Politics

[earthling]

^The definition of liberal/conservative have somewhat different meanings per decade as well, as do party agendas. But it is interesting KC is currently more heavily identified as Independent (43%) than other markets (as I do as well). The two parties are too extreme and polarizing for KC maybe.

[beautyfromashes]

Republican and Democrat brands have a lot of baggage. More people are identifying as Independent and Progressive. That’s likely part of the change in numbers.

[earthling]

Point being KC has higher independent identity than other markets, ranking 6th of major markets (4th in ranking value). KC went up 3% in Indie identity since 2013 while US avg went up 1%.

BTW, KC has historically been below avg for voter turnout and while KC is above US avg for voter registration it shrank 1% since 2013 while US avg went up a bit - according to...
http://ava.prri.org/#politics/2017/Metr ... r_status/1

KC could use a media blitz to encourage registration and showing up to vote. Large universities tend to have drives, but do KC's local colleges?

[FangKC]

I'm not sure the government should be empowered to dictate to people where they'll live, and I'm not really into viewing immigrants as merely tools to accomplish some end (be it economic growth, or revitalizing depopulated communities, or funding the retirement of existing citizens, or whatever), although I realize that emphasizing these advantages of immigration might help convince people who are skeptical of immigrants. I'm also not actually sure it's super necessary to exert that kind of control over immigrants anyway -- as has been discussed in this thread, immigrants are already helping to revive some of these towns and cities even without exerting that kind of control over them. If you want to accelerate that process it might be as easy as simply letting more immigrants in, rather than devising some convoluted authoritarian system that tells people where they can or can't live, or tells businesses where they can or can't employ people.

As opposed to the US government dictating that few-to-no immigrants will be allowed anywhere?

When it comes to immigration, the government does dictate anything and everything based on administrations' policy and interpretation of law, and federal judges' willingness to enforce law.

In the history of the republic, the government has had a lot of influence over where immigrants and citizens moved. Free land grants, railroad placement, defense contracts, etc.

If you re-read my comments, you will see I said the government wouldn't have any say over movement once the person achieved citizenship. However, until one becomes a citizen, I think the government can have a lot of say over whether you are allowed into, or stay in, the country at all, that could include where you will live. Because keep in mind, the government doesn't have to allow an immigrant into the country at all.

[mean]

I'm sure this is not what you're advocating, but the line between what I think you are advocating and a situation where immigrants are "welcomed" into "compassion camps" and "allowed" to perform slave labor to earn citizenship seems to me to be a lot narrower than you seem to think.

[beautyfromashes]

Why do we think America should take the best from every poor country in the world? Instead of exporting freedom and democracy to Honduras, we are taking their best...those who have the strength of character and mental fortitude to travel over 1000 miles for just a chance at a new life. I know that we think we are helping them, but at what point are we hindering the growth of the American Dream around the world? And, what’s left in the wake? A narco state we have to deal with in the next decade?

[FangKC]

I'm sure this is not what you're advocating, but the line between what I think you are advocating and a situation where immigrants are "welcomed" into "compassion camps" and "allowed" to perform slave labor to earn citizenship seems to me to be a lot narrower than you seem to think.

I certainly not advocating that.

I am just saying that the federal government should be able to make conditions where someone immigrating to this country lives until they become a citizen.

I have no problem with the federal government setting up immigration rules that would not allow more non-resident VISA holders to move to San Francisco or New York City, and instead make the residency VISAs conditional on them locating to a certain set of cities, or states. Once they earn their citizenship, they are free to live anywhere they want.

These are policy decisions. Government makes them all the time. It doesn't make sense for the federal government to allow more non-residents to move into already stressed real estate markets, where housing is scarce and at a premium for American citizens. More and more citizens are having to apply for federal housing subsidies in some cities because they are now becoming financially eligible--due to skyrocketing housing prices. Why would any immigration policy add to this problem?

Many cities are now facing problems even providing enough water for their existing residents. Why would federal policy do anything to encourage non-resident immigrants to add to the problem? Atlanta came within days of running out of enough water for its' residents several years ago.

https://observer.com/2018/02/los-angele ... -of-water/

There are many cities and states that would welcome growing their populations.

[missingkc]

Fang, I find your ideas on treatment of immigrants as expressed here to be really pretty nasty. And I must say, I'm surprised. I agree with Fuckyou that immigrants are pretty savvy at sorting geographic variations in economic conditions for themselves and aligning their movements in accord with those variations.

