Freedom Caucus offer - Page 4

Well you are attacking family reunification and in order to justify it, you tirade that they don’t want to assimilate/create ties. I’m refuting that because only people who are absolutely committed to America would wait 35 years to immigrate to America.

You don’t understand the rules of discourse. If you want to be taken seriously when you claim that family reunification is detrimental to America, then you’re going to have to use evidence to prove that it indeed is a problem. You have the burden of proof here since you’re making the claim, not me. I’m not required to see it as a problem a priori. From my vantage point, your views on immigration stem from nothing but your political views—a source that represent a privileging of emotion and passion over reason.

If there’s a problem with family reunification, make a convincing argument grounded in evidence and if you’re convincing, I’ll change my mind.

I’m giving you a chance. If you squander it, I will continue to see your views as hypocritical and deliberately misleading. If you provide citations convincing evidence to support your claims, I’m willing to be moved.

Pretty snowflakey to be triggered by Versailles views. You are free to ignore them dude.

your refutation is irrelevant to what i'm trying to get you to understand and my point in all of this.
how is the fact that it's hard for them to become citizens stop the GC status that is granted to millions?

there is no burden of proof for me when i have summed it up for you in as basic of a way as i can. you refuse to understand that there even is a problem with chain migration.

i didn't say "family reunification" is detrimental, i said chain migration and i've been pretty clear what people mean when they say that.

this is your problem with things, you want to reframe the issue as a moral stance and change the meaning of what i'm trying to say.

this is what i'm saying: chain migration is a real problem that americans don't like, we should prioritize people like DACA'ers who are virtually assimilated over people from other countries that are often way older than most of us and are disadvantaged at ever assimilating.

this is how you try and reframe the discussion: "well it's not chain migration it's family reunification, what are you, against families?"

if you can't understand the basic fundamental problem with bringing millions of people over the years with virtually no ties to this country, limited prospects, and in some cases vastly different cultural norms and values to us, than no amount of evidence i can show you, will ever change your ardent support for more and more immigration.

Why do you have such a problem with my term? You’ve prescribed a moralistic meaning to family reunification but my arguments are not moralistic. I’m saying that only people absolutely committed to being American are willing to wait in line for 35 years. There’s nothing moralistic about that. It’s economic. You must wait in line for 35 years and in exchange, you can eventually enjoy the benefits and responsibilities of being an American. The moralistic argument that you’re crusading against is a straw man in the context of our conversation.

Now your assertion about assimilation: what is the cutoff age for someone to be assimilated? Because there isn’t much of a difference between DACA recipients like you and me and a person who comes through the family reunification program. The main difference is the age. What age creates a border between a “well assimilated” person and someone who isn’t well assimilated? Is age even good criterion to use?

I can’t understand “the problem” because I care about empirical facts. A century ago, plenty of immigrants from countries with no ties to the US came over through Ellis Island from countries in Eastern and Southern Europe. I don’t see the harm they committed to the US. Enlighten me on the harm that they created.

I’m not triggered by them. I strongly disagree with them. But he has a right to say them and I have a right to voice my disagreement. Unlike you, Versailles isn’t a snowflake about speech. To my knowledge, he hasn’t told anyone to keep their thoughts private. He embraces free discourse (even if his views and arguments are totally off).

there you go again, you misrepresent what i say
where in my posts did i bring up those immigrants, this is a bad analogy. they aren't comparable at all to our situation now or the situations that people who come here from chain migration find themselves in.

from your responses you clearly just kind of want to skirt around issues instead of trying to understand a different viewpoint of this situation.
there is obviously differences between DACA'ers and people that come through family reunification, aside from just age.
but someone who is 30+ is going to have a much harder time assimilating to the country they move to as opposed to a childhood arrival.
this isn't even bringing into play the overall differing values of countries and parallel societies you'd run into with an endless supply of these people coming into the country.

i'll ask you again because you keep ignoring the point i have kept reiterating to you multiple times, and we're clearly not going to get anywhere like this.

do you or do you not see the problems with bringing in millions of people based on flimsy laws that allow people in beyond the scope of what is intended.
if chain migration isn't a problem, why is there such an obsession with it being a non-starter in immigration talks.

You didn’t bring them up. I did. They are a group of immigrants who were undeducated, unassimilated adults. Yet in my calculation, they didn’t seem to harm the country. The people coming in through family reunification are similar in their background and I haven’t seen them harm American society.

In the past, an endless supply of immigrants came from different countries with differing values. Did that cause lasting problems on America then. Today, there are even more countries represented but today, there aren’t open borders. Do the immigrants from the newly represented non European countries have values that are radically less aligned with American values than the values of European immigrants of the past?


But enough of this. Let’s get down to the nitty gritty. Correct me if I’m wrong. You seem to be saying that people who come here through family reunification will have a harder time assimilating. That seems reasonable. However, I’m having a hard time understanding how this will have a long term negative impact on society. Because even though we may have to use some of our resources to help assimilate them, we will also have a productive person who has had their educational experiences as well as their developmental stage paid for by a foreign government. And because of this, I believe that immigrants, even adult ones with limited skill, can still be useful to America.


I want to answer your question. However, I don’t know why the laws are “flimsy” and I don’t understand how one can understand the level of immigration “that was intended”.