Immigration & I.C.E. - A call for proposals

NeuM · February 4

@AlexY said:
Drink a shot when a far right wingnut forgets to have A.I. think for them therefore pwning themselves because they don’t realize the link they posted contradicts them.

There isn't enough agave in Mexico to keep up with the number of own goals dis guy keeps scoring.

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
Oh, wait, here’s an actual thing that isn’t completely made up right wing looney fan fiction

![]

Ooh. Look. Real propaganda.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/jan/28/images-comparing-democrats-to-musks-inauguration-h/

No, I read the link. Did you? Also, it's amusing that you believe I'm a "far right wing nut" when much of what I've said regarding immigration was standard for Democrats not long ago. Yes, Democrats actually thought for themselves back then instead of being brainwashed by CCP influence.

Paulieworld · February 4

@AlexY said:
Drink a shot when a far right wingnut forgets to have A.I. think for them therefore pwning themselves because they don’t realize the link they posted contradicts them.

There isn't enough agave in Mexico to keep up with the number of own goals dis guy keeps scoring.

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
Oh, wait, here’s an actual thing that isn’t completely made up right wing looney fan fiction

![]

Ooh. Look. Real propaganda.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/jan/28/images-comparing-democrats-to-musks-inauguration-h/

Why would anybody pawn themselves?

AlexY · February 4

I read the article and since I don’t fail at reading comprehension, I understood they were debunking the “whataboutobamakamalaclinton” nonsense that relies on out of context frozen frames.

If you’re playing dumb, this is worthy of an Oscar for how convincing it is.

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
Drink a shot when a far right wingnut forgets to have A.I. think for them therefore pwning themselves because they don’t realize the link they posted contradicts them.

There isn't enough agave in Mexico to keep up with the number of own goals dis guy keeps scoring.

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
Oh, wait, here’s an actual thing that isn’t completely made up right wing looney fan fiction

![]

Ooh. Look. Real propaganda.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/jan/28/images-comparing-democrats-to-musks-inauguration-h/

No, I read the link. Did you? Also, it's amusing that you believe I'm a "far right wing nut" when much of what I've said regarding immigration was standard for Democrats not long ago.

Progressives have an issue with how things are being executed. No one had a problem when Obama’s admin , for example, was enforcing immigration because they weren’t doing away with due process, among other things.

Yes, Democrats actually thought for themselves back then instead of being brainwashed by CCP influence.

Drink a shot everyone lol

Paulieworld · February 4

@maxxpower18 said:
This is why the US can't continue to be a Republic. It needs to be split up. Conservatives are so far gone and there is no way to meet in the middle. They can keep the South, the Dakotas, Montana and Idaho can join up with the conservatives in Alberta Canada, and then you'll have the East Coast and West Coast. Let's see how the racist South can pull itself up on their bootstraps when they don't have California and New York subsidizing their states.

I’ll get right on that.

AlexY · February 4

@Paulieworld said:

@AlexY said:
Drink a shot when a far right wingnut forgets to have A.I. think for them therefore pwning themselves because they don’t realize the link they posted contradicts them.

There isn't enough agave in Mexico to keep up with the number of own goals dis guy keeps scoring.

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
Oh, wait, here’s an actual thing that isn’t completely made up right wing looney fan fiction

![]

Ooh. Look. Real propaganda.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/jan/28/images-comparing-democrats-to-musks-inauguration-h/

Why would anybody pawn themselves?

Idk, ask NeuM why he’s doing it.

Simon · February 4

@JeffChasteen said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

Why would they be appalled? They voted for that corpulent, shit-scented buffoon.
His supporters are just as vile as him. They may not know much, but they know they love the cruelty.

I imagine a lot of people who voted for Trump are not full-on MAGA supporters. They are "normal people" who voted for him because he convinced them that he would bring supermarket prices down. They didn't vote for protesters being murdered on the street by gangs of masked, armed ICE thugs.

AlexY · February 4

@Simon said:

@JeffChasteen said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

Why would they be appalled? They voted for that corpulent, shit-scented buffoon.
His supporters are just as vile as him. They may not know much, but they know they love the cruelty.

I imagine a lot of people who voted for Trump are not full-on MAGA supporters. They are "normal people" who voted for him because he convinced them that he would bring supermarket prices down. They didn't vote for protesters being murdered on the street by gangs of masked, armed ICE thugs.