[beautyfromashes]

I agree with Fuckyou that immigrants....

Was this a subliminal message?

[FangKC]

Fang, I find your ideas on treatment of immigrants as expressed here to be really pretty nasty. And I must say, I'm surprised. I agree with Fuckyou that immigrants are pretty savvy at sorting geographic variations in economic conditions for themselves and aligning their movements in accord with those variations.

Explain more. How nasty?

[FangKC]

Josh Hawley, Missouri Senate Candidate, Oversees an Office in Turmoil

https://tinyurl.com/y9gecukm

[brewcrew1000]

Is curious though that this claims KC metro dropped significantly more in GOP identity (6 points since 2013) than other markets. KC is lower than even MSP area in GOP identity now and much lower than STL. KC ranks 6th in Independent identity according to...

2017
http://ava.prri.org/#politics/2017/Metr ... 8,13,18,28

2013
http://ava.prri.org/#politics/2013/Metr ... 8,13,18,28

I think eventually we will see a shift in politics where older Rust Belt mainly white majority states will turn red (Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota) and growing states with growing minority populations will turn Blue like Georgia, Arizona and Texas or they will all be very similar to Florida - I honestly think Texas, Arizona, and Georgia will all turn blue in the next 10-15 years while Wisconsin and Ohio will be solid Red in the next 10-15 years. Michigan and Minnesota might take longer

[flyingember]

2024 will be after the census and redistricting.

Texas is on path for Hispanics to be the largest demographic of Texas within about 5 years. Watch if Hipanics vote as a group or not in upcoming elections. My favorite fact, almost 70% of the Texas population in 2011 under the age of one (new births) were Hispanic. The 2028 presidential election is going to be interesting for Texas if 2024 isn't.

[earthling]

^Depends on who actually shows up to vote of course.

[brewcrew1000]

Does anyone think this whole Caravan thing is kind of staged and find it fishy? I would find it very odd if the caravan arrives before the midterms. Is this story a way to benefit the Republicans? Bring fear that these people are coming at the border and it could help boost the republican numbers in Texas. Isn't George Soros backing this or something thru some NGO?

[WSPanic]

Does anyone think this whole Caravan thing is kind of staged and find it fishy? I would find it very odd if the caravan arrives before the midterms. Is this story a way to benefit the Republicans? Bring fear that these people are coming at the border and it could help boost the republican numbers in Texas. Isn't George Soros backing this or something thru some NGO?

This is a group of Honduran asylum seekers. They aren't funded by Soros or any other NGO (although Pueblas sin Fronteras is providing some support - it's not their deal). There is zero evidence that any terrorists are hiding out in the caravan. They are not trying to "force" their way across the border.

This is simply a humanitarian crisis being exploited by the right.

[beautyfromashes]

This is simply a humanitarian crisis being exploited by the right.

But, aren’t they out of crisis once they leave Honduras? Wouldn’t Guatemala, El Salvador and Mexico be required to take them before the US? Sure, they would have more economic opportunity here, but wouldn’t that then be an economic choice and no longer a humanitarian crisis? How are we not taking everyone who makes it to our border?

[WSPanic]

This is simply a humanitarian crisis being exploited by the right.

But, aren’t they out of crisis once they leave Honduras? Wouldn’t Guatemala, El Salvador and Mexico be required to take them before the US? Sure, they would have more economic opportunity here, but wouldn’t that then be an economic choice and no longer a humanitarian crisis? How are we not taking everyone who makes it to our border?

How are we not, indeed. Good point. We should be.

[beautyfromashes]

How are we not, indeed. Good point. We should be.

So, the path for anyone to get US citizenship is merely putting a foot in the soil?

And what do we leave for those who want a successful Honduras country?

[WSPanic]

How are we not, indeed. Good point. We should be.

So, the path for anyone to get US citizenship is merely putting a foot in the soil?

Pretty much. I believe we need to monitor it and perhaps limit it at some point. I believe it should be regulated to the extent we can keep out terrorists, weapons and narcotics. However, I have yet to see any evidence that we have reached some crisis stage of immigration. So, yeah - citizenship for everyone. Everything I've seen says our population numbers are relatively stagnant. We have more resources than anyone and can certainly sustain the growth.