Immigration Ban

[Ready2Downsize]

I agree but immigration needs to be easier to achieve.  Seems like it's just a hard process for people wanting an opportunity to change their lives for family.

The visa program needs to go. I have family and friends that get replaced by these workers. It's one thing to outsource, but to ship someone over here to replace you?  Wow

Speaking of outsourcing........ wow. There are companies who outsource most of their tech work. They pay one guy to be a go between the client and outsourced software people in India. By day they meet with the client, by night they are on the phone to these RIDICULOUSLY LOW PAID, and I mean REALLY low paid techies telling them what to do. By morning hopefully they did what they were told correctly. If not they are paid so low the nightly meeting goes thru what is wrong and they do it over again.

Outsourcing is WAY cheaper than the visa route for companies and it's taking jobs from our workers at home.

My hubby was that go between guy for 15 years......... in charge of a big group of outsourced people happy to have a job in tech. The goal of every one of those outsourced was to some day get a visa so they could work here and guess what? Some actually went back home after getting a visa because the wages here didn't make up for the cost of living and they didn't or couldn't wait long enough to get their green card.

 

[Perspective]

You're not changing anyone's mind here.

I don't think Tim, or anyone else here, wants to change minds. I'm interested in hearing why folks support Trump's policies, but more so why folks are so eager to defend the man himself, and the things he says and does to implement his policies. That, I still don't understand.

 

[Perspective]

And when Hillary called half the country "deplorables" I had no real incentive to go out and vote but that to me felt like if I don't support her (which I didn't, not that I supported Trump), I felt she was bullying me and so I voted against her. That alone was enough for me to find some other candidate to vote for, not that it mattered. I knew it wouldn't.

I find this odd. She said this offensive thing once, and actually apologized for it, but this was unforgivable for you. I think her only mistake was adding "half" to the observation. I would've said "a small very vocal percentage of Trump's support is a basket of deplorables."

Trump said offensive things daily, continues to do so as president, is completely unapologetic, and this is perfectly acceptable?

 

[irvinehomeowner]

Here are the questions that I still have not had anyone answer:
1. What more needs to be done to vet immigrants and refugees?
2. How do you feel about the people that had visas and then had their lives thrown into chaos by the ban?
3. Why do you think so many tech companies filed an amicus brief with the suit to stop the ban taking place?
4. Why are you not frightened that Trump either doesn't understand the basics of how our immigration process works or is completely lying about it?

I still haven't had a travel ban supporter answer any of these questions that I asked days ago in the President Trump thread. Trump fans like to ask questions, criticize others for not answering, yet not answer themselves.

I'm not a supporter of the method but the intent. But I'll take a stab:

1. The problem is manpower and resources. To be able to effectively vet takes quite a bit of time and energy, so I understand that it's easier to just stop letting them in and sort out the chaos later. To put this as a comparison (which you guys like to apple and orange me on):

You are holding an event, you are told that of that of the 50 people on one bus, 2 of them are terrorists. What do you do? Do you interrogate each and every person on the bus (which you don't have the manpower to do and by the time you do that, the event will be over) or do you just prevent all 50 people from going in?

I don't know if there is an answer to this question. 9/11 happened because the vetting that did occur-- was ignored... that shouldn't happen.

2. I feel it's bad for them but again, 48 people on the bus will be inconvenienced but to save 10000 lives, it's a trade off I can live with.

3. See R2D's answer.

4. I can't comment on Trump's knowledge of immigration law but again, I am looking at intent. I think he doesn't know details about many things, but I hope that when he issued that EO, he would have his team make sure it's all on the up and up, which I don't think happened.

I think immigration security is a difficult topic but I don't know anyone who if given the scenario that there are absolutely a percentage of those refugees who are terrorists would not want to err on the side of caution.

So to counter:

1. Do you actually think enough is being done to vet immigrants? You stated there was but as someone who recently applied for someone's Visa, I can see how easy it is to fool the system given the proper resources.

2. Do you agree with the intent of Trump's EO and if so, how would you have done it?

 

[zubs]

When I look at my DIS stock today at $110....I wonder how much lower it would be if they had kept their original IT workers.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/...-replace-us-workers-with-immigrants.html?_r=0

As a shareholder I don't care how DIS gets their IT.  I just want my money.

 

[Loco_local]

When I look at my DIS stock today at $110....I wonder how much lower it would be if they had kept their original IT workers.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/...-replace-us-workers-with-immigrants.html?_r=0

As a shareholder I don't care how DIS gets their IT.  I just want my money.

How do you feel when the University of CA does the same thing?

