Who will you be supporting in the U.S. presidential election with our Catholic values in mind?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridgerunner said:
Does the moral law say the wages of Americans should be maintained at a lower than necessary level in order to accommodate illegal immigrants?

The civil law regarding lawful entry and residence is dead. It no longer exists. Our borders are open to the world, and so is employment.
Click to expand...
Are wages being maintained in order to accommodate illegals, or are they being kept low at the federal level, (remember many states have higher minimum wages than federal) because illegals will work for lower wages than Americans will.

After all, if one gets on Hope 6, Section 8, gets Tanf, medicaid, and a whole list of other things, they really don’t need a job to survive, so let someone else work for 7.25 per hour while I sit at home and watch tv, and eat cheetos.
 
Ridgerunner said:
40.png
Metis1:
What about the harm he’s done, much of which is in violation of Catholic teachings
Click to expand...
Tell us what harm he has done. No myths, please. Real, tangible harm.
Click to expand...
He has gotten an entire portion of the population to simply accept lies for the truth, or that telling lies is acceptable, bullying is ok, politicians surrounding themselves with criminals is ok.

Do I really need to go on?
 
I genuinely think that’s largely a myth. Around here, most illegals work in industry and earn good wages. Maybe this is unusual, but most of them are healthy young men; exactly who the industrial workplaces most like to hire.

They’re not picking lettuce. The lettuce is, to my understanding, being picked by unionized legal American workers of all ages and conditions. The illegals get better work than that.
 
Ridgerunner said:
40.png
farronwolf:
Do I really need to go on?
Click to expand...
No purpose in it. These are just talking points, not real harms.
Click to expand...
Really. The holder of the office of the President of the United States acting in such a manner and people accepting the behavior is no real harm.

I suppose defying the laws regarding Congress’ oversight on the executive branch is no real harm either. Sorry but the courts disagree with that as the rulings continue to come down on the side of oversight.

I guess when half of Congress abdicates their oath of office, there is no real harm in that either.
 
farronwolf said:
Really. The holder of the office of the President of the United States acting in such a manner and people accepting the behavior is no real harm.

I suppose defying the laws regarding Congress’ oversight on the executive branch is no real harm either. Sorry but the courts disagree with that as the rulings continue to come down on the side of oversight.
Click to expand...
Perhaps before deciding what the courts will do it would be best to actually see what they do. The Dems litigate virtually everything Trump does and he has won most of them so far.

But you still have not shown any harm Trump has actually done.

And supporters of a party that supports the killing of millions of children really have no place saying someone else is “causing harm”.
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
I genuinely think that’s largely a myth. Around here, most illegals work in industry and earn good wages.
Click to expand...
I know many businessmen and women who tell me this. I’ve also had a personal experience with a landscaping business that charged more because they hired Americans, but did horrible work. After I fired them I hired another company, less expensive, and does excellent work and I still use them. Are they illegals? I honestly don’t know. But they are Latino and are great workers. A couple of decades ago I knew some farmers that couldn’t find an American to work for them unless they could work in an air conditioned tractor with a nice stereo.
 
Convert3 said:
I knew some farmers that couldn’t find an American to work for them unless they could work in an air conditioned tractor with a nice stereo.
Click to expand...
Or claimed it.

Around here there are lots of poultry farms and dairy farms. Both are tough work, and most of it is done by Americans. Driving an open tractor is a piece of cake compared to that work. But I’ll add that most tractor work is done by owners or by computer-controlled systems.
 
Last edited:
As I said, everything Trump does is challenged by Democracts in court, even the Medicaid work requirement initiated by Bill Clinton. Remember “the end of welfare as we know it”? Dems didn’t challenge it until Trump tried to enforce it.

Of course the NYT and WaPo don’t mention the cases or gravity of the cases he won. They’re Democrat propaganda organs.
 
