Who should be Trump's VP choice and why?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(6 hours ago)pally Wrote:  If undocemented people coming across the boeder equals a violation of the Consitution then every Presdident since the beginning of the Republic is huilty.  Incluing Trump

If you want to discuss violations of the Constitution shall I remind you yet again of the illegal elector scheme designed by Trump to stay in power despite losing the election

It's expected to a degree that illegals will come, but the numbers under Biden's watch are over whelming. 

Whataboutism? 

[hollodero]

(5 hours ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: It's expected to a degree that illegals will come, but the numbers under Biden's watch are over whelming. 

Whataboutism? 

I think you have a very fair point here (I would not solely confine it to democrats, but whatever), in general I can not quite fathom how the US allows so many illegal aliens within its borders in the first place. It's just, the interpretation that Biden actually broke the constitution still is far fetched at best.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(4 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: I think you have a very fair point here (I would not solely confine it to democrats, but whatever), in general I can not quite fathom how the US allows so many illegal aliens within its borders in the first place. It's just, the interpretation that Biden actually broke the constitution still is far fetched at best.

The problem with Immigration this round is completely on the Dems. 
Biden was so hell bent on un-doing Trumps Immigration policies and had no plan in place once he un-did them in his first few days in office. And did nothing but Mouth about how he wanted Congress to DO something, when apparently as we have just seen, he has the power all along to do something and chose not to.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(4 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: I think you have a very fair point here (I would not solely confine it to democrats, but whatever), in general I can not quite fathom how the US allows so many illegal aliens within its borders in the first place. It's just, the interpretation that Biden actually broke the constitution still is far fetched at best.

There's a significant number of people here who think that past US actions, e.g. coups in various nations, resource exploitation, taking land such as Texas, etc. means that we cannot enforce our borders and that anyone who can set foot on US soil should be allowed entry.  You'd think this is an exaggeration of the position, but it really isn't.  Of course, in addition to allowing millions into a system without much in the way of checks on who they are or what they're doing here, no country can culturally absorb such a flow of immigrants, illegal or otherwise.  There's also the issue of putting up immigrants, both legal and illegal in comfy hotel rooms or houses while natural born US citizens are homeless.

Honestly, at this point I'd put a complete freeze on immigration of any kind for ten years, only reopening it once we've fixed the system including a Constitutional amendment removing the born on US soil citizenship, which has served its intended purpose and is now routinely abused.  Note that's all immigrants, no racism here, a complete blanket freeze.

[hollodero]

(3 hours ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: The problem with Immigration this round is completely on the Dems. 
Biden was so hell bent on un-doing Trumps Immigration policies and had no plan in place once he un-did them in his first few days in office. And did nothing but Mouth about how he wanted Congress to DO something, when apparently as we have just seen, he has the power all along to do something and chose not to.

I won't disagree with you on that one. Biden sure seems quite passive and planless on that. I just think the problem runs deeper than that.

My country does not have much undocumented immigrants, and the reason is not any kind of excellent border policy. It's that they do not get working permits, and if an employer is caught having undocumented workers, the consequences are hefty. In the US, consequences for the employer hardly exist at all, maybe a tiny fine and that's that. Imho, that contributes way more to the situation than anything you can do with other policies or at the border, and I would blame both parties for that. And also Trump specifically, who allegedly (but probably actually) likes to employ undocumented immigrants himself.

[hollodero]

(2 hours ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: There's a significant number of people here who think that past US actions, e.g. coups in various nations, resource exploitation, taking land such as Texas, etc. means that we cannot enforce our borders and that anyone who can set foot on US soil should be allowed entry.  You'd think this is an exaggeration of the position, but it really isn't.  Of course, in addition to allowing millions into a system without much in the way of checks on who they are or what they're doing here, no country can culturally absorb such a flow of immigrants, illegal or otherwise.  There's also the issue of putting up immigrants, both legal and illegal in comfy hotel rooms or houses while natural born US citizens are homeless.

Honestly, at this point I'd put a complete freeze on immigration of any kind for ten years, only reopening it once we've fixed the system including a Constitutional amendment removing the born on US soil citizenship, which has served its intended purpose and is now routinely abused.  Note that's all immigrants, no racism here, a complete blanket freeze.

