Are Folks Making America Hate Again?

[BCP1928]

Wait, what?

The United States is not hospitable; therefore we should not be hospitable?

Why not just make America hospitable again?

It is hospitable to white South African refugees.

 

[doubtingmerle]

If we care about hunger, then we need to budget before the country goes broke, because when that happens, no one can be fed. Does it make sense to you to borrow money to pay for interest on the debt?

Ah, now you want to talk about balancing the budget. OK, but this thread already has far too much diversity (and inclusion). I responded in a new thread... Can you balance the federal budget? .

 

[doubtingmerle]

If I understand you correctly, that little uptick from 10.2 to 10.5 makes you lose sleep, but the long-term trend from 1990 to the high of 12.2 in 2007 is not a big deal. Is that correct?

I was a child in the 90s. My only concerns were cartoons and school. I didn’t become interested in American politics until around 2015 and by then the chart shows it was on the decline.

That was a loaded question.

It was an honest question.

The number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. rose dramatically from about 3.5 million in 1990 to a peak of 12.2 million in 2007. Since then, the total has declined somewhat, fluctuating year by year. You noticed a small uptick at the end of the chart and raised alarm, but seem to overlook that the total remains below its 2007 high—and that the increase from 1990 to 2007 was far more significant.

Why did those numbers rise so sharply? There are powerful incentives: many undocumented immigrants come seeking safety, opportunity, and a better life. In turn, they contribute to our economy and communities. It's not a one-sided deal—we help them, and they help us. That, to me, seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement.

 

[Laodicean60]

Ah, now you want to talk about balancing the budget. OK, but this thread already has far too much diversity (and inclusion). I responded in a new thread... Can you balance the federal budget? .

I replied there.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Help reduce or prevent corruption. Help stop criminal gangs and the cartel.

We agree. We should help countries in the Global South reduce corruption and combat criminal gangs and cartels.

So why call me cold-hearted for disagreeing with your approach, when we clearly agree on the goals?

The question isn’t whether to help—it’s how to help. I suggested two concrete strategies:
1. Providing aid through organizations like USAID, and
2. Actively promoting better human rights policies where they are needed.

You dismissed those ideas and criticized me for not supporting your plan—but I’m still waiting for you to clearly state what you would do to help the Global South that I supposedly (cold-heartedly) oppose.

 

[BCP1928]

We agree. We should help countries in the Global South reduce corruption and combat criminal gangs and cartels.

So why call me cold-hearted for disagreeing with your approach, when we clearly agree on the goals?

The question isn’t whether to help—it’s how to help. I suggested two concrete strategies:
1. Providing aid through organizations like USAID, and
2. Actively promoting better human rights policies where they are needed.

You dismissed those ideas and criticized me for not supporting your plan—but I’m still waiting for you to clearly state what you would do to help the Global South that I supposedly (cold-heartedly) oppose.

Then there is the destabilizing effect of the drug trade. Prior to its full scale industrialization it was possible to keep order in these countries by hand-picking their governments and, when things got out of hand, by sending US Marines to occupy the country for a while. The scope of the drug problem plus changing geopolitical norms have largely ruled that out, unless done surreptitiously or by proxy. The problem with the drug business is that many of these nations do not exercise de facto sovereignty over large regions of their countries. This is even true in Mexico, so working through and with the governments has little effect.

 

[A2SG]

It is hospitable to white South African refugees.

Even those who have been here illegally, such as by having overstayed their visas.

-- A2SG, maybe ICE should make a call on DOGE headquarters.....it's a lair inside an active volcano, right?

 

[MrMoe]

It was an honest question.

Also a loaded question.

The number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. rose dramatically from about 3.5 million in 1990 to a peak of 12.2 million in 2007. Since then, the total has declined somewhat, fluctuating year by year. You noticed a small uptick at the end of the chart and raised alarm, but seem to overlook that the total remains below its 2007 high—and that the increase from 1990 to 2007 was far more significant.

