Am I supposed to feel sorry for these people?

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 2:58 am

Did I hear there's a major initiative about to come from the Executive on this issue?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:56 am

What brought this up?

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:59 am

AnneBoleyn;1467876 wrote: What brought this up?

I'd heard there's a major initiative about to come from the Executive on this issue. I think it was in the Washington Post yesterday.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:46 am

Probably referring to this:

report-obama-immigration-plan-expected-next-week

Not much progress is going to be made. Any executive action he proposes without congressional action will be challenged. And it won't stop people from crossing the desert trying to get into the US.

Just like Europe, The only way to truly stop illegal immigration is to make those countries people are leaving into places where they want to stay.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:53 am

He's about to irreversibly make five million undocumented residents into citizens out of the pool of around fourteen million, by Executive Order, if the Washington Post is to be believed. It's a measure relating to some of those already resident, not to those crossing.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:58 am

FG;1467884 wrote: He's about to irreversibly make five million undocumented residents into citizens out of the pool of around fourteen million, by Executive Order, if the Washington Post is to be believed. It's a measure relating to some of those already resident, not to those crossing.

The UK did the same thing several years ago I believe, or at least lowered the criteria to those they waved through.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:43 pm

FG;1467884 wrote: He's about to irreversibly make five million undocumented residents into citizens out of the pool of around fourteen million, by Executive Order, if the Washington Post is to be believed. It's a measure relating to some of those already resident, not to those crossing.

Ummm, No, he is not about to make them citizens.

The latter would expand deferred action for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, allowing 4.5 million illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. legally.

Big diffrence. They would then have available to them a path toward citizenship.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:48 pm

LarsMac;1467889 wrote: Ummm, No, he is not about to make them citizens.

Big diffrence. They would then have available to them a path toward citizenship.

So would you describe it as establishing a new permanent right of residency for this set of people?

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:38 pm

FG;1467901 wrote: So would you describe it as establishing a new permanent right of residency for this set of people?

I would not.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:00 pm

So much for

"Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

(Statue of Liberty)

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:38 am

FourPart;1467915 wrote: So much for

"Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

(Statue of Liberty)

Same with "Remember the Alamo".

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:58 pm

watermark;695215 wrote: I think Mexico has been forced to change how they live because of close proximity to US, also big US companies have taken advantage of the 'conditions' that makes the country easy target for greed and irresponsible merchandisers to set up there. I find the way business is handled between the countries disgusting. And oh yeah I also might mention how much I loathe thieves of any type regardless of national origin, just hate 'em. I do not like to be stolen from. Recently had my credit card stolen and used to purchase several tanks of gas at the local unassuming gas station that has become so lax and greedy they don't even require proof of I D to purchase something! Sick!

Erin :-6

I don't know you from Adam watermark..But the three post of yours I have viewed, I would bet you are AGAINST Voter ID...

Just a hunch...?? Not to change the subject, I am curious..

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:08 pm

Bryn Mawr;695462 wrote: Was it not the US Statute of Liberty that said "bring us you poor, your tired, your huddled masses,"?

Sure did Mr. Mawr....And they went through Ellis Island LEGALLY...Apples & Oranges compared to today

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:20 pm

Bryn Mawr;695488 wrote: But it was meant literally. It was the only way to build the country - not to destroy it. It was not to help others it was to help the USA.

Although the circumstances have changes the logic still holds, whilst the economy is operating at near capacity the only way to expand (and concequently improve standard of living) is to expand the workforce.

Once your swimming pool is chock full, do you keep piling in until someone drowns?? No, you have controls.

Over the past 20 years, the United States has granted legal permanent residence (green cards) to an average of more than 1 million persons per year.

How much is enough??

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusab ... rants.html

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 4:09 pm

BTS;1469430 wrote: Once your swimming pool is chock full, do you keep piling in until someone drowns?? No, you have controls.

Over the past 20 years, the United States has granted legal permanent residence (green cards) to an average of more than 1 million persons per year.

How much is enough??

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusab ... rants.html
Put into real terms that's a tiny amount. The UK alone has a typical immigration figure of about 650,000, with a net migration figure of about 250,000 perannum. That's more than half the American figure, while the entire UK could easily fit into just one of the US states.

Post by **Peter Lake** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:23 pm

FourPart;1469489 wrote: Put into real terms that's a tiny amount. The UK alone has a typical immigration figure of about 650,000, with a net migration figure of about 250,000 perannum. That's more than half the American figure, while the entire UK could easily fit into just one of the US states.

Typical distortion of the facts. Net migration is not the true figure and does not reflect the amount arriving. In 2013, 560,000 arrived. 154,000 British left the country. What's happening is a change of demographics where those coming in outweigh the amount of British going out. Rearrange these words, sand the in and head.

BBC News - Net migration into UK up by more than 38% to 243,000

Emigration: Two million quit Britain in 'talent drain' - Telegraph

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:47 pm

There are Many variables to how we control the LEGAL immigration and the most important being our workforce participation..

We are at a 36 year low...Furthermore, the million average does not include the ILLEGALS. Lord only know what that number is...

Like I say "when is enough enough?"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-0 ... t-labor-fo

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 11:29 pm

Peter Lake;1469495 wrote: Typical distortion of the facts. Net migration is not the true figure and does not reflect the amount arriving. In 2013, 560,000 arrived. 154,000 British left the country. What's happening is a change of demographics where those coming in outweigh the amount of British going out. Rearrange these words, sand the in and head.

BBC News - Net migration into UK up by more than 38% to 243,000

Emigration: Two million quit Britain in 'talent drain' - Telegraph
You may have noticed that the first figure I included refers to the total immigration figures. Fact. The second figure is the Net figure after Emmigration is deducted. Fact. The net figure affirms that the number entering the country is greater than those leaving it. Fact.

These are plain figures. How is that distorting them? I was just pointing out how Americas immigration figures on a size / percapita basis were a mere fraction of our own. In total figures we have about half the number of immigrants than they do, but we are nowhere near half the size of America. Therefore we have a much higher proportional immigration rate than America. How is that distorting the facts?

I would have thought that on this count you would have been agreeing with me, but then, that would be consistent & in line with party policy. As we know, the BNP are never really consistent & when anyone who normally opposes them actually agrees with one of their points they immediately panic, thinking it to be a trap & go all on the defensive by going on the offensive & flaming the words of anyone who makes one of their own points instead of them.