> I'm not concerned about the crime You may not be concerned about the crime, but many voters are. The author of the article you linked to also exhorts the Somali immigrant community to not engage in crime. > because that seems like a somewhat higher tendency until the 2nd and 3rd generation is able to make it into established society. History and data from various European nations suggest that some immigrant groups…
Some are unable, other groups are successfully integrating. Like Ukrainian refugees into neighboring European countries, especially Poland.
Ukrainians integrating into Polish culture is similar to the East and West German unification post wall, only more complicated by a few extra generations...
International law? That said, i don't think sanctions violate intl law. You are under no obligation to trade with people you dont like. A blockade probably would be (generally blockades are an act of war which is only allowed in defense or if un security council approves) however america isnt blockading it. Things can morally wrong without being illegal.
international law in itself means almost nothing, it's just a convenient excuse for the more powerful to threaten the less powerful
I support immigration and oppose the Republican anti-immigrant platform because it seems to me there is significant brain drain from many countries to the U.S. and that contributes to our success. For example, in this article is about white collar crime, it points out that many Somali-Americans were professionals back in Somalia. I'm not concerned about the crime because that seems like a somewhat higher tendency unt…
I really want people to understand that a sterile term like "economic sanctions" really means "starving them to death". It's not just food. It's the infrastructure necessary to grow food and to have clean drinking water. It's basic medicines, life-saving stuff. What we, as a country, have done and continue to do to Cuba is absolutely unconscionable. It affects us too. Over the last 60+ years there have hundreds of th…
> There is absolutely no justification for continuing 60+ years of sanctions just because our puppet was deposed. Two weeks ago Russia landed an armada there in a show of force right off the US coast. It’s not an easy black and white situation where you can just say “USA bad.”
It is, though. If US did not sanction Cuba, there very much would be no Russian visit. When US decides you are an enemy, you don't get to pick your friends.
if you don’t think lots of immigrants (and likely illegal immigrants) work as farm hands and at meat processor plants, you have clearly not spent much time in those industries https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2020-05-26/meatpacking-in... https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/28/business/economy/immigrat...
1.2% of the US population works on a farm. I imagine an order of magnitude less work at meat-packing plants.
What is and isn't legal immigration is always a moving target. A majority of US history included open borders where it was legal for anyone to get off a boat, provide some basic info, and go on to try and make their way here. The idea of closed borders, immigration caps, etc is relatively modern and driven more by the fact that social entitlement programs cost money than a fear of dangerous people coming here.
The original immigration laws were explicitly racist. They were long before the entitlement programs existed.
I don't know enough about the specific racial factors in our older immigration laws, I'll take your word for it, but there isn't anything linking the two. We could have open borders without entitlement programs or racist immigration laws.
> It is not desirable to have separate ethnic groups who "share the same language, culture and faith" distinct from the mainstream. Why not? Mainstreams are temporary. The Romans shifted from pagans to christians in just a decade (officially speaking). The German speaking region of Belgium was annexed in the 1900s (now the country has 3 different official languages). The whole latin america started speaking Spanish l…
Not every culture can integrate, not every culture is a step "forward". Also, your examples are quite weak 1. Paganism was not doing too well by the time Christianity became official. 2. Belgium is a joke country (sorry!) that still has a divided population based on the language they speak. Hardly a success case. 3. Americans speaking Spanish also resulted in losing native languages and cultures. It might be okay to…
I don’t know man. This idea of certain cultures being so distant that they cannot be integrated with others sounds a bit alien to me. If anything, we (all the different cultures in this planet) are the result of a vast amount of mixing over the centuries. We probably don’t notice it anymore (proof that the mix has worked wonders) and we think we all are so good because “our” culture, “our” values. I mean, if something so profound such as religion was literally imported to America, anything is possible. Sometimes I wish we were invaded by aliens 100% different from us in every aspect, so that we realised once and for all that we all humans just are and feel the same.
What is and isn't legal immigration is always a moving target. A majority of US history included open borders where it was legal for anyone to get off a boat, provide some basic info, and go on to try and make their way here. The idea of closed borders, immigration caps, etc is relatively modern and driven more by the fact that social entitlement programs cost money than a fear of dangerous people coming here.
Modern civilization has entitlements, if we get rid of entitlements, sure we can have open borders. We just can’t do both or the system collapses.
Agreed. That's where the question is really interesting, and important, though. If we can only have one or the other, and if a majority of Americans view our southern border as an untenable situation, can we maintain our entitlement programs?
Entitlement programs only work if we can secure our borders. If we can't secure our borders it seems to be clear that we can't have the entitlement programs.
Lowering wages and salaries for skilled workers has a big disinflationary effect and slashes inequality. (The bulk of inequality is indeed due to skill-biased divergence in labor income, not passive or unearned income from asset ownership.)
Cubans leaving Cuba today are taking advantage of immigration openness that anti-Cuba policies pushed for. Why would they not take advantage of that? They are literally the only refugees who can come to America and get automatic asylum. Why does that exist? Political power from Florida stemming from Batista supporters. I don’t have any interest in this argument, but the situation between America and Cuba is fairly ar…
> Political power from Florida stemming from Batista supporters. Last I heard Batista's daughter is homeless, support doesn't look so great lol: https://www.local10.com/news/2017/06/21/ex-cuban-leader-fulg...
It’s not unusual for right wingers to not be sentimental.