Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Busloads of migrants dropped off at Kamala Harris home

Page 10 of 10 [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Previous topic | Next topic

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,416
Location: Long Island, New York

29 Dec 2022, 12:38 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I wish someone would directly address the question as to why we shouldn't implement an "Ellis Island" sort of situation, so immigrants can be documented. It worked pretty well in the past.

It's not a "challenge," per se. I'm just curious. I understand there was lots of trauma within Ellis Island in its heyday. We can prevent much of it these days.

What stemmed the tide of immigration wasn't that Ellis Island "wasn't working"----but mostly it was a 1924 law severely curtailing immigration from certain nations.

I really feel, if an Ellis Island situation is practicable, that this could solve a lot of the problem of illegal immigrants.

I would like to know why this wouldn't be practicable. I'm not saying this would be an absolute solution----but I would want to know why, so I can learn. There, the immigrants could be fingerprinted and be monitored in general.

I know that most immigrants don't want to constantly run and hide from the authorities. They want to work legally, earn money, pay taxes, put their kids through college, etc.

I am not seeking to get into a debate about this. I'm just seeking the reasoning why this sort of thing can't be implemented. I'm not saying that this could be implemented. Nothing like Ellis Island has been implemented since at least the 1950s; there must be some reason for this.

I don't care if I get a litany of-----how can you NOT KNOW why?----or whatever. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.


If you are going to do that it should probably be several location to shorten lines. In 1910 you needed it in one place because it was impractical to have all the physical documents in several locations. With electronic data that is not an issue.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

It is Autism Acceptance Month

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

29 Dec 2022, 12:53 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I wish someone would directly address the question as to why we shouldn't implement an "Ellis Island" sort of situation, so immigrants can be documented. It worked pretty well in the past.

It's not a "challenge," per se. I'm just curious. I understand there was lots of trauma within Ellis Island in its heyday. We can prevent much of it these days.

What stemmed the tide of immigration wasn't that Ellis Island "wasn't working"----but mostly it was a 1924 law severely curtailing immigration from certain nations.

I really feel, if an Ellis Island situation is practicable, that this could solve a lot of the problem of illegal immigrants.

I would like to know why this wouldn't be practicable. I'm not saying this would be an absolute solution----but I would want to know why, so I can learn. There, the immigrants could be fingerprinted and be monitored in general.

I know that most immigrants don't want to constantly run and hide from the authorities. They want to work legally, earn money, pay taxes, put their kids through college, etc.

I am not seeking to get into a debate about this. I'm just seeking the reasoning why this sort of thing can't be implemented. I'm not saying that this could be implemented. Nothing like Ellis Island has been implemented since at least the 1950s; there must be some reason for this.

I don't care if I get a litany of-----how can you NOT KNOW why?----or whatever. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Like I said earlier, It's not politically convenient, IMO.

Agriculture/construction rely on cheap off the books labour - they don't want to lose that and gain having to do more paperwork and administrative things that add costs. I'm sure their donations to politicians help keep the status quo.

Politicians on both sides need the partisan topic to campaign on and sway their voters. If they come to a proper solution that works for everyone, they'll lose out on all the marketing they could keep doing for decades debating the topic.

Like I said earlier, too many people make too much money by not solving the problem.. it's the same reason so many problems aren't being solved even though we as lowly citizens can see potential solutions. Drugs/opiod crisis? Same same. etc. They don't solve the problem because someone(s) doesn't want to, not because no one can see a better way to try and see if it works or needs adjusting. The system isn't failing.. it's serving who it's supposed to as well as screwing who it's supposed to. In each and every case just follow the money to see who has what interest in ensuring things don't change and there you'll have your answer as to "Why?"


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


Persephone29
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,387
Location: Everville

29 Dec 2022, 2:22 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I wish someone would directly address the question as to why we shouldn't implement an "Ellis Island" sort of situation, so immigrants can be documented. It worked pretty well in the past.

It's not a "challenge," per se. I'm just curious. I understand there was lots of trauma within Ellis Island in its heyday. We can prevent much of it these days.

What stemmed the tide of immigration wasn't that Ellis Island "wasn't working"----but mostly it was a 1924 law severely curtailing immigration from certain nations.

I really feel, if an Ellis Island situation is practicable, that this could solve a lot of the problem of illegal immigrants.

I would like to know why this wouldn't be practicable. I'm not saying this would be an absolute solution----but I would want to know why, so I can learn. There, the immigrants could be fingerprinted and be monitored in general.

I know that most immigrants don't want to constantly run and hide from the authorities. They want to work legally, earn money, pay taxes, put their kids through college, etc.

I am not seeking to get into a debate about this. I'm just seeking the reasoning why this sort of thing can't be implemented. I'm not saying that this could be implemented. Nothing like Ellis Island has been implemented since at least the 1950s; there must be some reason for this.

