“Come one, come all, to the great tent cities of America!” isn’t the best message to send out.

“Zero Tolerance is nothing more than Enforcement of Federal Law. Are you against Enforcement of Law?”

Get on this planet. Do you just start pulling over all 56 mph drivers in 55 mph zones? Only if you want to break the current processing system.

===

Thank you for your service  and for that you have my respect. But I don’t abide by zero-tolerance applications of law except in closed environments such as corporations or private institutions.

===

The facilities were not in place. It was sprung upon the agencies with no warning the moment Jeff Sessions announced it.

Had they had advanced warning, facilities could be put into place with proper procedures implemented that do not interfere with due process.
=====

Perhaps the agencies knew but they certainly didn’t inform their vendors who would handle the actual work. Was this volume in their contracts?
=====
Given preparation, these stop-gap measures would be unnecessary and things would go smoothly.
====
That’s true. Still, considering the major head shuffling that happened in this (as in any) administration, the opportunity to prepare was there since Jan 2017.

I think had this been in Florida, there might be less of a mess. I’m in FL, and while I don’t like my Gov for a dozen reasons, he’s a Boy Scout when it comes to disaster preparedness and I DON’T think it would be this catastrophic administrative mess.
=====
Immigration has been handled by the USA for 150 yrs. How far back shall we go? Different eras have different solutions. I don’t think this era is any worse than other eras. I’ve just been lucky so far that they haven’t happened in my lifetime.

Ankle bracelets was an answer previously. Now it’s detain and hold.

That’s fine, but images of tent cities is an embarassment. I’m sure they get three square meals. “Come one, come all, to the great tent cities of America!” isn’t the best message to send out.
=====
This is the administration we’re in now. They can do things right if they want, avoiding scandal and chaos. But too many changes at once is what’s going on. Not enough time to see what’s working and what’s not.

Left hand does this, right hand does that and they collide.

==

I’m in the USA, not “which party is awesome and which party sucks” land.

====

I didn’t like the ankle bracelets either. Nor did I like how we tried offloading the problem onto Mexico to handle. Nor do I like how we’re doing it now.

=—–

I’m not a Democrat. Nor a Republican. I’m an American who believes in basic human rights in a manner similar to the UN. I don’t like our foreign policy. I don’t like our immigration policies. Usually our domestic polities are ok, but local law enforcements should get more training and less “qualified immunity” for fairness to citizen rights.

Undocumented workers surround me where I am. They work hard, pay taxes and have been doing so for generations.

This makes me biased of course.

====

The “moral relativism” that you espouse makes no logical sense to me,

====

All I know is: Once you reach our borders, UN type human rights should apply.

You can play name games if you like Don, but around here, ,they’re undocumented immigrants.

====

Immigrants without documents. It’s a statement of fact. “illegal immigrant” is a political term.

=====

Who is talking about “open borders”? Not many. It’s the “how” of immigrant processing that’s at issue, not the processing of immigrants.

====

Does the fix being delayed involve a $75 billion wall?

====

Well, you almost said it directly. You want the wall. You should’ve said that at the start instead of dancing around.

====

I’m not 100% thrilled with the UN either, especially not lately (past 15 yrs or so). But, I worked with them a long time ago (they worked with me as they wanted my help on an early internet project I was on in the early 90s), so my biases are still mostly positive.

====

I’m not a Democrat, Jeff, nor am I defending them. My voting is public record. Look me up. Florida.

====

Oh, forbidding states from enacting policies for consumer protections that are stronger than the fed level, all for the benefit of commercial interests. How many examples of that do you need?

====

Taking powers from the States and giving it to corporations from the Federal level is probably perfectly within the bounds of the US Constitution.

Doesn’t mean I have to roll over and like it.

=====

I know it is. That’s why I don’t want corporate-run human affairs for citizens.

No recourse for the lawyerless.

=====

I’m a bleeding heart Jeff, that’s true. But my voting pattern is a checkerboard.
====
I think the system of US govt works fine, even today. I prefer a greater Confederalism than we’re seeing today. Right now, this is a Federal heavy administration.
=====
States rights are being trampled upon by this administration, just as the last.
=======
So, it’s not states rights being trampled upon. States niceities maybe. It’s just a very federal heavy administration.
======
Oh good. There’s a phrase for that. Thank you.
“The amenities and services you know are tied to your home state. States shoulder the duties to administer roads, education, public safety, justice and more, as decided by voters, state lawmakers, and the state constitution. States take on all the powers not specifically granted to the U.S. Federal government, according to the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution”
=====
Not the privatization of services, no. Not without oversight.
=====
What privatizing means to me is that a citizen’s rights will be dictated by lawsuit and dependent upon the judge that day.

If you cannot afford a lawyer, there is no recourse. It is whatever the corporation has within their laws. Lack of transparency.
======
Having worked for a Pharmaceutical company for a time, you do not want a corporation handling human affairs. They aren’t evil but amoral.

Conscience is dictated by lawsuit and not looking bad to the media.
=====

I run a small (considered micro) business for the past 15 yrs. None of that free enterprise is much help to any company under 50 employees in the USA (small biz is 50-500 employees.So, none of those “We’re for small business” stuff impresses me any and any company under 50 who THINKS it’s helping them will see soon enough it’s not for their benefit either.
====
  I’d advice any company under 50 employees to subcontract when possible (not always possible). I did it the employee way once and it was dreadful. Nothing in these tax changes would have benefitted me in any way at all if I had them now. So, subcontractors it remains. Every man for himself.
====
 But if you have 50+ employees, you’re now running a small village and should be responsible for your citizens.
===
 “under the three ISO standards”. That matters.
With standards? Privatize all you like. But “We’re removing regulations + privatizing”? Disasters await.
===
  Under that level of strutiny, go for it. Not all businesses have that transparency and scrutiny required. It is those that concern me.
===
  Any company 50+ employees needs more than “at will employment” (no rights) and “self regulating” – unless the industry’s standards are also reviewed by govt officials, who should ultimately hold responsibility for citizenry and compel corporate compliance.
===
The govt allows companies to profit and grow and this is good. But as a company grows in employees and profit, they should also grow in responsibility, for more is given to them (the freedom to profit and grow).To whom more is given, more is required.A company with 50,000 employees shouldn’t have the same license as a 5 employee company. The company with 5, should have more leeway as it is responsible for less. The company with 50,000, more responsibility and accoutability.
====
  I’m not against privatizing if done properly. At such large scope, privatizing is logical and is already in effect for a great amount of govt services.But consumer-citizen transparency is crucial. That bulletin board note is something. With Internal regulations within private corporations, a consumer-citizen gets nothing.You wouldn’t want to know all the shit that went down within Schering-Plough. There’d be so many lawsuits if the public knew – and there were already plenty.

It’s only through lawsuit and discovery that consumers can eventually review internal matters.

=====
 Sure they do. Companies are on soil, and that soil is governed by a govt.
====
The constraints or freedoms of a company are directly tied to whatever is allowed by the govts the company operates within.
=====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven − = 2

Leave a Reply