re: Looks like Swedish officials are starting to come out supporting Trumps claims

quote:

---

Somehow it was made a (false) fact that Obama did nothing except just let people flood in to this country. In fact Obama deported many more people than other presidents, which should also indicate whether or not the left will admit it there are issues with immigrants coming and adjusting to another country's culture.

---

Getting into the Obama years is going to be a distraction as it seems like there was a split-personality running the illegals situation. I say this because while Obama was indeed "the Deporter in Chief", he also did nothing to address the influx.

For years I've posted on this forum that the best way to address the illegals situation is to look at it in a framework of incentives and disincentives. With that in mind, while getting deported is certainly a disincentive, no incentives were removed thus the reasons drawing them here would continue to do so (and why there is such a high rate of illegals who return after being deported).

quote:

---

My stance is there's no easy answer like Trump makes it out to be.

---

I disagree with part of that. The answer is easy; enforce the laws already on the books. This goes from doing round-ups (which ICE is doing with alacrity) to agencies reporting when illegals attempt to use their services to fining the bleeding balls out of businesses that hire illegals (although I prefer a fine based on the amount of illegals being employed).

If this is done, a wall isn't really necessary (although if done well it could make an interesting tourist attraction).

quote:

---

Eta: thank you for trying to thoughtfully discuss this.

---

Right back at ya

quote:

---

It's impossible to weed out bad apples perfectly in any group. There's no guarantee that any migrant will be an angel.

---

But there are certainly probabilities. Do you think 100k Japanese immigrants would cause many problems? The fact is, these hordes are coming from some of the worst places on earth. Their religion and culture is generally violent and oppressive and intolerant. They're not all like that of course, but it's no accident that their countries are like that.

quote:

---

When we talk about Islam having a particular problem with terrorism, even being an order of magnitude more violent, we're still talking about the difference between a 10,000:1 and a 100,000:1 ratio of terrorists to regular folks.

---

I understand these numbers. But they don't tell the whole story. Consider the swathes of ghetto now. Consider the ridiculous security measures needed at airports. Consider the incredible resources European governments have to devote to counter terrorism.

And the risk of dying in terrorism is on a whole small, right now. Although it's certainly there as has been proven in Europe. All it takes is a doodle of Muhammad. Think about that--this large group can be triggered so violently by a simple doodle. That's not a group that's interested in peace and assimilation. And as immigration continues and the Muslim birth rates keep exploding, the problems will only get bigger. Again, find me a safe and decent and tolerant Mid East or African Muslim country.

quote:

---

I disagree with part of that. The answer is easy; enforce the laws already on the books. This goes from doing round-ups (which ICE is doing with alacrity) to agencies reporting when illegals attempt to use their services to fining the bleeding balls out of businesses that hire illegals (although I prefer a fine based on the amount of illegals being employed).

If this is done, a wall isn't really necessary (although if done well it could make an interesting tourist attraction).

---

Sorry allow me to further explain. I say it's not easy because of the economic impact that it could have. I agree that ultimately you can view illegals as a tax burden, on average. However to remove them from industries like ag/construction/manufacturing has negative economic impacts. Alabama implemented one of the harshest laws, but when the immigrants vacated these jobs due to the harsh laws americans were not taking these jobs as originally projected causing hits the economy.

Additionally to deport these immigrants it was projected that we would need way more facilities to house them while due process took place along with the court costs, etc. That's all separate from the economy. So i wouldn't say just rounding people up and deporting them is easy as it results in unintended economic contraction and shrinks gdp significantly. Additionally these jobs, at least in Alabama, didn't appear to be filled by American/legal workers for the most part.

quote:

---

The issue is that we have freedom of religion in america so you cant just discriminate against an entire religion.

---

And that's the crux of the problem.

On the one hand you have religious freedom as part of our very first Amendment. It was important enough to the Founding Fathers to come ahead of freedom of speech or that of the press in the wording sequence of the Amendment. Coming from England they saw the dangers of government holding sway over religion and understood that allowing such was a very slippery slope.

On the other hand, is the ultimate in liberty to allow the Constitution to be a noose around ones neck? When a religion's current practice by millions of its practitioners is to abuse and/or kill non-believers, does it deserve a place in a free society?

Another point on this is that even though most estimates put the percentage of radicalized practitioners at only 10%, what is a free society to do when the number that 10% represents is over 100 million people?

For me the answer is closer to what the President is wanting to do and that's ban all immigration from hotspots of Muslim conflict where there are inadequate systems for vetting, especially when you look at the numbers of people trying to leave those places.

quote:

---

quote:
Well the Sweden Democrat party has a right-wing, nationalist, and anti-immigration platform.

---

quote:

---

Are you people born stupid, or is it an acquired affliction?

---

The poster correctly described the main platform of the SD party in Sweden.

You are the one who, whether born stupid or not, is now ignorant.

quote:

---

I've never heard of anyone calling for a ban on all immigrants. Also how could a shut down negatively affect our economy? It would also seem that more immigrants on the public dole would equal a heavier burden on taxpayers.

---

Probably poor choice of words on my part. I mean that just shutting our borders and then mass deportation.


True, as i stated above, the average illegal is a tax burden, but the cost to process these immigrants (due process still applies), what to do with their children born here, building a wall, the fact that the average cost of goods rises due to cheap labor being removed from the workforce, etc all negatively impact our economy as well as put a tax burden on the american people. It's a rather complex problem and something you can't do quickly or without a solid economic plan in place to prevent economic fallout or contraction.

quote:

---

On the other hand, is the ultimate in liberty to allow the Constitution to be a noose around ones neck? When a religion's current practice by millions of its practitioners is to abuse and/or kill non-believers, does it deserve a place in a free society?

---

You could argue this point all day and likely get nowhere. This goes even further in to things like the 2nd amendment. We have the right to bear arms but if those arms are killing people every day do we infringe upon that right? I know the argument guns don't kill people. People kill people. I would say that argument can be equally applied to the first amendment. Religion (all religion) has violent parts to it where it discusses killing non believer types. Does that mean that religion is bad or the people using that religion in a negative light are bad?

It's a tricky situation, and a slippery slope if we start deciding what religions are "right" and "wrong" especially since our govt should have separation of church and state.

It's admittedly hard to tell what's true about the crime in Sweden and what negative effects the Muslim immigration has had. I've never been there. Just seems to me, based on logic and history, that a horde of poor Muslims won't mix well with that very liberal society. I can't see the benefit to Sweden. It's surely going to be a burden on Swedens social programs if nothing else.

quote:

---

Gonna guess without reading they're SD 

---

Yeah, little losh, don't let your opinion be skewed by facts.

Besides, how could two Swedish politicians possibly know more about the situation than you?

I will never understand liberal stubborness on Islam.

What more do they need to see that is diametrically opposed to everything they claim to stand for until they stand with the rest of the world against Islamic extremism? It feels like a reflexive impulse to just disagree with everything conservatives say.