ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

鬼殺し wrote:

I find it amusing that Americans can't even get an analogy using Cheeseburgers right.

My analogy was criticizing 1453R’s ridiculous moral superiority. I got it right. Unless you’d care to dispute that. I’m always happy to learn how I’m wrong—that’s an opportunity it’s for growth—but then you’d have to actually dispute it and not just say “well I could, you know I’m good for it.”



Also, the conversation is about Trump. Geopolitics is all theoretical and complicated enough that you cannot strictly discuss the players without discussing the philosophy absent the players.


~~~~~~~~~~

In other news, Sessions got owned. By his own church. Yes! This is exactly what I want to see the church doing. This is a perfect example of the church, not interfering, but taking a principled position and providing commentary. More of this!

Separating children from families is never, should never be acceptable except when the parents present a clear and present danger to their children according to our standards. E.g., they are caught in the company of a known rapist/murderer coyote.

The government faces a legitimate problem here, something the media refuses to touch on: you think everybody is escaping gang violence? Either, it’s possible that people lie because it’s convenient, or they really are. If the latter, I do believe the mass exodus of a nation’s citizens towards our border is enough cause to strong arm that nation into fixing its problems. You have 364 days to clean up your gang problem or we’ll come down there and do it for you.

That said, if there is no room to detain families together, it is vastly more preferable to deny illegal-but-otherwise-not-criminally-dangerous entry by collecting information on the illegal entrants and sending them back across the river. Futile, yes? Better than separating families. “Sorry, you broke the law, but our legal system is at capacity, so the only responsible thing to do is send you away. If you keep breaking the law, yeah, that’s the mess ~points to this moment in time~ that you have to deal with.”

Family detention centers are too small. That system is not working; there is enough cause for otherwise innocent people to not want to engage in the legal entry process, and the response to illegal entry does not fix anything, just makes it worse. Here’s my idea: U.S. controlled entry-cities, built into “the wall,” open for immigration applicants to wait in while being processed. Gig labor for the various industries, ran according to U.S. labor laws, an actual economy, with apartment buildings, rent, emergency responders, the whole Great American Shebang. A safe American haven, a waypoint on the journey towards the American Dream. (“The wall” in quotes because I’m not expressing an opinion about the wall, but using it as euphemism for whatever border system is in place, but hell, if you wanted to fund an actual wall, there you go, funding solved).

"

Khoranth wrote:

Everyone knows the USA healthcare system is screwed up, but the question is how to fix it: more government meddling? Or removing government meddling[?]

That's not really the core problem at the moment.

The sad situation we're in now is everyone arguing about how to solve the funding problem, when all of their solution are at best a non-sequitur. The funding problem is an attempt to treat a symptom; curing the actual disease means fixing the pricing problem. There is no long-term-viable solution to the funding problem without addressing the pricing problem.

There are arguably (to use the term loosely) several potential Big Government solutions to the pricing problem, but amazingly I've only ever heard one. I don't hear anyone on the left suggesting government price-fix hospitals or nationalize health insurance -- well, technically that last one is single-payer, but it's fallen out of favor for Democrats to suggest that.

All I hear is lefties saying "don't be greedy, help other people pay for their healthcare;" meanwhile, Republicans oppose that solution while offering none of their own. No one in US government seems cognizant of the real problem.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Separating children from families is never, should never be acceptable except when the parents present a clear and present danger to their children according to our standards. E.g., they are caught in the company of a known rapist/murderer coyote.

Would you apply the same standards to an American-born politician and father of minor children who is charged with corruption? If not, then what makes violation of the law against taking bribes different from violating the immigration procedures prescribed by law?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Separating children from families is never, should never be acceptable except when the parents present a clear and present danger to their children according to our standards. E.g., they are caught in the company of a known rapist/murderer coyote.

Would you apply the same standards to an American-born politician and father of minor children who is charged with corruption? If not, then what makes violation of the law against taking bribes different from violating the immigration procedures prescribed by law?

If accepting the bribe exposes the children to child molesters, then yes. Otherwise, same dealio. Presumably said politician has a home and family that can oversee the children during detainment and legal proceedings, and the children are already citizens.

