Election 2024

[akaTrex]

Yes. You've said that already. Putting aside the fact that you can't show any numbers to substantiate your claim, you still refuse to acknowledge the fact that legalizing them is projected to MAKE the country trillions. Beyond what is saved.

Is that legal under campaign finance laws? I have no idea why you're bringing it up, other than to continue deflecting and avoiding the argument that I'm making.

Sure. But fewer people also means fewer workers, fewer solutions to problems being discovered, etc. Global statistics continue to show that larger populations are more prosperous, lift more people out of poverty, are more innovative, and myriad other things. There isn't any data to support the assertion that limiting the population will solve those problems. Quite the contrary.

What crusade???

Again, as the number of people goes up, issues go down. Life is FAR more convenient now than at any time in history and continues on that path. We get from place-to-place faster, don't have to wait as long for things, have less waste and sanitation issues, etc...

My argument comes from data that correlates population growth with better living conditions.

But, again... In your world, where we all just raise the drawbridge, you're born in a country and have to remain there for your lifetime because nobody is allowing citizenship outside of that. No thanks.

We don't condone or reward Criminals that INVADED our Country.

The Border Czar can now go do what she does best . . . Nothing!

 

[Johnny D]

We don't condone or reward Criminals that INVADED our Country.

OK. And there we have it.
And, as I've said to others... If that's where the primary impetus for deportation is coming from for you, fine. We disagree on the solution, but at least you're being intellectually honest in your argument. The economic outcome doesn't work in your favor - the math works against you - so simply say, as others have, that this isn't about the cost. There won't be a return on this investment, as you put it, other than that you'll feel better believing the scales of justice have been balanced.

 

[BigRooster]

Let's be honest. Nobody on either side truly wants meaningful discourse. What people want is power and remaining in power, and if division is what it takes to achieve that (more and more we're seeing that it is), then that's what people actually want.

Certain media. Sure. It's equally troubling to witness other media brushing over Trump's clear self-serving agenda and complete disregard for The Constitution, the rule of law, and assaults against women.

The party delegates officially nominated Harris. You can try to spin it however it sounds good to you but you can't change the facts. Pretend all you want that democracy was bypassed. It wasn't.

You keep asking that and I keep answering it, without even a hint of an acknowledgment from you. You jut disregard the inconvenient and continue down the path you've chosen.

That is because us the right. Do not want to waste our breath arguing with fools.

 

[Johnny D]

That is because us the right.

I don't even know what that means? Maybe I'm too much a fool.

Do not want to waste our breath arguing with fools.

A family member stopped having political discussions with me saying, "You always have facts and information, but I just know how I feel". That kind of arguing does sound like a waste of breath to me.

 

[not2big]

Congratulations to the new president elect

 

[CUSP82]

Johnny above you had a quote which read' "Trump's clear self serving agenda and his disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law". I won't debate the Trump stuff but why is it you make a point of Trumps disregard for the rule of law yet the people who illegally crossed our borders and those that let them in don't they show a complete disregard for the rule of law? If a law should be followed why aren't the people who disregarded our laws and walked across the border why aren't they subject to the same scrutiny as Trump ( although I'm not sure what laws Trump disregarded)? Do we now pick and choose what law we follow and which ones we don't?

 

[CUSP82]

Congratulations to the new president elect

Now there's a real good thing; a picture of a man falling down. Boy I do love pictures of people falling down where they may get hurt but I'd rather see it happen in person and hopefully I get to see them writhe in pain. Hey if' there's blood well that's even better. I just love seeing others misfortune; makes me feel really good. Anyone got any good pictures of car accidents or maybe people trapped in a burning building?

 

[akaTrex]

Congratulations to the new president elect

 

[akaTrex]

Sanctuary city Denver spent a whopping $356 million of Taxpayer's Money on Illegal Immigrants.

Sanctuary city Denver spending a whopping $356 million on migrants: study

A new study claims Denver has spent a whopping $356 million of tax-payers' hard-earned money on migrants since the crisis began in 2022 with costs including education, healthcare and housing.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Johnny D]

Johnny above you had a quote which read' "Trump's clear self serving agenda and his disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law". I won't debate the Trump stuff but why is it you make a point of Trumps disregard for the rule of law yet the people who illegally crossed our borders and those that let them in don't they show a complete disregard for the rule of law? If a law should be followed why aren't the people who disregarded our laws and walked across the border why aren't they subject to the same scrutiny as Trump ( although I'm not sure what laws Trump disregarded)? Do we now pick and choose what law we follow and which ones we don't?

