C'mon, Boring Board. Baseball and World events

[Loyal Coug1]

Aka politics.

BB lost the rubber match at home against Utah in Pac-12 play. 8-6 now.

Gaza nightmare. Just horrible. Read an article on that US ship that will help this temporary dock/port facility for aid deliveries. Article also said pre-tragedy Gaza was receiving 500 trucks a month in aid - for how many months or years and paid for who knows (I have an idea, starts with U). For a place smaller than many US cities. Really?

The whole Gaza history is pretty interesting, and from reading up on it, the whole cluster F IMHO is the fault of the British and Egypt after WWI, Egypt and Israel after WWII, and those two and various Arab countries in recent decades. But of course, we have to stick our snout deep into it like we do with everything. I guess because of influences from Hymietown?

The border. Why the F can't we just say no. No more immigrant/refugee/asylum crossing for any reason. No "legal" crossing. No release of illegally crossing families. They start wading or swimming or walking/climbing across, "stop and turn around or we will shoot". Article below tries to explain how it all works. Per the flowcharts, I see shitloads of people legally let in by the US, and shitloads of illegal crossers being released.

Who Gets In? A Guide to America’s Chaotic Border Rules. (Published 2023)

New restrictions on asylum will lead many migrants to be deported — but others will still get into the United States. Here’s what the process will look like.

www.nytimes.com

Much as I abhor Trump, and much as I hate the lying Repugnant ones in Congress, this is the one issue for which I would fully support major, major draconian change. And we shouldn't have to resort to telling outright and now admitted lies in the post SUTA repugnant response where Sen. Britt referred to a sex trafficking situation that happened in Mexico when George W. Bush was President as an outcome of failures in Biden's current policies. She only fessed up 2 days later when outed by the press.

This oughta keep all you haters occupied until Thursday!

 

[79COUG]

There's a bill in the California house that would give illegals interest free home loans. I'm a 62 white guy who is born and raised here and have paid taxes since I was 15 and I'm having a hell of a time just finding a damn house to rent.
In 14 months I'll be 64. Mexico here I come...I'm done with this jacked up country. My old man is rolling over in his grave.

 

[CougEd]

There's a bill in the California house that would give illegals interest free home loans. I'm a 62 white guy who is born and raised here and have paid taxes since I was 15 and I'm having a hell of a time just finding a damn house to rent.
In 14 months I'll be 64. Mexico here I come...I'm done with this jacked up country. My old man is rolling over in his grave.

So are you saying what you read California is giving away 30 year mortgages to illegals, where did California get the money to give away free money for 30 years?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

So are you saying what you read California is giving away 30 year mortgages to illegals, where did California get the money to give away free money for 30 years?

I just googled this - shitloads of articles. I gotta run somewhere but am leaving the page up for later.

 

[79COUG]

So are you saying what you read California is giving away 30 year mortgages to illegals, where did California get the money to give away free money for 30 years?

Same place every other state does.. you and i.

 

[BSpike76]

Aka politics.

BB lost the rubber match at home against Utah in Pac-12 play. 8-6 now.

Gaza nightmare. Just horrible. Read an article on that US ship that will help this temporary dock/port facility for aid deliveries. Article also said pre-tragedy Gaza was receiving 500 trucks a month in aid - for how many months or years and paid for who knows (I have an idea, starts with U). For a place smaller than many US cities. Really?

The whole Gaza history is pretty interesting, and from reading up on it, the whole cluster F IMHO is the fault of the British and Egypt after WWI, Egypt and Israel after WWII, and those two and various Arab countries in recent decades. But of course, we have to stick our snout deep into it like we do with everything. I guess because of influences from Hymietown?

The border. Why the F can't we just say no. No more immigrant/refugee/asylum crossing for any reason. No "legal" crossing. No release of illegally crossing families. They start wading or swimming or walking/climbing across, "stop and turn around or we will shoot". Article below tries to explain how it all works. Per the flowcharts, I see shitloads of people legally let in by the US, and shitloads of illegal crossers being released.

Who Gets In? A Guide to America’s Chaotic Border Rules. (Published 2023)

New restrictions on asylum will lead many migrants to be deported — but others will still get into the United States. Here’s what the process will look like.

www.nytimes.com

Much as I abhor Trump, and much as I hate the lying Repugnant ones in Congress, this is the one issue for which I would fully support major, major draconian change. And we shouldn't have to resort to telling outright and now admitted lies in the post SUTA repugnant response where Sen. Britt referred to a sex trafficking situation that happened in Mexico when George W. Bush was President as an outcome of failures in Biden's current policies. She only fessed up 2 days later when outed by the press.

This oughta keep all you haters occupied until Thursday!

The repubes were offered a bill with all they wanted and voted it down after trump said he doesn’t want it fixed. Pay attention. They even wrote the god damn bill and then voted it down when told to. Britt of the trafficking story from when Shrub was in office helped write it.

 

[Observer11]

The repubes were offered a bill with all they wanted and voted it down after trump said he doesn’t want it fixed. Pay attention. They even wrote the god damn bill and then voted it down when told to. Britt of the trafficking story from when Sheub was in office helped write it.

The bill should have been TWO bills - one on the border and one on funding for overseas wars.

But per usual the politicians have to be political.

Or, better yet, the executive branch could enforce the immigration laws already on the books.

 

[BSpike76]

The bill should have been TWO bills - one on the border and one on funding for overseas wars.

But per usual the politicians have to be political.

Or, better yet, the executive branch could enforce the immigration laws already on the books.

Without the immigration part they would have voted down the aid. They had a deal to do both and reneged when ordered to.

 

[Observer11]

Without the immigration part they would have voted down the aid. They had a deal to do both and reneged when ordered to.

Shame Cocaine Mitch didn’t get one last hurrah on his military industrial complex grift.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

There's a bill in the California house that would give illegals interest free home loans. I'm a 62 white guy who is born and raised here and have paid taxes since I was 15 and I'm having a hell of a time just finding a damn house to rent.
In 14 months I'll be 64. Mexico here I come...I'm done with this jacked up country. My old man is rolling over in his grave.

Ok - as usual a little fact-checking clarifies this. Here is the AMENDED text. Bill text in full is linked below:

(c) (1) An applicant under the program shall not be disqualified solely based on the applicant’s immigration status.

California AB1840 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2024-09-06) Home Purchase Assistance Program: eligibility. [Vetoed by Governor.]

legiscan.com

The amended version is still muddy - but the key here is that "illegal" immigrants would not qualify. So who are they talking about? The Fact-check link below appears to limit the availability to green card holders and DACA recipients - both of whom are legal. As well as all the US citizens who are already eligible. In fact, I don't believe that the amended bill even expands eligibility beyond what was originally there - if I read the fact Check article correctly.

Fact Check: California Bill AB-1840 Would NOT Give Interest-Free Home Loans To Undocumented, DOES To Eligible US Citizens | Lead Stories

Does California give away interest-free home loans exclusively to "people who came into this country illegally," bypassing U.S. citizens? No,...

leadstories.com

I agree that shit like this should only be for Bona fide US citizens. but any article (there are many, all apparently from conservative media outlets) that says "illegal" immigrant is simply not correct.

Now as a Californian, you should really be pissed about the underlying bill, passed last year. The "California Dream for All" bill was a complete joke and an atrocity. I'm not going to bother to link anything on it.

 

[CougEd]

Same place every other state does.. you and i.

Who services these loans ? Are these loans held by the state or are they sold off to Chase or some other entity ?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

The repubes were offered a bill with all they wanted and voted it down after trump said he doesn’t want it fixed. Pay attention. They even wrote the god damn bill and then voted it down when told to. Britt of the trafficking story from when Shrub was in office helped write it.

I am well aware of what happened with that bill and why. Don't tell me to pay attention.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Who services these loans ? Are these loans held by the state or are they sold off to Chase or some other entity ?

C'mon Ed. You are an intelligent guy. Why do you always have to take every thread down some irrelevant and often ridiculous path?

79 has no F-ing idea what he is talking about. That is obvious. I cleared that up.

If you really want to discuss loan servicing and who offers it under the "California Dream for All" program, how about you Google it and share this link which will tell us all about it including who services these down payment "loans". Which since they don't accrue interest and are only payable if/when the house is sold, don't need a lot of servicing. But you know that.

Dream For All | Shared Appreciation Loan

The California Dream For All Shared Appreciation Loan is a down payment assistance program for first-time homebuyers to be used in conjunction with the Dream For All Conventional first mortgage for down payment and/or closing costs.

www.calhfa.ca.gov

Me? I would prefer to have a semi-rational conversation about my migrant premise which is quit letting any of them in for any reason. Not some California loan program.

 

[CougEd]

b

C'mon Ed. You are an intelligent guy. Why do you always have to take every thread down some irrelevant and often ridiculous path?

79 has no F-ing idea what he is talking about. That is obvious. I cleared that up.

If you really want to discuss loan servicing and who offers it under the "California Dream for All" program, how about you Google it and share this link which will tell us all about it including who services these down payment "loans". Which since they don't accrue interest and are only payable if/when the house is sold, don't need a lot of servicing. But you know that.

Dream For All | Shared Appreciation Loan

The California Dream For All Shared Appreciation Loan is a down payment assistance program for first-time homebuyers to be used in conjunction with the Dream For All Conventional first mortgage for down payment and/or closing costs.

www.calhfa.ca.gov

Me? I would prefer to have a semi-rational conversation about my migrant premise which is quit letting any of them in for any reason. Not some California loan program.

C'mon Ed. You are an intelligent guy. Why do you always have to take every thread down some irrelevant and often ridiculous path?

79 has no F-ing idea what he is talking about. That is obvious. I cleared that up.

If you really want to discuss loan servicing and who offers it under the "California Dream for All" program, how about you Google it and share this link which will tell us all about it including who services these down payment "loans". Which since they don't accrue interest and are only payable if/when the house is sold, don't need a lot of servicing. But you know that.

Dream For All | Shared Appreciation Loan

The California Dream For All Shared Appreciation Loan is a down payment assistance program for first-time homebuyers to be used in conjunction with the Dream For All Conventional first mortgage for down payment and/or closing costs.

www.calhfa.ca.gov

Me? I would prefer to have a semi-rational conversation about my migrant premise which is quit letting any of them in for any reason. Not some California loan program.

Well not sure it is down some irrelevant path. People get worked up about things they don't really know about .

Cali isn't giving away free money . And if there were they would have to find a bank to sell it to . And no bank is buying a 30 year mortgage 7% market rate .

Now state of washington has state bond but no sales in Pierce King or Snohomish are going to accept state bond because of the competitive nature of the market .

So these immigrants really aren't getting the free ride as 79 believes they are . Another case of the boogeyman ...

 

[Coug1990]

Aka politics.

BB lost the rubber match at home against Utah in Pac-12 play. 8-6 now.

Gaza nightmare. Just horrible. Read an article on that US ship that will help this temporary dock/port facility for aid deliveries. Article also said pre-tragedy Gaza was receiving 500 trucks a month in aid - for how many months or years and paid for who knows (I have an idea, starts with U). For a place smaller than many US cities. Really?

The whole Gaza history is pretty interesting, and from reading up on it, the whole cluster F IMHO is the fault of the British and Egypt after WWI, Egypt and Israel after WWII, and those two and various Arab countries in recent decades. But of course, we have to stick our snout deep into it like we do with everything. I guess because of influences from Hymietown?

The border. Why the F can't we just say no. No more immigrant/refugee/asylum crossing for any reason. No "legal" crossing. No release of illegally crossing families. They start wading or swimming or walking/climbing across, "stop and turn around or we will shoot". Article below tries to explain how it all works. Per the flowcharts, I see shitloads of people legally let in by the US, and shitloads of illegal crossers being released.

Who Gets In? A Guide to America’s Chaotic Border Rules. (Published 2023)

New restrictions on asylum will lead many migrants to be deported — but others will still get into the United States. Here’s what the process will look like.

www.nytimes.com

Much as I abhor Trump, and much as I hate the lying Repugnant ones in Congress, this is the one issue for which I would fully support major, major draconian change. And we shouldn't have to resort to telling outright and now admitted lies in the post SUTA repugnant response where Sen. Britt referred to a sex trafficking situation that happened in Mexico when George W. Bush was President as an outcome of failures in Biden's current policies. She only fessed up 2 days later when outed by the press.

This oughta keep all you haters occupied until Thursday!

Well, we should be a country of laws. it is US and international law that if someone is on a countries soil and asks for asylum, they get their day in court. Now, the majority do get sent back home once they get in front of a judge. The biggest problem is that we have underfunded immigration judges for a long time. We just do not have enough. There are actually multiple millions of people here that have come to the US with our permission, on a visa, and have just stayed on an expired visa.

Also, if we ended immigration, it would not be too long until our economy is in shreds regardless of who is in the White House. Economic models show that for economies to grow, the work force most also grow with it. For the life of our country, people have crossed the border going both directions. Yes, we do need to control our border, but it is not a crisis despite what you hear from politicians and the media. It is just another way to con us by using fear.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

b



Well not sure it is down some irrelevant path. People get worked up about things they don't really know about .

Cali isn't giving away free money . And if there were they would have to find a bank to sell it to . And no bank is buying a 30 year mortgage 7% market rate .

Now state of washington has state bond but no sales in Pierce King or Snohomish are going to accept state bond because of the competitive nature of the market .

So these immigrants really aren't getting the free ride as 79 believes they are . Another case of the boogeyman ...

Ok - I think we are looking at 2 components here. The "free" (actually a non-interest loan) down payment piece, and the rest of the loan which I assume takes the form of a conventional mortgage. Everything I read says that the down payment is funded by CA tax dollars. To be paid back plus a small portion of the house's appreciation. Assuming there is any, which I guess there would be in CA.

So the "free" portion is the discounted PV on the down payment loan (I'm not saying that correctly but you get it), less the appreciation % owed? So I think I agree in part - no fully free ride, but an interest free ride. Gawd I've had enough of that - my brain hurts.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Well, we should be a country of laws. it is US and international law that if someone is on a countries soil and asks for asylum, they get their day in court. Now, the majority do get sent back home once they get in front of a judge. The biggest problem is that we have underfunded immigration judges for a long time. We just do not have enough. There are actually multiple millions of people here that have come to the US with our permission, on a visa, and have just stayed on an expired visa.

Also, if we ended immigration, it would not be too long until our economy is in shreds regardless of who is in the White House. Economic models show that for economies to grow, the work force most also grow with it. For the life of our country, people have crossed the border going both directions. Yes, we do need to control our border, but it is not a crisis despite what you hear from politicians and the media. It is just another way to con us by using fear.

See now we have intellectual dialogue. I guess we do have this thing called the Refugee Act of 1980. Maybe it should be rescinded. I don't know the stats on how many asylum seekers get sent back. But millions overstaying an expired visa seems problematic. I will note that my premise involves not letting them reach our soil in the first place.

Regarding the economy, I was not very good at Macroeconomics, which I believe economic models fall under. My uninformed comment is "when does it stop?" When we are overpopulated like China and India?

Finally, is it a crisis or not? Good point. But I think that it is a fact that immigration numbers are way up. If the US could ditch the crap and analyze the situation on a non-partisan basis that would be nice.

 

[mikalalas]

Ok - as usual a little fact-checking clarifies this. Here is the AMENDED text. Bill text in full is linked below:

(c) (1) An applicant under the program shall not be disqualified solely based on the applicant’s immigration status.

California AB1840 | 2023-2024 | Regular Session

Bill Text (2024-09-06) Home Purchase Assistance Program: eligibility. [Vetoed by Governor.]

legiscan.com

The amended version is still muddy - but the key here is that "illegal" immigrants would not qualify. So who are they talking about? The Fact-check link below appears to limit the availability to green card holders and DACA recipients - both of whom are legal. As well as all the US citizens who are already eligible. In fact, I don't believe that the amended bill even expands eligibility beyond what was originally there - if I read the fact Check article correctly.

Fact Check: California Bill AB-1840 Would NOT Give Interest-Free Home Loans To Undocumented, DOES To Eligible US Citizens | Lead Stories

Does California give away interest-free home loans exclusively to "people who came into this country illegally," bypassing U.S. citizens? No,...

leadstories.com

I agree that shit like this should only be for Bona fide US citizens. but any article (there are many, all apparently from conservative media outlets) that says "illegal" immigrant is simply not correct.

Now as a Californian, you should really be pissed about the underlying bill, passed last year. The "California Dream for All" bill was a complete joke and an atrocity. I'm not going to bother to link anything on it.

The term, words "IMMIGRATION STATUS" is the VAGUE, AMBIGOUS, MUDDY, term that WOULD, COULD, etc, MEAN, BE INTERPRETED AS, INCLUDING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

IMMIGRATION STATUS is commonly referred to as a person's immigration status, whether they have Visa's, green cards, asylum, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, here LEGALLY, HERE ILLEGALLY, ETC.

The words:

An applicant under the program shall not be disqualified solely based on the applicant’s immigration status.

Means that a applicant can't be disqualified just only because of their IMMIGRATION STATUS(which is defined as Visa, green card holders, those that granted asylum, those those that here legally and INCLUDES THOSE THAT ARE HERE ILLEGALLY, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

Something that helps prove my point.

Cops can't check the documents, showing IMMIGRATION STATUS, on whether a person is a ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT OR NOT, unless there is probable cause that has nothing to do with profiling.

example. It's illegal for cops to stop a car with a Mexican in it, without probable cause, just because the person is a Mexican and might be a illegal alien immigrant from Mexico.

That usage by law enforcement, media, practically almost everybody, and all that proves that IMMIGRATION STATUS does INCLUDE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, THAT ACCORDING TO THE BILL CANT BE DISQUALIFIED JUST ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT, BECAUSE OF THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS.

California Lawyers, Judges, THE LAW, GOVERNMENT, etc, will interpret it that way, and Illegal Immigrants will not be disqualified from getting these loans, and will be allowed to have these loans, mortgages.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

See now we have intellectual dialogue. I guess we do have this thing called the Refugee Act of 1980. Maybe it should be rescinded. I don't know the stats on how many asylum seekers get sent back. But millions overstaying an expired visa seems problematic. I will note that my premise involves not letting them reach our soil in the first place.

Regarding the economy, I was not very good at Macroeconomics, which I believe economic models fall under. My uninformed comment is "when does it stop?" When we are overpopulated like China and India?

Finally, is it a crisis or not? Good point. But I think that it is a fact that immigration numbers are way up. If the US could ditch the crap and analyze the situation on a non-partisan basis that would be nice.

As mentioned above by others, the biggest issue right now is that existing laws are being ignored by the Democrats. That said, the notion that we shouldn't allow ANY immigration is just as problematic. No offense to my fellow Americans, but many of the life changing inventions in our country in the past 150 years have come from the minds of immigrants or their kids.....not multi-generational Americans. The agricultural and construction industries are heavily dependent on immigrant labor....just like they've always been since slavery ended. We have a great country because of immigration, not in spite of it.

All that said (and in agreement with what you said above), even though I hate the former Cheeto-in-Chief more than any person that I've ever actually formed an opinion on....Biden and the liberals' immigration policies are terrible and they've intentionally relaxed the law just to be the opposite of the Donald....and that's incredibly short-sighted and harmful. A common sense approach to immigration needs to happen but knuckleheads on both ends of the political spectrum are making that impossible.

 

[Coug1990]

As mentioned above by others, the biggest issue right now is that existing laws are being ignored by the Democrats. That said, the notion that we shouldn't allow ANY immigration is just as problematic. No offense to my fellow Americans, but many of the life changing inventions in our country in the past 150 years have come from the minds of immigrants or their kids.....not multi-generational Americans. The agricultural and construction industries are heavily dependent on immigrant labor....just like they've always been since slavery ended. We have a great country because of immigration, not in spite of it.

All that said (and in agreement with what you said above), even though I hate the former Cheeto-in-Chief more than any person that I've ever actually formed an opinion on....Biden and the liberals' immigration policies are terrible and they've intentionally relaxed the law just to be the opposite of the Donald....and that's incredibly short-sighted and harmful. A common sense approach to immigration needs to happen but knuckleheads on both ends of the political spectrum are making that impossible.

This is not really true. No, the Democrats are not ignoring existing law any more than it has been. The last time we had new immigration law was under that notable liberal Democrat Ronald Reagan and yeah, it was a fairly liberal law. It was because immigrants were not being used a token on a chess board to scare the masses like they are today.

Trump did something illegal and horrific and that was separate parents and children. Yes, Biden doesn't do that. Trump did shut down the border, but he was able to do that legally because there was a pandemic and under the National Emergencies Act (NEA), it was legal. Since the pandemic is over, using the NEA is not an option.

People coming to the USA has more to do with the conditions on the ground in their home countries regardless of our immigration policies. So, the amount of immigration has ebbed and flowed for well over a hundred years. Sometimes it is high, and sometimes it is not. Right now, we are at a high point. While the USA got through the Global pandemic economically better than any other countries in the world, that is not the case in poor countries. There has also been a rise in authoritarian leaders in the world the last several decades. So, we are getting a lot of immigrants from some of those countries. For example, China.

Here is a fun fact. The US calls people that are deported "Removals". By year, President Obama and Biden had more removals than either Bush or Trump.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

An applicant under the program shall not be disqualified solely based on the applicant’s immigration status.

Means that a applicant can't be disqualified just only because of their IMMIGRATION STATUS(which is defined as Visa, green card holders, those that granted asylum, those those that here legally and INCLUDES THOSE THAT ARE HERE ILLEGALLY, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

Gee Mik, is that what the above means? Thanks for the word for word clarification.

Could these hordes of illegals possibly be disqualified because they have no source of income to pay the 80% of the loan that has to financed through a bank?

Look, read the fact check article, including the below quote from the Legislative Director of the sponsor of the bill. It is very clear that illegals can't participate in this program.

The existing program's handbook, last updated in January 2024, explicitly mentions U.S. citizens in the eligibility section as well as "qualified aliens" as defined at 8 U.S.C § 1641 (archived here). This section of the U.S. Code describes people who are either legal permanent residents or fall under very specific exceptions under the U.S. law.

In reality, however, the pool of noncitizens who can benefit from the program is much smaller. Besides green card holders, it is mostly limited to DACA recipients, Moss told Lead Stories:

The 'qualified aliens' in this program are only those able to get a mortgage loan. This means folks who are able to get an ITIN, which will almost always be DACA folks. There is no scenario that an undocumented person without a SSN or ITIN will be able to get a bank loan which means there is no scenario that they would qualify for a Dream for All investment. ... We just want to ensure that if a bank is willing to lend, the state doesn't have a more stringent standard that inadvertently excludes people when inclusion of these people has been the stated goal of the program all along.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

This is not really true. No, the Democrats are not ignoring existing law any more than it has been. The last time we had new immigration law was under that notable liberal Democrat Ronald Reagan and yeah, it was a fairly liberal law. It was because immigrants were not being used a token on a chess board to scare the masses like they are today.

Trump did something illegal and horrific and that was separate parents and children. Yes, Biden doesn't do that. Trump did shut down the border, but he was able to do that legally because there was a pandemic and under the National Emergencies Act (NEA), it was legal. Since the pandemic is over, using the NEA is not an option.

People coming to the USA has more to do with the conditions on the ground in their home countries regardless of our immigration policies. So, the amount of immigration has ebbed and flowed for well over a hundred years. Sometimes it is high, and sometimes it is not. Right now, we are at a high point. While the USA got through the Global pandemic economically better than any other countries in the world, that is not the case in poor countries. There has also been a rise in authoritarian leaders in the world the last several decades. So, we are getting a lot of immigrants from some of those countries. For example, China.

Here is a fun fact. The US calls people that are deported "Removals". By year, President Obama and Biden had more removals than either Bush or Trump.

When I say enforcing the law, I mean that ICE is actively ignoring illegal immigrants that they know about. Not to be heartless, but we should be flying planeloads of people every day back to their countries of origin and we should be making a big deal about it, particularly in those countries of origin. We should also be levying harsh fines on companies that hire illegal immigrants. Instead, Democrats have been guilty of letting things slide because they think it's what their voting base wanted.

We may technically have more removals under Biden, but it's a meaningless statistic when the perception is that it isn't likely to happen so people illegally immigrate to our country at higher levels when a Democrat is president. If we get a million illegal immigrants in a year and we deport 500,000 of them under Biden but we only have 600,000 illegal immigrants under Trump with 300,000 removals...you still have an extra 200,000 illegal immigrants in the country under Biden despite the additional removals. That stuff accumulates over time.

 

[Stretch 74]

This is not really true. No, the Democrats are not ignoring existing law any more than it has been. The last time we had new immigration law was under that notable liberal Democrat Ronald Reagan and yeah, it was a fairly liberal law. It was because immigrants were not being used a token on a chess board to scare the masses like they are today.

Trump did something illegal and horrific and that was separate parents and children. Yes, Biden doesn't do that. Trump did shut down the border, but he was able to do that legally because there was a pandemic and under the National Emergencies Act (NEA), it was legal. Since the pandemic is over, using the NEA is not an option.

People coming to the USA has more to do with the conditions on the ground in their home countries regardless of our immigration policies. So, the amount of immigration has ebbed and flowed for well over a hundred years. Sometimes it is high, and sometimes it is not. Right now, we are at a high point. While the USA got through the Global pandemic economically better than any other countries in the world, that is not the case in poor countries. There has also been a rise in authoritarian leaders in the world the last several decades. So, we are getting a lot of immigrants from some of those countries. For example, China.

Here is a fun fact. The US calls people that are deported "Removals". By year, President Obama and Biden had more removals than either Bush or Trump.

CHILDREN IN CAGES!!!

