Post New

His nibs moving to price nurse candidates out of the education they need.

Outrage over Trump’s bill reclassifying nursing as not a ‘professional degree’ for college students

Nursing has been excluded as a “professional degree” by the Department of Education as it looks to implement sweeping cuts to student loads laid out in President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

Under Trump’s bill, only “professional degree” students are eligible for the higher loan limit of $200,000, while graduate students are capped at $100,000. Excluding nursing by definition as a professional degree effectively prices aspiring nurses out of their studies.

The Education Department brushed off concerns over the future of nursing as “fake news” and accused the nursing organizations of having had an “unlimited tuition ride on the taxpayer dime.”

An entire four-year bachelor of science in nursing program can range from $89,560 to $211,390, including tuition, housing and other fees, according to NurseJournal.

Nursing wasn’t the only casualty of Trump’s spending bill. Physician assistants, physical therapists, educators, social workers, audiologists, architects and accountants were also on the list of degrees that were not classed as “professional” by the Trump administration.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/outrage-over-t...

The article does not mention what the loan limits are for "non-professional" degrees, so I asked the net sifter.

The new federal student loan limits for non-professional degrees depend on whether the degree is for undergraduate or graduate studies.

Undergraduate Non-Professional Degrees

For undergraduate students, the annual and aggregate federal direct loan limits have not changed for the 2025-2026 academic year. The limits are determined by a student's dependency status and year in school.

Dependent Students: The aggregate (lifetime) limit is $31,000 (with no more than $23,000 in subsidized loans). Annual limits are:
First year: $5,500
Second year: $6,500
Third year and beyond: $7,500

Independent Students (and dependent students whose parents are unable to obtain a PLUS Loan): The aggregate limit is $57,500 (with no more than $23,000 in subsidized loans). Annual limits are:
First year: $9,500
Second year: $10,500
Third year and beyond: $12,500

Graduate Non-Professional Degrees

For graduate students pursuing degrees that are not classified as "professional" (e.g., most master's programs), new, lower limits will go into effect for new borrowers starting on July 1, 2026.

The annual limit will be $20,500 in Direct Unsubsidized Loans.

The aggregate (lifetime) limit will be $100,000, including any loans received for undergraduate study.

The previous Graduate PLUS loan program, which allowed borrowing up to the cost of attendance, will be eliminated for new borrowers starting July 1, 2026.

Students who borrowed federal loans for a graduate program before July 1, 2026 may be eligible to continue borrowing under the prior, higher limits for a limited time.

Clearly, the "JCs" figure they can import enough nurses, who were educated at someone else's expense, for their own, personal, needs. The rest of us, can do without. We are, after all, nothing but expendable meat.

Steve

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/full-list-of-deg...

List of Degrees Not Classed as ‘Professional’ by Trump Admin

Nursing
Physician assistants
Physical therapists
Audiologists
Architects
Accountants
Educators
Social workers

If a person didn't know better, they might think that the Trump administration is trying to destroy the USA from within.

List of Degrees Not Classed as ‘Professional’ by Trump Admin

Nursing
Physician assistants
Physical therapists
Audiologists
Architects
Accountants
Educators
Social workers

If a person didn't know better, they might think that the Trump administration is trying to destroy the USA from within.

Funny- many of those professions are also dominated by women.

Any connection?

Clearly, the "JCs" figure they can import enough nurses,...

But they don't like immigrants.

If a person didn't know better, they might think that the Trump administration is trying to destroy the USA from within.

What is even more bizarre, is the remaining sorts of "professionals". Along with a variety of doctors and dentists, they list "theologian". With all due respect to Bill, I don't see the value in lending someone $200,000 to be a Bible banger.

Specialties like architect, and accountant, can be taken over by AI, or offshored to people who were educated at someone else's expense, who will do the job cheaper than a USian.

Educators and social workers? USian Proles will do without.

Steve

I've seen this and wonder who would post this. The Philippines cranks out a lot of nurses and educators. My wife has rapidly become friends with some Pilipinos who came over hear with education and experience to teach. Yes, "Pilipinos" is used in the Phils and I enjoy some of their variations. Her sister is a nurse, passed the test and is now earning good money in Minnesota. So we'll get to import more Filipinos. Countries will specialize in cranking out various degrees, and they'll get jobs around the world.

Koreans like to get Medical Degrees in the Philippines because lower cost, good medical program reputations, and they're also taught in English. At some point, we'll expand people leaving the US, getting a degree, and returning because we've priced them out.

>>Clearly, the "JCs" figure they can import enough nurses,...<<

But they don't like immigrants.

The "JC" puppet pols pander to their bigot goober base, by proclaiming their hate for immigrants, unless they are white. As we have seen from Trump and Musk's full throated defense of H1B visas, they are perfectly fine with importing people, even if they aren't white, who were educated at someone else's expense, for the benefit of the "JCs".

Some years ago, I proposed a "JC friendly" health care system: a private system, with a membership fee high enough to keep the "riff raff" out. The system would recruit doctors, nurses, technicians, from overseas, where they were educated at someone else's expense, to staff private doctor's offices, private clinics, and private hospitals, that are only open to those who paid the several thousands of dollars in membership fee to gain access. The Proles would do without medical care.

The Steve Plan for "JC only" health care, goes hand in hand with the Steve Plan for education. The "JCs" have their spawn's education subsidized by the government, using money taxed away from the Proles, while the Proles get "bantu education": just enough reading and arithmetic to work for the "JCs", then booted out of school around 8th grade, and told to go "learn the dignity of work". Of course, that frees up a lot of money that would no longer be used educating Proles spawn, to be given to the "JCs".

Steve

At some point, we'll expand people leaving the US, getting a degree, and returning because we've priced them out.

That would be fine with the "JCs". As long as someone else pays for their education, so the "JCs" aren't "burdened" by taxes.

Steve

With all due respect to Bill, I don't see the value in lending someone $200,000 to be a Bible banger.

All authoritarians nurture a professional cadre of holy men, court prophets, astrologers, seers or magicians.

It’s all part of the strongman image

>>Clearly, the "JCs" figure they can import enough nurses,...<<

But they don't like immigrants. - 1pg

--------------------

Every so often, you guys need to be reminded that is the criminal illegal immigrants that we don't like and want deported ASAP. Frankly I don't understand the sanctuary mentality that prefers to have these guys walking the streets of their communities.

Every so often, you guys need to be reminded that is the criminal illegal immigrants that we don't like and want deported ASAP.

And we mostly agree. But you guys skip due process almost entirely, and so are snaring people you probably shouldn't. You don't know if they are illegal until they get a hearing.

Frankly I don't understand the sanctuary mentality that prefers to have these guys walking the streets of their communities.

It's because we know how vital many of these folks are to various sectors of the economy. Whether we like it or not, a lot of ag workers are illegal. If you guys would address the issue of migrant workers, it would make things a lot easier.

