The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Right now our current refugee policy marathon is “imprison them in overcrowded camps”
Until we can be sure their ultimate destination is safe. Due to the sheer number of refugees they are being held longer than anyone (including me) finds acceptable. But it’s still the best possible approach out of the numerous options, since I’ve yet to hear an alternative that isn’t worse.
I consider “just let them go” to be a worse approach.
They’re prisons, Marathon. America’s solution to Latino immigration is to stuff the immigrants in prisons
Refugees/Asylum seekers and generic immigrants aren't interchangeable.
Requirements for Asylee status:
You are present in the United States (by legal or illegally entry)
You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country due to past persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return
The reason for persecution is related to one of five things: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion
Refugee is the same but you are outside the US at the time of application.
These kids are being treated as if they are asylum seekers- I'm not sure how closely the backside process on this is being followed- which is the only reason they are allowed into the US in the first place. And yeah, the asylum process is pretty much "arrive at destination, be placed in custody for period of time, then sent on" what else would it be, the entire asylum system is basically(by design) a circumvention of the immigration process.
The US does have an immigration process-which is all kinds of also screwed up, but that process exists- and step 1 isn't "Surreptitiously cross in to the US" . Every time you see someone complain about Big Tech using H1Bs , that is the immigration process they are complaining about.
So if I understand correctly, the argument here is "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" versus "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia, but in slightly different proportions"?
The argument is that racism is the driver for our treatment of Latin immigrants, because ultimately the unspoken truth of US immigration policy, even for democrats, is that they don’t want a racial other joining the US in large numbers.
So we round them into camps for their own... “protection,” while just so happening denying them access to lawyers, locking down the ability to report on the condition of the camps, for their “protection,” while cramming them into cramped spaces where they’re several times over capacity in the midst of a lethal pandemic.... for their “protection”
[because the protection of the interred isn’t the actual point. The detainment and horror stories meant to dissuade others from attempting to immigrate was the point]
So you're on team "immigration policy is driven by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" then?
Like, nobody here has argued that this crisis isn't driven by racism. Nobody has argued that it's only Republicans that have shitty views. There was some pushback on the notion that there would be no crisis if the immigrants were all white, which is kind of like saying there would be no poverty if we abolished money in terms of useful commentary.
Ultimately, I don't even see what the point of contention is.
The point of contention is that the administration is hurting large swaths of Latino folks in a project rooted in white supremacy, to accomplish the goal of maintaining white supremacy, by creating the precise image that the fate of those currently interned in our camps will be the fate of any others who try to escape the kind of nightmarish conditions that would cause people to flee for thousands of miles from their homes, on a gamble that they can make a better life in “the greatest country in the world.”
So "our immigration policy is based on racism, nationalism and xenophobia" but with more exclamation points.
Sorry, this just feels a bit like someone saying "there's a dog" and you respond with "no you FOOL can't you see that IT'S A DOG Jesus fucking CHRIST."
marathon said that race wasn't a component of this policy. that's what people were responding to. what are you doing?
No, what I said is that the Biden administration’s actions are not driven by racism.
This is where several of us disagree
That’s fine, I disagree with you as well.
They’re propping up a system that was founded as a means to preserve America’s white majority in the face of increased non-white immigration, by currently shoving so many Latin American folks into these facilities that they overcrowd to the point they’re over capacity by over seven hundred percent.
Like you can argue till you’re blue in the face that Biden doesn’t have racial animus in his heart. But his administration is still executing racist policy, because it is targeting a racially othered group disproportionately and continuing to exacerbate racial inequity against Latin Americans
I think you’re conflating two issues to make it one about race. I don’t agree that they are putting these people into these centers to prop up racism or racist systems.
They are being held there because we can’t just release them, they aren’t American citizens, because of the pandemic, and because we need to ensure where they intend on going at the end of the day is safe.
I don’t agree that it’s targeting a race. The consequence of so many people from Southern countries migrating to the US, almost by definition means that they will be effected. But that’s the reality of geography, that’s not intent.
Yes, I understand that the idea of limiting entry into the country at all has roots in racism. But that doesn’t mean that any and all efforts to exert control or order over who enters the US are also racist.
I understand that your inclination is typically one of blind defense, but I would sincerely urge you to perform some introspection on your stance of 'we're keeping them there for their own good'
Seriously. The desire to defend the party that you voted for should not be allowed to warp your perspective in such a way.
That's fairly patronizing, but I'll take a crack at this.
Children / minors can't in good conscience be dumped onto the street. Nor can they be released into the custody of unknown / unvetted adults. Even if the present conditions are far from optimal, blindly releasing them into the nation where they may be lost, alone, or exploited is worse than keeping them in overcrowded facilities.
The ideal solution is to make sure they are held in humane and enriching facilities where they can be properly cared for until they are released into the care of (vetted, safe) adults who have the ability to provide for them.
This is of course for minors who arrive alone - family separation is indefensible in almost any circumstances - but assuming the facilities where they are held are properly staffed / have proper resources holding them until they can be safely placed is the right answer. Those facilities being lacking in resources is the big immediate issue. Put them two to a room in an empty Courtyard Marriot with one HHS social worker monitoring each floor? I'm mostly good with that,.
The last thread had some extensive discussions on why the hotel idea is not a good one for minors. Would work well for families though, which is why the Biden admin is moving to do just that. Couscous linked the article on that back on page 2.
There's always going to be a delay between when the minors arrive in custody and when you can discharge them because of the need to vet where they are going. The more minors you have as compared to the number of people doing the vetting, the more the backlog can build up. And this only increases the longer that goes on. This then compounds onto other systems as longer time to process the minors means more of them need to be held for longer which means needing more facilities. None of which really comes online quickly.
Cool, so assuredly this admin is doing something extensive and groundbreaking to resolve the problem? If so, they need to do a lot more to show it. Again, burden of proof is on them, not on us to prove they aren't.
