Politics

Come here to talk about topics that are not related to development, or even Kansas City.
User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 13146
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:06 pm

Federal Judge Strikes Down Kansas Proof Of Citizenship Law

https://tinyurl.com/yagru9k3

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2376
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:25 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:Ok, there's a lot to respond to and I only have a short of amount of time to post, so here's my best attempt with time constraints:

I don't think that if the same thing happened while Obama was president, then it was Obama merely "dropping the ball." It should have been an outrage then too. Nobody is saying right now, "well, Trump just dropped the ball." People are saying, "FIX THIS NOW!"
But, for the nth time, the same thing didn't happen while Obama was president, so this is irrelevant.
Also, I agree with phuqueue that it doesn't really matter if children were placed in caged or mistreated during the Obama years. We have children in cages RIGHT NOW and need solutions RIGHT NOW. "But Obama did it too..." is not a solution. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm with you there. I also think Trump should care more. Maybe he does, but that's not the impression I get from reading his tweets.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the reason why this is making news NOW. I still think it's ploy from the left. I don't really believe the left (or the right for that matter) care at all about those children.
It's making the news now because, again, it is a new development. While I can't force you to acquiesce to reality, "agreeing to disagree" implies a certain benignity that is not present in this case. You will "believe" (which seems like the wrong word to use when it comes to accepting or denying a fact) whatever you want to believe, but I'm not "agreeing" to anything.
cityscape wrote: So in a sense, I don't agree with AllThingsKC, but I do appreciate his take so that we can all hope to better understand each other.
Exactly. I'm probably the only conservative on this board. But I LOVE this board and use it to counter my own ideologies because I know this board is at least 95% liberal. For all I know, I'm the only conservative in Downtown Kansas City. My conservative friends don't really understand the concept of being "pro-urbanism," so this board covers that base for me as well.
You have not historically been the only conservative on this board. I think you are just the only one interested in engaging on this these days. And I guess some of them have left or been banned (e.g. ppa/Maitre D, Michael). The board also has a libertarian contingent too.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3761
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester » Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:20 pm

What did happen under Obama and how it's different from now.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immig ... es-n884856

mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 10747
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: Politics

Post by mean » Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:29 pm

The whataboutism is getting unreal.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4632
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Politics

Post by earthling » Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:37 pm

phuqueue wrote:The board also has a libertarian contingent too.
Moderate independents too who try not to get caught up in such polarization and attempt to levelset the conversation yet isn't sensationalized enough to consider as reasonable.

You know when you watch a cheezy Hollywood movie with someone (of any age) buying into the theatrics/action as if real to levels of gullibility? That happens with a much larger % of population than it should when it comes to politics - in this case those still defending Trump (or Obama for that matter). Frankly, this applies to believers in supernatural forces w/out question as well. But fortunately more and more question it. Those who don't are the ones too noisy.

brewcrew1000
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2285
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Broadway/Gilham according to google maps

Re: Politics

Post by brewcrew1000 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:51 am

I know Obama deported a record number of people- but what worries me about Trump is that he actually uses and popularizes the rhetoric normalizing U.S. state sponsored terror against immigrants- and justifies it morally, using Christianity,and that it is simply "enforcing the law".
...like how in his campaign he famously suggested dissenters in the crowd "should be taken out in stretchers", normalizing fascist thuggery.
When I look in a comments section and see so many people *wanting* children to be separated from their families as punishment or a "deterrent" to asylum seekers, it really saddens me.


mykn
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by mykn » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:52 am

brewcrew1000 wrote:I know Obama deported a record number of people- but what worries me about Trump is that he actually uses and popularizes the rhetoric normalizing U.S. state sponsored terror against immigrants- and justifies it morally, using Christianity,and that it is simply "enforcing the law".
...like how in his campaign he famously suggested dissenters in the crowd "should be taken out in stretchers", normalizing fascist thuggery.
When I look in a comments section and see so many people *wanting* children to be separated from their families as punishment or a "deterrent" to asylum seekers, it really saddens me.
This

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9038
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Politics

Post by Highlander » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:14 am

brewcrew1000 wrote:I know Obama deported a record number of people- but what worries me about Trump is that he actually uses and popularizes the rhetoric normalizing U.S. state sponsored terror against immigrants- and justifies it morally, using Christianity,and that it is simply "enforcing the law".
...like how in his campaign he famously suggested dissenters in the crowd "should be taken out in stretchers", normalizing fascist thuggery.
When I look in a comments section and see so many people *wanting* children to be separated from their families as punishment or a "deterrent" to asylum seekers, it really saddens me.
Not to bore people here with a historical analog but I've been reading the book "Grant" by Ron Chernow. He spends quite a bit of time on Grant's role in the administration of Andrew Johnson who many regard as the worst president in American history. What struck me were the similarities between Johnson and Trump, particularly Johnson's brazen attempts to try to essentially undo the societal results of the civil war in the south and just about everything else Lincoln had done.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9229
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: Politics

Post by AllThingsKC » Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:46 pm

So the Dems have told Trump they aren't willing to work with him on the border issue so he can clean up his own mess. I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand, I agree that if it's Trump's mess, they aren't obligated to help him clean it up. On the other hand, I feel if Democrats care about these kids on much as they say they do, then they should be more than willing to do whatever they can to fix the problem.

