Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 18:15:08 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2014 13:13:58 GMT
Yes, let's compare a natural disaster that killed over 1800 people and caused 125 billion in damage to an immigration crisis. Boy, if that isn't the right wing talking point du jour, I don't know what is. The government is ill equipped because of sequestration....remember that? there are ramifications of that that a whole lot of people had no clue about and had no clue what the trickle down effect would be. and again....if it hadn't have been for 2008 law that was passed regarding children from Central America, there would be no need to process them they way are country has to now because it's the LAW. Would you like Congress and the President to change that law?I watch a bit of Fox News the other night and I could not believe the scare tactics that they were using regarding this immigration crisis....holy cow.....it was really really irresponsible of them. It never ceases to amaze me just how figuratively people take things here. Sequestration, the idea that originated in the White House and was passed with 58% of Democrats voting for it. Yeah, I remember that. Obama has already asked Congress to amend the 2008 law so that Border Patrol agents can make an immediate decision on deportation. Really, you don't think that CNN and others don't use their own form of scare tactics when reporting. You can't light a fire if you don't have a fuel source. Exaggeration in reporting is their fuel and they all use it. And let us not forget Obama's 2012 Executive Order which was basically the written invitation and if you look at the numbers, the huge influx began in 2012. If the 2008 law were to blame, we would've seen this in 2009.
Even if border patrol was fully funded (pre-sequestration) this issue would still be in crisis mode. These numbers that have been coming in since 2012 is unprecedented.
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,535
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jul 12, 2014 15:51:30 GMT
From everything I've read. Right now Texas is footing the bill for all the children that have crossed. The Federal govt hasn't given any money...yet. The border towns , particularly McAllen, have taken on most of the costs. I'm very torn about what needs to be done - I live in Texas. And we would be quite ignorant if we believed that these are all 'innocent children'. Stephanie in TX My understanding is actually a step worse. I've read that our year's allotment of federal disaster aid has already been spent on this, and that if we are hit by a big hurricane or something, we're completely SOL. Who knows? Regardless, it is definitely true we've spent a fortune on this one situation.
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,535
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jul 12, 2014 15:58:39 GMT
KiwiJo, you are right as far as the news here in the US. Even when you are trying to find news of other places, it can be difficult.
|
|
raindancer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,095
Jun 26, 2014 20:10:29 GMT
|
Post by raindancer on Jul 12, 2014 16:06:32 GMT
But that's just it. There hasn't been any disaster or conflict, just the usual turf wars, bad as they might be. Those people are coming here because as I said before, "suspension of deportations is the source of rampant rumors in Central America and elsewhere that children will find immediate amnesty or a path to citizenship when they get here. Show up and you are good to go. Thus the surge that we are currently seeing." Instead of being turned away at the border, they are invited in. I don't agree with that part of it because of why they came. Had there been a real war or disaster, my response would be different. I agree with the rest of your post, of course we need to be humane. Helping others in need is what we do. Becky just answered my unasked question. I have been trying to figure out what has suddenly changed in the political situation in any of these countries. Or wondering if there was some huge natural disaster that I completely missed. I don't think there is any good answer to this situation. I agree with a PP who said that anyone with gang ties should go back immediately. But as a mother, it's hard for me to countenance sending helpless CHILDREN back to abject poverty---I don't consider 15 to 17 year old gang members children---on the other hand, . . . . I could stay on this merry-go-round forever. Since I adopted my son from foster care, I do know some about how overburdened our system is. And since my own, American-born son was homeless for the first five years of his life, I know some about how precarious life is for our own citizens. We haven't managed to care adequately for THEM. I'm having a hard time understanding why care which should go to our own children first will be diverted to children from other nations. Yes, we are a nation of immigrants. Yes, we are a rich nation. Yes, we pride ourselves on everyone having the opportunity to achieve the American Dream. However, the home nations of these immigrants could/should encourage the same opportunities. WE can't fix those nations (no matter what we did or did not do in the past), so I fail to see that it is our job to take care of the children that their own policies have impoverished. As I've already said, there is no good answer. Here is where you lose me with your argument. Your son, and all the precious children in America are not somehow *more* deserving of care, compassion, humanity, and the basic essentials of life. And while you won't find me arguing with you about the disaster that is our foster care system (I worked in it for 3 years and am >.< that close to a public health degree, the argument that because they had the fortune of being born here and some other child had the misfortune of being born in Guatemala, gives the US child more "rights" to "our" stuff is crazy to me. As for your comment about how we can't fix those nations, regardless of our hand in their current situations is crap. And we just continue on, it's not like this is some thing of the past. Here is a link to a series put out by PBS, called Unnatural Causes. I would suggest watching Collateral Damage which is about the US and the Marshall Islands. It's shameful. We have really destroyed them, and we just continue on doing what we do and defending it.
