Where’s the news coverage about the caravan?

[HSFBfan]

Just now, Horsefly said:

That 12 mil are not the number of people that have crossed the border illegally, most of these are those that have overstayed  visas.  The number of illegally crossings have decreased by about 80% the past few years. 

Not good enough....until that border is 100% secure and not 1 person can get in will it ever be good enough. 

Next step find all that overstated Visa and deport and than halt all Visa applications. 

Next step jail all business owners that hire illegals. 

 

[Horsefly]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

Not good enough....until that border is 100% secure and not 1 person can get in will it ever be good enough. 

Next step find all that overstated Visa and deport and than halt all Visa applications. 

Next step jail all business owners that hire illegals. 

 

The point is border security has been improved and was on a commendable path.  Resources and energy could have been placed elsewhere like infrastructure.  The idea is to maximize dollars and resources where needed the most, border security and multi billion dollar walls is not it. 

trump knew immigration was a trigger point for many on the right and is politically exploiting it. 

[HSFBfan]

Just now, Horsefly said:

The point is border security has been improved and was on a commendable path.  Resources and energy could have been placed elsewhere like infrastructure.  The idea is to maximize dollars and resources where needed the most, border security and multi billion dollar walls is not it. 

trump knew immigration was a trigger point for many on the right and is politically exploiting it. 

Border security does need it. Well never agree on the issue but they need it. Unfortuantely well never do what is really needed at the border. Everything is a temporary solution. Never a permanent fix

[Troll]

5 hours ago, Horsefly said:

Here’s the link made easy for you. (Using the state sponsored propaganda machine...Fox)   Now entertain me and show me the stories about the caravan that’s just as attention grabbing and urgent as labeling this an INVASION?  

we have more troops on the border than we do In Syria.  I expect around the clock coverage for such a significant deployment of our military to the border.  

https://www.foxnews.com/

And my premise is the national urgency of this event is manufactured.  It’s overblown, this was never a major crisis. 

 

  

haha all good... we really are on the same page on this one being manufactured, and overblown....

Your whole point seems to be against fox, trump, reps etc., and you won't get any argument on that..... as they played it up and used it as much or more than any...

But yeah both sides have some headlines that are doozies, and since the election, not really being used by Trump as far as I know (don't subscribe to fox so can't say), and all he headlines I see are from the left so what does that tell you?? 🤔

Could be that my observations are merely the byproduct of the left dominating the corporate news cycle tho...….🤣

[World Citizen]

1 hour ago, Horsefly said:

That 12 mil are not the number of people that have crossed the border illegally, most of these are those that have overstayed  visas.  The number of illegally crossings have decreased by about 80% the past few years. 

I believe that there are more Mexican people leaving than coming to this country.  Not sure about Central or South America.

[HSFBfan]

Finally....my words must have gotten to the WH.....lethal force can be used at the border signed by COS Kelly

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/administration/417827-white-house-authorizes-use-of-force-for-troops-stationed-at-border%3famp

@Horsefly

@GardenStateBaller

[Mjd33]

22 hours ago, HSFBfan said:

Than why has 12 million illegals entered this country??

The left has been spewing this number forever .... it’s closer to 30 million illegals in this country currently .... 

[HSFBfan]

48 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

The left has been spewing this number forever .... it’s closer to 30 million illegals in this country currently .... 

Thanks for the correction

[NorCalRuss]

On 11/21/2018 at 8:43 AM, Horsefly said:

Border Patrol agents have had no trouble apprehending people who cross illegally.

"I see it as a political stunt and a waste of military resources and waste of tax dollars,"

Then why do we have an estimated 13-30 million!+ illegals in the country? 

This should be good. 

Do you know where they come up with the 12 million number? Do you think it’s close to being accurate?

I’m sure all the illegals or their families put them done on the census to get an accurate number. 

Yale, I believe it was did a study that showed numbers are double the census numbers and others project over 30 million. 

[NorCalRuss]

On 11/21/2018 at 8:52 AM, Horsefly said:

That 12 mil are not the number of people that have crossed the border illegally, most of these are those that have overstayed  visas.  The number of illegally crossings have decreased by about 80% the past few years. 

If most of the illegals are from overstaying Visas, then US should stop the Visa program with Mexico and other trouble visa countries citizens immediately. 

[Horsefly]

15 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said:

Then why do we have an estimated 13-30 million!+ illegals in the country? 

This should be good. 

Do you know where they come up with the 12 million number? Do you think it’s close to being accurate?

