"Immigration is a white only concern?"... obviously you think it is. Given the fact that my comment contained no reference to immigration. Yet, when I mentioned "White identity" you immediately assumed I meant keeping out brown people. Apparently "identity politics" and "open borders" are linked in your mind for some reason.
I think immigration is a national concern. And no one on the Right complains about immigration "keeping out brown people". We want to keep out ALL UNDOCUMENTED people. We aren't debating legal immigration national quotas.
The devisiveness on the issue ALL comes from the LEFT.
It isn't the Left that wants to build an incredibly expensive and ineffective wall (on the border where the brown people come through). You can't "keep out" people who are already here. We need comprehensive immigration reform, but the RIGHT doesn't want it. If both sides actually came to an agreement then the RIGHT's ability to whip up their racist base using the issue would be greatly diminished. BTW, I didn't bring up immigration. I was talking about the concerns of minority citizens. YOU brought up immigration when I pointed out that the RIGHT plays the White Identity politics game.
Democrats complaining about the expense of a government program is like a Republican complaing about corporate profits... it doesn't happen unless their not getting a piece of them. We had comprensive immigration reform w/o border security in 1986. And here we are, back again 30 years later with the same, but worse, problem. Border Security has proved itself a precondition for any further amnesty.
Border Control Facts: The cost of border enforcement has hit record highs for the past five years, with total overall budgets surpassing $20 billion. The annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol has increased more than tenfold since 1993. The number of U.S. Border Patrol agents have nearly doubled from 2003 to 2018. Since its founding in 2003, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spending has grown 103 percent. [END]
Border Security has proved itself a precondition for any further amnesty.
republics are like spoiled bratty childern. You keep getting what you want, yet continue to make even more absurd demands while crying about how unfair the adults are.
Republics don't want cheap labor and focus on border security to distract from them wanting to do nothing about employers hiring people not entitled to work here? Who knew?
US jobs should be for American citizens (and foreigners with work visas) only. I'm 100 percent in favor of a system for checking a prospective employee's ability to be legally hired. So long as we work on getting out any bugs and allow prospective employees the ability to contest incorrect information.
The stricter immigration standards at Trump’s golf clubs has caused the company to offer higher salaries for some manual labor jobs and rely more heavily on college-age Americans, according to former workers familiar with staffing decisions. The company has also put out a wide range of help-wanted ads this year, calling for groundskeepers, kitchen staff and other workers. Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, N.J., tried to recruit military veterans to its grounds crew on the jobs site recruitmilitary.com.
Predisent Dotard: ...The one problem is E-Verify is so tough that in some cases, like farmers, they're not — they're not equipped for E-Verify. ... A lot of the Republicans say you go through an E-Verify. I used it when I built the hotel down the road on Pennsylvania Avenue. I use a very strong E-Verify system. And we would go through 28 people — 29, 30 people before we found one that qualified. [end Dotard quote from Fox News].
Intelligencer article commentary on the above quote: Trump's argument here is not that E-Verify is easily subverted or prone to error. Rather, in the president's view, the problem with E-Verify is that it works ... The president's complaint with E-Verify is ostensibly that it might force employers to pay more for "low-skill" labor, since legal U.S. residents aren't quite as exploitable as workers who lack basic political and labor rights. [end 5/20/2019 Intelligencer commentary].
What this proves is that Dotard's anti-immigration rhetoric is ALL to rile up the base and get them out to vote. He isn't interested in ACTUAL immigration reform (which would involve compromise). That Dotard has now been FORCED to pay higher wages is (in his view, I am positive) an unfortunate downside of his anti-immigrant rhetoric.
Most employers recognize that if everyone uses it, it raises costs for everyone, and the effect is neutral. The "incentive" for unethical businesses, therefore, is to cheat. That's just economics.
The businesses affected will earn less profit or pass the cost on to it's customers. That is hardly "neutral". Anyway, that Dotard runs his businesses unethically is something I AGREE with you on. So why the HELL would you want him to be president KNOWING he is an unethical person?
