9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban - Page 6 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 129Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #76 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:10 PM
Member
 
BlueWoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 588
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

You know what kills me about people bringing up the 9/11 attacks? The majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia. Which, interestingly enough is not one of the countries on the list.

Of course we are not going to ban anyone from Saudi Arabia because we have huge economic interests in keeping them happy.

The ban was destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security.

BlueWoman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #77 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:24 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by EleGirl View Post
Yes, some kind of work permit. What's wrong with people having a legal permit for working in the USA?
If work permit equals prevailing wage I'm OK with it. My two examples above suggest this is not happening.

Why would Bob the landscape contractor hire Jose who has a work permit and pay prevailing wage when he can hire Pedro, document challenged, and pay a lot less?
john117 is online now  
post #78 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:31 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by becareful2 View Post
Build the wall. The cost is chump change compared to what W & O spent on their stimulus bills.
Sure. Build it and when it comes in at 50+ $B and doesn't work it will be left standing as the monument to human futility.
john117 is online now  
 
post #79 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:57 PM
Moderator
 
EleGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 32,979
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
If work permit equals prevailing wage I'm OK with it. My two examples above suggest this is not happening.

Why would Bob the landscape contractor hire Jose who has a work permit and pay prevailing wage when he can hire Pedro, document challenged, and pay a lot less?
Of course illegal immigrants are generally paid less. Pedro (document challenged) can be paid less. It's part of why some employers like illegal immigration... they are fine with paying people less so that they can underbid the competition.

And who can Pedro complain to? He can be abused by employers. He can be made to do things that break employment laws. What's he going to do? Go complain to the law? LOL
EleGirl is online now  
post #80 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:59 PM
Moderator
 
EleGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 32,979
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWoman View Post
You know what kills me about people bringing up the 9/11 attacks? The majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia. Which, interestingly enough is not one of the countries on the list.

Of course we are not going to ban anyone from Saudi Arabia because we have huge economic interests in keeping them happy.

The ban was destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security.
Did you believe that Obama's ban of all immigration/refugees from Syria was "destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security"?
EleGirl is online now  
post #81 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 08:04 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by EleGirl View Post
Of course illegal immigrants are generally paid less. Pedro (document challenged) can be paid less. It's part of why some employers like illegal immigration... they are fine with paying people less so that they can underbid the competition.

And who can Pedro complain to? He can be abused by employers. He can be made to do things that break employment laws. What's he going to do? Go complain to the law? LOL
If you throw the book at Bob, and revoke his business license after 1st offense, then maybe the other Bob's will get the message and stop hiring Pedro's.

Issue legal and temporary work permits for needed workers (agriculture) but pay prevailing wage and you'll fix it.

The wall is decoration.
john117 is online now  
post #82 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 08:08 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,624
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by EleGirl View Post
Did you believe that Obama's ban of all immigration/refugees from Syria was "destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security"?
https://www.google.com/amp/www.vox.c...fugee-ban-2011
john117 is online now  
post #83 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:12 PM
Moderator
 
EleGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 32,979
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
If you throw the book at Bob, and revoke his business license after 1st offense, then maybe the other Bob's will get the message and stop hiring Pedro's.

Issue legal and temporary work permits for needed workers (agriculture) but pay prevailing wage and you'll fix it.
I think that the above is what I was suggesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
The wall is decoration.
I believe that there are places where a wall/fence of some sort would help. Don't forget that some of those coming here are not coming for legal work. They are coming for the drug trafficking. And let's not forget about the human trafficking.
EleGirl is online now  
post #84 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:29 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,016
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Sure. Build it and when it comes in at 50+ $B and doesn't work it will be left standing as the monument to human futility.
At this point, even if the wall costs ten times that amount, I think the American people will still want it built. They are beyond fed up. Any talk of immigration reform without that wall is pointless and a waste of time. That seems to be the consensus on the right. If a wall is built, then people on the right may support to let the illegals stay but to never allow them to become citizens.

What irks me is all the illegals who flaunt their illegal immigrant status in front of us, with even one well known illegal immigrant journalist/activist named Jose Vargas going on tv with no fear.

As I see it, there are two kinds of threats from these refugees: ISIS members masquerading as refugees who plan to commit terrorist attacks, and the second are those who don't want to assimilate into western culture. Both are threats that we should take seriously. I feel it is too late for Germany and most of Europe, but it's still not too late for us.
becareful2 is offline  
post #85 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:32 PM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,506
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by naiveonedave View Post
I really struggle with how this is unconstitutional.
A) It is a leap of faith that it is a Muslim ban.
B) I didn't think foreigners had our constitutional rights
C) It is not a permanent ban, only 90 days, as I recall.
D) If this is truly unconstitutional, then how can we deny letting in any Chinese person who wants to come here? If we deny, then they would justly cry 'racism', in as far as I know, Chinese are more racially consistent than folks in the travel banned countries are Muslim.

