Up to 3.6 million Dreamers in line for citizenship under DACA replacement

@WillReadmore, I'm assuming you're taking your time to craft one hell of a reply!

 

I'm losing interest here - that's all.

This is free market capitalism. Cheap labor is the ONLY reason for guest worker programs.

There is no cue in our immigration system.

Governments including those of the US don't even slightly do a reasonable job of assessing "skills needs". That's why the US supports corporations hiring people from other countries rather than having governments asses those individuals. At its very root, we like free market capitalism - not government evaluations of who is of "net benefit". Plus, your answer fails in that it isn't enough to suggest how much "net benefit" is required or how that is measured. And, that would be a big change from my experience with Australia in the past with the international corporation I worked for.
[/QUOTE]


Given how thorough you've been at replying, I was expecting replies to each of the below:



I'm not saying its 100% negative, but how is it positive?



Where did you explain what you take "shithole" to mean?
[/QUOTE]
??? That expression is a nasty epithet, obviously.

The comments made by our president against Africa, Haiti, Muslims, etc., are really no more than hate spewed at large population groups - very much like racism. There is no room in America for that kind of hate. We're founded on individuals deserving equal treatment under the law, not categories of people being rejected because of where they came from, their religion, etc.

I thought that was too obvious and frequently answered both directly and as reflected in policy direction.

This is just abject nonsense.

Everything we do costs money. Suggesting we CAN spend money in stupid ways is exactly what I'm against - that's why we need a justification for spending $20B on a wall.

And, if the issue is fighting crime, then it must be compared against other methods of fighting crime. So, one would have to show how much crime might be reduced by building a wall with Mexico vs other opportunities to fight crime. Saying that the wall will reduce crime is a proposition. The next step is to determine whether it is cost effective - or even true!

This is just false. It probably comes from not knowing how our government works.

 

So someone who applies today could be processed before someone who applied months ago?

Sure, corporations hire people, but they don't give them immigration status do they? At the end of the day, it is the government which decides whether someone can enter the country to work. Surely you understand that. I acknowledge that the system in the US may be that the government uses the mere fact that a corporation wants the skills of someone, then that is good enough and the person is automatically granted entry, until a limit is reached and no further person can enter. Is this the case?

You've still not been able to back this up after multiple chances. Don't you have an answer as to how is it positive?

How would you describe Haiti and El Salvador?

Oh but its okay to ACCEPT categories of people because of where they came from? (Diversity Visa Program.)

Correct. And similarly, we need a justification for NOT spending 20 billion on a wall, from those who don't want a wall. And those people need an argument as to why a wall won't work. And you've yet to state why it won't work.

Yeah, but fighting crime is not the primary issue, just a side issue. The primary issue is that people are illegally crossing the border and they need to be stopped, regardless of the fact that people can still come legally and overstay their visa.

I don't need to know how your government works to know that Democrats had more than just the option of saying "NO." Are you actually telling me that they had no other alternative than to say no?

 

Absolutely.

There is a separate program for those who have been hired by a corporation that is willing to sponsor them. I'm referring to H-1B visas. This program has limitations that you can read about. To qualify there has to be an argument that, for the employer, feels like having to argue that you are actively offering the job within the US and can't find enough such people, because of the specialty of the occupation. It's not for labor, for example, because any able bodied citizen can do labor.

Diversity is positive. That's a given. Sorry.

Oh, good LORD!!! First of all, one does not sling epithets like Trump did. It's just plain ignorant, dismissive, discriminatory, and in NO WAY suggests lack of equality of those living there.

You are NOT LISTENING. Individuals must quality for the diversity program. There is nothing in the diversity program that suggests that those from some particular country or continent is of lesser value - like TRUMP DID.

NO. That is not the way it works. There NEVER has to be a reason for not throwing money at something. There DOES have to be a reason for spending tax dollars.

And, we don't have that for the border wall against Mexico.

You're missing the point AGAIN!! If someone wants to spend tax dollars to build a wall, they need to justify that. There could be a combination of factors that come together to warrant tens of BILLIONS of dollars. Fine. We do NOT have that yet.

Come on. There have been many proposals related to that border.

Remember that Obama adjusted our policy at the Mexican border with NO HELP from congress - because it didn't require budget increases. And, under his presidency the number of undocumented aliens in America DID NOT RISE for the last DECADE. That had never been accomplished.

This is one reason why there needs to be a justification. Why would we spend $20B more when the number of undocumented aliens here is NOT RISING even just using our current techniques???

 

Think about these answers for a while.

You're asking numerous silly questions that could be answered by YOU - even if you didn't even read my posts.

Try to get a grip on what your point is.

 

So then how the hell does the government prioritise who to process first? If it isn't first come first serve, then that seems very unfair.

Isn't having an employment sponsor the only way to immigrate to the US other than the Diversity Visa and refugee? How else does someone immigrate without having a job to come to?

If you believe this, then why don't you have even one reason why you believe it? You seriously cannot point to anything?

Sure, but now can you answer how YOU would describe Haiti and El Salvador?

Of course they do. However, they NOT being assessed on individual MERIT!

