We should embrace the death of Democracy

[huckelberry]

So you voted to mass deport your coworkers. Pretty cool.

Or you can address what Newsweek wrote Gad? Are you able to address that?

I doubt if you can remotely grasp what is going on here in California, and understand the impact of illegal immigration. But, if it is not addressed, and hard discissions made, it is coming your way, then you will get it. If you think these folks care about me, you, or our country, you are are extremely ignorant. Look at our streets and parks...etc.

Where do you live Gad? How many illegal immigrants living off the system live in your neighborhood?

I voted to get immigration under control. To fight against the cartel and their presence from "my" neighborhood and streets. One high ranking cartel member was arrested a few days ago about 30 minutes from my home...it is everywhere. The city I grew up in, a Mormon colony, was in the 70's, in the top ten best places to live in in the US...today...this is it, and illegal immigration is a huge part of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc3AQk7lgTA Note the Star Dust roller rink was about 5 blocks from my house and the first place I held a girls hand. It is a junkie's paradise these days. I would love for you to come here and let me give you a tour.

You have no idea what is going on here, or you just don't care. But yes, if my co-workers are here illegally they need to go home and do things right...why am I wrong? Should we just have open borders?

https://abc7ny.com/post/cristian-fernan ... /15573241/

Markk, I watched your San Bernadino review. It certainly shows serious problems. At least what is visible appear to be the results of jobs leaving an area, workers moving away, drug addicts, homeless folks moving in, and the high cost of housing elsewhere. These are serious and corrosive problems.

I live in the Pacific Northwest where the hispanic population has grown quite significantly. I do not see the sort of thing you are showing up here. People work. Addiction and homelessness are not unknown, of course. Perhaps the problem of winter inclines homeless addicts to drift south where one can be homeless in January.

[canpakes]

CP wrote...1. Given that illegals make up a certain percentage of your work force, would you prefer that an alternative would be made available by the incoming Administration that streamlined or fast- tracked the citizenship process for employed non-citizens?

No not now. When and if we get everything under control and have the means to manage it sure, but not so much fast tracked. It is in my opinion a privilege not a right.

CP wrote 2. Would you consider penalties levied against employers who hire illegals to be a fair consequence of having hired them?

Absolutely.

Many employers would rather not hire them, at least in construction. The problem is if they don't, they would never win a bid in that everybody does it. It is a vicious reality. And a reality of it is that skilled labor is almost impossible to find these days on privately funded projects, and when you do find them, you can't keep them in that the projects can't afford their wages because of underbidding using a lower class of "skilled" labor that will work for less. And in the end profits are down because or re-work and lack of productivity.

It gets even more complicated with government contracting and prevailing wages.

Thanks for that straightforward response.

Why would you think you might trap me? I have nothing to hide.

I didn’t think that. In the prior post I’m stating that I’m asking for your opinion out of curiosity as to how you think through the mass deportation strategy or any alternatives, as opposed to looking to maneuver you into some kind of argument.

Where did you live in CA and what years?

South end of Orange County, and it has been a while since. Between then and today, also spent time in the Phoenix AZ area, so I’m no stranger to populations with large numbers of suspected non-citizens. Regarding that, during my university days, I worked for one landscape design+installation company where I occasionally assisted with new hire paperwork. As you are probably already aware, it’s actually crazy easy to determine which SS cards are fake, but at the employer level we were not empowered to reject candidates based on that criteria - we would still submit paperwork and await those new hires to be flagged, if they didn’t have official docs. Interestingly, all of those flagged folks inevitably turned out to be the hardest workers. Attempts to hire local pale citizens or college kids (you get my drift) were always disastrous as they were just not up for the task.

You’re mentioning homelessness in your responses above, too. Homelessness was an issue during my CA days. I’m sure that it’s worse now, but CA is the most temperate state in the country, so it’s the easiest to survive through the seasons, which contributes to some extent to that high homeless population. I know at least one person who gave that weather as their reason for heading out to CA when they were in a homeless situation. That’s obviously just a single anecdote but I don’t think that they were the first person to conclude that reasoning.

This was also the case for AZ/Phoenix area. Sure, the heat in AZ can be brutal but it’s still easier to stay alive under a shade structure at 115 degrees than to do so when it’s 15 degrees. So, solid red states don’t necessarily escape the homeless issue.

Folks love to point at CA as if it has unique system failures but the problems driving homelessness are pretty much country-wide at this point.

Even with their overlap, immigration and homelessness do seem to be more separate than same, so I’m not sure why you are moving freely between the two in this thread. But I’ve been playing catch-up and may have missed an earlier tie-in.

[canpakes]

What's this term's "wall" grift going to be? A mass holding facility in Texas?