In the case of illegal entry, the typical legally prescribed correction is time served. Losing your children to an overreaching beauracracy does not match legal precedence for our attitudes towards the crime. In this case, if the response is “by necessity of the absence of resources at our disposal, we must inflict greater punishment upon you than the court would prescribe,” then the morally correct choice is non-entry + non-enforcement. Second offense, I’m less concerned.

Too many unpaid overtime hours to keep records? Then find another career. That’ll fix shit much faster than subsidizing* the boss’s mistakes.
*Not the right word but expresses similar sentiment? gtg, getting lazy at this point :)

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Spoiler

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Separating children from families is never, should never be acceptable except when the parents present a clear and present danger to their children according to our standards. E.g., they are caught in the company of a known rapist/murderer coyote.

Would you apply the same standards to an American-born politician and father of minor children who is charged with corruption? If not, then what makes violation of the law against taking bribes different from violating the immigration procedures prescribed by law?

If accepting the bribe exposes the children to child molesters, then yes. Otherwise, same dealio.

Presumably said politician has a home and family that can oversee the children during detainment and legal proceedings, and the children are already citizens.

Fair abuse of loophole.

Same question, except either
1) politician is a single father, or
2) his spouse is also being charged as part of the conspiracy

Then he failed to provide a stable foundation for his children + engaged in risky behavior. I see no problems here.

I also see the attempted comparison. Illegal entrants have no stable foundation, subjecting family to risky behavior, etc etc. I’m not suggesting we ought overlook crimes, and illegal entry is a crime. Where I make the distinction is that the politician, as beneficiary of legal citizenship, has a stable and robust legal system capable of handling the myriad needs of those suffering peripheral to his misdeeds. The very same legal system has been found wanting (severely), and needs to be brought up to date for illegal entrants.

The current response is more equivalent to handing out a life sentence for a nonviolent drug crime because the defendant wanted her right to a day in court. The punishment does not fit the crime. The punishment is only the punishment because incompetence. Not Trump’s per-say, but of everybody involved for the past sixty years. Fuckwit incompetent clowns, every last one of them, for thinking themselves effective stewards of modern society, and steering us towards this.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Friendly reminder: The president of the United States is a dictator fanboy. Not quite smart enough to be a dictator himself, but happy enough to praise them to the moon.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Fuck trump.

drumpft is dumb and luvs dictators, le hitler *tips fedora*

fuck drumpft!

finally, we have some high iq input

Ah yes, yes. That’s a nice dung castle you’re building, but please keep it in the litter box. The adults are talking about real problems.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Then he failed to provide a stable foundation for his children + engaged in risky behavior. I see no problems here.

I also see the attempted comparison. Illegal entrants have no stable foundation, subjecting family to risky behavior, etc etc. I’m not suggesting we ought overlook crimes, and illegal entry is a crime. Where I make the distinction is that the politician, as beneficiary of legal citizenship, has a stable and robust legal system capable of handling the myriad needs of those suffering peripheral to his misdeeds. The very same legal system has been found wanting (severely), and needs to be brought up to date for illegal entrants.

The current response is more equivalent to handing out a life sentence for a nonviolent drug crime because the defendant wanted her right to a day in court. The punishment does not fit the crime. The punishment is only the punishment because incompetence. Not Trump’s per-say, but of everybody involved for the past sixty years. Fuckwit incompetent clowns, every last one of them, for thinking themselves effective stewards of modern society, and steering us towards this.

I think the illegal immigration problem is similar to the healthcare problem in that the ridiculous levels of bureaucracy involved in the legal immigration process are an obvious contributor to illegal immigration.

However, there is an important distinction between illegal immigration and illegal entry. From what I understand, most of these detainees are illegal enterers. Considering that thousands of Mexican tourists enter the United States legally every day, and that the process for legal entry is much simpler than that for legal immigration, I have much less sympathy for these detainees.

I would support a detainment center for certain classes of illegal enterers that has a "you're free to leave" policy: nonviolent nonsmuggler illegal enterers could be given opportunity to complete legal entry procedures and await their day in court, or voluntarily self-deport. The catch would be that this detainment center would be on US land on the Mexico side of The Wall, such that anyone who leaves would be released back into Mexico. I don't see any reason why such a detention center couldn't provide families with accommodations that keep parents and children together. It's worth noting that this strategy of "outside the wall" voluntary detention centers has already proved effective in eastern Europe.