The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

Fare enough you proved your point there..

Glad to know it.

Speeding no. Too many speeding tickets, to where daddy goes to jail, yes. Same with grand larcany, or other crimes that end up putting daddy in jail.

No, daddy caught, first time, get out. You are altering the parameters of the situation to fit your argument, and it's not gonna fly. This is what your new approach to deportation is, caught you, get out.

And as i said before, there are also times where if say daddy buys kiddys stuff from his ill gotten gains, when the cops catch up with dad, those items get confiscated..

If the cops can prove that, yes.

Yes he should get booted. As for the kids, how many times have i said, SINCE THE RUling on 'birthright citizenship is based on a FLAWED reading of the 14th, it shouldn't be granting automatic citizenship to the kids born here, just cause illegal alien mommy was able to cross the border before she dropped out the kid in one of our hospitals.. So the kid should also go..
Come back when he (or she) reaches 18.

No, it's not based on a flawed reading
http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/25/...4th-amendment/
If the reading is flawed as you claim, then the US judicial system has no right to impose US law and punishment on any illegal immigrant because they would no longer be subject to US law. They could kill 100 people and the best you could do is deport them.

Yes i have, and every time i got caught, and ticketed i PAID IT OFF, no challenges, no whining.. No demonstrating that i am unfairly being targeted etc...

You are missing the point, you would not be paying off a ticket, the only punishment is deportation back to wherever your immigrant ancestors came from.

Since i am a citizen by blood, why would i leave just cause i broke the law?

No, you are a citizen by birth. By blood, you are an illegal immigrant, unless you are a native American.

To those who had their heads stomped in, and such i wouldn't think they would liken what happened to a mere bar brawl..

Is it the same as premeditated murder?

Try telling that to the victims of fort hood who STILL are trying to get it labeled a terror attack...

Irrelevant, did Obama comment on it, on the day it happened?
Yes.

Are those old people US citizens who have paid into the system via their medicare deductions from their wages each year for decades? THEN why would we tell them "sorry you are too old, get out"

You do know illegals pay tax, right? The only tax that they do not pay is federal tax, and given the generally low income of illegal immigrants, the fed isn't really missing out on much.
As to why kick them out, well they are a drain on the economy now, isn't that the argument you are making against illegals, they are a drain on the economy?

I've often wondered why in the UK a fund has been set up to take care of crime victims but nothing similar gets done here..

It does
https://www.ovc.gov/about/victimsfund.html

Your wife gets raped by an illegal alien who's been deported 5 times before, has a dozen stolen IDS.. So why not just let him stay...

Not the same thing, not even remotely.

[Annoyed]

What part of basic human rights don't you understand?

They are entitled to being treated with respect until the point they are send back from where they came, or allowed to enter as an "legal" immigrant.



So, you saw the title (the 2nd one I imagine), didn't read the article and assumed you knew what it was talking about... Well done!

Here, allow me to inform you that it talks about immigrants using the system:

"Federal law does prevent illegal aliens from receiving benefits meant for American citizens. The only benefit that illegal aliens are allowed is emergency medical care.

Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, at least one third of foreign born citizens in the United States are illegal aliens. Since children born in the United States are considered U.S. Citizens, it becomes complicated when illegal aliens then bear children who are U.S. Citizens.

If the U.S. government sent the parents of these children away, we would be separating families. Now that these families have given birth to U.S. citizens, the families are eligible for benefits such as WIC and food stamps. Benefits such as these are for low income families. Illegal aliens often work in low paying jobs so they now qualify for benefits."

There you go.



In Belgium, their children are even required to be enrolled into schools and attend school regularly.
And by their, I mean asylum-seekers, immigrants awaiting visas to stay, illegal immigrants passing through, immigrants who's stays were denied and are awaiting deportation.

The base of your argument seems to be that you do not want to break families up.

No one is saying they can't bring their families with them when they leave. But they have to leave.

How long have we been dealing with this problem? 30 years ago, Reagan did the amnesty bit. That didn't work out so well, did it?
So, we either keep doing what has failed or we do something to fix the problem. Deport upon detection, and they can apply for legal entry just like everybody else.

[Coco Pops]

So what happened to Trump and his promise of "health care for all" to replace the ACA?


