OK let’s talk about the border

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

11 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Wrong.  Prop 187 & Pete Wilson that turned California blue (even though it was already mostly blue to begin with).  In 1988, Bush won CA but lost in '92.  It was because in '91, Wilson started pushing the "Save our State" agenda.  It was his hardcore, anti-immigrant policy that turned CA blue.  If there's no "anti-immigrant" policy, there's no racism to push, and no tie to the Democrat party... who thrives on victimhood.

Bruh

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

3 hours ago, Engorgeous George said:

I don't accept your premise.  True, perhaps, that you can't.  True that it runs contrary to the politically correct, woke orthodoxy, but ultimately not remotely true.  We can.  Other countries can and do and so can we.  It would take an act of will, national will, but that will may yet be found when conditions change, as they invariably do.

It would take an act of will all right. A triumph of the will. 

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

14 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It would take an act of will all right. A triumph of the will. 

I am not sure I appreciate the comparison to the 1935 proganda piece.  Some might consider this the equivilent of implying I am a Nazi.  Still, you do you.  I do seem to recall you inviting discussion on this matter.  Your posting seems to foreclose further discussion.  No worries.  I can simply put you on ignore and discuss matters with others.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

2 hours ago, Engorgeous George said:

I am not sure I appreciate the comparison to the 1935 proganda piece.  Some might consider this the equivilent of implying I am a Nazi.  Still, you do you.  I do seem to recall you inviting discussion on this matter.  Your posting seems to foreclose further discussion.  No worries.  I can simply put you on ignore and discuss matters with others.

I think the fact that he feels that Sanctuary cities and states aren't a problem, confirms your assertion.

[Fnord 1,141]

6 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I think the fact that he feels that Sanctuary cities and states aren't a problem, confirms your assertion.

Could you outline what you feel the problem with sanctuary cities is? 

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

11 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Could you outline what you feel the problem with sanctuary cities is? 

B.O.F.A 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

28 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Could you outline what you feel the problem with sanctuary cities is? 

Sanctuary cities and states prevent the federal government from creating a closed border.  It openly invites people to come into the country illegally and stay.  On top of that, sanctuary cities and states give illegal immigrants access to government assistance (food, money, & housing), along with free healthcare and free education.  Things that AMERICAN'S need and could use, but now can't, because people who aren't American's are getting them.  If a sanctuary city or state wishes to keep up those resources for American's, they'll have to raise taxes.  So now, more taxes are being spend on people who don't belong here and aren't contributing to the pot.  Personally, I can't for the life of me think of ONE benefit that sanctuary cities and states provide to the country.  Now, if you want an "Open Border" policy, yeah, you'd think there's nothing wrong with sanctuary cities or states... but at that point, they wouldn't be needed, because the border is open.  They can come here and stay without recourse.

I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem.

[TimHauck 1,801]

57 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Sanctuary cities and states prevent the federal government from creating a closed border.  It openly invites people to come into the country illegally and stay.  On top of that, sanctuary cities and states give illegal immigrants access to government assistance (food, money, & housing), along with free healthcare and free education.  Things that AMERICAN'S need and could use, but now can't, because people who aren't American's are getting them.  If a sanctuary city or state wishes to keep up those resources for American's, they'll have to raise taxes.  So now, more taxes are being spend on people who don't belong here and aren't contributing to the pot.  Personally, I can't for the life of me think of ONE benefit that sanctuary cities and states provide to the country.  Now, if you want an "Open Border" policy, yeah, you'd think there's nothing wrong with sanctuary cities or states... but at that point, they wouldn't be needed, because the border is open.  They can come here and stay without recourse.

I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem.

So you’re in favor of poor Americans getting free food, housing and healthcare?

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

3 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So you’re in favor of poor Americans getting free food, housing and healthcare?

As long as they were born here, yes.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

3 hours ago, Engorgeous George said:

I am not sure I appreciate the comparison to the 1935 proganda piece.  Some might consider this the equivilent of implying I am a Nazi.  Still, you do you.  I do seem to recall you inviting discussion on this matter.  Your posting seems to foreclose further discussion.  No worries.  I can simply put you on ignore and discuss matters with others.

