So, Trump has said that his administration will deport a lot of people who are here illegally. What might that look like? It's a legitimate question.
I think we have to put these migrants into two categories The first, the people who came here looking for a batter life. Second, the criminal element. The criminals will self-identify, get arrested, andthe justice system can have its way with them.
Those who came here looking for a better life are more of a political minefield. We don't want to go hose-to-house, Gestapo tactics. But, the fact is that while the criminals are a drain on the justice system, the hopefuls are a drain on the social systems The schools, the hospitals, the state and local agencies. My solution would be to simply turn off the welfare tap. Give then notice, like 30 days, that the freebies have run out, and that after 30 days they need to find a place to live, a job to hold down, and food to eat. After 30 days they run the risk of homeless starvation.
So, the question becomes; if we shut off the welfare tap, no money, no housing, no nothing, how many of these multi-million migrants will self-deport?
6 comments:
Seems like the most humane thing to do. Living on welfare permanently is not an option for legal U.S. citizens. Why should it be for others wanting to become citizens. So your steps sound to be a fair practice.
Now if they people who WANT these new immigrants to remain, they could easily develop an legal U.S. citizen - family - group to be a sponser for the illegal immigrants. This sponser would be taking responsibility for housing - feeding - taking care of medical needs for their charge. People who are currently taking the steps to legally become U.S. citizens already have a sponser sign for these responsibilities - why should anyone else be any different ?
Regarding the criminals, do we assume their home countries are willing to take them back? Unless put under some forceful pressure I see no reason to expect they would. And do the families of the criminals go too? To what depth? All including grandma, or just spouse and children?
I agree with turning off the welfare tap, but that has to be all inclusive. No education, no medical. But no matter to what degree, what percentage would then turn to crime, beginning the criminal handling process all over again?
If there is an appeal process (I don't think there should be), that would tie up the system and the process for decades.
I agree with you completely, but what I've mentioned is I think what the social thinkers are going to use to tie it all up.
I suspect that Mr. Trump will run into constant legal roadblocks in any deportations. I have no problem with known criminals, gang members, human traffickers or foreign agents who aren't citizens being deported.
I agree that criminals should be deported back to their home-country the first time. If they come back, we should contract with El Salvador to house them in one of their prisons.
The bigger question is, how many of the new immigrants will choose crime after the welfare spigot is turned off?
It might make sense to taper the flow of welfare to smooth out the numbers who do choose crime as opposed to honest work so the numbers don't overwhelm the systems put into place to deport them. As the deportation capability grows, the taper can become steeper.
It's easier than that. Simply fine the beejeezis out of companies that hire illegals. You also do that with Chad and Ashley and their illegal nanny. You only have to do it once or twice before they catch on. You have to make it less attractive to come here.
The minute they get caught on so much as a traffic ticket, they get deported along with their families. Like I said, do it a few times, the rest get the message.
I've seen the figure as high as 30 million illegals, which would be roughly 10% of the US population. Many were subsidized by NGOs to get here. Govt, Fed & State has paid to ship them here and there. No one wants them where they came from. Even the best of them came as moochers for the free handouts.
The above is a harsh statement and mostly true. How many doctors and professors have snuck across the border? How many are prepared to live in our society and can speak the language?
You can cut off the welfare tap, but that will lead to a lot of frustrated and abandoned people, resulting in theft, rioting, and other criminal behavior. Where to send them and how to get them there - It will be our government's problem to solve. Do you think Venezuela will take their criminals back, or their poor? What about Haiti? We will have to collect them, transport them, drop them off in their country of origin, and turn away from whatever their own governments do to them. We may even have to send a MEU to enforce our ability to drop them off.
This problem has been years in the making, it will take months to fix even without deep state interference, that is, if you want to do it in as humane and Christian a fashion as possible.
Our country is broke; our Federal debt will be paid by our children, grandchildren, and great-grands. Or we will default. Either way, doing this to our descendants is criminal. Want to help these people? That is what the Peace Corps is about. Teach them where they live how to have a better life. But that is an opportunity lost, but hopefully not a lesson soon forgotten.
Cutting off welfare is needed, ASAP. But what follows? How do you mitigate the consequences?
Post a Comment