Donald Trump Goes All In On Slashing Legal Immigration

[Kamala]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

[Fight for Trump]

Unskilled? Unskilled?

You do realize that most legal immigrants are skilled, right?

No, they're not. Most come on unskilled family visas. The primary skilled immigrant visas are EB-1 (very rare, for people like pro athletes, models, etc.), EB-2 and EB-3, which are subject to strict nationality quotas, have much lower quotas in general than family-based immigrant visas, and generally only sponsor people who are already living in the US under guest worker status like L-1. The other common way of immigration to enter the US is via marriage, which is also an unskilled route.

I'm a twice-immigrant. My parents are thrice-immigrants. Family-based immigration beyond spouse and minor children is the worst possible type of immigration. Citizenship is the greatest gift a parent can pass to a child, and devaluing that gift is extremely offensive.

[Famous Mortimer]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

You really can't tell the difference between today and the 19th century? There is no sparsely populated western lands in need of settlers, there are no newly opened factories desperate for workers. We are entering an age where automation will do away with more and more forms of labor, and we'll struggle to find employment for our own citizens, so there is no need to continue to bring in large numbers of unskilled immigrants anymore. Different times call for different policies. And a poem written on a statue is not a part of the Constitution or US law.

Unskilled? Unskilled?

You do realize that most legal immigrants are skilled, right? Such as my dad, or Kamala's parents. And these skilled immigrants play important roles at universities and the private sector.

But it doesn't matter.

Nothing will change your (or Mortimer's) mind.

Nothing will change your preconceived notion that the standard immigrant is some lazy welfare mooch or secret terrorist.

Nothing will change your opinion that the Chinese Exclusion Act or the anti-immigrant acts of the 1920s were the best thing before and after sliced bread.

And nothing will disabuse you of the notion that me or Kamala are anything but scum just because of our immigrant backgrounds.

My position is we should bring in skilled immigrants to fill a skills shortage. There are numerous examples of companies abusing the h1b visa system to replace a qualified US citizen with a cheaper foreign worker who is then tied to the company. And you are so full of it to claim that immigrants from latin america are mostly skilled workers.

To be fair, "skilled" is a pretty subjective term. I think the more important thing is, immigrants from Latin America aren't doing anything native born Americans (which includes many many non-White native born Americans) couldn't also do.

[Unapologetic Chinaperson]

You have literally been unable to refute any economics based argument against immigration that anyone in this thread has made.

What economics based arguments? All I see are spurious correlations between income inequality and immigration levels and the lump-of-labor fallacy being thrown around.

It's not like economics is your principal reason anyways.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Am I wrong?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why do you think it's a good idea to make America more white?

[Jeffster]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

If you increase the labor supply, you drive down wages for workers, while increasing profits for owners.

[Famous Mortimer]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

Immigrants, with their willingness to work for lower wages, absolutely make the rich richer. Lower wages mean more profits for the boss.

Immigrants are used like scab labor, only instead of busting unions, they prevent unions from ever being formed in the first place.

[heatcharger]

I think the more important thing is, immigrants from Latin America aren't doing anything native born Americans (which includes many many non-White native born Americans) couldn't also do.

This is absolutely untrue. Just the other day, some Hispanic immigrant family came to my door offering to pull weeds and trim bushes on our lawn. No one in my family, which happens to be white, wanted to do it, and it was for a fair price, so we doled out the money. What does that say about American work ethic? Very lazy!

[Kamala]

Yep, it's the immigrants destroying labor unions, not right to work laws.

Yep, it's the immigrants who are fighting against raising (and previously, establishing) the minimum wage, not the rich.

Yep, it's easy, real easy, to blame immigrants for everything.
First you break them down into the "other."
Then you dehumanize them.
Then you just dump your problems on the "scary brown invaders," ruining our country's racial purity.

It was all so blissful before the hordes arrived, right?

[Jeffster]

I think the more important thing is, immigrants from Latin America aren't doing anything native born Americans (which includes many many non-White native born Americans) couldn't also do.

This is absolutely untrue. Just the other day, some Hispanic immigrant family came to my door offering to pull weeds and trim bushes on our lawn. No one in my white family wanted to do it, and it was for a fair price, so we doled out the money. What does that say about American work ethic? Very lazy!

