AOC Steps in it Again!

[Aseahawkfan]

I *have* debated it (many times, in fact- I was on debate teams in both HS and college and this isn't a new subject). It's a bigger *limiter* of immoral behavior than any alternative, and it's not close.

Capitalism is as open to immoral behavior as any other system. That's why you see things like slavery, child brothels, human trafficking, sale of elicit drugs, and the like. Capitalism and the free market have not done more to encourage moral behavior than any other system. That is a falsehood especially given the limited studies available of alternative systems since capitalism even before it was named capitalism has been the standard practice of the world since history started being recorded. Capitalism isn't some new system created by Adam Smith. Capitalism was giving a name to what humans had been doing since the first beginnings of what we might term modern society. Even feudalism might be considered capitalistic in nature given its incentive based reward system before it morphed into a class system. It is socialism and communism that are unnatural human states attempting to force humans into state or group slavery, servitude, or loyalty, whatever you feel like calling it.

Only an active effort taken by human beings regardless of economic system improve human moral outcomes, not an economic system. An economic system may provide different methods for ensuring that outcome, but it does not change the base requirement first which is regulation to ensure immoral industries and activities are not monetized.

If you do not have quality moral system in place first, no economic or government system will encourage moral behavior. Unregulated capitalism would produce awful moral outcomes if people did not have a quality moral base and an active government providing regulation to work from first.

Capitalism is a good system, but only zealots attribute to it unrealistic outcomes.

Your implicit assumption is that irrational behavior vanishes in your alternate system. Sorry, but it doesn't. This shouldn't be news to you.

My statement applies to any system. Humans by their nature are driven more by emotion than by rational action. The economic or governmental system is irrelevant. Humanity has been driven forward by small groups of humans with a higher intellectual capacity causing the human group's living standards to rise in spite of the majority.

If you had said capitalism had done more to improve human living standards than any other system in history, we would be in agreement. Moral behavior is not one of those areas where capitalism has shined any brighter than any other system though I would argue we haven't had many other systems for very long. If society's base moral ideas did not change significantly, we might be seeing some real bad outcomes right now like for profit war.

Let me make this real clear. I support capitalism, just not for everything. It is not some panacea for all the world's ills as some like to push it. It is in fact undesirable in certain areas which can clearly be shown. I'm beginning to think that our medicine system is one of them. Not sure I want a purely socialized model, but we're paying a great deal for healthcare that isn't substantially better for the cost with some real questionable pricing models seeking to profit off human suffering. That's not great no matter how people try to spin it.

[Aseahawkfan]

So what's your solution? All you've done is complain about these people that are making an effort to enter the country as if they should go to hell for having the gall to want to come here yet you have not said what should be done in response. Do you want to start shooting them? According to you, they're rushing our border and you've compared that act with defending our homes, so why not? If someone invades my home, there's a good chance that they could get shot, and the law will back me up. Or how about something less lethal, like attack dogs? Maybe some fire hoses? Tear gas?

1. I'd like to shore up the border sending a clear message that we're not having unlimited immigration into the nation. I'd probably use an electronic wall over a physical wall, though I'd probably employ a physical wall where it might be useful.

2. I"d come down harder on employers seeking to use undocumented immigrants in the labor force since demand drives supply. It's better to attack the demand side of the labor market given they are located in the United States and under our jurisdiction.

3. I'd tie immigration levels to the economic health of the nation limiting immigration substantially when the economy is not in a good state. I have to stabilize the job market domestically before I allow foreign folk into it.

4. I'd work on education within the nation pushing science and tech education into the K 1 to 12 environment much harder than they are now. We have to compete with India, China, and Russia in the tech industry. Whiny American kids telling their parents with sad little faces how much they don't like school, math, and science is no longer acceptable given the modern world's need for technological advancement. American kids need to be driven to compete because that is what foreign children are doing when it comes to school. Not just in sports, but in academics. The H1B visa program incentivized education centers focused on developing tech workers in many foreign nations since they were more willing than American kids to learn the necessary skills for high level performance in the high skill tech industry.

5. I'd start investment in education centers and programs aimed at educating Latin and Central American people with the idea that they will return to their nation of birth to improve the state of the nation there. If we don't help those folks improve the nations they live in, they'll just keep coming here. We can't take everyone in. We've done that for places like India, China, and other foreign nations reducing their need to come here, we can do that for Latin and Central America. There needs to be an overall cultural shift towards education in Latin and Central America. The lack of quality education in that area of the world is a big problem.