They were lied to, but I mean, Trump and his circle showed them they were scorpions and those who voted for him still offered that ride on their backs (the scorpion and the frog story; clarifying for the far right wingnuts who are kinda ignorant). They were warned about P2025, etc.

Paulieworld · February 4

@AlexY said:

@Simon said:

@JeffChasteen said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

Why would they be appalled? They voted for that corpulent, shit-scented buffoon.
His supporters are just as vile as him. They may not know much, but they know they love the cruelty.

I imagine a lot of people who voted for Trump are not full-on MAGA supporters. They are "normal people" who voted for him because he convinced them that he would bring supermarket prices down. They didn't vote for protesters being murdered on the street by gangs of masked, armed ICE thugs.

They were lied to, but I mean, Trump and his circle showed them they were scorpions and those who voted for him still offered that ride on their backs (the scorpion and the frog story; clarifying for the far right wingnuts who are kinda ignorant). They were warned about P2025, etc.

Wasn’t their a snack called WingNutz back in the 80s?

AlexY · February 4

I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Paulieworld · February 4

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

You might be thinking of DozeNutz. Joe Biden loved those. They were made by the same company that made Corn Popz.

NeuM · February 4

@Paulieworld said:

@maxxpower18 said:
This is why the US can't continue to be a Republic. It needs to be split up. Conservatives are so far gone and there is no way to meet in the middle. They can keep the South, the Dakotas, Montana and Idaho can join up with the conservatives in Alberta Canada, and then you'll have the East Coast and West Coast. Let's see how the racist South can pull itself up on their bootstraps when they don't have California and New York subsidizing their states.

I’ll get right on that.

LOL!

NeuM · February 4

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Good thing we don't have a dictator as our President today. Your ridiculous and embarrassing comments are evidence no one cares what you say.

NeuM · February 4

@Paulieworld said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

You might be thinking of DozeNutz. They were made by the same company that made Corn Popz.

I hear he was a bad dude.

AlexY · February 4

@Paulieworld said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

You might be thinking of DozeNutz. They were made by the same company that made Corn Popz.

I’m not familiar with DozeNutz, but I know someone on this thread who probably is.

Paulieworld · February 4

@NeuM said:
... comment removed because it wasn't clear if Paulie was replying to my comment or not. I'm guessing not.

I don’t know either. You’re doing fine, bro. My only suggestion would be to keep down to a single sentence with some humor and “gravitas”. I’ve always wanted to use that in a sentence!

We are like The Dick the Bruiser and The Crusher, on Saturday morning tag team wrestling in Chicaaaaago, back in the 60s and 70s. Brought to you by Bert Weinman Ford. Google it!

AlexY · February 4

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Good thing we don't have a dictator as our President today.

Agreed, he’s kind of a wannabe.

Your ridiculous and embarrassing comments are evidence no one cares what you say.

After you eat Deez Nutz make sure to hit that report button, snowflake.

Paulieworld · February 4

@AlexY said:

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Good thing we don't have a dictator as our President today.

Agreed, he’s kind of a wannabe.

Your ridiculous and embarrassing comments are evidence no one cares what you say.

After you eat Deez Nutz make sure to hit that report button, snowflake.

Wannabe? Is that like a Wallaby?

Watch me wallabie’s feed mate.
Watch me wallabie’s feed.
They are a dangerous breed mate.
So watch me wallabie’s feed.
All together now…

NeuM · February 4

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:
... comment removed because it wasn't clear if Paulie was replying to my comment or not. I'm guessing not.

I don’t know either. You’re doing fine, bro. My only suggestion would be to keep down to a single sentence with some humor and “gravitas”. I’ve always wanted to use that in a sentence!

We are like The Dick the Bruiser and The Crusher, on Saturday morning tag team wrestling in Chicaaaaago, back in the 60s and 70s. Brought to you by Bert Weinman Ford. Google it!

Coincidentally, I used to watch WGN when I visited the Chicago area back in the 70's. Loved going there back then.

NeuM · February 5

@AlexY said:

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Good thing we don't have a dictator as our President today.

Agreed, he’s kind of a wannabe.

Your ridiculous and embarrassing comments are evidence no one cares what you say.

After you eat Deez Nutz make sure to hit that report button, snowflake.

