Trump's future immigration policies- speculation MEGATHREAD

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

When laws are made based off feelings and making sure people feel good.   This is where we often get unjust laws.    

not "when" that's how laws originated.. from moral understandings of what is right and wrong. We did not just wake up one day with laws.

 

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Trumps immigration plan is simple.   Enforce the laws and have extreme vetting from danger areas of the world.   Right now it's Muslim countries so it affects them.    

He is not acting in proportion to facts. You seem to like facts. Did you read the links I posted earlier?

 

https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/terrorism-immigration-risk-analysis

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

 

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Back in the 80's it would have been the Irish and the Russians.  

This time of history is also covered in the first link above.

 

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

40's it would have been the muslims, Germans, and Japanese.   

I don't believe the concept of terror existed in the 40's. 

 

Just now, FloridaMinsk said:

 

And so on.....   

 

just because it seems the policy affect only one group now doesn't make it bad.  If you put the laws up over the rest of time then it only affects people coming from areas of concern.   

You can enforce laws without violating people's rights, which are also described in the law. This EO was disproportionate.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

Just now, vistajones said:

Don't think an issue as big as this can be dealt with cold objectivity. Anything involving a human being will have emotional variables in it much less immigration laws which affecting many people and families. As a president, he should've taken these "snowflakes variables" under considerations.

 

I empathize with those who are going this stuff.    I have my fiancé coming through next month.  So I know the fear and uncertainty that some here may be feeling.   

 

That being said... those who are in fear do not need more fear mongering and hysteria when they go to look for answers.    This board in particular is a source for factual information.   It's up to each of us if we take these facts and are scared or at ease.    No one needs me or anyone else here to heighten their fears by over reacting to things that none of us know what's happening on the ground.   

 

All We know is that 109 out of 325k were questioned.... and 12 were still being questioned the next day.   We also know one of the first Iranians released said he loved trump and the policy.   And others have also repeated that they were not scared or worried once they got here.    

 

Scaring anyone who is the middle of this situation is counterproductive on so many levels.   Which is why I post with as little feeling or emotions as possible.   

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

I empathize with those who are going this stuff.    I have my fiancé coming through next month.  So I know the fear and uncertainty that some here may be feeling.   

 

That being said... those who are in fear do not need more fear mongering and hysteria when they go to look for answers.    This board in particular is a source for factual information.   It's up to each of us if we take these facts and are scared or at ease.    No one needs me or anyone else here to heighten their fears by over reacting to things that none of us know what's happening on the ground.   

This is the general immigration-related discussions area and this specifically is the Trump, speculation thread. I think ppl can find plenty of facts on VJ at the same time give people room to discuss their worries and concerns. I don't think anyone here is over-reacting. Everyone is entitled to having their own opinion on what is going on. Over-reacting is subjective.

 

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

All We know is that 109 out of 325k were questioned.... and 12 were still being questioned the next day.   We also know one of the first Iranians released said he loved trump and the policy.   And others have also repeated that they were not scared or worried once they got here.    

We know that those are the numbers that the government have produced. We also know they don't match the stories of the people who went through it. Eventually we will know the true numbers. 

That's what I would also say were I worried to be thrown out.

 

2 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Scaring anyone who is the middle of this situation is counterproductive on so many levels.   Which is why I post with as little feeling or emotions as possible.   

Discussing what people have gone through and trying to get at the truth, not just what the government is putting out, is not trying to scare "someone", it is trying to provide real information and not just that which is sieved through government.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

12 minutes ago, Suss&Camm said:

not "when" that's how laws originated.. from moral understandings of what is right and wrong. We did not just wake up one day with laws.

 

He is not acting in proportion to facts. You seem to like facts. Did you read the links I posted earlier?

 

https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/terrorism-immigration-risk-analysis

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

 

This time of history is also covered in the first link above.

 

I don't believe the concept of terror existed in the 40's. 

 

You can enforce laws without violating people's rights, which are also described in the law. This EO was disproportionate.

 

You are confusing this as a terrorism issue.  There were border concerns from any area where there was violent conflict that affected the world.    

 

It's Affecting muslims now only because muslims around the world are doing violent and questionable things.    Restricting access from problem areas has been out national position for quite some time.     Has nothing to do with muslims or brown people as much as some want you to believe.    

 

For example: Azerbaijan is a Muslim country.... they aren't blocked because as a country they aggressively go after radicals and snuff them out.     When a country is committed to ending their violence problem then we don't have to further check their people on entry.    When the countries fail at home then we need to give their people another look.    

 

This was a good example I heard on LBC.   This Muslim man describes the issue in Muslim countries quite well.  

 

 

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

1 minute ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

You are confusing this as a terrorism issue.  There were border concerns from any area where there was violent conflict that affected the world.    

 

It's Affecting muslims now only because muslims around the world are doing violent and questionable things.    Restricting access from problem areas has been out national position for quite some time.     Has nothing to do with muslims or brown people as much as some want you to believe.    

 

For example: Azerbaijan is a Muslim country.... they aren't blocked because as a country they aggressively go after radicals and snuff them out.     When a country is committed to ending their violence problem then we don't have to further check their people on entry.    When the countries fail at home then we need to give their people another look.    

 

This was a good example I heard on LBC.   This Muslim man describes the issue in Muslim countries quite well.  

 

As you are not reading the provided links and instead responding to something I did not say rather than what I did, I'm not continuing the discussion.

[FloridaMinsk 88]

Pretty fair explanation in detail.   