You stated, in response to my assertion that we are never going to deport these people, that we can if we have the will to do it. I never suggested that you are a Nazi, but I’m telling you right now that only a Nazi type of state can carry out mass deportations. Our society is not capable of it. We might have been decades ago, but not now. I believe that’s a good thing. 

[TimHauck 1,801]

Just now, iam90sbaby said:

As long as they were born here, yes.

Cool, I’ll remember that the next time someone criticizes people “leeching off the government,” “looking for handouts,” “sucking the government’s teet,” etc

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Cool, I’ll remember that the next time someone criticizes people “leeching off the government,” “looking for handouts,” “sucking the government’s teet,” etc

I probably support more socialist policies than most here. You all are just so focked up on immigration and other social issues I can't vote for a D. I support universal healthcare, education and UBI. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Sanctuary cities and states prevent the federal government from creating a closed border.  It openly invites people to come into the country illegally and stay.  On top of that, sanctuary cities and states give illegal immigrants access to government assistance (food, money, & housing), along with free healthcare and free education.  Things that AMERICAN'S need and could use, but now can't, because people who aren't American's are getting them.  If a sanctuary city or state wishes to keep up those resources for American's, they'll have to raise taxes.  So now, more taxes are being spend on people who don't belong here and aren't contributing to the pot.  Personally, I can't for the life of me think of ONE benefit that sanctuary cities and states provide to the country.  Now, if you want an "Open Border" policy, yeah, you'd think there's nothing wrong with sanctuary cities or states... but at that point, they wouldn't be needed, because the border is open.  They can come here and stay without recourse.

I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem.

If they are a problem then getting rid of them is a far worse problem. What drives me nuts in these discussions is that you and others seem to believe that if we stop giving these folks food, shelter, education, etc. they will leave. They won’t leave. Instead they will become a bigger problem for us by increasing poverty and homelessness. Their children, if unable to attend school, will fester in gangs and commit crimes. You’re making it worse. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, iam90sbaby said:

I probably support more socialist policies than most here. You all are just so focked up on immigration and other social issues I can't vote for a D. I support universal healthcare, education and UBI. 

Being born here makes one a citizen and gives you the right to vote. Both of those are very big deals. But I don’t see why it should give one additional rights that those living here are not afforded. 

Also- many of the folks you want to deny privileges are paying for them already, specifically through sales taxes. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

11 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So you’re in favor of poor Americans getting free food, housing and healthcare?

If they need it, sure.  I've never been against it.  Who is?  Your make believe version of the Republican party?

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, TBayXXXVII said:

If they need it, sure.  I've never been against it.  Who is?  Your make believe version of the Republican party?

You raise a fair point here. Liberals have a skewed view of conservatives IMO. Conservatives in general are just as eager to help poor people as liberals. They simply don’t believe the state is always the most efficient way to get it done. 

[TimHauck 1,801]

4 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

If they need it, sure.  I've never been against it.  Who is?  Your make believe version of the Republican party?

Wasn’t the election thread filled with claims that “people only vote for Dems because they want handouts”?

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

If they are a problem then getting rid of them is a far worse problem. What drives me nuts in these discussions is that you and others seem to believe that if we stop giving these folks food, shelter, education, etc. they will leave. They won’t leave. Instead they will become a bigger problem for us by increasing poverty and homelessness. Their children, if unable to attend school, will fester in gangs and commit crimes. You’re making it worse. 

What a terrible argument that is.  No, we're not saying they'll leave, we're saying the won't come in the first place.  My guess is that you're misunderstanding people.  No one expects the illegal immigrants to up and leave if they're already here.

I thought you said you'd like to have a discussion.  Apparently not, because you didn't even read my post in dealing with the situation.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Wasn’t the election thread filled with claims that “people only vote for Dems because they want handouts”?

Wow.  Go away.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You raise a fair point here. Liberals have a skewed view of conservatives IMO. Conservatives in general are just as eager to help poor people as liberals. They simply don’t believe the state is always the most efficient way to get it done. 

