Should the American Taxpayer pay $50,000 to caravan members?

Jump to Last Post 1-14 of 14 discussions (131 posts)
  1. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

    Members of the caravan in Mexico are demanding the United States pay each of them $50,000 for them to go back to their home. 

    This is from the San Diego Tribune.

    "Two groups of Central American migrants made separate marches on the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana Tuesday, demanding that they be processed through the asylum system more quickly and in greater numbers, that deportations be halted and that President Trump either let them into the country or pay them $50,000 each to go home."

    https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/ne … story.html

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      They may demand all they wish, although it would seem more appropriate to demand it of Mexico, as it is Mexico paying to support them now and the blackmail would be more appropriate.  Either way, neither country has any obligation whatsoever to pay them to go, or stay, home.

      Once you have paid the Danegeld you never get rid of the Dane...

      1. Ewent profile image84
        Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        You righties would approve of mass extermination if WE, the sane, civilized Americans allowed it. You don't mind that Big Oil is sucking the Treasury dry?

        Who's fooling whom here? Texas is one of the 37 moocher states 13 donor states keeps flushing our hard earned state revenues to. Not for much longer. Our states don't get more than 70 cents on average for every $1 we pay in federal taxes. All while Moocher states which are ALL Republican get from $1.35 up to Alaska's $2.10 for that same $1.

        Why should we hand over our money to moochers and freeloaders? You want all that dirty filthy pollluting oil? Pay for it from your state, not the fed taxes.

        You want another $22 million a year for border money? Why should WE have to contribute to that? We have immgrants in the northeast every year and we don't get a dime.

        As for that moronic wall, Maggot Man thinks Mexico will pay for, that $5 billion he wants to build it is a lie. It will go to Cornballs state of TX so Trump can get them to rig more elections.

        And why are 95% of the border patrols ALL from TX? At a cost of $89,000 a day?

        Fess up boys. You tight wads love to lap up tax dollars by not paying your fair share and then whine like babies when it's your turn to give.

        Who told Republicans to go around defunding programs since Grinch Gingrich was Speaker that are ALREADY paid for?

        Ask taxpayers what WE want done with our money, not those hard bottom right wingers who'd steal the last crumb from their kids own mouths.

        Too liberal for you? Check the Preamble to the Constitution..."establish Justice, insure domestic Tranqulity, provide for the common defence, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE...."

        If Moochers states think we don't know why Cottonballs voted down immigration reform think again. The South and Midwest will NEVER rise again because they can't even do it without donor states paying for their states' needs. So they go back to sharecropper mentalities and the only way to accomplish that is to hire and exploit undocumented workers from across the border. No need to deny. The GAO proves that Confederate states pay their workers sharecropper wages.

    2. profile image77
      Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      That's a ridiculous demand; however, in today's touchy feely politically correct world, someone, somewhere, is taking this demand seriously.  And that is the humor of it!

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        It actually would be comical...if that $50,000 wasn't going to be taken from my wallet.  Maybe the DNC would care to cough it up? big_smile

      2. Ewent profile image84
        Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        You find mothers with children trying to keep their kids from Guatemalan gangs from being raped humorous? Well of course. Look at who you CONS put in the WH...a two faced low life sleaze bag mobster.

        There was NO demand. Stop the lying. There is a difference between demanding which YOU BOYS do all the time with your CONman bullying.

        Be warned. When you make idle threats, you better be prepared to carry them out. There are now 51 more WOMEN in Congress and the male testicles are sagging big time.

    3. Onusonus profile image78
      Onusonusposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Don't worry, California has a plan. They're going to tax text messages to get the money.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Won't work.  I predict millions of teens, and their parents, homeless and one the streets within 6 months.  Nobody could pay a tax on teen age texting.  lol

        1. Ken Burgess profile image89
          Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          If you hadn't noticed, there already are millions of homeless on the streets in CA.

        2. Ewent profile image84
          Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          And just what law on the books says that tax dollars can only be spent on mindless wars, the prison industries which are 95% located in CON states, the Agri Industries who suck up $20 billion a year in insurance against crop failure and Big Oil, Big Pharma and Big HMO honchos living like pigs and always finding ways to drain the Treasury dry.

          I'm guessing charity is not what you phony male "Chrissuns" know anything about. Charity too liberal for you? As for immigrants, look at the nude porn model who got a job in the US without a green card for 7 years. I guess porn modeling doesn't require a green card in the US?

          How did the First Nude Porn model get citizenship in less than 3 years when it takes others 11 years? How did Mommy and Daddy Putin supporters get citizenship in less than 3 years?

          I'm guessing there is NO national security threat from a nude Slovenian Porn Model whose Mommy and Daddy support Putin and Russian oligarchs right?

          Do us all a favor and go whine to Trump. He won't be around much longer.

    4. Live to Learn profile image82
      Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Can't they just cross illegally like everyone else?

    5. promisem profile image96
      promisemposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      It doesn't matter much what they say because they aren't U.S. citizens.

      The bigger news for actual U.S. citizens is the Republican voter fraud in North Carolina, don't you think?  wink

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ … 279938002/

    6. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      The RIGHT answer is NO or to put it more succinctly...…...HELL NO!  Pure & simple.  We have enough illegals already draining our social systems without adding any more!

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Can't.  We cannot remove someone from the country if they are not in it, and as of now they are not.

        Give the liberals their way, though, and they will be in the country, demanding services and their "entitlements" (though what they think we have agreed to supply them with is beyond me) from your tax money.

    7. Don W profile image84
      Don Wposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Good for them. What have they got to lose?

    8. Ewent profile image84
      Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Should taxpayers pay $95,000 for the First Nude Porn Model to travel? Weren't you the guys who blew a gut when Nancy Pelosi flew "first class" back home to CA for Christmas?

      Should taxpayers pay $85,000 every time Herr Von un zu Trump trots off to Mar-a-Lago and charges taxpayers for the cost of HIS Secret Service stays there?

      And if you really want to whine about cost, are you aware that keeping the immigrant children, a 2nd one who died this past week in those so called detention cages at a price tag of $2 million a month, where your complaints about that?