OK, then. Steve Bannon is on it.

[Markk]

Markk, i watched your San Bernadino review. It certainly shows serious problems. At least what is visible appear to be the results of jobs leaving an area, workers moving away, drug addicts, homeless folks moving in, and the high cost of housing elsewhere. These are serious and corrosive problems.

I live in the Pacific Northwest where the hispanic population has grown quite significantly. I do not see the sort of thing you are showing up here. People work. Addiction and homelessness are not unknown, of course. Perhaps the problem of winter inclines homeless addicts to drift south where one can be homeless in January.

It is not just San Bernardino, it is a large portion of SC. We (SC) is basically a border town, one can get to TJ from LA in a few hours.

You are correct that jobs lost was a huge part of the downfall of SB. They closed Norton Air Force Base, Kaiser Steel, and Santa Fe Railroad all within a few years. It did not just effect SB, but the whole of the Inland Empire (The IE). Homeowners started moving out and rented their homes.

It is moving your way for sure, and we see it in the news how other states and cities are starting to see and are scrabbling to deal with it. How would your area be impacted with a million new folks moving in, in the next few years, all looking for a place to live and work....? It is what So Ca and other border states are dealing with.

[canpakes]

CP wrote...1. Given that illegals make up a certain percentage of your work force, would you prefer that an alternative would be made available by the incoming Administration that streamlined or fast- tracked the citizenship process for employed non-citizens?

No not now. When and if we get everything under control and have the means to manage it sure, but not so much fast tracked. It is in my opinion a privilege not a right.

I have another question about this part.

From what I understand, the path to citizenship requires about 6 - 11 years, with the first portion of the process being a requirement to have been a Lawful Permanent Resident (‘green card’ holder) for at least 5 years. For citizens of Mexico, the average wait time as a LPR ends up being 10.4 years.

A border crosser can apply for a green card using, as example, the following methods:

- sponsorship by a family member or U.S. employer;
- refugee or asylee status or other humanitarian programs;
- individual filing

Requesting asylum seems to be the most-often used reason given for coming across the border. As our ‘system’ is overloaded, asylees are assigned a court date that may be more than a year out, but can then be released to a sponsor.

(Dr. Exiled, if you’re seeing this, please feel free to make corrections as needed; you’re the resident expert.)

Technically, anyone processed in this manner is not ‘illegal’ until they miss their court date. One way around this problem would be to vastly increase the number of immigration court judges available to hear cases. If doing so allowed border crossers to either (1) achieve legit asylee status or (2) to be rejected & returned, would you have objections to that approach, assuming most would be granted asylum?

It seems that this would be a much more economically beneficial and productive approach, with the bonus of costing exponentially less than trying to round up and mass deport thousands of people.

[Moksha]

Trump's failure to submit the required ethics pledge, stating that he will avoid conflicts of interest, has also meant that he has not disclosed who is funding his transition process. Newsweek has contacted the Trump transition team for comment via email.

In a post on X, formerly Twitter, the Republicans Against Trump group called the president-elect the "most corrupt president in American history" while sharing a Sunday New York Times headline stating that his transition team is being run on "secret money."

"Trump has yet to sign the ethics agreement required for the presidential transition, allowing him to raise unlimited amounts of money from unknown donors to pay for the staff, travel, and office space involved in preparing to take over the government," the group wrote.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 2dfc&ei=24

[Dr Exiled]

No not now. When and if we get everything under control and have the means to manage it sure, but not so much fast tracked. It is in my opinion a privilege not a right.

I have another question about this part.

From what I understand, the path to citizenship requires about 6 - 11 years, with the first portion of the process being a requirement to have been a Lawful Permanent Resident (‘green card’ holder) for at least 5 years. For citizens of Mexico, the average wait time as a LPR ends up being 10.4 years.

A border crosser can apply for a green card using, as example, the following methods:

- sponsorship by a family member or U.S. employer;
- refugee or asylee status or other humanitarian programs;
- individual filing

Requesting asylum seems to be the most-often used reason given for coming across the border. As our ‘system’ is overloaded, asylees are assigned a court date that may be more than a year out, but can then be released to a sponsor.

(Dr. Exiled, if you’re seeing this, please feel free to make corrections as needed; you’re the resident expert.)

Technically, anyone processed in this manner is not ‘illegal’ until they miss their court date. One way around this problem would be to vastly increase the number of immigration court judges available to hear cases. If doing so allowed border crossers to either (1) achieve legit asylee status or (2) to be rejected & returned, would you have objections to that approach, assuming most would be granted asylum?

