Benghazi!!!

[89Hen]

we should widen the gates for the number of legal immigrants we allow in each year

1M a year is too low?

[Chizzang]

Houndawg and I are seldom in agreement on many things, but on this one he's absolutely right. Illegals wouldn't be coming here in the large numbers that they have if they weren't finding good (for them) paying jobs here. We do need to be very strict and very diligent when it comes to regulating companies and businesses and individuals that are provding the paying jobs for these illegals. We don't need a fence, we need to be clear that if you employ illegals, you will be caught, you will be fined tremendously, and if it's a repeat offense or so significant in terms of scope or brazeness, your executive is going to do time. That won't stop the illegal immigration completely, but it wil take a good chunk of it out.

And while we're doing that we should widen the gates for the number of legal immigrants we allow in each year, and make familial relations less of a driver for this. I want to bring in the entrepeneurs and the educated as much as possible, and less the uncles and cousins of a person who's already here. Yeah, that's a little harsh, but if we get to pick and choose who to bring in I want more of the top draft picks, the blue chippers, not a bunch of undrafted free agents.

I'm on record as being in agreement on this.

However, there are a couple additional draws. Jus soli is one and our need based benefits are another, but the biggest draw by far is economic. Make it unprofitable to hire illegals and a fence wont be necessary.

Wow...

There are very few Republicans that actually grasp this
or if they do actually "get it" they are still repulsed by it because it holds corporate leaders accountable
under a political system that HATES to do that

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem



Trump has illegals employed
Imagine him doing 90 days for every illegal employed by his corporations
Problem solved OVER NIGHT

[CAA Flagship]

I would like to see the numbers on this.
# of illegals in the country
# of illegals employed by legitimate American companies

I wouldn't be surprised to see a large number of illegals employed by illegals.

[kalm]

Bullshit.

You may not like it Ganny and I don't expect you to admit because you never do, but you know it's a spot on description.

Externalizing wages and pollution is morally wrong if you subscribe to your own "it's a big world" theory. We keep people down and soil their landscape for the sake of cheap trinkets and corporate profits. We do it because we're selfish and greedy. That's a part of human nature. But we also do it because we have consented to a system that prioritizes those values. That's a choice we've made. That's also reality.

China now has a middle class voice, that's true. They're still polluting at what might be unsustainable levels. That also is true.

I think we can do better all around. That's progressivism.

And in your system, where America drops it's economic hammer on people, you're doing that because you want to keep things exactly as they are, or maybe even worse. Your system doesn't hold any chance for improvement in the future. You say that we can do better all around (soundbite again), and then you propose a system that only benefits America and ends at our shoreline. That's what Progressivism is today - pointing out problems and providing no answers to fix those problems. And you're a classic Progressive under that definition.

Now your just making up shit. I also find your lack of details troubling.

A vibrant middle class, innovation, clean environment, labor rights...these things are all exportable. If we choose to do that.

[kalm]

I'm on record as being in agreement on this.

However, there are a couple additional draws. Jus soli is one and our need based benefits are another, but the biggest draw by far is economic. Make it unprofitable to hire illegals and a fence wont be necessary.

Wow...

There are very few Republicans that actually grasp this
or if they do actually "get it" they are still repulsed by it because it holds corporate leaders accountable
under a political system that HATES to do that

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem



Trump has illegals employed
Imagine him doing 90 days for every illegal employed by his corporations
Problem solved OVER NIGHT

It's harder to blame whitey.

[BDKJMU]

we should widen the gates for the number of legal immigrants we allow in each year

1M a year is too low?

Yeah, exactly. We already have a massive amount of low skilled illegal labor already here (most of the 11 million). With have 90+ million out of the workforce, we don't need anymore low skilled blue collar labor. Only allow in folks educated with masters & phds, tech, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. Add on legalization by marriage and it shouldn't be more than 1 million per year.

[AZGrizFan]

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem

Let me shorten that for you:

Follow the money.

[Chizzang]

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem

Let me shorten that for you:

Follow the money.

I was channeling Dback there for a second

[GannonFan]

And in your system, where America drops it's economic hammer on people, you're doing that because you want to keep things exactly as they are, or maybe even worse. Your system doesn't hold any chance for improvement in the future. You say that we can do better all around (soundbite again), and then you propose a system that only benefits America and ends at our shoreline. That's what Progressivism is today - pointing out problems and providing no answers to fix those problems. And you're a classic Progressive under that definition.

Now your just making up ****. I also find your lack of details troubling.

