Do you support California giving checks to illegals?

[Former President tack50]

Illegal immigrants, like the name implies, should not be in California or anywhere else in the US in the first place anyways, let alone receiving checks.

Of course, the real problem is not the illegal immigrants themselves but the fact that the US has illegal immigrants that have stayed in the country for years or even decades in the first place; and in some cases even have kids who are US citizens.

But that's a reason to introduce a path to citizenship and maybe ease up immigration laws, not to let people starve

Oh absolutely. As I said, the problem is that the illegal immigrants were not deported when the time for deportation was appropiate. The time to deport someone is as soon as they enter illegally or break the terms of their legal visa. It is better to deport a months old baby, than to deport said person 12 years later as a 12 year old. (alongside his or her parents of course, and assuming the parents are also illegal immigrants)

I certainly do support a path to citizenship for several categories of illegal immigrants; for example off the top of my head deporting the DACA people would be absolutely heartless; and so would deporting people who have spent more than a decade in the US, and in many cases have stable jobs. Deporting someone who arrived just a couple months ago and has no buisness being in the US is absolutely fine by me though.

Given that the economic situation due to the coronavirus is more than uncertain I'd put it on hold for now, but in general I would also support legal immigration reform, and given the low unemployment the US should have temporarily increased immigration during the Trump presidency tbh; though I would need to first see a cost analysis for this (on one hand it solves labour shortages but on the other those same labour shortages can increase the wages of American workers, which have been declining for a while now?)

[dw93]

If they work and don't have a felony on their record than sure. If none of that criteria is met, then no.

[Xing]

Yes, because they’re human beings who need to eat, and it’s not like they can go back to their home country right now or resolve their immigration situation. Overstaying a visa doesn’t warrant cruelty or a literal death sentence.

[RI]

If adult students and adult dependents don't qualify for checks (not to mention citizens above the income threshold), illegal immigrants certainly shouldn't qualify either.

More generally, I'm not a fan of the government giving cash incentives for illegal behavior and thus encouraging it.

You do realize that illegals are doing the work that no american citizen would ever want to do, the hard breaking work that nobody else wants to do, and where else they should go, back to Central America, where they will get killed by gang violence or their children will join the gangs. You want families seeking a better life to get killed in Central America, but they could be doing work in America, and contributing to the American economy.

"Work that no American citizen would ever want to do" is a tired and ridiculous argument. American workers willingly do far more onerous and back-breaking work than picking fruit or cleaning houses. The only reason Americans aren't willing to do those jobs is because equilibrium wages have been driven below the minimum wage and into an exploitative black market by excess labor supply propped up by officials who refuse to enforce their own laws for political reasons and by the firms we're refusing to regulate and hold to account. The complete answer would be to remove the illegal workforce, enforce employment and immigration laws, repeal the minimum wage and let a market equilibrium be restored, and then prop up take-home incomes for workers with an aggressive negative income tax if labor supply is viewed as insufficient.

The rest of your argument is equally ridiculous and hyperbolic. Living in Central America is not a death sentence.

Wait why would you need a NIT if the labor supply is insufficient? If you were gonna place one wouldn't it be in the opposite scenario? Just asking honestly here. Wouldn't an NIT during a period of low labour supply just distort the market even more by discouraging work?

Labor supply being insufficient suggests there aren't enough workers supplying labor at the market wage to meet some socially optimal value. In that case, an NIT would create separation between the wage firms pay and the wage workers receive, thus incentivizing workers to supply more labor without forcing firms to bare the cost as they do under a minimum wage.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Are they human beings living in the United States of America in the middle of a global pandemic and economic meltdown?

The answers to OP's question and to my question are both YES

[lfromnj]

Hmm maybe it should be given nationally but also the public charge rule should be enforced after?

[PSOL]

Hmm maybe it should be given nationally but also the public charge rule should be enforced after?

I prefer if it gets equalized with what we give naturalized residents and that we realize that these are times to come together as hominids.

