The Invisible Crisis: Small Children Crossing the US Border on Their Own

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So many comments concerning drug trade and why we should send these kids back ‘home’ and how the US Government might / might not have been in collusion. Fact is that many of these children will more than likely be released to a ‘family member’ or ‘sponsor’ and then just disappear into the US. Parents were more than likely sold on the story that the US is going to take care of their children and provide them an education, etc… Many, many of these children will probably become slaves in the sex trades. Some of these children will become soldiers for gangs and then become smugglers themselves. These children have more than likely been ‘sold’ into bondage for the fees the smugglers charge and will live a life of indentured servitude here in the US.

catholiccharitiesusa.org/human-trafficking/ (hope this link works - cut & paste in browser if not)

scribd.com/doc/166023167/Human-Trafficking-Fact-Sheet
 
Dawnia said:
$37billion isn’t enough?
Click to expand...
Again, maybe the popes are excluding the US from their statements. Do you think that’s it- the Holy Father’s are referring to all of the non-US developed and wealthy nation?

Hmmmm. . . .

That doesn’t seem likely to me.
 
So we should feed them fish instead of teaching them how to fish? The problem is we can’t teach fishing when we don’t know it. They know how to eat for sure.
 
ringil said:
Again, maybe the popes are excluding the US from their statements. Do you think that’s it- the Holy Father’s are referring to all of the non-US developed and wealthy nation?

Hmmmm. . . .

That doesn’t seem likely to me.
Click to expand...
No, but neither were they targeting any country specifically. Money isn’t the only way to help others.
 
From
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/10061700/Pope-Francis-urges-global-leaders-to-end-tyranny-of-money.html

Countries should impose more control over their economies and not allow “absolute autonomy”, in order to provide “for the common good”.
The gap between rich and poor was growing and the “joy of life” was diminishing in many developed countries, the Argentinian Pope said, two months after he was elected as the successor to Benedict XVI.
“While the income of a minority is increasing exponentially, that of the majority is crumbling,” said Francis, who as archbishop of Buenos Aires visited slums, opted to live in a modest flat rather than an opulent Church residence and went to work by bus.
 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_social_teaching

The Church “has always understood this right within the broader context of the right common to all to use the goods of the whole creation: the right to private property is subordinated to the right to common use, to the fact that goods are meant for everyone.”[17]
 
ringil said:
From
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/10061700/Pope-Francis-urges-global-leaders-to-end-tyranny-of-money.html

Countries should impose more control over their economies and not allow “absolute autonomy”, in order to provide “for the common good”.
The gap between rich and poor was growing and the “joy of life” was diminishing in many developed countries, the Argentinian Pope said, two months after he was elected as the successor to Benedict XVI.
“While the income of a minority is increasing exponentially, that of the majority is crumbling,” said Francis, who as archbishop of Buenos Aires visited slums, opted to live in a modest flat rather than an opulent Church residence and went to work by bus.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t do the original any justice.
 
Dawnia said:
$37billion isn’t enough?
Click to expand...
The richest man in the world, Bill Gates, is worth more than double that amount.

Here, take a stroll through the world’s millionaires and billionaires. Their aggregate wealth is 6.6 TRILLION dollars. And if you ever feel up to it, just search “lifestyles of billionaires” on YouTube, to see how they spend their money. And OH BOY, do they spend it!

forbes.com/billionaires/list/#tab:overall

p.s. The Walton family have members in the top ten billionaires. The Walton family owns Wal-Mart.
 
gmx2014 said:
The richest man in the world, Bill Gates, is worth more than double that amount.

Here, take a stroll through the world’s millionaires and billionaires. Their aggregate wealth is 6.6 TRILLION dollars. And if you ever feel up to it, just search “lifestyles of billionaires” on YouTube, to see how they spend their money. And OH BOY, do they spend it!

forbes.com/billionaires/list/#tab:overall

p.s. The Walton family have members in the top ten billionaires. The Walton family owns Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...
And that has to do what with govt foreign aid?
 
Dawnia said:
And that has to do what with govt foreign aid?
Click to expand...
Perspective, of course.

For example, NASA cries budget woes. In one presentation, NASA reviewed government funding with a particular focus on wasteful spending. I think they’re out of their mind. Private billionaires could easily support NASA with no undue and unnecessary burden on taxpayers.

In economist Thomas Piketty’s new best seller, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, he calls for an 80 percent marginal tax rate on income in the United States to address inequality. That’s CRAZY. It’s THEFT.