 

[Loco_local]

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-uc-visas-20170108-story.html

How the University of California exploited a visa loophole to move tech jobs to India

USIng a visa loophole to fire well-paid U.S. information technology workers and replace them with low-paid immigrants from India is despicable enough when it?s done by profit-making companies such as Southern California Edison and Walt Disney Co.

But the latest employer to try this stunt sets a new mark in what might be termed ?job laundering.? It?s the University of California. Experts in the abuse of so-called H-1B visas say UC is the first public university to send the jobs of American IT staff offshore. That?s not a distinction UC should wear proudly

 

[zubs]

Government funding is really strange and has weird rules.  At one end you have the need to keep costs down.  At the other end you want to hire American, but that'll just bloat your funding request.

So what do you do?  You buy a bridge made in China.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html

This is the same for the UC IT replacement with immigrants.  If there is efficiency/productivity, do it.  Even the government can't escape gravity.

I expect Donald Trump to learn this the hard way.

 

[Happiness]

So what do you do?  You buy a bridge made in China.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html

The Chinese workers who built the SF Oakland Bay Bridge worked from 7 am to 11 pm 7 days a week for $12 per day.  That's a little less than California's minimum wage.

 

[zubs]

Think of all the money San Francisco saved!

 

[tim]

I'm not a supporter of the method but the intent. But I'll take a stab:

Cool, thanks!

1. The problem is manpower and resources. To be able to effectively vet takes quite a bit of time and energy, so I understand that it's easier to just stop letting them in and sort out the chaos later. To put this as a comparison (which you guys like to apple and orange me on):

You are holding an event, you are told that of that of the 50 people on one bus, 2 of them are terrorists. What do you do? Do you interrogate each and every person on the bus (which you don't have the manpower to do and by the time you do that, the event will be over) or do you just prevent all 50 people from going in?

I don't know if there is an answer to this question. 9/11 happened because the vetting that did occur-- was ignored... that shouldn't happen.

Yeah, it is that question of manpower. And also that we can never be sure of what is in someone's heart. Or who they will become. We only have enough manpower to do so much checking. This is the same way we approach pretty much all areas of crime. We can't stop it all. We can't predict it all. And different people have different ideas of how much freedom they want to give up in order to have more security. Since 9/11 we have changed our vetting procedures. But we will never be able to say we are preventing it 100%. It is the same with airport security.

2. I feel it's bad for them but again, 48 people on the bus will be inconvenienced but to save 10000 lives, it's a trade off I can live with.

For me, the ratios here are off. I see it as inconveniencing thousands and thousands in order to maybe save a couple lives. And maybe do nothing.

3. See R2D's answer.

4. I can't comment on Trump's knowledge of immigration law but again, I am looking at intent. I think he doesn't know details about many things, but I hope that when he issued that EO, he would have his team make sure it's all on the up and up, which I don't think happened.

I think immigration security is a difficult topic but I don't know anyone who if given the scenario that there are absolutely a percentage of those refugees who are terrorists would not want to err on the side of caution.

So then should we stop all people coming into the USA? The list of 7 countries was a joke. According to the list of terrorism from the White House, France and Belgium are the top 2 places for generating terrorists. Those should be at the top of the list. Why aren't people clamoring for that?

So to counter:

1. Do you actually think enough is being done to vet immigrants? You stated there was but as someone who recently applied for someone's Visa, I can see how easy it is to fool the system given the proper resources.

Yes, I think enough is being done. I think we should also let in more refugees. As I showed in the stats I posted (probably in the President Trump thread) the USA is not pulling its weight when it comes to this.

2. Do you agree with the intent of Trump's EO and if so, how would you have done it?

No, I don't think he should have done anything. I think his EO comes from a place of hate.

Do I support rounding up illegals and kicking their sorry illegal butts out of here? Absolutely. And this knowing they most likely bring buying into our economy and yes it will hurt a whole lot of people (teachers, health care, retail, fast food will all have a whole lot less to do and therefore most likely will face layoffs) and could very well lead to a recession.

So there you have it. I am FOR getting rid of illegals. I am FOR changing the law for birthright citizenship. That alone will take care of a whole lot of illegal immigration and birth motels.

If someone was brought here as a child and made a life for themselves here. Do you still want to kick them out? Maybe making their children live with no mother? I'm not trying to be ridiculous here. This is a real consideration.


And let's not forget that this ban also applies to refugees. Doesn't anyone want to help people that are fleeing disastrous conditions? What happened to America's generous spirit? Anyone read the parable of the good Samaritan? He didn't just help; he put his life at risk to help.

