Who is supporting the immigrant caravan?

[DocBarrister]

What I want is for them to turn on the EVerify system, and start throwing CEO's and Mangers in jail for not using it.

This. And farm and ranch owners.

Let's do it!

Yep

Millions of American jobless.

We need more immigrants why?

Basically to replace old people like you and expand the economy.

There are two basic ways to grow the economy:

(1) increase the number of workers and consumers; and

(2) increase worker productivity.

Item (2) covers technology, keeping people employed (no job, no productivity), overtime, etc.

Item (1) includes having children, young families (which consume a lot), and young workers.

The United States needs immigration to help with both. For example, because there are roughly 60 million stupid people in the Republican Party, many tech companies, life sciences firms, and universities are dependent on attracting highly educated foreign workers to fill their needs (e.g., my father, who arrived in the 1960s with an engineering degree).

In addition, with a rapidly aging population, we need immigration of young workers and their families to keep the population younger and to create more demand for consumer products (remember, 70% of economic growth is driven by consumer spending). The U.S. birth rate is too low without immigration to accomplish this.

If we reduce immigration, the U.S. will become a basket case like Japan ... with an aging population, shrinking work force, and workers who are burned out (because increasing worker productivity is the only way left for growing their economy).

Immigration grows the economy and creates jobs ... that is simply a fact.

Immigration is also essential for bringing in new ideas. Much of Silicon Valley has been led by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The United States has thrived for over 200 years because of immigrants.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand America.

DocBarrister

[old salt]

Because the 1% wants to pay them the low wages and zero benefits that only illegals will accept.

If the 1% had to pay a decent wage and benefits, they would make less money. They don't want to do that.

Trump is a POTUS of and for the 1%. Which is why you never hear about E-verify from the Trump admin.

Like CA roofers.

[a fan]

Because the 1% wants to pay them the low wages and zero benefits that only illegals will accept.

Bingo.

Why do you think Trump and the Republicans ran on fixing illegal immigration----and "whoops" forgot to do anything about it, 6ft?

And why do you think "radical lefty" Biden won't lift a finger to solve it, either?

Because the 1% makes money on the status quo. That's it. Full stop.

So they play the game of pointing at the Dems, and pointing at the R's------and partisans fall for it, for going on 50 years now.

Turn on EVerify, and throw CEO's and business owners in jail for not using it? This "problem" would disappear in less than a year.

Of course, this would lead to complete chaos in the American labor market, but whatever.

[6ftstick]

What I want is for them to turn on the EVerify system, and start throwing CEO's and Mangers in jail for not using it.

This. And farm and ranch owners.

Let's do it!

Yep

Millions of American jobless.

We need more immigrants why?

Basically to replace old people like you and expand the economy.

There are two basic ways to grow the economy:

(1) increase the number of workers and consumers; and

(2) increase worker productivity.

Item (2) covers technology, keeping people employed (no job, no productivity), overtime, etc.

Item (1) includes having children, young families (which consume a lot), and young workers.

The United States needs immigration to help with both. For example, because there are roughly 60 million stupid people in the Republican Party, many tech companies, life sciences firms, and universities are dependent on attracting highly educated foreign workers to fill their needs (e.g., my father, who arrived in the 1960s with an engineering degree).

In addition, with a rapidly aging population, we need immigration of young workers and their families to keep the population younger and to create more demand for consumer products (remember, 70% of economic growth is driven by consumer spending). The U.S. birth rate is too low without immigration to accomplish this.

If we reduce immigration, the U.S. will become a basket case like Japan ... with an aging population, shrinking work force, and workers who are burned out (because increasing worker productivity is the only way left for growing their economy).

Immigration grows the economy and creates jobs ... that is simply a fact.

Immigration is also essential for bringing in new ideas. Much of Silicon Valley has been led by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The United States has thrived for over 200 years because of immigrants.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand America.

DocBarrister

Oh please like we don't get it.

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

Within two generations their grandchildren were college grads lawyers doctors accountants. And blue collar pros and foreman and stewards in the mills

Theres millions of Americans that need jobs. They should get first crack.

[DocBarrister]

What I want is for them to turn on the EVerify system, and start throwing CEO's and Mangers in jail for not using it.

This. And farm and ranch owners.

Let's do it!

Yep

Millions of American jobless.

We need more immigrants why?

Basically to replace old people like you and expand the economy.

There are two basic ways to grow the economy:

(1) increase the number of workers and consumers; and

(2) increase worker productivity.

Item (2) covers technology, keeping people employed (no job, no productivity), overtime, etc.

Item (1) includes having children, young families (which consume a lot), and young workers.

