Photo of caged children

[digitaldog]

It is perfectly legal.

If you say so, sure.

However, and that's the catch, everything earned on the side must be reported and then it will be subtracted from their monthly benefits. You see how this solutions creates immediate incentive not to work? Why would anyone work just in order to get the same amount of money as not working?

Why? It may seem odd to you, some do wish to work, some do have integrity, some strive to play by the rules etc. All, no. None, no. Unless you believe, like Trump, these people are an infestation.
Wasn't an issue for his white wife of course.   

[digitaldog]

In any case, I Googled taxes and found out the it's estimated that the IRS lost $500 billion dollars ion 2012 to the underground economy because income is not reported.

Not surprising. That underground economy includes Americans who sell illegal drugs right?

I'm sorry you felt it necessary to imply that I called all Mexican rapists and criminals.

Did I, where? If you believe I did, I apologize. I know what Trump has said. I don't believe I said (nor do I believe he feels) ALL Mexicans are rapists. Such a statement is ridiculous!
I get bent out of shape when I hear people say or write "Everyone agrees...." I don't believe everyone agrees on ANYTHING. Or "Everyone Knows" for that matter; it's a bogus concept. I'm kind of OK with "Most people" better "Many people". How many?

I never said that nor did I imply it.

Again, where did I imply you did?

Something just crossed my mind about the mothers and children we're all discussing.  Where are the fathers?

An impossible question to answer accuracy but some are dead (which is why the others are fleeing). Some are already in this country, waiting for the rest of their families. They go first, expect the family to follow. I suppose some don't have fathers etc. How is this important?

Something doesn't seem right about this situation.  It seems that the mothers and children couldn't plead asylum if their husbands were with them.

Now what makes you say that? The father is killed and the rest of the family flee; you're saying they should NOT be able to plead asylum? Seriously?

It's hard to turn away a mother and child

It would be hard for you, and me! It's not so hard for the current administration. That's exactly what they are doing! Ask Stephen Miller if he thinks that's hard. Seems not.

Once they get in, then the fathers show up.

That's a problem why? Can you attempt to imagine a situation where the husband travels 2000 miles first, to let their families know it's even possible? Or how to do so?

So I suspect, some at least may be playing a game and are dishonest about their real situation.

You suspect, I get that. I don't find the suspicions justified.

An immigrant can't get asylum because he wants to live in America and get a better job

He can if where he came from was one of the most dangerous places in the world, where he/she could get killed for walking down the wrong street. For refusing to allow his kids to join a gang AND he also wants a job. With all due respect, are you really thinking about what's going on in these countries, the life people who live there face to stay alive, or eat?
Remember that North Korean solider who ran into South Korean last year, got shot in the back trying to escape? Let him die bleeding because he ran first, left his family (perhaps) back in N Korea? You think the choices are that much different from someone in El Salvador?

You have to wait on line with others for that proivelege.

If you're allowed that privilege, see my post about how Trump is making this more difficult.

So claiming they're escaping crime and are all alone may do the trick; but are the claims truthful?

All I can say is probably based upon what's going on in the countries they come from.
Let me ask you, where did you (or more likely) your parents come from and did they have to flee violence and prove this to get into the US? Did ALL immigrants that now reside here? I don't think so.

I think we're going to see that the missing fathers are not missing at all.

I don't see how it matters. Is it possible you, or others here had immigrated to this country long ago, without a father and why would they only be allowed to do so because they had a father? I really think you need to think about the history of immigration in this country and consider what other's did to get here and why. Then think about the contributions they made to this fine country. Please. Consider the history, your history, the history of others since this country was formed. Think about what those people had and today's people have to do to immigrate here, then think about what the current administration is doing about all this. It's sad, it's un-American. It's expensive and it's unnecessary. And BTW, seems the Republicans in power where again unable on their own to even pass a bill today in ONE branch.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Andrew, your need to parse every word and sentence someone writes and question it and respond line by line is now bordering on pathological.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... So tell us, do you believe Trump wants more, less or the same number of LEGAL immigrants to enter our country. Pick door 1, 2 or 3 (I'll ask again, don't expect you to answer).

I do not know what Trump wants, I'll respond what I think about it: legal immigration has always had rules, it has never been free for all. Those rules reflect the needs and interests of the U.S. at each particular time. They are not immutable. Changing the rules to limit certain type of immigration is possible and desirable. I am personally against the chain immigration and favor the more restrictive rules. The same with Indian H1b mills. The system has been played by some and it is time to tighten the rules.

[digitaldog]

Andrew, your need to parse every word and sentence someone writes and question it and respond line by line is now bordering on pathological.

Then move on. I'm OK with that. You can't answer a direct question to back up your text. Why are you here? Oh sorry another question you refuse to answer.
Considering a few people here who post without reading what other's have stated, I have to parse a lot of text to concentrate what I thought were native English speakers (?) to for one, cease putting words in my mouth. I've had one person accuse me of calling them a racist; no I did not. I had one person here state I implied the W7 changes a immigration status (no, I was simply answering his question about how they can pay taxes without an SSI number). Gotta parse words when people here simply can't read and comprehended the text, then make up a meaning that was never made. You're of course guilty too and yet, I try to continue engaging in the discussion despite all this and an utter lack of a reply to my questions about how and why your minds work.
I was of course right yesterday, this has become a CWOBaT (colossal waste of bandwidth and time).

[digitaldog]

I do not know what Trump wants....

Read his words. Better, see his actions.

[BAB]

Andrew
Thanks for sharing I didn't realize what a deep understanding you have of the issues you have discussed. From years of reading your posts regarding photography I really have enjoyed your wit and admired you, these posts you have made concerning "Photo of caged children" are well though out. Why OP don't just believe in your view and take your words as fact your thinking. Most of the pictures your seeing are from the last administration.

