1231 users online (172 members and 1059 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 85 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1275
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    5,956

    2017.05.07 - Legal immigration, illegal migration, and refugee programs

    For a week or so Iíve been pondering whether a new thread for discussion about immigration issues could exist here for respectful discussion. Iíve avoided starting a thread on immigration thread till now, because Iím concerned that we might not be able to discuss the ISSUES of immigration, without the thread devolving into anger, labeling, and name calling. But I am heartened to see some very intelligent posting on BOTH sides of a variety of issues in other threads, so I thought maybe we had settled in here to this new forum enough that we could TRY a discussion on issues related to legal and illegal immigration in the U.S. (and perhaps even applicable to other countries, as well).

    With credit to momma2cam, here is one thoughtful post:

    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...0#post13359340

    My personal feeling is that all areas of migration to the U.S. need to be seriously and publicly debated. Our immigration policies of 100 years ago are not necessarily the best for our country today, and the best and most effective immigration policies must consider the abilities and needs of the U.S. first, before we consider the needs and abilities of those we evaluate for legal immigration.

    I strongly believe we should have a more rigorous, quota/ tiered, merit-ranked approach to all forms of legal immigration that is tied strongly to our own economy, and objective markers of prosperity and poverty in our own population, that are reviewed and adjusted on a regular basis.

    In times of economic prosperity (that would be defined by hard data), we would adjust our immigration invitations upward, and accept more people who will need substantial support, and are less able to provide for their own needs, and contribute to our economy. In times of economic downturn (which would be quantified by hard data points), we would adjust our immigration invitations downward, so as to focus on our the needs of our own citizens, and growing our economy-- and yes, that might mean that we continue to invite more of those who are capable of creating jobs and boosting our economy, not "just" bar entry to those who are poor.

    For example, the EB5 visa is not "evil" in and of itself-- why not tie that to the requirement to invest in and create a certain number of sustainable jobs in a specific region that pay a certain wage to citizens who are already living there? We do that now thru some federally funded programs for economically depressed areas.

    I don't think that approach to immigration is "xenophobic" or "racist"-- it is pragmatic and sensible. IMO, we cannot afford to open our doors to everyone and anyone who wants to come here, simply because they are EITHER wealthy OR poor. A merit based system of immigration, with entry quotas at many levels, is the fairest and most sensible approach, IMO.

    My biggest concern about our public debate about immigration is that we have become far too focused on defining the "diversity" issues as "strength", and "humanitarian/ egalitarian" issues as the end goal, and not "unity" for the resources, goals, purpose, and prosperity of the ENTIRE country. Diversity is a social construct that places value on differences and "separateness" of individuals and groups, ahead of unity in purpose and goal for the greater prosperity of the entire population, IMO. Diversity can be a strength in some social and industry areas, and at the same time, be a barrier or detriment in other areas of policy. IMO.

    Our policies for refugees, for example, are chaotic, not equally applied, soaked in corruption and bureaucracy, often set up the refugee populations for long term economic and social failure, and long term dependency, in this culture. Our entire refugee program should be reviewed and reformed, IMO, because it doesn't work the way it was intended to work, and the population of who qualifies as "refugees" is not consistent, equitable, or logical.

    Simply put, if the dollars were spent helping these populations in their world region of origin, we could help many more people to stay closer to their cultures of origin, and be more prosperous and build/ re-build safer societies over time. It is possible to be tremendously compassionate to a huge population of real refugees, without believing that we need to bring many of them to America to help them, IMO. We also need far more wealthy world nation partners to help us care for refugees within their regions.

    Anyway, I'm hopeful we can have an ongoing, respectful conversation here about the ISSUES of all aspects of immigration.

    Post on......

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3,072

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,517
    Great post. I appreciate how you articulate the meaning behind more restrictive, vetted borders. I agree with you that the focus on diversity and equality for humanity needs to be balanced by our needs for prosperity and unity.

    I also don't disagree that revisions should be made to the immigration and refugee process. I think referring to a need for "extreme vetting" is missing the mark though and feeding into fear based rhetoric implying we are not strict enough and letting in too many criminals, which just isn't true.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    2,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    Great post. I appreciate how you articulate the meaning behind more restrictive, vetted borders. I agree with you that the focus on diversity and equality for humanity needs to be balanced by our needs for prosperity and unity.

    I also don't disagree that revisions should be made to the immigration and refugee process. I think referring to a need for "extreme vetting" is missing the mark though and feeding into fear based rhetoric implying we are not strict enough and letting in too many criminals, which just isn't true.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    I need to be reassured that the vetting process isn't similar to the federal back ground checks for driving hazardous waste materials (plutonium) because my ex is a convicted felon and he passed two of them, and he really shouldn't have.
    All you need is love and. . . .(fill in the blank)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,170
    WTHR did an outstanding series on this tax loophole for illegal aliens.

    Millions of illegal immigrants are getting a bigger tax refund than you. Eyewitness News shows a massive tax loophole that provides billions of dollars in tax credits to undocumented workers and, in many cases, people who have never stepped foot in the United States. And you are paying for it!

    http://www.wthr.com/article/tax-loophole-costs-billions

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    Great post. I appreciate how you articulate the meaning behind more restrictive, vetted borders. I agree with you that the focus on diversity and equality for humanity needs to be balanced by our needs for prosperity and unity.

    I also don't disagree that revisions should be made to the immigration and refugee process. I think referring to a need for "extreme vetting" is missing the mark though and feeding into fear based rhetoric implying we are not strict enough and letting in too many criminals, which just isn't true.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    There is no vetting when people can just come over the border.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    2,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Gardenista View Post
    WTHR did an outstanding series on this tax loophole for illegal aliens.

