Dangerous to whom?

FBI director warns of ‘very dangerous threats’ at border, smuggling network with 'ISIS ties'

On 2/29/2024 at 4:00 PM, Phillyterp85 said:

Sure, and there are externalities to consider as well when looking at policies that would increase the cost of a foreign good.  I just don't know that adding tariffs to the imported good is the way to go about bolstering American manufacturing.  For starters, typically when Country A imposes a tariff on a good imported from Country B, Country B typically responds by imposing their own tariffs on goods imported from Country A.  So while Country A may have helped out one domestic company or industry, another domestic company or industry gets harmed by the tariffs that Country B just imposed.   Secondly, while a tariff on a good can help the domestic companies that produce said good, they end up harming the domestic companies that use the imported good as an input in their final product.   They have to raise the price of their product as their costs of goods has now just increased, which likely means consumers buy less of them, which likely means they don't need as large of a workforce as their sales are down and people have to be let go. 

Not to mention that there's ways for foreign companies to get around those tariffs by shipping the goods to an intermediate country and then having shipper in the intermediate country ship the product to the destination country.  

Oh, sure, if you want to bring reality into this then it just isn't a fair fight.

Solid point.

Yeah but has he considered the food? 

Just now, Kz! said:

Yeah but has he considered the food? 

Average IQ of 67?  They'll fit right in with the liberals who are begging for them to come in  

  Dude's so F'ing stupid he just admits they don't want to fix the border.  At least lie about your evil bull sheet, dumb***.

12 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

  Dude's so F'ing stupid he just admits they don't want to fix the border.  At least lie about your evil bull sheet, dumb***.

Lol the bill would fix the border remains one of the most retarded talking points I've ever heard the NPCs repeat. 

Just now, Kz! said:

Lol the bill would fix the border remains one of the most retarded talking points I've ever heard the NPCs repeat. 

Retarded - check

NPC - check

Absolutely no counterargument or point of substance - check

Yep, it's a Kz post

Just now, VanHammersly said:

Retarded - check

NPC - check

Absolutely no counterargument or point of substance - check

Yep, it's a Kz post

We've discussed why the bill was a trainwreck ad nauseam in here. You're too stupid to get it.  

2 minutes ago, Kz! said:

We've discussed why the bill was a trainwreck ad nauseam in here. You're too stupid to get it.  

  Right.

Actually, you've said next to nothing about the specifics of the bill outside of your usual "everything I don't like is retarded" schtick.  And of course, that it really upsets you that there's funding in there that might hurt the feelings of a fascist dictator. 

Just now, VanHammersly said:

  Right.

Actually, you've said next to nothing about the specifics of the bill outside of your usual "everything I don't like is retarded" schtick.  And of course, that it really upsets you that there's funding in there that might hurt the feelings of a fascist dictator. 

Incorrect. There's been plenty of discussion. You're just an idiot. The bill gave 80 billion to foreign wars and a fraction of that to the actual border. The fraction of the money that actually goes to the border is mainly devoted to processing "asylum seekers" quicker so that they can be legalized. Republicans don't want that, Republican voters sure as hell don't want that, hell, even most democrat voters don't want that.  

Just now, Kz! said:

Incorrect. There's been plenty of discussion. You're just an idiot. The bill gave 80 billion to foreign wars and a fraction of that to the actual border. The fraction of the money that actually goes to the border is mainly devoted to processing "asylum seekers" quicker so that they can be legalized. Republicans don't want that, Republican voters sure as hell don't want that, hell, even most democrat voters don't want that.  

  So butthurt that a portion of it goes to stop a fascist dictator from marching across Europe.

And, no, it actually ensures that people that are requesting asylum are processed quick to get them OUT of the country and not sitting around here for years.  The system now is completely untenable and that's exactly what losers like you want.  On top of that it actually funds border security which is something that, surprise, border agents want.  It's easily the toughest border bill we've ever had and one that you idiots will never get under a Republican president.

7 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

  Right.

Actually, you've said next to nothing about the specifics of the bill outside of your usual "everything I don't like is retarded" schtick.  And of course, that it really upsets you that there's funding in there that might hurt the feelings of a fascist dictator. 

The bill didn’t even allow the "emergency measures” to be enacted until daily "encounters” at the border reach an average of 4,000.

That means we could have 1,459,635 "encounters” in a year and the bill’s emergency measures wouldn’t even come into effect.

Note — "encounters” is not the same as illegals actually entering the country. Illegals entering the country would, of course, be much higher than the number of encounters.

So this bill would literally allow millions of illegals to come into this country without even coming into effect.

