Front Office Football Central  

Go Back   Front Office Football Central > Main Forums > Off Topic
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Statistics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Today, 05:39 PM   #4351
Edward64
Head Coach
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward64 View Post
I'll be glad to answer this question on how I would do it if I was President and will do so later today (have an errand to run). Note that I'll not be answering as Trump. I'll reframe the question as "how would President Edward deal with illegal immigration".

Assumptions

1) Using the 80-20 rule, I assume 80% are law abiding and 20% have some sort of ding against them (e.g. felonies, known cartel associate etc.). Using 11M illegals as baseline, that means 8.8M vs 2.2M.
2) We do not need to give path to citizenship for illegals. We only need to give legal status such as renewable guest worker status (e.g. no voting rights). The only exception I can think of is DACA, give them citizenship
3) This is one time program only. Won't ever happen again. Any illegals after X date will be kicked out
4) Members have pointed out question of constitutionality or legal standing of X, Y, Z. Sure, any of these actions will be challenged in courts and SCOTUS will make the final ruling. Shouldn't stop us from trying to get a solution
5) There's always going to be some exception to the rule e.g. I'd probably give DACA citizenship ... even if they've committed felonies. Maybe some extreme hardship cases


As President Edward

6) Implement a holistic immigration reform program (see the Immigration thread for my ideas). This goes hand in hand with the below steps to get rid of illegals.
7) One key reform from #6 is to create/consolidate key pieces of info from all system/databases like social security, visa, immigration, Border Patrol, Homeland security, Prison etc.
8) All US citizens/PR get a nice check box on their driver's license or some other card or digital method

9) Ask the 80% to step forward, process them from illegal to guest worker assuming they pass they are eligible, see #1. They get ID cards they need to carry around everywhere
10) For the 20% baddies, focus law enforcement on capturing them and tossing them out. Their native country don't want them? I like the idea of paying their one-way ticket to Rwanda (aka the failed UK solution) or giving them an option to join the French/Ukraine Foreign Legion or ask the Vatican to take some since Pope Francis talks a good game. Whatever, given enough time and money, we can probably repatriate vast majority
Edward64 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 05:39 PM   #4352
Ksyrup
This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off.
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: In Absentia
Why is all this Robinson stuff such a surprise? It's been out there for awhile. I do find it funny that the Ashley Madison stuff is an issue in the age of Trump. Why is this an issue for everybody but Trump? I don't get it. Even my Trumpy SIL wasn't going to vote for Robinson (i assume she was going to leave it blank).
__________________
M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete."
Ksyrup is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 05:39 PM   #4353
Edward64
Head Coach
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
I've collected your questions and have answered them individually ...

Quote:
So what you’re saying is you are totally ok with people unconstitutionally being asked for papers, illegally detained, then possibly being deported to a country they are not from who’s job it will then be to figure it out?
Per #1, 80% will be invited to apply for guest worker status. For the remaining 20%, track them down. Expand whatever agency, give them the funds, and tell them to get it done. So no, not stopping people for no reason to ask for papers. But yeah, if you or me or some Latino are stopped for speeding, want to vote, buy a car, open a bank account etc. checking legal status will be part of the process.

Quote:
A wall wouldn't solve anything and mass deportations on the scale Trump is proposing just isn't feasible without massive costs and violating the rights of Americans. Unless you are in the "have to break a few eggs to make an omelet camp" when it comes to other peoples liberties you can't see this as a realistic solution.
I disagree with you on the Wall. I agree with you on Trump's solution ... we know he's a BS'er.

I don't see how my above solution will be violating the rights of Americans. Sure, there'll be some exceptions but for the most part, most American's will be okay albeit slight inconvenience at times.

But yes, I do believe you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. The initial Obamacare that passed broke alot of eggs to make the omelet. GOP challenged and eventually the individual mandate was found to be unconstitutional. If I propose a program, get it passed by Congress (somehow), I'll let the final constitutionality be determined by SCOTUS.

Same with Joe's student debt forgiveness. He proposed it, got shot down. He went around it, got $100B - $150B forgiven (?) and was recently forced to stop again. Another example of how Presidents break eggs to try get the omelet done.

Quote:
Logistically what does Trumps proposed mass deportations look like?
I do not speak for Trump. My plan is focused on the 20% or 2.2M. Create or fund an agency to track them down, kick them out. We can spend $150B to $250B on student debt forgiveness, we can spend that money on this specific law enforcement.

Low hanging fruit are the illegals in jail. Should be easy enough to monitor and then eventually toss out.

Their home country don't want them back? The UK plan to send unwanted to Rwanda is a creative option, only stopped by a new political party that came into power. If there is a political will and money, I'm sure we can find some country to take them.
Quote:
On 15 November 2023, the UK’s Supreme Court declared the policy unlawful because Rwanda was not a safe country to which asylum seekers could be removed. In response to the judgment of the Supreme Court, the government published a new treaty with Rwanda, which provides for additional safeguards, and introduced new legislation, which declares that Rwanda is a safe country for asylum seekers. On 25 April 2024, the UK’s treaty with Rwanda was ratified, and the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 became law and is now in force.

Since winning the 2024 general election and forming the new government, the Labour Party has cancelled the Rwanda scheme. It has announced that it will redirect money intended for the scheme to fund a new border agency.

So my question to you is:

You've acknowledged there is an illegal immigration problem. Does it rise to the level where you believe something needs to be done? And if so, what is your proposed solution?

Last edited by Edward64 : Today at 05:43 PM.
Edward64 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 34 (3 members and 31 guests)
dubb93, Edward64, Klinglerware
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 PM.



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.