Comment by trome | Hacker News Reader

Comment by trome | Hacker News Reader

In reading this, I see that there will no longer be any groups that are allowed to remain in the US based on prosecutor discretion (eg: Dreamers, kids/babies who were raised here will be deported), 10,000 more officers will be hired, and they plan to deputize more local police departments to deport people without Customs & Border Protection involvement.

About the only major screwup here for effective mass deportations is the Trump administration is hiring too few people to round up these people. Back in the 1940s when we were rounding up Japanese to send to concentration camps, it took way more manpower to effectively round up that population to send them to squalid, disease filled camps we sent them to, and there weren't 6 million to be rounded up either.

Hopefully this will get more Americans politically active at the very least, as when the food is rotting in the fields due to a lack of farm hands, that is when we will see something similar to what is happening with Obamacare and Republican voters right now.

> Hopefully this will get more Americans politically active at the very least

FWIW, many of us became politically active for the first time in our lives specifically because of the candidacy of DJT and the promises he made to deal with this issue.

A couple questions for HN, that I've yet to see answered without appeal to emotion:

1. By what moral principle do noncitizens have the right to reside in a sovereign country?

2. What is so morally outrageous about a sovereign country choosing to reduce its non-citizen : citizen ratio?

By what moral principle are citizens valued more than non-citizens?

There are many answers to this question, that have been rehashed elsewhere. Everything from citizens having more vested interest (skin in the game) in the future of their lands than noncitizens, to the protection of shared cultural heritage, to social cohesion borne of cultural integration and higher-trust societies, etc.

But I'm genuinely interested in answers to my questions devoid of appeal to emotion, not deflection to other questions.

> Everything from citizens having more vested interest (skin in the game) in the future of their lands than noncitizens

An illegal immigrant from a poor country sells everything, and by a stroke of luck is successful in coming to the US. Then they spend some time there (say 15 years).

Surely they have more to lose than a legal qualified immigrant (now a citizen) that spent some 8 years jumping through the hoops? The qualified immigrant could just pick a country at random and have reasonable chance of starting over, while the minimum wage illegal can't do the same (and so has to hope the country doesn't crap itself).

>protection of shared cultural heritage

How much cultural heritage does a white protestant factory worker share with an illegal Chinese immigrant?

Is it more or less than they share with legal Chinese programmer who had recently been granted a citizenship?

The Government is elected by the people, who have specific rights under the Consitution. Once you start letting other cultures, many of whom are hostile to US Culture walk freely across the border, the country won't last very long. You're seeing it play out in Germany, Sweden and other places where mass migrations has disrupted cultures and created pockets of lawlessness because the people have no affinity for their new governments. You might think they would be the most grateful people on earth, but that naive perspective assumes they were all really 'refugees' and that they all can simply forget their old cultures as soon as they cross the border.

Can you define "US Culture" for me real quick?

>You're seeing it play out in Germany, Sweden and other places where mass migrations has disrupted cultures and created pockets of lawlessness because the people have no affinity for their new governments.

Next you are going to tell me there are no-go zones in European cities, right?

By US Culture my simple definition is the respect of the current laws of the US. The left doesn't respect some laws like immigration, so it's quite logical that they are for the mass influx of others who don't respect them either. That's how cultures change, quickly.

Not sure on "no-go zones", but did you see some jouralists got assaulted [0] when they went to investigate the crazy claims of violent muslim immigrants in Sweden?

[0] http://www.dailywire.com/news/13664/american-journalist-sava...

>By US Culture my simple definition is the respect of the current laws of the US. The left doesn't respect some laws like immigration, so it's quite logical that they are for the mass influx of others who don't respect them either. That's how cultures change, quickly.

I doubt that the "left doesn't respect some laws like immigration". (I doubt that there even exists such a group as "the left" but that's for another discussion)

There are only people who don't come in contact with illegals very often, people who come into contact with them but don't know about their status, and then the people who employ them while knowing their status (and it would make sense to solve the issue there). After all, who would come to the US illegally when no one would give them a job?

>jouralists got assaulted

Yes, I've seen that clip. It still doesn't indicate a wider long-term issue.

2. The outrage is about the how, not the if. The easiest solution would be to simply nationalize everyone within its borders. Every other distinction falls foul of my sibling's response to your question #1.

What moral principle is required to refuse to deport people to a place where they have a good chance of being killed?

Non-citizens can still seek asylum in the US. That doesn't change.

USG is not founded on moral principles. All moral principles were so far overriden by expediency. So the question 1. seems to me beside the point.

Rape, torture, murder, all justifiable in the hands of your government at some point in the name of expediency, with no remorse or reparations provided.

2. All you need to do is watch the implementation carefully. You'll find reasons for outrage soon enough.

What "sovereign country" do you think you're talking about here? Are you a direct descendant of pre-Columbian indigenous inhabitants of the North American landmass?

Because if not, then you are not a citizen of a sovereign country, you are an European illegal alien, trespassing on land to which you have no legal claim of ownership or occupation, let alone sovereignty.

Come back when you have repatriated yourself to your proper country.

...when the food is rotting in the fields due to a lack of farm hands, that is when we will see something similar to what is happening with Obamacare and Republican voters right now.

Wait, I'm confused.

I thought there wasn't enough work for everyone, and we needed Basic Income/welfare/etc so that people wouldn't starve. I didn't realize the situation changed, and now we have a shortage of labor and desperately need people to do work or else people will starve.

Now that the situation has reversed, I guess we should end the welfare state and just redirect unemployed/etc people into these agricultural jobs?

> shortage of labor and desperately need people to do work or else people will starve.

Yeah also don't forget the eternal shortage of programmers and engineers.

So, illegals are cheap slaves who work at the farms?

People who work hard for money are 'slaves' now? No, slaves are people in chains, like the ones we're 'rounding up' to send back.

Slaves have often received pay, it's defined by deminished legal rights not nessisarily income.

"Working hard" isn't inherently valuable. I really don't get this protestant obsession.

"I know we pay you peanuts, but at least you get to work hard."

They are cheap labor everywhere, the backbone of this country. When Latinos went on strike (illegal and legal) in Wisconsin to send a message to Walker every restaurant in Madison was shutdown and the farmers were panicking because nobody was there to milk the cows, and that's very bad for the cows.

The ideal result here would probably be to streamline the path to citizenship, make it significantly cheaper, and get these people paying taxes as soon as possible.

> get these people paying taxes as soon as possible

I think that's a mistaken assumption. Undocumented immigrants pay far more in taxes than they get back: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/undocum...

As someone in the country illegally, why would they be entitled to get anything back?

If per chance you meant they are net contributors to the "system" that is unsupported by your citation

Because otherwise is legalized stealing.

Pay money, but don't get the benefits of what that money buys?

For anyone looking into the claim "When Latinos went on strike (illegal and legal) in Wisconsin to send a message to Walker every restaurant in Madison was shutdown", it appears to be a reference to "Day Without Latinos" last year in Madison on Thursday, February 18 (not to be confused with similar events this year).

I could find articles that indicated that some restaurants planned to close, eg http://www.wpr.org/madison-restaurants-are-closing-day-witho... , but nothing to suggest that even a substantial fraction of restaurants closed.

This article http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/Day-Without-Latinos-prot... lists nine restaurants (with multiple locations) that were closed, with no indication that were more.

Pretty much, most of the workers rights gains made by Cesar Chavez have been rolled back, hence why workers are forced to shit in the fields (due to a lack of places to do the needful), thus causing e coli and other outbreaks. Same thing has happened in the meat packing industry, worker protections have been gutted, and conditions there are similar to those described in The Jungle, a book which helped cause that industry to unionize and fight for safe & sanitary working conditions.

Up in Canada, they straight up import workers for low end jobs, hence why at Tim Hortons up north, you will rarely if ever see a native Canadian, its nearly entirely Asians, cause they are there on worker visas. The Canadian Govt has decided their workforce should be doing something better than making coffee or baking donuts, which isn't the worst idea when properly implemented.

If I'm reading this correctly, some memos allowing certain groups to remain in the US based on prosecutorial discretion - in particular, the policy of allowing those who came to the country as children to remain - are explicitly left standing.

That's my reading, too. From the top of page 2:

> With the exception of the June 15, 2012, memorandum entitled "Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children," and the November 20, 2014 memorandum entitled "Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children and with Respect to Certain Individuals Who Are the Parents of U.S. Citizens or Permanent Residents," all existing conflicting directives, memoranda, or field guidance regarding the enforcement ofour immigration laws and priorities for removal are hereby immediately rescinded.

That's a fairly large exception.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com