Consider Christy Walton, of Wal-Mart. She’s worth $37.4 BILLION dollars. Hey, tax HER the 80 percent and get this, she’ll still be left with over $7 BILLION dollars. But Piketty wants to tax the average American worker’s income 80%? The man is simply WRONG.

Take a good, good look at that list of billionaires and millionaires. People everywhere need a clear understanding of where the money is, where it comes from and where it goes.

In 2012, 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States. Those 46.5 million people SHOP AT WAL-MART.

I hear the United States government is looking for $1.9 BILLION dollars to cover the expenses of the phenomenal immigration flood. Well I don’t know about all other Americans, but here’s me … looking at the Forbes list of billionaires and millionaires … saying time to pay up now.

Let these people with their Wal-Mart establishment all over the country step up to the banker’s table and provide the $1.9 billion dollars. God almighty knows, they most certainly and most definitely can afford it.

By the way, Christy is only one of MANY family members EACH worth tens of billions of dollars.

P.S. How many of those immigrants will eventually go on to become employed at a Wal-Mart somewhere, and don’t try to tell me none of them. Hmph!
 
gmx2014 said:
The richest man in the world, Bill Gates, is worth more than double that amount.

Here, take a stroll through the world’s millionaires and billionaires. Their aggregate wealth is 6.6 TRILLION dollars. And if you ever feel up to it, just search “lifestyles of billionaires” on YouTube, to see how they spend their money. And OH BOY, do they spend it!

forbes.com/billionaires/list/#tab:overall

p.s. The Walton family have members in the top ten billionaires. The Walton family owns Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...
Envy is a really ugly thing. It goes against the fundamental tenets of Catholic Social Teaching.

That the spirit of revolutionary change, which has long been disturbing the nations of the world, should have passed beyond the sphere of politics and made its influence felt in the cognate sphere of practical economics is not surprising. The elements of the conflict now raging are unmistakable, in the vast expansion of industrial pursuits and the marvelous discoveries of science; in the changed relations between masters and workmen; in the enormous fortunes of some few individuals, and the utter poverty of the masses; in the increased self-reliance and closer mutual combination of the working classes; as also, finally, in the prevailing moral degeneracy. The momentous gravity of the state of things now obtaining fills every mind with painful apprehension; wise men are discussing it; practical men are proposing schemes; popular meetings, legislatures, and rulers of nations are all busied with it – actually there is no question which has taken a deeper hold on the public mind.

…The discussion is not easy, nor is it void of danger. It is no easy matter to define the relative rights and mutual duties of the rich and of the poor, of capital and of labor. And the danger lies in this, that crafty agitators are intent on making use of these differences of opinion to pervert men’s judgments and to stir up the people to revolt.

…Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.
  1. To remedy these wrongs the socialists, working on the poor man’s envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies. They hold that by thus transferring property from private individuals to the community, the present mischievous state of things will be set to rights, inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that were they carried into effect the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are, moreover, emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community.
(snip)

…First of all, there is the duty of safeguarding private property by legal enactment and protection. Most of all it is essential, where the passion of greed is so strong, to keep the populace within the line of duty; for, if all may justly strive to better their condition, neither justice nor the common good allows any individual to seize upon that which belongs to another, or, under the futile and shallow pretext of equality, to lay violent hands on other people’s possessions.

-- Leo XIII, Encyclical Rerum Novarum, 1-4, 38​

We all would do well to study what is actually taught by the Papal Magisterium, particularly the genius of Leo XIII.

[NB: Those who are exceptionally wealthy could and should do more for society with their wealth…both as a blessing to those who would benefit and as a blessing to themselves. That is a distinctly different matter than confiscation]
 
markomalley said:
[NB: Those who are exceptionally wealthy could and should do more for society with their wealth…both as a blessing to those who would benefit and as a blessing to themselves. That is a distinctly different matter than confiscation]
Click to expand...
The government already is taking a lot of money for causes that turn out to be without merit. The wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have been waged at a tremendous cost of human life and of US taxpayer money. What is confiscation except the taking of money from a private individual for some unwanted project?
 
Tomdstone said:
The government already is taking a lot of money for causes that turn out to be without merit. The wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have been waged at a tremendous cost of human life and of US taxpayer money. What is confiscation except the taking of money from a private individual for some unwanted project?
Click to expand...
True that the conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, the Balkans, and so on, all had tremendous cost. Whether any of them served the common good is a legitimate discussion point, but massively out of scope of the topic of this particular thread.