The government always handles things poorly, but it may be the only way... that said, most conservatives don't want people to have the ability to abuse the system.  It hurts people more than it helps them.  That's another discussion for another thread though.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

What a terrible argument that is.  No, we're not saying they'll leave, we're saying the won't come in the first place.  My guess is that you're misunderstanding people.  No one expects the illegal immigrants to up and leave if they're already here.

I thought you said you'd like to have a discussion.  Apparently not, because you didn't even read my post in dealing with the situation.

Part of my initial question is: there are 10-15 million undocumented people here. What are we to do with them? Maybe denying them services will keep others from coming (I doubt it) but it will also create a huge crisis for us. So it’s not worth it, IMO, either way. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Part of my initial question is: there are 10-15 million undocumented people here. What are we to do with them? Maybe denying them services will keep others from coming (I doubt it) but it will also create a huge crisis for us. So it’s not worth it, IMO, either way. 

I covered this...

[TimHauck 1,801]

On 9/24/2021 at 3:48 PM, TBayXXXVII said:

There are plenty of quality black folks.  The bad ones will stay with the liberals to get their handouts, but the smart ones will side with the conservatives.  If we could segregate based on politics, like most country divisions are based on, the quality of life for black people on the conservative side would be far better off and we'll all blend in.  In time, the ones who stayed with the liberals... the criminal element, they'll change their ways and leave the left for a better place.

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

9 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

 

There are people who need it and people who abuse it.  The people who abuse it are the ones I'm talking about in that quote.  I'm sorry you're not smart enough to figure that out on your own and you have to be held by the hand.  I'm also talking about a scenario where the country were split by political ideology.  The people who want free stuff would go with the Democrats, until reality slaps them in the face.

[BuckSwope 654]

43 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You raise a fair point here. Liberals have a skewed view of conservatives IMO. Conservatives in general are just as eager to help poor people as liberals. They simply don’t believe the state is always the most efficient way to get it done. 

They just want to do it with a Bible and message attached to it.   

 

 

(I am mostly joking!! ) 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

They have to go back.  Start with the criminals. They can’t think if they just get here they are in. It will never stop if you don’t. Democrats can’t think they can always do this either. No one is above the law, right? 

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

11 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

They have to go back.  Start with the criminals. They can’t think if they just get here they are in. It will never stop if you don’t. Democrats can’t think they can always do this either. No one is above the law, right? 

Except the wealthy and politically connected.  Sadly that does not include me.

[Casual Observer 597]

On 12/27/2022 at 5:54 PM, BuckSwope said:

Ah, another poster too worried about "other" people from another site online.  Oh the horror!! 

Economy in the sense that prices will rise if we either have to pay more afterwards for labor, or we go into even more of a labor shortage because of shutting down the border.    Our current economy and prices are affected by all this cheap labor.  I'm not sure how it's not effected if we were to completely shut it down like the person I was responding to was suggesting.   You don't think there would be ramifications from Wall Street as well?  

Yes, all this is also going on as humans are slowly being replaced by automation as well.  It's complicated.  

To the people that frequent this site, except for the people that have no friends other then the friends they make online here, FBG posters are a horror.  What was your name over there?  Anyway, there is no shortage of labor.  We've been allowing illegal aliens to pick our fruit and vegetables for decades.  There's no shortage there.  Working dairy farms and other large agribusiness farms like poultry?  There's enough labor there, too, especially at a million illegals a month and with processing factories either shutting down or mysteriously burning down? All other kinds of manufacturing?  It's been largely outsourced and what little is left is leaving the country.  Mexican drywallers and painters working for low cash under the table?  Keep raising interest rates Mr. Fed Chairman and you'll have real estate activity down to nothing.

You're spouting some kind of jibberish economics in support of a government-sponsored policy of replacement.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

It’s most definitely replacement. Don’t let them fool you by saying it’s racist trope. It’s not. Been going on forever. 