Can’t overlook something I did even know existed at the time.

Like I told you, I only became interested in American politics around 2015. By then the chart show the numbers declining.

You’re triggered because I didn’t notice a chart back when I was in school and not concerned with US politics?

Why did those numbers rise so sharply? There are powerful incentives: many undocumented immigrants come seeking safety, opportunity, and a better life. In turn, they contribute to our economy and communities. It's not a one-sided deal—we help them, and they help us. That, to me, seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement.

Better question: Why was it so low back then, and how can we get back to those numbers?

 

[MrMoe]

We agree. We should help countries in the Global South reduce corruption and combat criminal gangs and cartels.

So why call me cold-hearted for disagreeing with your approach, when we clearly agree on the goals?

But we don’t agree on the goal. Your goal is to keep illegal immigrants in America, but I want them to go back to their countries to make their countries better there.

Mexico could be face an aging population crisis by 2050 and as stats show 89.4% of illegal immigrants in the United States are of working age (16 to 64).

Better to give incentives for young people to stay there than risk their lives cross the border illegally.

The question isn’t whether to help—it’s how to help. I suggested two concrete strategies:
1. Providing aid through organizations like USAID, and
2. Actively promoting better human rights policies where they are needed.

You dismissed those ideas and criticized me for not supporting your plan—but I’m still waiting for you to clearly state what you would do to help the Global South that I supposedly (cold-heartedly) oppose.

I didn’t dismiss those ideas. We can aid other countries without a specific program like USAID.

“Foreign assistance done right can advance our national interests, protect our borders, and strengthen our partnerships with key allies,” Secretary of State Marc Rubio said in a statement.“Unfortunately, USAID strayed from its original mission long ago. As a result, the gains were too few and the costs were too high.”

Trump moves to officially close USAID, tells employees their jobs will be eliminated

The Trump administration is moving to effectively close global aid agency as federal appeals court clears path for DOGE cuts

www.independent.co.uk

And I’m all for actively promoting better human rights policies where they are needed.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Can’t overlook something I didn’t even know existed at the time.

Like I told you, I only became interested in American politics around 2015. By then, the chart shows the numbers declining.

Again, this is the chart we are discussing:

View attachment 364793
(Source)

I am not asking you to get into a DeLorean and go back to 1995 so you can have an opinion on this curve in real time.

I’m asking you to look at this chart and explain why the increase in unauthorized immigrants from 1990 to 2007 barely registers in your posts, yet you’re upset about the minor uptick on the right side of the graph.

Better question: Why was it so low back then, and how can we get back to those numbers?

Better questions: Why did illegal immigration go up? And do we need to get back to 1990's number of undocumented immigrants?

I’ll try to answer both.

First, why did it go up? One reason is that rich people wanted to hire undocumented workers. That includes many of Trump’s supporters—and even the Trump Organization.

• Rubio Campaign Press Release: Trump Used Undocumented Immigrants – UCSB Presidency Project
• Trump’s Company Employs Undocumented Workers at Golf Clubs – AP News
• Trump Organization Employed Undocumented Workers for Years – Vanity Fair
• Trump’s Contradictory Immigration Practices – America's Voice
• Video: Undocumented Workers Speak About Jobs at Trump Properties – YouTube
• Trump Businesses Seek Foreign Labor While Pushing Deportation – CREW
• Trump Donors the Uihleins and Reliance on Mexican Labor – The Guardian

As long as so many of Trump’s supporters are hiring undocumented immigrants, don’t expect him to send those people home. He won’t.

Instead, expect more of the same: high-profile deportations of selected individuals—some of whom might even be here legally—carried out in the most cruel and heartless manner. This will please the MAGA base. But the rich donors and the Trump Organization will continue hiring undocumented immigrants, who will remain here.

Another reason for the rise in undocumented immigrants is that turmoil in the Global South has left many people in dire situations. Many Americans responded with compassion.