I see so little danger from terrorism in this country. I am sad that some people are so afraid of it.

 

[Happiness]

Once you start arguing about whether or not we should let certain foreigners in because they are dangerous or not, you are validating the globalist/liberal perspective that people should be allowed to live anywhere they want unless there is some exceptional reason why they shouldn?t.

There is also the nationalist/populist perspective that it is a privilege that a country can give or not give to a foreigner, to allow them into the country. There is no right to live wherever you want. If you believe in this perspective, which is just as valid as the globalist view, you shouldn?t argue about whether refugees or migrants are dangerous or not because it doesn?t matter.

This is similar to the death penalty debate.  Death penalty opponents want to frame the issue as there being no evidence the death penalty prevents crime.  Once you get into that argument, you have just unnecessarily validated the death penalty opponents? worldview.

 

[Ready2Downsize]

I'm not a supporter of the method but the intent. But I'll take a stab:

Cool, thanks!

1. The problem is manpower and resources. To be able to effectively vet takes quite a bit of time and energy, so I understand that it's easier to just stop letting them in and sort out the chaos later. To put this as a comparison (which you guys like to apple and orange me on):

You are holding an event, you are told that of that of the 50 people on one bus, 2 of them are terrorists. What do you do? Do you interrogate each and every person on the bus (which you don't have the manpower to do and by the time you do that, the event will be over) or do you just prevent all 50 people from going in?

I don't know if there is an answer to this question. 9/11 happened because the vetting that did occur-- was ignored... that shouldn't happen.

Yeah, it is that question of manpower. And also that we can never be sure of what is in someone's heart. Or who they will become. We only have enough manpower to do so much checking. This is the same way we approach pretty much all areas of crime. We can't stop it all. We can't predict it all. And different people have different ideas of how much freedom they want to give up in order to have more security. Since 9/11 we have changed our vetting procedures. But we will never be able to say we are preventing it 100%. It is the same with airport security.

2. I feel it's bad for them but again, 48 people on the bus will be inconvenienced but to save 10000 lives, it's a trade off I can live with.

For me, the ratios here are off. I see it as inconveniencing thousands and thousands in order to maybe save a couple lives. And maybe do nothing.

3. See R2D's answer.

4. I can't comment on Trump's knowledge of immigration law but again, I am looking at intent. I think he doesn't know details about many things, but I hope that when he issued that EO, he would have his team make sure it's all on the up and up, which I don't think happened.

I think immigration security is a difficult topic but I don't know anyone who if given the scenario that there are absolutely a percentage of those refugees who are terrorists would not want to err on the side of caution.

So then should we stop all people coming into the USA? The list of 7 countries was a joke. According to the list of terrorism from the White House, France and Belgium are the top 2 places for generating terrorists. Those should be at the top of the list. Why aren't people clamoring for that?

So to counter:

1. Do you actually think enough is being done to vet immigrants? You stated there was but as someone who recently applied for someone's Visa, I can see how easy it is to fool the system given the proper resources.

Yes, I think enough is being done. I think we should also let in more refugees. As I showed in the stats I posted (probably in the President Trump thread) the USA is not pulling its weight when it comes to this.

2. Do you agree with the intent of Trump's EO and if so, how would you have done it?

No, I don't think he should have done anything. I think his EO comes from a place of hate.

Do I support rounding up illegals and kicking their sorry illegal butts out of here? Absolutely. And this knowing they most likely bring buying into our economy and yes it will hurt a whole lot of people (teachers, health care, retail, fast food will all have a whole lot less to do and therefore most likely will face layoffs) and could very well lead to a recession.

So there you have it. I am FOR getting rid of illegals. I am FOR changing the law for birthright citizenship. That alone will take care of a whole lot of illegal immigration and birth motels.

If someone was brought here as a child and made a life for themselves here. Do you still want to kick them out? Maybe making their children live with no mother? I'm not trying to be ridiculous here. This is a real consideration.


And let's not forget that this ban also applies to refugees. Doesn't anyone want to help people that are fleeing disastrous conditions? What happened to America's generous spirit? Anyone read the parable of the good Samaritan? He didn't just help; he put his life at risk to help.

I see so little danger from terrorism in this country. I am sad that some people are so afraid of it.

If they are illegally here then they should go.

If they were born here (to illegal aliens or legal citizens) then they are citizens, so they should be allowed to stay.

For those who whine about families being torn up, where will the kids go? BOO HOO! Where do the kids go to parents who go to jail? They go live with other relatives or friends. Illegal aliens can take their kids with them if they choose. They aren't being called LEGAL aliens are they? NOPE cuz they are here ILLEGALLY.