It says your family is a bunch of privileged pieces of crap that want use desperately poor people to do your dirty work for low wages. If it was such a "fair wage" then why didn't anyone in your household agree to do it for that price?

[Jeffster]

Yep, it's the immigrants destroying labor unions, not right to work laws.

Yep, it's the immigrants who are fighting against raising (and previously, establishing) the minimum wage, not the rich.

Yep, it's easy, real easy, to blame immigrants for everything.
First you break them down into the "other."
Then you dehumanize them.
Then you just dump your problems on the "scary brown invaders," ruining our country's racial purity.

It was all so blissful before the hordes arrived, right?

You guys claim to want to raise the minimum wage or make it easier to form unions, then you look the other way as employers hire illegal labor at sub-minimum wages and without labor protections from a union. Then you guys will cry about how things like vegetables will be too expensive if we don't use a permanent underclass of exploited labor to pick them for us. That sounds dehumanizing to me.

[Fight for Trump]

I think the more important thing is, immigrants from Latin America aren't doing anything native born Americans (which includes many many non-White native born Americans) couldn't also do.

This is absolutely untrue. Just the other day, some Hispanic immigrant family came to my door offering to pull weeds and trim bushes on our lawn. No one in my white family wanted to do it, and it was for a fair price, so we doled out the money. What does that say about American work ethic? Very lazy!

It says your family is a bunch of privileged pieces of crap that want use desperately poor people to do your dirty work for low wages. If it was such a "fair wage" then why didn't anyone in your household agree to do it for that price?

There's nothing wrong with paying people to do your dirty work, lol. That's how a market economy works. I pay to get my house cleaned and laundry done.

[Anna Komnene]

It's interesting how immigrants are apparently responsible for killing so many jobs across the country, when in the vast majority of states there aren't even that many of them as a share of population.  There are so many imaginary immigrants stealing all of the jobs of hard working Alabamans.

States like California, New York, New Jersey, and Florida have massively more immigrants than most other states, so you'd think if the anti-immigrant arguments were true, living in those states would be like living in a third world country. It isn't.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Most American immigration is charity. Full stop.

The immigrants get richer. The people already here get poorer.

If these immigrants are such a boon to the economy, why did they have to immigrate in the first place? Why are their countries of origin so poor?

Why does coming to America suddenly make them so profitable?

The answer is, it doesn't. They simply get richer because when they come here and have children, they qualify for benefits paid for by the American tax payer.

It should not be an imperative that US taxpayers have to continue giving out charity like this.

Surprisingly, immigrants also pay taxes. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp, but nonwhites are also people, and they pay taxes. Meaning they also qualify for benefits.

Many pay no federal income tax because of a combination of low wages and the child tax credit. Such people take more in benefits than they pay.

You obviously don't realize it, but immigrants by and large pay higher taxes on the same income than non-immigrants do. Quite a few of the various credits, including the child tax credit, require citizenship, not just legal residency, to claim.

[Famous Mortimer]

You have literally been unable to refute any economics based argument against immigration that anyone in this thread has made.

What economics based arguments? All I see are spurious correlations between income inequality and immigration levels and the lump-of-labor fallacy being thrown around.

It's not like economics is your principal reason anyways.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Am I wrong?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why do you think it's a good idea to make America more white?

I haven't called to make America more White.

Even if America had a 100% moratorium on all immigration (which is what I want), it would likely continue to become less White because of higher non-White birthrates.

I don't have a problem with America being less White. I have a problem with taking in millions of poor people.

Adding more poor people to a country makes the country poorer. This also also true of White immigration to White countries. Like UK wages are stagnated because of immigration from Poland.

Again, I have said I do not favor a race based immigration system. I do not favor deporting anyone who is already a citizen.

No, my main reason for opposing immigration IS economic. I can't prove it though.

[Unapologetic Chinaperson]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

If you increase the labor supply, you drive down wages for workers, while increasing profits for owners.

Immigrants also expand the consumer base, stimulating demand, and thus helps grow the economy. To neglect this aspect would be to commit the lump-of-labor fallacy.