The United States needs immigration to help with both. For example, because there are roughly 60 million stupid people in the Republican Party, many tech companies, life sciences firms, and universities are dependent on attracting highly educated foreign workers to fill their needs (e.g., my father, who arrived in the 1960s with an engineering degree).

In addition, with a rapidly aging population, we need immigration of young workers and their families to keep the population younger and to create more demand for consumer products (remember, 70% of economic growth is driven by consumer spending). The U.S. birth rate is too low without immigration to accomplish this.

If we reduce immigration, the U.S. will become a basket case like Japan ... with an aging population, shrinking work force, and workers who are burned out (because increasing worker productivity is the only way left for growing their economy).

Immigration grows the economy and creates jobs ... that is simply a fact.

Immigration is also essential for bringing in new ideas. Much of Silicon Valley has been led by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The United States has thrived for over 200 years because of immigrants.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand America.

DocBarrister

Oh please like we don't get it.

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

Within two generations their grandchildren were college grads lawyers doctors accountants. And blue collar pros and foreman and stewards in the mills

Theres millions of Americans that need jobs. They should get first crack.

Immigrants don’t take American jobs, they create them.

DocBarrister

[CU77]

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

And was that a good thing?

What about unions?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Wor ... _Committee

[6ftstick]

What I want is for them to turn on the EVerify system, and start throwing CEO's and Mangers in jail for not using it.

This. And farm and ranch owners.

Let's do it!

Yep

Millions of American jobless.

We need more immigrants why?

Basically to replace old people like you and expand the economy.

There are two basic ways to grow the economy:

(1) increase the number of workers and consumers; and

(2) increase worker productivity.

Item (2) covers technology, keeping people employed (no job, no productivity), overtime, etc.

Item (1) includes having children, young families (which consume a lot), and young workers.

The United States needs immigration to help with both. For example, because there are roughly 60 million stupid people in the Republican Party, many tech companies, life sciences firms, and universities are dependent on attracting highly educated foreign workers to fill their needs (e.g., my father, who arrived in the 1960s with an engineering degree).

In addition, with a rapidly aging population, we need immigration of young workers and their families to keep the population younger and to create more demand for consumer products (remember, 70% of economic growth is driven by consumer spending). The U.S. birth rate is too low without immigration to accomplish this.

If we reduce immigration, the U.S. will become a basket case like Japan ... with an aging population, shrinking work force, and workers who are burned out (because increasing worker productivity is the only way left for growing their economy).

Immigration grows the economy and creates jobs ... that is simply a fact.

Immigration is also essential for bringing in new ideas. Much of Silicon Valley has been led by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The United States has thrived for over 200 years because of immigrants.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand America.

DocBarrister

Oh please like we don't get it.

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

Within two generations their grandchildren were college grads lawyers doctors accountants. And blue collar pros and foreman and stewards in the mills

Theres millions of Americans that need jobs. They should get first crack.

Immigrants don’t take American jobs, they create them.

DocBarrister

Crock of poo doo

[6ftstick]

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

And was that a good thing?

What about unions?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Wor ... _Committee

It was the only thing.

[MDlaxfan76]

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

And was that a good thing?

What about unions?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Wor ... _Committee

It was the only thing.

Pretty sure 99% of mine workers (whether citizens or immigrants) in western PA and West VA, etc desperately wanted better work conditions, less rip off at the company store...they wanted and needed unions and ultimately that's what improved conditions.

[foreverlax]

What I want is for them to turn on the EVerify system, and start throwing CEO's and Mangers in jail for not using it.

This. And farm and ranch owners.

Let's do it!

Yep

Millions of American jobless.

We need more immigrants why?

Basically to replace old people like you and expand the economy.

There are two basic ways to grow the economy:

(1) increase the number of workers and consumers; and

(2) increase worker productivity.

Item (2) covers technology, keeping people employed (no job, no productivity), overtime, etc.

Item (1) includes having children, young families (which consume a lot), and young workers.

The United States needs immigration to help with both. For example, because there are roughly 60 million stupid people in the Republican Party, many tech companies, life sciences firms, and universities are dependent on attracting highly educated foreign workers to fill their needs (e.g., my father, who arrived in the 1960s with an engineering degree).

In addition, with a rapidly aging population, we need immigration of young workers and their families to keep the population younger and to create more demand for consumer products (remember, 70% of economic growth is driven by consumer spending). The U.S. birth rate is too low without immigration to accomplish this.

If we reduce immigration, the U.S. will become a basket case like Japan ... with an aging population, shrinking work force, and workers who are burned out (because increasing worker productivity is the only way left for growing their economy).