Links. It's split into two parts

Ways and means
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/ameri...alth-care-act/

Energy and coimmerce. Links to pdf file
http://energycommerce.house.gov/site...lthCareAct.pdf

So basically the "screw you and die" plan.

[Gatefan1976]

The base of your argument seems to be that you do not want to break families up.

Err, what?
She's pointing out the law as it exists as a whole, not just a specific subsection of it. Laws, even the constitution can be affected by other laws. The law does not exist in a vacuum.
Breaking families up is merely -one part- of the law, and one that is not consequence free.

No one is saying they can't bring their families with them when they leave. But they have to leave.

So, you think that the legal citizens should be deported as well? Or are you like Garkhal, labouring under the delusion that the 14th amendment has been "applied wrong"?
Why should they (leave), they can go into "the system" and create a far larger burden on the taxpayer instead, and cut the time it takes for their parents to come back. They have the right to only care about themselves as well, right?
Or did you not think of that?

How long have we been dealing with this problem? 30 years ago, Reagan did the amnesty bit. That didn't work out so well, did it?

Since your forebears stepped of the Mayflower, and mine stepped off the first fleet?

So, we either keep doing what has failed or we do something to fix the problem. Deport upon detection, and they can apply for legal entry just like everybody else.

No, you fix the immigration system, it's not an binary choice.

[Annoyed]

So, you think that the legal citizens should be deported as well? Or are you like Garkhal, labouring under the delusion that the 14th amendment has been "applied wrong"?
Why should they (leave), they can go into "the system" and create a far larger burden on the taxpayer instead, and cut the time it takes for their parents to come back. They have the right to only care about themselves as well, right?
Or did you not think of that?

Existing citizens can't be deported. But that citizenship should not extend residency privileges to any one else. If a citizen has an illegal relative that is being deported, he can go with them if he chooses to. If "keeping the family together" is so important to them that it is worth bending immigration law, it certainly must be important enough to them where he can leave with them to keep the family together.

And yes, I do agree with garhkal about the 14th amendment. It should not be allowed to enable "anchor babies".

No, you fix the immigration system, it's not an binary choice.

There is nothing wrong with the immigration system aside from the fact that it hasn't been enforced for decades.

[Gatefan1976]

Existing citizens can't be deported. But that citizenship should not extend residency privileges to any one else. If a citizen has an illegal relative that is being deported, he can go with them if he chooses to. If "keeping the family together" is so important to them that it is worth bending immigration law, it certainly must be important enough to them where he can leave with them to keep the family together.

Oh, I see, the onus is on everyone else.
I ask again, why should not the legal kids stay, make you pay for them and get their parents back quicker.
All good for them.

And yes, I do agree with garhkal about the 14th amendment. It should not be allowed to enable "anchor babies".

How about you meet the constitutional requirements to change it then.

There is nothing wrong with the immigration system aside from the fact that it hasn't been enforced for decades.

There is a lot wrong with your immigration system, otherwise it would not need reform.

[garhkal]

No, daddy caught, first time, get out. You are altering the parameters of the situation to fit your argument, and it's not gonna fly. This is what your new approach to deportation is, caught you, get out.

So we are deporting US citizens now?? Is that what you are saying here?

If the cops can prove that, yes.

True, they do have to prove it, but since they invariably confiscate the stuff WHILE awaiting it, and only if not proven does it get returned (or should it be returned), in a way they are still suffering..

If the reading is flawed as you claim, then the US judicial system has no right to impose US law and punishment on any illegal immigrant because they would no longer be subject to US law. They could kill 100 people and the best you could do is deport them.

That is an interesting counter argument. BUT YOU or I on a tourism visa, say to china fall under that country's laws. YES OR NO?
BUT we are still under our home country's Jurisdiction, correct?
THAT IS IMO what that part is saying.

You are missing the point, you would not be paying off a ticket, the only punishment is deportation back to wherever your immigrant ancestors came from.

And how many generations back are you going to go, to find out where they came from? My dad was born in Chicago, his father in maine, his father also in maine..

No, you are a citizen by birth. By blood, you are an illegal immigrant, unless you are a native American.

