• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should there be laws that regulate immigration?

Of course there should be laws that regulate immigration.
 
Pretty sure we already have laws regulating immigration....
 
Kobie said:
Of course there should be laws that regulate immigration.
Click to expand...

This is just more of the goPC false-equivalence nonsense. If you don’t support family separations, you support MS—13.
 
concernedpuma said:
Is there point of basis for supporting unbridled immigration? Could be a short lived thread.
Click to expand...


Maybe you should have worded the OPs title differently, because its not about the law if your first post is to be taken into account.

You seem to be asking why people would even support unbridled immigration. To which I would answer that there really isn't a good reason to do so.

Rampant, unchecked immigration, is the same kind that is destroying sections of Europe at this point and I would really hate if America just started practicing that same stance.
 
concernedpuma said:
Is there point of basis for supporting unbridled immigration? Could be a short lived thread.
Click to expand...

Yes. Doctrinaire libertarians believe all people have a right to travel and reside where-ever any property owner lets them. The nation-state boundaries are political repression of the rights of all people and should be removed.

Many who believe such also believe that liberty maximizes material well-being for the greatest number, and free trade, free capital movement, and freely migrating labor are all necessary to achieve this.

Those not so inclined to accept libertarian thinking may have more subjective, emotional, and gut feelings on the "rightness" of letting poor people move where they like, but are usually unable to formulate a non-emotional utilitarian viewpoint (beyond social justice slogans and buzz phrases).

Even though I am inclined to accept the libertarian doctrine within the context of the nation-state, I find utterly wrong-headed and short-sighted economically, politically, and culturally.
 
Oborosen said:
Maybe you should have worded the OPs title differently, because its not about the law if your first post is to be taken into account.

You seem to be asking why people would even support unbridled immigration. To which I would answer that there really isn't a good reason to do so.

Rampant, unchecked immigration, is the same kind that is destroying sections of Europe at this point and I would really hate if America just started practicing that same stance.
Click to expand...

Of course, you are right. I certainly ought to have worded it better. My first attempt at getting questions addressed was awful. I hope to do better going forward. Thank you for the advice
Sorry for the clumsy roll out.
Regards,
CP
 
maxparrish said:
Yes. Doctrinaire libertarians believe all people have a right to travel and reside where-ever any property owner lets them. The nation-state boundaries are political repression of the rights of all people and should be removed.

Many who believe such also believe that liberty maximizes material well-being for the greatest number, and free trade, free capital movement, and freely migrating labor are all necessary to achieve this.

Those not so inclined to accept libertarian thinking may have more subjective, emotional, and gut feelings on the "rightness" of letting poor people move where they like, but are usually unable to formulate a non-emotional utilitarian viewpoint (beyond social justice slogans and buzz phrases).

Even though I am inclined to accept the libertarian doctrine within the context of the nation-state, I find utterly wrong-headed and short-sighted economically, politically, and culturally.
Click to expand...

Man! I love this place! Discussions that make me uncomfortable are erudite and thought provoking. Yes, many tightly held belief's are Gut feelings, but we are of gut.
Regards,
CP
 
concernedpuma said:
Of course, you are right. I certainly ought to have worded it better. My first attempt at getting questions addressed was awful. I hope to do better going forward. Thank you for the advice
Sorry for the clumsy roll out.
Regards,
CP
Click to expand...

YOWZA...not everyone can do that!

:thumbs:
 
concernedpuma said:
Is there point of basis for supporting unbridled immigration? Could be a short lived thread.
Click to expand...

People will always try to protect what they have, and while most are open to legal immigration, they want it to be controlled and handled in a way that benefits everyone.

When you say "unbridled" I assume you mean non-regulated, and no one (well, no one in their right mind) would agree to that.
 
HowardBThiname said:
People will always try to protect what they have, and while most are open to legal immigration, they want it to be controlled and handled in a way that benefits everyone.

When you say "unbridled" I assume you mean non-regulated, and no one (well, no one in their right mind) would agree to that.
Click to expand...

I think there would be many that would agree to that. The only reason I am not for it is due to the social safety net in place. Having open borders and a welfare state is a recipe for disaster.
 
