Author Topic: Government Shutdown  (Read 5577 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #105 on: January 22, 2018, 10:25:43 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17794
  • Tommy Points: 1277
One side wants legalization for immigrants, the other wants a wall.

Like we have discussed here at work, why not just let the immigrants pay for the wall? Wouldn't that, in a way, is killing two birds with one stone?

If the wall costs $20 billion and there are 800,000 DACA recipients, thatís $25,000 each.
I have a better idea. How about we knock down the wall idea to some sort of a more reasonable  border control measure, and find a DACA solution that doesn't include a path to full citizenship for everyone and their families?
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #106 on: January 22, 2018, 10:27:31 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34868
  • Tommy Points: -27828
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #107 on: January 22, 2018, 10:30:47 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34868
  • Tommy Points: -27828
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
One side wants legalization for immigrants, the other wants a wall.

Like we have discussed here at work, why not just let the immigrants pay for the wall? Wouldn't that, in a way, is killing two birds with one stone?

If the wall costs $20 billion and there are 800,000 DACA recipients, thatís $25,000 each.

We're not talking about just DACA, we're talking all undocumented immigrants as a whole.

There's an estimated 11 million of them, according reports. Assuming 6 million of them pay a, say $1000 fine to get legal status (with restrictions of course), every 2-3 years, that would be at least $6 billion every three years, that would either pay for, if not, add to the funding of the wall.

And there's no way a wall could be built. Too expensive. That money, however, could be used for any other border security measure they can come up.

I think mass amnesty is a non-starter politically.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #108 on: January 22, 2018, 10:31:09 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17794
  • Tommy Points: 1277
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #109 on: January 22, 2018, 10:35:11 AM »

Offline Yoki_IsTheName

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10258
  • Tommy Points: 1180
  • I'm a Paul Heyman guy.
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.

There was a bipartisan bill, I believe in 2012, that has such restrictions where immigrants will not be eligible for some form of government benefits, like Social Security. That bill was killed in Congress IIRC.

They could easily just redo that and work some other things.
"The Boston Celtics are not a basketball team, they are a way of life."

- Red


Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #110 on: January 22, 2018, 10:40:52 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17794
  • Tommy Points: 1277
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.

There was a bipartisan bill, I believe in 2012, that has such restrictions where immigrants will not be eligible for some form of government benefits, like Social Security. That bill was killed in Congress IIRC.

They could easily just redo that and work some other things.
The devil is in the details, obviously. But I think we can agree there's enough middle ground there for a workable solution without too much hand-wringing, right?
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #111 on: January 22, 2018, 10:41:58 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34868
  • Tommy Points: -27828
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.

Yeah, Iím not a hard-liner. I think thereís a middle ground that includes legal status for some immigrants (including all current DACA), E-verify, limits on chain immigration and the lottery system with a move toward merit-based immigration

The wall doesnít strike me as a necessity, at least not along the entire border. If a wall is built, the cartels and traffickers will just build tunnels, etc..  It will slow things, but not end them.

And, increased cooperation with Mexico needs to be part of the solution.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #112 on: January 22, 2018, 10:42:42 AM »

Offline Yoki_IsTheName

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10258
  • Tommy Points: 1180
  • I'm a Paul Heyman guy.
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.

There was a bipartisan bill, I believe in 2012, that has such restrictions where immigrants will not be eligible for some form of government benefits, like Social Security. That bill was killed in Congress IIRC.

They could easily just redo that and work some other things.
The devil is in the details, obviously. But I think we can agree there's enough middle ground there for a workable solution without too much hand-wringing, right?

Yes, but I think this will never work because there are still some in both the Senate and Congress that are just against any form of "amnesty" in any way.
"The Boston Celtics are not a basketball team, they are a way of life."

- Red


Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #113 on: January 22, 2018, 11:51:07 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17794
  • Tommy Points: 1277
I agree. Mandatory E-verify should be part of any immigration compromise.

Iím curious: would you support an amnesty bill that granted conditional legal status to long-term immigrants, without a path to citizenship?  But, for those immigrants who have stayed out of trouble and who can support themselves, you take deportation completely off the table and give them a Tax ID number.
That's a tempting solution, but the million dollar question is what type of status are you giving those people, and what do you actually want to achieve with this measure.

I am not opposed to a solution that provides a path to citizenship for deferred action migrants, and a legal, non-citizen conditional status for their parents (or whoever brought them here). But what is that status taking off the table as compared to full citizenship?

I think it mitigates the argument that Dems just care about the issue due to vote, at least for a generation. It also doesnít reward people who cheated the process.
Fair enough. I am more concerned about paying into social security and other public programs, and having access to them. I think this is a workable solution. In another time, it wouldn't be taking so much posturing.

There was a bipartisan bill, I believe in 2012, that has such restrictions where immigrants will not be eligible for some form of government benefits, like Social Security. That bill was killed in Congress IIRC.

They could easily just redo that and work some other things.
The devil is in the details, obviously. But I think we can agree there's enough middle ground there for a workable solution without too much hand-wringing, right?

Yes, but I think this will never work because there are still some in both the Senate and Congress that are just against any form of "amnesty" in any way.
On any issue, I think, there will be some who oppose. But on such an eminently negotiable issue, shouldn't the many be able to prevail over the few?
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #114 on: January 22, 2018, 11:54:10 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18228
  • Tommy Points: 1964
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Rumblings that government will be reopened a little after noon with some kind of firm commitment to do an immigration deal before the CR expires.

Still doesn't fix the deeper problem of needing endless CRs to keep the lights on, but it's a start.