[Daniel909012]

It is not racism only to be qualified, a curious fact is that 80% of those who approve the Canadian system are whites especially Poland and Ukraine

[Fight for Trump]

You obviously don't realize it, but immigrants by and large pay higher taxes on the same income than non-immigrants do. Quite a few of the various credits, including the child tax credit, require citizenship, not just legal residency, to claim.

Actually, that is not true. Resident aliens (i.e. green card holders, i.e. legal immigrants) can claim the Child Tax Credit and other tax credits and benefits reserved for Americans. By the US government's legal definition of the term "immigrant", only people with green cards are immigrant aliens. All other foreigners are non-resident aliens.

When we talk about legal immigrants here, we should make sure to talk about only resident aliens, not non-resident aliens. Non-resident aliens are, legally speaking, just visitors.

[Famous Mortimer]

It's interesting how immigrants are apparently responsible for killing so many jobs across the country, when in the vast majority of states there aren't even that many of them as a share of population.  There are so many imaginary immigrants stealing all of the jobs of hard working Alabamans.

States like California, New York, New Jersey, and Florida have massively more immigrants than most other states, so you'd think if the anti-immigrant arguments were true, living in those states would be like living in a third world country. It isn't.

Have you ever been to New York City? It actually does look like a third world country. Most of the jobs outside the financial district are low paying service industry jobs, many of which don't even pay minimum wage because of small business exemptions.

[Jeffster]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

If you increase the labor supply, you drive down wages for workers, while increasing profits for owners.

Immigrants also expand the consumer base, stimulating demand, and thus helps grow the economy. To neglect this aspect would be to commit the lump-of-labor fallacy.

Spoken like a true supply-sider. Why don't you just change your avatar to Ronnie Reagan blue?

[Famous Mortimer]

This thread is really rich in how the children, or grandchildren, or great-grandchildren of immigrants are believing that all of the sudden these new immigrants are a burden and a strain on the economy.

Really interesting, isn't it? Must've been nice that your relatives had immigrated fifty, or one hundred, or two hundred years ago. They were real hard workers, way different from the lazy moochers coming in today, right?

Oh, I know the difference! It's the color of their skin, isn't it?

100 years ago immigrants weren't mooching because we didn't have any social programs to mooch off. That's the difference.

Social programs were created in the 30s after we mostly stopped taking in new immigrants.

We took in a lot of new immigrants after Hart-Celler was passed, and by that time we had the Great Society social programs. What makes today's immigrants so much more of an existential threat to white supremacist losers like you than the immigrants fifty years ago?

Immigrants today aren't more damaging to the economy than immigrants 50 years ago. Immigrants 50 years ago were just as damaging. That's why the real value of wages has been going down and wealth inequality has been going up continuously since 1965.

Hart-Celler was good in some ways, that it ended preferential treatment based on race. It was mostly harmful though because it totally blew the doors to immigration wide open. Most of the people we have taken in since then have been poor (obviously, if you're already rich in your own country, you have less reason to move) and thus a net drain on the economy.

Okay, so now immigrants are the sole reason real wages have dropped, they're the cause of wealth inequality. What else do we want to blame on the bogeyman of "scary foreigners"?

The last time we had inequality this high was during the gilded age when the immigrant share of the population was also this high.

This is beyond the deep end of stupidity. You are blaming poor and middle class immigrants for the wealth accumulation of the rich?

I have no love for political cartoons, but this might help you understand.
 

If you increase the labor supply, you drive down wages for workers, while increasing profits for owners.

Immigrants also expand the consumer base, stimulating demand, and thus helps grow the economy. To neglect this aspect would be to commit the lump-of-labor fallacy.

Why aren't India, Bangladesh, and Brazil the richest countries on Earth? Why do people have to immigrate in the first place? As I said before, if Latin American immigrants are so good for the economy, why aren't they good for the economies in their home countries?

[Kamala]

Yep, it's the immigrants destroying labor unions, not right to work laws.

Yep, it's the immigrants who are fighting against raising (and previously, establishing) the minimum wage, not the rich.