I’m sure all the illegals or their families put them done on the census to get an accurate number. 

Yale, I believe it was did a study that showed numbers are double the census numbers and others project over 30 million. 

The estimate is based on the actual immigrants illegally crossing the border and then those who have visas, a controlled document, that has expired.  

I have no idea if 12M or 30M is the more accurate number.  My response was the amount that is derived by illegally crossing the border, not through other means, like overstaying visas. 

[Horsefly]

18 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said:

If most of the illegals are from overstaying Visas, then US should stop the Visa program with Mexico and other trouble visa countries citizens immediately. 

I believe the greatest %? of those overstaying visas are from Asian countries.  

[Troll]

On ‎11‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 1:25 PM, World Citizen said:

I believe that there are more Mexican people leaving than coming to this country.  Not sure about Central or South America.

Mantequilla!!!

 

 

[Troll]

FOR ANYONE that cares about or follows this immigration topic, here is the LATEST as it comes to the United Nations Compact that is proposed and due to be signed in a few weeks (sometime in December)...

Of note, I believe the current US administrations stance (Trump LOL) is that the US will NOT be signing up....

Sure hope you guys can handle the 'angry white guy' commentary from a European perspective, or feel free to post another view of the proposed UN pact.  It's long but the guy just does not stop making points LOL...…..

 Sooooooo...…….

should the US sign up for this plan or not????

 

[ohio]

1 hour ago, Troll said:

FOR ANYONE that cares about or follows this immigration topic, here is the LATEST as it comes to the United Nations Compact that is proposed and due to be signed in a few weeks (sometime in December)...

Of note, I believe the current US administrations stance (Trump LOL) is that the US will NOT be signing up....

Sure hope you guys can handle the 'angry white guy' commentary from a European perspective, or feel free to post another view of the proposed UN pact.  It's long but the guy just does not stop making points LOL...…..

 Sooooooo...…….

should the US sign up for this plan or not????

 

Wasn't even aware of this. Did a little research.  It seems that several countries have pulled out already:  Here's the map of countries that probably won't sign and the ones that probably will.  Red won't, blue will, yellow are not sure.

The US was the only country that did not even participate in its negotiation, so you know the USA will not sign this, as they may be out already. 

Here's the actual agreement proposal.  It's a long and nebulous read.  

  https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180713_agreed_outcome_global_compact_for_migration.pdf

[Troll]

1 hour ago, ohio said:

Wasn't even aware of this. Did a little research.  It seems that several countries have pulled out already:  Here's the map of countries that probably won't sign and the ones that probably will.  Red won't, blue will, yellow are not sure.

The US was the only country that did not even participate in its negotiation, so you know the USA will not sign this, as they may be out already. 

Here's the actual agreement proposal.  It's a long and nebulous read.  

  https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180713_agreed_outcome_global_compact_for_migration.pdf

Yes we are OUT....but how many realize how deep (shit) IN that Europe is at this point??

Or even the state or direction of 'immigration' as it exists today.

The UN proposal is just plain ludicrous...  

[ohio]

1 minute ago, Troll said:

Yes we are OUT....but how many realize how deep IN that Europe is at this point??

Or even the state or direction of 'immigration' as it exists today.

The UN proposal is just plain ludicrous...  

Can see other countries not signing either.  Doubt if Saudi Arabia, Russia, Japan, China, and others will sign this.  Most of East Europe is either out, or will not sign.  Wouldn't be surprised if some third world countries don't sign this as well, since they have problems with border countries.

By trying to Coecerce nations into signing this, Germany and France will make other European countries more nationalist and maybe even fascist.  For instance, Austria was very liberal since the second great war, but is turning very conservative and shutting its borders.  Even Baltic nations are starting to push back.

This Pact proposal may have good intentions, but may also have dire consequences especially cultural and economic ones.

[World Citizen]

21 hours ago, Troll said:

Mantequilla!!!

 

 

Interesting.  That is exactly where I got that info from.  

 

[World Citizen]

18 hours ago, ohio said:

Can see other countries not signing either.  Doubt if Saudi Arabia, Russia, Japan, China, and others will sign this.  Most of East Europe is either out, or will not sign.  Wouldn't be surprised if some third world countries don't sign this as well, since they have problems with border countries.

By trying to Coecerce nations into signing this, Germany and France will make other European countries more nationalist and maybe even fascist.  For instance, Austria was very liberal since the second great war, but is turning very conservative and shutting its borders.  Even Baltic nations are starting to push back.

