Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front

[Mik]

You can also conduct raids and only grab those you identify as criminals. it should not be all that hard.

[Axtremus]

Or give the ones with no criminal records an easy path to citizenship. Fix our labor shortage issue, fix the low fertility rate issue, expand the tax base, fix the aging demographics issue, and solve the immigration issue all at once. If you like the America soon after Reagan’s amnesty, do it again. (Oh, do remind yourself that “amnesty” is a good, virtuous word.)

[jodi]

@Axtremus said in Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front:

Or give the ones with no criminal records an easy path to citizenship. Fix our labor shortage issue, fix the low fertility rate issue, expand the tax base, fix the aging demographics issue, and solve the immigration issue all at once. If you like the America soon after Reagan’s amnesty, do it again. (Oh, do remind yourself that “amnesty” is a good, virtuous word.)

This sounds reasonable to me.

[LuFins Dad]

Or fine them and put them m step one of the standard immigration process. If they violate any steps, then deport them.

Don’t reward lawbreaking. You are just penalizing those that did it the right way.

[Mik]

[jon-nyc]

He TACOed on his TACO.

It’s Tacos all the way down.

[Axtremus]

TACO is the new flip-flop.

[jon-nyc]

Though here he’s saying the focus is on Democratic-run cities.

So let’s get this straight - they’re going to focus on blue cities, where people are more chill about immigration, and do less in red states, where they are apoplectic about it.

Ok.

[jon-nyc]

I wonder if we’re going to see Lutnik/Bessent style ping pong with Miller and the Ag Secretary. Where policy swings back and forth twice a week based on who talked to him last.

[jon-nyc]

@jon-nyc said in Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front:

Though here he’s saying the focus is on Democratic-run cities.

So let’s get this straight - they’re going to focus on blue cities, where people are more chill about immigration, and do less in red states, where they are apoplectic about it.

So I guess the rational thing for an illegal in NYC would be to move to central PA.

[Axtremus]

Like @Mik's other thread title, this is sad.

[LuFins Dad]

@jon-nyc said in Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front:

@jon-nyc said in Possible good news on the immigration enforcement front:

Though here he’s saying the focus is on Democratic-run cities.

So let’s get this straight - they’re going to focus on blue cities, where people are more chill about immigration, and do less in red states, where they are apoplectic about it.

So I guess the rational thing for an illegal in NYC would be to move to central PA.

Not at all. In general, you are going to see the more criminal element of the illegals living in urban centers. More people, easier to hide, and easier to score. MS13 13 and TdA aren’t generally living in a farming community of 5800 in Oklahoma, they’re living in the he DMV, a metro region with 6M people, and not much agri-business, but plenty of food packaging and processing business, where many shenanigans occur.

[jon-nyc]

Stipulating all that, why would it not be the rational thing to do for an illegal in NYC to move to central PA? You can wash dishes anywhere.