The mass deportation and militarization of the border are interesting to think about as a logical exercise. First, stationing troops internationally is expensive, but stationing them in the states shouldn't be as bad, and further, military bases often have an economic benefit for the area in which they are built. So if you station thousands of troops along the US border it may actually have an economic benefit for the areas where they are stationed. Second, although there are obviously a ton of reports that extol the economic benefits of immigrants in the US, there are probably arguments that can be made that comprehensive immigration reform that provides legal ways for working class people to enter the country while simultaneously removing illegals that are forced to exist outside of our normal social safety nets could have a net benefit on the country as a whole. In order to conduct a mass deportation, the US would have to invest probably tens of billions of dollars into immigration enforcement, which includes hiring hundreds of thousands of people to hunt down, process, and then transport illegal immigrants outside of the United States. This is where it gets complicated though - where do we deposit these people? Let's say you find 100 Mexican citizens - do you just take them to the border and say start walking? What about south americans? Does the US just put them on a plane and drop them in various south American countries? What if those countries say no? Then we talk about other costs, like detention centers - which would have to be MASSIVE. Now maybe this is an economic benefit? More jobs for corrections officers? More money made in the human imprisonment sector of the US economy? But given the scope of what we would need here - this is probably another HUGE cost that will fall on the US Government - feeding and detaining so many people. Then there are the cultural costs - which include citizens trying to report on each other, american citizens that their neighbors accuse of being illegals being forced to defend themselves in court, and on and on and on. In other words, while I think there may actually be some benefits to militarizing the border with mexico, i think the mass deportation plan would be one of the most expensive boondoggles in US history. We should instead focus on building a path to citizenship for the illegals already in the country, and then just from now on moving forward do a better job controling the borders and limiting illegal immigration while allowing pathways for both working class andthe best and brightest a clear and efficient path to move to the US if they wish. Just my 2 cents.
I really struggle to understand the mindset a against removing people who broke the law to come here and who are decimating cities and are receiving federal aid out the wazzoo
Are they really "decimating cities" and "receiving federal aid out the wazzoo" ? I'd like to hear more about that, please.
Proof undocumented immigrants are decimating cities and receiving benefits? As for troops on the border, it won't be cheap. Troops require infrastructure. Check out the area between Yuma and Lukeville, AZ. Nothing but desert with no infrastructure. But plenty of border.
Illegal immigrants murder 12 year old. https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/us/jocelyn-nungaray-killing-houston/index.html
Militarizing the border is stupid. What, just park a bunch of NG troops down there? Could you get more ham handed? How about, IDK, hiring more border patrol? Or, asking border patrol what they need and providing it? How about more substations and processing facilities? There are literally a million better ways to handle this than anything that's on the table now.
Yeah, but didn't they have to build a bunch of roads through that formerly unpassable territory to build the symbolic wall? You know, making it far more traversable?
follow the money...private prisons will make bank as the storehouse for all those arrested and detained Private prison stocks jump after Trump appoints immigration hardliner as 'border czar' Private prison stocks rose on Monday after President-elect Donald Trump selected immigration hardliner Tom Homan as his “border czar.” The Geo Group and CoreCivic jumped more than 4% and nearly 8%, respectively, in premarket trading. Homan served as the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement during Trump’s first term.
Trump names "border czar" and noticeably doesn't shy away from calling him the "border czar".... Trump announces Tom Homan as incoming border czar
a demographic block of 12 million or more souls will certainly include some who commit a crime. Did your cool (not) GIFs prevent you from understanding the actual question about "decimating cities?" (Vs. there being a murder somewhere. LOL)
If violent crime is your key to decimating cities, then citizens are far more guilty than immigrants. Nobody is saying all 11 million or so undocumented are perfect angels. The criminals and gang members should be punished them deported. But one-off stories does not equal decimation. Especially when citizens are committing crimes at much higher rates. And still waiting on all the benefits these immigrants receive.
I’m not like rooting for it one way or another at this point. Just thinking about it academically. So yeah expensive to build some of these bases but then again entire regions could benefit economically from the troops and personnel stationed there. It’s not allllllllll bad.
Migrants coming to New York City are being given prepaid debit cards that in certain cases, like food assistance, dwarf the amounts provided to families of legal status. For example, the average family of four's monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payment is $713, but migrant families of four receive $1,400 a month. Migrants' monthly payment in NYC is higher than veterans compensation Here is one article that discusses it.
Those migrants are legal asylum seekers. Not here illegally. As for child deaths, more are killed by citizens and guns than immigrants.
That is what you and most D's are not getting. The article is saying these people are receiving more aid than families of legal status. I would think someone who is a legal asylum seeker would be considered in the group of families of legal status.