It’s a sh** bill that solves nothing but manages to spend lots of money on Ukraine. In other words, it’s a joke of a bill.

4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

 It's easily the toughest border bill we've ever had and one that you idiots will never get under a Republican president.

This is why it's just quicker to call you retarded and move on. This is what a negative IQ looks like.  

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

The bill didn’t even allow the "emergency measures” to be enacted until daily "encounters” at the border reach an average of 4,000.

That means we could have 1,459,635 "encounters” in a year and the bill’s emergency measures wouldn’t even come into effect.

Note — "encounters” is not the same as illegals actually entering the country. Illegals entering the country would, of course, be much higher than the number of encounters.

So this bill would literally allow millions of illegals to come into this country without even coming into effect.

It’s a sh** bill that solves nothing but manages to spend lots of money on Ukraine. In other words, it’s a joke of a bill.

Yeah, but have you considered that it's "easily the toughest border bill we've ever had?"  

I like the part of the bill where illegal crossers would be given work visas so they can legally work while waiting for their asylum claims to be heard. That will definitely help the situation and not clearly make it worse!   

9 minutes ago, TEW said:

It’s a sh** bill that solves nothing but manages to spend lots of money on Ukraine.

Ah, so that's why you hate it. Makes sense now.

9 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

 It's easily the toughest border bill we've ever had and one that you idiots will never get under a Republican president.

But remember, both sides are equally responsible!

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

I like the part of the bill where illegal crossers would be given work visas so they can legally work while waiting for their asylum claims to be heard. That will definitely help the situation and not clearly make it worse!   

They just want to come here to farm - and crush a few skulls along the way.  NBD! 

2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Ah, so that's why you hate it. Makes sense now.

I hate it because it doesn’t solve anything for our border.

If all the Democrats wanted in return for a bill which was actually effective was Ukraine funding, sure, easy trade is enthusiastically support.

Instead the bill is really an Ukraine funding bill pretending to be a border security bill. It’s completely bad faith and ineffective. It doesn’t even force anything to be done until an average of 5,000 daily encounters. Thats over 1,800,000 encounters before the law even forces anything to be done.

5 minutes ago, TEW said:

The bill didn’t even allow the "emergency measures” to be enacted until daily "encounters” at the border reach an average of 4,000.

That means we could have 1,459,635 "encounters” in a year and the bill’s emergency measures wouldn’t even come into effect.

Note — "encounters” is not the same as illegals actually entering the country. Illegals entering the country would, of course, be much higher than the number of encounters.

So this bill would literally allow millions of illegals to come into this country without even coming into effect.

It’s a sh** bill that solves nothing but manages to spend lots of money on Ukraine. In other words, it’s a joke of a bill.

100% false.  The reforms to asylum, getting people out faster, funding of border agents, etc, happen regardless of the emergency measures.

And in December there were over 8K encounters a day, so we'd hit the 4K threshold likely on day 1.

I realize you have to pretend like it sucks but it was a gift to the hardline immigration right (and largely written by them) and Trump squashed it to try and desperately keep himself out of prison.  You freaks should hate the dude for it but you don't because you're willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

100% false.  The reforms to asylum, getting people out faster, funding of border agents, etc, happen regardless of the emergency measures.

And in December there were over 8K encounters a day, so we'd hit the 4K threshold likely on day 1.

I realize you have to pretend like it sucks but it was a gift to the hardline immigration right (and largely written by them) and Trump squashed it to try and desperately keep himself out of prison.  You freaks should hate the dude for it but you don't because you're willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.

They are blinded by bigotry, plain and simple. 

But have they considered that Republicans are equally at fault for the border crisis?

4 minutes ago, TEW said:

But remember, both sides are equally responsible!

It's just politics.  You get the things you want through based on leverage.  Reps have leverage on this right now but they won't have any the next time there's a Republican president.  And based on the type of candidates you guys have been putting up lately, that president will undoubtable be an incompetent disaster that won't know how to reach across the aisle.  

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

100% false.  The reforms to asylum, getting people out faster, funding of border agents, etc, happen regardless of the emergency measures.

And in December there were over 8K encounters a day, so we'd hit the 4K threshold likely on day 1.

I realize you have to pretend like it sucks but it was a gift to the hardline immigration right (and largely written by them) and Trump squashed it to try and desperately keep himself out of prison.  You freaks should hate the dude for it but you don't because you're willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.

Van's entire argument that the processing of asylum claims would result in people being expelled faster when that obviously isn't the case. It'd be used to expedite claims getting granted and everyone knows it.