Also, there's one thing I can't figure out: Why did Trump need to sign an executive order? If this was simply his policy or just enforcing the laws, wouldn't a solution been to change the policy or not enforcing the law? Plus, the E.O. will likely be challenged in court. So, I don't understand the purpose of the executive order here. Short-term solution to make it look like Trump is doing something?
beautyfromashes wrote:This thread is now worse than the Downtown Stadium/ Save our Stadiums thread. It makes me want to shoot myself in the head everytime I see it turn red. Congratulations ATKC, you now = kcdcchef.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3761
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester » Thu Jun 21, 2018 6:44 pm

I think the crux of the long term fix is Trump wants to cut legal immigration numbers. Non-starter.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 13146
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:50 pm

There was never any law that required the separations of children from their parents. It was a policy that could have been changed at any time by Trump. It didn't require any action by Congress. I have a feeling the EO came after Trump's visit to Capital Hill, where lawmakers explained this to him, and how bad it all looked for them trying to get re-elected in the midterms. Thus, Trump signs the EO the next day.

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2376
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:11 pm

The bill that the Dems uniformly opposed that went down in the House was a hard line anti-immigration proposal. It was a cure worse than the disease. Also, the GOP controls the entire government, so if they want to do something they shouldn't need the Dems anyway. But it turns out, with the exception of the tax heist, they can't even agree on anything amongst themselves. They aren't fit to govern.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 13146
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:18 pm

grovester wrote:I think the crux of the long term fix is Trump wants to cut legal immigration numbers. Non-starter.
Cutting legal immigration is only going to cause more problems in the long-term. People who oppose even legal immigration don't realize this.

There is a demographic issue here. Our current birth rate is not high enough to create enough workers to support retirees via Social Security and Medicare. In 1965, there were around 16 workers paying into SS for each retiree. The last figure I saw was in 2013 when it was around 2.8 workers for every retiree.

The baby boomer generation (1946-66) has reached retirement age, and is the largest generation to retire in US history. Since our native birth rate is so low currently, we will need legal immigration to replace workers/citizens that are needed to take care of our seniors and disabled.

Keep in mind that it's also the largest generation in history to retire where a majority of the retirees have no other pensions or savings, so Social Security will be their primary, or only source of income.

Believe me. In a few years, people will be screaming to allow more legal immigration when they realize there will be no one paying to support them in their old age.

The other issue here is that the largest number of workers in US history will be leaving -- or have already left -- the workforce within the next 15 years. We are talking about experienced lawyers, business managers, scientists, engineers, architects, computer systems people, product designers, marketers, doctors, dentists, nurses, teachers, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc. We are already now seeing shortages of doctors, nurses, and teachers in many parts of the country, and calls for young people to enter into trade jobs like plumbers and electricians. Those professions are aging out quickly.

So, even if you are against legal immigration, and also among those who are opposed to Social Security and Medicare programs philosophically, there is another thing to consider here. Without legal immigration and these retirement programs funded, you will have millions of fellow citizens who cannot support themselves in their old age. This creates a societal problem. Imagine every place you go there are old people sitting with their hands out begging you for money. Everywhere. You will not be able to escape them. No gated community will protect you.

The other solution obviously is for our native population to have larger families to provide those workers. Well, good luck with that, because more and more Americans can no longer afford to have more than one or two children as it is.

A news report in May indicated that the US is below its' birth replacement rate, and has been for years. The only reason our population has increased at all was because of immigration.

Trump's actions to limit even legal immigration will be overturned once he's out of power. It will become necessary, and I think most politicians with any brains know it. Most of them are probably aware that immigrants tend to start businesses at a much higher rate than native-born Americans.

U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... record-low

Immigrants Twice As Likely To Start Businesses As U.S.-Born Citizens

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/ ... 99719.html
Last edited by FangKC on Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 13146
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Politics

Post by FangKC » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:26 pm

phuqueue wrote:The bill that the Dems uniformly opposed that went down in the House was a hard line anti-immigration proposal. It was a cure worse than the disease. Also, the GOP controls the entire government, so if they want to do something they shouldn't need the Dems anyway. But it turns out, with the exception of the tax heist, they can't even agree on anything amongst themselves. They aren't fit to govern.
There are two factions in the GOP when it comes to immigration. Those who support the business interests that need immigrants to operate their businesses (Silicon Valley, engineering firms, hospitals, agriculture), and those who are hard-core anti-immigration in principle. Some of this is racist, xenophobic attitudes, and some of it is simple fear of losing one's job to an immigrant.