Since to be a citizen you need a COUNTRY to be a citizen of, what exactly was the country 'native americans' were a part of?

You do know illegals pay tax, right?

Sales tax, yes. Income tax, maybe, on a fake ID, that's if they are not working for cash under the table..

It does

First i have heard of that. Thanks for the link.

Not the same thing, not even remotely.

True it might not, but that seems to be what you are saying. LET THEM STAY...
Additionally, someone testifying in a court trial, CAN GET a visa to let them do so, and avoid deportation for doing so... SO FEAR of 'being outed if they come forward is not as big as you make it out to be.
Combine that with.. HOW MANY people have been on TV/been reporters, worked for major networks etc, EVEN WITH IT being well known they were illegally here??

[Gatecat]

Asylum/Refugee is a bit different, but that's beside the point. What do you do with those who sneak into your country without following whatever legal process there is? Just sneak in by whatever means they can. I notice you didn't address that.

Austria (among other EU states) has very generous social welfare benefits, (and it's nice and safe to live, too). To exploit those social benefits refugees need to be registered asylumseekers. So it would be reasonable to apply for asylum either directly at the border, when they are picked up by a border patrol (those are currently joint patrols of police officers and Bundesheer soldiers at some regions of the border, east and south mainly), or as I said above at any police station and police officer in Austria. I guess most of them do so, if they are not moving further to Germany. In all cases their personal data is recorded and they are moved to a temporary accomodation where their further process is determined.
That process is shown (in a simplified way) in that refugee brochure I posted above, but I guess you didn't even bother looking at the link...

Basicly, chance of asylum (or subsidiary protection) has only who comes from a country where their lifes are in danger or they are persecuted in another way.
Economic refugees have no chance of asylum in Austria. They, and those who's asylum application was negative for other reasons, are deported back to their respective homecountries. IF possible. Some countries do not take back their own people because of various reasons, Pakistan for example. With other countries there exist return arrangements, Afghanistan for example. People who's asylum application was negative and decide to return freely get return aid (monetary mainly) to start over again in their home countries.
Those who can't be returned of various reasons or who have eluded custody pending deportation end up underground living with friends or homeless often sliping into criminality, drug dealing mainly, or they move to another country and try for a new asylum application there. Those would be the ones I would really call Illeagals, btw. When they are caught they are taken in custody and I guess it is tried again to return them to their home countries.

If you want numbers I don't think I can give you those, most of the detailed statistics is in German.
http://www.bmi.gv.at/cms/bmi_asylwes...tik/start.aspx (it's the homepage of the Interior ministry, btw, so I would think totaly reliable. )

[Gatecat]

Since to be a citizen you need a COUNTRY to be a citizen of, what exactly was the country 'native americans' were a part of?

The country they inhabited for thousands of years. They had their own nations, too.

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

Since to be a citizen you need a COUNTRY to be a citizen of, what exactly was the country 'native americans' were a part of?

Did you seriously just ask that? That's the same logic that made it ok to massacre them and steal their land.

But since you seem confused about which landmass the Native Americans from the North American continent came from.. I'm going to help and tell you it probably wasn't China.

I hope that narrows it down for you.

Go read a history book.

[Annoyed]

Austria (among other EU states) has very generous social welfare benefits, (and it's nice and safe to live, too). To exploit those social benefits refugees need to be registered asylumseekers. So it would be reasonable to apply for asylum either directly at the border, when they are picked up by a border patrol (those are currently joint patrols of police officers and Bundesheer soldiers at some regions of the border, east and south mainly), or as I said above at any police station and police officer in Austria. I guess most of them do so, if they are not moving further to Germany. In all cases their personal data is recorded and they are moved to a temporary accomodation where their further process is determined.
That process is shown (in a simplified way) in that refugee brochure I posted above, but I guess you didn't even bother looking at the link...