I don't care if I get a litany of-----how can you NOT KNOW why?----or whatever. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Like I said earlier, It's not politically convenient, IMO.

Agriculture/construction rely on cheap off the books labour - they don't want to lose that and gain having to do more paperwork and administrative things that add costs. I'm sure their donations to politicians help keep the status quo.

Politicians on both sides need the partisan topic to campaign on and sway their voters. If they come to a proper solution that works for everyone, they'll lose out on all the marketing they could keep doing for decades debating the topic.

Like I said earlier, too many people make too much money by not solving the problem.. it's the same reason so many problems aren't being solved even though we as lowly citizens can see potential solutions. Drugs/opiod crisis? Same same. etc. They don't solve the problem because someone(s) doesn't want to, not because no one can see a better way to try and see if it works or needs adjusting. The system isn't failing.. it's serving who it's supposed to as well as screwing who it's supposed to. In each and every case just follow the money to see who has what interest in ensuring things don't change and there you'll have your answer as to "Why?"



For once, you and I are in agreement. They do not want it fixed, or it would already be fixed.


_________________
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I hate you, it just means we disagree.

Neurocognitive exam in May 2019, diagnosed with ASD, Asperger's type in June 2019.


Persephone29
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,387
Location: Everville

29 Dec 2022, 2:24 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
People only get a decent amount of Social Security benefits if they have worked in the US most of their lives. For example, I've worked in the US about 43 years. I'm still not going to get over about $2,500 a month once I apply for Social Security at age 67. That's really not all that much, but it's better than in most countries. The difference is that most countries have free healthcare for many people. We don't. "Original Medicare" only pays 80% of your medical bill in most cases.

It's more like a certain immigrant might "know somebody," and that "somebody" might get them some sort of monthly welfare benefit or Food Stamps. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible for government programs, state and federal, by and large. If they get grievously sick or injured, though, a hospital can't turn them away from treatment.

In New York State, they could get a driver's license, though (this is so they could keep track of them better).


I've never applied, but I heard that it was 10 years.


_________________
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I hate you, it just means we disagree.

Neurocognitive exam in May 2019, diagnosed with ASD, Asperger's type in June 2019.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

29 Dec 2022, 5:33 pm

The minimum requirement to get regular Social Security benefits is working 40 quarters or 10 years. Guarantee you won’t get very much if you only work 10 years.



Persephone29
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,387
Location: Everville

29 Dec 2022, 8:37 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
The minimum requirement to get regular Social Security benefits is working 40 quarters or 10 years. Guarantee you won’t get very much if you only work 10 years.


I sometimes get confused between SSI, SSD, etc... My granddaughter qualified for benefits because she's disabled, she's been receiving a check since she was like 4 years old. She may never be able to work, but she has a social security number.

If you are working and you get hurt, are unable to return to work, you may qualify for some form of SS even if you've never worked 10 years. I don't know which, though.

Then, there's the one where you must work at least 10 years to be eligible for.


_________________
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I hate you, it just means we disagree.

Neurocognitive exam in May 2019, diagnosed with ASD, Asperger's type in June 2019.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

29 Dec 2022, 8:58 pm

You’re eligible for Social Security Disability (SSD) and Worker’s Comp if you’re injured on the job, and you get a permanent disability that renders you unable to work.

If you’ve worked for maybe a few years, then get some mental/physical illness which wasn’t necessarily related to the job, then you might be eligible for SSD—but, of course, not Worker’s Comp.

If you hardly or never worked at all, and you have a disability, you might be eligible for SSI.



Persephone29
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2019
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,387
Location: Everville

29 Dec 2022, 9:40 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
You’re eligible for Social Security Disability (SSD) and Worker’s Comp if you’re injured on the job, and you get a permanent disability that renders you unable to work.

If you’ve worked for maybe a few years, then get some mental/physical illness which wasn’t necessarily related to the job, then you might be eligible for SSD—but, of course, not Worker’s Comp.

If you hardly or never worked at all, and you have a disability, you might be eligible for SSI.



makes sense, thanks.


_________________
Disagreeing with you doesn't mean I hate you, it just means we disagree.

Neurocognitive exam in May 2019, diagnosed with ASD, Asperger's type in June 2019.


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,687
Location: Northern California

29 Dec 2022, 10:55 pm

Persephone29 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Persephone29 wrote:
I guess I should clarify "lack of jobs off the books." Even with the border wide open, there will still be 'stops' along the way. A big draw in Florida, especially in Ocala, Fl. where I grew up, are the horse farms. Hispanic workers can work (be exploited) by working for less cash and remaining hidden from the IRS. The jobs are there, but not enough to accommodate these numbers.