Immigration grows the economy and creates jobs ... that is simply a fact.

Immigration is also essential for bringing in new ideas. Much of Silicon Valley has been led by immigrants or the children of immigrants.

The United States has thrived for over 200 years because of immigrants.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand America.

DocBarrister

Oh please like we don't get it.

MY grandparents were first generation immigrants then citizens.

No welfare No free healthcare.

Steel mills and mines in western PA.

No safety net. Just blistering hard hot work.

Within two generations their grandchildren were college grads lawyers doctors accountants. And blue collar pros and foreman and stewards in the mills

Theres millions of Americans that need jobs. They should get first crack.

That's a joke right...what is keeping them from taking those jobs?

[Cooter]

I don't really agree with most of your rationales above, a fan, and I don't think we will gain much by discussing it - as we already have done on another thread with little result.

Obama's initial rationale about immigration being good for the nation over the last 200 year is a little misleading also. Back in the early 1800s, when the U.S. was a young nation, there was a lot of land to be settled, there was a great need for immigrants (unless you were an AmerIndian). Moving up to the latter 1800s, the frontier had still not all been settled - and you had the industrial revolution with a great need for man power. This industrial revolution continued into 1900s.
Now in the 21st century, the U.S. is a mature nation with 325 million+ people. The frontier has long been closed down, and the industrial revolution is over. Whether immigrants in great numbers really help the nation is questionable. They bring more over-crowding, urban sprawl, traffic congestion, pollution, ... with little real benefit - unless the individual is particularly talented. So not liking over-crowded situations and caring about the ecology of the country, I am against large amounts of immigration.

If you want to see what happens to a xenophobic nation that refuses to increase immigration even though its working age population is shrinking, look at Japan.

We need more immigration, not less. Immigration helps to grow our economy and revitalize our culture.

DocBarrister

Comparing Japan and the U.S. as you have done is questionable. Japan is a smaller, one race nation, while the U.S. is a large multi-race nation. So your point seems rather moot.

While democrats like you talk about global warming and cutting down on greenhouse gases, you seem to have a blind eye towards the consequences of global warming.

Global warming will bring large rises in sea level flooding many coastal areas, some used for habitation or agriculture. Global warming will also cause more extreme weather, including droughts. Oh the proud farmer cries how we can produce more food than we can eat, but whether the U.S. will be able to 50+ years from now, after things have warmed up significantly, is anybody's guess.

My opinion is that having a leaner U.S. w.r.t. population, will allow the U.S. to roll with the punches delivered by global warming much better, and cut down on human misery and deaths.

[MDlaxfan76]

I don't really agree with most of your rationales above, a fan, and I don't think we will gain much by discussing it - as we already have done on another thread with little result.

Obama's initial rationale about immigration being good for the nation over the last 200 year is a little misleading also. Back in the early 1800s, when the U.S. was a young nation, there was a lot of land to be settled, there was a great need for immigrants (unless you were an AmerIndian). Moving up to the latter 1800s, the frontier had still not all been settled - and you had the industrial revolution with a great need for man power. This industrial revolution continued into 1900s.
Now in the 21st century, the U.S. is a mature nation with 325 million+ people. The frontier has long been closed down, and the industrial revolution is over. Whether immigrants in great numbers really help the nation is questionable. They bring more over-crowding, urban sprawl, traffic congestion, pollution, ... with little real benefit - unless the individual is particularly talented. So not liking over-crowded situations and caring about the ecology of the country, I am against large amounts of immigration.

If you want to see what happens to a xenophobic nation that refuses to increase immigration even though its working age population is shrinking, look at Japan.

We need more immigration, not less. Immigration helps to grow our economy and revitalize our culture.

DocBarrister

Comparing Japan and the U.S. as you have done is questionable. Japan is a smaller, one race nation, while the U.S. is a large multi-race nation. So your point seems rather moot.

What does race have to do with his argument? If we don't have enough kids or attract enough immigrants, we get older, with fewer workers to support the retired workers and our economy contracts rather than expands. Race is irrelevant.

While democrats like you talk about global warming and cutting down on greenhouse gases, you seem to have a blind eye towards the consequences of global warming.

Global warming will bring large rises in sea level flooding many coastal areas, some used for habitation or agriculture. Global warming will also cause more extreme weather, including droughts. Oh the proud farmer cries how we can produce more food than we can eat, but whether the U.S. 50+ years from now, after things have warmed up significantly, can is any bodies guess.

My opinion is that having a leaner U.S. w.r.t. population, will allow the U.S. to roll with the punches delivered by global warming much better, and cut down on human misery and deaths.