I certainly understand the problem. Just today it was made public that 35% of Vienna's elementary school pupils are muslims now. That is too much for our society to absorb too, that's also not about racism, so I sure would not make that connection here. What I would disagree with is pinning immigrants and the homeless against each other, for the homeless crisis imho is not unsolved because of immigrants. I also am sceptical about a complete halt of any immigration. For one, it seems many industries depend on immigrant's labour. But mostly, it was always admirable to me how the US is built on ideals, built by immigrants uniting in said ideals, where everyone who is willing to contribute and work hard is welcome no matter the ethnicity. I wouldn't throw that away completely by a total immigration freeze, it seems like an advantage. Capping it, conditioning it to certain aspects and having way less tolerance towards illegal immigrants, that sure gets my support and I agree the Dems seem awfully weak on that issue.

Oh yeah and the born on US soil policy certainly is astonishing. I would never tolerate such a policy for my country.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: I won't disagree with you on that one. Biden sure seems quite passive and planless on that. I just think the problem runs deeper than that.

My country does not have much undocumented immigrants, and the reason is not any kind of excellent border policy. It's that they do not get working permits, and if an employer is caught having undocumented workers, the consequences are hefty. In the US, consequences for the employer hardly exist at all, maybe a tiny fine and that's that. Imho, that contributes way more to the situation than anything you can do with other policies or at the border, and I would blame both parties for that. And also Trump specifically, who allegedly (but probably actually) likes to employ undocumented immigrants himself.

And i would put alot of that blame on Politics not granting them enough $ to make it a priority. 
We do hit companies, seen it all the way up here in Cincinnati where we bust companies for hiring illegals. 

Not sure if the issue is manpower or money to investigate but more funding for that and a heavier emphasis on it would certainly start curbing it.

[hollodero]

(2 hours ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: And i would put alot of that blame on Politics not granting them enough $ to make it a priority. 
We do hit companies, seen it all the way up here in Cincinnati where we bust companies for hiring illegals. 

Just out of curiosity, what are the consequences for said companies in Cincy? I sure only know what's to be found on google, and taking this information there's fines from 250 to 1.000 dollars, more if it happens repeatedly or is proven to be systematic, but overall it seems like peanuts most employers are willing to risk.

(2 hours ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Not sure if the issue is manpower or money to investigate but more funding for that and a heavier emphasis on it would certainly start curbing it.

My guess would be a lack of political will on both sides. I would assume that many of the big party donors have no interest in going after illegal employments.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: I certainly understand the problem. Just today it was made public that 35% of Vienna's elementary school pupuils are muslims now. That is too much for our society to absorb too, that's also not about racism, so I sure would not make that connection here. What I would disagree with is pinning immigrants and the homeless against each other, for the homeless crisis imho is not unsolved because of immigrants. I also am sceptical about a complete halt of any immigration. For one, it seems many industries depend on immigrant's labour. But mostly, it was always admirable to me how the US is built on ideals, built by immigrants uniting in said ideals, where everyone who is willing to contribute and work hard is welcome no matter the ethnicity. I wouldn't throw that away completely by a total immigration freeze, it seems like an advantage. Capping it, conditioning it to certain aspects and having way less tolerance towards illegal immigrants, that sure gets my support and I agree the Dems seem awfully weak on that issue.

The freeze would be necessary to get those things.  The Dems have made immigration a racial issue, which we both agree it is not.  To force them to make much needed changes you'd need to play real hardball.  If you could achieve what we both think is a logical solution without it, all the better.  I just don't think you could.  

Quote:Oh yeah and the born on US soil policy certainly is astonishing. I would never tolerate such a policy for my country.

It was an excellent idea at the time it was enacted, the entire purpose of it being to prevent southern states from denying citizenship to freed slaves.  But I think it's safe to say that is no longer a consideration.  And it is routinely abused.  There is birth tourism, in this area of the country largely from China, whose sole intent is getting pregnant women over here to have children.  When I worked at a hockey store in my early 20's it was bought out by a Russian dude (who I am convinced was in the Russian mafia) who brought his wife over with him on a temporary Visa and they overstayed it so the kid could be born here.  The upside to that being that he couldn't return for a long time and he had a friend of his who lived here run the place and she was a scorching hot Russian woman.  Like a 10/10.  Gave me a reason to go into work everyday.

