@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
livinglava wrote:That makes the wall sound like ransom to buy freedom for the DACA dreamers, but I don't see it that way.
Not so much ransom as political compromise. Both sides get something they want.
What compromise is not some form of hostage deal for ransom?
Compromise and quid pro quo are only legitimate in business deals where the sacrifice is acceptable.
The lives of the DACA 'dreamers' hang in the balance of these political deals, so you can't subject them to the false hope that DACA provides in exchange for registering with the government for deportation.
People need to be able to plan their futures without threat of deportation.
All DACA does it make it easier to deport them by getting them to register in exchange for more time.
It just says, "if you make it easier on us to find you and process your deportation, we will give you a little more time before deporting you.
Is that ethical, and if so why/how?
Quote:
I don't believe that Democrats seriously object to the wall. They are just blocking it to be spiteful towards Mr. Trump.
I don't think they object to the idea of protecting jobs that US citizens want from foreign competition, as job-protection is a fundamental value of unions and other job-protection measures such as tenure, anti-discrimination, etc.
But I don't think they see the wall as being an effective tool, and they would rather spend the money on hiring more bureaucrats to regulate and monitor economic activities so that workers can file complaints about unauthorized competition and have people removed from jobs they have instituted protections for.
They don't have to say the reason they want to protect their job is to put citizens first. It's less ugly to just require certified workers and then have citizenship as a condition of getting certified, for example. They don't want to broadcast the inherent nativism in such policies and regulations, because that could lead people to question it. It's more effective to build an invisible bureaucratic wall and to do it quietly than to do what Trump does, drawing lots of attention and criticism to it.
Quote:Immigration reform legislation would not mean an extension of DACA, but rather a permanent fix that would allow the Dreamers to stay permanently.
That would be the right thing to do for them, but the problem is that doing so would set a precedent that would give people hope that bringing their children someplace as minors is like a DACA-amnesty lottery.
The problem is that there aren't just people who want to migrate due to their own independent decision-making. There are also business interests throughout the world that want to plant people in the US to use them as liaisons, so those business interests are going to press people to bring their children to the US knowing that they will be able to get a fast-track to citizenship later because they were brought as children.
In fact, people won't even wait to to prompted by a business. They will figure out on their own that their children gain marketability if they are moved to the US as children to gain a greater chance of winning the citizenship lottery.
So the problem that has to be dealt with is global, which is why are so many people trying to migrate for economic reasons? How can we fix the global economy so people can live happily and sustainably wherever they are and that way migration becomes something that people only do voluntarily and not because they see it as a way to make more money for themselves or anyone else.