      Whineeeeeeeeeeeeee Whineeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

      There was NO demand. If you have to post lies, don't expect anyone to trust a word in your posts.

      There is a difference between immigrants seeking asylum from countries where their kids are being killed every day. Your kid safe and sound like Baron von und zu Trumpf? Or are they living without adequate food or shelter like the immigrant kids?

      Maybe men like you need to spend a few months in one of those Willy Silly TX detention centers so you can stop the whinnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeeee.

      1. profile image77
        Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        "And if you really want to whine about cost, are you aware that keeping the immigrant children, a 2nd one who died this past week in those so called detention cages at a price tag of $2 million a month, where your complaints about that?"

        No complaints about the legitimate costs for securing our borders.

        Get a grip.

        1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
          JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          That's WHY it's called "Catch and Release" so we do not incur a substantial financial burden:

          Don't you think a super intelligent, legitimate president like Obama had already thought things through ?? Unlike Bozo Trump:

          1. Ewent profile image84
            Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Do you want to stop your BS? It was President Obama not your Crook in Chief who set up E-Verify. So you think he did that to catch and release 2 month old babies and then deport their parents?

            I live in NJ. The state where Trump in 2014 got a money laundering fine at the Taj Mahal Casino after 3 warnings from FinCEN.

            Men who support a crook are themselves just as crooked. Just as self absorbed and egotistical as Trump is.

            Did you know that Trump has to sneak into NJ via the GW bridge because he knows those union contractors he never paid to build his hotels and casinos would use the NJ Turnpike and Parkway for his grave yard?

            Americans do not catch and release human beings. We treat them as YOU expect to be treated If you are human and not a Trumplizoid that is.

          2. profile image77
            Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Catch and release is a failed policy.  It allows people to ignore our laws by choosing not to show up for hearings.

        2. Live to Learn profile image82
          Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Pay no attention to that rant. The picture attached is in New Jersey. They don't mind living next to homeless people and doing nothing to help. So, a few underpaid immigrants is just more people to take advantage of there.



          https://hubstatic.com/14328098.jpg

        3. Ewent profile image84
          Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Okay...let's talk about securing our borders. I am sure you realize that the longest border in the world between two countries is the US and Canada right?

          I am sure you know that for years, the border between the US and Canada since the 80s has seen more smuggling of immigrants into the US by Americans who made it a "business."

          For decades, Columbia in SA was the top drug smuggling enterprise. Did we need border security from the Columbians? Oh that's right. they came into the US from Florida and up the Drug Highway known commonly as Rt. 1 into NY.

          I am fed up with Texas bleeding us dry. When they are whining they need more money for Big Oil, they are making us pay for their dirty filthy oil spills. Not to mention the cost to our states in the northeast who are upwind of their pollution that costs our states to keep the air, water and soil clean.

          Texas is the biggest employer of undocumented workers. Why? Because TX is too cheap to pay American wages. But oh how they love to complain about business taxes being too high. Really? When they pay next to nothing in business taxes?

          And let's pretend for one minute why these border states REALLY want money for a wall. It is because they know the oil industry is falling apart and has been for decades.

          So what they want now is more funding from the rest of the states. Meanwhile, these skanks are the same ones who use undocumented recruiters to hire cheap immigrant labor to avoid paying employer taxes.

          Don't even bother to go there denying this. I am a freelance writer and I wrote an article about the abuses these hot shot business owners pull on these immigrant workers. All they have to do is breathe the word, "deportation" and these workers are denied overtime pay, sick time, vacation time and are told to file for SSDI if they need healthcare.

          You bet your life I am a Muckraker. I saw in one facility where the undocumented recruiter was also the immigrant workers' employers. Nice trick for Mr. Hot Shot CEO...all liabilities are on the recruiter/employer and Mr. Hot Shot CEO gets off paying NO employer taxes.

          But it gets worse. I saw these recruiter/employers dropping off mini vans full of these immigrant workers. Guess what? It was President Obama who set up E-Verify for employers to check immigrant status.

          But oh gee I guess Mr. Hot Shot CEO doesn't have to bother with that since he isn't the employer. Right?

          Wrong. What is happening is that for every immigrant hired by these undocumented recruiters, Mr. Hot Shot CEO pays them a 60% commission. So you bet these recruiters make big time profits hiring and firing these undocumented workers every 90 days.

          Some reason Mr. Hot Shot CEO can't check E-Verify which is HIS responsiblity? Oh that's right. If he did that, he's have to pay employer taxes. Not to mention that these undocumented workers are told they have to pay employee taxes and then it goes into Mr. Hot Shot CEO and their recruiter/employers' pockets. Not the IRS.

          Sorry but when you mess around with muckrakers like me, you get facts you don't want to hear.

          It is big business who WANTS and NEEDS undocumented immigrants to work on the cheap so they don't have to  pay American wages.

          Deny this at your own risk. I know what I saw and I interviewed 3 female immigrants, 2 of whom now managed to get green cards and permanent residency.

          1. profile image77
            Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            "I am sure you know that for years, the border between the US and Canada since the 80s has seen more smuggling of immigrants into the US by Americans who made it a "business."

            You're right, I"m totally aware of this, and in fact I wrote an article on it some time ago.  Securing our borders is not as much about illegal immigration as it is about national security, including human trafficking, drugs and terrorism.  Many Americans won't understand how important it is for us to know WHO and what comes into the country until we lose a city or two.

            "It is big business who WANTS and NEEDS undocumented immigrants to work on the cheap so they don't have to  pay American wages."

            Yep, I agree. And so I'm in favor of enforcing ALL of our immigration laws and of securing our borders.  I want e-verify, I want to make sure people that are here on Visa leave when they're supposed to leave.


            "

          2. GA Anderson profile image91
            GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            So you provide the facts that nobody wants to hear? You know what you are talking about because you are a freelance writer? (wouldn't that offer more credence if you claimed to be an investigative writer or reporter? You don't have to know what you are talking about to just write something for money)

            After reading through several of your factually incorrect tirades, you finally made it worth it to look at your "facts."

            You wrote; "Guess what? It was President Obama who set up E-Verify for employers to check immigrant status."

