Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas are black and Elon is Sub-Saharan. It has to be by individual merit.
Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread
- Thread starter thethe
- Start date
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
I’m just saying, those would be three massive exclusions that we wouldn’t have had the benefit of if this was being done by race or geography. Sowell has been a major conservative influence for decades, Thomas has basically shifted the path of the Court for the better, Elon is obvious. You don’t push a plan that leads to their exclusion.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It is also worth noting that under our current system the black immigrants that are being let in do well. And their children show the same upward mobility as other immigrant groups past and present.
There is always room for improvement. But the current system is producing results that are not bad.
There is always room for improvement. But the current system is producing results that are not bad.
Sure - When you look at the small successes and ignore all the failures it looks great!
Tapate50
Well-known member
acesfull86
Well-known member
End welfare eligibility for immigrants?
Thats an obvious one - All of sudden these success stories wouldn't happen as often.
acesfull86
Well-known member
How many of those “robbing us blind” went through any sort of formal review process versus coming here illegally?
Biden choosing not to enforce the border isn’t an indictment on a merit based system, so wouldn’t you want to make the distinction?
acesfull86
Well-known member
The point is Somalis on welfare isn’t an indictment on a merit based system more so than policy failure where people are responding to a poorly designed incentive.
You again assume a merit based system is even possible for most places in the world - It isn't
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It is the opposite of what you claim. The data turn on averages. The overwhelming majority lead productive law-abiding lives.
No - Its teh opposite of what you claim because its heavily weighted by the edge cases on the top.
And the mid level success is heavily driven by a system that subsidizes every section of hte immigrants life.
acesfull86
Well-known member
We have data on the people already here. We can’t compare those who came here from country “x” legally vs illegally and draw any conclusions?
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It should be noted that most refugees/asylees get some form of public assistance. We can end those programs if we wanted to. I don't think it would be smart or humane. It should also be noted that even if you focus just on refugees/asylees the net fiscal impact is positive. See this report for example: https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/fiscal-impact-refugees-asylees
Most people who look at this come to the conclusion that immigrants, including refugees and asylees, benefit the country. I think those studies tend to understate the net benefit if anything by among other things not counting the higher upward mobility of the children of immigrants and the reduction in the burden of servicing the national debt by having a bigger population and economy to finance it. Not to mention the lower interest rate from reduced risk of default.
Most people who look at this come to the conclusion that immigrants, including refugees and asylees, benefit the country. I think those studies tend to understate the net benefit if anything by among other things not counting the higher upward mobility of the children of immigrants and the reduction in the burden of servicing the national debt by having a bigger population and economy to finance it. Not to mention the lower interest rate from reduced risk of default.
Its just some matter of fact 'support' when in reality its housing/food assistance/Medical Aid/Schools/jobs placement
When 'legally' is bogus TPS I don't see the distinction.
Lotfs of the somlians committing fraud are here 'legally'.