As far as why other countries aren't banned..... I wondered the same thing and that is one reason I think this ban thing could have been handled differently. On the one hand it goes too far and on the other, not far enough but I'm not the President. I'm not qualified to know what to do and I don't have the info he does........ probably a good thing. LOL!

 

[Ready2Downsize]

And tim........ I'm not afraid of anything. I know where I'm going. I know things will get worse. I know the economy is going down big time. I know there is a currency crisis coming. When I don't know, but I know it's coming.

I know there is a plan and I'm going to heaven. I don't really pay a whole lot of attention to Trump, it's out of my hands and it makes no difference what I say or do. It's in God's hands.

 

[jmoney74]

And tim........ I'm not afraid of anything. I know where I'm going. I know things will get worse. I know the economy is going down big time. I know there is a currency crisis coming. When I don't know, but I know it's coming.

I know there is a plan and I'm going to heaven. I don't really pay a whole lot of attention to Trump, it's out of my hands and it makes no difference what I say or do. It's in God's hands.

Why is there a currency crisis coming?  Explain as I'm trying to see if gold is a good buy. Lol

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I'm taking a guess here but I think Tim was young when 9/11 happened and didn't feel the pain of those who lost their family and friends.

To think that the danger of letting in terrorists is not a high enough ratio to consider is weird to me. Even if only a "couple" people die, preventing that to inconvenience the many who are not citizens is equitable.

That kind of nonchalance about the risk of terror is how 9/11 happened.

 

[Loco_local]

I wasn't young when 9-11 happened, but I'm more fearful of getting run over in a supermarket parking lot than being a victim of a terrorist attack. I remember all of the paranoia and scare tactics dished out by the government and how ridiculos it was. If there were really so many evil and scary terrorists lurking about wanting "death to america", they would have done something dramatic in the past fifteen years. There are plenty of soft targets. You think some bad hombre is going to kill you, but more than likely your death will be caused by the lifestyle you choose.

 

[daedalus]

To think that the danger of letting in terrorists is not a high enough ratio to consider is weird to me. Even if only a "couple" people die, preventing that to inconvenience the many who are not citizens is equitable.

What about the societal good that immigrants bring?  How do you quantify what we're missing out on? 

 

[Perspective]

I wasn't young when 9-11 happened, but I'm more fearful of getting run over in a supermarket parking lot than being a victim of a terrorist attack. I remember all of the paranoia and scare tactics dished out by the government and how ridiculos it was. If there were really so many evil and scary terrorists lurking about wanting "death to america", they would have done something dramatic in the past fifteen years. There are plenty of soft targets. You think some bad hombre is going to kill you, but more than likely your death will be caused by the lifestyle you choose.

We cannot fall prey to fear mongering, horrible logic, demagoguery, and zero sum fallacies - basically, everything Trump does. Trump campaigned, and continues to talk, like the Obama administration did nothing to fight terrorism (and actually claimed Obama created ISIS). That's what Trump wants folks to believe, and he's convinced millions.

His administration can get this ban to work, it just has to be better considered and written, with justification for the conclusions requiring the prescribed solutions. Not sure why it was rushed in the first place. We know Trump knows more about the tax code than all tax attorneys, because he's told us so. We know Trump knows more about ISIS than all of the generals, because he's told us so. He probably then knows more about Constitutional and international law than those attorneys too. So get'r done.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

I wasn't young when 9-11 happened, but I'm more fearful of getting run over in a supermarket parking lot than being a victim of a terrorist attack. I remember all of the paranoia and scare tactics dished out by the government and how ridiculos it was. If there were really so many evil and scary terrorists lurking about wanting "death to america", they would have done something dramatic in the past fifteen years. There are plenty of soft targets. You think some bad hombre is going to kill you, but more than likely your death will be caused by the lifestyle you choose.

Why do people turn this into a fear for your own life? I fear for everyone's lives.

We've been safe the last 15 years because of the "inconveniences" that have been put into place. I'm sure there have been many things that could have happened but were prevented because of security measures and increased vigilance. But as the memory of that terrible event fades, I would rather not get complacent about it.

The point is that it has been a long time since something that large has happened, which could mean that something like that is being planned again.

I wish we could live in a world of open borders where everyone is at peace but that's not the reality. Did Trump overshooot... of course, but again, the intent behind it isn't fear mongering to me, it's security.

Why do many people choose to live in Irvine? If you think we should "all just get along and welcome everyone" then move to a different city, unlock your doors and let refugees into your own home.