Yes, of course there should be laws that regulate immigration. Other than a few major hardliners on either side (i.e. liberals who want completely open borders and conservatives that want completely closed borders) I think everyone agrees there need to be some laws regulating immigration.
 
Oborosen said:
Maybe you should have worded the OPs title differently, because its not about the law if your first post is to be taken into account.

You seem to be asking why people would even support unbridled immigration. To which I would answer that there really isn't a good reason to do so.

Rampant, unchecked immigration, is the same kind that is destroying sections of Europe at this point and I would really hate if America just started practicing that same stance.
Click to expand...

FYI no country in Europe has open borders and unchecked immigration. You exaggerate and use strawman because the reality is there's little difference between theirs and our own immigration laws.

maxparrish said:
Yes. Doctrinaire libertarians believe all people have a right to travel and reside where-ever any property owner lets them. The nation-state boundaries are political repression of the rights of all people and should be removed.

Many who believe such also believe that liberty maximizes material well-being for the greatest number, and free trade, free capital movement, and freely migrating labor are all necessary to achieve this.

Those not so inclined to accept libertarian thinking may have more subjective, emotional, and gut feelings on the "rightness" of letting poor people move where they like, but are usually unable to formulate a non-emotional utilitarian viewpoint (beyond social justice slogans and buzz phrases).

Even though I am inclined to accept the libertarian doctrine within the context of the nation-state, I find utterly wrong-headed and short-sighted economically, politically, and culturally.
Click to expand...

This is a great point. Literally the only people that believe in and call for completely open borders are certain libertarians and anarchists, both of which tend to reside on the far, far right.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
FYI no country in Europe has open borders and unchecked immigration. You exaggerate and use strawman because the reality is there's little difference between theirs and our own immigration laws.
Click to expand...

When compared to American immigration laws and the way we handle them. Places like Germany have proven far too lax, as well as England's own handling of the crisis that they were handed. Daily acid attacks and no go zones for police seem to be more than reason enough.

This is a great point. Literally the only people that believe in and call for completely open borders are certain libertarians and anarchists, both of which tend to reside on the far, far right.
Click to expand...

Richard Spencer is as far right as you can get in todays political climate and he almost wants closed boarders. However, last I checked, Hillary and her lackeys weren't far right.

Nor were all the others on their side that called for open borders.
 
Oborosen said:
When compared to American immigration laws and the way we handle them. Places like Germany have proven far too lax, as well as England's own handling of the crisis that they were handed. Daily acid attacks and no go zones for police seem to be more than reason enough.



Richard Spencer is as far right as you can get in todays political climate and he almost wants closed boarders. However, last I checked, Hillary and her lackeys weren't far right.

Nor were all the others on their side that called for open borders.
Click to expand...

No mainstream US politician has called for open borders, not even Hillary. You exaggerate because you can't argue on substance. Germany took in less than 1% of its population in refugees and still has less than 10% non-white minorities, and you're hysterically screaming about how the brown folk are taking over Europe and implementing shariah law. You make these things up because you hate Europe in general and parrot whatever Trump tells you.

Europe continues to thrive and consistently provides a better standard of living in most categories than the US. Keep exaggerating and pretending that the world is falling every time you see an immigrant. Your avatar alone makes it clear you're a partisan hack incapable of objectively looking at the situation.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
No mainstream US politician has called for open borders, not even Hillary. You exaggerate because you can't argue on substance. Germany took in less than 1% of its population in refugees and still has less than 10% non-white minorities, and you're hysterically screaming about how the brown folk are taking over Europe and implementing shariah law. You make these things up because you hate Europe in general and parrot whatever Trump tells you.
Click to expand...

Seeing as even Hillary was dreaming of open borders.
Will Hillary explain her dream of 'open borders'? - Chicago Tribune
Lying to my face, doesn't help.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/acid-attacks-uk-highest-world-figures-police-revealed-a8098236.html
[snip]
“The UK now has one of the highest rates of recorded acid and corrosive substance attacks per capita in the world and this number appears to be rising,”

Europe continues to thrive and consistently provides a better standard of living in most categories than the US. Keep exaggerating and pretending that the world is falling every time you see an immigrant. Your avatar alone makes it clear you're a partisan hack incapable of objectively looking at the situation.
Click to expand...

This wasn't about standard of living Rabid, so moving the goal post isn't going to help you at all.