            Can you support that with more of your facts? The ones I found said that the original employment verification program was started in 1996, and became known as today's e-Verify System when it went national - to all 50 states, in 2003.

            2003? Private citizen Barack Obama was 25 when the original e-verify started, and he was 2 years away from becoming a Senator, (2005), when e-verify became a national program.

            So how did Pres. Obama "set-up" the e-verify program?

            GA

    9. Sharlee01 profile image89
      Sharlee01posted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Oh yes, we should give them $50,000 a piece, and everyone that flood to the border after them... LOL

  2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image96
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 2 months ago

    I feel much more like they owe us money. LOTS of money.

  3. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

    I wonder what the guy from the caravan was talking about when he said the United States had stolen money from Honduras.

  4. hard sun profile image90
    hard sunposted 2 months ago

    No

  5. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

    The people in this caravan may be on to something.  If they are successful, I say thousands of us Americans tell Canada to give us $50,000 to not try to go into their country.  If this works we could then get New Zealand as well as Australia to pay us $50,000 to not try and get into their country.  I wonder if we would actually have to go there? We could all go online and tell them to pay us or we're coming.  We may be able to make quite a bit of money by agreeing to not enter countries in the privacy of our own home.  This is after all...the digital age. If someone asks what you do for a living you could say "I get countries to pay me not to go there."  Could be a pretty lucrative business.  Who is with me in this trail blazing entrepreneurial opportunity?

  6. psycheskinner profile image85
    psycheskinnerposted 2 months ago

    Well the alternative is to let them stay.  Unless you have a teleport machine and mind-changing raygun to provide.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image89
      Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Really? 

      ... they found their way to wherever they are, they can find their way back.

  7. PrettyPanther profile image84
    PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago

    It's sad and embarrassing that a great country such as ours cannot process these migrants in an efficient, professional and humane manner, without all the silly theatrics and ridiculous rhetoric.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image89
      Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately, its about a lot more than just these few thousand people, as I explained elsewhere.

      The U.N. and various no-borders organizations put together and supported that caravan. 

      Those types of efforts work in the EU because the EU is not controlled by elected officials, but by elites who are trying to transform the Western World so that they do not have to contend with things like worker's rights, free speech, etc. they want cheap labor and an easily controlled serfdom.

      Don't worry, in a couple of years they will be rid of Trump, one way or another, and then the floodgates will open up again.

      1. profile image77
        Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        "Don't worry, in a couple of years they will be rid of Trump, one way or another, and then the floodgates will open up again."

        Those are true words,Trump is a bulwark against the globalist agenda.  I do wonder though, if Trump can't be legally or politically disposed of in the next 24 months, will there be other kinds of efforts immoral efforts to deal with him.....it's just a thought that occurred to me as I wrote this.

    2. GA Anderson profile image91
      GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      You have mentioned that thought before PrettyPanther, and refraining from labeling that thought, I would ask, "Have you thought about what you find so sad? Have you thought about the process involved?

      I don't think you could realistically call it sad and embarrassing if you had.

      Consider this:

      300 undocumented, non-ID carrying folks lined at the door when it opens at 7am.
      30 Border control folks, (should it be 300, one for each applicant?),  waiting inside to  process their applications.

      One scenario would go quickly. Help them fill in the form, look at the available appointments schedule and schedule them.

      Then it's back out the door with a date and time to show up.

      Fast and easy. Except; their form data has to be verified. Usually an investigation of a small town or community thousands of miles away with only sketchy non-documented identifiers to go by.

      Usually no phone contacts with comparable authorities to verify the data.

      What do we do, send investigators?

      What caseload for these investigators, and how many per city, town, or village?

      How much time do we allott for each case; a day each way for travel, a couple days to investigate?

      Being optimistic let's say it only takes 3 days for each applicant. So within a week of their application we should know enough to schedule the right appointments and hearings.

      But, these 300, on this day, are behind the 2100 from last week, and the 2100 from the week before and the 2100 ...

      Bottom-line; their appointments are 11,000th to 11,300th on the schedule.

      Which door did we send them back out that first day? The one they entered, or the one to the U.S. side of the border?

      I am resisting that temptation Prettypanther, but can you consider the above process examples and really think your "sad and embarrassing" thought is a reasoned one?

      GA

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        GA, I have worked in government, which certainly does not make me an expert, but I have seen resources diverted and massive amounts of people hired and trained in very short periods of time. I'm not saying it is easy or inexpensive, and won't be messy, but it would be the logical way to respond, rather than ramping up irrational fear and behaving as though we're too stupid and incompetent to figure it out. If our government cannot deal with this relatively small crisis in a mature and competent manner, then I shudder to think what will happen if we have to respond to a massive crisis.

        1. GA Anderson profile image91
          GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          I understand the point you are making PrettyPanther. I think a basic question would address both of our perspectives.

          I am relying on recall, but I remember reading about a large number of judges, from across the nation,  pulled from their duties and transferred to the border to hold asylum hearings.
          *now there is a need to train or hire more judges to fill the gaps left by the ones drafted to the border to ensure U.S. citizens aren't denied justice

          And I remember that even with those additional judges, their daily caseload of hearings was some outrageous number that bordered on denying justice to the petitioners.

          I recall reading of the millions and millions spent to house, transport, feed, and supply all the other needs these petitioners would have while they wait for their hearings.

          There is also the massive CBP, (Customs and Border Patrol), budget increases for more personnel and facilities to deal with this problem.

          There is more to add to the costs, but as you mentioned for your solution, it is not inexpensive, nor is it easy. And as we can all see in the news, it is messy too.

          And we still cannot catch-up to the backlog of applicants.

          We would probably need to quadruple our current costs and efforts to achieve what you think a great nation like ours should be able to do. And this would not be a one-time thing, (surely you don't think these caravans are a one-time occurrence?), it would be the new normal for CBP operations going forward.

          Hell, we might need to create a new FBI-type investigative arm of CBP with the sole task of doing these asylum request investigations in 3rd world nations thousands of miles away.. (yes, I do know CBP already an investigative arm, but its investigative mandate isn't the one I mention)

          So, that basic question I mentioned.