There is. If you'll remember the last thread, there was a giant blow-up of posting over news of them opening new facilities to house more people. They are also trying to get migrant families into hotels as a way to house them. There's lots of stuff going on right now to manage the people on the southern US border and to move them onto the US side rather then leaving them on the Mexican side as the last admin was doing. People are even linking it in the thread. It's just getting buried under the rest of .... the stuff people are going on about.
We got pissed because the “more facilities” were more camps, Shryke.
We don’t want people housed in goddamn concentration camps. Period.
The question Hydropolo was asking was about whether they were doing anything about it. Which they are. Multiple things. Changing rules, opening up new facilities, putting people in hotels, expanding the number of refugee admitted, etc, etc. And they are showing it. It's all in the news and people have even linked much of it in these threads.
So if I understand correctly, the argument here is "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" versus "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia, but in slightly different proportions"?
The argument is that racism is the driver for our treatment of Latin immigrants, because ultimately the unspoken truth of US immigration policy, even for democrats, is that they don’t want a racial other joining the US in large numbers.
So we round them into camps for their own... “protection,” while just so happening denying them access to lawyers, locking down the ability to report on the condition of the camps, for their “protection,” while cramming them into cramped spaces where they’re several times over capacity in the midst of a lethal pandemic.... for their “protection”
[because the protection of the interred isn’t the actual point. The detainment and horror stories meant to dissuade others from attempting to immigrate was the point]
So you're on team "immigration policy is driven by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" then?
Like, nobody here has argued that this crisis isn't driven by racism. Nobody has argued that it's only Republicans that have shitty views. There was some pushback on the notion that there would be no crisis if the immigrants were all white, which is kind of like saying there would be no poverty if we abolished money in terms of useful commentary.
Ultimately, I don't even see what the point of contention is.
The point of contention is that the administration is hurting large swaths of Latino folks in a project rooted in white supremacy, to accomplish the goal of maintaining white supremacy, by creating the precise image that the fate of those currently interned in our camps will be the fate of any others who try to escape the kind of nightmarish conditions that would cause people to flee for thousands of miles from their homes, on a gamble that they can make a better life in “the greatest country in the world.”
So "our immigration policy is based on racism, nationalism and xenophobia" but with more exclamation points.
Sorry, this just feels a bit like someone saying "there's a dog" and you respond with "no you FOOL can't you see that IT'S A DOG Jesus fucking CHRIST."
marathon said that race wasn't a component of this policy. that's what people were responding to. what are you doing?
No, what I said is that the Biden administration’s actions are not driven by racism.
This is where several of us disagree
That’s fine, I disagree with you as well.
They’re propping up a system that was founded as a means to preserve America’s white majority in the face of increased non-white immigration, by currently shoving so many Latin American folks into these facilities that they overcrowd to the point they’re over capacity by over seven hundred percent.
Like you can argue till you’re blue in the face that Biden doesn’t have racial animus in his heart. But his administration is still executing racist policy, because it is targeting a racially othered group disproportionately and continuing to exacerbate racial inequity against Latin Americans
I think you’re conflating two issues to make it one about race. I don’t agree that they are putting these people into these centers to prop up racism or racist systems.
They are being held there because we can’t just release them, they aren’t American citizens, because of the pandemic, and because we need to ensure where they intend on going at the end of the day is safe.
I don’t agree that it’s targeting a race. The consequence of so many people from Southern countries migrating to the US, almost by definition means that they will be effected. But that’s the reality of geography, that’s not intent.
Yes, I understand that the idea of limiting entry into the country at all has roots in racism. But that doesn’t mean that any and all efforts to exert control or order over who enters the US are also racist.
I understand that your inclination is typically one of blind defense, but I would sincerely urge you to perform some introspection on your stance of 'we're keeping them there for their own good'
Seriously. The desire to defend the party that you voted for should not be allowed to warp your perspective in such a way.
That's fairly patronizing, but I'll take a crack at this.
Children / minors can't in good conscience be dumped onto the street. Nor can they be released into the custody of unknown / unvetted adults. Even if the present conditions are far from optimal, blindly releasing them into the nation where they may be lost, alone, or exploited is worse than keeping them in overcrowded facilities.
The ideal solution is to make sure they are held in humane and enriching facilities where they can be properly cared for until they are released into the care of (vetted, safe) adults who have the ability to provide for them.
This is of course for minors who arrive alone - family separation is indefensible in almost any circumstances - but assuming the facilities where they are held are properly staffed / have proper resources holding them until they can be safely placed is the right answer. Those facilities being lacking in resources is the big immediate issue. Put them two to a room in an empty Courtyard Marriot with one HHS social worker monitoring each floor? I'm mostly good with that,.
The last thread had some extensive discussions on why the hotel idea is not a good one for minors. Would work well for families though, which is why the Biden admin is moving to do just that. Couscous linked the article on that back on page 2.
There's always going to be a delay between when the minors arrive in custody and when you can discharge them because of the need to vet where they are going. The more minors you have as compared to the number of people doing the vetting, the more the backlog can build up. And this only increases the longer that goes on. This then compounds onto other systems as longer time to process the minors means more of them need to be held for longer which means needing more facilities. None of which really comes online quickly.
Cool, so assuredly this admin is doing something extensive and groundbreaking to resolve the problem? If so, they need to do a lot more to show it. Again, burden of proof is on them, not on us to prove they aren't.
I think the slow going is influenced by many factors, including difficulty in getting funding, a bunch of people in relevant positions who are just racist assholes, legitimate concerns about keeping covid contained, the existence of multiple simultaneous crises dividing Biden's attention, the lethargy inherent in any enterprise involving tens of thousands of employees, and - unfortunately - the reality that Biden probably prioritizes immigration issues lower than he probably should.
(I think it's reductive to say he likes the system just fine because he's a white supremacist, but he's definitely screwed a few pooches here.)
