Gary Johnson Scary Stance On Immigration

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Good!! 'Cause while I ain't afraid to poke the bear ... it wasn't my intention.

I'm totally fine with this. People should be able to come and go as they please. It's not like just because they can cross the border they'll be able to get a job here, send their kids to our schools, or anything like that. They're still citizens of their country and anyone who tries to take advantage of that would be punished. In our current system there is hardly any enforcement against companies who bring workers in here illegally or hire illegal immigrants. If a new system that better documents incoming migrant workers was created then we could get some serious tax benefits from that.

Criminals are always going to find their way in. If these criminals aren't allowed to take advantage of our system then we wouldn't have criminals wanting to come here. Opening the borders reduces the wasteful and archaic border patrol system. Of course border patrol wants a wall. It's the simplest answer to their problem, but their problem isn't the same as our problem. They're been assigned a job to prevent undocumented people from entering while what we the people need is to give undocumented people zero incentive to come here. If they come here through organized migrant work programs setup between businesses and the government then it's different. There would be a system to manage that and it'd be a hell of a lot easier than managing our entire border which we all know isn't feasible. Build a wall, people will tunnel under.

a reply to: sirlancelot

Gary Johnson does have scary immigration views (open borders), for the simple fact alone the Milton Friedman said its a disaster to have open borders in a welfare state. Gary Jihnson's views on open borders will bring about the same Cloward-Piven strategy the Democtrats are tying to see come to pass.

I am writing in a 3rd party vote, I can't support either Trump or Hillary for different reasons, but I can't get with Johnson either for his stance on open borders alone. I'm leaning toward the Constitution Party candidate now.

Some libertarian thinkers have came around trump. Data is typically very important for the libertarian.

The reason the Libertarian party is polling well is because of these new psuedolibertarians who are millenial white male republicans who are afraid of being called a racist.
I have quite a few friends who went this way, I went the other way jumping off the Libertarian party wagon.

The issue I have is we are letting a group of americans leave the labor force and sit idle, meanwhile importing a lot of labor. This labor importation keeps wages down, keeps government from reforming its education and welfare, prevents workers from being able to organize/negotiate.
The dumbest thing about libertarians and free borders is they will let in people who support big government and will vote against them.(PEW research center)
Open borders is the libertarians way to commit suicide. As the demographics will change against them.

Some pics on the change in employment.

a reply to: jellyrev

Also to, a lot of Constitutional Conservatives have abandoned the GOP for a party home that is more welcoming to those principles, the GOP has lost it's way and is just a Republican wing of the Democrat Party. They're quite Progressive these days, and not Progressive Socialist, but Progressive Fascist, it's still Statist in philosophy.

That's why I left the GOP, I've come to see that it's no longer the party of Reagan and Lincoln, they have contempt for the Conservative base of the party.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
...they have contempt for the Conservative base of the party.

The conservative base of the Republican Party warrants contempt for its relgio-fascism.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

A non-citizen cannot get welfare benefits so your point is moot

No it's not.

Just because illegal aliens are not legally entitled to these benefits does not mean they do not apply for them. Yes. It is true that illegal aliens have received grants, professional accreditations, loans, WIC, disability, public housing, college educations, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and tax credits from state and federal agencies. Law Dictionary: Why is it that Illegal Aliens Get Free Food Stamps, Health Insurance and Pay No Taxes?

thelawdictionary.org...

At a significant cost to the taxpayers. LEGAL taxpayers.

Mexico currently receives nearly $24.4 billion in remittances each year from immigrants in the U.S., accounting for about 2 percent of the Mexican GDP, according to the World Bank.

labs.time.com...

That 2% GDP is taken straight out of the American economy.

Moot ?

hardly.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

what is the conservative base?

Are you talking about the moral majority, theocrats?

Or are you talking about the group before them that warned about these theocrats, the goldwater republicans.

constitutional conservative would have something to do with Goldwater and in present days the Pauls, amash, massie. not cruz.

originally posted by: neo96
No it's not.

Yeah, it is. Stop making things up:

Overview of 1996 Provisions

The 1996 reforms changed almost every aspect of non-citizen eligibility for welfare benefits. Although the provisions are exceedingly complex, a rough general principle provides useful guidance. With some exceptions, non-citizens entering the United States after August 22, 1996, the date of enactment of the welfare reform legislation, are not eligible for most welfare benefits, including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), SSI, Medicaid, and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), until they have been in the U.S. for at least five years. Keeping this general principle in mind, a more thorough review of the 1996 provisions reveals both their complexity and breadth. Source

There are obviously people who will skirt the system, both citizens and non-citizens, but the law is clear, non-citizens are not to receive benefits.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

If you have been paying attention to the last eight years.

The law doesn't seem to matter.

Nothing was made up.

Mr. Johnson has these views on immigration because he's a true libertarian.

Not some hard right nut job that felt the Republican party was too liberal for him.

originally posted by: neo96
Nothing was made up.

Sure it was. Citing people illegally obtaining benefits does not somehow prove that there is a law that says non-citizens are entitled to them.

originally posted by: muse7
Mr. Johnson has these views on immigration because he's a true libertarian.

Not some hard right nut job that felt the Republican party was too liberal for him.

You really need to take a look at the early years of this country.

en.wikipedia.org...

The founding fathers did not believe in open borders.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
Nothing was made up.

Sure it was. Citing people illegally obtaining benefits does not somehow prove that there is a law that says non-citizens are entitled to them.

That works both ways ya know.

originally posted by: neo96
The founding fathers did not believe in open borders.

So we should go back to when it was 'Whites Only'?

Maybe we can further limit it to Protestants of Anglo-Saxon descent.

originally posted by: neo96
That works both ways ya know.

I am still waiting for you to show me a law that says non-citizens are entitled to benefits. People breaking the law is not proof of there being a law.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Read those immigration LAWS.

WHAT makes people from south the borders so 'special' ?

Why are they better than the Europeans.Chinese, and OTHER peoples restricted?

You know like treating them like my ancestors, were, and other peoples ancestors were.

You know that word EQUALITY ?

Not putting a people above the LEGAL residents of the country.

That's not how LAW words.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neo96
That works both ways ya know.

I am still waiting for you to show me a law that says non-citizens are entitled to benefits. People breaking the law is not proof of there being a law.

Look up sanctuary cities eh.

Drivings licences'.

Free education.

The list goes on.

Free free to IGNORE it.

a reply to: neo96

You really must have some massive reading comprehension issue.

I said there should be no restrictions on anyone; Chinese, Indian, Martian, whatever they are. Do you know what the word 'anyone' means?



If you are not a criminal and can pass the citizenship test you should be allowed to emigrate here.

a reply to: neo96

You would not have Sanctuary Cities if we did not have a tortuous immigration policy.