In addition to what I said above in blue...Interesting thesis about global warming...do I understand correctly that you're saying that global warming, (which you assume is inevitable?) will cause a failure to be able to produce enough food for the population so a lower population is the best way to deal with that?

Gee, what could go wrong with that assumption...how many millions, heck billions, need to die in the world so that food production is sufficient to cover those hungry mouths?

[Cooter]

What does race have to do with his argument? If we don't have enough kids or attract enough immigrants, we get older, with fewer workers to support the retired workers and our economy contracts rather than expands. Race is irrelevant.

This would seem to lead to eventual over population and the U.S. becoming like India. Given that a lot of today's work is non-physical, convincing people to work to an older age might be a better solution.

In addition to what I said above in blue...Interesting thesis about global warming...do I understand correctly that you're saying that global warming, (which you assume is inevitable?) will cause a failure to be able to produce enough food for the population so a lower population is the best way to deal with that?

Gee, what could go wrong with that assumption...how many millions, heck billions, need to die in the world so that food production is sufficient to cover those hungry mouths?

Your first paragraph seems insipid.

For the 2nd paragraph, we might well find out.

[MDlaxfan76]

What does race have to do with his argument? If we don't have enough kids or attract enough immigrants, we get older, with fewer workers to support the retired workers and our economy contracts rather than expands. Race is irrelevant.

This would seem to lead to eventual over population and the U.S. becoming like India. Given that a lot of today's work is non-physical, convincing people to work to an older age might be a better solution.

In addition to what I said above in blue...Interesting thesis about global warming...do I understand correctly that you're saying that global warming, (which you assume is inevitable?) will cause a failure to be able to produce enough food for the population so a lower population is the best way to deal with that?

Gee, what could go wrong with that assumption...how many millions, heck billions, need to die in the world so that food production is sufficient to cover those hungry mouths?

Your first paragraph seems insipid.

For the 2nd paragraph, we might well find out.

So, you are a Malthusian?
320 or so years later and he still is wrong...

insipid???

You're right, we might find out that global warming is a huge problem...better get on that one, right?

[Cooter]

You're right, we might find out that global warming is a huge problem...better get on that one, right?

Why are you saying this to me?

[old salt]

While democrats like you talk about global warming and cutting down on greenhouse gases, you seem to have a blind eye towards the consequences of global warming.

Global warming will bring large rises in sea level flooding many coastal areas, some used for habitation or agriculture. Global warming will also cause more extreme weather, including droughts. Oh the proud farmer cries how we can produce more food than we can eat, but whether the U.S. will be able to 50+ years from now, after things have warmed up significantly, is anybody's guess.

My opinion is that having a leaner U.S. w.r.t. population, will allow the U.S. to roll with the punches delivered by global warming much better, and cut down on human misery and deaths.

With the growth in global population, increased life expectancy & rising standard of living, it is impossible to arrest global warming & climate change, no matter how many green energy boon doggle scams are foisted upon 1st world economies.

We need to do what we can to reduce carbon emissions using evolving technology & market forces.
The US is meeting our Paris Accord targets thanks to the market driven switch from coal to natural gas generated electricity.
Nuc power technology is safe, available, & irrationally underutilized in stable 1st world nations.

We need to mitigate the current & coming impact of climate change. Altering forest, land & water resource management, as well as real estate development, in threatened areas (like CA & FL) is long overdue.

[Typical Lax Dad]

While democrats like you talk about global warming and cutting down on greenhouse gases, you seem to have a blind eye towards the consequences of global warming.

Global warming will bring large rises in sea level flooding many coastal areas, some used for habitation or agriculture. Global warming will also cause more extreme weather, including droughts. Oh the proud farmer cries how we can produce more food than we can eat, but whether the U.S. will be able to 50+ years from now, after things have warmed up significantly, is anybody's guess.

My opinion is that having a leaner U.S. w.r.t. population, will allow the U.S. to roll with the punches delivered by global warming much better, and cut down on human misery and deaths.

With the growth in global population, increased life expectancy & rising standard of living, it is impossible to arrest global warming & climate change, no matter how many green energy boon doggle scams are foisted upon 1st world economies.

We need to do what we can to reduce carbon emissions using evolving technology & market forces.
The US is meeting our Paris Accord targets thanks to the market driven switch from coal to natural gas generated electricity.
Nuc power technology is safe, available, & irrationally underutilized in stable 1st world nations.

We need to mitigate the current & coming impact of climate change. Altering forest, land & water resource management, as well as real estate development, in threatened areas (like CA & FL) is long overdue.