Given he told two Latin American activists, who questioned him on his record being too harsh to Latin Americans, to vote for Trump instead then, I would say that is an understatement
You love to cite this, but the context was the activist launching into a tirade at a public town hall because Biden wouldn't commit to rejecting the concept of deporting anybody ever. His response was instead that he would not end deportations for those with felony records, so the dude took that as an excuse to rant about all immigration sins ever. It was dismissive, absolutely, but it was neither unprompted nor with an activist who was trying to be productive in any way.
All the rest of that is Biden ignoring the rest of Rojas’ point in favor of something that plays better than three million deportations and family separations, as if we’re supposed to believe it’s only “the bad guys” getting deported
So if I understand correctly, the argument here is "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" versus "the immigration crisis is fueled by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia, but in slightly different proportions"?
The argument is that racism is the driver for our treatment of Latin immigrants, because ultimately the unspoken truth of US immigration policy, even for democrats, is that they don’t want a racial other joining the US in large numbers.
So we round them into camps for their own... “protection,” while just so happening denying them access to lawyers, locking down the ability to report on the condition of the camps, for their “protection,” while cramming them into cramped spaces where they’re several times over capacity in the midst of a lethal pandemic.... for their “protection”
[because the protection of the interred isn’t the actual point. The detainment and horror stories meant to dissuade others from attempting to immigrate was the point]
So you're on team "immigration policy is driven by racism, nationalism, and xenophobia" then?
Like, nobody here has argued that this crisis isn't driven by racism. Nobody has argued that it's only Republicans that have shitty views. There was some pushback on the notion that there would be no crisis if the immigrants were all white, which is kind of like saying there would be no poverty if we abolished money in terms of useful commentary.
Ultimately, I don't even see what the point of contention is.
The point of contention is that the administration is hurting large swaths of Latino folks in a project rooted in white supremacy, to accomplish the goal of maintaining white supremacy, by creating the precise image that the fate of those currently interned in our camps will be the fate of any others who try to escape the kind of nightmarish conditions that would cause people to flee for thousands of miles from their homes, on a gamble that they can make a better life in “the greatest country in the world.”
So "our immigration policy is based on racism, nationalism and xenophobia" but with more exclamation points.
Sorry, this just feels a bit like someone saying "there's a dog" and you respond with "no you FOOL can't you see that IT'S A DOG Jesus fucking CHRIST."
marathon said that race wasn't a component of this policy. that's what people were responding to. what are you doing?
No, what I said is that the Biden administration’s actions are not driven by racism.
This is where several of us disagree
That’s fine, I disagree with you as well.
They’re propping up a system that was founded as a means to preserve America’s white majority in the face of increased non-white immigration, by currently shoving so many Latin American folks into these facilities that they overcrowd to the point they’re over capacity by over seven hundred percent.
Like you can argue till you’re blue in the face that Biden doesn’t have racial animus in his heart. But his administration is still executing racist policy, because it is targeting a racially othered group disproportionately and continuing to exacerbate racial inequity against Latin Americans
I think you’re conflating two issues to make it one about race. I don’t agree that they are putting these people into these centers to prop up racism or racist systems.
They are being held there because we can’t just release them, they aren’t American citizens, because of the pandemic, and because we need to ensure where they intend on going at the end of the day is safe.
I don’t agree that it’s targeting a race. The consequence of so many people from Southern countries migrating to the US, almost by definition means that they will be effected. But that’s the reality of geography, that’s not intent.
Yes, I understand that the idea of limiting entry into the country at all has roots in racism. But that doesn’t mean that any and all efforts to exert control or order over who enters the US are also racist.
I understand that your inclination is typically one of blind defense, but I would sincerely urge you to perform some introspection on your stance of 'we're keeping them there for their own good'
Seriously. The desire to defend the party that you voted for should not be allowed to warp your perspective in such a way.
That's fairly patronizing, but I'll take a crack at this.
Children / minors can't in good conscience be dumped onto the street. Nor can they be released into the custody of unknown / unvetted adults. Even if the present conditions are far from optimal, blindly releasing them into the nation where they may be lost, alone, or exploited is worse than keeping them in overcrowded facilities.
The ideal solution is to make sure they are held in humane and enriching facilities where they can be properly cared for until they are released into the care of (vetted, safe) adults who have the ability to provide for them.
This is of course for minors who arrive alone - family separation is indefensible in almost any circumstances - but assuming the facilities where they are held are properly staffed / have proper resources holding them until they can be safely placed is the right answer. Those facilities being lacking in resources is the big immediate issue. Put them two to a room in an empty Courtyard Marriot with one HHS social worker monitoring each floor? I'm mostly good with that,.
The last thread had some extensive discussions on why the hotel idea is not a good one for minors. Would work well for families though, which is why the Biden admin is moving to do just that. Couscous linked the article on that back on page 2.
There's always going to be a delay between when the minors arrive in custody and when you can discharge them because of the need to vet where they are going. The more minors you have as compared to the number of people doing the vetting, the more the backlog can build up. And this only increases the longer that goes on. This then compounds onto other systems as longer time to process the minors means more of them need to be held for longer which means needing more facilities. None of which really comes online quickly.
Cool, so assuredly this admin is doing something extensive and groundbreaking to resolve the problem? If so, they need to do a lot more to show it. Again, burden of proof is on them, not on us to prove they aren't.
I think the slow going is influenced by many factors, including difficulty in getting funding, a bunch of people in relevant positions who are just racist assholes, legitimate concerns about keeping covid contained, the existence of multiple simultaneous crises dividing Biden's attention, the lethargy inherent in any enterprise involving tens of thousands of employees, and - unfortunately - the reality that Biden probably prioritizes immigration issues lower than he probably should.
(I think it's reductive to say he likes the system just fine because he's a white supremacist, but he's definitely screwed a few pooches here.)