All authoritarians nurture a professional cadre of holy men, court prophets, astrologers, seers or magicians.

It’s all part of the strongman image

For those who missed it, Putin started sucking up to the church several years ago, by enacting homophobic laws.

And who could forget Lord Trump, posturing in front of a church, holding a Bible?

Steve

And who could forget Lord Trump, posturing in front of a church, holding a Bible?

And who can forget that PorkyDon asked Gen Miley if the soldiers couldn't just shoot the unarmed, largely peaceful protesters in the legs on the walk to the church.

Keep that in mind when MAGAts ask 'what unlawful orders might a soldier need to refuse'?

It's because we know how vital many of these folks are to various sectors of the economy. Whether we like it or not, a lot of ag workers are illegal. If you guys would address the issue of migrant workers, it would make things a lot easier.

Uh, huh. We have guest worker programs already.
If you want more guest workers, that's one thing. But the left enacts policies that result in open borders and that...we can't have.

Dope1

The strategy is to let many millions of illegals in to economically exploit them as a low paid indentured servant force

Then give them amnesty and the vote as well as all kinds of government benefits.

Then have permanent majorities for electoral purposes.

Heck they don't even need the vote illegals are counted by the x census for apportionment purposes already.

Oh yeah launder those government benefits back to the Dem party as contributions.

We have guest worker programs already.

Sort of. The employer has to petition the specific worker. It's an H2A (for ag workers). That is very tricky to do, in practice (even if it's fine in theory).

We have never had open borders, at least not since I was old enough to vote. Obama deported huge numbers of illegal migrants. Albaby repeatedly provided statistics and data that indicated there was no dip in removals. It's simply a myth.

There are some fringe-left people that support open borders. But they are not significant in terms of voting power. There are a large number of supporters for the DREAMERs, and similar. But that's not really the same thing. I think I can safely say that the left (realizing the left is not a monolith) doesn't want "illegals" any more than the right does. We simply want a workable guest worker (bracero) program, fair dealing with DREAMERs, and a generally more humane system. Then we will have a lot less stress on the system, and we will know exactly who is here and where they are.

Uh, huh. We have guest worker programs already.
If you want more guest workers, that's one thing. But the left enacts policies that result in open borders and that...we can't have.

Those programs have never worked, so since you want to blame the left, make them work and you'll be one up on us. But the answer is you aren't really interested at the legislature level because it's such a good issue to run on. Solve it and Republicans can't run on it and blame the left.

Open borders may have existed in the 1700s and 1800s, but not in my lifetime. So that's false and further, you knew it was false when you wrote it. I proposed that we let them stay on the other side of the border until their asylum claim # came up, and build little courts and admin rooms just across the border that could hear their claims.

We have never had open borders, at least not since I was old enough to vote. Obama deported huge numbers of illegal migrants. Albaby repeatedly provided statistics and data that indicated there was no dip in removals. It's simply a myth.

The violence and brutality we are seeing on the "news" now, appeals to the puritanical, punishment oriented, USian culture, so it's a big hit with certain factions.

Steve

Open borders may have existed in the 1700s and 1800s, but not in my lifetime. So that's false and further, you knew it was false when you wrote it.

A lie. Several, actually.
Biden provided every incentive for people to rush the border and threw the gates wide open. We called it out while this board disingenuously claimed that "no, no, that's not happening" when it clearly was.

In 3 months merely be enforcing the laws on the books it got cleaned up. One would think some of you would learn something from that.

The ProGlibs do not study, nor do they understand, history. They do not study nor do they understand human nature.

Infected by Marxism, they wrongly believe that history and human nature can be erased by sheer force of will.

I read an article recently where archaeologists determined that one group of Neanderthals cannibalized a group of smaller, weaker Neanderthals, women and children, about 44,000 years ago. I guess they can tell by the way he bones were laid out.

The civilized niceties we arrogantly take for granted in the West are not a birthright. They are very fragile and it is a constant struggle to protect them against the forces of chaos and destruction--agsinst our true bestial nature lurking beneath a very thin cerebral cortex.

They delusionally believe that things like the Russian war against Ukraine, or the middle east conflict, are aberrations.

They are not.

When my bones are excavated by sine future archaeologist in the next 40 or 50,000 years, I don't want to be in either of those piles of bones.

If we allow Western civilization to be overrun without a fight, by conquerors who share.none of our traditions or values, we have no one but ourselves to blame for committing civilizational suicide.

Ironically, the ProGlibs will likely be the very first to be separated from their heads.

I guess they would rather end up in the "eaten" bone like to prove a point if some kind. Maybe that their college degree is worth something?

Personally I'd rather keep my head on my shoulders

If we allow Western civilization to be overrun without a fight, by conquerors who share.none of our traditions or values, we have no one but ourselves to blame for committing civilizational suicide.

I'm in! Let's get rid of the Irish first. They pray funny, and they do this foreign "St Patrick's Day" thing, like they wish they were still in Ireland. Let's accommodate them, on a one way trip! ;^)

Steve

Steve,

This is the problem with ProGlibs.

You act like a clown in response to a very serious threat.

You're delusional and believe your delusion shields you from reality.

The decisions you have to make in your life are not important to anyone except yourself or perhaps immediate family, because you believe you have successfully structured your life so as to influence yourself from these threats.

Hope you're right.

If we allow our civilization to be overrun without a fight, by conquerors who share.none of our traditions or values, we have no one but ourselves to blame for committing civilizational suicide. ~MAGABOT 2025 & Adolf Hitler, 1941

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined fascist regimes and found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
Here's one:
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe:
racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists.

The full list:
https://rense.com/general37/char.htm

I read an article recently where archaeologists determined that one group of Neanderthals cannibalized a group of smaller, weaker Neanderthals, women and children, about 44,000 years ago. I guess they can tell by the way he bones were laid out.

Another lecture showing marco000's fear. He thinks no one understands history but him. What does he paint? Another version of replacement theory. Our great white civilization here in America will be overrun by illegal black and brown immigrants who will mosque us to death, chomping on our bones with their mosques and their inferior morals and understanding will mean proglibs will be the first to die.

This he conjures up from 44,000 year old bones of a group of weaker neanderthals who they think were the last in a group escaping, chased down by neanderthals culling the weak out of another herd of neanderthals.

Transfixed by replacement theory he pours out his fears on our board, right as we are wondering if we are seeing the beginnings of the death of our democracy. We've got more than three years left, and we're going to have to listen to this garbage for three years??

You act like a clown in response to a very serious threat.

Some things invite comedic mockery. ;^)

For those who do not know, the Irish were hated by a lot of people, when they first arrived in numbers. There is even a line in "Blazing Saddles" that mocks the hatred the Irish faced.

Steve...not Irish

ME: Open borders may have existed in the 1700s and 1800s, but not in my lifetime. So that's false and further, you knew it was false when you wrote it.

Dope: A lie. Several, actually.
Bidern provided every incentive for people to rush the border and threw the gates wide open. We called it out while this board disingenuously claimed that "no, no, that's not happening" when it clearly was.

