Author Topic: Re: open borders  (Read 2142 times)

cubsfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 900
Re: open borders
« Reply #10 on: October 23, 2018, 12:14:49 PM »
It certainly not a net positive for California, where the largest population of illegal immigrants have gone.
They've flooded the state - overwhelming the schools and taxing all the social services. The California prisons are about
25% Mexican, which does not represent the makeup of the state. Even though college is almost "free" for many of
these immigrants - you have maybe 5% that end up with college degrees.

Immigration is only good if assimilation occurs - and it's not occurring in CA.

Immigration can be good if failed governments like Honduras, Mexico, etc - are not exporting people they discriminate
against and do not wish to take care of.

This is not the immigration of the early 1900's whereby Italian, Jewish, etc immigrants came into our country
and learned our languages, accepted our culture and totally assimilated into the "American Identity" which was
about common ideals. Many even brought valuable skills.

This illegal immigration is a disaster - and puts those immigrants (Indian, Asian, etc) who deserve to be here and
do it the legal way - totally to the back of the line.

There is nothing good about the open borders with Mexico when they overwhelm your country because
they feel "you have to take us", and you have no say in the matter.


LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2690
Re: open borders
« Reply #11 on: October 23, 2018, 12:24:00 PM »
So I agree and disagree.

I agree on the topic of integration. This usually does NOT occur in the first generation. The first gen is usually pretty bad - overwhelming social services, higher than average crime rates, etc. It gets better from there (logarithmically) - the second generation is one of the highest net contributors.

Where I disagree is your characterization of the Jewish/Irish/Italian diasporas. They were almost exactly like the current South American waves of immigration. Low-to-no literacy, very little integration (Chinatown? Little Italy?), poor employment (if any), high crime rates (the irish jewish italian mobs). I think you are doing a bit of selective recollection there in terms of what those immigrant waves were first like.



"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

DTEJD1997

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1444
Re: open borders
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2018, 12:30:33 PM »
It certainly not a net positive for California, where the largest population of illegal immigrants have gone.
They've flooded the state - overwhelming the schools and taxing all the social services. The California prisons are about
25% Mexican, which does not represent the makeup of the state. Even though college is almost "free" for many of
these immigrants - you have maybe 5% that end up with college degrees.

Immigration is only good if assimilation occurs - and it's not occurring in CA.

Immigration can be good if failed governments like Honduras, Mexico, etc - are not exporting people they discriminate
against and do not wish to take care of.

This is not the immigration of the early 1900's whereby Italian, Jewish, etc immigrants came into our country
and learned our languages, accepted our culture and totally assimilated into the "American Identity" which was
about common ideals. Many even brought valuable skills.

This illegal immigration is a disaster - and puts those immigrants (Indian, Asian, etc) who deserve to be here and
do it the legal way - totally to the back of the line.

There is nothing good about the open borders with Mexico when they overwhelm your country because
they feel "you have to take us", and you have no say in the matter.

Speaking of the immigration of a century + ago....those were different times & different circumstances.  That was also about the time my ancestors came from Europe.    On both sides of the family, they were fleeing war/persecution.  They had NO CHOICE but to assimilate, they could not go back...no matter what.  It was "do or die". 

A lot of illegal immigrants today are economic immigrants, they stay here for a period of time and sometimes will even go back & forth to their home country 1x a year or every other year.  I knew a few that did this.  They do not have the same motivation to integrate.  They have an "out".  They can drive to their country.  A century ago, you had to get on a ship & it took a week or so.  Most people made that trip 1 way, and one time in their life.

There is also a HUGE problem with 2 different sets of laws.  My Aunt & Nieces & nephew immigrated to USA legally.  It took them a LONG time, a LOT of money, and a LOT OF HASSLE.  They did it the right way.  They are great people AND a great addition to the country.  They are educated (and getting educated), hard working, tax paying, law abiding, and a tremendous benefit to both my family & country.  How is it fair that they do everything right (to their detriment) and others just get a "free pass"?

Who gets to choose what set of laws you want abide by?  That is NOT going to end well.

Finally, open borders cheapens the value of USA citizenship & society.  All you got to do is just walk on in....

cubsfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 900
Re: open borders
« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2018, 12:35:16 PM »
So I agree and disagree.

I agree on the topic of integration. This usually does NOT occur in the first generation. The first gen is usually pretty bad - overwhelming social services, higher than average crime rates, etc. It gets better from there (logarithmically) - the second generation is one of the highest net contributors.

Where I disagree is your characterization of the Jewish/Irish/Italian diasporas. They were almost exactly like the current South American waves of immigration. Low-to-no literacy, very little integration (Chinatown? Little Italy?), poor employment (if any), high crime rates (the irish jewish italian mobs). I think you are doing a bit of selective recollection there in terms of what those immigrant waves were first like.

I'm not being selective at all. This sheer volume of immigration and non-assimilation is CHANGING California and
hundreds of communities. It's great for the immigrants - free health care, free schools, welfare, etc. 
It's terrible for the California RESIDENTS - you don't live there LC - give it a try. 

Move to Central California many of these places are 90% hispanic and English IS the foreign language.
Your schools are wrecked, your hospitals are taxed with immigrants. Crime is out of control.
Not only are you paying for it, but your hometown has been permanently changed. And the CA resident has no say in what happens.
Your taxes are the highest in the country, yet the infrastructure and schools are the worst.

We are talking about a level of magnitude that is much, much higher.