Given he told two Latin American activists, who questioned him on his record being too harsh to Latin Americans, to vote for Trump instead then, I would say that is an understatement
You love to cite this, but the context was the activist launching into a tirade at a public town hall because Biden wouldn't commit to rejecting the concept of deporting anybody ever. His response was instead that he would not end deportations for those with felony records, so the dude took that as an excuse to rant about all immigration sins ever. It was dismissive, absolutely, but it was neither unprompted nor with an activist who was trying to be productive in any way.
The immigration activist had started off by translating questions asked in Spanish by another attendee, who asked if the former vice president would stop all deportations immediately upon taking office if elected.
Biden responded, "No. I will not stop all deportations. I will prioritize deportations, only people who have committed a felony or serious crime."
The activist, identified by a CNN reporter as Carlos Rojas, later continued by telling Biden he had volunteered for former President Barack Obama's campaign in 2008, but was disheartened by the number of deportations during his presidency.
"The fact is that over those eight years, there were 3 million people that were deported and separated from their families," Rojas said.
Cutting Rojas off, Biden said, "You should vote for Trump. You should vote for Trump."
That clip also cuts off the start where exactly what I said happened. The guy stood up to ostensibly translate a question from someone else, but instead used that as an excuse to hijack the floor for his personal Airing of Grievances because Biden wouldn't take an absolutist position.
I’ve read it many many times. Every time I cited it
Why are you ignoring Rojas’ and the woman’s claims about the number of deportations in favor of the claims of the man who told two members of a group targeted by the trump admin to vote for the very man who sought to oppress them?
Right now our current refugee policy marathon is “imprison them in overcrowded camps”
Until we can be sure their ultimate destination is safe. Due to the sheer number of refugees they are being held longer than anyone (including me) finds acceptable. But it’s still the best possible approach out of the numerous options, since I’ve yet to hear an alternative that isn’t worse.
I consider “just let them go” to be a worse approach.
They’re prisons, Marathon. America’s solution to Latino immigration is to stuff the immigrants in prisons
Refugees/Asylum seekers and generic immigrants aren't interchangeable.
Requirements for Asylee status:
You are present in the United States (by legal or illegally entry)
You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country due to past persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return
The reason for persecution is related to one of five things: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion
Refugee is the same but you are outside the US at the time of application.
These kids are being treated as if they are asylum seekers- I'm not sure how closely the backside process on this is being followed- which is the only reason they are allowed into the US in the first place. And yeah, the asylum process is pretty much "arrive at destination, be placed in custody for period of time, then sent on" what else would it be, the entire asylum system is basically(by design) a circumvention of the immigration process.
The US does have an immigration process-which is all kinds of also screwed up, but that process exists- and step 1 isn't "Surreptitiously cross in to the US" . Every time you see someone complain about Big Tech using H1Bs , that is the immigration process they are complaining about.
But that doesn’t make the conditions in these camps no longer those of prison conditions.
You took my post, seized a legal technicality in the wording I used regarding immigrants (because even if refugees and asylum seekers have a specific legal status, they’re still immigrants) and focused on that instead of the fact that US policy is to house them in prison camps
To the "it takes time" crowd, now that we are two months in, would you accept > 2 months as acceptable time frame to get basic food/water/hygiene/boarding if say, a massive hurricane hit part of the country? We expect FEMA to be in and going in days at WORST. This is why I don't give Biden much more benefit of the doubt here. Declare an emergency (the conditions we're seeing constitute one to me) and get FEMA to at least set up refugee camps.
If Biden's admin is doing something to alleviate the problem, they need to communicate.
Conditions for housing disaster victims is just like cots in the middle of a warehouse or a gymnasium or something. It's not that far off the photos posted last page.
And let's not forget that one of the reasons we're still having trouble is that there is a pandemic going on, so there is an even greater need to isolate everyone.
They are very very clearly not taking pandemic requirements very seriously in those photos.
The BBC article describes them as being divided up into "pods", so maybe they are trying some kind of cohorting system.
What do you mean by "some kind of cohorting system" and how does it make for a suitable substitution for social distancing and proper sanitation? Ideally you could point out in the photographs how this cohorting system is being deployed.
"Cohorting" or "pods" are a pretty common method that people have used to take precautions against Covid while still having some semblance of human connection. The idea is basically that you have a relatively small group of people with whom you interact, and those people all only interact with people in this small group. In this way, you limit your exposure to outside sources which may have Covid. There are limitations and downsides to this. First off, it requires everyone in the "cohort" to be acting very responsibly.... one person can screw it up for everyone. But even then, limiting exposure is still limiting exposure.
I'm not sure if there is any conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of these or such, but logically it seems like it should help, albeit not be as good as complete social distancing. It is not something new for immigrants or whatever, though.
In the photographs, it looks like the immigrants are separated out into groups, which are divided by the plastic barriers? Those could be intended to be some sort of "cohort" system, especially if they were described as "pods".
No, Kime, the photographs are not evidence of "some sort of cohort system."
What it is is having a number of smaller holding pens, rather than having one enormous communal holding pen. It is the same configuration of these facilities as before the pandemic, they just taped some plastic tarps along the chain link divisions.
It's about as effective as defining jail cells as "pods" in a prison, which is to say not at all effective.
I will reiterate for the umpteenth time that we have no reason to be giving the benefit of the doubt to the government on any of this at all.
You didn't seem to understand the concept that was being presented. "What is a cohorting system?"
I was trying to explain that to you.
I'm sorry, you did explain that and I appreciate it. Thank you. I inadvertently omitted my thanks before because I became focused on responding to the speculation about if such a system had been implemented.
The entire concept of a "cohort system" and "podding" seems like an excuse for organizations to claim they're doing something about COVID when they have no means/desire to implement proper social distancing, mask requirements, etc. I think it is a poor concept with little effectiveness, regardless of where it is ostensibly implemented. Insert this thought before the rest of my earlier response.
Yeah I mean like, "spend more time outside" is one of the best things they could be doing to help with Covid.
