Obama to exempt nearly 5 million illegal immigrants from deportation - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Killuah;46537754]what benefits are they reaping except shit jobs that noody wants??[/QUOTE] For arguements sake, in my town fast-food jobs that were taken by college students and high school kids back in the 90's. Today it's almost exclusively run by adult Mexicans/Latinos wherever they are from. Giving a path for easy immigration that none of these people earned there will be even less [I]shit[/I] entry level jobs for young adults.

[QUOTE=Xystus234;46538649]This is my last post in SH ever so let me just say this: This has gotten way off topic, and I'm done being attacked personally. I apologize for offending anyone. My opinions are my opinions, and I figured that I could say whatever the hell I wanted. Serious warning to all: For anyone who views this, remember that there's real world consequences for saying whatever you want on the internet. Remember that before you post.[/QUOTE] Did someone figure out who you are or something? I'm legit concerned about how you phrased that last part.

[QUOTE=toaster468;46538642]If you are referring to the ACA, then you should know that healthcare is not mandatory for illegal migrants, only for their children. I am not sure how that last part relates to immigration. We already do this, what is your point exactly? I am not setting you up for a strawman. In fact that isn't even what a strawman is.[/QUOTE] I am referring to the ACA and my point was that Americans don't really seem to have a problem with people not having insurance. As for accepting more citizens, I feel that maybe, if they at least cut the time for the process in half to 6 years, it would be a tremendous step forward. Maybe even stagger it by age? ie: less time for a 6 year old to become a citizen then someone who's 40? There are so many ways that the system is flawed that its absurd.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;46538647]Please tell me where these handouts are so I can go get some? Thanks.[/QUOTE] You're only 19. lol. And if you didn't know it's easy as shit to get subsidized housing.

[QUOTE=X12321;46538664]For arguements sake, in my town fast-food jobs that were taken by college students and high school kids back in the 90's. Today it's almost exclusively run by adult Mexicans/Latinos wherever they are from. Giving a path for easy immigration that none of these people earned there will be even less [I]shit[/I] entry level jobs for young adults.[/QUOTE] If this is really your argument then I feel like you've already lost. That said, you don't really have any evidence this that this is a net loss for the country in the short term, do you? What about 5 years? 10? 20? 40? Kay. What you do have instead are people who pay taxes, work the jobs that need to get done (for pitiful pay might I add), and the biggest issue is that it means Americas have more competition? You're gonna have a difficult time explaining how that's the worst thing ever.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;46538675]I am referring to the ACA and my point was that Americans don't really seem to have a problem with people not having insurance. [/quote] Well it was an issue and now that is why we are making citizens buy insurance. Now the only people who don't pay for their ER visits are those who didn't buy insurance (and just pay the fine) or those who are here illegally and can't prove they are a resident in order to get healthcare and cost hospitals and doctors lots of money when they get sick or hurt. [quote] As for accepting more citizens, I feel that maybe, if they at least cut the time for the process in half to 6 years, it would be a tremendous step forward. Maybe even stagger it by age? ie: less time for a 6 year old to become a citizen then someone who's 40? There are so many ways that the system is flawed that its absurd.[/QUOTE] You are contradicting yourself, first you say that we should bring in intelligent people who will help our country, then you say that we should bring in more children than educated adults?

[QUOTE=X12321;46538681][b]You're only 19. lol.[/b] And if you didn't know it's easy as shit to get subsidized housing.[/QUOTE] Great argument? Okay so subsidized housing: is subsidized housing offered to US citizens? Yes. Do immigrants as a percentage use more subsidized housing than US citizens? [Citation Needed] Do immigrants as a percentage use subsidized housing longer than US citizens? [Citation Needed] Do immigrants as a percentage go on from this safety net to achieve more than US citizens and contribute more to society? [[url]http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/immigrants-children-smarter-family-cultural-tools-succeed-study/story?id=17284688][/url] Huh. [editline]20th November 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=toaster468;46538723]Well it was an issue and now that is why we are making citizens buy insurance. Now the only people who don't pay for their ER visits are those who didn't buy insurance (and just pay the fine) or those who are here illegally and can't prove they are a resident in order to get healthcare and cost hospitals and doctors lots of money when they get sick or hurt. [b]You are contradicting yourself, first you say that we should bring in intelligent people who will help our country, then you say that we should bring in more children than educated adults?[/b][/QUOTE] Children educated in the USA school system should in theory contribute more to US society over their life time than already developed adults from other countries, no? If this is not the case, then perhaps the US has greater systemic problems that cannot be blamed on immigrants and should be addressed first? I swear arguing about immigration is like trying to bail water out of the Titanic with a bucket.

