• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Immigration Crisis Solution: Fix Central America

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Colombia had a conservative president in Uribe. We busted the cartels but the action just moved to Mexico. Colombia elected Ivan Duque, a consevative protege of Uribe, as president yesterday.

Mexico has an election in a couple of weeks and right now a communist is the overwhelming favorite.

There is an alliance of five socialist countries: Venezuela, Cuba, Nicauraga, Equador, and Bolivia.

We cannot fix Latin America. We are twenty trillion dollars in debt. The rich want more cheap labor and the Dems want more easy votes.

We need to stop immigration until we sort out our own problems such as 58,000 homeless in LA, most of whom are blacks who lost their jobs to illegals.

.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Even if a wall is ever built(hey, didn't Donald Trump say that Mexico was going to pay for it, not that the American people would have to front the money first with little to no prospect of being
repaid :rolleyes: ), it will still cost to maintain it. And people will still find ways to get over, under, or around it(there is a lot of water around this country, plus there is the Canadian border as well, and a lot of folks enter legally and then just stay after their visa runs out).

An analogy: You have hole in your roof that allows rain to come inside. So you put bucket down to catch the rain. Then the next time it rains, another hole and another bucket. And so on and so on and so on. The solution is to go to the source of the leaks and fix the roof, or in this case, Central America.
The solution is build a wall and swiftly dump what leaks through into the bucket right back where it came from.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The solution is build a wall and swiftly dump what leaks through into the bucket right back where it came from.

Right. An intervention into Latin America would be fiscally irresponsible and doomed to failure amongst the socialists, the Catholics, and the secular humanists in Latin America. We can't even get a condemnation of Cuba out of the OAS.

Also, iran, Russia, China, North Korea, and European and American drug lords are very powerful in Latin America.
 
Last edited:

777

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Kind of hard to bring a culture with you when the median age is 6 and the most common age is 3 of Dreamers when they came to the U.S.

A Typical ‘Dreamer’ Lives in Los Angeles, Is From Mexico and Came to the U.S. at 6 Years Old

so says the open-border Center for (central) American Progress, those ages are disputed

The truth about DACA is uglier than we've been told


but then so what? Why can so few of these DACA people speak English at all?

They are NOT assimilating, they don't have to. They are taught in public schools at the American taxpayer expense in their home language. Most of them have crossed the border many times to visit all the relatives they send money home to and they all have citizenship there.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
so says the open-border Center for (central) American Progress, those ages are disputed

The truth about DACA is uglier than we've been told


but then so what? Why can so few of these DACA people speak English at all?

They are NOT assimilating, they don't have to. They are taught in public schools at the American taxpayer expense in their home language. Most of them have crossed the border many times to visit all the relatives they send money home to and they all have citizenship there.

We can't afford any more immigrants. The welfare buden is too great.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
There should be a path to citizenship for them.
There is already a path to citizenship for them. Go back to country of origin, come to US legally, follow our laws, apply for citizenship, take the test, swear the oath to obey our constitution....tada!!!!! They become a US citizen.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dreamers had no choice about being here. They were brought here as children. They grew up here.
[...]

We are discussing Central America, not some far off place like Liechtenstein.

Your argument seems to be that proximity is everything in forgiving and forgetting how someone came to be in the US.

Proximity to birth--the younger the illegal immigrant the closer they are to being US citizens. After all, if they had been born in the US they'd automatically be US citizens. So a 3 year old should be more worthy of a path to citizenship than a 20 year old.

Proximity to the US--it you are an illegal from Honduras you should be more worthy of a path to citizenship than someone from Liechtenstein.

This is illogical thinking and based on emotion. Most liberal positions are like this.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mexico is part of North America, not Central America.

If Mexico goes communist next month, everyone will want the border secured because it is hard to imagine what a communist government would do except align Mexico with Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Bolivia.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Even if a wall is ever built (hey, didn't Donald Trump say that Mexico was going to pay for it, not that the American people would have to front the money first with little to no prospect of being repaid :rolleyes: ), it will still cost to maintain it. And people will still find ways to get over, under, or around it(there is a lot of water around this country, plus there is the Canadian border as well, and a lot of folks enter legally and then just stay after their visa runs out).

An analogy: You have hole in your roof that allows rain to come inside. So you put bucket down to catch the rain. Then the next time it rains, another hole and another bucket. And so on and so on and so on. The solution is to go to the source of the leaks and fix the roof, or in this case, Central America.
How are you a Libertarian?
I thought that Libertarians wanted a smaller Government ... to do only those things that people and states could not do for themselves ... like National Defense and controlling borders.

You are advocating a US Government that not only interferes more in OUR lives (through increased taxation to allow the transfer of wealth) but interferes more in the lives of people in other nations by telling them what to do and how to live. That is the opposite of "Liberty". You may need to turn in your Libertarian credentials.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
How are you a Libertarian?

I have not had any association with the Libertarian Party in about 2 years. As I told someone on Facebook a while back, I consider myself to be a recovering Libertarian. :)

When I got really involved in the LP beyond just contributing money for decades, I was shocked by the number of anarchists in the party and really got tired of the “taxation is theft” mantra, which I consider to be nonsensical.
 
Last edited:

atpollard

Well-Known Member
I have not had any association with the Libertarian Party in about 2 years. As I told someone on Facebook a while back, I consider myself to be a recovering Libertarian. :)
In that case, the question becomes:

Given the utter failure of the US Government to control either Poverty or Drugs or Violent Crime in the United States, what possible evidence is there that would lead anyone to believe that the US Government is capable of ending Poverty AND Drugs AND Violent Crime in Central America (where all three are institutionalized by the Cartels)?

The best you can hope to achieve is to bankrupt the US economy making everyone in 'The Americas' equally poor.

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” ― Margaret Thatcher
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
The poverty rate is down about 43% over the past 60 years. The violent crime rate is down about 47% since 1991.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
The poverty rate is down about 43% over the past 60 years. The violent crime rate is down about 47% since 1991.
You will have to excuse my skepticism. I live on a street with only 10 houses. In the last 10 years, we have had drug seekers rob our car three times. We have had one murder on our block. We have had an offender fleeing another murder scene break into the back porch of a neighbor only to have her call 911 and hear "911, please hold". We have police helicopters fly overhead often enough that we just sleep through them.

And I live in a suburb over an hour's drive from the city.

So I call "poppycock" on your statistics.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Well, it is poor practice statistically-speaking to apply your anecdotes to the entire country.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Well, it is poor practice statistically-speaking to apply your anecdotes to the entire country.
OK. Let's look at statistics. Poverty Rate in 1960 (start of the "war on poverty") was about 22% of the US population living below the poverty line. By 1973 the percentage had fallen to a record low of 11%. Since 1973, the poverty rate has fluctuated cyclically between 11% and 15%. So throwing ever more money at 'entitlement' programs (now the largest component in the US budget) has failed to reduce poverty below this 13% median value. So we can conclude that throwing money at poverty can only reduce it a 'little' and ever larger amounts of money are required to maintain that reduction in poverty.

In 1976, they began tracking something called "Deep Poverty" (defined as those earning less than 50% of the poverty threshold). Deep poverty has risen steadily from 3% in the late 1970's to over 6% of the population in the new millennium. In spite of everything, the poorest of the poor are increasing as a percent of the population.

Federal poverty statistics are determined by surveys sent to households, so the homeless are completely excluded from all poverty data.

I would argue that the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960's had more impact on poverty than the government dole.
 
Top