          Do you think it is wrong to demand that potential immigrants follow our processes, rather than us expending additional hundreds of millions of dollars, suffering dislocations that harm our citizens, (the judgeship vacancies, the forced relocations, the additional government costs that must come out of taxpayer's pockets), to meet their demands?

          So, to that short version of that basic question; Do you think we should meet their demands or that they meet ours?

          Before you answer that, take a Google cruise to see what you can find out about the additional efforts we have made to accommodate our illegal immigration and asylum applicant problems in the last few years.

          Then you can reasonably decide if our efforts are a sad embarrassment.

          GA

          1. PrettyPanther profile image84
            PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            I think we differ in how we view the people in the caravan. You seem to view them as making demands upon us. I view them as asylum.seekers who should simply be processed according to our existing laws. The number of people seeking asylum.has ballooned due to dangerous conditions in other countries. They're.coming and we must deal with them in the immediate term.

            For the long term, we can look at a myriad of ways to.mitigate and cope with the probem, including assisting these countries to take control of their own problems, which will not happen over night.

            If we want to be a country that denies asylum seekers, turns its back on those fleeing violence and facing certain death, then we need to return the Statue of Liberty or at least remove the plaque that says  "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

            Frankly, I think we're seeing a rise in self-centered whiners with a can't-do attitude. We're rich, powerful, and we used to be good and resourceful. Are we no longer a can-do people, who lead the world in humanitarian and just causes?

            We need to decide, because if we no longer want to be that kind of nation, then we need to stop the false advertising.

            1. GA Anderson profile image91
              GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              I am worried this is not going to end well PrettyPanther. I find myself rejecting each of my 'first thoughts' for addressing your perspective because they sound too harsh, but yet, they are my first thoughts.

              For instance; your view of the people as asylum seekers and mine as people making demands. I think you have that one right, but, only because I think your view is wrong.

              [EDITED] *I was right. I couldn't moderate the tone of my response so I snipped most of it.

              But I did leave this:

              And we are not a country denying asylum seekers. That's baloney. We may not be doing an adequate and timely job by your thinking, but check out our application acceptance and approval rates before you claim we should cover Lady Liberty's poem.

              I think I remember from some old research in a thread with peterstreep that we accept about 6 million total  immigration applications a year, and total immigration approval is around a million and a half per year. You should check those numbers though, because I might have remembered wrong, and it will also offer you more insight into our current efforts.

              Self-centered whiners, rich, powerful and resourceful...

              {EDITED] Yep, this response got snipped too.

              I think that your perspective might be a little different if you dug into the actual numbers involved.

              GA

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                GA, I will step back a bit and give you a more measured reply later when I have more time. Please keep in mind that, from my perspective, we have a President who is asking for $5 billion for a completely unnecessary border wall. This same President sent in the military for pretty much the sole purpose of looking tough for his base, at an estimated cost of over $200 million by year's end.

                Yet, somehow we cannot address this crisis in a logical, efficient manner because it would cost too much money? That's hard for me to swallow. If Trump believes we can cough up $5 billion for a border wall, then cost is just a convenient excuse to make these people suffer. THAT is what this administration and many of his supporters actually want. John Kelly admitted it was the primary reason for the family separation policy, to make immigrants and their children suffer, as a deterrent.

                How we spend our money is a reflection of our moral values. Right now, this administration is not looking too good.

                1. GA Anderson profile image91
                  GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  I will wait for that measured response PrettyPanther, but I hope it doesn't include more Trump references.

                  This is an issue that predates Pres. Trump, and he was not a reference in my responses.

                  My point is that we have been struggling with this problem for a long time, but it is mostly in the last decade when it has escalated to a caravan-style invasion, (yep, that was just a bit of red meat to liven things up ;-)).

                  The political and social environment have changed. Now, it seems, the optics are more important than the details.

                  My opinion is that the details will trump, (yep, another red meat tidbit), an optics-based opinion every time.

                  I hear; dump Lady Liberty's poem, we are cruel and heartless for not accepting everyone that is fleeing a bad life, we are turning away mothers and children, but what I don't hear are the facts on the ground that matter.

                  The current caravan in the news has been reasonably estimated to be more than 80%, (not a claim I will stand on, but a amalgamation of different news sources), economically driven males. It might be a stretch to legitimately claim even a 10% valid asylum seeker content - yet we are demonized for not throwing open the border doors.

                  I hear we have shut our doors to asylum seeking immigrants, but there is no mention of the 6 million applications we try to process each year or the 1 1/2 million immigrant applications we accept each year, (this may be an "iffy" number).

                  That is why I mentioned a shallow dive into our immigration stats. I think you will find a different picture than your comments imply.

                  GA

            2. Ken Burgess profile image89
              Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this



              I think you believe in a mythical past.

              What this country was originally, was a group of self determined states that didn't believe in taxation or government control.

              It became more and more unified, and more and more militaristic.  In part out of necessity for its survival, having to defeat the French forces, British forces, and then to expand across to its current size, the Spanish, Mexican forces and Native American tribes.

              In short, this nation was built on being cut-throat, and crushing all who opposed its 'Manifest Destiny'.

              It took a major turn under Woodrow Wilson, who essentially sold-out the American people, and America's sovereignty, knowingly or not, he was the most traitorous, most evil President this country has ever had.  But that is another tale.

              After Woodrow Wilson allowed for the 'Federal Reserve' and the IRS to be created, we have been marching toward a new 'Manifest Destiny' ... which will eventually strip all Americans of their Constitutional Rights and any semblance of privacy or ability to pursue opportunity to the fullest of their ability.

              Trump merely is delaying that inevitability, the fact that so many hate him, and believe the propaganda the likes of CNN and MSNBC pump out, proves the term 'sheeple' is really fitting of most Americans these days.

              He is no more corrupt or criminal than anyone in Congress, or that held that position before him.  Its funny to watch criminals and conspirators 'build up' a case against him, all the while protecting those who have committed true crimes and atrocities against the American people from ever seeing justice. ...but its sad to see so many buy into it.