I'm pretty much okay with this. As I understand it, this is basically deferring deportation for parents with US citizen children, and people who were brought to the US as children. Everyone else who isn't a criminal gets deemed a lower priority and aren't deported as often. So fucking what? People without proof of citizenship don't get to collect benefits. They aren't getting subsidized healthcare. They aren't getting jobs that American citizens are clamoring to do. At worst they're benign, and at best our economy actually depends on cheap, disposable, mobile labor that won't protest dangerous working conditions. Deporting them, at the end of the day, doesn't really accomplish anything except ruining people's lives.

[QUOTE=X12321;46538664]Giving a path for easy immigration that none of these people earned there will be even less [I]shit[/I] entry level jobs for young adults.[/QUOTE] Your argument would be great if that's what Obama was actually doing. Obama is dealing with the immigrants who are [B]already in the US[/B] and [B]already making productive contributions[/B], and who have legal-resident children here. The border didn't become any easier to get across because of this executive order.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;46538724] Children educated in the USA school system should in theory contribute more to US society over their life time than adults from other countries, no? If this is not the case, then perhaps the US has greater systemic problems that cannot be blamed on immigrants?[/QUOTE] Yes there is a systemic problem with the united states education system, but do you think letting in more children from other countries is going to fix the rampant under funding problem? This is contrary to letting in adults who are extremely qualified or professionals in their fields in at a higher priority who are going to start bringing money into the country almost immediately. I will even humor your suggestion, OK so under your system [I]generally[/I], children will come here from countries that are not as developed as America (that is how immigration works here usually). So you just expect a 6 year old to sign legal documents to grant him citizenship? That isn't how it works, the parents have to prove that they are good candidates for immigration status and their children come along with them. So not only do we have 1 child that will take decades to get a return on investment on, but we also have a whole family of people who are also coming too. [editline]20th November 2014[/editline] [quote]I swear arguing about immigration is like trying to bail water out of the Titanic with a bucket.[/quote] I am debating you because i want to see if you could actually find a better solution to the problem other than just opening the floodgates. If you had a solid argument then you wouldn't be feeling this way.

[QUOTE=toaster468;46538803]Yes there is a systemic problem with the united states education system, but do you think letting in more children from other countries is going to fix the rampant under funding problem? This is contrary to letting in adults who are extremely qualified or professionals in their fields in at a higher priority who are going to start bringing money into the country almost immediately. I will even humor your suggestion, OK so under your system [I]generally[/I], children will come here from countries that are not as developed as America (that is how immigration works here usually). So you just expect a 6 year old to sign legal documents to grant him citizenship? That isn't how it works, the parents have to prove that they are good candidates for immigration status and their children come along with them. So not only do we have 1 child that will take decades to get a return on investment on, but we also have a whole family of people who are also coming too. [editline]20th November 2014[/editline] [b]I am debating you because i want to see if you could actually find a better solution to the problem other than just opening the floodgates. If you had a solid argument then you wouldn't be feeling this way.[/b][/QUOTE] You genuinely believe that halving the time for the immigration processes would be opening the floodgates? First of all, I'm not even sure of how that would work, because if you have 50 people start the immigration processes at t=0, and it takes them 2 units of time to complete it, then after 20 years, 50 people will have immigrated into the country. Yet, somehow, if you have 50 people start the immigration process and it only takes them 1 unit of time to complete, after 20 years more than 50 people will have immigrated into the country? I'm not sure I follow. You could argue that decreasing that time would create an influx of applications... but would there be significantly more that are accepted? The flux of immigrants entering the country is not controlled by the latency. And I feel like you missed the entire point of my Titanic comment. It was not that we should/shouldn't open the floodgates. It was that the fact this even being serious discussed means that there aren't thousands of other things that would produce far more gains for the country than this issue, no matter which way it was decided/was the right way to decide.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;46538863]You genuinely believe that halving the time for the immigration processes would be opening the floodgates? First of all, I'm not even sure of how that would work, because if you have 50 people start the immigration processes at t=0, and it takes them 2 units of time to complete it, then after 20 years, 500 people will have immigrated into the country. Yet, somehow, if you have 50 people start the immigration process and it only takes them 1 unit of time to complete, after 20 years more than 50 people will have immigrated into the country? I'm not sure I follow. You could argue that decreasing that time would create an influx of applications... but would there be significantly more that are accepted?[/QUOTE] Ok, you didn't even bother to mention any of my real points. Ignoring that, you seem to forget that people can (and often are, as seen in the picture that YOU posted) denied. If you argue for a looser immigration system more people would come in.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;46537761]We always hate our immigrants until the new one comes along. The Irish, Italians, Asians, Middle-Easterners, and now Latino/Hispanics. Its history and it repeats itself[/QUOTE] Don't forget that at one point we hated the natives, too :v:

