Anonymous wrote:Nope, sorry.

Reagan agreed to amnesty with tightening up avenues of illegal immigration. The amnesty happened. Enforcement didn't. Why should anyone believe there will be enforcement in the future without there being teeth to it?

We've already had the amnesty. It happened 30 years ago. It's time for the enforcement. All amnesty did under Reagan was cause more people to come here illegally, taking a chance they'd get to stay. Cutting them a break will lead to more illegal aliens. Enforcement should happen quickly.

Anonymous wrote:Only an idiot would look at the US, with its aging population and declining birth rates, and think, “yeah, let’s stop immigration, that’s the ticket!”

Talk about shithole countries....

Anonymous wrote:Only an idiot would look at the US, with its aging population and declining birth rates, and think, “yeah, let’s stop immigration, that’s the ticket!”

Talk about shithole countries....

Anonymous wrote:1) They have no prior criminal convictions

2) They are either pursuing education or has a job and not relying on public assistance

3) Chain immigration is ended for everyone except those bringing over minor dependents.

What about you? Do you support giving permanent status and under what conditions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) They have no prior criminal convictions

2) They are either pursuing education or has a job and not relying on public assistance

3) Chain immigration is ended for everyone except those bringing over minor dependents.

What about you? Do you support giving permanent status and under what conditions?

That is all already built in. Glad you're on board

I'd be happy to keep the DACA kids who have college degrees or have joined the military. According to thus report about 4% have college degrees: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/profile-current-daca-recipients-education-industry-and-occupation

Anonymous wrote:Only an idiot would look at the US, with its aging population and declining birth rates, and think, “yeah, let’s stop immigration, that’s the ticket!”

Talk about shithole countries....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) They have no prior criminal convictions

2) They are either pursuing education or has a job and not relying on public assistance

3) Chain immigration is ended for everyone except those bringing over minor dependents.

What about you? Do you support giving permanent status and under what conditions?

That is all already built in. Glad you're on board

OP here...I believe 1 and 2 are but not 3.

“Chain migration” is such a bullshit, GOP made-up concept — yet another way scare white people afraid of the brownification of America.

This BS term is their spin on family sponsorship, which is ALREADY incredibly expensive, protracted and arduous. You can’t just tell the government you want your family here, and then they say GREAT! and it’s done. The process takes years (exact length depends on country of origin and family relation), requires all the usual background checks, etc — and then the petitioner has to be able to demonstrate financial ability to sponsor the family member in case s/he cannot work.

Immigrant families with loved ones back home often send money back home in order to protect and support these family members over the years.

So: either stop the efforts to say we’re a country of family values, and support keeping families together; OR admit we don’t give a shit about brown families and drop the outrage over immigrants sending money back home. But either way, don’t play this BS game where the GOP is worried about this phenomenon that already doesn’t exist. I don’t know of any multimillionaire DACA recipents able to petition for all of their cousins.

OP here...this isn't true. I know for a fact because I have family who sponsored their parents who are elderly. They come here and obtain their green cards and are able to apply for public assistance. They are on medicaid, and live in assisted living, go to government sponsored adult daycares all at the taxpayers expense. This is also happening all over my Potomac neighborhood. The adult children sponsor their parents who had already transferred all their own savings to the adult kids so on paper they are poor. They can then apply for medicaid (sometimes with a wait) and go to adult daycare centers, get taxi allowances, etc. All those buses you see with Asian characters that say adult daycare are running around getting these folks. BTW, just because on paper it says the adult children are promising financial support for their parents when they applied, it is never enforced. This is the same for siblings only for siblings, it is a longer wait. My parents sponsored a sibling over and it was a 10 year wait. However, once the siblings are here, they can apply for green card and a few years later apply for public assistance (as long as they are elderly). I am totally against this and believe our taxes should be helping those that truly need help, not those hiding their own savings so they can benefit from taxpayers money.

yes but PP read an article in vox so she is an expert on immigration

No, it’s because I actually worked on immigration policy.