I"ll stop there. There's a lot to manage to balance this out so it doesn't screw Americans too badly while the rest of the world catches up to us in wages. I understand the main goal of international policy is to slowly have economic standards improve worldwide until we have a state where a person can work in any nation for a quality wage with a quality standard of living. That is a slow process and we have a lot of work in our backyard to do to make that happen. We should start focusing on Latin and Central America since a stable, prosperous Latin and Central America would benefit us greatly in nearly all areas whether economics or national security.

[burrrton]

Capitalism is a good system, but only zealots attribute to it unrealistic outcomes.

It's a fantastic system, the best in the course of human history by leaps and bounds, and if "better than the others" is an "unrealistic outcome" to you, that's your problem.

[edit]

And I like your suggestions, although for #3, I'd point out that illegal immigration largely self-regulates, rising and falling with the health of the economy. That's why levels dropped through much of Obama's admin and have been picking up the last few years.

Doesn't mean any adjustments on our part wouldn't be worthwhile, but just saying.

[RiverDog]

1. I'd like to shore up the border sending a clear message that we're not having unlimited immigration into the nation. I'd probably use an electronic wall over a physical wall, though I'd probably employ a physical wall where it might be useful.

Agreed. In an urban area, a wall makes a lot of sense, but not across hundreds of miles of barren desert. The kind of wall Donald Trump wants to build is going to take decades to build, and in all likelihood, will never get to 10% of the buildout he proposes. There's plenty of other methods, everything from satellites and drones to ground sensors and active patrols that can be just as effective at a fraction of the cost. Besides, most of our problems come through the ports of entry, ie drugs, human trafficking, etc. The vast majority of undocumented aliens are here because they overstayed their visas, meaning that they entered legally. We must reinforce and improve the methods being used at ports of entry, and not just at the southern border, and improve our tracking of visa holding visitors and prosecute or deport those that overstay their visas.

2. I"d come down harder on employers seeking to use undocumented immigrants in the labor force since demand drives supply. It's better to attack the demand side of the labor market given they are located in the United States and under our jurisdiction.

Speaking from experience, most major employers do not hire illegals. All employees and prospective employees must give their employer a valid SSN who in turn gives that information to the IRS/SSA, which is/or should be the government's heads up. The government can track that individual through their SS contributions. The government knows, or should know, where and when that person is working. There should be no reason for the federal government not to know that a company is employing an illegal. There are small companies, farms, etc, that no doubt employ illegals under the table and do not report them to the government.

3. I'd tie immigration levels to the economic health of the nation limiting immigration substantially when the economy is not in a good state. I have to stabilize the job market domestically before I allow foreign folk into it.

I agree 100%. Currently we have a labor shortage across a wide variety of industries. Indeed, we need a particular demographic group, 18-35 year olds that will contribute to our social programs/insurance plans without taking benefits from them. We need to prioritize allowing those folks into our country vs. the 50+ year olds. That could change if the economy slips into recession and our unemployment rate starts to increase, and if it does, our immigration quotes need to be reduced accordingly. I would also put a premium on an applicant that has a documented educational background, a high school diploma, or some type of trade if they can verify it. I'd also consider giving an applicant a competency exam, see if they have the ability to learn. Those with the ability to speak and read English should be given priority.

4. I'd work on education within the nation pushing science and tech education into the K 1 to 12 environment much harder than they are now. We have to compete with India, China, and Russia in the tech industry. Whiny American kids telling their parents with sad little faces how much they don't like school, math, and science is no longer acceptable given the modern world's need for technological advancement. American kids need to be driven to compete because that is what foreign children are doing when it comes to school. Not just in sports, but in academics. The H1B visa program incentivized education centers focused on developing tech workers in many foreign nations since they were more willing than American kids to learn the necessary skills for high level performance in the high skill tech industry.

Agreed.

5. I'd start investment in education centers and programs aimed at educating Latin and Central American people with the idea that they will return to their nation of birth to improve the state of the nation there. If we don't help those folks improve the nations they live in, they'll just keep coming here. We can't take everyone in. We've done that for places like India, China, and other foreign nations reducing their need to come here, we can do that for Latin and Central America. There needs to be an overall cultural shift towards education in Latin and Central America. The lack of quality education in that area of the world is a big problem.

