700 million, “tens of thousands of migrants”, that’s about ten to seventy thousand per head. And that’s just for transporting them!

  • 5PACEBAR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    I was wondering why the comments in this thread suck so much… then I looked at the community’s name.

    • eldoom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah I was really quite confused. Went from glorious communism to …this… Thanks for pointing that out.

      • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        Nothing is glorious about communism. Communism has killed more people than the Nazis. Screw that

          • OnlyTakesLs
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            So better to be genocidal than to disagree with you?

          • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            11 months ago

            Not at all. Conservatism is why our nation has last this long. It’s provides stability and reason. Communism just provides death and destruction. If you think communism is nifty, move to Cuba.

  • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    And he’ll lose wasting everyone’s money for a marginal bump. Meanwhile jackass over in Texas plays politics with immigrants lives.

    • soviettaters@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Texas isn’t able to deal with the massive amounts of migrants. Other states have to help out or we simply need to start turning people away.

    • OnlyTakesLs
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      More like NYC and other sanctuary cities are. Tearing down red states who have to deal with illegals.

  • Marcbmann@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    You guys remember learning about the dust bowl in school? A pivotal moment was when the dust finally got bad enough that it blew all the way into Washington DC. This was followed by government intervention and real change.

    Uncontrolled illegal immigration is an issue. Biden is doing nothing about it. And this is a problem for southern states. I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a fraction of these immigrants and dropping them on the doorstep of the states that say there is no immigration issue.

    The reality is, if this truly is not an issue, they should encourage it! Give us your hungry, your sick, and your poor, right?

    And if having a literal fraction of these immigrants dropped in your city is an issue, could you imagine being a border state and having these people flooding in? Maybe, just maybe, we should do something about it.

    Pursuing a lawsuit against the bus companies tells me they think this is an issue. Maybe their energy is better invested in pressing Biden to step in and address the immigration issue. Instead, they just want this to be an unaddressed problem for the southern states and not the entire country. The equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and closing your eyes.

    Imagine if Washington DC had criticized the mid west for allowing their dust to blow east, and tried to build fans that blow the wind back west. Would be pretty pathetic, right?

    • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      So Texas is doing something about it? Isn’t it the state’s problem? I mean, states rule their land, right? Or, is it only when it’s convenient? Perhaps Texas, who has them in hand, should send them BACK, instead of forward.

      • Marcbmann@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Okay, so you believe States should be able to dictate border policy and supersede the Federal government?

        • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Did the federal government ask them to be sent to New York? Is there not an existing policy on how to handle illegal immigrants?

          • Marcbmann@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Based on recent events, it appears the way we deal with them is by letting them into the country to do whatever.

            These states are finding immigrants, and using deceitful tactics to trick them into getting onto busses so they can send them elsewhere.

            A normal developed country would apprehend individuals who have illegally crossed the border and send them back. But Bidens administration is not interested in doing that.

            I’m not anti-immigration at all. I think we should be fixing our immigration system so that people can legally enter our country with a path to citizenship. What were are doing right now is allowing people into the country who cannot legally work. This means they are taking low paying jobs and living in poverty conditions. Most are not paying taxes. In some ways we have set them up for failure.

      • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Taxes can’t ship them back. That is against federal law. That’s why they are shipping them forward

    • Throwaway@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      11 months ago

      We did. Abbott is doing well in this regard. First with the barbed wire along the border, handling border patrol ourselves, and with the calling out sanctuary cities with their bullshit.

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Lmao, rich coming from c/conservative.

        Just ban me like the r/ version does when there is any pushback/you get made to look like idiots.

        • Throwaway@lemm.eeOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think I know why you were banned. Rule 1, Rule 3, last warning. Next will be a ban.

          • YeetPics@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t rule 1 or 3 of anything. Would you mind using complete sentences please? I don’t know what you mean.

            • Throwaway@lemm.eeOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              11 months ago

              Rule 1 is our general civility/follow instances rules rule. Rule 3 is our bad faith rule. What I’m saying that you aren’t following those rules, and I’m issuing your last warning. The next time will be a ban.

              • YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                I love the vague coverage of “in good faith”. It totally won’t become a cudgel for you when you realize your community can’t handle outside opinions. Totally won’t, nope.

                I may even argue that that rule was made in bad faith.

  • Throwaway@lemm.eeOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    54
    ·
    11 months ago

    So much spice in this article. I honestly wonder if he’s going to swallow his pride and say that NYC is no longer a Sanctuary City (IMO that would be the honorable thing to do), or keep up this charade.

    • HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      A sanctuary city just means the city is going to let the federal government handle the federal issue. You aren’t a citizen of a state. You are a citizen of the country. So it’s a federal issue.

      And it actually has some benefits. Like imagine witnessing a murder and not being able to say anything. They find the body, it’s a mystery, no one knows who did it. You could bring closure to the family… but you can’t say anything. Because you would also get punished.

      In a sanctuary city, they can come forward with information without worry about being deported.

      Maybe do some research on things instead of just using them as buzzwords.

      • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Shush, we can’t have truth around here. It ruffles too many feathers.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      The article is behind a paywall, but I fail to see how being a sanctuary city justifies trafficking people and dumping them in another state. Do you not understand what a sanctuary city is? Or do you not understand that lying to people so they will get on a bus out of state is a crime?

      • HitlerCunnyRape@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        11 months ago

        but I fail to see how being a sanctuary city justifies trafficking people and dumping them in another state

        You fail to see how actively supporting illegal immigration is justification for dumping the problem on them?

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Got it, you don’t know what a sanctuary city is, and you think that people existing in your state is a problem you can solve with kidnapping.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              These people? Not yet, this just happened.

              But these people were deceived. Kidnapping by deception is the legal equivalent of using force.

              https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/migrants-landed-marthas-vineyard-tricked-misleading-brochure-lawyers-s-rcna48390

              Some people have reported being intimidated, some have said that they were told there would be services, some report being told that it was going to expedite their asylum process.

              None of these people have committed a crime. Existence is not illegal. It is not a crime to cross the border. It is not a crime to seek asylum. There’s a process, and all of these people are going through it. They have case numbers and wristbands with their info on it. Calling them “illegals” is both dishonest and reveals your own prejudice. If they had been denied asylum in court, then they would be deported.

              • OnlyTakesLs
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                11 months ago

                Illegally immigrating is illegal. It is a crime to cross the border with authorization. Claiming asylum when you get caught does not absolve you of that.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Personally most of the asylum claims are bs from the start. They should be sent to Mexico and they can file there. Immigrants have learned they can claim it and o get in.

              • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                11 months ago

                Accusations are not evidence.

                Entering a country illegally is … Illegal.

                Crossing the border illegally is … Illegal.

                • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  There’s no such thing as entering the country illegally or crossing the border illegally. These are inventions of xenophobic politicians trying to make you fear outsiders. It is illegal to circumvent the immigration process, or to fail to follow the application process for asylum. But you can cross the border and then apply for immigration or asylum without committing a crime.

                • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Did you not even bother to read your own link?

                  improper entry into the United States by an alien

                  Proper entry includes crossing the border and asking for asylum. There is no crime committed until and unless the person attempts to circumvent the immigration or asylum process. The act of crossing the border by itself is not enough.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      11 months ago

      God no. Though to be fair; the term doesn’t mean much. It means they won’t actively go after illegal immigrants but Biden isn’t going after them either. In effect all cities are sanctuary cities under Biden

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        And gas prices were so much lower under clinton, that’s the other point we use to determine who the worst president is right? Clearly clinton was better than trump too, gas was so cheap back then.

          • YeetPics@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            If you didn’t like that just wait until I tell you about gas prices under JFK 🫣

              • YeetPics@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                Nah, just refuting the braindead take I hear from your type of folk everyday before you get the chance to make it.

                It’s called preparation.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s not often I can say that’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard. Congrats