Of course there's not because that would be wrong. However, the program suggests that those from some particular country are of GREATER value.
The program is based on what country someone is from. Right or wrong? If you say wrong, then you clearly don't have a clue how the program works.

Are you serious? If people give reasons for throwing money at something, then those who disagree will have to have a counter argument at to why the money should not be spent. You don't get this? Really?

Are you against the wall purely because of money? What if the wall could be built for free?Would you have a problem with it?

Who says that you do not have that yet? Isn't it highly subjective as to whether it warrants tens of billions of dollars? Or does it only warrant it when Democrats agree?

How does this mean that Dems couldn't have said yes to the last bill?

Why does it need to rise first? Aliens are still arriving and they always will. Saying that it needs to rise is not logical.
If it was rising, then it would just be even more critical, but its not as if its not a problem just because its not rising!

 

So, when this leaks out of the CAP Action Fund:

To: Interested Parties
From: Jennifer Palmieri, President, and Navin Nayak, Executive Director, Center for
American Progress Action Fund
Re: Defending Dreamers is a Moral Imperative and a Defining Political Moment for
Democrats
Date: January 8, 2018
,,,,
"The fight to protect Dreamers is not only a moral imperative, it is also a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success."
,,,,

needing to load up voter registration with illegals is a made up right wing meme? When did the Center for American Progress start trafficking in "made up right wing memes"?

 

No, YOU need to think about this subject first.

These questions are both trivial and already answered.

For example, I know we don't have a justification for the wall, because nobody in government has provided one.

And, yes, Democrats could have voted for ANY bill. The reason they didn't vote for that one bill were discussed earlier.

And, no, it's been answered several times that not all immigration programs require an employer sponsor.

I'm out unless I see something interesting to answer.

 

No. These questions are too challenging for you to answer. Its very easy to simply say, "already answered" and its a very convenient way to avoid answering questions which you HAVEN'T actually given an answer to. Its a way to convince the questioner that they may have forgotten that the person has already answered their questions. However, in this case, you've not convinced me.

Where exactly have you answered these questions?

1. How would YOU (not Trump) describe Haiti and El Salvador?
2. IN WHAT WAYS is diversity positive?
3. The Diversity Visa Program is based on what country someone is from. Right or wrong?
4. Are you against the wall purely because of money? What if the wall could be built for free? Would you have a problem with it?

I'm sorry, but you simply haven't answered these! Direct me to your post where you did.

The justification is clearly to create a physical barrier in order to make it much harder for people to cross the border illegally.
Are you actually saying that nobody has talked about this including Trump? You may not accept this as a justification but its a justification nonetheless.

Regardless of the reasons they have, the fact is they had a chance to do the right thing for Dreamers but they didn't.
Therefore, the fact that Dreamers are still in limbo is NOT purely because of Republican's. That's just a fact.

Of course - there is the refugee program and the Diversity Visa Program.
However, I would be surprised if there was another one where someone can simply arrive with no job to go to with the risk of becoming homeless.

Well it was only a matter of time. Most people pull out of debating me.

 

Those are countries in central America.
America was built on diversity, and I see America as positive.
The diversity visa program takes care to increase diversity by ensuring there are slots available from a wide variety of countries.
I'm against spending tens of billions of dollars where there is no justification. I want to see the justification. And, the justification should drive what it is that we do to solve the problems identified in that justification.

I've said ALL that before!!

You are failing to think - and THAT is what I told you.

No, it is a hand wave. The justification has to be much more detailed than that and has to be able to be used to design approaches that address the problems identified in the justification.

I've said that before.

NO. I totally disagree. And, I've said that before.

I've pointed out the capabilities requirements in the diversity program, the professional employment program, and other programs exist.

AGAIN, you are just failing to listen.

I certainly can see why people end up not wanting to discuss topics with you. You are failing to do ANYTHING to contribute and you aren't even remembering what's been said, cited, etc. You aren't even bothering to keep up with the news on the topic.

 

Do you actually think that I was asking you where they are geographically located? Come on now. How would you describe them? Good, poor, bad, rich?

No, you didn't say that before actually, but you have now so you've now given an answer. I'm just surprised that you're not able to say more on this.

Fair enough. Now if money wasn't a problem, would you be against the wall? I'm trying to determine if you have a problem with the wall ITSELF.

I agree that there has to be much more detail than that, however you were saying that there was no justification at all. I have to admit that I did assume that it went beyond this. If it is actually the case that no justification has been made beyond "we need a wall to stop aliens from crossing the border" with not even a cost benefit analysis, then that is pathetically poor from the Trump administration. However, are you actually 100% informed that this is in fact the case?

Look, it is a fact that if Democrats voted yes, that the Dreamer's protection would be secured. Are you saying that it wouldn't be secured?

Sure, but is there actually a program where someone can immigrate with no job to go to?

 

So out of the total number of Diversity Visa Recipients combined with employment visa recipients, 33% are Diversity Visa Recipient?

Is that all? If that's the case, then what is the percentage of those who come through employment and as refugees? I would've guessed 95%.

No, of course they won't "CRASH" America, but how will they necessarily benefit America?