A vibrant middle class, innovation, clean environment, labor rights...these things are all exportable. If we choose to do that.

I'm sure they are. Just go ahead and click your ruby slippers and it will happen. Heck, ruby slippers are more of a plan that what you have. And shame on you taking my innovation soundbite - but I'm glad that you've finally come around, after several years, to agreeing that innovation is the way forward for American manufacture. I'll keep working on the other stuff and I'm sure you'll come around in a couple of years after the fallacy of modern day Progressive thought is exposed for the empty idea that it is.

[GannonFan]

1M a year is too low?

Yeah, exactly. We already have a massive amount of low skilled illegal labor already here (most of the 11 million). With have 90+ million out of the workforce, we don't need anymore low skilled blue collar labor. Only allow in folks educated with masters & phds, tech, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. Add on legalization by marriage and it shouldn't be more than 1 million per year.

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

[Ivytalk]

Yeah, exactly. We already have a massive amount of low skilled illegal labor already here (most of the 11 million). With have 90+ million out of the workforce, we don't need anymore low skilled blue collar labor. Only allow in folks educated with masters & phds, tech, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. Add on legalization by marriage and it shouldn't be more than 1 million per year.

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...

-- Gannon Q. Fan, Esq.

[89Hen]

Yeah, exactly. We already have a massive amount of low skilled illegal labor already here (most of the 11 million). With have 90+ million out of the workforce, we don't need anymore low skilled blue collar labor. Only allow in folks educated with masters & phds, tech, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. Add on legalization by marriage and it shouldn't be more than 1 million per year.

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

You need to show me that there are more than 1M "doctors and engineer and scientists and those types" who want to come here each year.

[BDKJMU]

Yeah, exactly. We already have a massive amount of low skilled illegal labor already here (most of the 11 million). With have 90+ million out of the workforce, we don't need anymore low skilled blue collar labor. Only allow in folks educated with masters & phds, tech, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. Add on legalization by marriage and it shouldn't be more than 1 million per year.

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

Well, yeah, when the population was 100-200 million. We already have 320ish million people. We don't need anymore. When the population hit 300 million I think we needed to slow it down. The population has been expanding around 3 million a year the last couple of decades. At some point you don't want the population to expand anymore. What is that #? 300 million? 350 million? 400 million? 500 million? At the rate we're going we'll hit 400 million in our lifetimes, and 500 million in your kids' lifetimes..Too many people...

[GannonFan]

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...

-- Gannon Q. Fan, Esq.

Yeah, times have changed, we don't need the castoffs anymore.

[GannonFan]

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

You need to show me that there are more than 1M "doctors and engineer and scientists and those types" who want to come here each year.

I honestly don't know if there are, but we seem to fill the immigration lottery up really quick every year and we still have tons of foreigners streaming to our Universities, so I'm thinking it's not like we're going to have spots go unfilled.

[Grizalltheway]

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...

-- Gannon Q. Fan, Esq.

Yeah, times have changed, we don't need the castoffs anymore.

I think that's exactly what Jesus said!

[GannonFan]

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

Well, yeah, when the population was 100-200 million. We already have 320ish million people. We don't need anymore. When the population hit 300 million I think we needed to slow it down. The population has been expanding around 3 million a year the last couple of decades. At some point you don't want the population to expand anymore. What is that #? 300 million? 350 million? 400 million? 500 million? At the rate we're going we'll hit 400 million in our lifetimes, and 500 million in your kids' lifetimes..Too many people...

When the population stops growing is when you run into problems. See Japan and Europe and Russia for the wonders of zero or negative population growth. I'm not saying there won't be challenges with a bigger population, of course there will be, but I'm not a Malthusian so I'm optimistic that we'll deal with it well.

[BDKJMU]

Well, yeah, when the population was 100-200 million. We already have 320ish million people. We don't need anymore. When the population hit 300 million I think we needed to slow it down. The population has been expanding around 3 million a year the last couple of decades. At some point you don't want the population to expand anymore. What is that #? 300 million? 350 million? 400 million? 500 million? At the rate we're going we'll hit 400 million in our lifetimes, and 500 million in your kids' lifetimes..Too many people...

When the population stops growing is when you run into problems. See Japan and Europe and Russia for the wonders of zero or negative population growth. I'm not saying there won't be challenges with a bigger population, of course there will be, but I'm not a Malthusian so I'm optimistic that we'll deal with it well.

So at what # do we put the brakes on? 350 million? 400? 500? 1 billion?

[CID1990]

I'm on record as being in agreement on this.