Not lies, you were present in the arguments and didn't dispute Albabay's explanations of the process, just his legal reasoning. If you look back, you'll find that 10-15% we're being turned back at the borders. You are just propagandizing, or more accurately, lying.

Sifter

"In fiscal year (FY) 2024 (October 1, 2023, to September 30, 2024), the Biden administration completed
roughly 700,000 removals and returns of immigrants at and between U.S. borders. This figure represents the highest number of annual removals and returns since 2010." (BP can go up to 100 miles from borders.)

Also, there was an admin review of the remaining claims at six weeks, and a third of those were disqualified, but some filed appeals.

Then it tightened up into crossing the border and claiming asylum was the wrong way, you had to cross at certain points and file for asylum (the right way), and the number was limited. Crossing anywhere else disqualified your claim (and you had to wait for a few years, IIRC)

So at a minimum 10-15% were turned back, then later on that tightened. I like the policy where they stayed in Mexico, but that border area become dangerous.

Then another half were denied at their final hearing. (roughly 1-2 years)

So at 100 crossing the numbers looked something like this:
Crossed 100
Turned back -15 Immediately
Remaining 85
1st hearing DQ -28 six weeks
Remaining 57
Final hearing DQ -28 1-2 years
Qual Asylum, etc 29

Right. The way the entire Arab world scapegoats Israel and Jews. I knew that already.

The Irish aren't hostile to Western civilization and enlightenment values.

Why do ProGlibs who can't deal with a real issue insist on clowning themselves?

you had to cross at certain points and file for asylum (the right way),

Which provided the nativists with pix of massive numbers of brown people lined up to enter the US.

Then another half were denied at their final hearing. (roughly 1-2 years)

Which provided the nativists with another talking point "catch and release".

As much as the "JCs" want cheap labor, the goober base does not want non-white people coming in. So, impasse.

Hence, "Plan Steve" (offered with tongue in cheek): forcing Prole spawn out of school by age 14, so they can "learn the dignity of work", filling the low pay, crap jobs, that immigrants would no longer be available to fill.

fwiw, the net sifter (suspecting I should have trademarked that term) says there are 17M USians between ages 14 and 18. There are supposed to be around 20M illegal immigrants. See? Plan Steve solves the labor shortage. And, booting that many people out of school, means all the money now spent on high school educations could then be used to give the "JCs" another tax cut.

The breakdown:

Age 14: Approximately 4.3 million
Age 15: Approximately 4.47 million
Age 16: Approximately 4.47 million
Age 17: Approximately 4.40 million

Steve

The Irish aren't hostile to Western civilization and enlightenment values.

(nativest talking points) This is a Protestant country. They're Catholics. They can't be trusted. They take their orders from Rome!

You have forgotten how Jack Kennedy had to give a speech, in 1960, to reassure USians that his Catholic faith was not going to dictate how he ran the country? I was heartened that Biden did not feel the need to repeat that bit. Most of the country seems to have gotten over that prejudice. But, Mitt Romney did feel the need to give a speech reassuring people his LDS faith would not dictate how he would run the country.

Transcript: JFK's Speech on His Religion

But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected president, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured — perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again not what kind of church I believe in — for that should be important only to me — but what kind of America I believe in.

https://www.npr.org/2007/12/05/16920600/transcript...

Steve...raised in a Baptist lodge

Which provided the nativists with pix of massive numbers of brown people lined up to enter the US.

No. All the pics I saw were prior to this.

Then another half were denied at their final hearing. (roughly 1-2 years)

Which provided the nativists with another talking point "catch and release".

No. Catch and release was as they crossed the border, not after two years. You never understood that?

And what I am responding to is Dope's lie that the borders were open. Do you agree with Dope? It's interesting if you agree with Dope that there were open borders. My plan was remain in Mexico, and we even built administrative and court systems down in Mexico using embassy type agreements.

No. Catch and release was as they crossed the border, not after two years. You never understood that?

The thrust of the "catch and reliease" line was obvious. The complaint was that when people make their asylum claim at the border, they are given a work permit, and a court date, months, or years, in the future, then released into the US. There was a plan, to increase funding for immigration courts, to shorten the wait time for a hearing, but someone prevented that plan making it through Congress.

Steve

The thrust of the "catch and reliease" line was obvious.

Just as my question - Do you agree with Dope that the borders were open, was not answered by you?

You have forgotten how Jack Kennedy had to give a speech, in 1960, to reassure USians that his Catholic faith was not going to dictate how he ran the country?

And I remember, first hand, how many refused to believe him.

My own grandmother (bless her name, but not her racism) warned me that Jack Kennedy would be taking his marching orders from the pope. She was serious.

And I remember, first hand, how many refused to believe him.

My own grandmother (bless her name, but not her racism) warned me that Jack Kennedy would be taking his marching orders from the pope. She was serious.

You must be really old! :) I read about this but was unaware at the time. I don't remember anyone speaking out against the Catholics, so it was new to me. Whereas as cuts and jokes about Jews, Poles, and blacks were ubiquitous.

Just as my question - Do you agree with Dope that the borders were open, was not answered by you?

At the hazard of sounding like a lawyer, it depends on your definition of "open". If you mean "open" in the sense that anyone could cross, anywhere, at any time, without the Border Patrol caring or knowing, no. If you mean "open" as in any brown people allowed in, even if temporarily, while waiting for their hearing, then they appeared "open". Of course, the corporate media made the most of the hype and hysteria, showing huge lines at border crossings, and mobs walking along Mexican roads heading north.

From the net sifter:

The number of encounters at the southern border varies significantly by year, with a peak of over 2.2 million in fiscal year 2022 and a drastic drop to nearly 238,000 in fiscal year 2025. Other years have seen high numbers, such as over 1.7 million in FY2023 and 646,822 in FY2020.
Fiscal Year
Number of Encounters
FY2017 526,901
FY2019 1,147,480
FY2020 646,822
FY2021 Over 1.7 million
FY2022 2.2 million
FY2023 Over 1.7 million
FY2025 238,000

For the halibut, I pulled up the numbers during the Obama administration. They never exceeded 500,000/year. So, yes, numbers of 1.7-2M/year were extraordinarily high.

Steve

You must be really old! :) I read about this but was unaware at the time. I don't remember anyone speaking out against the Catholics, so it was new to me.

iirc, Catholics are #3 on the Klan's hate list, behind blacks and Jews.

Steve

You must be really old!

Older than dirt, and twice as crusty.

I'm 76..... though I just walked in from splitting several red oak logs into kindling.
Ok.... so I had to sit down between logs.

Great HIIT exercise. (That's what I tell myself)
Split,rest, split, rest, split, rest, split, rest.

Wobbly footed now... have to get ready to go to a choir concert at a church in Ann Arbor

Older than dirt, and twice as crusty.