I feel like we have so twisted the constitution, we only use it when it really doesn't apply....
It obviously isn't unconstitutional. The President has the constitutional authority to do it, as well as specific statutory authority.

These judges just decided that they could stick a finger in a Republican President's eye and get away with it.

Note: I don't think the pause (not ban) is a particularly good idea, and the way it was done was awful. What he should have done is say "No more visas will be issued to travelers from those countries for 90 days (or whatever time period)." That would have prevented anyone from taking advantage of a time delay in enforcement, as all the existing visa holders had already passed screening and no new ones could get a visa during the pause.

But I'm not the President, so I don't get to make that determination.


Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
post #86 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:33 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,016
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWoman View Post
You know what kills me about people bringing up the 9/11 attacks? The majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia. Which, interestingly enough is not one of the countries on the list.

Of course we are not going to ban anyone from Saudi Arabia because we have huge economic interests in keeping them happy.


The ban was destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security.
They still have a functioning government who can help us vet their refugees, and yes, we still need their oil. That is why we must quickly become energy independent. Some experts claim the US have enough petroleum than all of the ME but it remains untapped. The left like Obama won't allow it. Drilling permits on public property were slashed by about half under his watch.
becareful2 is offline  
post #87 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:56 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,861
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhtred View Post
I wish people could get away from the political divide and try to find a solution to a very difficult problem.

1) We want secure boarders, but the proposals to do that look to be very expensive.

2) We want to allow long term productive members of society to stay - but doing that without secure boarders just encourages more immigration.

3) We want a system that effectively vetts people, but which doesn't take so long that following the rules for immigration is impractical.
1) Yes it is going to be expensive. Mexico built a wall on their southern border. Most other countries have physical walls. We can afford to build a wall and install other effective measures along the most critical parts of the borders. The alternative of unsecured borders will be fatal to our country. This has been proven throughout history repeatedly.

2) Why? They broke the law coming here and staying here. Many live in non-English speaking communities and have no interest in assimilating. Allowing some to gain lawful resident status only makes sense if it is a benefit to those already legally here and does not penalize others who are attempting to come here legally.

3) Why do we want massive immigration? What is wrong with a difficult process to gain lawful admission? Too much immigration is demonstrably bad for a country. Metered immigration of the right kinds of people can be very healthy. We currently allow far too many immigrants in (legally and illegally).
Thor is offline  
post #88 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 09:57 PM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,506
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhtred View Post
If I knew how to perfectly secure the boarder, I would, then legalize everyone already here. Of course if we don't secure the boarder, legalizing people just gives an incentive to others to sneak in.

OTOH, I am not up for deporting people who have been her a long time and have become a functioning part of our society - especially since our rules have made it so difficult to get here legally. (difficult in ways that do not enhance security)
Can we deport people who keep writing "boarder" instead of "border"?
(Note for the sarcasm-impaired: this is not a serious suggestion)

Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
post #89 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 10:00 PM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,506
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWoman View Post
You know what kills me about people bringing up the 9/11 attacks? The majority of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia. Which, interestingly enough is not one of the countries on the list.

Of course we are not going to ban anyone from Saudi Arabia because we have huge economic interests in keeping them happy.

The ban was destructive on individual level and completely useless in terms of national security.
Of course 9/11 was actually insurance fraud. But if one believes the official conspiracy theory, then Saudi Arabia would be one of the most dangerous countries to let people in from.

Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
post #90 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 10:01 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,861
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by EleGirl View Post
The attacks on 9/11 spent the USA spiraling financially for a long time. And it was really a pretty small attack. Imagine what a wide spread dirty bomb attack would to if it hit someplace like the financial center of NYC... something that killed many thousands more and put the financial district out of business. Yes, it would take only one large attack to disrupt the USA for months, if not years.
The first WTC attack was an attempt to knock over the tower. The 9/11 attack consisted of large jets flown at very high speed into the top of each tower, from opposite directions. It certainly seems to me that they were attempting to knock over the buildings rather than simply create a fire. Nobody would likely have predicted the collapse of the buildings unless they were a structural engineer. Flying a large airliner at very high speeds with accuracy for a novice is much more difficult than at moderate speeds.

The death toll if they had tipped the two towers over in opposite directions would have been tens of times larger than it was.

I agree that a dirty bomb or a series of dirty bombs would have a very disruptive effect on this country. I also think it could lead to massive military actions against sponsor countries throughout the middle east and asia.
Thor is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome