Mass Deportations: what will the impact be?
drewcareypnw
not the real drew carey, but I play him at strip clubs...
Since this is about to move from the rhetorical to the real, it is interesting to consider the impacts. My guess...
1. Lot of ruckus as bleeding heart types tie themselves to taco trucks or whatever meaningless drama displays. Sad talk and tsk tsk from the reanimated Maddow show. Gringos with nothing better to do stage feel-good protests and fight with cops, etc.
2. ICE runs short on budget... this is going to cost, and the money has to come from somewhere.
3. Detention centers fill up. Again a budget issue, but enterprising corporate prisons will probably find a way.
4. Repatriation costs climb. Sending these people home costs money too, there is also the question of whether their home countries want them.
5. Will there or won't there be a commensurate rise in the price of agricultural and meat packing goods, restaurant meals, construction, laundry services, etc. ? These are the traditional destinations for illegals, and the facile economic analysis suggests that this will cost the consumer. But who knows, we've never really tried it.
6. Will crime rates drop or stay the same? Different studies suggest different criminal profiles for illegal immigrants. I've certainly read some that suggest that they are less likely to offend, and I'm sure some of you have read something to the contrary. It's hard to imagine a minority of 3% o the population having a big impact.
7. Will there be some kind of new day in America? Will this change things materially for working class or any citizens?
8. What will stop them coming back? If we spend a bunch of coin to arrest, detain, house, and transport someone back home and they turn around and sneak back... that could get expensive.
TBH I could GAF about illegal immigrants getting kicked out of the USA. Lining up with foreign shivering masses is an arbitrary liberal sacred cow. I'm a lot more interested in the welfare of our *own* citizens, I'd like to see the least of us better paid, housed, fed, etc. before we start working on the considerable problems of the rest of the world.
Maybe Trump (Orange Turd) is on to something. My gut says is that he is not. It's easy to look at someone different and say "that's the problem". Actually improving the quality of life in America is going to be complicated, and a simple fix like "kick out all the illegals" isn't going to move the needle. Or if it does, it will move several needles: some good and some bad.
1. Lot of ruckus as bleeding heart types tie themselves to taco trucks or whatever meaningless drama displays. Sad talk and tsk tsk from the reanimated Maddow show. Gringos with nothing better to do stage feel-good protests and fight with cops, etc.
2. ICE runs short on budget... this is going to cost, and the money has to come from somewhere.
3. Detention centers fill up. Again a budget issue, but enterprising corporate prisons will probably find a way.
4. Repatriation costs climb. Sending these people home costs money too, there is also the question of whether their home countries want them.
5. Will there or won't there be a commensurate rise in the price of agricultural and meat packing goods, restaurant meals, construction, laundry services, etc. ? These are the traditional destinations for illegals, and the facile economic analysis suggests that this will cost the consumer. But who knows, we've never really tried it.
6. Will crime rates drop or stay the same? Different studies suggest different criminal profiles for illegal immigrants. I've certainly read some that suggest that they are less likely to offend, and I'm sure some of you have read something to the contrary. It's hard to imagine a minority of 3% o the population having a big impact.
7. Will there be some kind of new day in America? Will this change things materially for working class or any citizens?
8. What will stop them coming back? If we spend a bunch of coin to arrest, detain, house, and transport someone back home and they turn around and sneak back... that could get expensive.
TBH I could GAF about illegal immigrants getting kicked out of the USA. Lining up with foreign shivering masses is an arbitrary liberal sacred cow. I'm a lot more interested in the welfare of our *own* citizens, I'd like to see the least of us better paid, housed, fed, etc. before we start working on the considerable problems of the rest of the world.
Maybe Trump (Orange Turd) is on to something. My gut says is that he is not. It's easy to look at someone different and say "that's the problem". Actually improving the quality of life in America is going to be complicated, and a simple fix like "kick out all the illegals" isn't going to move the needle. Or if it does, it will move several needles: some good and some bad.