Straw man. Your “anecdotes” are likely not accurate, but even if they are, are far from a reflection of reality of family sponsorship. It takes years, decades to bring a relative here, and tens of thousands of dollars. The process for sponsorship is as exactly as I described it. Even the word “chain” implies there’s link after link, when the reality is that most families aren’t ever able to sponsor a relative, let alone two.

But since we’re evidently going to based this debate on anecdotes via an anonymous bulletin board, here’s one: when I was a kid, my mother attempted to sponsor her sister, and finally gave up hope on the idea by the time I was in college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) They have no prior criminal convictions

2) They are either pursuing education or has a job and not relying on public assistance

3) Chain immigration is ended for everyone except those bringing over minor dependents.

What about you? Do you support giving permanent status and under what conditions?

That is all already built in. Glad you're on board

OP here...I believe 1 and 2 are but not 3.

“Chain migration” is such a bullshit, GOP made-up concept — yet another way scare white people afraid of the brownification of America.

This BS term is their spin on family sponsorship, which is ALREADY incredibly expensive, protracted and arduous. You can’t just tell the government you want your family here, and then they say GREAT! and it’s done. The process takes years (exact length depends on country of origin and family relation), requires all the usual background checks, etc — and then the petitioner has to be able to demonstrate financial ability to sponsor the family member in case s/he cannot work.

Immigrant families with loved ones back home often send money back home in order to protect and support these family members over the years.

So: either stop the efforts to say we’re a country of family values, and support keeping families together; OR admit we don’t give a shit about brown families and drop the outrage over immigrants sending money back home. But either way, don’t play this BS game where the GOP is worried about this phenomenon that already doesn’t exist. I don’t know of any multimillionaire DACA recipents able to petition for all of their cousins.

OP here...this isn't true. I know for a fact because I have family who sponsored their parents who are elderly. They come here and obtain their green cards and are able to apply for public assistance. They are on medicaid, and live in assisted living, go to government sponsored adult daycares all at the taxpayers expense. This is also happening all over my Potomac neighborhood. The adult children sponsor their parents who had already transferred all their own savings to the adult kids so on paper they are poor. They can then apply for medicaid (sometimes with a wait) and go to adult daycare centers, get taxi allowances, etc. All those buses you see with Asian characters that say adult daycare are running around getting these folks. BTW, just because on paper it says the adult children are promising financial support for their parents when they applied, it is never enforced. This is the same for siblings only for siblings, it is a longer wait. My parents sponsored a sibling over and it was a 10 year wait. However, once the siblings are here, they can apply for green card and a few years later apply for public assistance (as long as they are elderly). I am totally against this and believe our taxes should be helping those that truly need help, not those hiding their own savings so they can benefit from taxpayers money.

I'm an immigrant too and I agree what you are saying . I have seen it plenty of free-loaders. American immigration system is broken and whatever the laws we have it is not enforced ,most of them. Most Americans are sleeping and don't care to know.

i am an immigrant as well and never got anything for free nor brought any family. however my nanny who was also an immigrant brought a bunch of relatives (adult children who brought spouses etc) and I was amazed at all the free godina she was somehow getting. that women knew everything and where to get it. she was very savvy while I, a phd, had no idea of the possibilities. you really need ground-level knowledge to understand how immigration actually works.

Immigrants cannot bring married adult children. Only citizens can and the wait is long, so forgive me if I doubt the veracity of this claim. -someone with extensive ground-level knowledge of immigration.

Anonymous wrote:If we're going to be intellectually honest about this debate, we should remember that "they should go back to their home country" or "I want them gone" or "get them out" = Deportation Force with Elian Gonzalez style raids and apprehensions and transportation costs back to wherever. We should factor in the full cost of a Deportation Force against the public resources being used by DACA kids. Is it worth the cost?

Anonymous wrote:If we're going to be intellectually honest about this debate, we should remember that "they should go back to their home country" or "I want them gone" or "get them out" = Deportation Force with Elian Gonzalez style raids and apprehensions and transportation costs back to wherever. We should factor in the full cost of a Deportation Force against the public resources being used by DACA kids. Is it worth the cost?