Oh, the horror! Sadly, you are ignorant of the facts here. Remember those heart wrenching pictures of the "kids in cages" that was blamed on Trump. Sure, it was a big deal for a short time, right up until the time that it was proven that the pictures were actually taken during Obama's term, I think it was 2014.

But that is only a part of the issue. Yes, there were some times when children were separated from their parent(s), however there was a very good reason for doing so. See, not everyone follows the laws, does the legal and moral thing. There are SOB's that traffic young kids that they bring into the country, and in order to try to protect these young children they would at times separate the kids from the person or persons that claim to be the parent. When the adult can be verified to be the parent then the family can be reunited, but if that adult is attempting to smuggle the kid in for nefarious purposes then the child is taken care of and avoids a life that may consist of being sex trafficked.

Now I may be considered just a heartless, conservative bastard, but for some reason that seems to me that is a very compassionate thing to do.

 

[Coug1990]

When I say enforcing the law, I mean that ICE is actively ignoring illegal immigrants that they know about. Not to be heartless, but we should be flying planeloads of people every day back to their countries of origin and we should be making a big deal about it, particularly in those countries of origin. We should also be levying harsh fines on companies that hire illegal immigrants. Instead, Democrats have been guilty of letting things slide because they think it's what their voting base wanted.

We may technically have more removals under Biden, but it's a meaningless statistic when the perception is that it isn't likely to happen so people illegally immigrate to our country at higher levels when a Democrat is president. If we get a million illegal immigrants in a year and we deport 500,000 of them under Biden but we only have 600,000 illegal immigrants under Trump with 300,000 removals...you still have an extra 200,000 illegal immigrants in the country under Biden despite the additional removals. That stuff accumulates over time.

As I wrote above, it is a fallacy that immigrants are more likely to come to America under a Democratic president. I know that gets repeated by people that want to spread false information because perceptions can become people's truths. Again, people come to America because of the conditions in their home countries.

In fact, of the last four Republican presidents, only one has been hostile towards immigrants and that is Trump. Reagan even gave millions of people amnesty. George Bush certainly didn't hate immigrants and if you read what he thinks about the subject, he sounds more like a current Democrat than a current Republican.

 

[Coug1990]

CHILDREN IN CAGES!!!

Oh, the horror! Sadly, you are ignorant of the facts here. Remember those heart wrenching pictures of the "kids in cages" that was blamed on Trump. Sure, it was a big deal for a short time, right up until the time that it was proven that the pictures were actually taken during Obama's term, I think it was 2014.

But that is only a part of the issue. Yes, there were some times when children were separated from their parent(s), however there was a very good reason for doing so. See, not everyone follows the laws, does the legal and moral thing. There are SOB's that traffic young kids that they bring into the country, and in order to try to protect these young children they would at times separate the kids from the person or persons that claim to be the parent. When the adult can be verified to be the parent then the family can be reunited, but if that adult is attempting to smuggle the kid in for nefarious purposes then the child is taken care of and avoids a life that may consist of being sex trafficked.

Now I may be considered just a heartless, conservative bastard, but for some reason that seems to me that is a very compassionate thing to do.

This is so exaggerated. The overwhelming pictures and videos we saw were under Trump. What you are writing about was never policy like it was under Trump. Did something happen temorarily on a small scale under Obama, Sure, and I would even condemn that. But to say that they were the same is just you are being told a story that they want you to believe.

 

[mikalalas]

Gee Mik, is that what the above means? Thanks for the word for word clarification.

Could these hordes of illegals possibly be disqualified because they have no source of income to pay the 80% of the loan that has to financed through a bank?

Look, read the fact check article, including the below quote from the Legislative Director of the sponsor of the bill. It is very clear that illegals can't participate in this program.

The existing program's handbook, last updated in January 2024, explicitly mentions U.S. citizens in the eligibility section as well as "qualified aliens" as defined at 8 U.S.C § 1641 (archived here). This section of the U.S. Code describes people who are either legal permanent residents or fall under very specific exceptions under the U.S. law.

In reality, however, the pool of noncitizens who can benefit from the program is much smaller. Besides green card holders, it is mostly limited to DACA recipients, Moss told Lead Stories:

Words have meaning, and the law has to go by that meaning.

If the constitution, a law, bill, contract, etc, says the sky is blue, then the law, lawyers, judges, courts, etc, rule that the sky is blue. They don't say that the sky is red, or some other interpretation, or at least they are not supposed to.

You say Illegal immigrants don't have the money to pay back the loans, and that that's the reason they would be disqualified.

That's partially right and wrong.

Some illegals don't have money, which would disqualify them. BUT IN TECHNICAL THEORY, THEY COULD THEORETICALLY BE DISQUALIFIED JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, AND THATS FORBIDDEN BY THE CALIFORNIA LAW.

Some illegals immigrants DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO GET A LOAN, and under the California law, would qualify for the loan, and IT WOULD BE FORBIDDEN TO DISQUALIFY THEM ONLY JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, UNDER THE CALIFORNIA LAW.