45 comments
***That's where DOGE comes in.
3. Detention centers fill up. Again a budget issue, but enterprising corporate prisons will probably find a way.
***80/20 rule. Trump isn't going to sweep up every illegal as he finds them. Low-hanging fruit first.
4. Repatriation costs climb. Sending these people home costs money too, there is also the question of whether their home countries want them.
***Perhaps he can repurpose the budget for Biden/Mayorkas flying them all over the country. If I were Trump, I'd say if you don't accept them, we're going to tax remittances to your country 200%. They'll play ball right quickly.
5. Will there or won't there be a commensurate rise in the price of agricultural and meat packing goods, restaurant meals, construction, laundry services, etc. ? These are the traditional destinations for illegals, and the facile economic analysis suggests that this will cost the consumer. But who knows, we've never really tried it.
***Again, 80/20. Trump can go after the big corporations who employ them, but not every contractor scouring the Home Depot parking lot for day labor. If Trump _really_ wanted to send illegals home, he'd go after the employers.
6. Will crime rates drop or stay the same? Different studies suggest different criminal profiles for illegal immigrants. I've certainly read some that suggest that they are less likely to offend, and I'm sure some of you have read something to the contrary. It's hard to imagine a minority of 3% o the population having a big impact.
***He will prioritize nests of criminals and gangsters in cities like New York and Denver where they have taken hold. Crime will drop.
7. Will there be some kind of new day in America? Will this change things materially for working class or any citizens?
***Not right away. Deportations will take time, and it will take even more time to feel the impact. I don't think Trump will ever deport even half of them. Just the most problematic ones. The greatest impact, as with a lot of Trump's actions, will be an increase in social cohesion and a return to pride in America, as opposed to Democrats' groveling before effete Europeans and the Davos/Brussels crowd. Hopefully, we bolster this with a return to merit-based immigration, no chain migration, no birthright citizenship via a reinterpretation of the 14th amendment.
8. What will stop them coming back? If we spend a bunch of coin to arrest, detain, house, and transport someone back home and they turn around and sneak back... that could get expensive.
***Trump has always talked about countermeasures to keep them out. But not demoralizing and unjustly accusing the Border Patrol, funding it, and not rolling out the red carpet, is a great place to start.
TBH I could GAF about illegal immigrants getting kicked out of the USA. Lining up with foreign shivering masses is an arbitrary liberal sacred cow.
***Someone tell the libs that the poem on the Statue of Liberty was written in a different time, and was never signed into law.
I'm a lot more interested in the welfare of our *own* citizens, I'd like to see the least of us better paid, housed, fed, etc. before we start working on the considerable problems of the rest of the world.
***Yes. We cannot get rich by importing poverty (and terror) from all over the world. Half the libs here are incels who care more about cheap illegal Latin ass than the welfare of Americans. They should be laughed at, at every opportunity. You're starting to sound Republican. Progress! ;)
Actually improving the quality of life in America is going to be complicated, and a simple fix like "kick out all the illegals" isn't going to move the needle. Or if it does, it will move several needles: some good and some bad.
***"Kicking out all the illegals" is like "I'll end the Ukraine War within 24 hours." It's directional intent but highly exaggerated. I think Trump will deport the worst of them, reinstitute Remain In Mexico with some threats, fortify the border, and that's that. Until the next Democrat wants to import another 11 million illegals and register them to vote.
On a different note, I doubt Trump will ever go after the true cause of out of control border crossing, as the main culprit is the employers, and he along with his buddies, that will get the biggest tax breaks, are among the worst abusers of the system that employs illegal aliens.
(If they couldn't find sufficient work, they'd all self deport, and/or stop coming)
2. No, many millions of dollars will be saved when illegals are moved from hotels with SNAP cards, free everything, free spending cash, to criminal detention facilities where they await deportations
3. We can build new ones.
4. see #2
5. It is better to protect Americans' personal security and national security than to feed money to Cartels, Coyotes, identity thieves, dealers, and sex traffickers. The money saved from suuporting tens of millions of illegals can be fed back into the federal budget to lower taxes and enact inflation reducing measures to grow wages and increase employment opportunities for citizens and lawful workers.