This Pact proposal may have good intentions, but may also have dire consequences especially cultural and economic ones.

This will undoubtedly be true to a degree.  However, this is to be expected and is even unavoidable as large groups of people migrate for various reasons (some for Climate reasons and some for safety).  It will only get worse (depending on how you view 'others') as people migrate away from places that are increasingly difficult to live in.  I imagine there will be many Californians who will decide to move away because of the fires that burn all year long now.  Same principle.  

So, Imo, as people move and settle in wherever it is they decide to go, societies must reach a balance of sorts or we will have to deal with world war again.   Fascism is a much more serious threat than Immigration IMO.  And in this country, our elected Republicans are the biggest threat.  Mainly due to their refusal to address humans role in changing our climate.  That is a much greater a threat to us socially, economically, our health, and nothing won't be affected by it. 

In 100-150 years, how do you think we will have dealt with this?  Will we achieve a balance and some peace and global harmony where people will decide that the future is not going to be a remake of the past?   I have to assume that we will choose a more loving view of our fellow humans because to continue on as we currently are is unsustainable.  IMHO   Probably take much longer than 150 years as there is such incredible hate and fear that must be reckoned with and people are very invested in their hate and fear.

 

[Troll]

42 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

This will undoubtedly be true to a degree.  However, this is to be expected and is even unavoidable as large groups of people migrate for various reasons (some for Climate reasons and some for safety).  It will only get worse (depending on how you view 'others') as people migrate away from places that are increasingly difficult to live in.  I imagine there will be many Californians who will decide to move away because of the fires that burn all year long now.  Same principle.  

So, Imo, as people move and settle in wherever it is they decide to go, societies must reach a balance of sorts or we will have to deal with world war again.   Fascism is a much more serious threat than Immigration IMO.  And in this country, our elected Republicans are the biggest threat.  Mainly due to their refusal to address humans role in changing our climate.  That is a much greater a threat to us socially, economically, our health, and nothing won't be affected by it. 

In 100-150 years, how do you think we will have dealt with this?  Will we achieve a balance and some peace and global harmony where people will decide that the future is not going to be a remake of the past?   I have to assume that we will choose a more loving view of our fellow humans because to continue on as we currently are is unsustainable.  IMHO   Probably take much longer than 150 years as there is such incredible hate and fear that must be reckoned with and people are very invested in their hate and fear.

You know what? this is all pretty good stuff...

Simple question for you though, (see above highlighted) what is your take on the climate engineering going on? or is this a simple truth you refuse to address?

And if I were to go with your plant food CO2 as being the main (or any) problem, how would you even begin to address what 'man' produces individually (in say their cars etc.) vs what a single freighter ship or transportation commerce puts out? How do you jive moving people to 1st world countries from 3rd, where this move would only exponentially exacerbate (CO2 based climate change)what you are claiming as reason?

    

[World Citizen]

On 11/25/2018 at 1:07 PM, Troll said:

You know what? this is all pretty good stuff...

Simple question for you though, (see above highlighted) what is your take on the climate engineering going on? or is this a simple truth you refuse to address?

And if I were to go with your plant food CO2 as being the main (or any) problem, how would you even begin to address what 'man' produces individually (in say their cars etc.) vs what a single freighter ship or transportation commerce puts out? How do you jive moving people to 1st world countries from 3rd, where this move would only exponentially exacerbate (CO2 based climate change)what you are claiming as reason?

    

I'll start by saying that I appreciate the way in which the question was asked.  Now we can talk.

On climate engineering - I think it is better if we concentrate on lowering and ultimately reversing our contribution while we are able to rather than having to engineer out of necessity.  As far as I know we do not have the technology yet but it is a thing.  Is what a simple truth that I refuse to address?  I will have to read some more about it.

I wouldn't go with plant food as being the main (or any) problem either and it isn't my idea.  There are several problems that must be addressed and I'm sure you understand that I did not invent them or scientifically prove them to be true.  I do see that the entire world's scientist are in agreement.   The world's population, every government, the vast majority of this country, our military, everybody except Republicans in this country believe what the science is telling us.  

We know how much we have pumped out of the ground and we know how much we have burned.  We know how much plants and trees can consume and we know how much the ocean has consumed.  We know that the amount that we do see in the atmosphere is about the same as what we would expect there to be with what we burned minus the sinks.  There is no reason that I have ever heard that would explain how this would happen, that the environment would arbitrarily start increasing CO2 at the same time we are doing it.  In addition, we have land clearing which contributes.  As we warm and the permafrost melts and releases all that methane, there will even be more heat trapping gasses.  The effects of heat trapping gasses are very well understood.