[*pally*]

Immigration is a bilateral problem caused by decades of inaction by Congresses who were too busy politicizing the problem to fix it.

A 10 year moratorium on immigration is ridiciculous and not going to happen.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: Just out of curiosity, what are the consequences for said companies in Cincy? I sure only know what's to be found on google, and taking this information there's fines from 250 to 1.000 dollars, more if it happens repeatedly or is proven to be systematic, but overall it seems like peanuts most employers are willing to risk.



My guess would be a lack of political will on both sides. I would assume that many of the big party donors have no interest in going after illegal employments.

Not enough, i turned in a company that had already been busted 2x, they use illegals to clean hotels. They can change their name and start all over again. 

probably not. But it would be a good start vs wasting money running around chasing them down to deport them. Deport those they catch working illegally, hold them for a few days so in case they do have legal papers they have a chance to get them brought forward. Otherwise deport them. Message will get thru, if you work illegally and get caught, auto-deport on top of the company getting heavily fined or at least heavily fine the OWNER of the company. That way they feel it directly.

(2 hours ago)pally Wrote: Immigration is a bilateral problem caused by decades of inaction by Congresses who were too busy politicizing the problem to fix it.

A 10  year moratorium on immigration is ridiciculous and not going to happen.

10 years probably a bit much, but would bring both sides to the table for sure.

[hollodero]

(2 hours ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The freeze would be necessary to get those things.  The Dems have made immigration a racial issue, which we both agree it is not.  To force them to make much needed changes you'd need to play real hardball.  If you could achieve what we both think is a logical solution without it, all the better.  I just don't think you could.  

Yeah well, I just think it's a radical approach that comes with distinct problems. Imho you need the cheap labor, Americans are not really willing to bring in crops or work hard for minimal pay, but you understandably still like cheap stuff. No immigrants would probably mean increasing prices and/or an even bigger trade deficit. Also I'd have a severe issue with abandoning the right of asylum. (And, as I said, I think the US loses an important part of its core identity, but you sure might have a better feeling about that one than a stranger like me.)

(2 hours ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It was an excellent idea at the time it was enacted, the entire purpose of it being to prevent southern states from denying citizenship to freed slaves.  But I think it's safe to say that is no longer a consideration.  And it is routinely abused.  There is birth tourism, in this area of the country largely from China, whose sole intent is getting pregnant women over here to have children.  When I worked at a hockey store in my early 20's it was bought out by a Russian dude (who I am convinced was in the Russian mafia) who brought his wife over with him on a temporary Visa and they overstayed it so the kid could be born here.  The upside to that being that he couldn't return for a long time and he had a friend of his who lived here run the place and she was a scorching hot Russian woman.  Like a 10/10.  Gave me a reason to go into work everyday.

I see... the recent influx of mostly female Ukrainian refugees sure made my country more beautiful too. I don't know how they do it, but these slavic countries just breed female beauty. As for the ius soli, I knew a bit about the history, but it's quite clear how open for wide spread abuse that system is, something one can know without knowing. Does any party actually demand a change?

[hollodero]

(2 hours ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Not enough, i turned in a company that had already been busted 2x, they use illegals to clean hotels. They can change their name and start all over again. 

probably not. But it would be a good start vs wasting money running around chasing them down to deport them. Deport those they catch working illegally, hold them for a few days so in case they do have legal papers they have a chance to get them brought forward. Otherwise deport them. Message will get thru, if you work illegally and get caught, auto-deport on top of the company getting heavily fined or at least heavily fine the OWNER of the company. That way they feel it directly.

Yeah, I would assume these are way more feasible and effective measures than building a 2.000 miles long wall. I'd agree you need to severly punish both parties, employee and employer, I would even focus on the latter. The fact that illegal immigrants are so likely to find a job is what we in Europe would call a huge pull factor.

Btw. my leftist peeers are routinely shocked by my views on that.... so yeah, on that particular issue I'm probably way more with you than with the left.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: Yeah well, I just think it's a radical approach that comes with distinct problems. Imho you need the cheap labor, Americans are not really willing to bring in crops or work hard for minimal pay, but you understandably still like cheap stuff. No immigrants would probably mean increasing prices and/or an even bigger trade deficit. Also I'd have a severe issue with abandoning the right of asylum. (And, as I said, I think the US loses an important part of its core identity, but you sure might have a better feeling about that one than a stranger like me.)



I see... the recent influx of mostly female Ukrainian refugees sure made my country more beautiful too. I don't know how they do it, but these slavic countries just breed female beauty. As for the ius soli, I knew a bit about the history, but it's quite clear how open for wide spread abuse that system is, something one can know without knowing. Does any party actually demand a change?

The first isn't really an issue like they want  you to believe. 

We have a giant legal pool of both Agriculture and Non-Agriculture labor workers that are seasonal and come from over the border and return when the job is done. Yes some abuse and run but not as many as you think. They make a living doing this, so leaving is important if you want to be allowed back.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: Yeah well, I just think it's a radical approach that comes with distinct problems. Imho you need the cheap labor, Americans are not really willing to bring in crops or work hard for minimal pay, but you understandably still like cheap stuff. No immigrants would probably mean increasing prices and/or an even bigger trade deficit. Also I'd have a severe issue with abandoning the right of asylum. (And, as I said, I think the US loses an important part of its core identity, but you sure might have a better feeling about that one than a stranger like me.)

Unless you arrive on US soil via the ocean you cannot claim asylum in this country unless you are Mexican or Canadian.  As claiming asylum requires you to apply in the first safe country you enter and both Mexico and Canada are designates as safe countries.  As for cheap labor, I don't see that as an issue given the push towards a $20 minimum wage in many states.

Quote:I see... the recent influx of mostly female Ukrainian refugees sure made my country more beautiful too. I don't know how they do it, but these slavic countries just breed female beauty. As for the ius soli, I knew a bit about the history, but it's quite clear how open for wide spread abuse that system is, something one can know without knowing. Does any party actually demand a change?

Yes, it is a mystery I'd love to see solved.  As for the change, I don't recall anyone of any prominence suggesting such an amendment.  I think it's far too racially charged and no one wants to be the first person to bring it up.  I think if it was discussed openly there would be significant support for it among the general populace.

[hollodero]

(1 hour ago)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: The first isn't really an issue like they want  you to believe. 

We have a giant legal pool of both Agriculture and Non-Agriculture labor workers that are seasonal and come from over the border and return when the job is done. Yes some abuse and run but not as many as you think. They make a living doing this, so leaving is important if you want to be allowed back.

I don't really care about "them"... but for sure I am not that well informed on the issue. It's just, when the topic is a complete freeze on immigration, the current dynamics might change a lot (if these seasonal workers are even allowed back in and are not part of said freeze to begin with). It could suddenly become a way more popular possibility to enter the country and stay illegally, compared to the current status quo where you basically just have to fly over on a visa and overstay.

[hollodero]

(1 hour ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Unless you arrive on US soil via the ocean you cannot claim asylum in this country unless you are Mexican or Canadian.  As claiming asylum requires you to apply in the first safe country you enter and both Mexico and Canada are designates as safe countries.

Well, I don't really know all that much about it, so these are more questions than anything. But first off, aren't there quite a lot that do enter via ocean, from Cuba or other caribic states for example. It seems the US has around 20.000 to 40.000 people per year that are granted asylum, do most of them apply illegally?
Also, I would have objections to just claim Mexico has to deal with all asylum seekers from the south. Imho, some kind of solidarity from the US is just and reasonable. Eg my country is surrounded by safe countries, that doesn't mean that we have no obligation to grant asylum and imho that is only fair to the other countries. That's one of the points where I am just not on board with your idea, as I am generally not.

(1 hour ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As for cheap labor, I don't see that as an issue given the push towards a $20 minimum wage in many states.

Well, you don't have such minimum wages yet and chances are it will never be that high. And even if, does that minimum wage really apply to non-citizens? I would assume it would not.

(1 hour ago)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As for the change, I don't recall anyone of any prominence suggesting such an amendment.  I think it's far too racially charged and no one wants to be the first person to bring it up.  I think if it was discussed openly there would be significant support for it among the general populace.