Yep, it's easy, real easy, to blame immigrants for everything.
First you break them down into the "other."
Then you dehumanize them.
Then you just dump your problems on the "scary brown invaders," ruining our country's racial purity.

It was all so blissful before the hordes arrived, right?

You guys claim to want to raise the minimum wage or make it easier to form unions, then you look the other way as employers hire illegal labor at sub-minimum wages and without labor protections from a union. Then you guys will cry about how things like vegetables will be too expensive if we don't use a permanent underclass of exploited labor to pick them for us. That sounds dehumanizing to me.

Don't you even try to make it seem like you care about undocumented workers. This is your strategy at work: try to divide people, make them work against each rather than against people like you.

You benefit from immigrants, documented and undocumented. Yet from your ivory tower you deride those beneath you.

You are the bottom of the barrel of the human gene pool. Disgusting, exploitive, ridiculous. You yourself, unless you're a Native American,  are a descendant of immigrants but you spit upon anyone who is making the same process as your family had. You were lucky enough to have ancestors who were born at the right time, had the right resources, and were of the right race. You have no standing, moral or economic, to claim that these new immigrants are worse than the people who were born in the United States. Your relatives destroyed not just the economy of the Native Americans, you destroyed their civilization.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If they increase the number of immigrants accepted and scrap the english requirement, I could see this legislation passing.

We want to make sure our immigrants are net positives and not net negatives on our nation's finances.

A merit system with less hoops to jump through, an overhaul of the green card "lottery", a focus on skills and the families of those already here, e-verify and an increase in persons accepted would have my full support

Amen. Going to a more merit based system is good, but cutting the number of legal immigrants is not.

[Fight for Trump]

The diversity lottery is actually one of the most innovative and interesting immigration programs and I fully support keeping it.

[heatcharger]

I think the more important thing is, immigrants from Latin America aren't doing anything native born Americans (which includes many many non-White native born Americans) couldn't also do.

This is absolutely untrue. Just the other day, some Hispanic immigrant family came to my door offering to pull weeds and trim bushes on our lawn. No one in my white family wanted to do it, and it was for a fair price, so we doled out the money. What does that say about American work ethic? Very lazy!

It says your family is a bunch of privileged pieces of crap that want use desperately poor people to do your dirty work for low wages. If it was such a "fair wage" then why didn't anyone in your household agree to do it for that price?

There's nothing wrong with paying people to do your dirty work, lol. That's how a market economy works. I pay to get my house cleaned and laundry done.

Probably the most I've been in agreement with Santander ever lol. I'm sure Real Americans know that keeping a well-maintained house is required by many HOAs, which ultimately is to keep real estate values high. If it requires some dirty work to be done by people of lower class, so be it. They're the ones offering.

[Jeffster]

Yep, it's the immigrants destroying labor unions, not right to work laws.

Yep, it's the immigrants who are fighting against raising (and previously, establishing) the minimum wage, not the rich.

Yep, it's easy, real easy, to blame immigrants for everything.
First you break them down into the "other."
Then you dehumanize them.
Then you just dump your problems on the "scary brown invaders," ruining our country's racial purity.

It was all so blissful before the hordes arrived, right?

You guys claim to want to raise the minimum wage or make it easier to form unions, then you look the other way as employers hire illegal labor at sub-minimum wages and without labor protections from a union. Then you guys will cry about how things like vegetables will be too expensive if we don't use a permanent underclass of exploited labor to pick them for us. That sounds dehumanizing to me.

Don't you even try to make it seem like you care about undocumented workers. This is your strategy at work: try to divide people, make them work against each rather than against people like you.

You benefit from immigrants, documented and undocumented. Yet from your ivory tower you deride those beneath you.

You are the bottom of the barrel of the human gene pool. Disgusting, exploitive, ridiculous. You yourself, unless you're a Native American,  are a descendant of immigrants but you spit upon anyone who is making the same process as your family had. You were lucky enough to have ancestors who were born at the right time, had the right resources, and were of the right race. You have no standing, moral or economic, to claim that these new immigrants are worse than the people who were born in the United States. Your relatives destroyed not just the economy of the Native Americans, you destroyed their civilization.

You don't know me, and in fact you don't know sh!t. Everything you said is dead wrong.