*BTW, I would hesitate to call Vietnam or any of the other conflicts “wars.” The United States has only declared war 11 times in its history…the last time was against Romania in 1942. None of those conflicts that you mentioned or that I mentioned above were technically wars. There is a difference between authorizing a President to use military force and declaring that a state of war exists.
*
Governments have a right to impose tax upon their people to fund activities that serve the common good. Such things as national defense, public safety, fire protection, public roads, sanitation, water, and so on (this list is hardly comprehensive) are clearly for the common good. Having said that, there is a matter of prudence, within limits, of how those taxes are collected. And there is a prudential matter, again, within limits, of what exactly constitutes activities that support the common good. There is also a matter of prudential, within limits, as to which layer of government (the neighborhood association, the municipality, the county, the state/province, or the federal) is the best to execute those activities.

You can pretty clearly see Leo XIII’s take on some activities that clearly do NOT support the common good in the extract above.
 
markomalley said:
True that the conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, the Balkans, and so on, all had tremendous cost. Whether any of them served the common good is a legitimate discussion point, but massively out of scope of the topic of this particular thread.

BTW, I would hesitate to call Vietnam or any of the other conflicts “wars.” The United States has only declared war 11 times in its history…the last time was against Romania in 1942. None of those conflicts that you mentioned or that I mentioned above were technically wars. There is a difference between authorizing a President to use military force and declaring that a state of war exists.

Governments have a right to impose tax upon their people to fund activities that serve the common good. Such things as national defense, public safety, fire protection, public roads, sanitation, water, and so on (this list is hardly comprehensive) are clearly for the common good. Having said that, there is a matter of prudence, within limits, of how those taxes are collected. And there is a prudential matter, again, within limits, of what exactly constitutes activities that support the common good. There is also a matter of prudential, within limits, as to which layer of government (the neighborhood association, the municipality, the county, the state/province, or the federal) is the best to execute those activities.

You can pretty clearly see Leo XIII’s take on some activities that clearly do NOT support the common good in the extract above.
Click to expand...
The thread concerns children crossing the border. IMHO, they are escaping the drug wars which have been inflicted on their area, at least partly, due to the demand in the United States for illegal drugs. There are several well known American personalities who have admitted to using these illegal drugs and nothing has been done to stop them from doing so, except death in the case of their overuse. Does the USA have the financial resources to help these children who are now in the USA because of the disastrous failure of the Americans to halt the flow of illegal drugs to the USA? I believe that there is plenty of money to help these children. When you consider the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan that have only resulted in disaster both for the countries involved and for the American taxpayer, then you will see that a few million dollars to help these children is really very little in comparison.
 
Tomdstone said:
The thread concerns children crossing the border. IMHO, they are escaping the drug wars which have been inflicted on their area, at least partly, due to the demand in the United States for illegal drugs. There are several well known American personalities who have admitted to using these illegal drugs and nothing has been done to stop them from doing so, except death in the case of their overuse. Does the USA have the financial resources to help these children who are now in the USA because of the disastrous failure of the Americans to halt the flow of illegal drugs to the USA? I believe that there is plenty of money to help these children. When you consider the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan that have only resulted in disaster both for the countries involved and for the American taxpayer, then you will see that a few million dollars to help these children is really very little in comparison.
Click to expand...
Actually, this thread is about the callous attempt by the Obama Administration to use innocent children and (not so) innocent teens in yet another effort to destabilize this country even further than it is.

You were the one trying to drag it down a rathole by suggesting that the the government wholesale confiscate 80% of the income of certain people in order to finance this destabilization effort.
gmx2014 said:
(snip)

Consider Christy Walton, of Wal-Mart. She’s worth $37.4 BILLION dollars. Hey, tax HER the 80 percent and get this, she’ll still be left with over $7 BILLION dollars. But Piketty wants to tax the average American worker’s income 80%? The man is simply WRONG.

Take a good, good look at that list of billionaires and millionaires. People everywhere need a clear understanding of where the money is, where it comes from and where it goes.

(snip)

I hear the United States government is looking for $1.9 BILLION dollars to cover the expenses of the phenomenal immigration flood. Well I don’t know about all other Americans, but here’s me … looking at the Forbes list of billionaires and millionaires … saying time to pay up now.
Click to expand...
Envy? Are you kidding me? It’s called MATH.
Click to expand...
Yes, envy is a really, really ugly thing. No matter what the math.

edited to add an appropriate quote to substantiate my statement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top