I didn't see this when it was posted and didn't have a chance to reply until now due to my schedule. I don't have anything to say that hasn't been said by Oracle already. I believe that it's absolutely useless and only serves to piss law-abiding people off.


While I believe that it's important to take care of your own country's citizens before taking on the problems of other people, the way that Trump and his administration are going about trying to solve those problems, both foreign and domestic is all wrong. A travel ban and adding even more security measures for immigrants and refugees on top of what Oracle already outlined above will not add security and only creates more work for the people that would have to carry them out.



A fairly common counterpoint to this is that these illegal immigrants tend to take very difficult but also low-paying jobs, thus saving the business money. However since that money is considered part of its profits, that money is taxed. Theoretically there is a tipping point where having enough underpaid employees increases profits enough that the tax taken from profits is more than legal employees would be taxed individually from their incomes. I have not seen enough research on this topic to determine whether it would be worth it for a business, and I personally believe that underpaying illegal immigrants is akin to slavery.



That is an extremely narrow minded view of how discussions work and is very disrespectful to those who wish to actually talk about issues instead of insulting their opponents. I would much rather value the opinion of a Dutch guy who has a degree in political science than the opinion of Amos the Tennessee hick who gets all his news from his uncle Crazy Earl. I realize those are extremes, but based on my experiences, in general, people outside of the US are more informed and involved than US citizens, which is disappointing.



It's not a question of overwhelming one side or the other with numbers, it's a question of wanting to help people in a bad situation get out of that bad situation. Even if it was about numbers, it still wouldn't matter. If a potential refugee gets denied simply because they live in a certain country, don't you think they're going to get mad at the denier? If they were neutral to the conflict before, that might push them to fight against the US, or at the very least become more open to listening to the arguments from the rebels.



you quoted exactly why it's infeasible. If someone is really determined to get somewhere, they will find a way, legally, "legally," or illegally. You don't patch a hole in a boat with a piece of paper and some glue. I don't know what the best option is, but I do know it's not this.


Just because they aren't radicalized doesn't mean that they're on our side, or even against who we're fighting.


You do know that second-generation immigrant is referring to the grandchild of the actual immigrant? Which means it takes a MINIMUM of 28 years to make one. A lot can happen in that time, including proper guidance on culture differences and acceptance of the values of the country they are residing in.


This is the only thing I agree on. While it's possible it's just random chance, the evidence against that possibility is very strong. However, it is not right to deny everyone of a certain culture or region simply because a few bad people wanted to cause some mayhem.