That comment was being critical of the media who. I was agreeing that certain medial channels were ignoring Biden's cognitive decline, while other channel were ignoring Trumps indiscretions. It wasn't about whether Trump should be prosecuted, so it's a bit out of context with your premise. That said... I've also agreed that people who are here illegally have broken the law but, yes, sometimes we are in a position where we have to choose what the next best course of action is. I've said over and over again that I'm not advocating for illegal residence, illegal crossing, or anything of the sort. Just that at this point in time, when the US is facing serious economic headwinds from massive debt and deficit spending, the more advantageous solution to this problem is to provide a path to documentation. It's advantageous to the tune of trillions of dollars, whereas deporting them will, in fact, exacerbate the economic issues by a very large degree. Sometimes we're faced with tough decisions. Sometimes, yes, we do have to choose to not prosecute when a law has been broken.

 

[Johnny D]

Congratulations to the new president elect

What is that meant to suggest???

 

[CUSP82]

If you're concerned about debt maybe we should get back the 260 billion dollars we've given to Ukraine to fight a war they can't win.

 

[Johnny D]

If you're concerned about debt maybe we should get back the 260 billion dollars we've given to Ukraine to fight a war they can't win.

No doubt! I've never argued against it. You won't find a single comment from me where you can infer that I support money for Ukraine. But these aren't mutually exclusive. Spending has to stop.

 

[not2big]

If you're concerned about debt maybe we should get back the 260 billion dollars we've given to Ukraine to fight a war they can't win.

Most of the money was paid to U.S. suppliers of the equipment sent to Ukraine

 

[Johnny D]

Most of the money was paid to U.S. suppliers of the equipment sent to Ukraine

Doesn't matter where it went. We're fleecing the US taxpayer to spend money on a war we don't have to fight. Like I've said, everyone advocates for spending less except for on those things that they support and agree with. In which case, money seems to be no object.

 

[not2big]

I guess I was brought up in an earlier time when we supported our Allie’s when they were attacked by our enemies. Sometimes we even sent troops, but that, thankfully, is no longer the case.

 

[akaTrex]

The Dementia Patient President who stated he would not Pardon his son LIED!
President Biden previous remarks to the media, declared he would not pardon his son Hunter.

"Yes," President Biden told ABC News when asked if he would rule out pardoning Hunter ahead of his guilty verdict in the gun case.
Following a jury finding Hunter guilty of three felony firearm offenses, President Biden said again that he would not pardon his son.

Interesting . . . Biden's Christmas Stockings yet again is missing one of his Grand Daughter!

 

[Rok]

That comment was being critical of the media who. I was agreeing that certain medial channels were ignoring Biden's cognitive decline, while other channel were ignoring Trumps indiscretions. It wasn't about whether Trump should be prosecuted, so it's a bit out of context with your premise. That said... I've also agreed that people who are here illegally have broken the law but, yes, sometimes we are in a position where we have to choose what the next best course of action is. I've said over and over again that I'm not advocating for illegal residence, illegal crossing, or anything of the sort. Just that at this point in time, when the US is facing serious economic headwinds from massive debt and deficit spending, the more advantageous solution to this problem is to provide a path to documentation. It's advantageous to the tune of trillions of dollars, whereas deporting them will, in fact, exacerbate the economic issues by a very large degree. Sometimes we're faced with tough decisions. Sometimes, yes, we do have to choose to not prosecute when a law has been broken.

We do not know the cost of deporting the illegals that have criminal records. We also do not know the money and lives saved. There will be a huge savings as well, because these people will not be getting all the govt handouts they currently receive including, transportation, free medical, food, clothing, room and board, free schooling for the kids, etc. The Biden administration flew these illegal people all over our country and embetted them into sanctuary cities all in the hopes of increased liberal voters. It did not work. We are alreading paying local law enforcement, ICE agents, FBI agents to track and catch people who break the laws. Will we need to hire more? That is a strong possibilty, but no one knows for sure. If we do, that is creating a few more good jobs for young people out of the academy. If you really want to look at fiscal spending look at programs that cost billions and provide no return on investment. You claim to not be liberal or conservative so you must just want to argue both sides for the sake of it and that's fine also.

 

[akaTrex]

The Libs /Democrat Arguments for Illegals have fallen on Deaf Ears.
Illegal Immigration was #2 on the Minds of Voters in 2024.
Highlighted by the Lawlessness of the Illegals and the Rape and Murdering of multiple women.
Venezuela is now safer after they sent their Criminals to the USA.

 

[Johnny D]

I don't know if you guys are being obtuse, or what, and not sure how I can be any clearer. I AM NOT arguing in favor of the status quo - keeping illegal immigrants as they are. It's a total straw man argument you're making. I am arguing that providing a path to legalization will be a net positive for the economy whereas deportation will be a net negative.