It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump signs executive order to stop family separations at border

page: 20
27
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Xenogears

why are you talking about low and high IQ? Completely irrelevant.




posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

The denying of due process would be NOT detaining them. These people are arrested under suspicion of Illegal Entry into the United States, so they must be detained through the judicial process of their case. We can't just put them out on bail into our country when they don't even have sponsors or a place to live, so all that we can do is detain them until their case is adjudicated.

It's pretty straight-forward, to be honest, and I don't understand why people refuse to understand that--I can only chock it up to willful ignorance at this point.

Denying due process is the catch-and-release that Obama was doing, and now Trump seems to be going back to, because we haven't put enough resources toward the problem, and when Trump does try to come up with fixes, like using military facilities to hold detainees, people continue to throw hissy fits over it.

What needs to happen is more judicial resources need to be allotted to the problem until we get caught up with the case load. I agree that we are detaining these people for too long, but some of that is not just the due process issues, but also proving identities and familial relationships with children and dealing with frivolous requests for asylum and the like.

So, how would you fix this problem?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: WorkingCollective
a reply to: Xenogears

why are you talking about low and high IQ? Completely irrelevant.


Not so. We as a nation can support some individuals with low iq, but too many and the system collapses.

And yes, intellectual capacity, influences an individuals ability to succeed in life, and be productive. You might not think it, perhaps you're one of those science denialist, that thinks enough training will take someone from mentally retarded to nobel laureate genius, but that is not reality.

Look you just need to see the difference on average on the accomplishments of migrants from high iq areas vs those from migrants from low iq areas.

For some you have harvard disciminating against to favor the elites and athletes, because they'd make too large a number of their student body otherwise, these migrants are just too successful. The others are sending states to bankruptcy by overloading the welfare system and making nothing of themselves.

IQ is largely genetic, outside of environmental abuse or toxins, it is pretty much solely genetics like height. It is not just one generation but many. Why do so many failed countries comprise of low average iq populations? Because it is the people not the soil that is causing their failure.




More than 2/3rds of the variation between nations can be explained by IQ.-coltaine

edit on 26-6-2018 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Xenogears

iq test are a joke

it has no basis with common sense



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Xenogears

iq test are a joke

it has no basis with common sense


keep telling yourself that. There's a reason the military blocks those below 83 iq, and iirc, it's by law. It is predictive, it is effective, it is correct. You deny it, just like you'd deny measures of height, the facts are uncomfortable. But reality does not have to be comfortable.





"The iq researchers have defined intelligence in a more stringent way than most any other psychological measure."-paraphrase



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I would decriminalize crossing the border. Naturally, I do want to create a barrier to entry for criminals and gangs to operate and to prevent drugs, but I think that anyone who wants to come here and work for a better life should be able to. To accomplish this, I would let anyone cross over, but in order to work a work permit that establishes identity, current/previous employment, and finances would have to be issued. Work without one of these permits would be illegal with steep penalties for the employer. I would do something similar with access to the banking system, except I would move further towards a cashless society.

By doing this, those who are generating an illegal income would have trouble actually obtaining their funds or spending them. Even making sales would be difficult. While at the same time anyone who wants to come here and make an honest living would be able to do so. As a side effect, this would also completely eliminate the human trafficking market to the US, and I think we can all agree that that would be a good thing on humanitarian grounds if nothing else.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If people want to come to the US for a better life then come here legally. If they cant respect our border or domestic laws then their reasons for coming here are contradictory.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

So people should wait in countries where they're unsafe, for a chance of coming here? What if they pay attention to US politics and notice the huge push among some anti immigration groups, that they want a skim the cream policy of immigration rather than letting anyone come over? What recourse is there for someone of moderate or less education in that scenario?

I think it's unreasonable to suggest they simply don't come in that case.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Xcathdra

So people should wait in countries where they're unsafe, for a chance of coming here? What if they pay attention to US politics and notice the huge push among some anti immigration groups, that they want a skim the cream policy of immigration rather than letting anyone come over? What recourse is there for someone of moderate or less education in that scenario?