[Fnord 1,141]

19 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Sanctuary cities and states prevent the federal government from creating a closed border.  It openly invites people to come into the country illegally and stay.  On top of that, sanctuary cities and states give illegal immigrants access to government assistance (food, money, & housing), along with free healthcare and free education.  Things that AMERICAN'S need and could use, but now can't, because people who aren't American's are getting them.  If a sanctuary city or state wishes to keep up those resources for American's, they'll have to raise taxes.  So now, more taxes are being spend on people who don't belong here and aren't contributing to the pot.  Personally, I can't for the life of me think of ONE benefit that sanctuary cities and states provide to the country.  Now, if you want an "Open Border" policy, yeah, you'd think there's nothing wrong with sanctuary cities or states... but at that point, they wouldn't be needed, because the border is open.  They can come here and stay without recourse.

I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem.

I don't have a staunch position on sanctuary cities one way or another, just wanted to get your opinion on them. I'm not convinced about the reality of your bolded take above that the services being provided to immigrants are causing a shortage of services for Americans. I'd like to see some real data there and not rely on your opinion (no offense) or the opinions of the talking heads that would have us believe it. 

17 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

If they need it, sure.  I've never been against it.  Who is?  Your make believe version of the Republican party?

As for this, Republicans have voted over and over again, nationwide, to cut services for poor American citizens. The discontinuation of free school lunches to help food insecurity during the pandemic is just one recent glaring example. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

On 12/27/2022 at 5:54 PM, BuckSwope said:

Ah, another poster too worried about "other" people from another site online.  Oh the horror!! 

Economy in the sense that prices will rise if we either have to pay more afterwards for labor, or we go into even more of a labor shortage because of shutting down the border.    Our current economy and prices are affected by all this cheap labor.  I'm not sure how it's not effected if we were to completely shut it down like the person I was responding to was suggesting.   You don't think there would be ramifications from Wall Street as well?  

Yes, all this is also going on as humans are slowly being replaced by automation as well.  It's complicated.  

For the record, and I think (?), this has been cleared up.  I wasn't suggesting to shut the border down and no one can ever come here.  I was talking about shutting down the border for people to just walk up, cross over, and enter the country.  I'm fine with people coming here, we just need to make sure they come here and aren't just sponging off of society.  Get them in, they can get jobs, and housing.  We eliminate the criminal element for sneaking in and reduce the money/resources for trying to track down the actual criminals and criminal activity.

[Pimpadeaux 2,270]

My wife last night wanted me to grab chips and salsa from a local Mexican-food restaurant. She tried to phone in the order, but no one answered the phone.

I went in there, and it was clear that this place had a labor shortage. There was no one at the door to seat people, and the few workers who were there were frantically scrambling around to serve people.

I sat at the bar, and it was 10 minutes before I could place my order. Just a bag of chips and a quart of hot sauce, both likely pre-made and ready to go.

I noticed this person sitting nearby and couldn't tell if it was a man or a woman. It kind of looked like Buffalo Bill from "Silence of the Lambs," wearing earrings and makeup. Buffalo Bill seemed frustrated. 

After 15 or so minutes went by, I asked Bill how long the wait had been. It was obvious Bill was a dude by his voice. He was a Door Dash driver waiting on an order and fussily expressed how fed up he was at the wait. He was about to just leave.

Finally, the chips and salsa came out, so I could disengage from the Bill conversation that I regretted starting.

Perhaps there needs to be an organized work-placement program for those coming up from the border. Had that restaurant been properly staffed, my wife could have phoned in the order, and I would have been in and out of there, with no conversation with the scary bull-fruit delivery driver.

 

[TheNewGirl 1,031]

14 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

 

Perhaps there needs to be an organized work-placement program for those coming up from the border. 

 

This would be great if they wanted to work. Many of them don't. Why should they work when they can get assistance for food, housing, and health care? Even American citizens don't want to work now; they can get the same stuff. 

[Pimpadeaux 2,270]

6 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

This would be great if they wanted to work. Many of them don't. Why should they work when they can get assistance for food, housing, and health care? Even American citizens don't want to work now; they can get the same stuff. 

I know that you see things from the California perspective, but it's not like that here in Texor.

Hispanics in this state work their asses off and take the jobs that no one else wants. They work in kitchens, bus tables, operate garbage trucks, mow lawns and work in the hot-ass Texor sun on road crews. There is construction work going on all over the building in which I work, and those construction workers predominately are Hispanic. I put in a new fence a couple of years ago, and most of those workers were Hispanic. The fence-company owner told me he would be able to take on a lot more business if he had more guys.

