you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

There's a few faulty premises. The community groups and churches who fed and housed the refugees who had dumped at the airport - what's the association with the left? Why do you think those people have advocated to abolish ICE?

Martha's vineyard is literally a sanctuary city. I didnt say they want to abolish ICE, I said they want to refuse to enforce immigration laws, and I said abolishing ICE was one example of a common idea on the left about how to handle immigration that I don't think addresses the problem

Another faulty premise is that this stunt was connected to ICE or border law in any way - they were refugees and asylees, it's not a statement about ICE. If anything it would be a statement about the international convention on refugees?

This stunt is related to the larger issue of immigration. Whether they have applied for asylum or crossed illegally wasn't really the center of the issue, they want more action to address immigration on the southern border, and this was a stunt to call attention to it. That 2 million crossers number I cited was from a NYT article talking about this, so even they realize what this stunt was about.

Another faulty premise is that Texas and the border states have to bare the cost of what is actually a federal burden...or that border states don't benefit from all the people moving to it for work - whether as a refugee or from anywhere.

Well now you are bringing up a whole other economic issue. This kind of low skill labor influx tends to hurt lower class workers and benefit the capital owners that hire them. You may be able to measure a gain in GDP, but this isn't as clear cut of a 'benefit' as you make it out to be.

What is this "state of the border" which we're suffering so much under to excuse what happened to those poor people.

I'm not saying using these people as props fora a stunt was justified, I'm saying they are justified in calling immigration a real problem

I live in Texas. I can tell you that there is no emergency here.

So youd agree that DC calling a state of emergency over 150 migrants was unjustified too?

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Martha's vineyard is literally a sanctuary city

You can't honestly be telling me it's acceptable to respond to municipal politics you don't agree with, by dumping humans at an airport for community groups to deal with.

So my mayor doesn't like some Arizona commissioner's politics on XYZ. Are you excusing the firing of human refugee weapons at his county as a suitable method of dealing with it?

This stunt is related to the larger issue of immigration.

Refugees can travel freely and work anywhere in America. They are not a regional burden or a red state burden, they are a human resource

Well now you are bringing up a whole other economic issue. This kind of low skill labor influx tends to hurt lower class workers

Are you kidding me. Have you left the house in the past 2 years? Have you been to literally any town or city in America since 2019? Do you think it's hard to get a "low skill labor" job right now? There are "help wanted" signs everywhere

So youd agree that DC calling a state of emergency over 150 migrants was unjustified too?

Well, what the hell do you know about it? They need to mobilise DC responders and housing support staff and someone to check the incoming flights for more victims and health response and so on. How do you know whether that's a "code yellow" or a "status three" or "a procedural emergency scenario"? Nobody could tell what the appropriate response should be with so little information