I come from a rural county that is very, very conservative. There is little risk of any immigrant taking any of their jobs. Immigrants don't move there. The county is 98 percent white. The vast majority of the county is anti-immigration of any kind, and I can tell you it's mostly a racist and xenophobic reaction. If the immigrants coming into the USA were white Christians from Germany, the UK, or Ireland, they wouldn't have a problem with them. They might have a problem with them if they were French or Italians though. :D

However, the residents of my home county are also very suspicious of any newcomers who move to town who were not born there-even if they are white Christians. Basically they just don't like anyone they don't know, or weren't raised with.

I have patiently listened to hours of people from my home county pontificating on immigration. When they are done, I explain what I said above about our growing demographic problem with birth rates, and supporting Social Security and Medicare. It always shuts them up. Every time.

Because even a moron can understand that 2 workers per retiree doesn't work once the SS trust fund starts running out.

However, there are some Democrats who are against immigration as well. Many are blue collar workers who worry immigrants will take their jobs, but otherwise support Democratic programs and ideals.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/de ... migration/

I think people wouldn't worry so much about immigrants if they knew that they could go back to school, or get retrained for a new job, for free or low cost. I think that is why Bernie Sanders' plan for free college was appealing to many. It's not just that they wouldn't have to worry how they would send their kids to college. It's that they also could go back to college if they lost their job.
Last edited by FangKC on Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9229
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: Politics

Post by AllThingsKC » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:40 pm

FangKC wrote: It was a policy that could have been changed at any time by Trump. It didn't require any action by Congress.
But, this is what I don't understand: If it was policy that could have been changed anytime by Trump, then what was the point of the executive order? Why wouldn't Trump just change the policy? If he didn't need an executive order to enact the policy, why was it needed to end the policy? Besides, it will likely be challenged in court, and I suspect Trump knew that when he signed it. So what was the point of it in the first place? To make it look like short-term band-aid to the problem?
phuqueue wrote:Also, the GOP controls the entire government, so if they want to do something they shouldn't need the Dems anyway.
GOP has 51 Senate seats. It takes 60 to get anything done.





In any event, here's some conflicting polling data:

FiveThirtyEight: Separating Families at the Border is Really Unpopular
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sep ... unpopular/

Rasmussen: 54% of voters blame parents, not feds, for border children crisis
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... ren_crisis
beautyfromashes wrote:This thread is now worse than the Downtown Stadium/ Save our Stadiums thread. It makes me want to shoot myself in the head everytime I see it turn red. Congratulations ATKC, you now = kcdcchef.

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2376
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:23 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:
FangKC wrote: It was a policy that could have been changed at any time by Trump. It didn't require any action by Congress.
But, this is what I don't understand: If it was policy that could have been changed anytime by Trump, then what was the point of the executive order? Why wouldn't Trump just change the policy? If he didn't need an executive order to enact the policy, why was it needed to end the policy? Besides, it will likely be challenged in court, and I suspect Trump knew that when he signed it. So what was the point of it in the first place? To make it look like short-term band-aid to the problem?
You're basically asking "why did Trump make a big show of doing something"

And more specifically, "why did Trump make a big show of appearing to 'fix' a major controversial issue"
phuqueue wrote:Also, the GOP controls the entire government, so if they want to do something they shouldn't need the Dems anyway.
GOP has 51 Senate seats. It takes 60 to get anything done.
This argument would be much more persuasive if they could get anything out of the House. And when they got their health "care" bill to the Senate, they couldn't even pull together 50 votes. As for immigration specifically, that didn't even come close to passing the House.
In any event, here's some conflicting polling data:

FiveThirtyEight: Separating Families at the Border is Really Unpopular
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sep ... unpopular/

Rasmussen: 54% of voters blame parents, not feds, for border children crisis
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... ren_crisis
I'm not a polls expert but I do know that Rasmussen tends to have a stronger R lean than other polls. Something about how they weight their results tends to favor Republicans relative to other polls. Could be the same effect at work here.

Also, these are not mutually exclusive anyway. It looks like the 538 piece is talking about all Americans, but Rasmussen polled likely voters. Rasmussen also asked who's more to blame, which means their respondents might think the parents have the most responsibility, but the feds aren't necessarily innocent either.

phuqueue
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2376
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

Re: Politics

Post by phuqueue » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:25 pm

Incidentally, people who believe parents are to blame for having their own kids stolen from them as the penalty for fleeing violence in their home countries that is largely America's fault in the first place are disgusting, but we live in hell now so what else is new

Riverite
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 182
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:49 pm

Re: Politics

Post by Riverite » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:33 pm

Currently working in China teaching children English, I can’t even comprehend the callousness of some towards foreign children. It’s getting to the point where I’m questioning if I ever want to go back to the us. I want to fight it but I’m not sure how anymore

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12251
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Politics

Post by aknowledgeableperson » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:36 am

Given the recent attitude of Trump on immigration I have finally figured out what he means by Make American Great Again. He means Make America WHITE again.

Post Reply