Trump to make major announcement re shutdown

[Farmer77]

4 minutes ago, Setton said:

So even the 500k does not refer to illegal entry exclusively. You need a more detailed breakdown of the data to make any such claim. 

Dang good catch. From the article:

Quote

The Department of Homeland Security said that, in total, 521,090 individuals were either apprehended or deemed "inadmissible" after arriving at a port of entry on the border during the 2018 fiscal year. In 2017, 415,517 people were caught crossing illegally or turned away, as were 553,378 in 2016.

WOAH so the numbers theyre throwing around for illegal immigration now also include attempted crossings at legal ports of entry? Christ I deal with at least a couple of people monthly who get turned back  by CBP due to various reasons. Usually theyre Americans who didnt realize their ID had expired or their ID has been damaged beyond recognition. Not a single one of them are attempting to illegally migrate.

 

[Tatetopa]

10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Yeah, those are the ones caught. How many are NOT caught. Estimates are three to four times as many.

I'll look at a better estimate if you have one?

No I didn't find a better number Die Checker.  I believe accuracy is important in your professional life, lets stick to a number we know rather than an estimate.  You do have my concurrence that even 400,000 is too many, and there we seem to be on solid ground with facts.  .  

[Tatetopa]

10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

In his first State of the Union address on January 30, 2018, Trump outlined his administration's four pillars for immigration reform: (1) a path to citizenship for DREAMers; (2) increased border security funding; (3) ending the diversity visa lottery; and (4) restrictions on family-based immigration.^[11] The Four Pillars reinforce Trump's campaign slogan to "Buy American, Hire American"^[12] and 2017 executive order by the same name, and tracks with previously outlined immigration policy priorities.^[13]

Yep you are right.  That was at least a starting point.

[+DieChecker]

14 hours ago, Setton said:

In addition to your maths being... shaky... (500,000 =/= millions) you conveniently missed this 

So even the 500k does not refer to illegal entry exclusively. You need a more detailed breakdown of the data to make any such claim. 

Did you read post 397? Probably it will answer some of your questions.

[+DieChecker]

13 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Yep you are right.  That was at least a starting point.

I don't know if Trump referenced that during the shutdown, but I seem to remember he offered DACA as being on the table, and Pelosi still said it was a non-starter. 

I'll check if Pelosi has agreed to even speak about a wall yet.

[Setton]

22 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Did you read post 397? Probably it will answer some of your questions.

I did but it doesn't. Since the number is illegal entry and turned away, all your subsequent calculations are also off. As I said, to do any meaningful analysis on it, you'd need the data that splits illegal entry from those turned away. 

Do you have that data? 

[+DieChecker]

31 minutes ago, Setton said:

I did but it doesn't. Since the number is illegal entry and turned away, all your subsequent calculations are also off. As I said, to do any meaningful analysis on it, you'd need the data that splits illegal entry from those turned away. 

Do you have that data? 

I can look... 

Edit: I found this...

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/04/the-stats-on-border-apprehensions/

Which seems to show 2017 at about 300,000 and 2016 at just over 400,000. 

Original article said 425,000 in 2017 and 550,000 in 2016. Which means, roughly, 125,000 in 2017 were turned away, and 150,000 in 2018. About 27%, in both instances, appear to have been turned away.

Going back to my calculation, that would mean (at worst case 40% being caught) there are 300k x 1.5 = 450k... 750k attempts in 2017, and 400k x 1.5 = 600k... 1 million attempts in 2016.

And the expected numbers for 2018 appear to be similar to 2016, see graph below from same site as above graph, and previous links. 

So assuming 2018 had roughly a million attempts is not unreasonable.

Is a million people a year enough of a problem? I think most people would say yes. The sticking point would be what to do? 

Walls have worked in the past, and continue to work. The graphs alone show this. Illegals have chosen other methods to use to come here. Methods that allow a lot more people to be screened and the bad ones (hopefully) denied. Given those who can travel legally to the US do so... whom does that leave to cross illegally, and whom are those hundred thousand plus whom are turned back? Possibly the very poor, but in a lot of cases, drug mules, human traffickers and other criminals. Probably a lot higher percentage then the "regular" illegal community.

Expanding the existing barriers should be a no brainer, other then the involvement of partisan politics.

Edited January 30, 2019 by DieChecker

[Farmer77]

No One Should Be Surprised': After Long Career Stiffing Workers, Trump Blocks Back Pay for Federal Contractors

 

Quote

As a real estate mogul, Donald Trump was notorious for swindling low-wage workers out of pay.

So—as economist Robert Reich put it—"no one should be surprised" that Trump is continuing this cruel practice as president, this time by reportedly refusing to sign any government funding deal that includes back pay for the estimated 580,000 federal contractors who were furloughed or forced to work without pay for over a month due to the shutdown.