As for the individual vs commercial contribution, that is for others to figure out.  I'm more of a concept guy.  Lol  We must first recognize the problem.  I do know that the removal of regulations by Trump is not going to help anything and will only make it worse.  The standards for MPG that got removed was one way that would have addressed your question in a direct way by lessening individual's footprint.  

As for people migrating - remember, it is not me that is going to move people nor is it my idea that they do so.  It's just going to be a reality as different regions face harsher weather and droughts or flooding and food/water shortages.  It will affect the poor and disenfranchised first and it's only reasonable to assume they will not want to remain there.  It will be difficult for everybody, those migrating and those receiving them.  I guess it would have been better if we had acted 40 years ago but we can't.  We can act today though.  Except in this country because, as you know, Republicans have been reluctant to admit the problem.  At least now they are saying that it is just too expensive to do anything about.  We both know that the problem will only get more expensive and costly by not acting now.  How could it not?   

[NorCalRuss]

3 hours ago, World Citizen said:

I'll start by saying that I appreciate the way in which the question was asked.  Now we can talk.

On climate engineering - I think it is better if we concentrate on lowering and ultimately reversing our contribution while we are able to rather than having to engineer out of necessity.  As far as I know we do not have the technology yet but it is a thing.  Is what a simple truth that I refuse to address?  I will have to read some more about it.

I wouldn't go with plant food as being the main (or any) problem either and it isn't my idea.  There are several problems that must be addressed and I'm sure you understand that I did not invent them or scientifically prove them to be true.  I do see that the entire world's scientist are in agreement.   The world's population, every government, the vast majority of this country, our military, everybody except Republicans in this country believe what the science is telling us.  

We know how much we have pumped out of the ground and we know how much we have burned.  We know how much plants and trees can consume and we know how much the ocean has consumed.  We know that the amount that we do see in the atmosphere is about the same as what we would expect there to be with what we burned minus the sinks.  There is no reason that I have ever heard that would explain how this would happen, that the environment would arbitrarily start increasing CO2 at the same time we are doing it.  In addition, we have land clearing which contributes.  As we warm and the permafrost melts and releases all that methane, there will even be more heat trapping gasses.  The effects of heat trapping gasses are very well understood.

As for the individual vs commercial contribution, that is for others to figure out.  I'm more of a concept guy.  Lol  We must first recognize the problem.  I do know that the removal of regulations by Trump is not going to help anything and will only make it worse.  The standards for MPG that got removed was one way that would have addressed your question in a direct way by lessening individual's footprint.  

As for people migrating - remember, it is not me that is going to move people nor is it my idea that they do so.  It's just going to be a reality as different regions face harsher weather and droughts or flooding and food/water shortages.  It will affect the poor and disenfranchised first and it's only reasonable to assume they will not want to remain there.  It will be difficult for everybody, those migrating and those receiving them.  I guess it would have been better if we had acted 40 years ago but we can't.  We can act today though.  Except in this country because, as you know, Republicans have been reluctant to admit the problem.  At least now they are saying that it is just too expensive to do anything about.  We both know that the problem will only get more expensive and costly by not acting now.  How could it not?   

9 of the top 10 most polluted cities in America are from massive Democrats states. 8 from California and 1 from New York. 

Califuckinfornia, the liberal hot spot of the world where they want to send you to jail for using a plastic straw, open borders, free everything, cries the loudest about climate change and has 8 or the top 10 polluted cities in America. Let that sink in for a min. 😂

[Troll]

3 hours ago, World Citizen said:

I'll start by saying that I appreciate the way in which the question was asked.  Now we can talk.

1) On climate engineering - I think it is better if we concentrate on lowering and ultimately reversing our contribution while we are able to rather than having to engineer out of necessity.  As far as I know we do not have the technology yet but it is a thing.  Is what a simple truth that I refuse to address?  I will have to read some more about it.

2) I wouldn't go with plant food as being the main (or any) problem either and it isn't my idea.  There are several problems that must be addressed and I'm sure you understand that I did not invent them or scientifically prove them to be true.  I do see that the entire world's scientist are in agreement.   The world's population, every government, the vast majority of this country, our military, everybody except Republicans in this country believe what the science is telling us.  