Basicly, chance of asylum (or subsidiary protection) has only who comes from a country where their lifes are in danger or they are persecuted in another way.
Economic refugees have no chance of asylum in Austria. They, and those who's asylum application was negative for other reasons, are deported back to their respective homecountries. IF possible. Some countries do not take back their own people because of various reasons, Pakistan for example. With other countries there exist return arrangements, Afghanistan for example. People who's asylum application was negative and decide to return freely get return aid (monetary mainly) to start over again in their home countries.
Those who can't be returned of various reasons or who have eluded custody pending deportation end up underground living with friends or homeless often sliping into criminality, drug dealing mainly, or they move to another country and try for a new asylum application there. Those would be the ones I would really call Illeagals, btw. When they are caught they are taken in custody and I guess it is tried again to return them to their home countries.

If you want numbers I don't think I can give you those, most of the detailed statistics is in German.
http://www.bmi.gv.at/cms/bmi_asylwes...tik/start.aspx (it's the homepage of the Interior ministry, btw, so I would think totaly reliable. )

Those who can't be returned of various reasons or who have eluded custody pending deportation end up underground living with friends or homeless often sliping into criminality, drug dealing mainly, or they move to another country and try for a new asylum application there. Those would be the ones I would really call Illeagals, btw. When they are caught they are taken in custody and I guess it is tried again to return them to their home countries.

So, apparently your country doesn't give people who sneak in, overstay their visa or whatever a pass. They are deported.
And yet you think we ought to give our illegals a pass.

[Falcon Horus]

The base of your argument seems to be that you do not want to break families up.

Nope, the base of my argument is how you treat immigrants after you arrest them or when you deport them. Or in general, how you deal with them, after which I provided that favorite benefit-excuse.

They don't get any benefits but it gets complicated when they have children born in the US, then they can use the system to gain benefits which are generally for low income families (which they are when they work low-income jobs, just not entirely legal).

Separating families, or as DHS is thinking about separating children from adults, is a delicate situation. The way DHS envisions it, children accompanied by adults who are not blood relatives and could thus be victims of exploitation. That I support.

But seperation of blood-relatives -- guess who else used that practice some years ago?

And also, a flaw in that particular plan, children seperated from their parents are placed in the system or placed with relatives already in the US. Thus, parents usuallly want what's best for their children and give them a good future, can hop the border, get detained and the children will automatically be provided for. Goals accomplished, even if it means leaving the behind. They at least will have a better future ahead nevetheless.

So what happened to Trump and his promise of "health care for all" to replace the ACA?

So basically the "screw you and die" plan.

Since your forebears stepped of the Mayflower, and mine stepped off the first fleet?

I doubt Annoyed's forefathers stepped off the Mayflower.

But yours might have stepped off a prisonship.

Mine are a melting pot of Celts, Eburons, Romans, Germanic, Norse maybe, Frankish... Never stepped off a ship, I fear.

If you want numbers I don't think I can give you those, most of the detailed statistics is in German.
http://www.bmi.gv.at/cms/bmi_asylwes...tik/start.aspx (it's the homepage of the Interior ministry, btw, so I would think totaly reliable. )

All government can't be trusted.

But since you seem confused about which landmass the Native Americans from the North American continent came from.. I'm going to help and tell you it probably wasn't China.

*snorts Ice-Tea through the nose*

[Annoyed]

All government can't be trusted.

On this, we agree.

[Coco Pops]

OK what happens next if the one in a million chance all the Russia stuff is true? Where do we go from here?

This will be totally uncharted territory..... So what happens?

[Gatecat]

So, apparently your country doesn't give people who sneak in, overstay their visa or whatever a pass. They are deported.
And yet you think we ought to give our illegals a pass.

Of course we deport. We can't keep everyone. Austria is a small country and we don't have endless capacities. But we don't automaticly stamp them as criminals or 2nd-class people. They are still treated humanly and with respect, not brute force.

On a sidenote, two different aspects rephrasing the term "refugee": were Austrian police speaks of "uaF- unerlaubt aufhältiger Fremder/illeagal alien", our military calls them "hsF- hilfs-und schutzbedürftiger Fremder/ alien in need of help and protection".
https://www.truppendienst.com/themen...z-in-kaernten/
("Truppendienst" is a magazine of Austria's Armed Forces. Probably no use for most of you since it's in German,... expect for FH maybe?)

I doubt Annoyed's forefathers stepped off the Mayflower.

But yours might have stepped off a prisonship.

All government can't be trusted.

Austrian government is not the best, admitted, but they are not doing so bad lately...