Shipping Migrants Inland

[BDKJMU]

I've had a few posts before (not in this thread) outlining that we should register them.

I'm for an open border*, but that's because it incentivizes people who show up to register with the government. It's already a long journey and they're committed; they're not coming here and saying "oh the border is closed, oh there's a fence...I guess I need to turn around."

An open border takes away the incentive to cross illegally and gives us a better chance to register, track, and deport people when necessary. It's also safer for our citizens, for the migrants, and allows governments to keep track of their economic contributions (aka. collect taxes).

An EU-style agreement would be even better between the Americas, but that's for a different topic. Either way, de-humanizing and hunting people down like animals never solves anything. Giving them autonomy and freedom makes it easier for everyone involved.

*an open border doesn't mean there's no security, anyone can walk in, etc. It just means that if you show up at the border, the nation you came from is informed, a background check is done, and you're registered and allowed in (or disallowed in some cases).

There’s 7 1/2 billion peopple in the world not in the US, several billion of whom would like to come to the US. We couldn’t even absorb 1% of them. You‘ve officially joined the Mt Rushmore of Retard.

[BDKJMU]

https://academic.oup.com/oxrep/article- ... ogin=false

Most economic theories tell you immigration economically benefits society. It doesn't really matter if it's legal, but the gains over time are always positive. While a small number drain the system, as in most mixed economies, the vast majority will be contributors.

But I know you don't read books - or live in reality - so I guess doesn't matter I even reply to you.

Anyways, I'd rather have an illegal immigrant in the US than BDK. At least they contribute to the real economy because no way does someone who posts on the internet all day, everyday have a real job.

Let me stop you right there bro. Most economic theories. Real life is far different than theory. Look no further than Krugman in regards to economists.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with immigrants, let's just fix the system so they can get registered to be a legal part of America.

How many illegals were fucked over by the vaccine Karen's during the pandemic? Yeah, libs sure shit on the immigrant population hard, and they had no recourse. Let's fix that.

Yep. I stopped reading his post at ‘theories‘.

[GannonFan]

I've had a few posts before (not in this thread) outlining that we should register them.

I'm for an open border*, but that's because it incentivizes people who show up to register with the government. It's already a long journey and they're committed; they're not coming here and saying "oh the border is closed, oh there's a fence...I guess I need to turn around."

An open border takes away the incentive to cross illegally and gives us a better chance to register, track, and deport people when necessary. It's also safer for our citizens, for the migrants, and allows governments to keep track of their economic contributions (aka. collect taxes).

An EU-style agreement would be even better between the Americas, but that's for a different topic. Either way, de-humanizing and hunting people down like animals never solves anything. Giving them autonomy and freedom makes it easier for everyone involved.

*an open border doesn't mean there's no security, anyone can walk in, etc. It just means that if you show up at the border, the nation you came from is informed, a background check is done, and you're registered and allowed in (or disallowed in some cases).

The issue with an open border, which I think another poster alluded to, is that there is a finite number of immigrants we can effectively take in per year and still get the economic benefits you are correct in saying comes with reasonable immigration without suffering the economic difficulties that come with unrestricted immigration which you are ignoring. I don't know what the number is of how many people we can absorb in a year and effectively get them into the country, get them pointed in the right direction, and get them access to the support they need to become contributing citizens in this country. But it's not infinite. And in reality, who wouldn't want to come to this country? I'm sure the vast majority of the third world would come here in a heartbeat if they knew they could and if they had the means. We can't take in that many people in such a short time frame. I'm all for greatly increasing the number of folks we bring into the country, but like you said, we need to do it at a level where we can handle them coming in and where we can be sure they are going to be capable of succeeding once they get here.

[UNI88]

Let me stop you right there bro. Most economic theories. Real life is far different than theory. Look no further than Krugman in regards to economists.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with immigrants, let's just fix the system so they can get registered to be a legal part of America.

How many illegals were fucked over by the vaccine Karen's during the pandemic? Yeah, libs sure shit on the immigrant population hard, and they had no recourse. Let's fix that.