Last edited:
farronwolf said:
You don’t mind they are residents, but don’t want them to be citizens. What is that? Talk about having a second class society. Sure, come here pay our taxes, abide by our laws, but you have no say so in what we do, you don’t have all the legal protections, but maybe your kids can one day be full citizens.
Click to expand...
I feel that giving them citizenship is unjust to those trying to immigrate legally. They came illegally and I feel that it is just that there shuld be a penalty for that. I think many would happily pay a fine, but not getting citizenship may be harder for them to take.
 
Elf01 said:
I think many would happily pay a fine, but not getting citizenship may be harder for them to take.
Click to expand...
Lax enforcement and dangling the prospect of citizenship is what draws the illegal immigrants here and causes them to spend a lot of money on cartel criminals to get them here. It needs to end, but the Democrats intend to change the demographics of the U.S. using illegal immigrants to do it. Big business, whether Dem or Repub, like the cheap labor, which keeps Americans’ wages down as well.
 
Ridgerunner said:
As I said, everything Trump does is challenged by Democracts in court, even the Medicaid work requirement initiated by Bill Clinton. Remember “the end of welfare as we know it”? Dems didn’t challenge it until Trump tried to enforce it.

Of course the NYT and WaPo don’t mention the cases or gravity of the cases he won. They’re Democrat propaganda organs.
Click to expand...
Talk about talking points. Do you have any evidence of all the court cases he has won. Do you have any facts on what the welfare reform in 1996 actually did, or didn’t do? Do you have something besides talking points?
 
farronwolf said:
Talk about talking points. Do you have any evidence of all the court cases he has won. Do you have any facts on what the welfare reform in 1996 actually did, or didn’t do? Do you have something besides talking points?
Click to expand...
I do not keep track of all the court cases, no. Nor did I claim to.

I don’t know every detail of the 1996 welfare reform. What I do know is that it had a work requirement which could be satisfied by being in a re-education program. That’s not a talking point. A number of the states did not actually require it, and Obama wouldn’t enforce it. Trump attempted to reinstate its enforcement.

https://lawstreetmedia.com/issues/politics/drug-work-requirements-public-assistance/
 
Did you even read the article you posted the link too. Do you know how most all of the welfare programs are administered?

States have passed laws which have either been upheld by the courts or struck down. States administer the programs within their states. Has little or nothing to do with who the President is. Work requirements are still there and are enforced at the state level.

Give the facts for your claim that states didn’t require and Obama didn’t enforce. You put it out there, back it up.

Since 1996, nearly 25 years ago, there has not been a major revamp in any of the programs on the national level. During that time Rep, and Dems have both held congress and the presidency, none have sought to revamp the system.
 
farronwolf said:
Give the facts for your claim that states didn’t require and Obama didn’t enforce. You put it out there, back it up.
Click to expand...
There was some accommodation made, for obvious reasons, in the depths of the Great Recession.
 
State waivers did go up during the period from 2007 till 2014 when we were recovering from the recession.

Not certain that focusing on feeding folks is the best place to start saving money in the US budget since it only consists of 2% of the entire budget.

Maybe they could fix the DOD with the nearly 1 trillion it is budgeted each year. I am certain that we could save a whole lot more money.


The target of USDA’s plan: Under current law, able-bodied adults without dependents, or ABAWDs, can’t receive SNAP benefits for more than three months during a three-year period, unless they’re working or enrolled in an education or training program for 80 hours a month. But states can waive that time limit when unemployment is high or there aren’t enough jobs available.

USDA said that in 2016, the most recent year data is available, nearly 74 percent of the ABAWD population was not working. Still, ABAWDs make up a just a sliver — 2.8 million — of the nearly 40 million Americans who receive SNAP benefits.
 
Last edited:
Ridgerunner said:
I think it’s a mistake for a country to reward lawbreaking, regardless of how well-intentioned.
Click to expand...
I think the proposal was to change the law so it wasn’t breaking the law. It would be similar to when the 55 mph speed limit was abolished. It wasn’t a reward to those who exceed the speed limit, but a recognition that in parts it simply wasn’t dangerous.
 
I was under the impression we were talking about changing the penalty, not the law. But sure, if the law is changed so that all immigration is legal, then nobody will be breaking any law coming here. The same is true of anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top