6. Stupid question. Of course, crime will decrease. See #5
7. More jobs, less crime, lower taxes. Yes.
8. The same way Trump created the lowest rates of illegal immigration in his first term.
“ Wise men speak when the have something to say, fools like you feel a need to say something when they don’t have anything else to offer. “
What a stupid little child you are.
First, the most 80’s thing that ever 80’ed is this: Rob Lowe made a yacht rock demo with the members of Toto while high on cocaine.
Second, the stupidest thing about an argument in TUSCL political thread in the history of TUSCL political threads is this: Gamma thinking he won an argument by stating that a Mark Twain quote should not be attributed Samuel Clemens despite acknowledging that Clemens’ pen name is (lemme check my lion-y notes) Mark Twain.
ROAR!!!
First, Gamma will praise every Trump’s every utterance as the most genius thing that ever geniused. He will do so in a way that makes it clear that he is jacking off while typing his praise of Trump. However, Gamma will be even angrier than he was during the Biden presidency for some inexplicable reason.
Second, Skifredo will just be really angry all of the time. He may confess to TUSCL that the only way he can get an erection is by staring at a photo of Hillary Clinton until he is completely enraged (and oddly turned on).
Anybody wanna bet against these lion-y predictions?
I didn’t think so…ROAR!!!
Third, a few drama queens on this board will continue to treat every Trump utterance as set in stone and engage in endless melodrama and doomsaying.
For example: "Since this is about to move from the rhetorical to the real..." LOL. No, it isn't, and anyone with a lick of sense knows this. They'll definitely go after the ones with criminal convictions and will no doubt engage in a few splashy raids, but they simply have no way to pull off mass deportations.
Seriously now. Even if they had even a fraction of the manpower, and they do not, how would you even track a lot of these people down? Many of them don't have their names on almost anything except for rental agreements that aren't public.
As usual, the dugan is right.
I don’t know exactly what is going to happen. But one thing this lion does know that we’re not going to gain insights from reading social media, listening to hyperbole, and posting 40-page essays on a site for demented perverts.
C’mon folks…embrace your inner pervert and have some frickin’ fun. ROAR!!!
I will comment on your discussion:
“Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away, and that in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
Clutch your pearls, scream at the sky, rage type here and elsewhere. I think by the midterm elections all of our lives will be so much better, even for those who refuse to admit it.
"For example: 'Since this is about to move from the rhetorical to the real...' LOL. No, it isn't"
Yes, it is.
1. The Rhetorical: President elect Orangeturd has stated his intent to begin a large deportation when he is elected. Per Trump, the deportation will be so large that it will be the largest in history.
quote: " 'On my first day back in the Oval Office, I will sign a historic slate of executive orders to close our border to illegal aliens and stop the invasion of our country,' Trump proclaimed to a friendly crowd at Turning Point Action’s AmericaFest conference in Phoenix."
“And on that same day, we will begin the largest deportation operation in American history, larger even than that of President Dwight D Eisenhower,”
https://nypost.com/2024/12/22/us-news/tr…
Rhetorical: adjective - expressed in terms intended to persuade or impress. e.g. "the rhetorical commitment of the government to give priority to primary education"
...since OT wasn't in power prior to tomorrow, we may say that his statements were merely rhetorical. You seem to suggest that they will remain rhetorical. However, I invite you to consider point 2.
2. The Real.
quote: "Trump to Begin Large-Scale Deportations Tuesday
Chicago will be an early target, with as many as 200 officers being sent to carry out the operation, say people familiar with the planning"
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trum…
Real: adjective - actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed. e.g. "Julius Caesar was a real person"
...according to the WSJ, large scale deportations will begin Monday. Since these will actually exist, we may say that the deportations will be real.
Proof:
1. trump spoke rhetorically (to impress and persuade) about mass deportation prior to his upcoming presidency.
2. real, large scale deportations will begin Monday.
3. The deportation are about to move from the Rhetorical to the Real.
QED
queue default accusations of shrill girliness...
No less a lib than Ezra Klein pointed to Biden's "everything bagel liberalism," meaning that he felt he had to placate every faction of the Democratic party before proceeding. A bone to the DEI crowd, saying an N% of it had to go to minority/LGBTQ/female-owned businesses...a bone to the unions, that they had to pay inflated union wages. That's how you spend $42 billion for rural broadband and still can't connect a single household. Or 7 EV charging stations for a billion.
A strong economy isn't a sure thing; Trump's going to inherit inflation that's down but not out, a record high level of consumer debt, and more. But Trump's already spurring a glut of investment and optimism, as opposed to the Democratic agenda of grievance and decline.
Yes, lib politicians go out of their way to placate each tiny minority. But it's important to remember that by doing so, they're actually simultaneously placating a majority: the woke self hating white guilt liberal that wants to be able to say that he supports that tiny minority and does so by proxy exactly once a year on voting day. It's the modern equivalent of "oh, rest assured, I have *lots* of black friends".
To quote Dugan: "we do it to ourselves". Democracy is mostly working fine for Dems. We have the politicians that reflect our values, unfortunately we have the politician that reflect our values. Which are a mess.
I'd place Dem unity more on the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and now Hakeem Jeffries than anything Biden did.
That politicians reflect your values isn't "working fine," it's what took you down two months ago. Your values look to be:
1. Extreme feminization; no less a liberal than Joe Klein lamented this. Abortion vans outside the DNC. The Obamas browbeating black men into voting for a woman. Julia Roberts treating women as oppressed and having to hide their votes from their husbands.
2. LGBTQ extremism
3. Racial grievance politics, which totally missed what black and Latin men voted upon. Open borders are related to this.
4. Profligate spending on Dem pet priorities like climate change, which is near the bottom of the average American's priority list.
5. And encompassing all of this, contempt for the working class, particularly the white working class, treating them like retards who didn't know what's best for them.
Bernie was right; the working class just struck back.
Wrt “working fine”, the point is we have more or less on brand representation, not that the representation results in a winning ticket.
That said, the notion that the country just shifted right is overblown and smells of gop triumphalism. Any party that presented a demented old man for a candidate and then sat on the election for a month only to run a black woman with no positions would be loser.
That on-brand representation is the problem.
In 2020, with COVID, Trump was so overexposed and in everyone's face that being Not Trump was enough. Biden ran on being a moderate, then broke hard left in office. Insiders say he was obsessed with being a transformational liberal president. I don't think history will be kind to him.
In 2024, I don't know if Democrats thought Trump would be so radioactive that they could run an outrageously left-wing ticket and succeed, or they just listened to their hard left flank and didn't get out into middle America and thought they _could_ sell a hard left platform. But they _did_ run a hard left platform (oh, I forgot anti-Semitism. Queers for Palestine, lulz, that's like sheep for wolves. If they didn't try to placate their Jew-haters, they might have chosen the popular, swing state Josh Shapiro). I don't think the country shifted right as much as the Democrats shifted left. You ran the most liberal member of the Senate during her tenure, and she chose the most liberal governor in the country. How the hell does that appeal to the center?
I lay Biden's last minute withdrawal on the Democratic party, too. We've been calling out Biden's dementia for years; you insisted otherwise. "Sharp as a tack," yeah, no. It was reported in early 2024 that he needed handlers to make sure he didn't embarrass himself. Dems didn't yank him because he had dementia, they yanked him because they couldn't hide it any longer. And no fucking way the identity politics-obsessed party could shove a black woman aside. Crisis of their own making.
And while I see the arguments otherwise, I disagree that Harris would have won with a longer runway. She had her time in 2019 and came in 5th in her own state. Biden admitted choosing her for her skin color and genitalia. She spent $2 billion dollars; if you can spend that much and not get your message across, you are either the world's shittiest communicator or your message fucking sucks.
If Trump is more effective and less obnoxious--and there's reason to believe that--the country might just shift to the right.
But 2024 is Democrats hoisted on their own petards.
You realize that there are conservatively over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country now, no? An estimated 530,000 of them are in Illinois alone. Just how many of those half million immigrants do you think a couple of hundred agents are going to realistically round up?
It helps to calm down, think and maybe even take a look at the situation before becoming melodramatic. Just a thought.
“In 2020, with COVID, Trump was so overexposed and in everyone's face that being Not Trump was enough. “
Correct.
“Biden ran on being a moderate,”
Correct.
“then broke hard left in office”
Incorrect. That’s an exaggeration. There’s nothing “hard left” about a country with no universal health care. By this measure Europe is a totalitarian Bolshevik state. Maybe in right wing circles where the EPA is the definition of jack booted thugs, but not in real life.
“Insiders say he was obsessed with being a transformational liberal president”
Seems plausible, but who knows.
“I don't think history will be kind to him.”
I agree. It won’t be for being transformational, liberal, or hard left. If you are a lib, it will be because he lied about his mental state, sat on the election for a month because “he’s stubborn”, and blew up any chance of dems winning the election. To be clear, Kamala was no one’s first choice.
If you’re a right winger, he will be judged unkindly simply for being not a conservative.
IF Trump is serious about removing illegals, there is announcements effective path forward.
1. Focus on criminals first. That is already stated policy
2. Require businesses verify employment eligibility and pass a law adding penalties for non compliance. Right now it is a state by state situation.
2.1. While waiting to pass the law, require anyone who does business with the federal government to use e-verify, or whatever it's called.
3. Tax remittances at 25% and clamp down on welfare benefits to immigrants.
Doing this will, make visible deportation effort, reduce the pull of getting jobs under the table, increase cost to send out money and make the cost of staying higher. People respond to incentives. Change the current incentive structure and many will self deport.
Trump then claims victory after building the wall and everyone pretends the remaining illegals aren't here.
Stripping away your usual go to cries “melodrama”, I think your argument is:
“Bla bla bla”
sarcasm
😉
Bla bla bla
“12 million, 530k in IL, is too many for those 200 agents to arrest.”
Bla bla bla
“melodrama”.
…so I think your argument is that there are too many illegals to arrest?
As I covered in points 2 and 3, there’s not funding for this. So, it would seem that Rick Dugan agree with me!
This doesn’t change the fact that the shift from rhetoric to real will begin, see definitions above.
What is so threatening about hearing a different option Rick? Do you panic when someone taps your shoulder at the diner and asks you to pass the ketchup?
------------------------------------
For 2024: ICE’s latest report reveals that of the 271,484 removals carried out last fiscal year, around 32% of those were people with criminal histories. ICE’s enforcement and removal branch also arrested 113,431 immigrants, down from the previous year. Of those, 81,312 were convicted criminals or had pending criminal charges at the time of arrest.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/19/politics/…
With Carter I do have lots of good things to say about his character, as POTUS not so much. With Biden, he was and is just a Tool with NO good things about him. I'll be surprised if a ton of Pardons are release before Noon ET on Monday 20-Jan-2025 including himself.
I didn't say the country became hard left, I said he broke that way after the election. Besides, all my friends on the left told me we had universal healthcare after Obamacare. Were they lying?
Massive spending bills on green anything, most radical pro-abortion agenda ever, calling trans the "civil rights issue of the day" = hard left, no matter what he did or didn't on healthcare. (BTW I know this field well and neither party has a goddamn clue.)
"If you are a lib, it will be because he lied about his mental state, sat on the election for a month because “he’s stubborn”, and blew up any chance of dems winning the election."
And that's the only reason? None of it will be a 21% increase in price levels, or 11 million over the open border, or his BBBJTCWSs to Khameini, or Ukraine and Gaza?
"To be clear, Kamala was no one’s first choice."
