"Zero Tolerance", Family separations & other immigration iss

[Primula Baggins]

I would suggest that anyone with concerns about particular posts of theirs (or quotes of those posts) could PM Voronwë or me.

[Inanna]

I really don’t remember....

[Sunsilver]

This is about what I expected regarding the government's ability to keep track of children who have been separated from their families, but it's very disturbing and upsetting none the less! If the link doesn't work for you , let me know and I will cut and paste the whole piece.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater

[Frelga]

Actual Onion for once:

Picky Refugee Just Expects To Be Reunited With Exact Same Family As Before
https://local.theonion.com/picky-refuge ... 1827449946

[Frelga]

I would suggest that anyone with concerns about particular posts of theirs (or quotes of those posts) could PM Voronwë or me.

Prim, I appreciate it, but it also means we can't have a conversation going forward.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

The topic of embassies and consulates has achieved zero traction, even though they are a viable alternative to a long and dangerous trek through the desert. So how about this instead.

What should our immigration laws be? Not "against what we have now" but an actual suggestion that either says "people who meet these criteria should be let in" or "people who meet those criteria should be kept out." How should we enforce such? Remember, whichever of those two you choose, people outside that criteria would default to the other option.

[yovargas]

What were they doing before the current family separation fiasco?

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Well, they weren't fully enforcing the law basically. Trump demonstrated the principle of "if you want to turn people against a law, enforce it fully."

I am a believer in the principle of executive discretion, which gives the executive branch the ability to decide on the enforcement of existing law. I'm also told that is a horrible principle because it means the executive can simply make up laws, which is actually the opposite. Still, people do seem to approve of it on occasion, such as existing law.

One of the problems with existing law is that enables interpretations such as the current situation. There are other interpretations of existing law that do not give us the current situation. That existing law is so open to interpretation is a big flaw in existing law and the principle of objective laws objectively enforced.

That's one of the reasons I asked what the law should be, not just what we should do. What we should do is have a law that makes more sense than our current law, so that's why I am asking what that law should be.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Okay, everyone wants to say Trump is wrong, but nobody wants to say what is right. But if you don't have a "what is right" how can you say he is wrong?

I believe that our current set of immigration laws are much too strict and should be loosened. It should be sufficient to pass only an ID check and fingerprint check to enter the country, to see that the people entering are not wanted criminals. Those who do come in through an ID check and fingerprint check are therefore here legally and able to get and hold a job. One of the reasons illegal immigration is such a problem is because seasonal workers are not sure they can come back in if they leave.

Those who still come in illegally under such a setup are therefore clearly here in order to evade the ID check. ICE can redirect their efforts from people whose really do need their attention.

However, and this is a major sticking point for me and my idea, becoming an actual citizen should be very challenging so that only the truly deserving can get it. Not even being related to a citizen is enough to make it easier to become a citizen.

I know people are lining up to tell me how wrong I am, but if you can't tell me what is right then you have no basis for telling me I am wrong.

[yovargas]

Okay, everyone wants to say Trump is wrong, but nobody wants to say what is right. But if you don't have a "what is right" how can you say he is wrong?

I don't really think you need to have a fully formed policy opinion to say that caging kids is wrong.

However, and this is a major sticking point for me and my idea, becoming an actual citizen should be very challenging so that only the truly deserving can get it. Not even being related to a citizen is enough to make it easier to become a citizen.

This is interesting to me because I've never been sure where libertarians in general stood on immigration. This is not what I would've expected. My personal, extremely unpopular, and totally-never-going-to-happen-in-real-life position is quite the opposite - I don't think there is any moral grounds for a government to deny people from living and working wherever the hell they want. And citizen probably shouldn't mean much more than "person who wants to live and work here".

[Dave_LF]

becoming an actual citizen should be very challenging so that only the truly deserving can get it.

Hm. I wonder how many Trump voters would pass the test?

[Griffon64]

Why would anyone want to become an actual citizen if they can legally live and work in the US ( I assume for as long as they want, you don't say ) without becoming one? Just to be able to vote? Most citizens don't even vote.

[River]

So green cards come with lots of perks but a US passport isn't one of them. And traveling on a US passport is pretty sweet. Visas for Americans tend to be easily acquired if they're even required.

You can also run for office if you're a citizen. And green cards only last ten years with one renewal. Then you have to either move or file for status adjustment.

Of course, citizens are also on the hook for responsibilities such as jury duty. And you could be conscripted into the military or some other public service (says so right in the oath...really, everyone born into US citizenship should find a way to attend a naturalization ceremony; it's quite enlightening).

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Okay, everyone wants to say Trump is wrong, but nobody wants to say what is right. But if you don't have a "what is right" how can you say he is wrong?

I don't really think you need to have a fully formed policy opinion to say that caging kids is wrong.

However, and this is a major sticking point for me and my idea, becoming an actual citizen should be very challenging so that only the truly deserving can get it. Not even being related to a citizen is enough to make it easier to become a citizen.

This is interesting to me because I've never been sure where libertarians in general stood on immigration. This is not what I would've expected. My personal, extremely unpopular, and totally-never-going-to-happen-in-real-life position is quite the opposite - I don't think there is any moral grounds for a government to deny people from living and working wherever the hell they want. And citizen probably shouldn't mean much more than "person who wants to live and work here".

I already stated that my position on coming in is a mere ID check to make sure you aren't currently a wanted criminal, and that I don't care if you're here for work or fun. Showing an ID is enough to then get a job. It is only naturalization I would make hard.

[yovargas]

I already stated that my position on coming in is a mere ID check to make sure you aren't currently a wanted criminal, and that I don't care if you're here for work or fun. Showing an ID is enough to then get a job. It is only naturalization I would make hard.

Ah, I misunderstood. If by "naturalization" we mean getting those few special citizen rights like voting and holding office than that seems fine, I suppose. Though really I don't see why that needs to be any harder than "lived and worked in the country for a decently long while".

[Inanna]

And living and working in a country for a long while means that you have paid taxes, social security, Medicare and Medicaid.

[Frelga]

AKA taxation without representation. Didn't people get quite upset about that at one point?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

These days, though, you'd get fined for polluting the Boston Harbor with a bunch of tea!

[Frelga]

OK, this is a total Osgilliation, but the Tea Party museum in Boston is super fun. And it's worth it just to watch people's faces go carefully blank when you mention it, until you explain that no, the *original* Tea Party. Plus, they have a nice tea shop.

[Inanna]

I will try and check out the tea shop when we’re there in August. Staying on beacon hill, presenting at Sloan, but have enough time in between to take family around.