The time to act was about 20 years ago..... but but but. The longer you put it off, the more likely it will be that you can’t do anything about it......don’t take COVID mitigation efforts, eventually you won’t be able to stop a lot or people from dying.... See how that works?

[old salt]

While democrats like you talk about global warming and cutting down on greenhouse gases, you seem to have a blind eye towards the consequences of global warming.

Global warming will bring large rises in sea level flooding many coastal areas, some used for habitation or agriculture. Global warming will also cause more extreme weather, including droughts. Oh the proud farmer cries how we can produce more food than we can eat, but whether the U.S. will be able to 50+ years from now, after things have warmed up significantly, is anybody's guess.

My opinion is that having a leaner U.S. w.r.t. population, will allow the U.S. to roll with the punches delivered by global warming much better, and cut down on human misery and deaths.

With the growth in global population, increased life expectancy & rising standard of living, it is impossible to arrest global warming & climate change, no matter how many green energy boon doggle scams are foisted upon 1st world economies.

We need to do what we can to reduce carbon emissions using evolving technology & market forces.
The US is meeting our Paris Accord targets thanks to the market driven switch from coal to natural gas generated electricity.
Nuc power technology is safe, available, & irrationally underutilized in stable 1st world nations.

We need to mitigate the current & coming impact of climate change. Altering forest, land & water resource management, as well as real estate development, in threatened areas (like CA & FL) is long overdue.

The time to act was about 20 years ago..... but but but. The longer you put it off, the more likely it will be that you can’t do anything about it......don’t take COVID mitigation efforts, eventually you won’t be able to stop a lot or people from dying.... See how that works?

We are acting. Carbon emissions have been coming down in the US, will continue & accelerate as the technology continues to advance.

What's >30 years behind are forest, land & water resource management in places like CA & FL which are increasingly feeling the impact of climate change. CA's water delivery infrastructure, forest management & timber harvesting used to be the model for the rest of the planet. But the spotted owl & delta smelt have been protected.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2009/09/23/ ... out-water/
https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/news ... ndustry-2/
https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/ ... _stone.pdf

[MDlaxfan76]

You're right, we might find out that global warming is a huge problem...better get on that one, right?

Why are you saying this to me?

Because I was agreeing with you that global warming could indeed have a devastating impact on food production...one of the fundamental reasons why addressing climate change proactively, now, makes sense to do.

Where I was disagreeing with you was the Malthusian philosophical notions about excess population inevitably outstripping food supply, (and other necessary basics) and, thus, a rationale to reduce or eliminate immigration.

Those dire predictions of imminent collapse by Malthus have not proven accurate in the past 300 years because we have advanced technologies and processes even faster than population has increased and met these demands...and that's what we need to do to slow down and stop man made global warming and to address its effects, in the latter to the extent that we don't stop the warming fast.

Of course, this doesn't just happen magically...both our private and public responses will need to meet the scale of the challenges.

But trying to not have too much population as the answer?
Nope...we need to unleash our human capital potential, not restrict it numerically.

[Cooter]

You're right, we might find out that global warming is a huge problem...better get on that one, right?

Why are you saying this to me?

Because I was agreeing with you that global warming could indeed have a devastating impact on food production...one of the fundamental reasons why addressing climate change proactively, now, makes sense to do.

Where I was disagreeing with you was the Malthusian philosophical notions about excess population inevitably outstripping food supply, (and other necessary basics) and, thus, a rationale to reduce or eliminate immigration.

Those dire predictions of imminent collapse by Malthus have not proven accurate in the past 300 years because we have advanced technologies and processes even faster than population has increased and met these demands...and that's what we need to do to slow down and stop man made global warming and to address its effects, in the latter to the extent that we don't stop the warming fast.

Of course, this doesn't just happen magically...both our private and public responses will need to meet the scale of the challenges.

But trying to not have too much population as the answer?
Nope...we need to unleash our human capital potential, not restrict it numerically.

There are actually people starving to death in the world right now. So it would appear that in some countries population has outstripped food supply.

The US population has actually slightly more than doubled since 1950. I don't know that we need to do the same over the next 70 years, or even try outdo it with massive levels of immigration.

Just because Malthus was wrong in the past, doesn't mean that it won't happen in the future. You can't use something like that to prove what will happen in the future. Technological improvements could have their limitations. This could be particularly true if there were some serious droughts caused by global warming.

Nope, you are too much into the business side of things - trying to make money off of people. More people more money. Unfortunately, more people will lead to more greenhouse gases, pollution, over-crowding, and loss of quality of life.
You seem to want to make the U.S. into New India.