[Catholics vs. Convicts]

If they pay taxes.

[lfromnj]

Hmm maybe it should be given nationally but also the public charge rule should be enforced after?

I prefer if it gets equalized with what we give naturalized residents and that we realize that these are times to come together as hominids.

So just give everyone in the world a 1000?

[Fight for Trump]

Illegal immigrants, like the name implies, should not be in California or anywhere else in the US in the first place anyways, let alone receiving checks.

More reason to switch to jus sanguinis.

[SWE]

I fully support treating some people who live in this country differently during a pandemic. I see no consequences that could come of this. Surely the virus will understand and respect our citizenship laws.

[Horus]

If they pay taxes.

Pretty much this.

[Dipper Josh]

A good chunk of those undocumented immigrants are the people that grow our food, so yes, yes I do. They should be getting $1,200 though.

Look, the fundamental reality is that these people pay federal and state taxes and account for an unignorable % of total consumers in the state, it would be suicidal to California’s economy to say only #reel Murrikkkans should get pandemic money.

[dead0man]

"lol"@ the red avatars that just know the illegals will turn to crime the second they're out of income....the bigotry of lowered expectations is an ugly, ugly thing

[America Needs R'hllor]

"lol"@ the red avatars that just know the illegals will turn to crime the second they're out of income....the bigotry of lowered expectations is an ugly, ugly thing

Wow I hope Gavin Newsome gives that strawman a check or it'll definitely turn to crime

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

"lol"@ the red avatars that just know the illegals will turn to crime the second they're out of income....the bigotry of lowered expectations is an ugly, ugly thing

well, you know what they say about civilization being three missed meals away from anarchy: any group of people denied basic needs will quickly lose their qualms, regardless of citizenship status.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Illegal immigrants, like the name implies, should not be in California or anywhere else in the US in the first place anyways, let alone receiving checks.

Of course, the real problem is not the illegal immigrants themselves but the fact that the US has illegal immigrants that have stayed in the country for years or even decades in the first place; and in some cases even have kids who are US citizens.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I'll be honest... yall have made good arguments for both positions so Im not sure at the moment. This actually is a very interesting policy discussion. I'll try and brainstorm some nuanced compromise policy that no one likes and then pick that answer.

[fhtagn]

Give them money on the condition that they go back where they came from once things calm down. If they accept the money and do not leave within a certain time period, round them up and put 'em on the first trip to their country of origin.

Then it would have my support. Otherwise, no. They don't deserve it.

[S019]

Yes, undocumented immigrants still live here, and many have lived here for a while. For all intents and purposes, they are de-facto Americans and should be treated as such, and not as second-class citizens. Also many undocumented workers work in low-paying jobs and this could be an added lifeline for those workers.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If adult students and adult dependents don't qualify for checks (not to mention citizens above the income threshold), illegal immigrants certainly shouldn't qualify either.

More generally, I'm not a fan of the government giving cash incentives for illegal behavior and thus encouraging it.

And these factors outweigh our duty to save our fellow man from starvation and misery? Is this really the kind of Christian you want to be, RI?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

No, they aren’t citizens and need to return to country of origin

[Intell]

I have changed my opinion of this slightly, in that they should be given money during the corona crisis and then they should be kicked out of the country (unless they have family or were raised here).

[PSOL]

I have changed my opinion of this slightly, in that they should be given money during the corona crisis and then they should be kicked out of the country (unless they have family or were raised here).

And if they are sick with the pandemic? I’m not positive that instigating a sizeable movement occurs people across borders at this time is an action worth conducting now, no?

[Intell]

I have changed my opinion of this slightly, in that they should be given money during the corona crisis and then they should be kicked out of the country (unless they have family or were raised here).

And if they are sick with the pandemic? I’m not positive that instigating a sizeable movement occurs people across borders at this time is an action worth conducting now, no?

Then they should get healthcare.