The southern US border is insane right now.

[Gospel]

It appears that the United States could draw upon some of its historical approaches rooted in social(ist) policy to enact legislation aimed at addressing private land ownership. This could serve as a means to foster affordable housing options and promote property ownership for both struggling American citizens and immigrants who aspire to achieve the classic American dream, which has become increasingly elusive.

It's unfortunate that the leaders who were instrumental in drafting legislation like the Homestead and Preemption Acts, regardless of the associated drawbacks (from assholes with money), are no longer with us. Leaving us with spoiled & bitter stepchildren ignoring the referee's whistle on a held ball. Consider the potential if the same determination that historically disadvantaged Native Americans were channeled into improving the lives of both immigrants and Americans, despite the objections from those who are already affluent.

 

[RVonse]

Just for shits and giggles I think I'm going to put some actual verified facts in this thread.

The 2.25 million number RVonse keeps saying? It's bullshit. Over half of those crossings are repeated crossings. Did I get this information from a Twitter post? No. MSNBC? No. George Soros? Well...yes of fucking course, I'm on his payroll. But he got the figures from as RVonse would say reports from the fucking authorities themselves.

CBP Releases September 2022 Monthly Operational Update

Securing America's Borders

www.cbp.gov

The large number of expulsions during the pandemic has contributed to a higher-than-usual number of migrants making multiple border crossing attempts, which means that total encounters somewhat overstate the number of unique individuals arriving at the border.

I'm not sure why RVonse is misinterpreting these numbers, but I'm sure it's not to push some Reich wing talking point. But there's a photo of some migrants in a river so I guess Tucker was right all along.

I again refer you to the video in the OP. Real people in and real place telling us and showing us in real time what they are seeing take place. I suppose it could be fake doctored artificial doctored up video..... but you aren't even making that argument.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Just for shits and giggles I think I'm going to put some actual verified facts in this thread.

The 2.25 million number RVonse keeps saying? It's bullshit. Over half of those crossings are repeated crossings. Did I get this information from a Twitter post? No. MSNBC? No. George Soros? Well...yes of fucking course, I'm on his payroll. But he got the figures from as RVonse would say reports from the fucking authorities themselves.

CBP Releases September 2022 Monthly Operational Update

Securing America's Borders

www.cbp.gov

The large number of expulsions during the pandemic has contributed to a higher-than-usual number of migrants making multiple border crossing attempts, which means that total encounters somewhat overstate the number of unique individuals arriving at the border.

I'm not sure why RVonse is misinterpreting these numbers, but I'm sure it's not to push some Reich wing talking point. But there's a photo of some migrants in a river so I guess Tucker was right all along.

I again refer you to the video in the OP. Real people in and real place telling us and showing us in real time what they are seeing take place. I suppose it could be fake doctored artificial doctored up video..... but you aren't even making that argument.

What is your argument? That the entire world is immigrating illegally to the US. That isn't particularly serious.

Yes, we have people immigrating to the US. Yes, we need to actually start recognizing it and managing it better. Do we have room in the US? Yes. Plenty of it.

The bigger issue is that the right-wing has riled many into a frenzy... yet, their only contribution to managing immigration is to effectively ignore the problem. The left-wing is trying to do stuff, but the right-wing base are so militantly against immigration, that makes it hard... even for George W. Bush to get any reform through. Obama was the first President in decades to address the issue, with the very few abilities the President has to manage it.

 

[James Brown]

I recall PJ O'Rourke (not exactly a bleeding heart liberal) calculating that if everyone lived in an area with the population density of New York City (where more than 8 million people live every day now) then the entire world's population would occupy an area the size of Kentucky.

Here's Kevin Drum's take on it:

Take a look at the past two years. The number of border crossers has been 3-4 million more than it is during normal times, which ought to be something of a destruction test of the impact of illegal immigration and sketchy asylum seeking. But what happened in real life? Unemployment is low, crime in border cities is low, and the total population of illegal immigrants has been flat.

 

[thebeave]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

 

[Ford]

According to what is being reported by the authorities who know and see the trend, will double each year. 4.5 million this year, 9 million next year, 18 million, etc.

In eleven years, more than the entire population of the world will be illegally crossing the Mexico/US border annually.

Or your concerns are ridiculous.

Pick one.

According to what our own authorities are reporting, our southern boarder is open right now. Open to the rest of the world. So it is not at all ridiculous to be concerned that all the rest of the world can and will come over the border. It is more likely they will.

According to what authorities? Can you direct me to the report where the Border Patrol said "yep, we're not even showing up to work anymore" and the detailed plan to dismantle all the border crossings?

And what about the border with Canada? Because you know people cross that, right?

Another vote here for"your concerns are ridiculous."

The OP. Those people Musk interviewed are "the US authorities".

But who are those people? What were their job titles, which agency did they represent, and were they actually representatives of said agencies or were they just random people that Cowboy Rocket found?

 

[bilby]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election

That's the eternal democratic conundrum. In a democracy, should politicians do what they know to be right, but unpopular; or should they do what they know to be wrong, but popular?

Should the stupid opinions of a bunch of idiots who have swallowed nonsensical propaganda be prioritised over doing what is best for the nation - including the idiots?

Or should politicians have the testicular fortitude to do the right thing, despite the risk to their own jobs?

The reason your country is in such a shitty mess that someone like Trump could get the top job, is that the politicians who have cojones get dumped in favour of those who pander to the opinions of morons - or rather, to the opinions that propagandists (like Musk) tell morons to hold.

Perhaps you should stop advising politicians to be craven puppets of the propagandists, and start advocating for politicians who are prepared to do what is right, rather than what is popular.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I recall PJ O'Rourke (not exactly a bleeding heart liberal) calculating that if everyone lived in an area with the population density of New York City (where more than 8 million people live every day now) then the entire world's population would occupy an area the size of Kentucky.

Here's Kevin Drum's take on it:

Take a look at the past two years. The number of border crossers has been 3-4 million more than it is during normal times, which ought to be something of a destruction test of the impact of illegal immigration and sketchy asylum seeking. But what happened in real life? Unemployment is low, crime in border cities is low, and the total population of illegal immigrants has been flat.

That math feels wrong. A quick back of the napkin, and it seems like an area the size of Texas works better (assuming 7 billion global population and population density of NYC as 29,303 people per square mile (sorry bilby)).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

They are doing a bad job. The problem is, the GOP solution for the last couple of decades amounts to "complain about it". The GOP had the House, Senate, and White House... and the GOP controlled Congress wanted nothing to do with W's reform plan.

The immigration courts are absurdly overwhelmed to the point of being comedy. We have a number of people that want to live here because it is better than the countries our foreign diplomacy had hand in fucking up. While cities are capable of managing large immigration populations, as seen with their current large immigration population, they can't absorb it all, and small areas along the border can quickly be overwhelmed.

So we need pragmatism and money... but all the right-wing wants is to complain and build a fucking wall.

 

[scombrid]

You know what will really help with the border problem? Shutting down the federal government.

And making sure that the tiny fraction of the population that holds 90% of the capital wealth don't pay any taxes. 90% of the population should pay 90% of the taxes even if they have 0 capital because they are 90% of the people and should pay 90% of the taxes. Fair is fair. And the multinational corporations that rely on the military and contractors to protect supply lines and enforce compliant governments should not pay any taxes either. That will fix the immigration problem.

 

[Harry Bosch]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

Beave: I'm on the same page with you 95% of the time. I wasn't mocking Rvose in my post. I quoted CATO which is a right leaning site. Here's the deal: the right is continuously campaigning problems that they only blame the left for: the deficit, immigration, and etc. And yet when they get in office, they don't do a damn thing about either issue or in most cases, do worse. (Again, I'm not lumping you into this crowd). These issues got worse when Trump was in office, not better. Republicans control the house, and have a very slight minority in the senate, what are they doing about right now? All that I hear is belly achining and blaming.

 

[bilby]

I recall PJ O'Rourke (not exactly a bleeding heart liberal) calculating that if everyone lived in an area with the population density of New York City (where more than 8 million people live every day now) then the entire world's population would occupy an area the size of Kentucky.

Here's Kevin Drum's take on it:

Take a look at the past two years. The number of border crossers has been 3-4 million more than it is during normal times, which ought to be something of a destruction test of the impact of illegal immigration and sketchy asylum seeking. But what happened in real life? Unemployment is low, crime in border cities is low, and the total population of illegal immigrants has been flat.

That math feels wrong. A quick back of the napkin, and it seems like an area the size of Texas works better (assuming 7 billion global population and population density of NYC as 29,303 people per square mile (sorry bilby)).

Perhaps Mr O'Rourke was using the population density of Manhattan? That's 28,154 people per square kilometre, or (for those watching in black and white) 72,918 per square mile.

5.6 billion people (the population at the time he wrote All the Trouble in the World in 1994) then need an area approximately twice the size of Kentucky.

Maybe that was the original claim?

 

[Politesse]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

I would be more sympathetic if those fears were justified in some way. The majority isn't right just because it is a majority.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

I would be more sympathetic if those fears were justified in some way. The majority isn't right just because it is a majority.

There are a couple angles. One is what do they mean when they say not going a "good job"? Liberals could be upset about policies regarding taking asylum seekers and keeping them outside the US, requiring them to use an app to get an appointment (of which fill up instantly)... verses conservatives who are angry because Biden is President.

 

[laughing dog]

You guys are mocking the OP and are getting in some good insults in on RVonse, but Democrats ought to be concerned about this, at least with regard to the next election:

Americans remain critical of government’s handling of situation at U.S.-Mexico border

Just 23% of Americans say the government is doing a good job dealing with the large number of people seeking asylum at the border, while more than three times as many (73%) say it’s doing a bad job.

Both of those surveys asked about the “increased number” of people seeking asylum, while the question in the Center’s latest survey asks about the “large number” of asylum seekers.

Just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners currently rate the government’s performance positively.

I don’t think our gov’t has a clue about how to effectively deal with our border . Neither party has demonstrated either a coherent or effective border policy. As a result, what goes on at the border plays no effect on my voting. I suspect that is the case of a significant portion of the electorate, regardless of their political leanings.

“ The border” has become a dog whistle for white nationalists and their dupes.

All around the world, people are risking their lives to move to a safer environment in order to improve the lives of themselves and their households. Making their home countries safer and more prosperous is the best long term “solution” ( assuming that immigration is a true problem). But that involves sending resources out of our country - something a small but vocal contingent of those on the right and on the left pitch fits over.

And, of course, in most of the developed West and East, there is a looming demographic issue of an aging population and low birth rates.

Like it or not, the voters in these countries face a trade off between stemming immigration through increasingly costly efforts along with a diminishing standard of living due a real slowdown in economic activity and dealing with immigration to keep the standard of living up along with the social change it entails.

 

[James Brown]

I recall PJ O'Rourke (not exactly a bleeding heart liberal) calculating that if everyone lived in an area with the population density of New York City (where more than 8 million people live every day now) then the entire world's population would occupy an area the size of Kentucky.

Here's Kevin Drum's take on it:

Take a look at the past two years. The number of border crossers has been 3-4 million more than it is during normal times, which ought to be something of a destruction test of the impact of illegal immigration and sketchy asylum seeking. But what happened in real life? Unemployment is low, crime in border cities is low, and the total population of illegal immigrants has been flat.

That math feels wrong. A quick back of the napkin, and it seems like an area the size of Texas works better (assuming 7 billion global population and population density of NYC as 29,303 people per square mile (sorry bilby)).

Perhaps Mr O'Rourke was using the population density of Manhattan? That's 28,154 people per square kilometre, or (for those watching in black and white) 72,918 per square mile.

5.6 billion people (the population at the time he wrote All the Trouble in the World in 1994) then need an area approximately twice the size of Kentucky.

Maybe that was the original claim?

That was indeed the book of his where I read that quote back in the mid-90s, so I may have mis-remembered.

Good catch, bilby.

So five+ billion people living like Manhattanites in a small corner of the United States, but if we let in a few thousand more then Earth will spiral into the sun.

Forgive me if I'm not too alarmed. Especially if the numbers that are bandied about ignores net immigration, where someone who comes into the US to work goes back to Mexico later. Maybe the job ran out. Maybe their US-based relatives got sick of them crashing on their couch. Maybe the summer's over and they need to get back to school.

Net immigration is far lower than counting just those who come in. It's like counting the people who walk into a Walmart and concluding "At this rate, they're going to be over the Fire Code Limit in about three hours." Meanwhile the shoppers who go out the exit door aren't counted.

 

[RVonse]

According to what is being reported by the authorities who know and see the trend, will double each year. 4.5 million this year, 9 million next year, 18 million, etc.

In eleven years, more than the entire population of the world will be illegally crossing the Mexico/US border annually.

Or your concerns are ridiculous.

Pick one.

According to what our own authorities are reporting, our southern boarder is open right now. Open to the rest of the world. So it is not at all ridiculous to be concerned that all the rest of the world can and will come over the border. It is more likely they will.

According to what authorities? Can you direct me to the report where the Border Patrol said "yep, we're not even showing up to work anymore" and the detailed plan to dismantle all the border crossings?

And what about the border with Canada? Because you know people cross that, right?

Another vote here for"your concerns are ridiculous."

The OP. Those people Musk interviewed are "the US authorities".

But who are those people? What were their job titles, which agency did they represent, and were they actually representatives of said agencies or were they just random people that Cowboy Rocket found?

If you would bother to listen to about the first 2 or 3 minutes you know one of them was congressman of that district and the others were sheriffs or some other official law enforcement job for that geography.

 

[Patooka]

If you would bother to listen to about the first 2 or 3 minutes you know one of them was congressman of that district and the others were sheriffs or some other official law enforcement job for that geography.

Or you could answer the question. I am skeptical of any video you post because you believe we should get our news from this fucking guy.

I again refer you to the video in the OP. Real people in and real place telling us and showing us in real time what they are seeing take place. I suppose it could be fake doctored artificial doctored up video..... but you aren't even making that argument.

And you aren't making any argument, other than "I don't like what is being shown to me so I'm going to keep on believing random strangers from Twitter and Youtube who reinforce my preconceived biases".


Tell me how that has worked out for you in the past.

 

[Ford]

The OP. Those people Musk interviewed are "the US authorities".

But who are those people? What were their job titles, which agency did they represent, and were they actually representatives of said agencies or were they just random people that Cowboy Rocket found?

If you would bother to listen to about the first 2 or 3 minutes you know one of them was congressman of that district and the others were sheriffs or some other official law enforcement job for that geography.

I would rather not give Elon even 2 minutes of my time, but it appears (as Patooka said) that you are basing your opinion that the border is utterly undefended and anyone is free to cross at any time on the word of a very unreliable source (the aforementioned wannabe cowboy) who "interviewed" a (and I'm guessing here) Republican Congressman and a couple of (again, wild guess) Republican Sheriffs who are hardly objective. As for them being "the authorities," it has apparently escaped your notice that the responsibility for patrolling/controlling access to the border is not "a few local politicians in a very small town in Texas" but rather the federal government - specifically DHS - and as such a reasonable person would consider them to be the source of authority.

It also appears that lonesome wrangler Musk went to just one particular area near one particular town along the border, and he (and you) are judging the entirety of the thousands of miles of the US/Mexico border (or is it "boarder?") on that one narrow - and again, biased - data point. Some dudes who are mad at Joe Biden say so, and therefore you believe that the border is utterly undefended and I could easily load up a truckload of cartel members carrying AK-47s and drive them right across the border at the Santa Teresa, NM port of entry and nobody would even try to stop us.

If choosing that one crossing seems oddly specific, it's because I know it well...having lived in Santa Teresa right up the road from that port of entry. You bring with you Pardner Elon and his Texas deputies from one bit of land, and that's nice, but I have some experience here as well. Over the past 30 years I have lived in 3 border states within varying distances from the border, and have also crossed that border back and forth so many times I've lost count. I used to go to Mexico once or twice a week for a few years.

Now, are there problems along the border? Yes. You head from downtown El Paso to Santa Teresa along Paisano Drive and you get a real close up look for yourself. Back in the day it was less than wise to go there at night, but I never ran into any problems. Is the border a free-for-all like you and Vaquero El Musko make it out to be? No. It is complex, but you're trying to both over-simplify it and fear-monger at the same time. With your source being some guy who fancies himself a dude and just happens to own a social media platform, and this leads you to believe he's an objective fountain of truth and also an expert on border policy because....you watched a video?

And you expect others to watch a few minutes and agree with you that the entire population of the world is gathering in Mexico to stream into the US while CBP sits back and says "nothing we can do here"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The immigration courts are absurdly overwhelmed to the point of being comedy. We have a number of people that want to live here because it is better than the countries our foreign diplomacy had hand in fucking up. While cities are capable of managing large immigration populations, as seen with their current large immigration population, they can't absorb it all, and small areas along the border can quickly be overwhelmed.

I have never dealt with the immigration courts but I have dealt with other parts of the system--and it's insane. The wait for a document to be processed can be years. And I think it's deliberately manipulated--oh, so convenient for them that my wife's application was approved only days before our marriage reached two years, thus giving her conditional permanent residency that would require another (fortunately simple) application in two years to remove the conditional status.