              Yeah Trump may be an Ogre of a person, and done plenty of shady things, but that was as a private person, not as a representative of the people, abusing the position of his Presidency, or Secretary, or Senator.

    3. Live to Learn profile image82
      Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      I don't support increasing any government agency. We have immigration quotas. My brother in law didn't leave Ireland to apply for citizenship. He applied and came over when approved. We aren't responsible for decisions made by foreign citizens to trek across another country and present themselves at the border, then demand we restructure to accommodate that decision. I suppose, if it were proven that liberal forces within America were behind raising expectations of what would happen upon arrival, then I might listen to their grievances.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image84
        PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        It is a gross exaggeration to think people will leave their homes and trek hundreds of miles with their children without a compelling reason to do so. If each and every one is processed according to our existing laws, only a small fraction will be allowed to stay in th the U.S. That is hardly incentive for more people to endure such hardship only to be turned away unless, of course, their situation is dire.

        I am not suggesting we accept them all. I am saying we should humanely and efficiently process them. If that means hiring temporary workers, so be it. It is a fact that they are here. Let's use our heads and deal with it instead of crying about  scary people coming to our border. Are we so incompetent we can't process a few thousand people? I think not.

        1. Live to Learn profile image82
          Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          There are reports that many have decided to trek back home so whatever compelled the march forward wasn't enough to prohibit the march back.

          I honestly think most people have compassion for the fact that many want a better life in America. But, I firmly believe these are economic migrants, which I have no real problem with, if proven to be people who are not a danger, i.e. tied to gangs, etc. There's one problem. How to vet check.

          Secondly, I want to feel that an immigrant has a chance of bettering themselves. It disgusts me when the argument is presented that we need people to pick our vegetables, clean our toilets, etc. It's like modern slavery. I want to know they will have hope of a better life, by our standards; not third world standards. Not allow them in because we're happy we have a ready supply of low paid workers. If we need to import people for low paying jobs that tells me we aren't offering decent wages for work required.

          I've always said our quotas should be most readily available to our southern neighbors because we share culture, they can most easily assimilate. But, laws matter. If you can't respect the law as a foreign national what reason would we have to assume that person would respect laws after entry?

          1. profile image77
            Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            "It disgusts me when the argument is presented that we need people to pick our vegetables, clean our toilets, etc. It's like modern slavery."

            Exactly, and that's what we currently have with much of the illegal population.  It seems to me that neither party is too interested in solving the illegal problem because it provides this slave labor.  On the other side are those who want to simply give them citizenship, as we did in 1986, and thus we reward bad behavior, encouraging more economic migrants to press up against our borders.

            Lawlessness breeds lawlessness.

        2. Ken Burgess profile image89
          Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Its not reasonable or rational to take in who-ever can make it to the border.

          A recent poll showed that 750 million people in the world want to leave their countries for the U.S. ... I don't know how they came up with that number, or how they polled them, but we couldn't handle 10% of that without our economy collapsing, and our society/nation shredding to something resembling between Mexico (with its Drug Cartel controlled sections) and Venezuela (with its impoverished majority) ... the people in gated communities guarded by private security would be safe, the rest of us, not so much.

          I agree that a 'better way' should be found. 

          But you have to understand this 'caravan' was funded/supported by private (or 'non-profit') organizations that helped them get here (food, water, transportation) and observed by United Nations officials... this wasn't some small group of people that happened to make their way here, it was orchestrated and funded, and had they succeeded tens of thousands more would be on their way right now.

          In fact tens of thousands were indeed on their way, they have been turned away by Mexico officials, in large part because of the fiasco in Tijuana, and in part because of the efforts of the Trump Admin working with the Mexican regime.

          Those who are interested in learning about why this 'caravan' came into existence should educate themselves on the UN Migration Pact, and the Soros funded 'open border' organizations that supported it.

    4. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      We have more than enough illegals already draining our social systems & costing Americans more in tax.   Let us deal with needy Americans first.  Remember American first.   We don't need any more illegals.  There are poor & homeless Americans who should be provided for.    We need to take care of our own, not others.    We can't let everyone who wants to come to America in.  That is beyond ridiculous.   These people are low skilled & can't contribute socioeconomically to this country.  Au contraire, they will drain the system.

      1. Jean Bakula profile image95
        Jean Bakulaposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I also agree charity starts at home. We have homeless, hungry people in all our major cities. I think we need to take a new look at our immigration laws, although I don't believe a wall is necessary.

        Canada, for instance, doesn't take anyone who doesn't have a college degree. They want people who can be assets to their country. I'm not saying we need to be draconian, but we do allow many people into the country, and they are getting to be a drag on our own economy. We need to fix our country first.

        Why doesn't Mexico protect their southern border more?

        Religious leaders have been discussing this caravan issue often, and think it's morally right to accept these people. Maybe they are right. But they don't even pay taxes or contribute money to help these people once they get here. I feel sympathetic to these people, but we can only absorb so many of them.

        Maybe they need to stand and fight the corruption in their own countries.

        We are a country that was founded on ideals. And I love that. But sometimes pragmatism has to take precedence over ideals, when hoards of people think they can come here and make a mess like they did in Tijuana. The city there doesn't have the resources to cope with the magnitude of this large group of people.

  8. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

    Does anyone on HupPages have a sense of humor?

    A story about illegal immigrants asking for $50,000 per person to go home is funny.  How can anyone take this serious?  This story is to be mocked and made fun of.  The idea is a real joke.

    I can understand liberals taking it serious because liberals tend to take themselves serious and this as far as I am concerned is the real humor of any political discussion.

    Come on and learn to laugh.  I expect more from conservatives.  Liberals are as boring and shallow as ever but come on conservatives...start talking about how ridiculous this story is in so many ways.

    1. GA Anderson profile image91
      GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      I get your point readmikenow, but hopefully you noticed that the non-laughing replies are focused on a different aspect of the caravan issue.