[QUOTE=toaster468;46538803]Yes there is a systemic problem with the united states education system, but do you think letting in more children from other countries is going to fix the rampant under funding problem?[/QUOTE] I feel that it is a wholly irrelevant point. The children are an investment in the future and will have a net positive impact on society as a whole over the next 50 years. If you would like government to not plan that far ahead then that's a different argument. [QUOTE=toaster468;46538803] This is contrary to letting in adults who are extremely qualified or professionals in their fields in at a higher priority who are going to start bringing money into the country almost immediately.[/QUOTE] I didn't realize that I had to write comprehensive immigration policy. You asked me to name any improvements and I did. I'm pretty sure it would be fairly trivial to balance "work experience" onto that graph and therefore give them citizenship sooner. However, children will become adults, so it seems fairly silly to spend money educating them and then not let them be citizens once they graduate high-school. [QUOTE=toaster468;46538803]I will even humor your suggestion, OK so under your system [I]generally[/I], children will come here from countries that are not as developed as America (that is how immigration works here usually). So you just expect a 6 year old to sign legal documents to grant him citizenship?[/quote] Really? This is basically the definition of a strawman argument. [QUOTE=toaster468;46538803] That isn't how it works, the parents have to prove that they are good candidates for immigration status and their children come along with them. So not only do we have 1 child that will take decades to get a return on investment on, but we also have a whole family of people who are also coming too. [/QUOTE] Never at any point did I argue that immigrants should not have to show that they are good candidates. But again, investing is not a terribly difficult concept and you're really going to have to explain to me how receiving fully educated adults, who's parent countries spent money to educate and keep healthy, and their children, who are ready to learn how to participate in society and demonstratively do better in school* than American children, can possibly be a bad thing. *[url]http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/immigrants-children-smarter-family-cultural-tools-succeed-study/story?id=17284688[/url] [editline]20th November 2014[/editline] Bad thing meaning net loss socially/economically.

[QUOTE=gk99;46538885]Don't forget that at one point we hated the natives, too :v:[/QUOTE] Oh no no, that's ongoing.

That's just 5 million people that are going to go get lawyers and get wellfare and disability from a system that's already strained that they never paid a fucking dime into.

[QUOTE=TheTalon;46539688]That's just 5 million people that are going to go get lawyers and get wellfare and disability from a system that's already strained that they never paid a fucking dime into.[/QUOTE] read the damn article dude

So can someone explain to non-American how is it a big deal and a cause for any outrage? As far as I understand, it only concerns people who pretty much weren't going to be deported anyway? And that they're offered a legal way to stay.