I'm 76..... though I just walked in from splitting several red oak logs into kindling.
Ok.... so I had to sit down between logs.

74 here, and I walk 2+ miles a day. I spent this afternoon on a ladder sanding the porch fascia, prepping for painting. Still have to power wash and deal with abnormalities, then use sealant to even things out. I promised my wife a beautiful porch and she will get it. I ordered in a hundred stainless steel screws to replace the rusty ones. As long as she's happy and can bring her friends over. :)

Steve, this is what your snifter says:

"An open border is a border with no or minimal control, allowing for the free movement of people, goods, and services, which can be either a result of intentional legislation or a lack of enforcement."

It isn't subject to debate, there is no other side when it's a propaganda point. And your point here is dead wrong:

Steve: If you mean "open" as in any brown people allowed in, even if temporarily, while waiting for their hearing, then they appeared "open".

As stated previously, 10-15% of the people who came across the border were returned. That's not an open border. If there's an open border then there would be almost no one to talk to, no one there to stop them and for them to claim amnesty to, and there might also be no problem with drugs crossing the border. I've crossed open borders - there may be a sign there but that's it.

Here's Wiki:

An open border is a border that enables free movement of people and often of goods between jurisdictions with no restrictions on movement and is lacking a border control.[1][2

Here's Cambridge:

open border
a situation in which goods and people can enter and leave a country easily

Now as I've stated, we moved to right way, wrong way, which I liked, and I favor keeping them across the border till they are adjudged to enter. Open border is just good sound bite propaganda.

Open border is just good sound bite propaganda.

That's all that matters these days. As I said :then they appeared "open".

Something motivated triple the number of people to come to the US during the Biden administration. The GOP exploited the daylights out of it.

Steve

Some things invite comedic mockery. ;^)

Amd some things are actually serious.
I’d suggest you read up on the goings-on in Malmo, Sweden and other places in Europe. Or what Pakistani gangs do to little girls in the UK. You might now find that so funny.

Not lies, you were present in the arguments and didn't dispute Albabay's explanations of the process, just his legal reasoning. If you look back, you'll find that 10-15% we're being turned back at the borders. You are just propagandizing, or more accurately, lying.

No. This is the problem with hiding behind other posters and you AI engine. Al was and is 100% wrong in his interpretation of the border because his arguments depended on government officials obeying the law…and following the spirit of the law.

But the Biden admin winked and nodded at the asylum process and abused it to the maximum extent. That’s the nuance that you don’t understand.

Biden threw incentives out there to entice people to cross the border. Now that those incentives have been removed, they’re not. It’s that simple.

Maybe spend more time trying to understand the issues instead of trying to score points off other posters. Neither you nor your doppel are very good at it.

I’d suggest you read up on the goings-on in Malmo, Sweden and other places in Europe. Or what Pakistani gangs do to little girls in the UK. You might now find that so funny.


...and there was never, ever, any crime in the US, until "they" came here. There were never any rapes, or murders. There was never any disease. There were never any gangs, let alone violent gangs.

I have had rational conversations with Marco. I don't know why he went off on this tangent today.

Steve

But the Biden admin winked and nodded at the asylum process and abused it to the maximum extent. That’s the nuance that you don’t understand.

Something clearly happened during the Biden administration. The data makes that clear. Otherwise, why would the number of people showing up at the border triple and quadruple, compared to the Obama administration? Was Biden a slave to the "JCs" that wanted to flood the US with cheap labor?

As offered before, the US has four political parties: the bigot goober GOP, the "all for the JCs" GOP, the "all for the JCs" Dems, and the democratic socialist Dems. fwiw, I wondered about who the Big O was serving, when he was nattering about fictions like "clean coal", and pushing his "automatic IRA" to skim people's paychecks, and hand the money to Wall St, without the Prole's prior informed consent.

from the net sifter.

The Obama automatic IRA was a legislative proposal that would have required employers without a retirement plan to automatically enroll their workers in an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) via payroll deduction, unless the employees opted out. The proposal was never passed by Congress, but it spurred the creation of similar, successful state-level auto-IRA programs.

The Federal Proposal (Never Enacted)

President Obama included the auto-IRA proposal in every one of his administration's budgets, but it never gained enough traction in Congress to become federal law. Key features of the proposed national program included:

Mandatory Employer Participation: Employers with more than 10 employees who did not already offer a retirement plan (like a 401(k)) would be required to facilitate the program.

Automatic Enrollment with Opt-Out: Employees would be automatically enrolled but could choose to opt out and stop contributing at any time.

Employee Contributions: Contributions would come solely from employees via payroll deduction; employers would not be required to contribute.

Tax Credits for Small Businesses: Small businesses would receive tax credits to help cover the costs of implementing the program.

Default Investment: The default investment was generally expected to be low-cost target-date funds.

Steve

No. This is the problem with hiding behind other posters and you AI engine. Al was and is 100% wrong in his interpretation of the border because his arguments depended on government officials obeying the law…and following the spirit of the law.

But the Biden admin winked and nodded at the asylum process and abused it to the maximum extent. That’s the nuance that you don’t understand.

Cheap shot on AI,expected because ya ain't got nothing.

Al was and is 100% wrong in his interpretation of the border because his arguments depended on government officials obeying the law…and following the spirit of the law.

Thanks for saying that. I'd disagree. What Al was explaining to you was what was going on under Biden, as Biden abides by the law. He was explaining to you why that was happening and giving you that perspective, staying within the law, the Constitution, not abusing power, and respecting our allies. Al was definitely not trying to explain to you what it would be like if everyone disobeyed the law,etc., and on top of that didn't care about being humane. So Al wasn't wrong, but we have gotten an education on how easy it is to do things outside the law as a populist President and all guardrails are on the scrap heap, emergency powers used when there is no emergency and the courts and Supremes go along with it.

But I will say this much. Biden initially listened to some activists who thought latinos would vote for someone who allowed more latinos in. Big mistake. Most latinos and myself don't want large amounts of people trying to get in. We don't want to find out that they're advertising in China, or Yemen that you can walk across the border and apply for asylum in the USA and they'll get you there for $xxxxx. Biden initially said, come on down! Then changed and said, "Don't come!" Too late. So Biden shot himself in the foot and we are paying the price for it by having Trump rip everything up, bounce off the walls, and the only 2 things that seems to be going well are 1. people not crossing the border, and 2. his grifting.

Something clearly happened during the Biden administration.

Like, say, Russia invading Ukraine? Asylum seekers from both countries surged. Many countries took them in, including the USA.

There were also a lot of Syrian refugees (Assad lost power in 2024) starting -I think- in the Felon's first administration, and continuing through Biden (where it was really intense as Assad tried to hold on to power).

World events can't be ignored. Our asylum policy was similar to most first world nations. Events just necessitated us helping more people than typical.

Most latinos and myself don't want large amounts of people trying to get in. We don't want to find out that they're advertising in China, or Yemen that you can walk across the border and apply for asylum in the USA and they'll get you there for $xxxxx.