MarkS

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
Re: open borders
« Reply #14 on: October 23, 2018, 12:36:21 PM »
The photo speaks for itself, LC - at a  high pitched scream I might add.  The initial group now somewhere between 7000 - 14000 will soon be the lead group as another group is forming behind them.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-caravan/second-migrant-caravan-moves-through-guatemala-toward-mexico-idUSKCN1MX2JP
You can insult me all you want.  But it won't change the fact that this will not play well with voters in the mid terms.  BTW you keep making the argument that the second generation is better in terms of not costing as much as the first generation. That may be true.  But the information you've previously posted also suggested that the second generation were still a net cost to the American taxpayer.. So your argument pretty much sucks.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2690
Re: open borders
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2018, 12:51:27 PM »
You can't talk about California without talking about the fact that your market is permanently skewed due to your property tax laws.

In the 2003 California recall election in which Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor, his advisor Warren Buffett suggested that Proposition 13 be repealed or changed as a method of balancing the state's budget.[52] Schwarzenegger, believing that such an act would be inadvisable politically and could end his gubernatorial career, said, "I told Warren that if he mentions Proposition 13 again he has to do 500 sit-ups."[53]


But I agree the magnitude is much higher. This is due to the fact that it is 2018 and not 1930, not because those were "better people" as others have said. Today, sheer population has doubled since the 40s/50s. Income inequality is worse. Prospects for the marginal immigrant is worse. Geographic mobility is worse (increasing centralization of work in urban centers). The US is growing stale.

"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
Re: open borders
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2018, 12:59:40 PM »
How about we ask Elon to create a HyperLoop that sends these savages straight from the US border into Canada. Then maybe we can see if the nucks are as philanthropically minded when they are in our shoes.

cubsfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 900
Re: open borders
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2018, 01:29:17 PM »
You can't talk about California without talking about the fact that your market is permanently skewed due to your property tax laws.

In the 2003 California recall election in which Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor, his advisor Warren Buffett suggested that Proposition 13 be repealed or changed as a method of balancing the state's budget.[52] Schwarzenegger, believing that such an act would be inadvisable politically and could end his gubernatorial career, said, "I told Warren that if he mentions Proposition 13 again he has to do 500 sit-ups."[53]


But I agree the magnitude is much higher. This is due to the fact that it is 2018 and not 1930, not because those were "better people" as others have said. Today, sheer population has doubled since the 40s/50s. Income inequality is worse. Prospects for the marginal immigrant is worse. Geographic mobility is worse (increasing centralization of work in urban centers). The US is growing stale.

No, they are NOT assimilating. As DTEJD pointed out - they move here wanting to totally keep their Mexican culture.
They want Mexico in California - unlike those immigrants that viewed the move as permanent from across the ocean.
And life is way better for them here, because someone else is paying for the important stuff - hence the enormous tax burden.
And life is worse for the average CA taxpayer who sees their hometowns being overrun by illegal immigration.

Your chances of growing stale are much better when you are a welfare state.

SharperDingaan

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2892
Re: open borders
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2018, 01:41:51 PM »
I just smell burning republicans ahead of the mid-terms ...

Can't shake the MeToo movement (50% ot the population) - and trying eveything to change the channel instead?
Rile up the base and pressure it to make their women folk vote republican? - cause the illegals are coming!, the illegals are coming!
What happens behind a closed door we can't see, and we really need that senate!

Cant even claim anymore how great 'America First' has been for the US - 'cause the Dow is down 1500 points in 10 days - and continuing  to collapse.
How's that MAGA working out for you? and how about those tarriffs. We're winning!

And that Saudi thing.
115B seems an OK price for a dead journalist, & hey .. we're friends!
Real smart.

Those illegals are WALKING, they will not get to the Mexico/US border untill AFTER the mid-terms, and they are going to be meeting active American and Mexican resistance the whole way.  What do you think happens when pictures of the nightly rapes and gang raids start showing up on TV stations at a voting station near you?

SD
« Last Edit: October 23, 2018, 01:44:30 PM by SharperDingaan »

GregS

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: open borders
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2018, 01:56:48 PM »

Speaking of the immigration of a century + ago....those were different times & different circumstances.  That was also about the time my ancestors came from Europe.    On both sides of the family, they were fleeing war/persecution.  They had NO CHOICE but to assimilate, they could not go back...no matter what.  It was "do or die". 

A lot of illegal immigrants today are economic immigrants, they stay here for a period of time and sometimes will even go back & forth to their home country 1x a year or every other year.  I knew a few that did this.  They do not have the same motivation to integrate.  They have an "out".  They can drive to their country.  A century ago, you had to get on a ship & it took a week or so.  Most people made that trip 1 way, and one time in their life.


This view of immigration is dated.  In the 90s and earlier most of the Latin American immigration was from Mexico and it was strictly economic - getting a job and sending money back, returning if and when they could.  I don't have the most recent data but we've had recent years when net migration from Mexico was negative - more people returning to Mexico than coming to the US.  Lots of reasons for that, primarily that it's tougher to get jobs here and better economic conditions in Mexico.

In recent years, most Latin American immigration is from Central America.  They are fleeing poverty, yes, but also violence (mostly gangs).  They are asylum seekers and this caravan is basically going to present themselves at the border to make an asylum claim.

This complicates things because it brings in a whole other legal process as people try to prove their claims.  Some (most?) will not pass muster but some will.  The problem is you can either let people into the US and give them court dates to show up (which makes it look like we're accepting them in and encourages the next caravan) or you can put them in holding centers at the border which may create more international incidents like the child separation policy.  Or you can close the border and refuse to let anyone in, which might be what Trump does, but this has political and economic consequences as well.

I'm pretty liberal on immigration, but aside from the politics if people can't see the problem of thousands of people trying to cross the border together in a high profile march I don't know what to say.  I don't blame Trump for being angry at Mexico for letting them through because they are basically passing the problem along to us.  I'd be putting pressure on Mexico to basically process them through their own asylum process first, assuming they have one, I have no idea.