Immigration isn’t a typical Apt. 11D topic. It wasn’t one of my policy areas, and it’s not a hot topic in my area of the country. But there is absolutely nothing else in the news today, so let’s talk about it.
Do you think that the United States should have completely free open borders? Do you think there should be numerical quotas on the number of people allowed in the country? What should be done with unaccompanied minors? Should there be background checks done on people coming over the border?
Should we allow entry to all people who are threatened with gang violence? With domestic violence? with rampant poverty?
Would you support an increase in taxes to support the education and support for new immigrants?
Tell me. I’m curious.
Apt. 11d 
Do you think that the United States should have completely free open borders?
As near as I can tell, nobody thinks that, it’s what Trump is using as his strawman to defend indefensible behavior.
How many people we take in is a question that is separate from how we treat people when enforcing the laws. Nobody ever says “Should we legalize all homicide or let the police run amok?” as a real choice.
LikeLike
“As near as I can tell, nobody thinks that . . . .”
Wow, you don’t read either Crooked Timber or the Wall Street Journal editorials.
LikeLike
Or listen to Democratic congressional nominees. Abolish ICE! https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-joe-crowley-new-york-14-primary/index.html
LikeLike
I think we honestly have a special responsibility toward Central American refugees and those from the narcos in Mexico because our country, addictions and policy are the reasons for that violence. Anyone who says we have no responsibility is ignoring history.
I don’t believe in totally open borders. But I would like to see some kind of program to help these countries beef up their democracy and security so that they could actually deal with some of the domestic violence issues. I’m a bleeding heart liberal but I think that domestic violence could potentially be dealt with in the country. Maybe. I don’t get to move to france and get asylum if my husband is a maniac! so I understand both sides of that issue, actually. The gang violence is another question. But these countries need their own economy. Look at Costa Rica and Panama: basically peaceful places…its possible. We really screwed it up! That said, of course I think in some cultures being LGTQIA is basically a death sentence: I think asylum is fine there.
I do think there are better ways to handle this current problem. Obviously Stephen Miller chose the cruelest one and then implemented it poorly because he’s an incompetent individual who will definitely need to find asylum somewhere else if there’s any justice. The oped in the NYtimes explained some programs for ensuring asylum seekers that provide better results so that people actually show up for their asylum hearings. These are much cheaper and more humane than putting people in camps. I also think we should strengthen E-Verify. Then there would be fewer jobs for undocumented people and it would be less attractive to come here That said, our economy would totally change! everything would be more expensive. We should change the temporary visa situation.
There’s a lot of productive things we CAN do.
LikeLike
I remember the Burger King jingle in the 1970s that began with the line, “Two hundred million people/no two are quite the same.” The U.S. now has more than 300 million, and I don’t think we yet qualify as overpopulated – of course I live in the middle of the country in a rural area, and have to drive for over an hour to get to a town with more than 50,000, so that shades my view of things.
From what I understand – and this isn’t my area either – refugees and asylum seekers (and sometimes other immigrants) are willing to work hard, almost anywhere, at almost any job, so they don’t have to go back to where they came from. This seems to have been true in the 1700s, the 1800s, and the 1900s, and I don’t see it becoming any less true now.
I don’t think completely open borders makes sense – there has to be some kind of vetting to screen out criminals, and even beyond that it seems logistically too difficult to let everyone in – but from countries where many people are unsafe, from their own government or from those their government has no desire to control or no hope of controlling (whether that be drug traffickers, gangs, or violent spouses), I’d be inclined to let in as many as can get here. I do think we are a nation of immigrants, and that it has made the U.S. stronger. And I do think we should continue to be one. I’m fine with higher taxes to support that.
LikeLike