If she was no one's first choice, why did the party fall in line behind her so quickly? I heard Obama wanted a fast primary. Or was she the choice of the identity politics pimps and the rest of the party was too shit scared to do the right thing? If Biden chose her, that reinforces what I said that he went hard left. Again, if the Dems weren't hard left, why did they choose the most liberal member of the Senate as candidate and most liberal governor as running mate?
"If you’re a right winger, he will be judged unkindly simply for being not a conservative"
Right, like Dem historians aren't declaring Trump tHe WoRSt PreSiDeNT eVar right in the middle of a campaign? For one, anyone, who no matter how left or right, gives that title to Biden or Trump rather than James Buchanan or Andrew Johnson, has so little historical perspective that I wouldn't believe anything they said. For another, I don't think we can historically rank anyone until some decades have elapsed; we're still seeing the impact of their policies.
The American people were just given a choice between 45 and 46 (and his number two), and chose Trump. What does that tell you?
3x as many gotaways under Biden!
https://homeland.house.gov/2024/10/24/st…
You don't need to deport those you don't let in, in the first place!
We know Trump has massively overhyped and simplified the immigration issue (except for perhaps the kool-aid drinking MAGA supporters who believe everything Trump says). We also know Trump had Republicans block funding for the border last year so he could campaign on this issue. As things move forward we should be better able to discern the truth from the bullshit.
Dems have lied repeatedly and blatantly on the immigration issue while actively facilitating illegal immigration and coddling them once they get here.
You've got 11 minutes before your punchbowl is taken away. We're not going to stop reminding you of the crime and strained services your policies have brought us.
The price level game cuts both ways. We all know that presidents have relatively little control over prices. Biden didn’t give you expensive eggs any more than trump is going to give you cheap ones.
“ If she was no one's first choice, why did the party fall in line behind her so quickly? “
Same reason we voted for Biden last time, and you said it first: she was the not trump choice.
“Right, like Dem historians aren't declaring Trump tHe WoRSt PreSiDeNT eVar right in the middle of a campaign?”
We already have experience in this department. Remember?
“ Marry your own fucking head of iceberg lettuce bitches” hahahaha ski quote of the year so far.
The flood is going to be all on Trump starting in a few hours. I doubt he will be able to have anywhere near the impact he’s selling, either in the deportations or border hardening departments. People move because they have to or really really want to.
No less of a delicate liberal flower than George Patton said “Fixed fortifications are monuments to man’s stupidity. If mountain ranges and oceans can be overcome, anything made by man can be overcome.”
So, the desperate Latin Americans will keep coming back on the cheap even as we spend billions to deter and remove them.
I think now is the time we normally start saying 80/20 and he’s just bluffing etc.
***Not sure what's your point here. "Left" and "right" are relative to the place and time; it doesn't matter what Biden would be considered in Sweden. Relative to his campaign he pushed a leftist agenda.
The price level game cuts both ways. We all know that presidents have relatively little control over prices. Biden didn’t give you expensive eggs any more than trump is going to give you cheap ones.
***Incorrect. They own spending and have significant though not formal authority over the federal reserve. Biden owns the green pork put through in the American Rescue Plan and "Inflation Reduction Act." Individual commodities might vary but deficit spending equals debt equals inflation. In this case, they also own the supply chain disruptions at the ports that worsened inflation, while Mayor Pete took 2 months off to adopt a kid.
Same reason we voted for Biden last time, and you said it first: she was the not trump choice.
***You had a million Not Trump choices other than Harris. Shapiro, Whitmer, Moore, Newsom. You chose Harris.
We already have experience in this department. Remember?
***What, calling someone the worst president ever? How many historians put together a "serious" paper saying that the other guy is worse than the one who split the country apart or botched Reconstruction, the effects of which we feel today?
And now you're all over the place. You start the thread assuming that this will actually happen, but then switch gears by claiming that your budget was really an acknowledgement that it won't. So which is it?
Like I said man, slow down and think a bit. 200 agents to Chicago is a piss hole in the snow. It's just more showmanship, nothing more, which makes all of your other dire predictions...I almost hesitate to say it, but...rather melodramatic. ;)