3) We know how much we have pumped out of the ground and we know how much we have burned.  We know how much plants and trees can consume and we know how much the ocean has consumed.  We know that the amount that we do see in the atmosphere is about the same as what we would expect there to be with what we burned minus the sinks.  There is no reason that I have ever heard that would explain how this would happen, that the environment would arbitrarily start increasing CO2 at the same time we are doing it.  In addition, we have land clearing which contributes.  As we warm and the permafrost melts and releases all that methane, there will even be more heat trapping gasses.  The effects of heat trapping gasses are very well understood.

4) As for the individual vs commercial contribution, that is for others to figure out.  I'm more of a concept guy.  Lol  We must first recognize the problem.  I do know that the removal of regulations by Trump is not going to help anything and will only make it worse.  The standards for MPG that got removed was one way that would have addressed your question in a direct way by lessening individual's footprint.  

5) As for people migrating - remember, it is not me that is going to move people nor is it my idea that they do so.  It's just going to be a reality as different regions face harsher weather and droughts or flooding and food/water shortages.  It will affect the poor and disenfranchised first and it's only reasonable to assume they will not want to remain there.  It will be difficult for everybody, those migrating and those receiving them.  I guess it would have been better if we had acted 40 years ago but we can't.  We can act today though.  Except in this country because, as you know, Republicans have been reluctant to admit the problem.  At least now they are saying that it is just too expensive to do anything about.  We both know that the problem will only get more expensive and costly by not acting now.  How could it not?   

I will try to address this one paragraph at a time....and try to be nice LOL.

1) I agree with your first sentence 'concepts' as applied to 'true' environmental pollution, and while CO2 should be included like everything else, it is not even close to what should be considered a higher priority.  Yes you should check out what is actually going on in the world right over your head today (don't look up LOL), and you might soon realize that the academic 'solutions' of spraying tons of heavy metals  to 'offset' global warming is f'ing up more than just the ozone layer and is certainly more impactful than the Co2 they think they are offsetting.  

2) you can leave politics out of the topic if you want to actually be scientific about it, and to say there is anything resembling consensus on topic would degrade anything you say even further. 

3) we know a lot more than gases retaining heat...we modify the atmosphere with a lot more than gas (or even heavy metals), and we do it in 'layers'....   if the only thing you see is methane and Co2, then you are missing it.

4) "That's for others to figure out" is the basic issue here......short version...while it is industry polluting...the politicians want the public to pay all the bills for it...

5) this is just a plain old mess of a paragraph, being nice, I will just say I agree with the premise you were trying to make in acting now vs later etc. but aside from that.... any 'migration' you try to tie in, shoots the shit out of any "do right by global warming" argument...whether you think you can blame it on politics or not...

[Troll]

57 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said:

9 of the top 10 most polluted cities in America are from massive Democrats states. 8 from California and 1 from New York. 

Califuckinfornia, the liberal hot spot of the world where they want to send you to jail for using a plastic straw, open borders, free everything, cries the loudest about climate change and has 8 or the top 10 polluted cities in America. Let that sink in for a min. 😂

That's the basic issue and result.... when 'good intentions' ignore reality..

Reality is plenty of UVC being measured at ground level in Cali now....and given the recent fires, I would think that this might start to hit some peoples radar...of course CO2 is all man-made, but our monkyfucking the stratosphere to (supposedly) combat global warming is not???  

[Troll]

8 hours ago, World Citizen said:

On climate engineering - ...  As far as I know we do not have the technology yet but it is a thing.  Is what a simple truth that I refuse to address?  I will have to read some more about it.

 

FYI if you wanted to try and catch up to where we are really at.... without drudging thru all the tin foil on the net, I found a decent 2 minute clip to start you off......Don't go with any fear mongering and stick to the published pier reviewed stuff, and you can easily form your own opinions on climate engineering...

 

Now I can bitch all day about the SOOT (carbon black) that the military likes , or complain how the metals the antiglobalwarming crowd uses has killed the ozone layer even worse, but the fact of the matter is that just like your CO2, there are even bigger issues at hand...

Did you know that recent 'climate changes' here on earth have been echoed by every other planet in our solar system just recently as well? with most of the other planets experiencing worse?  You would have a hard time trying to explain that as 'man made' tho...

Also consider that a single (large) volcanic eruption, like Pinatubo in 1991 will drop global temperatures a full degree for several years and that's more than the entirety of 'man made' global warming to date....when you stop to think of priorities...