this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
300 points (93.6% liked)

politics

18828 readers
4714 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy said Friday he would deport the children of undocumented immigrants with their families, despite them already being U.S. citizens.

“There are legally contested questions under the 14th Amendment of whether the child of an illegal immigrant is indeed a child who enjoys birthright citizenship or not,” Ramaswamy said after a town hall in Iowa.

Ramaswamy is not the only GOP candidate to question U.S. citizenship rules. Former President Trump announced in late May that on his first day back in office, he would seek to end birthright citizenship by way of an executive order.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Much, MUCH different in the US.

There were just shy of 800,000 births by undocumented immigrants between 2010 and 2016, or over 110,000 births per year. So several orders of magnitude above Canada.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Technically only a single order of magnitude in terms of total births (3% vs 0.1%). Up to Americans to determine whether 3% of all births is worth worrying about though.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s not worrying, only racists are upset about this. A growing, working, tax-paying population is only good for a nation. Almost every single one of those 110k a year will spend 5-7 decades contributing to the American economy and workforce, that’s a plus in my book regardless of how they got here.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's interesting is back in the day Republicans supported this. Milton Friedman, Reagan's infamous economic advisor, advocated for open borders. It's essentially what we had in the 1800s. Chicago was 80% immigrant or child of immigrant in 1880s.

Hell, Reagan even gave amnesty to millions of illegals.

I think we should have more or less open borders. Block criminals and extremists.. but everyone else let them in. Give them a trial period of like 5 to 10 years. If they pay taxes during that time period and don't commit serious crimes.. let them join the country.

We're gonna need the population to compete with China. There's plenty of space in this country for many more people. And more people = more demand for goods and services = more jobs = more opportunities = more GDP

I really don't see many good reasons why not. Sure, the price of labor will go down but illegals are already doing much of the menial labor already anyways.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, the price of labor will go down

That's a pretty big problem to gloss over when the country is still fighting for a living wage for the lowest earners.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When would be a good time, then? 25 years from now?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Like, maybe when we have a thriving working class?