      Speaking for myself, I thought the OP was so silly sounding that I was tempted to look for a Snopes debunking ;-)

      GA

  9. Aime F profile image84
    Aime Fposted 2 months ago

    No, demanding payment is ridiculous. It’s very unfortunate that they felt the need to seek asylum in the first place but not being granted it doesn’t entitle them to anything. Surely anyone who attempts this is clear that it might not go smoothly, especially when they group up with thousands of other people to do it.

    Letting them in sets an unmanageable precedent. Paying them instead of letting them in also sets an unmanageable precedent.

    1. Ken Burgess profile image89
      Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      To be fair, under any other past President, they would have succeeded.

      We have had the Cuban Migrant crisis of the 80s, again in the 90s, somewhere in there we had Reagan's Amnesty for illegal immigrants, Bush did the same, Obama had an open-borders 'catch and release' policy, he approved and improved illegal immigration welfare, etc.

      Trump is the first President in 50 years to deny any large group of immigrants access into the country.

      1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
        JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Ken, I don't know where to begin with addressing your "talking points" but I'll try: First of all, despite the ridiculous CONservative spin from fox fiction channel and other right wing nuts, the USA has NEVER had "open borders" under any past legitimate president and nobody is advocating for this and of course everyone knows "catch and release" for those individuals apprehended at the border is the ONLY reasonable strategy to ensure we treat human beings humanely and with the dignity they deserve from a so called Christian Nation which might be an insane notion under Bozo Trump who is up to his beatie eye balls in legal woes:

        "catch and release" is also the ONLY sensible way to ensure American tax-payers are not subjected to footing the financial bill to detain, feed and treat undocumented immigrants, a cost which is one aspect I hear cry baby republicans whining about all day long: ALWAYS remember, especially around Christmas time that we are talking about human beings from other countries who are just as valuable as you and I, no better no worse in stature or human worth and your relatives long ago did the very same things to gain access to the USA: It's just too bad the Trump's made it through border security without rejection:

        Although we are declining in every way under the insanity of Bozo Trump, for 250 years the USA has been the greatest nation on Earth WITHOUT a big, useless financially burdensome 2,000 mile pile of concrete surrounding us which could have been easily breached in so many ways, and once the pitch dark karma of the Trump's is finally evicted from our politics, and we pray to god that happens VERY soon, we will pick up the pieces of what's left of the national ruble and hopefully, god willing, we will become great once again:

  10. Live to Learn profile image82
    Live to Learnposted 2 months ago

    Here's an interesting article for those who think entry into the United States should be unrestricted.

    https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-border … 37307.html

    1. crankalicious profile image92
      crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Here's an interesting article for those who think all people trying to cross the border should be shot dead on sight.

      https://www.memecenter.com/fun/1677131/ … -immigrant

      1. Readmikenow profile image96
        Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Good one!

      2. Live to Learn profile image82
        Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        I find it insulting that you would post that piggy backed on my post. I didn't read your article link but, even if a joke, it's offensive. A desire for orderly and lawful entry is not tantamount to a desire to shoot anyone who might not agree.

        1. crankalicious profile image92
          crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          As many people who think entry into the U.S. should be unrestricted think that people approaching the border should be shot dead on sight, so I find the proposition that there is some significant population that thinks entry into the U.S. should be unrestricted equally offensive.

          To my mind, the proposition is an attempt to devalue any argument about immigration reform from the start and is intellectually dishonest.

          That said, I recognize that you have expressed admirable and empathetic views toward those attempting to come to this country, so it's not personal.

          1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
            JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            ONLY a sick, demented, mentally ill, dark unholy individual truly believes a person regardless of ethnicity who approaches our border should be as you say "shot dead on sight", and any American who commits the this act of murder whether it be a private citizen pretending to be law enforcement, or a border agent or military personnel will absolutely be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and could end up behind bars for the rest of his or her life:

          2. Readmikenow profile image96
            Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            I just can't take this as serious as the rest of you.  Okay, so we don't shoot anyone on sight.  How about we let people shoot in the dirt near them or shoot stuff around them?  At the worst we will only give them above the waist grazing shots.  Legs are off limits because they'll need those to carry them back to the shit hole country of which they came.  I mean, everyone needs target practice.

            1. Live to Learn profile image82
              Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              You do realize each statement made stands alone, at many times. You might want to put a laughing face behind that so any one who reads it understands it is a joke. A poor one, admittedly, but still a joke.

          3. Live to Learn profile image82
            Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            The main thrust of my argument has always been that most people are compassionate and want fair and equitable policies. The problem is in the details. Insisting that everyone who walks up to the border be allowed entry, even if only until we process and ultimately deny an asylum application puts an unfair burden on the American taxpayer.

            I would challenge you to prove that open border advocates are in equal proportion to the number of people with some ridiculous wild west notion of shooting people who arrive at the border. I doubt you'd ever be able to prove it so it is no more than a hyperbolic statement which sows discord for no apparent reason.

            1. crankalicious profile image92
              crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              I believe you are sowing discord, knowingly or unknowingly, by attempting to link liberals to an open border argument. The very nature of the question you are posing is intellectually dishonest by its very nature.

              I believe the equivalent argument is to say that conservatives want immigrants shot. After all, isn't that why these militias go down to the border? They want to shoot Mexicans.

              I'm just trying to pose an equivalent argument because the idea that any substantial number of people want open borders is ridiculous and Democrats don't want that.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                The idea of an open border does come from the liberal side, and it is not the handful of people advocating "shoot on site" that the conservative side of the nation produces.

                It can be written off to ignorance, to a mistaken belief that it doesn't affect them or the country.  It can be attributed to the constant claim that we either have illegals here or we will starve.  It can be seen in the cries of "But they just want a better life" or "But they're just women and children!".  It is expressed by the comment "Well, we should take down the statue of Liberty, then, if we don't let them in."  We see it in sanctuary cities and states (all very liberal) that actively aid in avoiding deportation.

                Bottom line is that there is indeed a very large percentage of liberals that would not turn anyone away.  An open border, then, even as we all recognize that they don't want drug runners or other criminals (no one ever said they were rational, after all).

                1. crankalicious profile image92
                  crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  The idea of an open border is a specious argument used by conservatives to get other conservatives in a tizzy about immigration. Like virtually every other conservative cause (guns, among them), it is driven by paranoia (some immigrant is going to rape my daughter).