It's also a big thing that makes these facilities less inhumane.
And yet... it's apparently just not happening at all
Right, forget not going outside, they don't even get to see the sun.
And - I cannot stress this enough - if you are 18 or older you are not out of those facilities in an average of 130 hours. You are held in these conditions for months, if not years.
Right now our current refugee policy marathon is “imprison them in overcrowded camps”
Until we can be sure their ultimate destination is safe. Due to the sheer number of refugees they are being held longer than anyone (including me) finds acceptable. But it’s still the best possible approach out of the numerous options, since I’ve yet to hear an alternative that isn’t worse.
I consider “just let them go” to be a worse approach.
They’re prisons, Marathon. America’s solution to Latino immigration is to stuff the immigrants in prisons
Refugees/Asylum seekers and generic immigrants aren't interchangeable.
Requirements for Asylee status:
You are present in the United States (by legal or illegally entry)
You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country due to past persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return
The reason for persecution is related to one of five things: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion
Refugee is the same but you are outside the US at the time of application.
These kids are being treated as if they are asylum seekers- I'm not sure how closely the backside process on this is being followed- which is the only reason they are allowed into the US in the first place. And yeah, the asylum process is pretty much "arrive at destination, be placed in custody for period of time, then sent on" what else would it be, the entire asylum system is basically(by design) a circumvention of the immigration process.
The US does have an immigration process-which is all kinds of also screwed up, but that process exists- and step 1 isn't "Surreptitiously cross in to the US" . Every time you see someone complain about Big Tech using H1Bs , that is the immigration process they are complaining about.
But that doesn’t make the conditions in these camps no longer those of prison conditions.
You took my post, seized a legal technicality in the wording I used regarding immigrants (because even if refugees and asylum seekers have a specific legal status, they’re still immigrants) and focused on that instead of the fact that US policy is to house them in prison camps
Is your issue these specific conditions, or just generally that they are going to be put into some sort of congregate living facility they aren't allowed to leave at will-aka a prison?
Because yeah, if the government needs to temporarily house/feed/process thousands of people-especially minors- in facilities they aren't allowed to wander off from for up to a few weeks; somewhere between barracks based camp to prison, is about where I'd expect to be the trade off point between logistical & staffing complexity and the ideal world to be.
Like if they were putting them in actual otherwise unused prisons-not under lockdown in the cells- it'd be an improvement and I'd be generally fine with it. It is contained, it is designed to allow few staff to supervise a large number of people, has dinning and bathing facilities, and can hold a lot of people so staff can work on processing kids efficiently.
Maybe over a few decades, they could build and staff the 500 or so Holiday Inns(there are only 589 Holiday Inns in the US btw) It'd take to house them all or something, but that isn't going to fix things now.
Right now our current refugee policy marathon is “imprison them in overcrowded camps”
Until we can be sure their ultimate destination is safe. Due to the sheer number of refugees they are being held longer than anyone (including me) finds acceptable. But it’s still the best possible approach out of the numerous options, since I’ve yet to hear an alternative that isn’t worse.
I consider “just let them go” to be a worse approach.
They’re prisons, Marathon. America’s solution to Latino immigration is to stuff the immigrants in prisons
Refugees/Asylum seekers and generic immigrants aren't interchangeable.
Requirements for Asylee status:
You are present in the United States (by legal or illegally entry)
You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country due to past persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return
The reason for persecution is related to one of five things: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion
Refugee is the same but you are outside the US at the time of application.
These kids are being treated as if they are asylum seekers- I'm not sure how closely the backside process on this is being followed- which is the only reason they are allowed into the US in the first place. And yeah, the asylum process is pretty much "arrive at destination, be placed in custody for period of time, then sent on" what else would it be, the entire asylum system is basically(by design) a circumvention of the immigration process.
The US does have an immigration process-which is all kinds of also screwed up, but that process exists- and step 1 isn't "Surreptitiously cross in to the US" . Every time you see someone complain about Big Tech using H1Bs , that is the immigration process they are complaining about.
But that doesn’t make the conditions in these camps no longer those of prison conditions.
You took my post, seized a legal technicality in the wording I used regarding immigrants (because even if refugees and asylum seekers have a specific legal status, they’re still immigrants) and focused on that instead of the fact that US policy is to house them in prison camps
Is your issue these specific conditions, or just generally that they are going to be put into some sort of congregate living facility they aren't allowed to leave at will-aka a prison?
Because yeah, if the government needs to temporarily house/feed/process thousands of people-especially minors- in facilities they aren't allowed to wander off from for up to a few weeks; somewhere between barracks based camp to prison, is about where I'd expect to be the trade off point between logistical & staffing complexity and the ideal world to be.
Like if they were putting them in actual otherwise unused prisons-not under lockdown in the cells- it'd be an improvement and I'd be generally fine with it. It is contained, it is designed to allow few staff to supervise a large number of people, has dinning and bathing facilities, and can hold a lot of people so staff can work on processing kids efficiently.
Maybe over a few decades, they could build and staff the 500 or so Holiday Inns(there are only 589 Holiday Inns in the US btw) It'd take to house them all or something, but that isn't going to fix things now.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited March 2021
The US military has the means to rapidly setup camps on the go, with better spacing and living conditions than what the people in the photo above have. We should be able to do better on our own soil for people staying in a location for a longer duration. We can get them proper beds, we just choose not to. Or rather, the government chooses not to.
Edit - Furthermore, in instances of natural disasters, the US is able to mobilize private means to deliver things like water and other supplies to the affected areas. If there's a surge at the border, we can absolutely utilize these logistics. But again, the United States merely chooses not to.
Why is the US government obsessed with giving refugees metal survival blankets? Cloth blankets would be more comfortable, easier to clean and probably cheaper too.
Why is the US government obsessed with giving refugees metal survival blankets? Cloth blankets would be more comfortable, easier to clean and probably cheaper too.