These words:

In reality, however, the pool of noncitizens who can benefit from the program is much smaller. Besides green card holders, it is mostly limited to DACA recipients, Moss told Lead Stories:

That's basically saying that NONCITIZENS which INCLUDES ILLEGAL ALIEN IMMIGRANTS, BECAUSE THEY ARE NON CITIZENS, who can benefit from the program(That's saying that ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CAN BENEFIT FROM PROGRAM), is much smaller(note that it does not say NONE, or CANT, etc. Smaller means that altho a lot of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS can't participate, a small amount, some ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM, it's just a smaller amount that's less then the amount of Visa, Green Card, Asylum, Daca.), is much smaller(covered smaller above)


There are a couple, few, some ILLEGAL ALIEN IMMIGRANTS, that do have enough money, etc, that can participate in the program under California law, and under that California law, it would be forbidden to disqualify them, only just because they are a Illegal Alien Immigrant.

Even if it were to be only 1 single Illegal Alien Immigrants that qualified to participate in the program, it would be illegal to disqualify that one, just only because they are a Illegal Alien Immigrant.

And the LAWYERS, JUDGES, COURTS, GOVERNMENT, POLITICIANS, ETC, WOULD INTERPRET IT THAT WAY, or at least should interpret it that way, as that's what it means.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

As I wrote above, it is a fallacy that immigrants are more likely to come to America under a Democratic president. I know that gets repeated by people that want to spread false information because perceptions can become people's truths. Again, people come to America because of the conditions in their home countries.

In fact, of the last four Republican presidents, only one has been hostile towards immigrants and that is Trump. Reagan even gave millions of people amnesty. George Bush certainly didn't hate immigrants and if you read what he thinks about the subject, he sounds more like a current Democrat than a current Republican.

Is it a fallacy? Or is it just a current thing because Trump was such a dick? I don't know. To your point, before Trump came along, the GOP understood that a certain amount of immigration is needed to make things go. A while back (and I can't remember when it was), Georgia passed a law making it more difficult for immigrants to work in agriculture. The law was quickly rescinded when farmers couldn't get anyone to work in their fields.

The narrative for at least 12 years now is that Democrats are soft on immigration and they are doing a terrible job of combating that narrative.

 

[Stretch 74]

As I wrote above, it is a fallacy that immigrants are more likely to come to America under a Democratic president. I know that gets repeated by people that want to spread false information because perceptions can become people's truths. Again, people come to America because of the conditions in their home countries.

In fact, of the last four Republican presidents, only one has been hostile towards immigrants and that is Trump. Reagan even gave millions of people amnesty. George Bush certainly didn't hate immigrants and if you read what he thinks about the subject, he sounds more like a current Democrat than a current Republican.

I see what you are doing here. You are doing the typical liberal trip of sneakily redefining the issue by omitting the key word. The key word is ILLEGAL! Donald Trump and the very vast majority of Republicans/conservatives do not object to controlled, legal immigration. We are all aware of the fact that this country was built up into the #1 country in the world by all of the LEGAL immigrants that came to the USA, primarily through Ellis Island in the east and San Francisco in the west. Why does the left continually insist on conflating illegal immigration with legal immigration? There has to be a reason, and I think it is the obvious one- they want to flood the country with people that they can use to make into democrat voters and reallocate seats in Congress and Electoral College votes to their side. We are onto your tricks.

As far as attracting aliens (an accurate term for non-citizens) to come to our country, you can see the trends in the chart below. Border encounters went up under Clinton, trended down significantly under Bush, continued down under Obama during the recession and then went flat which was continued under Trump, and then encounters skyrocketed up under Brandon.

Border crossing encounters U.S. 1990-2023 | Statista

The number of illegal border crossings reached an all-time high in 2022, with over 2.2 million migrant encounters registered by the U.S. Border Patrol.

www.statista.com

 

[Loyal Coug1]

I see what you are doing here. You are doing the typical liberal trip of sneakily redefining the issue by omitting the key word. The key word is ILLEGAL! Donald Trump and the very vast majority of Republicans/conservatives do not object to controlled, legal immigration. We are all aware of the fact that this country was built up into the #1 country in the world by all of the LEGAL immigrants that came to the USA, primarily through Ellis Island in the east and San Francisco in the west. Why does the left continually insist on conflating illegal immigration with legal immigration? There has to be a reason, and I think it is the obvious one- they want to flood the country with people that they can use to make into democrat voters and reallocate seats in Congress and Electoral College votes to their side. We are onto your tricks.

As far as attracting aliens (an accurate term for non-citizens) to come to our country, you can see the trends in the chart below. Border encounters went up under Clinton, trended down significantly under Bush, continued down under Obama during the recession and then went flat which was continued under Trump, and then encounters skyrocketed up under Brandon.

Border crossing encounters U.S. 1990-2023 | Statista

The number of illegal border crossings reached an all-time high in 2022, with over 2.2 million migrant encounters registered by the U.S. Border Patrol.

www.statista.com

Well since we can't see much of the chart since we (me) are not premium subscribers, your chart doesn't tell me much. And is it possible that the dramatic change in the Biden Presidency coincides with the very significant change in methodology that happened in 2020 per what I can read? A change that sounds as if it adds to the numbers by combining categories....

 

[Coug1990]

Is it a fallacy? Or is it just a current thing because Trump was such a dick? I don't know. To your point, before Trump came along, the GOP understood that a certain amount of immigration is needed to make things go. A while back (and I can't remember when it was), Georgia passed a law making it more difficult for immigrants to work in agriculture. The law was quickly rescinded when farmers couldn't get anyone to work in their fields.