Next question: Do we need to get back to 1990’s numbers?

Answer: No.

 

[Laodicean60]

From my research the bill started being formed in late October 2023. People realised there was a crisis at the border long before that.

Yes, it was a miscalculation, and Democrats waited till the election year to give the American people the impression that they were trying to do something about it.

 

[doubtingmerle]

We can aid other countries without a specific program like USAID.

And I’m all for actively promoting better human rights policies where they are needed.

Ah, so you now agree with my suggestions that we aid foreign countries with programs like USAID and that we promote human rights policies.

 

[doubtingmerle]

I’m talking specifically about illegal immigration. Seeking asylum is legal therefore I have no issue with it.

What if the current law is wrong? If the law as written could be improved, then is it not reasonable to want immigration policies to change?

Laws need to evolve with the times. We elect members of Congress not just to uphold existing laws, but to create better ones for the future.

It’s OK to propose new laws. I believe the law should include a pathway for some undocumented immigrants to gain legal status. Others, certainly, should be deported. It needs to be handled on a case-by-case basis.

Trump plans to increase immigrant labor—but he’s aiming to bring in large numbers of temporary workers under programs that amount, functionally, to indentured labor. To be fair, the Biden administration has done this too.

This eye-opening video explains what’s happening:

Where is our compassion?

Seeking asylum is legal therefore I have no issue with it.

Is asylum still possible?

Do you believe we should do more to ensure that people have a fair chance to make their case?

In the past, after a migrant’s criminal case for illegal entry unfolded, they would be taken into ICE custody, where they could attempt to plead for asylum. “The real battle is in immigration court,” one attorney told me. But when Castañeda spoke with Chris Carlin, who runs a federal public defender’s office in the Western District of Texas, he was concerned that, owing to Trump’s executive order, she might not be permitted to make an asylum claim at all. Instead, he warned her that she could be swiftly deported, potentially back to Venezuela. About two thousand people, including at least ninety-four women and two children, have been deported from the United States to Venezuela so far this year. “We’ve never shut down access to the asylum process to this extent,” Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, told me. (source)

It’s a difficult problem.

You say you have “no issue” with asylum—and that’s actually a fairly liberal position. It’s good to offer protection to those in danger. But the reality is, we have limits. There are only so many people we can take in at once. Right now, the borders are overwhelmed with asylum seekers, and the immigration courts are hopelessly backlogged.

We can try to hold people back, but they keep coming.

I believe we need:
- Increased capacity to process asylum claims quickly and fairly,
- Improved security to manage the flow,
- And a compassionate, yet practical system to handle this complex challenge.

Being “for asylum” is a good starting point—but it’s not, by itself, a solution.

 

[doubtingmerle]

So why do want illegal immigrants to stay in a country with such a corrupt leader?

For the same reason I stay in a country with a corrupt leader. There are many good people here who want things to change.

I am staying here and placing my bet that, in the long run, good wins.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Or better yet make the countries they are fleeing hospitable.

Help reduce or prevent corruption. Help stop criminal gangs and the cartel.

How do you want to help other countries? I suggested aid programs like USAID. At first you objected, but now you seem to want aid programs like USAID, with some differences. Good, let's help poor countries in the global South.

In the meantime, many people are coming here fearing for their lives. Even you have suggested that we should have an asylum program to give them an escape if it is desperately needed. But we find ourselves overloaded at the border, and unable to address everybody. Simply saying "make their home countries more hospitable" is a dream solution that doesn't begin to address the complexity of doing that.

 

[doubtingmerle]

The cuts seem almost random, but there is a clear emphasis on destroying anything that helps the poor (labeled "Marxism"), helps the environment, or helps foreign countries and foreigners.

This is absolutely false ! You have been deceived by false reporting.