Sure. But, as albaby argued with Dope, the data show that something like 60% (if memory serves) of asylum-seekers were approved. That's without counsel. They stood in front of a judge and made their case without a lawyer, and it was accepted. So I think your characterization is a little unfair. Not completely inaccurate. Just that a lot of those people were adjudicated to have legitimate claims.

Biden initially said, come on down! Then changed and said, "Don't come!

I think Biden initially saying, come on down! is wrong. I was rereading the Cato Institute 4 parts on it and think that needs to be corrected.

Most latinos and myself don't want large amounts of people trying to get in. We don't want to find out that they're advertising in China, or Yemen that you can walk across the border and apply for asylum in the USA and they'll get you there for $xxxxx.

Sure. But, as albaby argued with Dope, the data show that something like 60% (if memory serves) of asylum-seekers were approved. That's without counsel. They stood in front of a judge and made their case without a lawyer, and it was accepted. So I think your characterization is a little unfair. Not completely inaccurate. Just that a lot of those people were adjudicated to have legitimate claims.

Just what do you think my characterization is? Do you actually want the cartels advertising in China that they'll get you to the US border for say $30k? Is that as bad characterization, because I read an article and a fellow paid for him and his daughter and I posted it here. Do you want people from Yemen flying into Nicaragua, because it was advertised that the border was a short hop away and all you had to pay was airport tax?

There are polls here in Florida showing latinos favor mass deportation of illegal immigrants, with an exception for long termers.

And as for us taking asylum seekers - that's fine, but I also support that they apply in interim countries that they pass through if they aren't in danger in that country. I think 30% of the world might qualify for asylum and we cannot take them all, but I'm sympathetic.

Nice pot shot though. (I thought it was 40%, and questioned the criteria. I'd like to see how they do it)

Cheap shot on AI,e

Nope. Using AI to think for you is not something to be proud of.

What Al was explaining to you was what was going on under Biden, as Biden abides by the law.

Biden used every loophole under the sun which is why I mentioned the spirit of the law. The first 5 months of this year in which we actually enforced the laws on the books and reduced illegal border crossing MILES down from where they were under Biden...proved me to be 100% right.

Thanks for playing, though. Don't forget to Like and Subscribe.

Something clearly happened during the Biden administration. The data makes that clear. Otherwise, why would the number of people showing up at the border triple and quadruple, compared to the Obama administration?

I’d be more inclined to look at the period between Obama and Biden for the answer.

Did the number of people showing up at the border decrease significantly during that time? I seem to recall something about a wall during those years. And perhaps a bit of hostility toward immigration in general.

Perhaps when that intervening administration ended, a bunch of pent up demand for immigration into the US was unleashed.

I’d be more inclined to look at the period between Obama and Biden for the answer.

According to the CBP web site, apprehensions, by year:

FY2018 521090
FY2017 415517
FY2016 553378
FY2015 444859
FY2014 569239
FY2013 489498

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migra...

FY 2019 977509

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migra...

Footnote for 2020: Beginning in March FY20, USBP Encounters statistics include both Title 8 Apprehensions and Title 42 Expulsions. To learn more, visit the Title-8-and-Title-42-Statistics page.

FY 2019 977,509
FY 2020 458,088
FY 2021 1,734,686
FY 2022 2,378,944

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-...

FY 2023 2,475,669
FY 2024 2,135,005
FY 2025 443,671

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-...

Those are the most consistently measured numbers, from the same source, that I can find. Discounting 2020, due to the impact of the plague, there was a sharp increase under Biden, compared to either Obama, or Trump, then a sharp fall in the first year of Trump's second term. So, unless someone wants to contend that Giuliani was doing the counting, that is the data.

Steve

Nope. Using AI to think for you is not something to be proud of.

Another lie, AI just makes it easier and quicker to see you're a non thinking precambrian haploid.

The first 5 months of this year in which we actually enforced the laws on the books and reduced illegal border crossing MILES down from where they were under Biden...proved me to be 100% right.

You said you break the law. I'm happy crossings are down, but if you break the law to lower crossings, or to find and deport people, it isn't worth it. So change the law. You have to save those times when you break the law for when it's a necessity and circumstances warrant it. And in the past we've grandfathered in people who've been here for thirty years. You break up families and destroy people's lives - hurt people without reason.

You should look at this review by CATO Institute Steve.

Overall, we rate the Cato Institute Right-Center Biased. While Cato’s economic and environmental positions are strongly right, they also hold liberal positions on immigration and social liberty issues. On the whole, this places them Right-Center as we weigh economic theory more heavily in the overall score. We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing of information and recognizing the consensus of science

https://www.cato.org/blog/biden-didnt-cause-border...

High on factual reporting.

I'm still reading it.

Summary

The main takeaways are:

~Biden immediately started increasing expulsions from his first day in office.
~Biden tripled interior detention and increased border detention 12-fold.
~Biden increased air removal flights by 55 percent over 2020 levels.
~Biden negotiated broader expulsion deals with foreign countries than Trump.
~Biden got many foreign countries to carry out crackdowns on illegal and legal migration.
~Biden removed or expelled 3.3 million border crossers—three times as many as Trump.
~Biden even managed to remove a similar percentage of crossers as Trump’s four years.

Despite Biden’s historic crackdown:

Expulsions did not deter migrants, even among demographics universally expelled.
The percentage increase in evasions of Border Patrol increased as much as Border Patrol arrests, implying that releases did not cause the
crisis and that many people did not want Border Patrol to catch them but were undeterred by the threat.
Releases occurred not because Biden cut removals but because migration grew faster than the administration could increase them.
As a result, releases only occurred among specific demographic groups and in certain areas where removals were logistically complicated.
Biden could not easily remove groups to Mexico, like families, children, and immigrants from distant countries who were arrested in record numbers.

The actual causes of the increases in illegal immigration were:

Unprecedented labor demand, which incentivized and funded migration from around the world: From February 2021 to August 2024, there were more open jobs each month than in any month before Biden’s term began. During this time, economies worldwide were recovering far less quickly than the United States. As labor demand subsided in 2024, immigration fell.
Unprecedented access to information about migration through the Internet and social media: Internet access rose rapidly from 2018 to 2021, nearly doubling in Central America and reaching unprecedented highs in South America. Social media platforms gave people step-by-step instructions on migrating and connected them directly with smugglers. This opened migration from around the world, which contributed to the number of releases.
Novel and perverse enforcement policies: The Title 42 expulsion policy incentivized repeat crossings by returning people to Mexico, where they could immediately attempt to re-enter the United States. Title 42 also cut off access to asylum, incentivizing more Border Patrol evasions.
Novel and perverse legal migration policies: Title 42 not only banned asylum for people who crossed illegally but also prohibited legal entries by asylum seekers, including demographic groups that had traditionally always entered legally, like Haitians, Cubans, and Mexican families. Biden eventually increased legal entries by these groups and others, limiting the crisis’s extent and ultimately contributing to its end.