I would suggest that you check your facts out though and keep your ears and eyes wide open so you can see the real truth for yourself instead of believing what someone else wants you to believe. I think either the thin air or shear boredom has led you to believe this is a new issue. When the facts are its been going on for decades decades no not a double word just in case you missed the first one.

These lousy laws have been on the books for decades. Dump your hatred and find the real Andrew. We have a Senate and Congress composed of many smart people who for the last 30 years can't figure it out. So why try to show your ignorance on this subject and ruin all the years of hard work you have put into Photography. I have several acquaintances whom have tried this same route and it hasn't ended pretty for them.
Andrew save yourself while you still have a chance.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Oh sorry another question you refuse to answer...

I generally refrain from answering your non-sensical, straw-man questions.

By the way, for someone who only recently discovered what a straw-man argument is, and late in life, you've become awfully skillful in using it frequently.

[digitaldog]

Andrew
Thanks for sharing I didn't realize what a deep understanding you have of the issues you have discussed. From years of reading your posts regarding photography I really have enjoyed your wit and admired you, these posts you have made concerning "Photo of caged children" are well though out. Why OP don't just believe in your view and take your words as fact your thinking. Most of the pictures your seeing are from the last administration.

Thanks.

I would suggest that you check your facts out though and keep your ears and eyes wide open so you can see the real truth for yourself instead of believing what someone else wants you to believe

That's my goal.

I think either the thin air or shear boredom has led you to believe this is a new issue. When the facts are its been going on for decades decades no not a double word just in case you missed the first one.

I don't believe it's new. I think it's worse recently. 

These lousy laws have been on the books for decades. Dump your hatred and find the real Andrew. We have a Senate and Congress composed of many smart people who for the last 30 years can't figure it out. So why try to show your ignorance on this subject and ruin all the years of hard work you have put into Photography. I have several acquaintances whom have tried this same route and it hasn't ended pretty for them.
Andrew save yourself while you still have a chance.

Thanks, I'll try.....

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... So why try to show your ignorance on this subject and ruin all the years of hard work you have put into Photography.

Andrew save yourself while you still have a chance.

 

[texshooter]

Open borders, Yeah!

Los Angeles circa 2075

[Ray]

This entire topic raises deep philosophical questions about social equality and freedom.
In an ideal world with an ideal free market, there would be no restrictions on anyone moving to any country they preferred, except for criminals in jail, of course.

I did a lot of travelling in my youth, sometimes working illegally in countries I visited. For example, I arrived in Iran on a 2-week transit visa in 1962, yet stayed 10 months in Tehran teaching English, proof reading the local English language newspaper, and even had a job as a warehouse supervisor with an American company for part of that time I was in Tehran.

When I decided to leave Iran, after saving a sufficient amount of money to continue my travels, it wasn't possible to hide the fact that I'd overstayed my visa and that I didn't have a work permit. But no big deal. I just had to front up in court and pay a fine, which I could easily afford because of the money I'd saved during the 10 month period I'd been working. In fact, I had enough money to buy my first SLR with interchangeable lenses, the Pentax Spotmatic, which I bought whilst passing through the duty-free port of Penang on my way to Thailand.

In Thailand I continued to work illegally, without even thinking or worrying about it. When my visa expired, I simply visited a neighbouring country, such as Lao or Burma, and returned with a new visa. Eventually, the owner of a Commercial College in Bangkok got me a residence visa and a work permit so I could teach legally at his college, as well as giving private tuition.

The entire experience was a wonderful adventure, however it needs to be emphasized that I was a person from a developed country (the UK), visiting undeveloped countries. I had something significant to offer.

The current situation of literally millions of refugees fleeing war zones and/or deep poverty in dysfunctional countries, trying to gain acceptance in rich and well-organised countries, is the opposite to my situation as a 1960's hippie.

This is a major problem in Australia, which is understandably an attractive destination for all refugees because of Australia's excellent social security network, which is much better than America's, relatively high standard of living, and relative freedom from serious racial conflict and gun massacres.

I chose Australia as my preferred country of residence because I like the climate, which is warmer than in the UK, and I like the less class-conscious, egalitarian attitude of Australians, and I like the fact that we are not over populated, and so on.

I can understand perfectly why any refugee, or underprivileged and poverty-stricken person, would choose Australia as a preferred destination, if there were no restriction.
However, without restrictions on immigration, Australia would be flooded with immigrants seeking a better life, as would the US. That's the problem.

The purpose of all these apparently inhumane treatments of illegal immigrants and queue-jumper refugees, is to reduce the number trying to enter the country illegally, by sending a message to those who are contemplating an illegal entry, that it's not worth it.

This is the same principle that's in effect with the judicial system of capital punishment and jail sentences. We not only jail criminals, and sometimes hang them, in order to protect the public from the criminals' possible future bad behaviour, but the treatment of the criminals also acts as a deterrent to other potential criminals.

Each country has the right to decide who it is going to accept as a new citizen, just as each family has the right to accept which visitor will have access to their own home.

[Alan Klein]

Ray, I didn't know you were a hippie.  Something interesting I now know about you.  You've become so normal, regular.  Boring! 
Sorry.  I meant conventional.

The original attempt to separate mother and child was as you said to send a message to others not to attempt to illegally come here.  But then it got political.  Democrats saw an opening and used their usual guilt game to make everyone feel like a cretin for splitting families.  Well, it is unattractive but makes sense of you want to stop illegal entries.  So here we are fighting again and will until the November elections.  Then we'll start over again in January as we fight until the 2020 elections.  Meanwhile, little will get done.

[Jeremy Roussak]

The heat:light ratio of this thread is too large.

Jeremy