Many, many, many people can come. But the regular businesses will not hire them unless they have a social security number... And the off the books jobs will reach a limit.


There is an obvious way to fix this problem: make it legal for them to work. Then they don't have to be "off-books," or using stolen social security numbers to get "on-books" jobs. Our immigration laws should be dynamic and able to change based on the needs of our labor market. Instead, we're stuck with a rigid and archaic quota system that stopped serving our needs half a century ago. We don't have to make them citizens or permanent residents; we can just make it legal to live and work here as long as there is a need for the labor.

The problem is that our politicians don't really want to fix the problem. It's all hot air. The broken system gives conservatives a talking point to rail against, while also creating an underground economy that allows their wealthy constituents to exploit undocumented immigrants. Trump used underpaid, undocumented labor for decades, only cleaning it up near the end of his presidency. Nannies, maids, gardeners ... citizens like how cheap the undocumented labor is. Construction, agriculture ... our economy relies a lot on cheaper migrant labor. As long as it stays in the shadows, it can be exploited. Cheap, underground, migrant labor also helps keep wages for US citizens in similar jobs low. Again, the wealthy (who have big political pull) win.

The desire for the labor isn't hard to see. If migrants weren't able to find work when they come here, they wouldn't keep coming. There wouldn't be a "better life" to pursue.

The problem could be fixed if the will was there. It's obvious the will isn't there.

Busing migrants in a political stunt is a waste of resources and fixes nothing, on top of simply being cruel and inhumane. What it does do is keep the con alive.

I'm past fed up with the con.



Then you get into them being entitled to the social security withholdings that were paid in years before they arrived. That's gonna go over like a lead balloon. There's a reason it takes a while for naturalization. I'm past fed up with goons that want to give the farm away. I have an idea, why don't you and others like you offer up your social security benefits to the refugees. Then, you can figure out how to survive when you turn 67.


It feels like you are too wrapped up in the political con to see the obvious. The laws that make it legal for them to work can also set whether or not they will pay into and eventually be able to withdraw from social security. The right to draw social security doesn't arise simply because a person is paid wages. It's an earned entitlement system, meaning you have to pay into it in order to have rights to later benefit from it. People can't just arrive here and legally draw social security, despite what you've likely heard.

The "legal to work" concept starts with an assumption the migrants are not necessarily making a permanent move. They won't necessarily retire here. We don't have to wrap them into all the benefits and burdens of citizenship, we can just make it legal for them to be here and work. It doesn't have to be that complicated. Save "complicated" for the next steps available to those that do wish to stay make their lives here permanently. That won't be everyone.

Are you aware that before the 1980s or so, migrants used to simply float across the boarder for seasonal work and GO HOME? Workers rarely took their families with them. The goal was to work and take those strong American dollars back to their families in the country of their birth. It became more common for whole families to migrate together after the border crossing became more difficult and perilous. Since the worker couldn't float back and forth anymore, the worker brought the family, too. If we create a legal venue for migrants to work, odds are good they will only come to work ... and then GO HOME.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,687
Location: Northern California

29 Dec 2022, 11:03 pm

Persephone29 wrote:
The whole point of them getting these "off the book" jobs is because the employers are screwing everyone: the government, the immigrant, etc... They get cheap labor, the 'employee' doesn't pay taxes on the income, they aren't entitled to insurance, etc... It's illegal.

Give them all social security numbers and these jobs will not be available to them. They have a vested interest in being off the books too. They send a large portion of the money back to Mexico (or where ever), and live 14 to a house to minimize expenses in the states. I lived in horse farm country my entire childhood. There's a way these things work and it's more complex than just 'have them all work on the books.'


I said in my earlier post, there are a lot of economic reasons for the power players in our economy to want to keep the system broken. That doesn't mean we have to play that game and make it easy for them.

The public has been mislead for decades. I believe you are buying into arguments that are based on false premises. Obviously changing the system won't magically be free of bumps and hurdles, but once the initial adjustments have been made, I honestly believe it would work much better.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

30 Dec 2022, 9:41 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
Are you aware that before the 1980s or so, migrants used to simply float across the boarder for seasonal work and GO HOME? Workers rarely took their families with them. The goal was to work and take those strong American dollars back to their families in the country of their birth.
That's happening all the time across Europe, especially with highly seasonal jobs like agriculture. Polish people went picking strawberries in Netherlands and Ukrainian people went picking strawberries in Poland.
Of course, recent events complicated the latter part and pushed many normally seasonal workers to bring here their whole families - but making this legal, too, saved us a lot of other problems.

I am entirely sure quite a lot of Central Americans would be perfectly happy picking strawberries in California and going home off-season, with money that would give them a decent life at home (but not in California). I know plenty of Polish people who worked like that in West Europe and a number of Ukrainians who, until recently, did the same in Poland.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>