Will you be very upset if I don't? Sounds like you've run out of anything worth saying or responding to.

gusgranite · February 5

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

NeuM · February 5

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

AlexY · February 5

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:

@NeuM said:

@AlexY said:
I’ve seen Corn Nuts. I think NeuM likes Deez Nutz.

Good thing we don't have a dictator as our President today.

Agreed, he’s kind of a wannabe.

Your ridiculous and embarrassing comments are evidence no one cares what you say.

After you eat Deez Nutz make sure to hit that report button, snowflake.

Will you be very upset if I don't?

I’m indifferent to whether you like to eat Deez Nutz or not.

Sounds like you've run out of anything worth saying or responding to.

Yet here you are

.. and so are the rest of us as we cast pearls before swine.

AlexY · February 5

Wow, the level of delusion is just astounding

NeuM said:

gusgranite said:

NeuM said:

gusgranite said:

Paulieworld said:

NeuM said:

Simon said:

NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2026/02/03/layoffs-at-amazon-ups-show-labor-market-under-stress

I know who loves Trump’s Nutz

gusgranite · February 5

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

A tight labor market does not mean workers have real power. It just means employers are short staffed. Higher posted wages do not equal livable wages once rent, healthcare, and basic costs are counted.

Job boards are not reality. Many listings exaggerate pay, offer unstable hours, or rely on overtime to make wages look good. People can get jobs, but that does not mean they can get security.

Good markets come and go. Labor protections exist because workers should not only be protected when conditions are perfect.

NeuM · February 5

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

A tight labor market does not mean workers have real power. It just means employers are short staffed. Higher posted wages do not equal livable wages once rent, healthcare, and basic costs are counted.

Job boards are not reality. Many listings exaggerate pay, offer unstable hours, or rely on overtime to make wages look good. People can get jobs, but that does not mean they can get security.

Good markets come and go. Labor protections exist because workers should not only be protected when conditions are perfect.

Know what the solution is to "job instability"? Start your own business (and that's something that can be done with virtually no capital investment if you choose to address any number of personal services jobs that require only a modicum of intelligence and the ability to show up).

A job is not guaranteed, nor should it be. But there has never been a better time to be a jobseeker or to start your own business.

gusgranite · February 5

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

A tight labor market does not mean workers have real power. It just means employers are short staffed. Higher posted wages do not equal livable wages once rent, healthcare, and basic costs are counted.

Job boards are not reality. Many listings exaggerate pay, offer unstable hours, or rely on overtime to make wages look good. People can get jobs, but that does not mean they can get security.

Good markets come and go. Labor protections exist because workers should not only be protected when conditions are perfect.

Know what the solution is to "job instability"? Start your own business (and that's something that can be done with virtually no capital investment if you choose to address any number of personal services jobs that require only a modicum of intelligence and the ability to show up).

A job is not guaranteed, nor should it be. But there has never been a better time to be a jobseeker or to start your own business.

Starting a business is not a real answer to job instability. It just dumps risk onto people who often have no savings, no benefits, and no margin for failure. Most small businesses fail, and telling everyone to be an entrepreneur is fantasy, not policy.

Society still needs regular jobs done, and not everyone can or should become a contractor to dodge labor protections. Jobs may not be guaranteed, but basic fairness should be. Opportunity for some does not excuse instability for many.

NeuM · February 5

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@NeuM said:

@gusgranite said:

@Paulieworld said:

@NeuM said:

@Simon said:

@NeuM said:
Trump was elected, based in large part, on his promise to deport illegal aliens.

True.

I wonder how many of those who voted for him are now appauled by the way the deporting is being conducted by ICE thugs?

The numbers are too low, due to illegal interference and threats in the Democrat-run states. Trump should’ve invoked the Insurrection Act months ago (and no, that’s not evidence “fascism”, that’s the constitutionally correct way to handle the violent Marxists and Communists who are engaging in insurrection).

The funny thing about "facism" is that when it benefits their side, it's called "patriotism".
I have repeatedly asked 2 questions.

Why were 11-20 million people allowed to enter this country illegally?

Why weren't immigration laws changed when they had the opportunity and the VOTES?

They are uncomfortable questions that nobody is willing to address.
I think I'll just sit back and observe for awhile.