I don't know if Dotard uses E-verify (you've provided no links to back up this claim). Years into his presidency reporters were exposing his hypocrisy and the fact that he was STILL employing undocumented workers. He didn't do it by choice but because he was forced to. IF he's doing it uniformly now and not just for instances where he's been caught (new hires/replacements).
He isn't being "forced" to do squat. E-Verify is a voluntary program if your business isn't subject to federal acquisition contracting requirements. And last I checked, hotels and golf courses aren't commodities that the federal government buys.
YOU may have no problem with extreme hypocrisy, but some people (voters) do. I meant "forced" in it could cost him votes and business to not use it. And it would certainly result in (more) bad publicity. Something that very much concerns Dotard. He ABSOLUTELY was forced to use it (by those factors, not legally. Idiot).
So you have no problem with Dotard hiring illegal immigrants previously and think he was right to do so (because others did and he'd need to keep his labor costs down to remain competitive). Now you say he is using E-verify, but only because it's "prudent". Clearly doing the right thing isn't a factor for you and you don't give a shit about Americans not having those jobs previously. So why built an expensive wall? Why not just say we should go farther with the Reagan policy of mostly looking the other way when it comes to illegal hires? Wouldn't that be better for business?
If Dotard is prudent, it is because he was forced to be. Why would I compliment someone for doing the right thing -- but only because it was in their selfish best interest? No compliment/get bent.
29 comments:
Location where the video was filmed = Camp Dotard.
Left Identity politics isn't divisive by design? Who knew?
It's divisive by design to solely address White identity concerns OVER minority concerns. What you call "Left identity politics" is inclusive.
Immigration is a white only concern? Who knew...
Calling efforts at immigration enforcement "racism" is hardly "inclusive" for anyone but demagogues..
"Immigration is a white only concern?"... obviously you think it is. Given the fact that my comment contained no reference to immigration. Yet, when I mentioned "White identity" you immediately assumed I meant keeping out brown people. Apparently "identity politics" and "open borders" are linked in your mind for some reason.
I think immigration is a national concern. And no one on the Right complains about immigration "keeping out brown people". We want to keep out ALL UNDOCUMENTED people. We aren't debating legal immigration national quotas.
The devisiveness on the issue ALL comes from the LEFT.
;p
It isn't the Left that wants to build an incredibly expensive and ineffective wall (on the border where the brown people come through). You can't "keep out" people who are already here. We need comprehensive immigration reform, but the RIGHT doesn't want it. If both sides actually came to an agreement then the RIGHT's ability to whip up their racist base using the issue would be greatly diminished. BTW, I didn't bring up immigration. I was talking about the concerns of minority citizens. YOU brought up immigration when I pointed out that the RIGHT plays the White Identity politics game.
Democrats complaining about the expense of a government program is like a Republican complaing about corporate profits... it doesn't happen unless their not getting a piece of them. We had comprensive immigration reform w/o border security in 1986. And here we are, back again 30 years later with the same, but worse, problem. Border Security has proved itself a precondition for any further amnesty.
Democrats are like children. They demand to eat dessert before the entree has been served.
"...w/o border security..."????? WTF???
Border Control Facts: The cost of border enforcement has hit record highs for the past five years, with total overall budgets surpassing $20 billion. The annual budget of the U.S. Border Patrol has increased more than tenfold since 1993. The number of U.S. Border Patrol agents have nearly doubled from 2003 to 2018. Since its founding in 2003, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spending has grown 103 percent. [END]
Border Security has proved itself a precondition for any further amnesty.
republics are like spoiled bratty childern. You keep getting what you want, yet continue to make even more absurd demands while crying about how unfair the adults are.
lol! Something had to be done to counter these Amnesty -driven, ever INCREASING, numbers to drive them down
Blame Reagan. He gave amnesty then continued to allow employers to hire undocumented workers.
Demnocrats are for Instacheck? Who knew?