[QUOTE=gudman;46539976]So can someone explain to non-American how is it a big deal and a cause for any outrage? As far as I understand, it only concerns people who pretty much weren't going to be deported anyway? And that they're offered a legal way to stay.[/QUOTE] The US has one of the most liberal immigration systems in the world. And people still say "fuck the proper way of doing things, I'm just running across and hiding" and now we are going to support that behavior by saying "you did such a great job at hide and seek, we're letting you stay"

[QUOTE=gudman;46539976]So can someone explain to non-American how is it a big deal and a cause for any outrage? As far as I understand, it only concerns people who pretty much weren't going to be deported anyway? And that they're offered a legal way to stay.[/QUOTE] All that is offered is that for some people, they are offered a way to stay temporarily without fear of being deported, but they aren't getting a red carpet to stay here forever. In my family, we were kind of raised to despise illegal immigrants (and to a greater extend, Mexican immigrants) in one of those famous southern ways. And the idea that it's unfair to proper legal immigrants is just fuel for people to hate the idea that some people came out outside of the legal paths and now are being "rewarded" for it, for already being here for 5+ years or having a child here. (Called Anchor Babies by many)

[QUOTE=Flapadar;46537202]Fair enough, deport people who break the law[/QUOTE] ...Such as people who immigrate illegally and evade law enforcement to live here? I'm all for immigration reform but 'congrats on avoiding the police after breaking the law, you get to stay now' is not the right solution and it certainly won't encourage others to immigrate legally.

i find the people who say shit like this ^ have little to no experience with the immigration system in general ill give you a hint, you dont want to have an experience with the immigration system

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;46541235]i find the people who say shit like this ^ have little to no experience with the immigration system in general ill give you a hint, you dont want to have an experience with the immigration system[/QUOTE] So let's [i]fucking fix it[/i], not encourage more people to circumvent the system and turn it into some bizarre game of hide-and-seek where if you avoid getting deported for long enough you win the prize of amnesty.

[QUOTE=catbarf;46541258]So let's [i]fucking fix it[/i], not encourage more people to circumvent the system and turn it into some bizarre game of hide-and-seek where if you avoid getting deported for long enough you win the prize of amnesty.[/QUOTE] He gave Congress a chance to do that, and they deadlocked completely because of a bunch of knee-jerk reactions and refusals to let anything pass that benefits the other party. So now he's overstepping them and doing [i]something[/i] instead of just letting Congress continue to be Congress and do nothing productive.

[QUOTE=darunner;46540794]The US has one of the most liberal immigration systems in the world. And people still say "fuck the proper way of doing things, I'm just running across and hiding" and now we are going to support that behavior by saying "you did such a great job at hide and seek, we're letting you stay"[/QUOTE] What gives you the right to decide weather or not other people can live here? Why is your opinion worth more than theirs?

[QUOTE=catbarf;46541258]So let's [i]fucking fix it[/i], not encourage more people to circumvent the system and turn it into some bizarre game of hide-and-seek where if you avoid getting deported for long enough you win the prize of amnesty.[/QUOTE] Ok great, you've decided to ignore the problem of "there are 5 million illegal immigrants already here integrated deeply into our society" and instead decided to solve the problem of "should we fix the immigration system in this country". While also ignoring that many of the problems we face as a society are nearly entirely our fault. Maybe if Mexico wasn't a shithole there wouldn't be an illegal immigration problem. Why is Mexico a shit-hole? Well because their government is corrupt as fuck and the cartels make massive profits off of drugs. Oh, why do they make massive profits off of drugs? Because the USA decided in the 1960s that drugs are bad and therefore should be illegal, creating a massive black market for drugs, that has only grown as the drug war persisted and we doubled down deeper and deeper into the wrong decision, all the while our country is the cartel's biggest customer. But no, you're right, the [I]REAL [/I]problem is clearly that the border isn't secure and we're not deporting enough Mexicans.

[QUOTE=Lijitsu;46541991]He gave Congress a chance to do that, and they deadlocked completely because of a bunch of knee-jerk reactions and refusals to let anything pass that benefits the other party. So now he's overstepping them and doing [i]something[/i] instead of just letting Congress continue to be Congress and do nothing productive.[/QUOTE] I'd prefer an absence of productivity over counterproductivity, personally.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;46543469]I'd prefer an absence of productivity over counterproductivity, personally.[/QUOTE] Explain how this is counterproductive.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;46543469]I'd prefer an absence of productivity over [B]counterproductivity[/B], personally.[/QUOTE] [Citation Needed]

All of the arguing of this particular action aside, I think many can agree that this is somewhat of a temporary solution, the real solution would be to reform the broken immigration system. The problem? We have to go through congress. Thats why we made almost no progress on this issue, or just about any issue for the past many years.