                  I've never met a liberal or talked to a liberal who wanted an open border. I've known far more liberals who want limited immigration and more restrictions.

                  That said, I will admit that Democrats twist the crap out of the immigration debate to the point where they sound like they want open borders because they know that recent immigrants and their relatives are more likely to be Democratic votes.

                2. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
                  JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  You must be getting that "Open Border" nonsense from CONservatives, perhaps that's truly what they wish for considering Bozo Trump's crappy property according to reports, may have hired Illegal Aliens: But that's certainly NOT coming from Progressive Democrats despite the number of times Sean Hammity and other knuckleheads cry and whine about it on national television:

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                    Do you see sanctuary cities as conservative?  If illegals can just make it to one of those they're pretty safe - the city itself will help them stay free.

                    If that isn't a blatant advertisement for open borders I don't know what is.

              2. Live to Learn profile image82
                Live to Learnposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                Yeh. What wilderness said.

  11. hard sun profile image90
    hard sunposted 2 months ago

    Obama sent troops to the border. He was elected twice as a Democrat in case anyone forgot.
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics … index.html

    1. profile image77
      Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      He did do that.  And I understand far better now than I did while he was in, that border security improved some (just by his adding personnel).  He was far from a border security hawk however, though I doubt we'll have such a hawk once Trump leaves office.  This country has become wimpified.

  12. profile image61
    Teresa Blalockposted 2 months ago

    like brenda replied t­h­At ­A ­m­ot­h­er ­c­A­n ­m­A­k­e $6821 ­i­n ­A ­f­ew w­e­e­ks ­o­n t­h­e ­c­o­m­put­er. ­d­i­d y­ou ­l­o­o­k ­At t­h­is w­e­b s­it­e­...............>>>>>>>>>>>  www.find.jobs95.com

  13. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
    JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months ago

    If anyone around here happens to be Irish, your ancestors were persecuted for no reason when they tried to enter the USA just like today's immigrants are: ALL of our ancestors regardless of ethnicity have been through the very same unnecessary hostilities, unjustifiably persecuted by those delusional beings who actually believe they are superior:

    It's a shame things have not changed but so be it, unfortunately for God's children, it goes on and on like clockwork: Persecution of the Irish as they try to make it ashore:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7ML2hzsNbo

    1. hard sun profile image90
      hard sunposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      Good points. Also, that all our ancestors immigrated legally is a complete myth. Many of the Irish "walked right in" from Canada. As the below linked article states also states, "No one in his or her right mind believes that the US in 2018 should not have border security and comprehensive immigration reform."

      https://www.bostonirish.com/history/201 … historical

      1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
        JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Absolutely hard sun: Migration to the USA has always come in many forms and taken many different avenues which ALL of our ancestors endured just like the hard working immigrants of today:

        As for this 'open borders' nonsense, we Progressive Democrats certainly are not in favor of it and just because we advocate for smart security which WORKS like more border agents which creates more permanent jobs and the use of 21st century technology instead of an overblown, useless 2,000 mile multi billion dollar pile of obsolete concrete like China built centuries ago, means we are the INTELLIGENT looking forward party, not the retarded cave men of the CONservative right:

        1. profile image77
          Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          "As for this 'open borders' nonsense, we Progressive Democrats certainly are not in favor of it and just because we advocate for smart security which WORKS like more border agents which creates more permanent jobs and the use of 21st century technology instead of an overblown, useless 2,000 mile multi billion dollar pile of obsolete concrete like China built centuries ago, means we are the INTELLIGENT looking forward party, not the retarded cave men of the CONservative right."

          I don't care how it gets done really.  Whatever works.  However, the far left has demonstrated, thus far, little interest in secure borders.  Truth is many Republicans are limp wristed on this as well.

          1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
            JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Hxprof, the 'far left' as you call us signed off on approximately 1.6 BILLION for border security in 2018 which is not exactly chicken feed in an era when Bozo Trump is exploding our national debt like never before with his insane Corporate Welfare Tax Cut Scam where he and criminal congressional republicans simply gave the filthy rich trillions of our wealth:

            1. profile image77
              Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              Well, more is needed.  They need to "sign off" on that too.

        2. GA Anderson profile image91
          GA Andersonposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          So Jake, you are not for open borders, but you are for letting illegal immigrants stay here so you can get your $7 car wash?

          GA

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            It would appear so.  It's OK to cheat them out of a legal wage, but not OK to cheat US law by sneaking across the border illegally. All while ranting about $30 salads and $50 pork ribs if they don't ignore our laws.

            1. promisem profile image96
              promisemposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              And yet our government would rather punish the immigrants and ignore the businesses that hire them.

              If Trump really wanted to stop illegal immigrants, he would enforce the laws with the businesses that are breaking the laws and "cheating" the country out of Social Security payments.

              No jobs, no illegal immigrants.

              1. profile image77
                Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                Yeah, and on it goes.  But Trump is correct in wanting that southern border secured better because all kinds of people take advantage of a poorly protected border.

              2. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                How are illegals "punished"?  By not allowing them to violate the law?

                Certainly the law should be enforced, but it's kind of tough when local politicians tell them when to disappear for a day or two.  And the e-verify system is still inadequate to the task, at least as I understand it.  It needs help that congress will not supply.  Plus, of course, there are no real teeth in the laws concerning employment of illegals; a slap on the wrist is hardly a deterrent to saving thousands for every such employee hired.

                1. promisem profile image96
                  promisemposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  Is going to jail a reward or punishment?

                  Slap on the wrist? Please read the law before making such claims.

                  Punishment for a business owner includes fines in the thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands plus the possibility of jail.

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                    How many have their companies are confiscated for repeated violations?  We know it goes on - what are we doing about it?

                    Yes, I get that they may be fined a thousand dollars.  While saving three thousand by hiring illegals.  I'm not seeing the punishment here.  And that doesn't include those employers that knowingly hire illegals, but have paperwork showing that if they were incredibly stupid during the interview they wouldn't have caught the three fake documents and thus go free of any fine at all.

