Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.
Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?
Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.
Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?
What is in my post that would make you think that?
If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.
If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.
So you're going to set parameters for the ongoing "conversation", answer mine first and then I'll answer yours, by the same question.
I'll do it in caps with spacing so you can understand. Here's your answer.
"WHAT IS IN MY POST THAT WOULD MAKE YOU THINK THAT?"
Do you see anything in my post that makes me seem unsettled about the caravans?
Are you just trolling to see what reaction you can get?
Do you know anything about US history?
Forget it. I got my answer.
Forget it. I got my answer.
No, you didn't.
[quote[No, you didn't.
You are right. You never answered the question. My bad.
The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.
When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.
By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.
We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.
The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.
When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.
By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.
We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.
Using that reasoning, I would love to have $21,000 as would my friends and family. or better yet, a Homeless VETERAN....I mean "what the hell"? right?..it all just gets eaten up by the Taxpayer, right?
Or, what about the next group of 7,000 and the next and the 7,000 who follow?
If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.
So you're going to set parameters for the ongoing "conversation", answer mine first and then I'll answer yours, by the same question.
😉
It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.
After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.
No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.
Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.
If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.
Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.
Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.
Jerry you need to run for Congress, you got some great answers!
Stefan Molyneaux pointed out that an asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first country whose border they cross that is a safe place. Mexico is safe in most places, therefore THEY should be the ones dealing with them, you get to trounce thru many countries till you find one you like the best.
Could a bunch of poor Americans go to Canada and demand they take us in and feed, clothe, house and give us free medical care and college educations?
I am also reminded of a plan from long ago to make Canada, the US and Mexico one united country called the NORTH AMERICAN UNION. Remember that? Is somebody still pushing for that plan?
Figure rough fifty billion $ for wall. Another hundreds of billions for upkeep and defense. Don't have to do any math to see that for a miniscule fraction of that we could funnel a few pesos across to fund a human wall of mexicans keeping the rest out.
It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.
After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.
No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.
Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.
If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.
Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.
Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.
Jerry you need to run for Congress, you got some great answers!
Stefan Molyneaux pointed out that an asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first country whose border they cross that is a safe place. Mexico is safe in most places, therefore THEY should be the ones dealing with them, you get to trounce thru many countries till you find one you like the best.
Could a bunch of poor Americans go to Canada and demand they take us in and feed, clothe, house and give us free medical care and college educations?
I am also reminded of a plan from long ago to make Canada, the US and Mexico one united country called the NORTH AMERICAN UNION. Remember that? Is somebody still pushing for that plan?
Gina, the ideas aren't mine, except for the modern updates. They were policies used on Ellis island on the east coast and Angel island on the west coast (Hence the question about US history). The main difference is that those who docked there had already applied for travel visas.
The North American Union was a proposal for an European Union set-up for the North American countries. That would tie our economy with Mexico and Canada, including monetary values. I don't think we want the dollar to be chained to the Mexican Peso.
[quote[No, you didn't.
You are right. You never answered the question. My bad.
On that point you are correct.
I asked "What in my post would make you think that".
Since you can't answer that question with anything I posted, then I have to believe that you just trolled to see what reaction you would get.
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.
Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.
The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.
When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.
By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.
We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.
Using that reasoning, I would love to have $21,000 as would my friends and family. or better yet, a Homeless VETERAN....I mean "what the hell"? right?..it all just gets eaten up by the Taxpayer, right?
Or, what about the next group of 7,000 and the next and the 7,000 who follow?
I am just trying to give perspective, that's all. I just never hear people who complain about the tax burden saying anything about fighter jets and aircraft carriers. The Defense Department and their contractors bleed us all... period. However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.
I am just saying the money is there if we would only use it to fix the problems, domestic or foreign.
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.
Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.
Immigration enforcement, then reform.
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.
Whatever makes you feel better. I simply believe that if someone doesn’t show me the courtesy of answering me, then he doesn’t deserve that courtesy from me in return.....especially when you solicited for feedback! Please.
Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.
No thanks. I’m about to go watch a few episodes of Cheers.
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.
Whatever makes you feel better. I simply believe that if someone doesn’t show me the courtesy of answering me, then he doesn’t deserve that courtesy from me in return.....especially when you solicited for feedback! Please.
Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.
No thanks. I’m about to go watch a few episodes of Cheers.
If you had given feedback about the post, you would have gotten comments about your feedback.
You asked "Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?"
I responded with a question "What is in my post that would make you think that?"
So, why would you think I'm unsettled by the news?
You were either trolling for a response that I didn't give you, or you have no reading comprehension.
Hope you enjoy Cheers, and might as well enjoy a few cold ones while watching.
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.
Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.
Immigration enforcement, then reform.
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.
