I'm unsure how Russia defines it laws, seems to be more about what Putin wants. But that would be more your area of expertise.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? Or unintentionally? I honestly don't know! I mean come on! Is dictionary the definition for laws of our country?
He knows that too. The only reason he prefers that term is because it obfuscates that an illegal is here without authorization and should be deported. "Undocumented" sort of implies they have a legal right to be here but for a lack of proper form or something and that's not the case at all. It's akin to calling a squatter an "undocumented homeowner," the problem isn't a lack of paperwork but rather the squatter has no legal rights to even be in the house to begin with.
Anybody with any sense at all knows it's gone too far for mass deportations to be the answer. Deporting ~10% of the population of greater LA, ~1M people, is an insane proposition. It's the same for Houston, NY, or anywhere else they've settled in numbers. It would tear the country apart.
Get over it, and get over yourself, too. We need solutions that promote harmony & domestic tranquillity, not ones that will destroy it.
Anybody with any sense at all knows it's gone too far for mass deportations to be the answer. Deporting ~10% of the population of greater LA, ~1M people, is an insane proposition. It's the same for Houston, NY, or anywhere else they've settled in numbers. It would tear the country apart.
Get over it, and get over yourself, too. We need solutions that promote harmony & domestic tranquillity, not ones that will destroy it.
I beg to differ. An "immigrant" is someone who has permanent residency status (green card). Others may by here legally on various visas. I know a lot of immigrants so I know all about these things. But whether you are a permanent resident or on a visa, you are definitely "documented". So there is no such thing as being here legally and not being documented. The term "undocumented immigrant" is an oxymoron. Kind of like rap music ha...
I agree, it is just not possible to deport that many people. But what is the solution? More illegal people keep coming in. Every few decades a new amnesty and more promises of "securing" the border? While more and more areas of the country turn into ghettos? The right seems happy with this because it gives them a reason to whip up votes (while not doing anything about the employers who hire illegals). The left would like these illegals to be legalized so more votes for them. But in the absence of that, the left seems happy with the status quo as well. Because it still gives them more votes as the children of illegals are citizens and on and on it goes. It is a fucked up situation.
The number of undocumented immigrants in the US has held steady or declined for the last decade or so.
The solution is pretty simple, people are coming here for work so make a guest worker program.
This is inaccurate. For example, people who have come here and are applying for refugee status may be here legally (granted) or here illegally (denied). Either way they will lack documentation until that determination is made.
I'm glad you at least have abandoned trying to argue from principles held in bad faith and have moved to argument from practicality instead. It's progress that you no longer are trying to excuse away their status or pretend they do have the right to be here.
There is really no way to know. The "studies" and "surveys" and "polls" and all that, there were a lot of them before the 2016 election as well. That is just one example. For something that by definition can't be accurately measured, or even close to, there is really no way to know. I don't know about you, but I live in a big city. And the above definitely seems to be untrue.
Not going to happen. The right won't let it happen because it means employers will have to pay more. The left won't let it happen because it will resolve the issue of granting citizenship, not in their favor. Hence no new votes for them. As always, the two sides are not interested in a solution that helps the country.
Not going to happen. The right won't let it happen because it means employers will have to pay more. The left won't let it happen because it will resolve the issue of granting citizenship, not in their favor. Hence no new votes for them. As always, the two sides are not interested in a solution that helps the country.
Project often? If the GOP doesn't garner the votes of immigrant citizens, whose fault is that?
Do I look like the spokesperson for GOP? So because I don't support legalization of illegals, it makes me a GOP supporter? Do you realize how ridiculous that notion is? Do you actually know any real people in life? I think most people are not the liberal or conservative flag bearers as New York Times or Fox News would like them to be.
Also someone coming here illegally gives them zero rights to become immigrant citizens. You would perhaps realize this more if you actually knew LEGAL people from other countries here in America, who go through so much crap and bullshit from the authorities. You would then be sympathetic to their plight and not favor amnesty for illegals
Do I look like the spokesperson for GOP? So because I don't support legalization of illegals, it makes me a GOP supporter? Do you realize how ridiculous that notion is? Do you actually know any real people in life? I think most people are not the liberal or conservative flag bearers as New York Times or Fox News would like them to be.
Also someone coming here illegally gives them zero rights to become immigrant citizens. You would perhaps realize this more if you actually knew LEGAL people from other countries here in America, who go through so much crap and bullshit from the authorities. You would then be sympathetic to their plight and not favor amnesty for illegals
This is provably false. The left (and in some ways the center right) have repeatedly come to almost exactly that sort of compromise, only to have it torpedoed by the far right. Just go look at the most recent senate immigration bill that the house refused to even take up. It’s important not to #bothsides this issue because it’s really just one side.
I was pretty sure what the last senate immigration bill was (2013 one). But to be sure I went back and checked. Sure enough, it provided a path to citizenship, and all the usual bureaucratic language about border security, this department to certify that, and all that. But you and I were talking about guest worker.
The bill failed because it gave illegals citizenship, which is not only wrong, but also provides yet another incentive for more illegals to come in. That has already been done in the 80s, I am sure you know that. If it was a guest worker program, it may not have failed. But as I already said, why guest worker won't get support from left.
So yes, it is definitely a what you call bothsides issue. Neither side is sincere on what benefits the country. But that is entirely expect of two powerful corrupt parties.
I was pretty sure what the last senate immigration bill was (2013 one). But to be sure I went back and checked. Sure enough, it provided a path to citizenship, and all the usual bureaucratic language about border security, this department to certify that, and all that. But you and I were talking about guest worker.
The bill failed because it gave illegals citizenship, which is not only wrong, but also provides yet another incentive for more illegals to come in. That has already been done in the 80s, I am sure you know that. If it was a guest worker program, it may not have failed. But as I already said, why guest worker won't get support from left.
So yes, it is definitely a what you call bothsides issue. Neither side is sincere on what benefits the country. But that is entirely expect of two powerful corrupt parties.
If you think that the possibility of gaining citizenship 30 years down the road is incentive for illegals to come into this country you might be interested in some Arizona oceanfront property.
No, he thinks it's incentive for Democrats to ask for it since they think it will create future votes for them and quasi slave labor for them in the meanwhile. I don't think illegals need our government to provide any incentive for them to come here.
This is again provably false as the bill most certainly had a guest worker program in it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...what-you-need-to-know/?utm_term=.4e3cf9a3b78a
I don’t think you have a strong grasp of the immigration debate and what’s happened over the last 20 years and are instead inventing facts to justify the position you already hold. Like I said, this is not a #bothsides thing. The problem is conservatives.
Man, I don't know if you are doing this deliberately!
The main point is that the bill contained citizenship for the illegals. Yes it had a puny bit 20K to 75K guest worker, but that is utterly beside the point. The citizenship thing has already been done before in the 80s. Ok I will stop repeating myself. I completely fail to see what your point is?
Wait, you said the main point was the guest workers? A combined 100,000 guest workers is not puny and that was just a start.
My point is that the primary obstacle to improving our immigration system has been extreme conservatives refusing to sign off on a compromise between liberals and moderate conservatives. Both sides are not equally to blame and making that claim just enables conservatives to get away with it.
Were you in a previous life, or are in current life, a talking head or politician? You have perfected the art of repeating the party line over and over again, all the while dodging the main issue. Please consider these professions if you are not already involved