              3. Ken Burgess profile image89
                Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this



                So long as there is illegal immigration welfare and support services, as well as legal immigration welfare for those who have 'anchor babies' ...

                So long as cannabis is illegal, so long as millions use heroin, opium, meth, etc. there will be illegal immigration.

                And of course, Amnesty cities, and Amnesty states draw them like moths to the flame.

                1. promisem profile image96
                  promisemposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  Does your reply mean you think companies that hire illegals should get a free pass or not?

            2. Ken Burgess profile image89
              Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              I think you have that backwards...

              It's OK to cheat US law by sneaking across the border illegally, and then its OK to cheat those illegals out of a legal wage, so that Jake can have his cheap labor and not pay taxes, but have the taxpayer's system support the illegals.

              But maybe I misunderstood.

    2. Ewent profile image84
      Ewentposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      My father left Italy at age 7 when the Fascists there were known as "The Black Hand." He hated Mussolini and would hate Trump.

      The first thing he had always remembered seeing when he came to the US was the Statue of Liberty. He memorized the poem by Emma Lazarus, "The New Colossus:"

      "Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame
      With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

      Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
      A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
      Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
      Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
      Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

      The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame,
      "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

      With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,

      Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

      We all know that affluenza is the disease of these right wingers who hate anyone who is not as affluent as they are. So they look down those beak noses with their beady eyes and blame the poverty on those these diseased affluent wingers created in the first place.

      All I see are a bunch of oneupmanship blowhards whose greed is their worst disease.

      1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
        JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Well said Ewent: rabid "Right Wingers" don't seem to understand history nor do they seem to care about it but if they did, they would surely understand that the vicious, unjustifiable and at times CRIMINAL persecution of our South American brothers and sisters today who are simply fleeing desperate situations just as right winger's ancestors did centuries ago, was the very same persecution endured by the Irish, Polish, German and Japanese as they sought a better, safer life here in the USA:

        When the insanity of persecuting South Americans subsides, which sooner or later it will considering border crossings are DOWN, and especially after the inevitable imprisonment of Bozo Trump, which ethnicity will the so called "Christian Right" try to persecute next ????

  14. Readmikenow profile image96
    Readmikenowposted 2 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14328228.jpg

    Probably a lot sooner than we realize!

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      My area of Idaho is filling up with Californians fleeing their home state.  Not a formal caravan, but most assuredly a flood of "immigrants" running from a liberal state gone berserk.

      1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
        JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        lol, that's really not happening but if a few do indeed migrate to Idaho, don't worry you're little head off, after a few short weeks or even days , they'll discover the HUGE mistake they've made and double back to civilization:

        There's good reasons WHY a rather large state geographically like Idaho has very few inhabitants, just like Alaska, Wyoming and a few other desolate states in the union:

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          How I wish that were true.  The city of Meridian, Id., where I live, is the fastest growing city in the country.

          1. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
            JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            lol: Trump followers might believe you without checking themselves, but I'm not sure where that alternative fact came from: Perhaps Sarah Hucklebery Sanders or whatser name Kellyanne Clownway:

            Sorry, but I don't see Meridian Id listed as the fastest growing city in any reputable site, maybe you got it mixed up with another city:

            1. profile image77
              Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              Come on Jake.  Are you busy trying to shine the earth??  Look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridian,_Idaho.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image89
        Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Problem is, they are like a plague, same with NYers coming to FL...
        The damned fools flee their Liberal-loons run states to get away from obscene taxes and restrictions, and then bring their liberal politics with them which caused the economic and social conundrums they fled from.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          All too often.  That is true all too often. sad

      3. Readmikenow profile image96
        Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        As someone who likes the outdoors...Idaho is a fantastic place to visit.  It's beautiful!  If you want a great outdoors experience...Idaho can really provide it.  A few other states in the area do also, but Idaho is definitely a place to go to have great outdoor experiences. I will be going again this spring.  Great place.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Love it for that, and northern Idaho is absolutely beautiful.  I get up there some, but not as much as I'd like.  Rode the Hiawatha bicycle trail a few years ago, and the lakes are always great.

          But the mountains aren't far from me, and I camp there a lot during summer months as well.  Lots of campgrounds and lots of pull off spots you can stop in for a night or a week if you are self contained.

          1. Readmikenow profile image96
            Readmikenowposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Sounds great.  I plan to do some backpacking as well as fishing when I go there this year.  I have a friend who lives there and invited me to go hunting with him next year.  Again, as a person who likes the outdoors...Idaho is great place to visit.  My friend who lives there moved there from Mississippi.  Long story.  Only good experiences in Idaho.

        2. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
          JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Finally the truth: YES Idaho might be a good place to VISIT, just like N Dakota, Alaska, Zimbabwe, Vietnam, Cuba and Wyoming might be places to VISIT for a change of scenery, but certainly not for a job, to retire or to raise a family:

          1. Ken Burgess profile image89
            Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            Oh yeah, the resemblances between Zimbabwe and Idaho are staggering.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              lol

            2. profile image77
              Hxprofposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              Both words have the letter i......

            3. JAKE Earthshine profile image77
              JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              Go back and read my last comment and you'll find I never said there were resemblances between Idaho and Zimbabwe, I said they both might be places to visit for a change of scenery and considering the last time I visited Idaho I was bored to tears which fell from my eyes then froze immediately from the frigid cold, I think I'd rather visit Zimbabwe next time I travel" for some soothing warmth and enticing scenery:

              But that said, Bozo Trump still needed to successfully pull off one of the greatest private property land grabs in our history before he could have even thought about building that great useless wall in his empty head, and considering  he's this close to either a fitting for a straight jacket or orange jump suit, I seriously doubt this is a top priority for him: This whole wall thing was just a big campaign farce anyway, a farce that got out of hand:

              1. hard sun profile image90
                hard sunposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                I go to Eastern Oregon now and then and drive through Northern Idaho. Beautiful! And I'm sure plenty of happy people there. I just ran across this though and thought of this conversation.

                Depression, suicide rates highest in Mountain West states

                https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/ … 213071002/

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)