I think it's unreasonable to suggest they simply don't come in that case.


Where are they getting the funding to travel ?

🤓



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Where are they getting the funding to travel ?


A mix of sources, some have the funds from working in their home country. Some take out loans. Some are given money by family members.

What does the source of their travel funds have to do with anything?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: xuenchen
Where are they getting the funding to travel ?


A mix of sources, some have the funds from working in their home country. Some take out loans. Some are given money by family members.

What does the source of their travel funds have to do with anything?


You can show us the figures right?

And maybe who is funding them.

⚖🎃



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
And maybe who is funding them.


Why does who is funding them matter?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: xuenchen
And maybe who is funding them.


Why does who is funding them matter?


Good deflection.

What if the funding comes from traffickers and smugglers ?

I bet you don't even know how much it costs to "walk" from El Salvador to Texas.

😎



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Good deflection.

What if the funding comes from traffickers and smugglers ?

I bet you don't even know how much it costs to "walk" from El Salvador to Texas.

😎


Deflection? You asked me a question, I answered and asked one back. You haven't yet answered it.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: xuenchen
Good deflection.

What if the funding comes from traffickers and smugglers ?

I bet you don't even know how much it costs to "walk" from El Salvador to Texas.



Deflection? You asked me a question, I answered and asked one back. You haven't yet answered it.


Yeah but you answered without any facts and figures.

Start over without the red herrings.

🎃



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Xenogears
Have you not seen the increase in violent crime from migrants in places like germany? They bring their hell here, know it, and understand it. Moving them from one location to another won't change their capabilities or culture.


Since Germany opened their borders, the crime rate has dropped. Any source that says otherwise is lying to you.

www.reuters.com...

www.dw.com...

www.independent.co.uk...



Yet in the very article you posted there was this:


A government-sponsored study published in January showed that violent crime had risen about 10 percent in 2015 and 2016, attributing more than 90 percent of the rise to young male asylum seekers.


Were the 2017 numbers higher or lower than the Pre 2015 Germany before the mass migration?

After a few years of big increases, it's easy to show a drop from those high levels and claim success.

For example:

The Interior Ministry could also report positive news on violent crime, which dropped by 2.4 percent. Nonetheless, that does not reverse a 6.7 percent jump in violent crime recorded in 2016.


link



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Yeah but you answered without any facts and figures.

Start over without the red herrings.

🎃


Why is the source of funding for migrants relevant?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

Violent crime went up slightly, then cooled off. Overall crime went down.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Xcathdra

So people should wait in countries where they're unsafe, for a chance of coming here? What if they pay attention to US politics and notice the huge push among some anti immigration groups, that they want a skim the cream policy of immigration rather than letting anyone come over? What recourse is there for someone of moderate or less education in that scenario?

I think it's unreasonable to suggest they simply don't come in that case.


There are billions suffering. We can't take them all in. We simply can't and if we did, if we offered first class and brought hundreds of millions in, america would collapse and we'd be just as bad in the end as the countries they came from.

Look at places like california, suffering needless from your virtue signalling madness.

They simply can't be helped, that's the lot they got in life.

Was it in Europe where word is 4 years after coming there like 80+% of migrants remain unemployed? Even working here, places like walmart are said to educate on ways of requesting welfare, they don't pay a living wage to legal citizens, even working low skill migrants need welfare, they're a burden, an unsustainable one.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: pavil

Violent crime went up slightly, then cooled off. Overall crime went down.


Violent crime remains higher. And again, a 10% increase is significant, when we're talking a very small minority of migrants coming in as compared to the rest of the population, and this is with under reporting. Not like they got 10% of their population replaced by migrants.

Also from what I've heard something like 80% remain unemployed 4 years after arriving, iirc. A burden, that creates no go zones, does not assimilate, and has low potential to accomplish anything.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join