migrants, migrants, migrants. the more things change, the more they stay the same

Not really. They are allowed to enter by any manner they want if they claim asylum.

 

Yep. Yep. Yep. Because big government bureaucracies are not exactly fun for even the people not in your in-group. You want immigration to be an exercise in giant government bureaucracy picking and choosing on non-market criteria and then are surprised that people avoid it when possible.

 

They aren't. You are allowed to apply for asylum regardless of your entry manner.

 

Coming in and claiming asylum comes with some potential problems. For example, the government will detain you and could transport you to an area you don't want to go to. There are reasons why some immigrants might want to avoid this. Which is why, for some, they trailer might seem like a better option.

But if we gave immigrants a truly better option, by registering at immigration facilities along the border for a guest worker visa, they would take this option. Those who don't would be the ones either unlikely to pass a basic background check, or aren't coming just to look for work. These are the types we don't want here. Giving immigrants a better option to sift those out who we do want with those we don't would ultimately make the border more secure.

 

Sure, why not? You figure they are going to voluntarily go back if captured without trying to stay here?

 

Are you trying to be obtuse?
Resources to handle the influx of migrants. Why is NY mayor whining about having too many homeless migrants?Why is DC whining about having an too many homeless migrant?
Both claim they have a limited supply of resources and their homeless systems are being taxed, push to the limits. Two major cities cant handle a few bus loads of migrant workers but the boards cities are supposed to handle thousands and thousands to hundred thousands.
Again.. it’s a numbers issue. Southern boarder states, especially Texas are dealing with the majority of the influx. Many in in homeless shelters, eating from soup kitchens, taxing the system in the cities.
Again, a numbers problem.

 

If captured? You mean they only claim asylum once caught entering illegally, but if not caught… well away we go? So it’s not really asylum is it. It’s just a loophole excuse.

 

1954? Very relevant. Well done.

 

So most aren’t really seeking asylum. Whether our system is working at a efficient rate or not does not change the fact that they are trying to enter in an illegal manner. Many are crossing and not claiming asylum until captured. Do I think we need a revamped immigration policy… absolutely. So I think that excuses those trying to enter illegally. No.

 

Wait, you are telling me that migrants subject to a system set up and defended almost entirely in bad faith are not themselves acting in good faith?

 

Like I said, there are pros and cons from an immigrant's view with asylum. The pro is they can enter legally. The cons are they will be detained, could possibly be transported to an unknown location, and ultimately, their asylum case will likely be denied. Meaning the US government has a record of the immigrant in the system.

Entering with the help of a coyote is a misdemeanor offense. And if caught, you're subject to a more immediate removal from the country, with no legal way to enter. The pros of entering this way for the immigrant that if successful, there is no record of you being in this country.

There has to be, and is a better way. Allow both groups just coming here to look for work to register and come legally. No asylum claim needed. Just register, wait while a criminal background check is made, and if you pass, come in legally on a guest worker visa. Pay the visa and show you're gainfully employed, you can stay until the visa expires. When that happens, either return home or get on a citizenship track.

This was basically the Gang of 8 plan. Also the 2007 bipartisan plan. It's the best way to revamp our system, and decrease both the influx of asylum seekers plus those riding packed in the back of of a tractor-trailer. And allows the US to get the necessary labor from the immigrants our economy needs.

 

But the article he posted in the OP is strictly about apprehensions.

 

I seem to recall about five years ago you asserting that illegal immigration was no problem because we had reached a steady state. I think we’ve blown way past a steady state with the flux now heading north.

I will give you credit that you were at least trying to think of some kind of solution. I’m not entirely opposed to something like you’re proposing, although I think there would need to be limits on it. It strikes me as one of those solutions that seems great on paper but might be entirely unworkable in real life. Some issues that would have to be dealt with:

• Can anybody who wants one get a work permit? Does that mean anybody from anywhere in the world?
• How do you do background checks on someone from Belarus, or Nigeria, or Syria, or Guatemala?
• Is there a limit on the number of work permits we give out, or do we fill up the country with as many people as want to come here? If a limit, what about those who come here anyway illegally?
• Do people have to apply for the work permit before they get here or can they merely show up and apply for the work permit? Visitors from other countries need to get visas before they leave their home, but with the work permits they get handed out at the border?
• Immigration processing at airports is terrible enough as it is. The system would drastically increase the number of people arriving just to get the work permit.
• Where do the people hang out while the background check is being performed? Outside our country or inside our country? Do we have to put everybody up while their application for a work permit is being processed?
• You say they need to prove they get a job, but what if they cannot find a job? Do we deport them? What if after deportation they show up at the border and cross illegally?
• Are people allowed to bring their families with them when they get this work permit? Are taxpayers obligated to educate their children and provide healthcare, housing, and food?
• What happens when economy is in a downturn? Are you really going to uproot families and send them back home?
• If we send them home when the economy down, what do we do when they try to illegally cross the border to come back?

If anybody who wants to come here is allowed to come provided they pass the background check, and anyone who’s work permit is expired is allowed to stay on a citizenship path, then I don’t think it would take too many years before we double our population.

furthermore, I can’t see how any plan like this one can begin to work unless the border is secure.

 

There are more visa overstays practically every year than there are people crossing the southern border. A lot of those visa overstays are white people. I don’t recall any threads started by you about the people who overstay their visas.

 

I know that I am going to eventually block you because you consistently start threads or post on threads without saying anything of value. Why post when you are uninformed on the topic. In the instant case, asylum seekers who have been trying to enter the country cannot as a general rule get through legal ports of entry for lengthy periods of time, which forces them to stay near the ports of entry for lengthy periods of time in squalid and dangerous conditions. Most of these people are going to turn themselves in as soon as they illegally cross the border. The U. S. and Mexico could easily put into place procedures that would allow these people to legally cross the border, although that does not mean that they ultimately would be allowed to stay in the U.S.

 

If anything it’s gotten more racist since then