It's an insulation material used as emergency blanketing. It's fine when meeting people at the border but once you have them indoors, the use screams "we have insufficient supplies." Which then begs the question, is there a shortage of blankets in the United States, or is the government somewhere along the chain of command simply choosing not to supply the bankets?
Why is the US government obsessed with giving refugees metal survival blankets? Cloth blankets would be more comfortable, easier to clean and probably cheaper too.
But not as easy to fold into tiny packets and store en mass then either give away or throw away. That's probably why. Which is still a bit silly if you actually think it through; that's fine for any pop up location but anywhere expecting to have x number of people to handle daily should surely have permanent blankets and such.
“We should stop detaining innocent human beings in mass camps that serve to dehumanize them, all as part of a campaign to maintain a restrictive immigration system founded to preserve white majorities and thus white supremacy, and instead reform our immigration system to be open and treat those seeking life in America with dignity and humanity.”
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
Even if one is going to argue that we can't release children unsupervised (as though anyone is proposing that), I have yet to hear an explanation for why we need to be holding all of these people who are 18 and older in these conditions for months/years.
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
Even if one is going to argue that we can't release children unsupervised (as though anyone is proposing that), I have yet to hear an explanation for why we need to be holding all of these people who are 18 and older in these conditions for months/years.
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
I’m going to say... America’s lingering original sin of white supremacy and the continued overwhelming fear of America ceasing to be a majority white nation, which in turn feeds fearmongering law and Order mentalities about Latin Americans
Oh also the profits to be made by the contractors we funnel all these folks into the custody of
Even if one is going to argue that we can't release children unsupervised (as though anyone is proposing that), I have yet to hear an explanation for why we need to be holding all of these people who are 18 and older in these conditions for months/years.
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
The reason is they’re trying to discourage people from coming, one way to do that is to make it clear that you arrive without prior approval what you’ll face is going to unpleasant and unwelcoming - and mostly you will be turned back.
Even if one is going to argue that we can't release children unsupervised (as though anyone is proposing that), I have yet to hear an explanation for why we need to be holding all of these people who are 18 and older in these conditions for months/years.
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
Let's not pretend that releasing the children unsupervised wasn't proposed multiple times in these threads. Because it was.
I don't at all disagree with the rest of what you said, though.
One person, -tal, taking the piss out of the apologists for the system, suggested it. To take the piss out of their defense of these camps. And you’ll note she hasn’t been back in here, presumably out of disgust that we keep dancing this infernal dance of one side defending the camps while the other decries them as indefensibly inhumane
Even if one is going to argue that we can't release children unsupervised (as though anyone is proposing that), I have yet to hear an explanation for why we need to be holding all of these people who are 18 and older in these conditions for months/years.
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
I’m going to say... America’s lingering original sin of white supremacy and the continued overwhelming fear of America ceasing to be a majority white nation, which in turn feeds fearmongering law and Order mentalities about Latin Americans
Oh also the profits to be made by the contractors we funnel all these folks into the custody of
Some migrant families arriving in the US will be housed in hotels under a new program managed by nonprofit organizations, according to two people familiar with the plans, a move away from for-profit detention centers criticized by Democrats and health experts.
Endeavors, a San Antonio-based organization, will oversee what it calls “family reception sites” at hotels in Texas and Arizona, the sources said. The organization, in partnership with other nonprofits, will initially provide up to 1,400 beds in seven different brand-name hotels for families deemed vulnerable.
The opening of the reception centers would mark a significant shift by the administration of Joe Biden. In January, Biden issued an order directing the justice department not to renew its contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities. However, the order did not address immigration jails run by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice).
"Is" would be current-tense. These sites have not opened yet. As the quoted portion of the article says, "The opening of the reception centers would mark a significant shift by the administration of Joe Biden." The sites are planned to open in April, so I guess we have a timeline now to see if something promised by the administration actually comes to pass.
The sites are also "family reception sites," for families, so it doesn't exactly solve the issue of all the adults being held in these facilities, even if all the adults who crossed the border with their children are given rooms at the Ritz-Carlton.
“We should stop detaining innocent human beings in mass camps that serve to dehumanize them, all as part of a campaign to maintain a restrictive immigration system founded to preserve white majorities and thus white supremacy, and instead reform our immigration system to be open and treat those seeking life in America with dignity and humanity.”
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
“...”
“We don’t need to put the cells on lockdown.”
What are the requirements for the facilities?
It needs to have containment. The kids can't be allowed to just sneak/wander away.
It needs to allow for easy supervision at all times, with few staff. These are kids across a wide age range. These ideas of putting them up in hotels or facilities with private rooms is...naïve. Ever part of a traveling sports team? Think of the the shit you got up to in those hotels and the adult:kid ratio on those was much higher(and more invested) than what any facility could provide. This helps keep the kids safe; from themselves, from each other, and to some extent from the adults.
It needs a sufficient number of beds.
It needs dinning, shower, restrooms and other basic facilities of size to handle the numbers.
It should have open common and outdoor areas.
And they need to be large, the fewer facilities the more efficient it is to staff. Especially on the resettlement side. So you aren't trying to split a few hundred(at best) case workers across dozens of facilities.
I mean there are some options for what such a facility looks like, but reductively it is some version of a low/minimum security prison or an internment camp.
“We should stop detaining innocent human beings in mass camps that serve to dehumanize them, all as part of a campaign to maintain a restrictive immigration system founded to preserve white majorities and thus white supremacy, and instead reform our immigration system to be open and treat those seeking life in America with dignity and humanity.”
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
“...”
“We don’t need to put the cells on lockdown.”
What are the requirements for the facilities?
It needs to have containment. The kids can't be allowed to just sneak/wander away.