The narrative for at least 12 years now is that Democrats are soft on immigration and they are doing a terrible job of combating that narrative.

This is 100% true. The Chamber of Commerce, which is very conservative is not against immigration. They know we need labor in agriculture, construction, and in many types of labor-intensive plants. Yep, Georgia did that and it was a fiasco. Florida also has been trying to do the same thing. Yes, the one thing that the Democratic party is really good at and that is doing a bad job at messaging.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

This is 100% true. The Chamber of Commerce, which is very conservative is not against immigration. They know we need labor in agriculture, construction, and in many types of labor-intensive plants. Yep, Georgia did that and it was a fiasco. Florida also has been trying to do the same thing. Yes, the one thing that the Democratic party is really good at and that is doing a bad job at messaging.

Interesting - did not know about Georgia, which prompted me to look at the low minimum wage states. Which would presumably attract more migrants since Americans don't want to work in low wage jobs (correct me if I'm wrong). Surprise! They are mostly (dare I say almost all?) Red states. So are the "R's" cutting off their own noses to spite their faces on immigration? I dunno. Florida is a relatively high wage state.

States with the Highest & Lowest Minimum Wages - Minimum-Wage.org

www.minimum-wage.org

 

[Stretch 74]

Well since we can't see much of the chart since we (me) are not premium subscribers, your chart doesn't tell me much. And is it possible that the dramatic change in the Biden Presidency coincides with the very significant change in methodology that happened in 2020 per what I can read? A change that sounds as if it adds to the numbers by combining categories....

I am not a premium subscriber and had no problem accessing the chart. Maybe try a different browser?

 

[CougEd]

Ok - I think we are looking at 2 components here. The "free" (actually a non-interest loan) down payment piece, and the rest of the loan which I assume takes the form of a conventional mortgage. Everything I read says that the down payment is funded by CA tax dollars. To be paid back plus a small portion of the house's appreciation. Assuming there is any, which I guess there would be in CA.

So the "free" portion is the discounted PV on the down payment loan (I'm not saying that correctly but you get it), less the appreciation % owed? So I think I agree in part - no fully free ride, but an interest free ride. Gawd I've had enough of that - my brain hurts.

Trust me when I tell you this down payment assistance loan is not being used in La or the LA area, San Diego, or the San Diego area, it is not being used in the Bay area. Or Sacramento. Maybe in some very rural areas that it can actually be used.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

I am not a premium subscriber and had no problem accessing the chart. Maybe try a different browser?

I was wrong. You only have to be a subscriber. I won't do it because I fear an avalanche of Trump scam if I do......

 

[Stretch 74]

I was wrong. You only have to be a subscriber. I won't do it because I fear an avalanche of Trump scam if I do......

Try going incognito. I am not a subscriber, but I realized I did the search using the incognito window, which I often to to try to limit/eliminate the pop-ups and auto play videos that I hate. See if that method let's you in.

 

[Coug90]

I was wrong. You only have to be a subscriber. I won't do it because I fear an avalanche of Trump scam if I do......

The grift is strong with that one!

 

[Stretch 74]

The grift is strong with that one!

I guess you are referring to Brandon?

 

[CougEd]

I guess you are referring to Brandon?

Could be... apparently according to Magats he and his Vice President Hunter are much better marketers and sell a better product than the gold shoes and the Agent Orange playing cards.

And Brandon is smart enough to have his and VP Hunters legal fees funneled in a way that seems to be covert and under the radar .

Forrest Trump is like Tammy Faye joining the PTL Club the Pay Trumps Lawyers Club to pay his fees and begging for money .. I wonder if Carrot Tops makeup will run like Tammy Fake Bakers did when crying for money. .

 

[UberCougars]

Dipshits gonna dipshit, I guess.

 

[95coug]

I see what you are doing here. You are doing the typical liberal trip of sneakily redefining the issue by omitting the key word. The key word is ILLEGAL! Donald Trump and the very vast majority of Republicans/conservatives do not object to controlled, legal immigration. We are all aware of the fact that this country was built up into the #1 country in the world by all of the LEGAL immigrants that came to the USA, primarily through Ellis Island in the east and San Francisco in the west. Why does the left continually insist on conflating illegal immigration with legal immigration? There has to be a reason, and I think it is the obvious one- they want to flood the country with people that they can use to make into democrat voters and reallocate seats in Congress and Electoral College votes to their side. We are onto your tricks.

As far as attracting aliens (an accurate term for non-citizens) to come to our country, you can see the trends in the chart below. Border encounters went up under Clinton, trended down significantly under Bush, continued down under Obama during the recession and then went flat which was continued under Trump, and then encounters skyrocketed up under Brandon.

Border crossing encounters U.S. 1990-2023 | Statista

The number of illegal border crossings reached an all-time high in 2022, with over 2.2 million migrant encounters registered by the U.S. Border Patrol.

www.statista.com

I can’t see the chart either, but the other variable at play is our own economy. Border traffic goes down when opportunity is lower - there were lots of jobs for migrants under Clinton, so higher traffic. Started moving downward under Bush and after the post- dot com bubble mini-recession, stayed down through the housing bubble recession and the COVID shutdowns. Late COVID and post-COVID job markets exploded and again there are numerous opportunities for migrant workers.

There’s always a degree of “the grass is greener” in the US. But how much greener depends on the domestic job market.