Those people weren’t “allowed in” because nobody noticed. They came because the US economy has needed their labor for decades. Farms, construction sites, restaurants, cleaning, caregiving and food processing all rely on workers Americans generally do not line up to do, especially for the wages offered. Employers hired them anyway, consumers benefited from lower prices, and politicians from both parties avoided fixing the system because cracking down without changing the economy would have caused shortages and higher costs. That is why enforcement was inconsistent. It was convenient.

Immigration laws were not changed even when there were votes because real reform forces politicians to admit tradeoffs. You cannot have cheap food, cheap housing, fast construction, and zero undocumented workers at the same time. Every serious reform proposal makes someone angry. Business loses workers, voters hear higher prices, activists see enforcement, and politicians lose elections. So nothing changes and everyone blames the other side.

What the US has gained is real and measurable. Undocumented immigrants lower inflation by keeping labor costs down. They pay billions in taxes including Social Security that many will never collect. They keep entire industries running and help offset an aging population that would otherwise shrink the workforce and slow the economy. None of this means the system is good or fair. It means it was tolerated because it benefited the country while leaders refused to be honest about it.

But for me the bottom line needs to be fairness and decency in how laws are now being newly enforced. Not deliberate cruelty. That is at the heart of the moral bankruptcy I see today from the current administration and its supporters.

What I see you saying here is: "The economy can't function without people being paid below the minimum wage."

So... why do we still have the minimum wage? It should be eliminated and wages should be determined by the value of the work to the employer and the willingness of people to trade their labor for money, as would happen in a true free-market economy.

Supply and demand are immutable forces and every time they try to legislate those forces away, they always make their presence known somehow.

That argument pretends the market is neutral and fair. It isn’t. When one side is desperate and the other controls the job, willingness is not freedom. It is leverage. Minimum wage exists because without a floor, wages race downward, not toward some noble balance.

Supply and demand do not care whether people can survive. They only care who has power. We already tried a no–minimum wage world. It produced child labor, slums, company towns, and workers paid in scrip. Those were not mistakes. They were the market working as designed.

If you want a true free market, fine. Then enforce contracts, enforce wages, and punish employers who cheat. What you are actually defending is not free markets, but employers breaking the rules while everyone else pretends it is economic law.

We have the tightest labor market in generations today. Right now. That means anyone who wants a job can get a job. And the pay is insanely high, even for jobs with minimal experience. Have you actually taken a look at jobs boards recently? We are not living in the 1930's.

A tight labor market does not mean workers have real power. It just means employers are short staffed. Higher posted wages do not equal livable wages once rent, healthcare, and basic costs are counted.

Job boards are not reality. Many listings exaggerate pay, offer unstable hours, or rely on overtime to make wages look good. People can get jobs, but that does not mean they can get security.

Good markets come and go. Labor protections exist because workers should not only be protected when conditions are perfect.

Know what the solution is to "job instability"? Start your own business (and that's something that can be done with virtually no capital investment if you choose to address any number of personal services jobs that require only a modicum of intelligence and the ability to show up).

A job is not guaranteed, nor should it be. But there has never been a better time to be a jobseeker or to start your own business.

Starting a business is not a real answer to job instability. It just dumps risk onto people who often have no savings, no benefits, and no margin for failure. Most small businesses fail, and telling everyone to be an entrepreneur is fantasy, not policy.

Society still needs regular jobs done, and not everyone can or should become a contractor to dodge labor protections. Jobs may not be guaranteed, but basic fairness should be. Opportunity for some does not excuse instability for many.

Some of the biggest and best businesses were started by people who were dissatisfied with what was already available from other companies (Examples: Netflix, Uber and AirBnB).

Ours is a competitive society, not a Socialist one.

gusgranite · February 5

A few famous success stories are not an economic model as there are thousands of failures you never hear about. Competition does not mean no rules. Labor standards are not socialism.

NeuM · February 5

@gusgranite said:
A few famous success stories are not an economic model as there are thousands of failures you never hear about. Competition does not mean no rules. Labor standards are not socialism.

There are no guarantees in life, except for the big two (death and taxes). The sooner people face reality, the better. Because informed people can better prepare and manage their lives.

Zerozerozero · February 5

Just to reiterate what offbrands said a while back…
The NeuM account is 100% inauthentic and designed to waste energy.
It’s why it’s reluctant to report people.
It consistently demonstrates established troll techniques (although is poor at them).
Would encourage to cease engaging with it.

Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

Immigration & I.C.E. - A call for proposals

Comments