You can keep living in your little bubble and I'll stay out here with the sane people.
Also if you want to take swipes, my avatar is just to take a jab at the thin skinned posters like yourself. Though it is obvious that just by talking to you, that you don't care for scientific, or recorded fact in general. Tesla would be almost as ashamed as I am, to even read your post.

Has my point gotten across yet?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
No mainstream US politician has called for open borders, not even Hillary. You exaggerate because you can't argue on substance. Germany took in less than 1% of its population in refugees and still has less than 10% non-white minorities, and you're hysterically screaming about how the brown folk are taking over Europe and implementing shariah law. You make these things up because you hate Europe in general and parrot whatever Trump tells you.

Europe continues to thrive and consistently provides a better standard of living in most categories than the US. Keep exaggerating and pretending that the world is falling every time you see an immigrant. Your avatar alone makes it clear you're a partisan hack incapable of objectively looking at the situation.
Click to expand...

Of course no mainstream politician has publicly supported open borders, they know that such would end their careers (well, unless they represent California democratic districts). On the other hand, some are lying to the public, and many more are lying to themselves.

As for Germany, I suppose the "non-white" numbers are dependent upon what is considered to be "white" and what that category obscures. In any event, the most serious controversy over immigration and of "refugees" is that of Muslims, all of which are mainly from from foreign born or second generation of foreign born (5 percent of population). Add to that past and current immigration from other third world nations (including Turkey) and you are well on your way to a multi-ethnic society with all the troubles associated with it.

Given the dislocative social effects whenever any minority population (white or non-white) exceeds 5 percent of the population, its not something to woo-hoo about. And when you are importing poverty, and those minorities whose rate of crime is much disproportionately larger to that of the root population, it is understandable that some folks won't tolerate that.

Finally, as for "standard of living" that is dependent on who we are speaking of and how that is measured. Aside from differences in median income (adjusted for PPPP) there is every reason to believe Germans (and Europeans in general) should have a higher standard of living if their tested abilities (IQ), skills, and knowledge is greater - the US has a much higher minority population (roughly 1/3rd black and Latino) whose abilities and skills are nowhere near that of the mostly white German population.

None the less, the particular US system of business and business culture outperforms (even with "challenged" material). And let's face it, Americans love their toys and if RV's, owning a house with some land, and driving big SUV's and pickups, dining out, etc. in general the US provides a better "standard of living".
 
Last edited:
"Should there be laws that regulate immigration?"


There ARE laws that regulate all immigration scenarios/variations to the US of A.
Democrats ignore them, Republicans have no backbone to enforce them.
 
What we need is enforcement.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
No mainstream US politician has called for open borders, not even Hillary. You exaggerate because you can't argue on substance. Germany took in less than 1% of its population in refugees and still has less than 10% non-white minorities, and you're hysterically screaming about how the brown folk are taking over Europe and implementing shariah law. You make these things up because you hate Europe in general and parrot whatever Trump tells you.

Europe continues to thrive and consistently provides a better standard of living in most categories than the US. Keep exaggerating and pretending that the world is falling every time you see an immigrant. Your avatar alone makes it clear you're a partisan hack incapable of objectively looking at the situation.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall Kerry as the commencement speaker at Northeastern U two years ago claimed that
'They were the first class to enter a borderless world."

Kerry does qualify as a mainstream US Politician and he by that speech did seem to be accepting the advent
of a borderless world. I think he was counting his chickens before they hatched as Trump beat Hillary.
 
Barnacle said:
"Should there be laws that regulate immigration?"


There ARE laws that regulate all immigration scenarios/variations to the US of A.
Democrats ignore them, Republicans have no backbone to enforce them.
Click to expand...

There certainly are. Given the call for closing ICE by some, I think the answer in yes or no; and why, would be quite revealing of the responder's view of one-world government support.
Regards,
CP.
 
Of course there should be laws regulating immigration.
I'd even be in favor of a merit based system.
Add to that a good solid background check, thorough vetting into criminal, social and economic histories.

Thing is, it needs to be equitable, accessible, fair, affordable and it needs to recognize the difference between immigration and asylum.

But of course we need strong border protection and laws that regulate who comes here to live.
Simple common sense.

PS: I'm one of those "libtards".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom