fine for TGZ to level vile accusations about what conservatives believe, but the moment someone suggests that progressives might favor something much less offensive, you go into maximum defense mode. Got it.

 

[Manopolus]

So you think it's perfectly fine for TGZ to level vile accusations about what conservatives believe, but the moment someone suggests that progressives might favor something much less offensive, you go into maximum defense mode. Got it.

I don't remember TGZ having much to do with this conversation. I was responding to your post, not his. And tu quoque fallacy noted.

And yeah, I sometimes do drop a little context here and there, sorry about whatever I missed. I wasn't stepping in to defend anybody. I was responding quite directly.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

as I said, it's a basic, incredibly lazy fallacy to claim that it's either Open Borders or what the current Regime is doing.
Fact is that the US immigration system is by design dysfunctional - in the absence of a working system to legally enter and stay in the country, undocumented workers are just what's going to happen and what employers are banking on.
The system is a mess because it profits so many people - not the immigrants.

You have to be a rather stupid bully to see the problem with the migrants.

 

[Manopolus]

Meanwhile, I'm currently watching a video on Noticias Telemundo (Trying to brush up on my Spanish. I'm not fluent, though.) interviewing a guy whose 6-year-old daughter is currently detained by ICE. Not sure what that has to do with open borders, but there you go.

 

[Venom]

as I said, it's a basic, incredibly lazy fallacy to claim that it's either Open Borders or what the current Regime is doing.
Fact is that the US immigration system is by design dysfunctional - in the absence of a working system to legally enter and stay in the country, undocumented workers are just what's going to happen and what employers are banking on.
The system is a mess because it profits so many people - not the immigrants.

Start prosecuting employers. Bring criminal charges if they knowingly hire illegal workers. Issue civil fines if there's uncertainty.

You have to be a rather stupid bully to see the problem with the migrants.

I don't even blame migrants for coming here, but they are an essential part of the process so they need to be arrested and interrogated at the very least. They could be given clemency for information leading to the prosecution of their employer.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

you have no clue, do you?
Republicans are the ones protecting exploitative employers. They never get arrested, fined at most.

Why don't you write to your Congressmen ?

 

[Venom]

you have no clue, do you?
Republicans are the ones protecting exploitative employers. They never get arrested, fined at most.

Why don't you write to your Congressmen ?

I never suggested Republicans aren't also to blame. But if they started enforcing this I bet you'd complain about that too.

 

[Resume]

you have no clue, do you?plaus
Republicans are the ones protecting exploitative employers. They never get arrested, fined at most.

Why don't you write to your Congressmen ?

I know of several large U.S. companies that regularly exploit migrant labor under the plausibly deniable excuse that they're using staffing companies that assure them they are doing rigorous background checks. It's all bull ◊◊◊◊ of course and they thing is, they have been reported. I leave it up to the reader to decide what, if anything, were the consenquences.

 

[sinnikal]

""I don't even blame migrants for coming here, but they are an essential part of the process so they need to be arrested and interrogated at the very least. They could be given clemency for information leading to the prosecution of their employer"".
With the added bonus that they don't have a job any more.
Two for the price of one