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,535
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jul 12, 2014 16:07:36 GMT
And I'll do this as a separate post so as not to confuse issues. The bigger scale problem I see with this is that if we accept all these people, just how many are going to come in the next wave? And the next? Like it or not, we aren't able to accept everyone. I think the best thing for the MOST people is to send these ones home, in hopes of dissuading larger mass immigration. This is saddeningly a situation that doesn't permit us to look at individuals but the problem. If we accept 40000 now, then will we be facing 100,000 next time? I'd rather have to turn away 40,000 than 100,000. I'd love to welcome every single person who wants to join our country, but reality is that we're not even taking care of our own. We don't have resources to handle a massive influx of people like this, and they're in pretty inhumane circumstances for the most part even as we speak. Logistics are a very real part of the problem here. A few people a day we can absorb. But 40,000 people arriving on our doorstep at once is something we can't handle. Look at history, and the Mariel boatlift. We have a mixture of innocents and less innocents here, as well, and what can we do? Do we just accept everyone, even when we don't have the resources, and pay the price in our society? The bottom line is there is NO good answer, we can only try to decide what does the least harm.
|
|
|
Post by SunnySmile on Jul 12, 2014 16:08:17 GMT
While I do understand why these people are basically abandoning their children because of the conditions in their homeland, why is it our responsibility to take care of them? I'm not being snarky or judgemental, I seriously want to know why some people think that it is our responsibility? How can these people live with themselves sending small defenseless children into another country without anything? To me that is abandonment. Now we are supposed to spend billions of dollars that we need for other things (funded by the average American and not the elite 1%) to take care of this issue. Okay, off my soapbox. I'm right there on the soapbox with you. It does seem like there are so many variables though. So many reasons why. I want to say with greater prosperity comes greater responsibility. It's hard when my tax dollars are paid for this when my own family struggles to put kids through college, and we can't afford health premiums.
|
|
raindancer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,095
Jun 26, 2014 20:10:29 GMT
|
Post by raindancer on Jul 12, 2014 16:32:49 GMT
And I'll do this as a separate post so as not to confuse issues. The bigger scale problem I see with this is that if we accept all these people, just how many are going to come in the next wave? And the next? Like it or not, we aren't able to accept everyone. I think the best thing for the MOST people is to send these ones home, in hopes of dissuading larger mass immigration. This is saddeningly a situation that doesn't permit us to look at individuals but the problem. If we accept 40000 now, then will we be facing 100,000 next time? I'd rather have to turn away 40,000 than 100,000. I'd love to welcome every single person who wants to join our country, but reality is that we're not even taking care of our own. We don't have resources to handle a massive influx of people like this, and they're in pretty inhumane circumstances for the most part even as we speak. Logistics are a very real part of the problem here. A few people a day we can absorb. But 40,000 people arriving on our doorstep at once is something we can't handle. Look at history, and the Mariel boatlift. We have a mixture of innocents and less innocents here, as well, and what can we do? Do we just accept everyone, even when we don't have the resources, and pay the price in our society? The bottom line is there is NO good answer, we can only try to decide what does the least harm. The least harm to whom?
|
|
elainebenis
Junior Member
Posts: 50
Jul 3, 2014 23:26:11 GMT
|
Post by elainebenis on Jul 12, 2014 17:08:44 GMT
Well if there was a civil war raging in these countries, with terrorists ravaging the countrysides and slaughtering innocents for the crime of not being Muslim etc... Then I would feel differently about this situation.
Well if there was a civil war raging in these countries, with terrorists ravaging the countrysides and slaughtering innocents for the crime of not being in a murderous drug gang etc...