Think of the number of vets we could help with the $17,500,000,000 we just spent on the new USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier. When that ship goes into service in 2020, we will have 11 active aircraft carriers. Russia and China each have one active and one or two under construction. We could fix a lot of problems and still have way more defense capabilities than any other nation.
Like I said earlier, just trying to give perspective... There are unimaginable amounts of money in the federal budget, but the defense contractors get their half and everybody else gets to bitch about the rest. Pick a problem - immigration, veteran services, infrastructure, public education - we have the money to fix it. It just seems like the collective will to help others is hard to muster.
If Trump gets $20billion, he’s going to buy a wall instead of help Veterans.
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.
This is a good starting point in terms of prioritizing.
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.
Why is this our responsibility? There are so many issues here in this Country that need attention. So many scenarios that that deserve our resources, the focus of our brightest minds.
Good fences make good neighbors.
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.
Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.
Immigration enforcement, then reform.
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.
Think of the number of vets we could help with the $17,500,000,000 we just spent on the new USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier. When that ship goes into service in 2020, we will have 11 active aircraft carriers. Russia and China each have one active and one or two under construction. We could fix a lot of problems and still have way more defense capabilities than any other nation.
Like I said earlier, just trying to give perspective... There are unimaginable amounts of money in the federal budget, but the defense contractors get their half and everybody else gets to bitch about the rest. Pick a problem - immigration, veteran services, infrastructure, public education - we have the money to fix it. It just seems like the collective will to help others is hard to muster.
Agree.
A strong military is critical to protect us and deter hostile countries (some including those run by dictators who are now Trump's BFF's) who could present military danger to us. Also a strong military is part of us being seen as protector of the foreign countries we see as our responsibility. Some of this is certainly debatable.
The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).
When would a proportion of the excess military resources be given to other programs for the greater good of our people in need and for programs that are seen as scapegoats for deficits?
The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).
Good point, but what does this have to do with crossing the border Illegally?
The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).
Good point, but what does this have to do with crossing the border Illegally?
Oh probably nothing directly. I was merely following up on what I thought was a very good post & some of the points he raised.
But you probably knew that, right?
But you probably knew that, right?
Well....ok, I did.
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.
This is a good starting point in terms of prioritizing.
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.
Why is this our responsibility? There are so many issues here in this Country that need attention. So many scenarios that that deserve our resources, the focus of our brightest minds.
Good fences make good neighbors.
One point... becoming a refugee is not illegal or even wrong. It happened to Jesus.
It is NOT our responsibility to take care of people from other countries, but clearly part of this situation is a problem with which we are involved. (I also personally have some questions about how much responsibility we had in those countries by propping up bad governments during the Cold War that have prevented the people from really having any options economically once we lost interest in whether they would ally with the USSR.) We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border? We are supposed to be the best nation in the history of the world -why not prove it to our neighbors? People do not flee their homes if they have a reason to stay. We could figure out a way to help them if we wanted to do it.
We could also figure out ways to fix most of the problems here in our country as well. However it is difficult when taxes keep getting cut and the military eats up the majority of the budget.
This is a separate question:
Some people coming into the US are seeking asylum, some are economic migrants. Some go to ports of entry, some sneak across.
Suppose in 1989 when the American auto industry was performing very poorly, a laid-off factory worker from Detroit decided to sneak across the border and work for cash at a maple syrup farm in Canada. He had exhausted his savings, and was not able to find a job in Michigan where he could make his house payment and feed his family.
Is this guy a criminal, or someone doing what he has to do to get by?
We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border?
"We" have the power and the means to help as Individuals, not as a collective people. It is just not "our" burden. "We" from my point of view is best translated into "what can I do"? Not "we"..Answer - whatever "you" can or want. Your wallet and mine have absolutely nothing in common when it comes to this issue, I feel no obligation at all.
We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border?
What would you have us do to fix the "humanitarian crisis". Go in and take over the country? Take over their leadership? Bomb the country to way before the stone age?
People do not flee their homes if they have a reason to stay. We could figure out a way to help them if we wanted to do it.
Again, what would you like to be done that hasn't been tried over the past 70 years (remember the Banana Republic Wars of the 1920-1940 era)
We could also figure out ways to fix most of the problems here in our country as well. However it is difficult when taxes keep getting cut and the military eats up the majority of the budget.
Our military budget has actually been going down for 7 years. The big thing is that a lot of that budget is pay
for all the civilian workers on bases and military posts.
This is a separate question:
Some people coming into the US are seeking asylum, some are economic migrants. Some go to ports of entry, some sneak across.
Suppose in 1989 when the American auto industry was performing very poorly, a laid-off factory worker from Detroit decided to sneak across the border and work for cash at a maple syrup farm in Canada. He had exhausted his savings, and was not able to find a job in Michigan where he could make his house payment and feed his family.
Is this guy a criminal, or someone doing what he has to do to get by?
I think this would depend on Canada and its law regarding that issue.