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #115 on: January 22, 2018, 12:27:38 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1228
  • Tommy Points: 43
I think I just saw something (please let me know if you did too)...Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) tried to pass a bill guaranteeing military pay and death benefits during the govít shutdown ó and GOP leader Mitch McConnell blocked it...

Thoughts?

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #116 on: January 22, 2018, 12:38:56 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18228
  • Tommy Points: 1964
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I think I just saw something (please let me know if you did too)...Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) tried to pass a bill guaranteeing military pay and death benefits during the govít shutdown ó and GOP leader Mitch McConnell blocked it...

Thoughts?

It's just political theater, Republicans did similar things in 2013. Propose a narrow bill just funding popular things, the other side shoots it down because it reduces their leverage, run to social media with it. I mean it helps show the insincerity of the "we just care so much about our troops!" line of attack but anyone who hasn't figured out that's just cynical messaging isn't going to be swayed by this kind of thing.

Also moot now because they're about to reopen and kick the can down the road to February.

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #117 on: January 23, 2018, 07:17:16 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15861
  • Tommy Points: 1019
The fact of the matter is that we need immigrants in this country.   But we have to clean up in that blantant side stepping of our immigration process.   I have little sympathy for someone that has lived here 20 years and did not apply or try for citizenship who is deported.   We are a nation of laws for a reason.

They need a solid fix to this problem.  So much for the backbone, I tried to tell people once the vote got on record, it could be weaponized politically.

Quote
I have a better idea. How about we knock down the wall idea to some sort of a more reasonable  border control measure, and find a DACA solution that doesn't include a path to full citizenship for everyone and their families?

Like say lawful permanent residency?  We have that already and people who stay five years after that can apply for citizenship.  I think this is a solid idea that is compassionate and is in the middle.

Quote
And, increased cooperation with Mexico needs to be part of the solution.

I don't think we will get this because of the amount of funds that get sent back to Mexico.

Quote
These annual "remittances" ó as they're called by analysts ó topped $69 billion in 2016, according to central bank data compiled in a new report by the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington, D.C.-based think-tank. The money has been a lifeline for the national economies of many countries in the region since at least the 1990s, when Manuel Orozco, a political scientist who authored the report, first began tracking remittances. They climbed steadily since then, only to plummet when the Great Recession hit the U.S. economy in 2008. But they began to rise again in 2012. The 2016 tally is the highest amount on record and an increase of nearly 8 percent over 2015.

About 40 percent of the money goes to just one country ó Mexico ó practically all of it sent by migrants in the United States. The recent surge is all the more notable because migration from Mexico has slowed to a crawl ó with the number of migrants in the U.S. increasing by just 1 percent between 2010 and 2016 to a total of 11.8 million. Also, says Orozco, the median amount that any given Mexican migrant sends hasn't changed ó about $300 at a go, 14 times a year, most commonly through a money transfer company such as Western Union.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/02/10/514172676/mexicans-in-the-u-s-are-sending-home-more-money-than-ever

it is a lot of money and they have no interest in stopping it.   I think all remittances should be taxed and use that money for border security.  Also, Pres. Trump, is not really beloved by Mexico and they might not work with them.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2018, 07:47:43 AM by Celtics4ever »

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #118 on: January 23, 2018, 09:44:41 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17794
  • Tommy Points: 1277
The fact of the matter is that we need immigrants in this country.   But we have to clean up in that blantant side stepping of our immigration process.   I have little sympathy for someone that has lived here 20 years and did not apply or try for citizenship who is deported.   We are a nation of laws for a reason.
Look. The immigration process is more complicated than this. Just because you've been here for 20 years doesn't mean you can just apply for citizenship. Heck, you can be in the country legally for many years and still have no legal way for obtaining citizenship.

Quote
I have a better idea. How about we knock down the wall idea to some sort of a more reasonable  border control measure, and find a DACA solution that doesn't include a path to full citizenship for everyone and their families?

Like say lawful permanent residency?  We have that already and people who stay five years after that can apply for citizenship.  I think this is a solid idea that is compassionate and is in the middle.
I'm aware of how the green card process works, but I don't think that people who crossed illegally and were of age at the time should be allowed to progress past permanent residency. And right now I'm not aware of the existence of a conditional green card that precludes you from applying for citizenship once the residency requirement is satisfied.


it is a lot of money and they have no interest in stopping it.   I think all remittances should be taxed and use that money for border security.  Also, Pres. Trump, is not really beloved by Mexico and they might not work with them.
I'm quite curious now. Do conservatives really believe in letting you keep (more of) the money you earned, or does it not apply when you come from Mexico?

If they want to fund border security, they should tax everyone for it.. I don't think anything else is fair.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Government Shutdown
« Reply #119 on: January 23, 2018, 10:00:46 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34868
  • Tommy Points: -27828
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
it is a lot of money and they have no interest in stopping it.   I think all remittances should be taxed and use that money for border security.  Also, Pres. Trump, is not really beloved by Mexico and they might not work with them.
I'm quite curious now. Do conservatives really believe in letting you keep (more of) the money you earned, or does it not apply when you come from Mexico?

If they want to fund border security, they should tax everyone for it.. I don't think anything else is fair.

I agree. If immigrants are working legally, tax them at the same rates as everyone else. What they do with their money is their business. Sending it to Mexico is no less legit than taking a vacation, going to a casino, buying a bigger TV, etc.

Double taxation - taxing them on their earnings, and then taxing them gain when they send their post-tax dollars abroad - seems wrong.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...