Yep. I stopped reading his post at ‘theories‘.

SG and BDK - flat earther brothers by another mother. The benefits of reasonable immigration are well known, but fools ignore or deny them.

[houndawg]

I've had a few posts before (not in this thread) outlining that we should register them.

I'm for an open border*, but that's because it incentivizes people who show up to register with the government. It's already a long journey and they're committed; they're not coming here and saying "oh the border is closed, oh there's a fence...I guess I need to turn around."

An open border takes away the incentive to cross illegally and gives us a better chance to register, track, and deport people when necessary. It's also safer for our citizens, for the migrants, and allows governments to keep track of their economic contributions (aka. collect taxes).

An EU-style agreement would be even better between the Americas, but that's for a different topic. Either way, de-humanizing and hunting people down like animals never solves anything. Giving them autonomy and freedom makes it easier for everyone involved.

*an open border doesn't mean there's no security, anyone can walk in, etc. It just means that if you show up at the border, the nation you came from is informed, a background check is done, and you're registered and allowed in (or disallowed in some cases).

There’s 7 1/2 billion peopple in the world not in the US, several billion of whom would like to come to the US. We couldn’t even absorb 1% of them. You‘ve officially joined the Mt Rushmore of Retard.

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

[houndawg]

Some of them are due in federal court back in Texas. Less than 30% of applicants are granted asylum.

So?, The majority don’t show up for their asylum hearings and are ordered deported in abscentia. And for those who do show and are denied, they then get a deportion hearing, which few show up for, and again are ordered deported in absentia. And most will never encounter ICE again; much less be deported. And for those few who do encounter immigration authorities years/decades down the road, you have bleeding hearts saying you can’t deport someone who’s been bere for years/decades because they’ve become established bere, kids were born here, etc, etc, despite the fact that they entered illegally, remained illegally, worked illegally, often with stolen ID, and ignored orders of deportation years/decades prior.

They also contribute about $12,000,000,000 per year in taxes. Send some freeloader CEOs back in their place.

[houndawg]

Illegal immigrants who entered US since Biden took office to cost taxpayers $20+ billion a year: analysis

The study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which advocates for lower levels of immigration overall, calculates that the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. since Jan. 2021 will add an extra $20.4 billion burden a year, in addition to the $140 billion existing illegal immigrants already cost.

The analysis is based on an estimated 1.3 million released into the U.S. by immigration officials, as well as approximately one million "gotaways" -- or illegal immigrants who have slipped past overwhelmed agents. FAIR calculates that each illegal immigrants costs $9,232 a year to support.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/illega ... r-analysis

https://academic.oup.com/oxrep/article- ... ogin=false

Most economic theories tell you immigration economically benefits society. It doesn't really matter if it's legal, but the gains over time are always positive. While a small number drain the system, as in most mixed economies, the vast majority will be contributors.

But I know you don't read books, or know history, or live in reality, so I guess it doesn't matter I even reply to you.

Anyways, I'd rather have an illegal immigrant in the US than BDK. At least they contribute to the economy because there's no chance someone who lives on the internet as much as BDK has a job that benefits America.

Holding down the Parasite wing of the Republican Party

[∞∞∞]

There’s 7 1/2 billion peopple in the world not in the US, several billion of whom would like to come to the US. We couldn’t even absorb 1% of them. You‘ve officially joined the Mt Rushmore of Retard.

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

[AZGrizFan]

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

Where does your magic pile of money come from to "scale up" all the services that would be required? FFS, it takes more than just PHYSICAL SPACE to be able to adequately absorb that many illegals.

[AZGrizFan]

So?, The majority don’t show up for their asylum hearings and are ordered deported in abscentia. And for those who do show and are denied, they then get a deportion hearing, which few show up for, and again are ordered deported in absentia. And most will never encounter ICE again; much less be deported. And for those few who do encounter immigration authorities years/decades down the road, you have bleeding hearts saying you can’t deport someone who’s been bere for years/decades because they’ve become established bere, kids were born here, etc, etc, despite the fact that they entered illegally, remained illegally, worked illegally, often with stolen ID, and ignored orders of deportation years/decades prior.