It needs to allow for easy supervision at all times, with few staff. These are kids across a wide age range. These ideas of putting them up in hotels or facilities with private rooms is...naïve. Ever part of a traveling sports team? Think of the the shit you got up to in those hotels and the adult:kid ratio on those was much higher(and more invested) than what any facility could provide. This helps keep the kids safe; from themselves, from each other, and to some extent from the adults.
It needs a sufficient number of beds.
It needs dinning, shower, restrooms and other basic facilities of size to handle the numbers.
It should have open common and outdoor areas.
And they need to be large, the fewer facilities the more efficient it is to staff. Especially on the resettlement side. So you aren't trying to split a few hundred(at best) case workers across dozens of facilities.
I mean there are some options for what such a facility looks like, but reductively it is some version of a low/minimum security prison or an internment camp.
it’s a prison, Tinwhisker
+4
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
weird. two years ago we were all on the same page about the toddler jails being bad. what changed?
+2
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
it is more objectionable in this thread to use the word "apologist" to refer to someone arguing in favor of toddler jails than it is to argue in favor of toddler jails.
real, real good discourse. healthy and functional.
Okay tinwhiskers, for the sake of argument, children must be kept under lock and key. Throw 'em in the prepubescent panopticon or whatever. Unfortunate but unavoidable. Not the conclusion I would come to, but let's roll with it in order to remove them from the equation for this next part.
“We should stop detaining innocent human beings in mass camps that serve to dehumanize them, all as part of a campaign to maintain a restrictive immigration system founded to preserve white majorities and thus white supremacy, and instead reform our immigration system to be open and treat those seeking life in America with dignity and humanity.”
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
“...”
“We don’t need to put the cells on lockdown.”
What are the requirements for the facilities?
It needs to have containment. The kids can't be allowed to just sneak/wander away.
It needs to allow for easy supervision at all times, with few staff. These are kids across a wide age range. These ideas of putting them up in hotels or facilities with private rooms is...naïve. Ever part of a traveling sports team? Think of the the shit you got up to in those hotels and the adult:kid ratio on those was much higher(and more invested) than what any facility could provide. This helps keep the kids safe; from themselves, from each other, and to some extent from the adults.
It needs a sufficient number of beds.
It needs dinning, shower, restrooms and other basic facilities of size to handle the numbers.
It should have open common and outdoor areas.
And they need to be large, the fewer facilities the more efficient it is to staff. Especially on the resettlement side. So you aren't trying to split a few hundred(at best) case workers across dozens of facilities.
I mean there are some options for what such a facility looks like, but reductively it is some version of a low/minimum security prison or an internment camp.
it’s a prison, Tinwhisker
So I don't know what talismanic power that word has for you, but it doesn't have it for me so maybe explain your position or your alternative.
“We should stop detaining innocent human beings in mass camps that serve to dehumanize them, all as part of a campaign to maintain a restrictive immigration system founded to preserve white majorities and thus white supremacy, and instead reform our immigration system to be open and treat those seeking life in America with dignity and humanity.”
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
“...”
“We don’t need to put the cells on lockdown.”
What are the requirements for the facilities?
It needs to have containment. The kids can't be allowed to just sneak/wander away.
It needs to allow for easy supervision at all times, with few staff. These are kids across a wide age range. These ideas of putting them up in hotels or facilities with private rooms is...naïve. Ever part of a traveling sports team? Think of the the shit you got up to in those hotels and the adult:kid ratio on those was much higher(and more invested) than what any facility could provide. This helps keep the kids safe; from themselves, from each other, and to some extent from the adults.
It needs a sufficient number of beds.
It needs dinning, shower, restrooms and other basic facilities of size to handle the numbers.
It should have open common and outdoor areas.
And they need to be large, the fewer facilities the more efficient it is to staff. Especially on the resettlement side. So you aren't trying to split a few hundred(at best) case workers across dozens of facilities.
I mean there are some options for what such a facility looks like, but reductively it is some version of a low/minimum security prison or an internment camp.
it’s a prison, Tinwhisker
So I don't know what talismanic power that word has for you, but it doesn't have it for me so maybe explain your position or your alternative.
Because this tangent started with you going “hey, literal prisons actually do seem practical ways of housing large numbers of people with minimal supervision”
You shouldn’t need to be told why putting immigrants in literal prisons is bad! You should be capable of that level of insight!
Posts
Refugees/Asylum seekers and generic immigrants aren't interchangeable.
Requirements for Asylee status:
You are present in the United States (by legal or illegally entry)
You are unable or unwilling to return to your home country due to past persecution or have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return
The reason for persecution is related to one of five things: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion
Refugee is the same but you are outside the US at the time of application.
These kids are being treated as if they are asylum seekers- I'm not sure how closely the backside process on this is being followed- which is the only reason they are allowed into the US in the first place. And yeah, the asylum process is pretty much "arrive at destination, be placed in custody for period of time, then sent on" what else would it be, the entire asylum system is basically(by design) a circumvention of the immigration process.
The US does have an immigration process-which is all kinds of also screwed up, but that process exists- and step 1 isn't "Surreptitiously cross in to the US" . Every time you see someone complain about Big Tech using H1Bs , that is the immigration process they are complaining about.
The question Hydropolo was asking was about whether they were doing anything about it. Which they are. Multiple things. Changing rules, opening up new facilities, putting people in hotels, expanding the number of refugee admitted, etc, etc. And they are showing it. It's all in the news and people have even linked much of it in these threads.
Why are you distorting what happened?
That isn’t a “tirade”
In case it’s hard to hear over the crowd:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/11/22/joe-biden-tells-immigration-activist-you-should-vote-trump/4273814002/
All the rest of that is Biden ignoring the rest of Rojas’ point in favor of something that plays better than three million deportations and family separations, as if we’re supposed to believe it’s only “the bad guys” getting deported
Why are you twisting what happened?
Are you even reading the article you cite?
That clip also cuts off the start where exactly what I said happened. The guy stood up to ostensibly translate a question from someone else, but instead used that as an excuse to hijack the floor for his personal Airing of Grievances because Biden wouldn't take an absolutist position.