Agreed, but that's not going to help the current crisis at the border. Those people want out of those countries because there's so much crime and government corruption. Many if not most are not going to want to go back. IMO something has to be done inside those countries, whether it be foreign aid, military/law enforcement assistance, etc. But as we discussed, it's a little hard to keep this activity as being seen as more American imperialism.

I"ll stop there. There's a lot to manage to balance this out so it doesn't screw Americans too badly while the rest of the world catches up to us in wages. I understand the main goal of international policy is to slowly have economic standards improve worldwide until we have a state where a person can work in any nation for a quality wage with a quality standard of living. That is a slow process and we have a lot of work in our backyard to do to make that happen. We should start focusing on Latin and Central America since a stable, prosperous Latin and Central America would benefit us greatly in nearly all areas whether economics or national security.

I agree with most of your thoughts except that wasn't what I was asking for you to respond to. You are talking about the big picture that's going to take years to solve. My question is what are you going to do about the current border crisis.

[Aseahawkfan]

I agree with most of your thoughts except that wasn't what I was asking for you to respond to. You are talking about the big picture that's going to take years to solve. My question is what are you going to do about the current border crisis.

I'd do what they're doing I imagine, Boost funding to improve the facilities and hire additional personnel.

I'd probably use some of Trump's methods like pressuring Mexico and other Latin American nations to get control of their immigration enforcement. Mexico pushing the cost of immigration enforcement on us by herding immigrants to the American border is BS. I know you feel sympathy for Mexico's poverty, but after reading how Mexico uses their border enforcement personnel to push the immigrants along certain paths so they don't have to detain and process immigrants is irresponsible and a bad neighbor policy. Immigrants literally have no fear of crossing Mexico because Mexico is pushing the cost to us.

If I was being a real dick, I'd maybe do like Mexico and push the Latin/Central American immigrants to Canada. See how they like it since Trudeau was celebrated as a champion of immigration even though Canada's immigration laws are stricter than ours and they benefit from having us between them and Latin and Central America. See how well Canada's 30 million people absorb the level of immigrants we do showing up at the border. I likely wouldn't really be that much of a jerk, but it would amuse me to see what Canadian's do if we did to them what Mexico is doing to us. Would it be cheaper for us to buy each immigrant a bus or train ticket to Canada with some food vouchers? More than likely.

I'd stay stern and strict but professional in my information delivery to the American people that the Executive Branch is fulfilling it's duty to protect our borders. That we will boost funding to improve conditions, while at the same time not allow an open borders policy that harms our sovereignty and our ability to control who enters our nation. I'd ensure the American people know that who becomes an American is an important consideration for our nation and we will not allow unlimited and unchecked immigration.

On a side note, I would likely support DACA. I'm ok providing citizenship to children brought over young and raised here. That seems reasonable to me, even though I don't like the fact that we allowed his large number of people using children as anchors in. Though I am happy that the American people do have a soft spot for children. No one wants to be part of a nation that is hard-hearted against children.

*********

I'm personally not sure how bad the crisis is at the moment to be honest with you. It feels as though the media is exaggerating the problem to attack Trump and Trump is exaggerating it to rouse his base. What numbers do we have down there? A few people dying in a mass of people in this situation is to be expected. I feel we're not hearing the entire story. If a child was dragged on a 2000 mile trek or even a few hundred miles, they may already be in ill health and it may not have anything to do with our care at the border facilities. When you see these two parties politicizing this entire situation, it's difficult to get a real idea of how badly or well things are going at the border. For all I know this may be business as usual for our border enforcement but due to the way both parties are politicizing this situation along with media magnification may be making it all seem way worse than it is.

I mean at the moment I'm hearing trash about concentration camps. I'm wondering what's next? Someone making up some lie about Trump having immigrants gassed or something like that? The politicization of this thing gives the feeling that they're both lying to push their agenda. People tend to believe the opposing view of whichever group they hate more.

[burrrton]

On a side note, I would likely support DACA. I'm ok providing citizenship to children brought over young and raised here.

Yup, and *especially* now that the horse is out of the barn. For better or worse, we told them to come forward with the promise of citizenship, and they did so in good faith. Yanking that away now that they've come into the light would be cruel.

And this is even ignoring the fact that it's asinine to characterize people brought here as children, who have literally never known another home, as some kind of interloper with bad intentions.

The DREAMers are a bit different, but mostly get the same wide berth from me for meeting the requirements for leniency.