However, there are a couple additional draws. Jus soli is one and our need based benefits are another, but the biggest draw by far is economic. Make it unprofitable to hire illegals and a fence wont be necessary.

Wow...

There are very few Republicans that actually grasp this
or if they do actually "get it" they are still repulsed by it because it holds corporate leaders accountable
under a political system that HATES to do that

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem



Trump has illegals employed
Imagine him doing 90 days for every illegal employed by his corporations
Problem solved OVER NIGHT

clitz

i know you understand that "the fence" is just populist BS for the retard GOP base - most Republicans DO understand it

it is the same as the economic populism we're getting from Bernie and Fauxcahontas for the retard Dem base

there has to be something for the mouth breathers and remedial readers ... they dont come out to the polls for complex issues they dont understand- so they get "border fence" or "shut down the banks" or "blacklivesmatter" and thats true of them all

you try to throw complex ideas out there that cant be summed up in a tweet and peoples eyes start glazing over

[GannonFan]

When the population stops growing is when you run into problems. See Japan and Europe and Russia for the wonders of zero or negative population growth. I'm not saying there won't be challenges with a bigger population, of course there will be, but I'm not a Malthusian so I'm optimistic that we'll deal with it well.

So at what # do we put the brakes on? 350 million? 400? 500? 1 billion?

I don't see how having 1M to 2M legal, selected immigrants per year is going to require the brakes being put on. And besides, how do you plan on putting the brakes on? Instituting Chinese-like child restrictions? Regardless, I feel safe in saying that we won't hit the 1 billion in our lifetimes, so it truly is a problem for the next generation or even the generation after that. Population restriction (immigrants and births) is not going to be something we tackle in the next 50 years.

[GannonFan]

Yeah, times have changed, we don't need the castoffs anymore.

I think that's exactly what Jesus said!

Well, we were never founded as a Christian nation so...

[Ivytalk]

Wow...

There are very few Republicans that actually grasp this
or if they do actually "get it" they are still repulsed by it because it holds corporate leaders accountable
under a political system that HATES to do that

There's an old adage that I will butcher badly here:
To get to the bottom of a problem simply look to see who profits from the problem



Trump has illegals employed
Imagine him doing 90 days for every illegal employed by his corporations
Problem solved OVER NIGHT

clitz

i know you understand that "the fence" is just populist BS for the retard GOP base - most Republicans DO understand it

it is the same as the economic populism we're getting from Bernie and Fauxcahontas for the retard Dem base

there has to be something for the mouth breathers and remedial readers ... they dont come out to the polls for complex issues they dont understand- so they get "border fence" or "shut down the banks" or "blacklivesmatter" and thats true of them all

you try to throw complex ideas out there that cant be summed up in a tweet and peoples eyes start glazing over

Jizzang tends to view the world through the pink-colored glasses of TCFHPs. (Terminally Condescending Former Harvard People)

[Ibanez]

I do think it's too low. We have 319M people in this country, so allowing 1M of legal immigration per year is a really tiny percentage (what is it, 0.3%?). And I already said I don't want to expand the rolls and bring in low skilled blue collar folks, I do want the educated, the thriving, the successful to come into the country. I already said I want the doctors and engineer and scientists and those types. We need a vibrant and expanding population - that's what helps to drive economic growth in the model we have choosen to base our economy on, so we might as well be picky about it and pick those people best suited to flourish in this country and have kids who will continue to flourish. We could add 2M people each year and that would still just be 0.6% of the population. That's doable, especially if we clamp down on the reasons that people come into this country illegally and start to dry up those leaks.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...

-- Gannon Q. Fan, Esq.

That sonnet shouldn't be the basis of our immigration policy.

[Ivytalk]

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...

-- Gannon Q. Fan, Esq.

That poem shouldn't be the basis of our immigration policy.

I guess I should have added an emoticon so you would have seen the dripping

[Chizzang]

clitz

i know you understand that "the fence" is just populist BS for the retard GOP base - most Republicans DO understand it

it is the same as the economic populism we're getting from Bernie and Fauxcahontas for the retard Dem base

there has to be something for the mouth breathers and remedial readers ... they dont come out to the polls for complex issues they dont understand- so they get "border fence" or "shut down the banks" or "blacklivesmatter" and thats true of them all

you try to throw complex ideas out there that cant be summed up in a tweet and peoples eyes start glazing over

Jizzang tends to view the world through the pink-colored glasses of TCFHPs. (Terminally Condescending Former Harvard People)

Um...
89hen likes to call me a "smug prick"
Which has become my defining characteristic here its a heavy burden but I do it for you guys