The border crisis did not end because Biden signed an executive order in June 2024. If he had signed his border executive order in 2021, it would have merely duplicated what Title 42 was already doing: ban asylum. Moreover, the border executive order did not significantly change the downward trend in arrivals in 2024, which had already fallen in half during the five months before he signed it. Finally, the order did not increase removals. Rather, the crisis primarily ended because labor demand subsided significantly and because Biden expanded legal migration.

Nice pot shot though.

No pot shot intended. I try to avoid that as it impedes conversation. I interpreted your "cartels advertising" to imply that a significant segment of asylum-seekers fell into that category. And that simply isn't true. I'm sure some do. I'd be surprised if it's more than a few percent, but am open to data if any is available.

I think 30% of the world might qualify for asylum and we cannot take them all, but I'm sympathetic.

Again, I'd be surprised if it's that high. As I understand it, asylum criteria -in a nutshell- is that you have to fear for your life in your native country. Warlords, your own government, or something of that sort. Just being poor and desperate isn't good enough for asylum. I doubt even 1B would qualify, much less 2.4B (which is 30% of 8B). Though I stand to be corrected if there is relevant data to be had, or if I don't have the basic criteria correct.

actual causes of the increases in illegal immigration were:

I’d add another reason that people flocked to the borders, and don’t believe for a moment that potential migrants in Latin America don’t hear or read the news:

Right wing media was blaring out the “news” that Biden was opening the borders snd promising health care for immigrants.

All horseshit, but immigrants got the message…. from right wing media.

The right shits on the floor and then blames the left for the smell.

Reminds me of high school…. No… Jr. High

As I told the Liberal racists on TMF long ago: Hopefully the skilled immigrants find other places and leave you people with welfare, crime, drugs, gangs, and on english speakers.

It was Club 401K who for years had a beef with skilled immigrants, especially engineering and tech. It was Sheeple who would cry 'racist' if I suggested that America do like many other Western Nations and *decide* who we want, what skills we need, and who will be better for US.


America needs to become even more trailer park, ghetto, and barrio and it's happening. It's proliferating and eventually it'll get Club 401K one way or another. (I don't condone nor condemn any of those methods)




"The right shits on the floor and then blames the left for the smell."

The roses smell was mine.

Mind you i'm not sure Right nor Left will take me these days.

I interpreted your "cartels advertising" to imply that a significant segment of asylum-seekers fell into that category. And that simply isn't true. I'm sure some do. I'd be surprised if it's more than a few percent, but am open to data if any is available.

I think it's fairly easy to see what I'm talking about. That's the extent to which the migration path was known in many places in the world. How did the Chinese fellow know he could reach our Southern border and fly to Ecuador? The cartels were running a for profit operation, and were advertising it on social media in China. Do I think the Chinese fellow they interviewed about how he made the trip should get asylum? Yes, if his story checks out. How is it that people in the Middle East knew to fly into Nicaragua? It's being discussed in the Middle East, but a cartel doesn't seem to be profiting on that one.

The Chinese didn't show up until around the last 6 months of Biden's term, but they were there. Middle Easterners flying into the Nicaraguan airport and paying the airport tax. Nicaragua brought about the airport tax so they could profit off of it when they saw it happening. Middle Easterners were talking about it on line.

It was happening.

Again, I'd be surprised if it's that high. As I understand it, asylum criteria -in a nutshell- is that you have to fear for your life in your native country. Warlords, your own government, or something of that sort. Just being poor and desperate isn't good enough for asylum. I doubt even 1B would qualify, much less 2.4B (which is 30% of 8B). Though I stand to be corrected if there is relevant data to be had, or if I don't have the basic criteria correct.

I differ.

Under the Geneva Convention, asylum is granted to those with a "well-founded fear of persecution" due to their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. To qualify, an applicant must be outside their home country and be unable or unwilling to return because of this fear. This fear must have both a subjective (genuine) and an objective (evidence-based) component.

Do I think 30% of the world could have a well founded fear of persecution? YES. The problem is the evidence based part. Killings and persecutions happen every day. I have no idea what the evidentiary requirements are. I worked with people who walked through no mans land at night, could've been shot, to ultimately get here, and ended up working with me in the USA. Do I think they qualify for asylum? YES

But if, as you say, 60% of those people crossing the border qualified, that tends to support 30% of the world. Remember its not just the government, if the local gang gets in your face, time to leave.

AI just makes it easier and quicker...to post thoughts that aren't yours without attribution. Keep digging.

So change the law.

Turns out to stop the crossings we didn't need to. In other words, I was 100% right and you were 100% wrong. See the pattern forming here?

Your insults are lame. When a family man goes off and robs a bank, should we not send him to jail because his wife is pregnant with septuplets? Where's your humanity?

Dope1,

The clown fool ProGlib you are responding to apparently does not actually read his A.I. search results, which invariably include broad disclaimers that any generative A.I. search result may be wrong and should be independently verified for accuracy.

All this clown fool ProGlib does (and the many others who are similar) is frame his queries so as to try to generate responses that he can vomit onto message boards.

"Please provide me with arguments in favor of the proposition that Orange Man Bad."

The reason that some experts fear that, while a valuable tool, misuse of A.I. can cause a lot of damage, is precisely because of clown fool ProGlibs such as the one you are responding to.

AI just makes it easier and quicker...to post thoughts that aren't yours without attribution. Keep digging.

You are coming untethered if you think AI thinks - which you appear to. It's the net sifter that you don't jump on Steve about. You only bring this up because you have nothing else.

ME: So change the law.

Turns out to stop the crossings we didn't need to. In other words,

Yes, you told us - you all broke the law and say so. See the pattern? You are 100% correct there - you got a bunch of people to break the law. But that doesn't make you 100% right to break the law, does it? And since you haven't paid attention, I am not 100 wrong either - bet you can't remember my positions - only Albaby's positions.

As an aside, you recently commented that the 28 point peace plan means Russia is in real trouble. Would you mid explaining how you determined that and what changed your mind from your previous "dudes, ammo, and money" (something similar to that)? Are you coming around now?

Yes, you told us - you all broke the law and say so.

Erm, okay. Now who's coming untethered?
We enforced the existing laws...and border crossings dropped. Precipitously.


As an aside, you recently commented that the 28 point peace plan means Russia is in real trouble.

No, I commented that a deal like that indicates that the Ukrainians are in real trouble. In other words, the only reason you offer that deal is because you think things might get a lot worse for Zelensky later on and this is the best you can do.

Dope1,

The clown fool ProGlib you are responding to apparently does not actually read his A.I. search results, which invariably include broad disclaimers that any generative A.I. search result may be wrong and should be independently verified for accuracy.

All this clown fool ProGlib does (and the many others who are similar) is frame his queries so as to try to generate responses that he can vomit onto message boards.

"Please provide me with arguments in favor of the proposition that Orange Man Bad."