/fixed
|
|
conchita
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,141
Jul 1, 2014 11:25:58 GMT
|
Post by conchita on Jul 12, 2014 17:47:34 GMT
I know at one military base in Oklahoma they have shut down the emergency room at the hospital as well as on-post lodging. Anyone know how it's affecting other bases where some of the minors are being held?
|
|
|
Post by Pahina722 on Jul 12, 2014 18:03:33 GMT
raindancer said "Here is where you lose me with your argument. Your son, and all the precious children in America are not somehow *more* deserving of care, compassion, humanity, and the basic essentials of life. And while you won't find me arguing with you about the disaster that is our foster care system (I worked in it for 3 years and am >.< that close to a public health degree, the argument that because they had the fortune of being born here and some other child had the misfortune of being born in Guatemala, gives the US child more "rights" to "our" stuff is crazy to me. As for your comment about how we can't fix those nations, regardless of our hand in their current situations is crap. And we just continue on, it's not like this is some thing of the past. Here is a link to a series put out by PBS, called Unnatural Causes. I would suggest watching Collateral Damage which is about the US and the Marshall Islands. It's shameful. We have really destroyed them, and we just continue on doing what we do and defending it." (I didn't feel like quoting half a page!) We'll just have to agree to disagree. Yes, I feel that our own children are more deserving of care FROM OUR GOVERNMENT than the children of other nations. Unless I'm just totally confused about how the world works, we don't ship our poverty-stricken kids to other countries and expect those countries to take care of them. We need to fix our problems (and illegal immigration is one of them) first. If you'd read my earliest post, you'd see that I'm torn on the situation. I don't want to turn children away, yet I believe our resources are better used for our children FIRST. With the other nations, most Americans now realize how often and disastrously we've interfered in other countries' governments. Has it ever turned out well? So what exactly could our government (knowing its horrendous history of toppling dictators to replace them with worse) be expected to fix the problems of other nations? I'm certainly not an isolationist, but we just don't seem to be able to "fix" problems without creating larger ones--definitely not by ourselves.
|
|
jodis
Shy Member
Posts: 12
Jun 25, 2014 19:21:25 GMT
|
Post by jodis on Jul 12, 2014 18:09:13 GMT
Everything that AussieMeg posted and then some.. I also had a reply but then deleted it and walked away. I've read a few times on this thread about why aren't Canadians stepping up.. well this Canadian would take a couple of those kids myself, into my own home. In fact, send that airplane full of those children and I would personally help organize shelter, foster care, etc for them. I know many here that would step up to help. So don't be bashing us Canadians for not wanting to help. We would in a heartbeat. It's the political redtape that ties our hands at the moment.
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,535
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jul 12, 2014 20:28:31 GMT
And I'll do this as a separate post so as not to confuse issues. The bigger scale problem I see with this is that if we accept all these people, just how many are going to come in the next wave? And the next? Like it or not, we aren't able to accept everyone. I think the best thing for the MOST people is to send these ones home, in hopes of dissuading larger mass immigration. This is saddeningly a situation that doesn't permit us to look at individuals but the problem. If we accept 40000 now, then will we be facing 100,000 next time? I'd rather have to turn away 40,000 than 100,000. I'd love to welcome every single person who wants to join our country, but reality is that we're not even taking care of our own. We don't have resources to handle a massive influx of people like this, and they're in pretty inhumane circumstances for the most part even as we speak. Logistics are a very real part of the problem here. A few people a day we can absorb. But 40,000 people arriving on our doorstep at once is something we can't handle. Look at history, and the Mariel boatlift. We have a mixture of innocents and less innocents here, as well, and what can we do? Do we just accept everyone, even when we don't have the resources, and pay the price in our society? The bottom line is there is NO good answer, we can only try to decide what does the least harm. The least harm to whom? The least harm overall. Do we hurt 40,000 now, or 100,000 tomorrow? Someone is going to suffer no matter what. We have the reality that there will come a point, whether it is now or later, when our society simply can't take care of all these people. We are there, in my opinion, in that we can't handle the scale of this many at once, and we need to get THAT point across. I have no problem with immigration in general, and I'm not even addressing the legal/illegal issue here. I wouldn't be happy if the situation was 40,000 documented British kids showing up on the doorstep with no place to go, either. We don't have anything in place to handle that many people at one time. Period. And my very real fear is that if we let this barrage of people in, particularly if we end up waiving requirements, etc., then what signal are we sending to everyone who is at home just waiting to see what happens? Send us more! And we just don't have the way to deal with that. No, I don't think US kids are "better than" anyone else's kids. But I'm darn well going to care for my family before I take care of someone else's.
|
|