Republics don't want cheap labor and focus on border security to distract from them wanting to do nothing about employers hiring people not entitled to work here? Who knew?
US jobs should be for American citizens (and foreigners with work visas) only. I'm 100 percent in favor of a system for checking a prospective employee's ability to be legally hired. So long as we work on getting out any bugs and allow prospective employees the ability to contest incorrect information.
Bernie's against it. You need to vote for Tulsi or Trump.
The stricter immigration standards at Trump’s golf clubs has caused the company to offer higher salaries for some manual labor jobs and rely more heavily on college-age Americans, according to former workers familiar with staffing decisions. The company has also put out a wide range of help-wanted ads this year, calling for groundskeepers, kitchen staff and other workers. Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, N.J., tried to recruit military veterans to its grounds crew on the jobs site recruitmilitary.com.
Yes, jobs for Americans...
Predisent Dotard: ...The one problem is E-Verify is so tough that in some cases, like farmers, they're not — they're not equipped for E-Verify. ... A lot of the Republicans say you go through an E-Verify. I used it when I built the hotel down the road on Pennsylvania Avenue. I use a very strong E-Verify system. And we would go through 28 people — 29, 30 people before we found one that qualified. [end Dotard quote from Fox News].
Intelligencer article commentary on the above quote: Trump's argument here is not that E-Verify is easily subverted or prone to error. Rather, in the president's view, the problem with E-Verify is that it works ... The president's complaint with E-Verify is ostensibly that it might force employers to pay more for "low-skill" labor, since legal U.S. residents aren't quite as exploitable as workers who lack basic political and labor rights. [end 5/20/2019 Intelligencer commentary].
What this proves is that Dotard's anti-immigration rhetoric is ALL to rile up the base and get them out to vote. He isn't interested in ACTUAL immigration reform (which would involve compromise). That Dotard has now been FORCED to pay higher wages is (in his view, I am positive) an unfortunate downside of his anti-immigrant rhetoric.
Most employers recognize that if everyone uses it, it raises costs for everyone, and the effect is neutral. The "incentive" for unethical businesses, therefore, is to cheat. That's just economics.
The businesses affected will earn less profit or pass the cost on to it's customers. That is hardly "neutral". Anyway, that Dotard runs his businesses unethically is something I AGREE with you on. So why the HELL would you want him to be president KNOWING he is an unethical person?
Trump uses E-Verify at HIS golf courses. And if everyone earns more, they can afford to pay more... making it revenue neutral in an ethical economy.
btw - Good luck stopping this invasion.
Maybe you should try building a wall...
I don't know if Dotard uses E-verify (you've provided no links to back up this claim). Years into his presidency reporters were exposing his hypocrisy and the fact that he was STILL employing undocumented workers. He didn't do it by choice but because he was forced to. IF he's doing it uniformly now and not just for instances where he's been caught (new hires/replacements).
He isn't being "forced" to do squat. E-Verify is a voluntary program if your business isn't subject to federal acquisition contracting requirements. And last I checked, hotels and golf courses aren't commodities that the federal government buys.
YOU may have no problem with extreme hypocrisy, but some people (voters) do. I meant "forced" in it could cost him votes and business to not use it. And it would certainly result in (more) bad publicity. Something that very much concerns Dotard. He ABSOLUTELY was forced to use it (by those factors, not legally. Idiot).
So you admit that the President is being 'prudent'. THAT's a first. A compliment!
So you have no problem with Dotard hiring illegal immigrants previously and think he was right to do so (because others did and he'd need to keep his labor costs down to remain competitive). Now you say he is using E-verify, but only because it's "prudent". Clearly doing the right thing isn't a factor for you and you don't give a shit about Americans not having those jobs previously. So why built an expensive wall? Why not just say we should go farther with the Reagan policy of mostly looking the other way when it comes to illegal hires? Wouldn't that be better for business?
If Dotard is prudent, it is because he was forced to be. Why would I compliment someone for doing the right thing -- but only because it was in their selfish best interest? No compliment/get bent.
Post a Comment