They also contribute about $12,000,000,000 per year in taxes.

He says without a shred of proof.

[UNI88]

They also contribute about $12,000,000,000 per year in taxes.

He says without a shred of proof.

Are you upset that Houndy out-Chizzied you on that one?

[UNI88]

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

Where does your magic pile of money come from to "scale up" all the services that would be required? FFS, it takes more than just PHYSICAL SPACE to be able to adequately absorb that many illegals.

Duh, a return to a pre-Reagan 70% federal income tax rate.

[GannonFan]

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

Well, in the two centuries of open borders (I question what two centuries you're referring to - we closed the spigot on open borders by about the 1920's so that's just over 100+ years of open borders, unless you're counting colonial time, and even then it wasn't all that open) the borders may have been open, but it was pretty difficult to get here. With transportation being difficult, and costly, and long, it did take some doing to get here. As for the services and economy growing rapidly, of course they will, but will they grow rapidly enough to meet the needs of the size of the immigrant population you're saying would come here (you use an estimate of 1% so that's 70 million people)? Evidence suggests it wouldn't. Here in the US we struggled for decades accommodating the incoming immigrant populations and largely did a poor job of it - ethnic ghettoes were widespread, political corruption was considerable, and as a result there was a lot of ethnic and racial strife that to some extent still continues today. And even if we say that was just a product of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when immigration was even getting towards the amount of immigration you're suggesting, all we have to do it look at Europe and the difficulties they've experienced in handling wide swaths of migrants to know that many of the same problems would happen again today (very forward looking countries like Germany and Belgium and France particularly have had significant issues handling large migrant populations).

Like I said, I'm in favor of considerably more legal immigration to this country than what we've done in the recent past, but that number is still finite and far smaller than what you're proposing with a true open borders concept. And don't underestimate how many people do want to come here.

[houndawg]

They also contribute about $12,000,000,000 per year in taxes.

He says without a shred of proof.

Forbes.com, read it and weep.

there is no dumb fuck like a conk dumb fuck.

[AZGrizFan]

He says without a shred of proof.

Are you upset that Houndy out-Chizzied you on that one?

Yes, Chizzy....the king of baseless "facts".

[AZGrizFan]

He says without a shred of proof.

Forbes.com, read it and weep.

there is no dumb fuck like a conk dumb fuck.

Sure thing, Einstein.

[houndawg]

Where does your magic pile of money come from to "scale up" all the services that would be required? FFS, it takes more than just PHYSICAL SPACE to be able to adequately absorb that many illegals.

Duh, a return to a pre-Reagan 70% federal income tax rate.

sweeeeeet

[BDKJMU]

Yep. I stopped reading his post at ‘theories‘.

SG and BDK - flat earther brothers by another mother. The benefits of reasonable immigration are well known, but fools ignore or deny them.

Agreed after your 1st sentence. But what is your definition of reasonable? The US has avg about a 1/2 million legal permanent residents added a year since 1820.
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/program ... -Residents
That seems reasonable to me. Even 1 million legal LPR + 1 million or so guest workers each yr if were able to cut illegal immigration 90% from what we have now under Biden (2+ million illegals in the last yr alone). Legal, reasonable limited, and controlled.

[BDKJMU]

He says without a shred of proof.

Forbes.com, read it and weep.

there is no dumb fuck like a conk dumb fuck.

$9,232 cost to US each year per illegal to support (FAIR #s from link in prior post) x 20 million illegals before Brandon + 3 million illgals added since Brandon = over 200 billion per year in cost to the taxpayers, compared to the 12 billion a year in taxes you claim.

Looks like no dumb fuck like a donk dumb fuck..

[Baldy]

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

Wait a damn minute here.

The folks on your side are the ones complaining about overpopulation. How can the world be overpopulated if the entire population of the world can, as you say, comfortably fit inside the state of Texas?

[BDKJMU]

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

[BDKJMU]

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.