Uh, no, The Trump administration has been cutting out programs that help the poor, the environment, and foreigners. See, for instance,

• Hundreds of Thousands Will Die - The New Yorker
• USAID Cuts Total $4 Billion for Children – First Focus
• What Do Trump’s Proposed Foreign Aid Cuts Mean? – Oxfam America
• Trump’s Foreign Aid Cuts “Playing With Fire,” Says IRC Chief – AP News
• USAID – Wikipedia
• USAID Cuts Threaten Global Conservation Programs – Yale E360
• Trump Budget Slashes Renewable Energy and EPA – Reuters
• Trump Budget Targets Safety Net Programs – Vox

 

[DaisyDay]

I am all for cutting back on the write-offs offs which I used to enjoy.

I'm all for a low corporate tax, but again, with not so many loopholes. I agree about crypto (except for the little people).

Why? Some clever people have their corporation own almost everything. They take a nominal salary with "perks" such as housing, cars, planes, deferred compensation, stock options and such are provided by the corporation which can write those off as a business expense.

I agree with Trump's willingness to raise taxes on high-income earners on all that you mention. It's kinda surprising, but he listens to his constituents.

Who does he consider his important constituents to be?

 

[MrMoe]

Again, this is the chart we are discussing:



I am not asking you to get into a DeLorean and go back to 1995 so you can have an opinion on this curve in real time.

I’m asking you to look at this chart and explain why the increase in unauthorized immigrants from 1990 to 2007 barely registers in your posts, yet you’re upset about the minor uptick on the right side of the graph.

Could you please clarify what you mean by “barely registers”. Like I told you, that increase from 1990 to 2007 happened long before I became aware of this chart and these statistics, and the numbers started to go down after 2007. So what exactly are you wanting from me? Seems like you’re fishing to use the tu quoque fallacy.

Better questions: Why did illegal immigration go up? And do we need to get back to 1990's number of undocumented immigrants?

I’ll try to answer both.

First, why did it go up? One reason is that rich people wanted to hire undocumented workers. That includes many of Trump’s supporters—and even the Trump Organization.

• Rubio Campaign Press Release: Trump Used Undocumented Immigrants – UCSB Presidency Project
• Trump’s Company Employs Undocumented Workers at Golf Clubs – AP News
• Trump Organization Employed Undocumented Workers for Years – Vanity Fair
• Trump’s Contradictory Immigration Practices – America's Voice
• Video: Undocumented Workers Speak About Jobs at Trump Properties – YouTube
• Trump Businesses Seek Foreign Labor While Pushing Deportation – CREW
• Trump Donors the Uihleins and Reliance on Mexican Labor – The Guardian

As long as so many of Trump’s supporters are hiring undocumented immigrants, don’t expect him to send those people home. He won’t.

Instead, expect more of the same: high-profile deportations of selected individuals—some of whom might even be here legally—carried out in the most cruel and heartless manner. This will please the MAGA base. But the rich donors and the Trump Organization will continue hiring undocumented immigrants, who will remain here.

Another reason for the rise in undocumented immigrants is that turmoil in the Global South has left many people in dire situations. Many Americans responded with compassion.

These links don’t explain the huge spike in the 90s, which is what I want to know.

Next question: Do we need to get back to 1990’s numbers?

Answer: No.

We should go back to 80s numbers. Less illegal immigrants risking their lives by crossing the border only to then be exploited by rich people would be a great thing.

 

[MrMoe]

Ah, so you now agree with my suggestions that we aid foreign countries with programs like USAID and that we promote human rights policies.

I agree that we should aid foreign countries and that we promote human rights policies, but not with USAID, because as the Secretary of State Marc Rubio said in a statement:
“Unfortunately, USAID strayed from its original mission long ago. As a result, the gains were too few and the costs were too high.”

 

[bèlla]

Why? Some clever people have their corporation own almost everything. They take a nominal salary with "perks" such as housing, cars, planes, deferred compensation, stock options and such are provided by the corporation which can write those off as a business expense.

Who does he consider his important constituents to be?

I’m amazed when people champion policies that benefit the few while maligning the same for the needy.

~bella