The reason that some experts fear that, while a valuable tool, misuse of A.I. can cause a lot of damage, is precisely because of clown fool ProGlibs such as the one you are responding to.

No. You are a pretender. Everyone here is as smart or smarter than you, and are well aware of potential pitfalls. What you are saying is that this fellow doesn't know how to tie shoes. Fairly basic. I can tell you I ran into one answer that was horribly wrong and researching why gave me a chuckle. The bad sources were conservative and were just lying to their readers. That's why I really appreciated people like George Conway, an old type of conservative.

I'm sorry but AI makes you closer to being obsolete. All I need to do is copy part of what you say and stick one word in front of ti, like "Does" and a ? at the end. Easy peasy. But now it asks back - Is this marco or Dope? It learns!

You could get a job in Russia spreading propaganda to the masses though. Are you retired or still working?

Yes, you told us - you all broke the law and say so.

Erm, okay. Now who's coming untethered?
We enforced the existing laws...and border crossings dropped. Precipitously.

Dope, they dropped to almostr zilch under Biden at the end. So if you enforced existing laws how did you break the law? Is that going to change too?

And how is reminding you of what you said coming untethered? I think you are getting confused again.

So if you enforced existing laws how did you break the law? Is that going to change too?

Now you're making *zero* sense.

And how is reminding you of what you said coming untethered?

See the above.

Prolapse City,

I'll tell you what.

There's a fairly fair and neutral way of trying to resolve your assertions re: A.I. and your use of it instead of your cerebral cortex.


Pick a subject that you want to make a point about, your choice.

Submit a query to whatever generative A.I. you are using, a query of your choice.

When you receive the response to your query, cut and paste the ENTIRE query, verbatim; and the ENTIRE A.I. response, verbatim, including any disclaimers or caveats.

Do not edit your query or the generative A.I. response.

Post both in their entirety to permit the rest of us to see how badly you are cheating when you attribute your idiocy to "A.I."

It was Club 401K who for years had a beef with skilled immigrants, especially engineering and tech.

Back then you could get good tech H1B workers for half price, and they aren't immigrants, btw.

Back then you could get good tech H1B workers for half price, and they aren't immigrants, btw.

H1-B holders are indeed immigrants, unless you're redefining the term.

So if you enforced existing laws how did you break the law? Is that going to change too?

Now you're making *zero* sense.

Too abstract? :) You stated you won 100% the debate about the border because you got people to break the law. Thanks again for stating it took breaking the law. Then you said all you had to do was enforce the law (which isn't breaking the law) to win. So the question is - why did all those people have to break the law for you to win 100%, if all you did was enforce the law? Reasonable question.

Enquiring minds want to know!

You stated you won 100% the debate about the border because you got people to break the law.

When did I say that?
You're interpreting "enforcing existing laws" as "breaking laws" which is...curious. But you do you!

H1-B holders are indeed immigrants, unless you're redefining the term.

"H-1B

The H-1B program allows employers to temporarily employ foreign workers in the U.S. on a nonimmigrant basis in specialty occupations or as fashion models of distinguished merit and ability.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/foreign-labor/pro....

Next.

Next.

Uh, huh. Never worked with or sponsored people from the program, have we? Didn't think so.
In many jobs, they're already here (as students in US universities already) -or- get internships from foreign ones.
And once they're employed, many put down roots and apply for green cards/citizenship.

Next.

Uh, huh. Never worked with or sponsored people from the program, have we? Didn't think so.
In many jobs, they're already here (as students in US universities already) -or- get internships from foreign ones.
And once they're employed, many put down roots and apply for green cards/citizenship.

I didn't redefine the term. H-1Bs are not immigrant visas. Next.

Me: You stated you won 100% the debate about the border because you got people to break the law.

Dope:When did I say that? You're interpreting "enforcing existing laws" as "breaking laws" which is...curious. But you do you!

Dope earlier in the thread:Al was and is 100% wrong in his interpretation of the border because his arguments depended on government officials obeying the law…and following the spirit of the law. see link below

I've thanked you for stating that government officials didn't follow/obey the law several times in this thread and it didn't phase you one bit. In fact you emphasized violating the spirit of the law. Then you contradicted yourself within the thread and never realized it. Dope, you're OK, but I do remember your reaction and seeming smugness, in the original conversation over a year ago, and I understood you were thinking - fuck those laws, we don't have to do that. :)


https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=629321545

I didn't redefine the term.

H1-Bs go to people who are often already immigrants or will soon be. Does that help?

I've thanked you for stating that government officials didn't follow/obey the law several times in this thread and it didn't phase you one bit. In fact you emphasized violating the spirit of the law. Then you contradicted yourself within the thread and never realized it. Dope, you're OK, but I do remember your reaction and seeming smugness, in the original conversation over a year ago, and I understood you were thinking - fuck those laws, we don't have to do that. :)

Wow, you've managed to completely misinterpret what I've said, take it out of context and then try to turn it into...something.

Dude, I've told you: you have zero skillz in this area.

As far as being smug, I don't need to be. Merely being 100% correct is more than sufficient.

I didn't redefine the term.

H1-Bs go to people who are often already immigrants or will soon be. Does that help?

No. By definition it's a non immigrant Visa. I've known plenty of people who come in on a tourist visa and convert to a green card. That doesn't make the tourist visa into an immigrant visa. The EBs are the immigrant visas.

Immigrant visas (for permanent residency)

Purpose: To live permanently in the United States.

Employment-Based: Based on a job offer or investment.

EB-1: Priority workers, including those with extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and certain multinational executives and managers.
EB-2: Professionals holding advanced degrees or individuals with exceptional ability.
EB-3: Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers.
EB-4: Certain special immigrants.
EB-5: Investors who create jobs in the U.S..

Diversity Visa: An annual lottery for individuals from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S..

Non-immigrant visas (for temporary stays)

Purpose: To be in the United States on a temporary basis for a specific purpose.
Examples:
Tourism: B-2 visa.
Business: B-1 visa.
Temporary Work: H-1B, H-2B, L-1, O-1, P visa categories.
Study: F and M visas.
Exchange Visitors: J visa.
Fiancé(e)s: K-1 visa for those intending to marry a U.S. citizen.
Spouses: K-3 visa for spouses of U.S. citizens who are waiting for an immigrant visa to be processed.

A non-immigrant visa is for a temporary stay and has an expiration date.

Prolapse City,

Each one if us develops our own methods for testing the seeming veracity of what we read. There's no need to discuss these methods with people who are hostile to deal with, and hostile to the truth.

Wow, you've managed to completely misinterpret what I've said, take it out of context and then try to turn it into...something.

Dude, I've told you: you have zero skillz in this area.

And this is what you always do, you do not understand that you get confused about what you have said in the past, this one has been discussed and brought up to you several times in this thread, and rather than deal with it on a mature level, you blame the person your talking to for your own failures. Normal Dope denial.