 

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1275246275846132&id=203805062990264

[Russ&Caro 1,549]

From a few Trump supporters I talk to from time to time, they are concerned about legal immigration as well as illegal immigration.

 

Trump and his advisers are very knowledgeable about what his supports are concerned about.

 

So by the transitive property, Trump is concerned about legal immigration.

 

If we're looking out toward future immigration policies, I think it would be reasonable to assume that policies that slow down legal immigration will be looked upon favorably. This 90 day ban fits into this model. I would expect more policies that cause visa and immigration delays. I would expect longer processing times for visas, green cards, and citizenship across all nationalities. If in the run up to the 2018 midterms, Trump and the GOP can show less legal immigration occurring, then that will sit well with his supporters. He needs those supporters to vote, en masse.

[Lazybones18 261]

Are I-130's and all pending applications (immigration/visit) cancelled/suspended by USCIS from those seven countries ? or are they still processing them

[FloridaMinsk 88]

11 minutes ago, Suss&Camm said:

 

As you are not reading the provided links and instead responding to something I did not say rather than what I did, I'm not continuing the discussion.

 

I saw your links.   The Cato study is a pretty long study.  We are on a message board, we are not here to be buried reading a study.  If you have specifics then please post them or at least direct to particular sections.  

 

It also goes into types of visa and violent acts.....    visa type is irrelevant.   Where they originated is the issue.    Which is covered in this EO.   

[FloridaMinsk 88]

1 minute ago, lazybones18 said:

Are I-130's and all pending applications (immigration/visit) cancelled/suspended by USCIS from those seven countries ? or are they still processing them

 

From my understanding they are just paused.    

[FloridaMinsk 88]

2 minutes ago, Russ&Caro said:

From a few Trump supporters I talk to from time to time, they are concerned about legal immigration as well as illegal immigration.

 

Trump and his advisers are very knowledgeable about what his supports are concerned about.

 

So by the transitive property, Trump is concerned about legal immigration.

 

If we're looking out toward future immigration policies, I think it would be reasonable to assume that policies that slow down legal immigration will be looked upon favorably. This 90 day ban fits into this model. I would expect more policies that cause visa and immigration delays. I would expect longer processing times for visas, green cards, and citizenship across all nationalities. If in the run up to the 2018 midterms, Trump and the GOP can show less legal immigration occurring, then that will sit well with his supporters. He needs those supporters to vote, en masse.

Legal immigration is way down the road.  That would be second term stuff.   Which he will get if he can prove he can control the border.    

 

In the end family visas will probably stay the same.   Refugees, Students, and maybe some work visas will probably be slowed down.    Especially from any areas that are of concern for the security people.   

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

6 minutes ago, lazybones18 said:

Are I-130's and all pending applications (immigration/visit) cancelled/suspended by USCIS from those seven countries ? or are they still processing them

All visas that have been issued from those countries are no longer valid. They are canceled/suspended.
Whether temporary or indefinitely no agency is forthcoming with that information. Do the visa holders need to start all over again,

or be able to use those issued visas, who knows ! Trump sure doesn't nor does DHS/DOS.
All interviews for applicants also have been canceled.
 

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

15 minutes ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

I saw your links.   The Cato study is a pretty long study.  We are on a message board, we are not here to be buried reading a study.  If you have specifics then please post them or at least direct to particular sections.  

 

It also goes into types of visa and violent acts.....    visa type is irrelevant.   Where they originated is the issue.    Which is covered in this EO.   

So  links from others aren't ok even you asked for them but your youtubes are ?
As long as your stuff is read and listened to it's alright then but you close your eyes to other perspectives ?

 

[FloridaMinsk 88]

16 minutes ago, Ebunoluwa said:

So  links from others aren't ok even you asked for them but your youtubes are ?
As long as your stuff is read and listened to it's alright then but you close your eyes to other perspectives ?

 

 

No.   A full study is quite a bit of matieral to digest and respond to on a message board.     And does not lend Itself to back and forth that typically happens via a message board.    

 

If you want to have a long winded discussion on policy then this isn't right venue.   We would be better off on a conference call.   

 

And as I stated before....  I looked over the Cato study.    Crimes by visa type isn't in question here..... it's crimes by country of origin that is at the heart of the EO and discussion.  

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

1 hour ago, FloridaMinsk said:

 

Either we are going to have a discussion on facts or we are going to have one on feelings.    

 

Getting emotional is the first step to losing control.  

 

Now your personal insults aside....  if you don't want a factual discussion then please make that known.    You can get with the other snowflakes and be hysterical.   The problem with that behavior is that there are plenty of people who come here for facts and if emotions are disguised as facts then we get more hysteria.   Which helps no one.   

 

 Show me where I did not comment in facts and I will show you your alternate facts you so love a la Breitbart's menu.
I can multitask in feeling empathy for my fellow human beings and at the same time deal in facts.
There need not be an either or.  Unless you prefer a government like Russia of course,

then I would understand your point. This is still a democracy last time I checked though fascistic viewpoints have been

dropped here and there. The sheep want to be driven and not be lead it seems. Driven with a yuuuge bigley stick.
Authoritarian regimes are the new change it seems.

The day someone lost empathy is the day he lost his humanity.
You speak of fear and hysteria and I say again the motivation for this EO was and is fear mongering.
Now we the people who react in protest you call hysterical. No no, the hysteria label always belonged to the extreme right.
You are getting cause and effect mixed up.
Protest is democratic, not hysteria. Banning people with this EO is full fledged hysteria.
Trump owns this created hysteria in airports and the protests all over the world.