Curious. I would not have thought Trump to shy away from suggestions that might be seen as racist by some more leftist circles.

[Dill]

(2 hours ago)hollodero Wrote: I certainly understand the problem. Just today it was made public that 35% of Vienna's elementary school pupils are muslims now. That is too much for our society to absorb too, that's also not about racism, so I sure would not make that connection here. What I would disagree with is pinning immigrants and the homeless against each other, for the homeless crisis imho is not unsolved because of immigrants. I also am sceptical about a complete halt of any immigration. For one, it seems many industries depend on immigrant's labour. But mostly, it was always admirable to me how the US is built on ideals, built by immigrants uniting in said ideals, where everyone who is willing to contribute and work hard is welcome no matter the ethnicity. I wouldn't throw that away completely by a total immigration freeze, it seems like an advantage. Capping it, conditioning it to certain aspects and having way less tolerance towards illegal immigrants, that sure gets my support and I agree the Dems seem awfully weak on that issue.
Oh yeah and the born on US soil policy certainly is astonishing. I would never tolerate such a policy for my country.

Yeah, 35% is a lot.

Just watched Tatort Wien, season 1 episode 1 (2010) last night. The story includes local resistance to a minaret for a mosque in an alpine village called "Telfs."
But the plot turns around the murder of a Turkish girl and her Austrian boyfriend by the son of the guy who leads local opposition to the minaret. The 
murdered girl's father wants to send her sister back to Turkey for marriage when he finds out she is dating the other son the opposition leader. Contemporary Romeo and Juliet. 

Looks like the local cop, of Turkish heritage, is an Austrian citizen, but disliked by Turks for being a "traitor" and by Austrians for being a Turk. Except for the Commissar of course who is liberal and insists the cop be treated according to his office. Can foreigners be naturalized there? Guessing it may be different for Turks who have been there for several generations.

PS beautiful mountains there. Wow. 

[hollodero]

(55 minutes ago)Dill Wrote: Yeah, 35% is a lot.

Just watched Tatort Wien, season 1 episode 1 (2010) last night. The story includes local resistance to a minaret for a mosque in an alpine village called "Telfs."
But the plot turns around the murder of a Turkish girl and her Austrian boyfriend by the son of the guy who leads local opposition to the minaret. The 
murdered girl's father wants to send her sister back to Turkey for marriage when he finds out she is dating the other son the opposition leader. Contemporary Romeo and Juliet. 

Looks like the local cop, of Turkish heritage, is an Austrian citizen, but disliked by Turks for being a "traitor" and by Austrians for being a Turk. Except for the Commissar of course who is liberal and insists the cop be treated according to his office. Can foreigners be naturalized there? Guessing it may be different for Turks who have been there for several generations.

PS beautiful mountains there. Wow. 

Ah yeah, "Baum der Erlösung". Probably one of the best of the Vienna Tatort series. The part about the minaret is based on real events in the Tyrolean city Telfs, which I have to add is quite a different world than Vienna is. Tyroleans are particularly proud, particularly nationalistic and isolated, don't quite like strangers that aren't tourists (them they like very much) and there's not that much difference between Viennese people and Turkish people in that assessment, both have the wrong blood. The problems with integration there sure are multiplied in comparison.

As for getting naturalized, if you mean citizenship then usually one can apply after ten years. The turkish community is especially difficult to grasp really, since there are many in second or third generation and there's quite a large spectrum of perfectly integrated people up to the ones who still keep in strict isolation from the Austrian locals - though I would assume that the extreme of sending a daughter to Turkey for marriage is not all that common any more. I was quite shocked though how many of our Austrian-Turks are big Erdogan fans, which quite contradicts our values and beliefs. Imho, it is a problem and will lead to the forming of muslim parties in the not so distant future, which only further feeds the rise of the right-wing extremists here, and a failing immigration policy imho is largely to blame for that. That's why I say I'm not so left on that issue, since the only answer from the left leaning parties seems to be that there is not a problem at all and if you claim otherwise you're just irrationally scared and racist and quite possibly a Nazi. It's something I also accuse the American left of doing, just negating the problem and sending people right into the Trump camp.

And yeah, the beauty of our mountains is amongst our biggest economic exploits. Me personally, I only like them from a distance. The money is good though.