 

[Gromdor]

34 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

No One Should Be Surprised': After Long Career Stiffing Workers, Trump Blocks Back Pay for Federal Contractors

 

 

He keeps ripping off other people's work as well:  https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/16/politics/rem-trump-everybody-hurts-video/index.html

It's hard to crack down on the Chinese for stealing tech and bootlegging when our president does it himself. 

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

No One Should Be Surprised': After Long Career Stiffing Workers, Trump Blocks Back Pay for Federal Contractors

Were these 580,000 people part if the 800,000 affected by the shutdown? I thought those were federal workers, not contractors?

Edited February 17, 2019 by DieChecker

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

Were these 580,000 people part if the 800,000 affected by the shutdown? I thought those were federal workers, not contractors?

I think these contractors are outside of the 800,000 federal employees.

[+DieChecker]

So... correct me if I am wrong. But, the contractors were not allowed to work, and so did not work. And yet, they want the pay that they WOULD have earned?

[Farmer77]

Just now, DieChecker said:

So... correct me if I am wrong. But, the contractors were not allowed to work, and so did not work. And yet, they want the pay that they WOULD have earned?

Not necessarily. Some of them did actually work during the shutdown.

Regardless of how many worked during the shutdown the fact that their lives were uprooted so they could be used as pawns in an attempt to reach a political goal, and the fact that the government isnt going to do all it can to make that right, should make us all recoil. Elites being elites and whatnot

[Habitat]

These govt employees that are being jerked around, do they have the right to strike ? 

[+DieChecker]

4 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Not necessarily. Some of them did actually work during the shutdown.

Regardless of how many worked during the shutdown the fact that their lives were uprooted so they could be used as pawns in an attempt to reach a political goal, and the fact that the government isnt going to do all it can to make that right, should make us all recoil. Elites being elites and whatnot

I think if they get paid, or not, depends on.... Their Contract... If they are contractors, then they have a contract. If they don't have wording in the contract on when they are forced not to work... Then I'd assume that is miss on that contractor's fault. Let the contracting businesses pay their employees and eat the loss. These shutdowns seem to be happening semi regularly, so it should, logically, be included in contract negotiations.

IMHO, forcing the government to pay people who didn't work, is... Using them as pawns for gaining of political points.

Likewise, it wasn't just Trump who was using these people. Pelosi and the House Democrats didn't were going to let them swing as long as possible also. ... Sure, Trump "owned" the shutdown, but regardless House Democrats let those people affected by the Shutdown swing in the wind for Political purposes. 

[Farmer77]

10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Likewise, it wasn't just Trump who was using these people. Pelosi and the House Democrats didn't were going to let them swing as long as possible also. ... Sure, Trump "owned" the shutdown, but regardless House Democrats let those people affected by the Shutdown swing in the wind for Political purposes. 

Sorry amigo I just cant agree with you here. The dems offered trump 25billion for the wall he turned it down. He chose to not accept the money and he chose to shut down the government.

[Gromdor]

Was at a friend's house the other day.  He's a federal worker.  He and his wife were a bit upset because they were saving up his paid time off days for a trip to Yellowstone, but they forced him to use his time for the shutdown. (He could have opted for unpaid time off, but that really wasn't an option)

Basically two years of vacation planning wasted. 

[+DieChecker]

On 2/17/2019 at 4:31 PM, Farmer77 said:

Sorry amigo I just cant agree with you here. The dems offered trump 25billion for the wall he turned it down. He chose to not accept the money and he chose to shut down the government.

Sorry, but that is beside the point. Pelosi said, not a dollar. She could have made a deal, but didn't for political leverage.

She's not any better then he is.

[+DieChecker]

11 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Was at a friend's house the other day.  He's a federal worker.  He and his wife were a bit upset because they were saving up his paid time off days for a trip to Yellowstone, but they forced him to use his time for the shutdown. (He could have opted for unpaid time off, but that really wasn't an option)

Basically two years of vacation planning wasted. 

Is he a contractor, or an actual Federal employee?

I thought the Federal Employees got back pay?

[Gromdor]

1 minute ago, DieChecker said:

Is he a contractor, or an actual Federal employee?

I thought the Federal Employees got back pay?

He wasn't essential and called in for work.  So they considered it "paid time off" and took it from his accrued time.  I can't say that it isn't fair.  But it is a bit heavy handed. 

[+DieChecker]

Just now, Gromdor said:

He wasn't essential and called in for work.  So they considered it "paid time off" and took it from his accrued time.  I can't say that it isn't fair.  But it is a bit heavy handed. 

Well that sucks. They should have considered it paid time off, but not take it from your accrued off time.

I'd not read that. Really sucks.  Is his Union working on it? They should.

[Gromdor]

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Well that sucks. They should have considered it paid time off, but not take it from your accrued off time.

I'd not read that. Really sucks.  Is his Union working on it? They should.

Don't think he is union.  I never asked him his official title, but I think he's just a low level worker for one of the federal agencies working out of the college.  Maybe CDC or Animal Infectious Disease Lab.  I'll ask next time I see him.