I think BDK thinks our services/economy wouldn't be scaled up with more people, but scaled growth is exactly what would happen. We've prior grown rapidly because of immigration and it turned out fine. People will build new communities and micro-economies.

Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

Well, in the two centuries of open borders (I question what two centuries you're referring to - we closed the spigot on open borders by about the 1920's so that's just over 100+ years of open borders, unless you're counting colonial time, and even then it wasn't all that open) the borders may have been open, but it was pretty difficult to get here. With transportation being difficult, and costly, and long, it did take some doing to get here. As for the services and economy growing rapidly, of course they will, but will they grow rapidly enough to meet the needs of the size of the immigrant population you're saying would come here (you use an estimate of 1% so that's 70 million people)? Evidence suggests it wouldn't. Here in the US we struggled for decades accommodating the incoming immigrant populations and largely did a poor job of it - ethnic ghettoes were widespread, political corruption was considerable, and as a result there was a lot of ethnic and racial strife that to some extent still continues today. And even if we say that was just a product of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when immigration was even getting towards the amount of immigration you're suggesting, all we have to do it look at Europe and the difficulties they've experienced in handling wide swaths of migrants to know that many of the same problems would happen again today (very forward looking countries like Germany and Belgium and France particularly have had significant issues handling large migrant populations).

Like I said, I'm in favor of considerably more legal immigration to this country than what we've done in the recent past, but that number is still finite and far smaller than what you're proposing with a true open borders concept. And don't underestimate how many people do want to come here.

He must think we had air travel back then..

[BDKJMU]

We have vast amounts of space out West - wouldn't have to send that many to Wyoming to make the Ds competitive...

The entire world's population can comfortably live in the continental United States, probably even Texas itself. If you took just bodies with 0.4 square meters of space for each person, the entire world's population fits inside Rhode Island with 60 square kilometers to spare. So yeah, I think we'd be ok handling 1% of the world's population. This is a ridiculously large nation and a lot of the global population relies on US support anyways.


Additionally, we're gonna need to bring more people if we want the economy to keep growing as birthrates decline.

Anyways, 1% of the world's population will not show up at our doorstep. Leaving everything you know is hard enough, but then you also need to have the money, means, and plan to do it. In the two centuries where we basically had open borders, we didn't approach close to 1% of the world's population showing up at our doorstep. Even today, the people coming from Central/South America doesn't approach 1% of their population.

We're a beacon to some, but don't over inflate our how much people want to come here.

We have roughly 4% of the world’s population now. If you think if the US announced a fully open border and anyone around the world can be given a green card and come, we wouldn’t have far more than 1% of those outside the US (75 million of 7.5 billion) actually coming, then you’re a lot dumber than I thought you were. It would be disproportionately 2nd and 3rd world, lower and no skilled, completely swamping and overwhelming every institution in America (schools, health care, social services, housing, criminal justice system, immigration system, etc, etc, etc). Of the several billion poor 2nd and 3rd world people, many living under oppressive and autocratic regimes, who wouldn’t want to come to the US? It wouldn’t take that many years for US society as we know it to completely collapse.

[UNI88]

Duh, a return to a pre-Reagan 70% federal income tax rate.

sweeeeeet

I forgot to mention that with the 70% income tax rate will come an economic malaise caused by fewer individuals starting their own businesses. R&D will fall off a cliff and we won't come up with innovative solutions to climate change. Millions around the world will die due to drought/famine, extreme weather and flooding. Donks will have solved the world's overpopulation problem. Congratulations

[kalm]

sweeeeeet

I forgot to mention that with the 70% income tax rate will come an economic malaise caused by fewer individuals starting their own businesses. R&D will fall off a cliff and we won't come up with innovative solutions to climate change. Millions around the world will die due to drought/famine, extreme weather and flooding. Donks will have solved the world's overpopulation problem. Congratulations

The same individuals that benefit from that high rate are at least partially responsible consolidation and monopolies.

What do captains of industry do when taxes are high? They reinvest…in their business. They can pay employees more, invest in R&D, upgrade equipment and factories rather give it to the government.