So many restaurants around have closed because they were understaffed. 

I've seen sanctuary states and cities, including Portland and San Francisco. They're focking gross.

I think it's funny that Texor and Florida are sending people to sanctuary cities, but that's not going to solve the problem. 

Sanctuary states and cities should be abolished, and we need to put these fockers to work, in jobs that no one else wants. 

Then we could track them and throw them out if they decide they don't want to work. 

I also think we should be working on ways to get to the root of the problem, that a huge driving force behind all these illegals is that their countries suck and they're desperate to better their families' lives.

Mexico needs to do something besides let the focking cartels and corrupt people run the country. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

5 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I don't have a staunch position on sanctuary cities one way or another, just wanted to get your opinion on them. I'm not convinced about the reality of your bolded take above that the services being provided to immigrants are causing a shortage of services for Americans. I'd like to see some real data there and not rely on your opinion (no offense) or the opinions of the talking heads that would have us believe it. 

As for this, Republicans have voted over and over again, nationwide, to cut services for poor American citizens. The discontinuation of free school lunches to help food insecurity during the pandemic is just one recent glaring example. 

I mean, common sense.  If you want to leave your country and see that America has cities and states that won't kick you out and provide you with services... you're not going to take advantage of it?   What, you think the people coming here are idiots or something?  Geez, what a racist! 

Seriously though, let me ask you this.  Can you show me data that says people who came here illegally, never considered the sanctuary cities or states when deciding to come here?  I'm willing to be that you don't.  Why?  Well, lets ask the Democrat politicians who refused to put the question of "Are you legal" on the census in 2020.  The Democrats don't want you to know who the illegals are so that you can't ask them questions.  BUT, they want to make sure these people have the right to vote, without needing ID.  Why do you think that is?

 

So, Republican's ending a program that was supposed to end, is a sign that they don't want to help poor American citizens?  Got it.  The Omnibus spending bill was $1.5 TRILLION.  The program for school lunches was $11B.  Democrats felt that it wasn't worth arguing about or felt that it wasn't important enough to cut $11B from somewhere else to make sure that the program continued... but it's ALL the Republican's fault, right?  Yup. Got it.

 

Since you didn't respond to this last time, I'll throw it out there again.  "I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem."

 

By your line of questioning (and reluctance to add what benefits you feel a sanctuary city or state provides), that you didn't read my post to Tim's OP.  Here's the post, maybe this will help you on why we should get rid of sanctuary cities and states.

[Fnord 1,141]

14 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Seriously though, let me ask you this.  Can you show me data that says people who came here illegally, never considered the sanctuary cities or states when deciding to come here?  I'm willing to be that you don't.  Why? Because as far as I know, this data doesn't exist. How is one supposed to get inside the mind of immigrants to get an answer? The cities with the most illegal immigrants are sanctuary cities. But what does that prove? Well, if they're here to work, of course they'll go to the places that have the most opportunity and be drawn to areas that have large, thriving immigrant communities. Is it because these same cities are sanctuary cities, or because they are large metro areas? This question is chicken v. egg, without a widely accepted answer that isn't rooted in politics vs. data.  Well, lets ask the Democrat politicians who refused to put the question of "Are you legal" on the census in 2020.  This is law. The Democrats don't want you to know who the illegals are so that you can't ask them questions.  BUT, they want to make sure these people have the right to vote, without needing ID.  Why do you think that is? This does not appear to be true. Democrats cannot just wave a wand and grant illegal immigrants the ability to vote.

 

So, Republican's ending a program that was supposed to end, is a sign that they don't want to help poor American citizens?  Got it.  The Omnibus spending bill was $1.5 TRILLION.  The program for school lunches was $11B.  Democrats felt that it wasn't worth arguing about or felt that it wasn't important enough to cut $11B from somewhere else to make sure that the program continued... but it's ALL the Republican's fault, right?  Yup. Got it. Meh, more specifically Mitch McConnell's fault. From the link I provided earlier: "But earlier this week, news reports detailed how key Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, opposed extending the waivers as part of the omnibus package, arguing that the waiver was never meant to be permanent and that the $11 billion price tag to extend it for another year wasn’t palatable to Republicans concerned about the deficit increasing." This is bullsh!t politics from a group of people that were more than happy to rubberstamp gigantic deficit spending while there is a Republican POTUS, but now that a D is in office, they're back to the same tired antics of pretending to care. Been this way for decades, and their argument is ridiculous, given that deficit spending normally increases under Republican administrations, while decreasing under Democratic administrations.