Why are you ignoring Rojas’ and the woman’s claims about the number of deportations in favor of the claims of the man who told two members of a group targeted by the trump admin to vote for the very man who sought to oppress them?
But that doesn’t make the conditions in these camps no longer those of prison conditions.
You took my post, seized a legal technicality in the wording I used regarding immigrants (because even if refugees and asylum seekers have a specific legal status, they’re still immigrants) and focused on that instead of the fact that US policy is to house them in prison camps
I'm sorry, you did explain that and I appreciate it. Thank you. I inadvertently omitted my thanks before because I became focused on responding to the speculation about if such a system had been implemented.
The entire concept of a "cohort system" and "podding" seems like an excuse for organizations to claim they're doing something about COVID when they have no means/desire to implement proper social distancing, mask requirements, etc. I think it is a poor concept with little effectiveness, regardless of where it is ostensibly implemented. Insert this thought before the rest of my earlier response.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
It's also a big thing that makes these facilities less inhumane.
And yet... it's apparently just not happening at all
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Right, forget not going outside, they don't even get to see the sun.
And - I cannot stress this enough - if you are 18 or older you are not out of those facilities in an average of 130 hours. You are held in these conditions for months, if not years.
I would say it's indefensible, but
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I would argue that the best thing to do re: COVID-19 is to not hold people in camps with cramped quarters. Or really camps at all, for that matter.
Is your issue these specific conditions, or just generally that they are going to be put into some sort of congregate living facility they aren't allowed to leave at will-aka a prison?
Because yeah, if the government needs to temporarily house/feed/process thousands of people-especially minors- in facilities they aren't allowed to wander off from for up to a few weeks; somewhere between barracks based camp to prison, is about where I'd expect to be the trade off point between logistical & staffing complexity and the ideal world to be.
Like if they were putting them in actual otherwise unused prisons-not under lockdown in the cells- it'd be an improvement and I'd be generally fine with it. It is contained, it is designed to allow few staff to supervise a large number of people, has dinning and bathing facilities, and can hold a lot of people so staff can work on processing kids efficiently.
Maybe over a few decades, they could build and staff the 500 or so Holiday Inns(there are only 589 Holiday Inns in the US btw) It'd take to house them all or something, but that isn't going to fix things now.
That’s a prison, Tinwhisker
Source, Rep Henry Cuellar, Democrat from Texas, via Axios
https://www.axios.com/photos-overcrowded-border-patrol-migrant-tents-0525a96b-0dc8-473f-b59c-38b0b3e52760.html
Edit - Furthermore, in instances of natural disasters, the US is able to mobilize private means to deliver things like water and other supplies to the affected areas. If there's a surge at the border, we can absolutely utilize these logistics. But again, the United States merely chooses not to.
But not as easy to fold into tiny packets and store en mass then either give away or throw away. That's probably why. Which is still a bit silly if you actually think it through; that's fine for any pop up location but anywhere expecting to have x number of people to handle daily should surely have permanent blankets and such.
“Have we considered housing them in unused prisons?”
“...”
“They’re designed to keep tabs on a lot of people in a single space.”
“...”
“We don’t need to put the cells on lockdown.”
On average, Ellis Island was able to process 5,000 immigrants entering the country, per day.
The record was over 11,000
https://time.com/4740248/ellis-island-busiest-day/
Why can't we put them up in hotels with a stipend and/or temporary work visa and a court date? Make them check in with a parole officer on the reg or whatever but there are options that are both more humane and (because this is always a concern for some reason) cost less than having to build and maintain and staff all these facilities.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I’m going to say... America’s lingering original sin of white supremacy and the continued overwhelming fear of America ceasing to be a majority white nation, which in turn feeds fearmongering law and Order mentalities about Latin Americans
Oh also the profits to be made by the contractors we funnel all these folks into the custody of
The reason is they’re trying to discourage people from coming, one way to do that is to make it clear that you arrive without prior approval what you’ll face is going to unpleasant and unwelcoming - and mostly you will be turned back.
Let's not pretend that releasing the children unsupervised wasn't proposed multiple times in these threads. Because it was.
I don't at all disagree with the rest of what you said, though.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
No one has proposed it in seriousness.
Biden's administration is doing this.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/21/us-migrant-families-hotels-biden
The sites are also "family reception sites," for families, so it doesn't exactly solve the issue of all the adults being held in these facilities, even if all the adults who crossed the border with their children are given rooms at the Ritz-Carlton.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
How should one refer to those who insist that these facilities are necessary?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
What are the requirements for the facilities?
It needs to have containment. The kids can't be allowed to just sneak/wander away.
It needs to allow for easy supervision at all times, with few staff. These are kids across a wide age range. These ideas of putting them up in hotels or facilities with private rooms is...naïve. Ever part of a traveling sports team? Think of the the shit you got up to in those hotels and the adult:kid ratio on those was much higher(and more invested) than what any facility could provide. This helps keep the kids safe; from themselves, from each other, and to some extent from the adults.
It needs a sufficient number of beds.
It needs dinning, shower, restrooms and other basic facilities of size to handle the numbers.
It should have open common and outdoor areas.
And they need to be large, the fewer facilities the more efficient it is to staff. Especially on the resettlement side. So you aren't trying to split a few hundred(at best) case workers across dozens of facilities.
I mean there are some options for what such a facility looks like, but reductively it is some version of a low/minimum security prison or an internment camp.
it’s a prison, Tinwhisker
real, real good discourse. healthy and functional.
Explain why the adults need to be imprisoned.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
So I don't know what talismanic power that word has for you, but it doesn't have it for me so maybe explain your position or your alternative.
Because this tangent started with you going “hey, literal prisons actually do seem practical ways of housing large numbers of people with minimal supervision”
You shouldn’t need to be told why putting immigrants in literal prisons is bad! You should be capable of that level of insight!