You said it, I thanked you for saying that a few times, pointed it out, it was discussed, there's no denying it. Anyone can read through the thread. Now you deny it and blame someone else. And you wander why I don't want to talk to you sometimes.

Yes, Albaby explained it within the law for what was going on at the time. That if you disregard the law that changes everything was likely understood by everyone reading it, including you. Thank you for stating that officials went outside of the law, which you now deny.

No.

Okay, then.

Whatever, homie. You've accused me of lying when in fact...you're tripling down on putting words in my mouth. What does you saying "thank you" to something you made up mean?

Again, thanks for playing. Be sure to hit the tip jar.

Dope1,

The people you are talking with are divorced from reality.

AdrianC linked to an interview a recent one with Becky quick in which he is insisting on a 3 year extension of Aca enhanced subsidies.

No one watched it except me apparently.

They are blowing smoke out their cloacas saying the Dems would take one or two years on the extension. That is not the House Dem position. The house Dems have no intention to compromise on anything. Just like the shutdown. Inflict pain on America and try to blame the patriotic party.

It was Club 401K who for years had a beef with skilled immigrants, especially engineering and tech.

Back then you could get good tech H1B workers for half price, and they aren't immigrants, btw.
***

Semantics - lol. Good for you.

Now please loudly support 2,000,000 a year of said visa type.

Don't remember too many 401K'ers over the years doing that and when I'd bring it up. -crickets ;)

It's ok.

The racist white 401K'ers - made it. They'll be fine.

But the next generation of 401K'ers - they're gonna get it good.

It's lovely.

Semantics - lol. Good for you.

No - definition

"Some estimates suggest around 33% of H-1B holders (me: that's the high estimate) may eventually become naturalized citizens." The H-1B visa is not an immigrant visa, but you can convert to a green card. But I expect that to go past you because in your dreams there are 2 million.

Now please loudly support 2,000,000 a year of said visa type.

No need to. Is your conception that there weren't discussions on this board about H-1B visas? There were. I remember chuckling because Steve Jobs was upset with Obama for not increasing the H-1Bs. I actually don't mind if we bring in highly qualified people if we need them, but the discussion was Jobs and other CEOs wanted the high tech boys on the cheap side. Wage competition. Now, wages are supposed to be fairly even. I had an Indian friend in NY who rented apartments to H-1Bs from India.

"The H-1B visa program is hugely important and beneficial to the United States.

FWD.us estimates that there are as many as 730,000 H-1B holders within the US at any one time "

I'm sure they fall in love, marry, and have kids. Hope so.

I'm sure they fall in love, marry, and have kids. Hope so.

Happened to me :-)

As far as being smug, I don't need to be. Merely being 100% correct is more than sufficient.

Sounds just like a certain extremely overconfident President I know, full of undeserved hubris.

As far as being smug, I don't need to be. Merely being 100% correct is more than sufficient.

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." ~Bertrand Russell

As far as being smug, I don't need to be. Merely being 100% correct is more than sufficient.

Sounds just like a certain extremely overconfident President I know, full of undeserved hubris.

And he can't read. He was being smug about his certainty in the original conversation with Albaby over a year ago. I've encountered this before, most of MAGA doesn't realize what the Geneva Convention is. But I remember being woken up at 5am to march down to a stuffily warm hall to get lectures on the Geneva convention at 6 am delivered by an artless officer in a Helen Keller monotone. If you fell asleep they pulled you out and had you do exercise. No coffee. So I dug my fingernails into my hand and the pain kept me awake.

But most of MAGA hears Geneva and says we don't have follow Europeans, screw Europeans. Many of them equate what happened at our border to the caravans that crossed Europe years ago. They think we're imitating and following the Europeans, when the Euros never turned back an initial 15%, and then turned to right way, wrong way for asylum. No one had to prove they feared persecution. They just had to survive the boat ride.

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

Ain’t that the truth?!

The ProGlibs are the most absolutely cocksure people there are.

You guys are never wrong.

Examples: Epstein files; Ukraine peace deal; ACA subsidies; government shutdown.

Should I go on?

So why not get another 1,000,000 per year?

Why be anti immigrant?

You've accused me of lying when in fact...you're tripling down on putting words in my mouth. What does you saying "thank you" to something you made up mean?

No, when I thanked you I restated what you initially said in clear and stark terms. It didn't faze you because YOU MEANT IT. It's there for everyone to see - you actually meant it. Now you are attempting to backpedal and making accusations. Sorry - you said the silent part out loud, and then reinforced it.

No, when I thanked you I restated what you initially said in clear and stark terms.

"Restated what you initially said"? No, you lied about what I meant and you keep doing it.

Again, homie - you lack the skillz for this. It's not in your programming.

No, when I thanked you I restated what you initially said in clear and stark terms.

"Restated what you initially said"? No, you lied about what I meant and you keep doing it.

Again, homie - you lack the skillz for this. It's not in your programming.
*********


Don't piss against the wind.

Don't pick a sword fight with Zorro.


Do not. Fuck. With Dope1.


Jedi 3:14

So why not get another 1,000,000 per year?

Why be anti immigrant?

I you go on Fox News and say Americans have bad skills and we need another million H-1Bs because Americans are stupid and lazy. I'll stand 20 feet behind you and clap. How's that? Ya couldn't ask for more! 😉 😎

I you go on Fox News and say Americans have bad skills and we need another million H-1Bs because Americans are stupid and lazy. I'll stand 20 feet behind you and clap. How's that? Ya couldn't ask for more! 😉 😎
**

Only once you do so in the Bay Area loud and proud.

And then read posts of Liberal I/T idiots online for the last 20 years on this topic.

"Restated what you initially said"? No, you lied about what I meant and you keep doing it.

See? You blame everyone else and take no responsibility for what you say when you are being open, just like Trump! Was it a lapse? Were you on medication? No, you just had an open moment, fell for the technique of restating it back to you in different ways, but when it was pointed out, you immediately claim the other person lies.

Don't worry yet, it doesn't look like dementia so far, look up the list of behaviors though.

sano: "And who can forget that PorkyDon asked Gen Miley if the soldiers couldn't just shoot the unarmed, largely peaceful protesters in the legs on the walk to the church."

In my dotage I wrote 'Miley' instead of SecDef Mike Espers.
Either way, were it not for the unnecessary, the controversial deployment (deemed unlawful by many constitutional experts) of inexperienced, unsuspecting Nat Guards, the sadly deceased lady would be eating thanksgiving leftovers with her family this weekend.

Sano,

If it weren't for demented ProGlibs like yourself enabling and alibing for Jihadi Murderbots, she would be finished with her Thanksgiving and continuing her patriotic duty of patrolling the streets of D.C., helping to ensure the safety of its citizens.

It's clearly all your fault. Her blood is on your hands.

it weren't for demented ProGlibs like yourself enabling and alibing for Jihadi Murderbots,

Same old monotonous horseshit.

Post New

Retirement Investing FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.