 

Since you didn't respond to this last time, I'll throw it out there again.  "I'd like for you to outline why you feel they aren't a problem." I did respond. I said "I don't have a staunch position on sanctuary cities one way or another, just wanted to get your opinion on them."

 

By your line of questioning (and reluctance to add what benefits you feel a sanctuary city or state provides), that you didn't read my post to Tim's OP.  Here's the post, maybe this will help you on why we should get rid of sanctuary cities and states.

I appreciate the conversation, and that you're not resorting to name calling and such like others here. 

[BuckSwope 654]

3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

For the record, and I think (?), this has been cleared up.  I wasn't suggesting to shut the border down and no one can ever come here.  I was talking about shutting down the border for people to just walk up, cross over, and enter the country.  I'm fine with people coming here, we just need to make sure they come here and aren't just sponging off of society.  Get them in, they can get jobs, and housing.  We eliminate the criminal element for sneaking in and reduce the money/resources for trying to track down the actual criminals and criminal activity.

Thanks for the clarification.   Too often stances get swirled in with others as we talk to multiple people at the same time.   It seems your idea of what the border should look like differs from some others.   I have for sure seen the opinion of more F-it, shut it down completely.  

 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

A secure border shouldn’t be part of a negotiation. It should be a given. The democrats are failing to secure the border and want something before they will. Just wrong 

[BuckSwope 654]

2 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

My wife last night wanted me to grab chips and salsa from a local Mexican-food restaurant. She tried to phone in the order, but no one answered the phone.

I went in there, and it was clear that this place had a labor shortage. There was no one at the door to seat people, and the few workers who were there were frantically scrambling around to serve people.

I sat at the bar, and it was 10 minutes before I could place my order. Just a bag of chips and a quart of hot sauce, both likely pre-made and ready to go.

I noticed this person sitting nearby and couldn't tell if it was a man or a woman. It kind of looked like Buffalo Bill from "Silence of the Lambs," wearing earrings and makeup. Buffalo Bill seemed frustrated. 

After 15 or so minutes went by, I asked Bill how long the wait had been. It was obvious Bill was a dude by his voice. He was a Door Dash driver waiting on an order and fussily expressed how fed up he was at the wait. He was about to just leave.

Finally, the chips and salsa came out, so I could disengage from the Bill conversation that I regretted starting.

Perhaps there needs to be an organized work-placement program for those coming up from the border. Had that restaurant been properly staffed, my wife could have phoned in the order, and I would have been in and out of there, with no conversation with the scary bull-fruit delivery driver.

 

People have wildly different experiences on these issues.   I don't know where people like Casual Observer and other who might be saying there isn't a labor shortage, but there is barely a restaurant or business around here that doesn't have help wanted signs of or are giving off very obvious signals they are short staffed - decreased hours, not providing all the services they used to, etc..    I look around and see a clear need for workers in my area.   Most of our kitchen staff is ESL and we have even started using them on positions up front because we struggle with staffing.    Like you posted, I've had several experiences like yours in the last couple years - things that used to take 5 mins now take 15+ plus as the few staff left frustratedly try to get things done.  

Now I understand that this type of help and work doesn't apply to all businesses or sectors, just relaying some observations and experiences here.   Part of the basis of my stance is that 100% we need at least some of these people to fill these voids.  

[KSB2424 3,083]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

A secure border shouldn’t be part of a negotiation. It should be a given. The democrats are failing to secure the border and want something before they will. Just wrong 

Bingo.  You first secure the border then you figure out the best immigration policies for those legally wanting to come to America.  It's like a Castle, there should be a mote around the whole thing for security but a huge bridge and large door in front for those wanting to come legally and peacefully.