It seems that this would be a much more economically beneficial and productive approach, with the bonus of costing exponentially less than trying to round up and mass deport thousands of people.

First of all, I wouldn't consider myself an expert in immigration, yet. I've done a few cases over the years and am seriously looking into taking on more. So, talk to me in a couple of years and I can give more light on the subject. The last time I looked into it and advertised, my phone wouldn't stop ringing, but it was from frustrated people that had been waiting 10, 15, and 20 years to get their number called. Most immigrants I've come across are from Mexico and the US only allows so many in each year. So, a lot spend their time waiting. Some spend a lifetime waiting (if they are on the lower end of the preferred categories). USCIS publishes a bulletin based on when the original petition was filed. Take a look, the waiting times are crazy:

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel ... -2024.html

Translating the above chart, a brother/sister from Mexico, waiting to get the chance to get a green card using their resident brother/sister as the applicant is around 23 years and 6 months. These were the people that were calling me asking if there was a way around the waiting. Having your brother/sister apply for you is the worst category. The above bulletin says its about a two year wait to apply for a green card for your mexican bride or husband.

At the time, I was so busy with bankruptcy filings that I simply didn't have the time to sift through the calls. So, I limited my cases to helping people with issues in getting their citizenship after they got their green card.

Asylum is a different matter and it has deportation proceedings as a companion usually. I haven't done those petitions yet, but, that's where I am looking to start taking on cases. Asylum isn't an easy petition to have granted. Only about 37% were granted under Biden and it'll probably go down. Some immigration judges don't grant them at all. Anyway, in order to have a petition granted, one must show that there is a credible case of persecution or fear of persecution due to race, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. It is highly subjective and is why there are different rates of approvals depending on the judge. In Las Vegas, the judges tend to grant more petitions, except for one outlier judge. See https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/judgereports/

Getting more judges would speed things up for asylum petitions, for good or bad depending on your point of view, to answer your question. However the wait times for green card processing would need an act of congress to increase the numbers allowed in the country per year and I don't see that happening any time soon.

[canpakes]

First of all, I wouldn't consider myself an expert in immigration, yet.

No worries. But, based on that thoroughly informative post, I will switch to referring to you as “our resident most-expert resident non-expert”.
: )

[Markk]

No not now. When and if we get everything under control and have the means to manage it sure, but not so much fast tracked. It is in my opinion a privilege not a right.

I have another question about this part.

From what I understand, the path to citizenship requires about 6 - 11 years, with the first portion of the process being a requirement to have been a Lawful Permanent Resident (‘green card’ holder) for at least 5 years. For citizens of Mexico, the average wait time as a LPR ends up being 10.4 years.

A border crosser can apply for a green card using, as example, the following methods:

- sponsorship by a family member or U.S. employer;
- refugee or asylee status or other humanitarian programs;
- individual filing

Requesting asylum seems to be the most-often used reason given for coming across the border. As our ‘system’ is overloaded, asylees are assigned a court date that may be more than a year out, but can then be released to a sponsor.

(Dr. Exiled, if you’re seeing this, please feel free to make corrections as needed; you’re the resident expert.)

Technically, anyone processed in this manner is not ‘illegal’ until they miss their court date. One way around this problem would be to vastly increase the number of immigration court judges available to hear cases. If doing so allowed border crossers to either (1) achieve legit asylee status or (2) to be rejected & returned, would you have objections to that approach, assuming most would be granted asylum?

It seems that this would be a much more economically beneficial and productive approach, with the bonus of costing exponentially less than trying to round up and mass deport thousands of people.

CP, You are missing the point. We (Americans) do not owe folks from other countries a right to be here, it is a privilege. It takes years to become a citizen because we need to vet them and make sure they will be productive contributors. And in the long run I doubt it would be cheaper if the folks coming in are a burden to the system/s.

We have no idea who came in our country over the past 4 years. Are you okay with just giving folks a blanket citizenship with out vetting and waiting in line?

My yes or no answer is no, I am not okay with it. What is yours? We can move forward from there.

[Markk]

CP wrote...South end of Orange County, and it has been a while since. Between then and today, also spent time in the Phoenix AZ area, so I’m no stranger to populations with large numbers of suspected non-citizens.

I assume that means San Clemente or maybe SJC/Dana? What years?

How much time did you spend in the Phoenix area, and did you live and work there?

What is a suspected non-citizen? In other words do you know these folks well enough to....well know them?

Where do you live today?

These are important question for me, it will help in our conversation.

I live in Yucaipa Ca., a 3 or 4 miles from the Redlands LDS Temple, you can google map it. I work all over So Cal. In fact today I was in El Cajon about 25 miles from Mexico. I was born and raised in San Bernardino Ca.