    Millions of illegal immigrants are getting a bigger tax refund than you. Eyewitness News shows a massive tax loophole that provides billions of dollars in tax credits to undocumented workers and, in many cases, people who have never stepped foot in the United States. And you are paying for it!

    http://www.wthr.com/article/tax-loophole-costs-billions
    I don't know how they're claiming dependents who don't have social security numbers. Aren't you required to put your kids ssns on the tax forms to claim them? Otherwise, you could claim your pets or make up names.
    All you need is love and. . . .(fill in the blank)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by Alleykins View Post
    I don't know how they're claiming dependents who don't have social security numbers. Aren't you required to put your kids ssns on the tax forms to claim them? Otherwise, you could claim your pets or make up names.
    Read the series or watch the videos. IMO, doing one or the other should be required for ever American citizen.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    9,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Gardenista View Post
    There is no vetting when people can just come over the border.
    You are correct that there is no vetting of illegal immigrants to prevent criminals or terrorist's from entering the US.

    If extreme vetting of refugees prevents one person from entering the US who is a criminal or a terrorist then I'm all for it.
    Last edited by RANCH; 05-07-2017 at 07:45 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento CA
    Posts
    9,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Alleykins View Post
    I don't know how they're claiming dependents who don't have social security numbers. Aren't you required to put your kids ssns on the tax forms to claim them? Otherwise, you could claim your pets or make up names.
    Does the IRS verify SS#'s of claimed dependents on all returns? I don't know if they do or don't.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    Great post. I appreciate how you articulate the meaning behind more restrictive, vetted borders. I agree with you that the focus on diversity and equality for humanity needs to be balanced by our needs for prosperity and unity.

    I also don't disagree that revisions should be made to the immigration and refugee process. I think referring to a need for "extreme vetting" is missing the mark though and feeding into fear based rhetoric implying we are not strict enough and letting in too many criminals, which just isn't true.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    The larger message being sent with "extreme vetting" to those who are sneaking across the border or overstaying their visas or coming in with evil intent (e.g., the wife of the San Bernardino terrorist couple) is the party's over. Obviously we haven't been strict enough in many instances, and the "fear based rhetoric" to which you refer is actually quite effective when backed up with application of the law.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Gardenista View Post
    There is no vetting when people can just come over the border.
    Sure, that would be illegal immigration, which is very different than the vetting that occurs with legal immigration and refugees. The wall is currently being proposed to help with that. What are your thoughts on that? Any other thoughts for securing the borders?

    You bring up a great point, though, that often makes topics like this challenging. Too often illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, refugees, those here on various types of visas are all lumped into the same category. Often even legal citizens born here in the US are lumped into that category based on the language they speak and/or physical appearance. That is where the discriminatory, racist accusations come from toward individuals in support of securing the borders. I don't agree that everyone who wants secure borders is racist but some are and they are usually the loud ones making comments about going back to where you came from, chanting build the wall to a bunch of hispanic Americans, etc.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    44,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Alleykins View Post
    I don't know how they're claiming dependents who don't have social security numbers. Aren't you required to put your kids ssns on the tax forms to claim them? Otherwise, you could claim your pets or make up names.
    I had someone using my social security number for years. It caused a big hassle for me with the IRS for awhile. Someone used my SS number and was being paid for factory work in Oregon. I lived in California. I was a stay at home mom, not working.

    The IRS tried to say I had not claimed this money on my taxes from previous years. It was annoying and expensive to fight but eventually they dropped it. But it taught me that anyone can claim any number as theirs if the company does not check.
    ďEvery day that they donít find something is good for me.ď Billie Dunn

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by RANCH View Post
    You are correct that there is no vetting of illegal immigrants to prevent criminals or terrorist's from entering the US.

    If extreme vetting of refugees prevents one person from entering the US who is a criminal or a terrorist then I'm all for it.
    You are confusing refugees with illegal immigrants. Not at all the same and is, again, what makes this topic challenging. We have to first be on the same page and understand the difference between illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, and refugees.

    Extreme vetting of refugees already occurs. In fact, it takes years (sometimes 20+) to be randomly selected by lottery to participate in the UN resettlement program. First, a potential refugee must complete an application and prove that they have left their home for fear of persecution and/or war. Then they wait. And wait. For years. Then, they are assigned one of the 37 possible countries, which may or may not be the US. Then, there is an approximate 2 year stringent vetting process before they are finally approved. Terrorists don't attempt the refugee vetting process (who wants to wait 20 years to maybe get selected for the US?) and if they do, they aren't going to make it through.


    "The chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion per year."

    http://www.politifact.com/california...erica-refugee/


    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Momma2cam; 05-07-2017 at 09:01 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by Momma2cam View Post
    You are confusing refugees with illegal immigrants. Not at all the same and is, again, what makes this topic challenging. We have to first be on the same page and understand the difference between illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, and refugees.

    Extreme vetting of refugees already occurs. In fact, it takes years (sometimes 20+) to be randomly selected by lottery to participate in the UN resettlement program. First, a potential refugee must complete an application and prove that they have left their home for fear of persecution and/or war. Then they wait. And wait. For years. Then, they are assigned one of the 37 possible countries, which may or may not be the US. Then, there is an approximate 2 year stringent vetting process before they are finally approved. Terrorists don't attempt the refugee vetting process (who wants to wait 20 years to maybe get selected for the US?) and if they do, they aren't going to make it through.


    "The chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion per year."

    http://www.politifact.com/california...erica-refugee/


    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    How are they fully vetted when their govts do not keep databases on their citizens?

Page 1 of 85 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. More problems caused by illegal immigration
    By reb in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 10:24 AM