100,000 missing children...

[AUDub 11,784]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Answer the questions.  Why do children show up at our border unaccompanied?

Could be many reasons. Maybe their family is already here. Maybe their family was abusive. Maybe there was something constraining their family from coming with them.

Either way you have to admit that it’s a trauma kids don’t deserve. 

[AUDub 11,784]

55 minutes ago, Tigermike said:

You dismiss it as nothing.  Obviously you are OK with it so go on and hang out with your far left extremists Buds.

You go to the unserious forum and stay there, you waste of my time. You’re not here to have a serious discussion in the “serious” forum. You’re a troglodyte. Hopefully your fellow moderators straighten your ass out, because you are awful. 

[AUDub 11,784]

The rules are basically pinned on this forum. If you don’t like them take them up with the guys that made them and/or enforce them, that being @TexasTigeror @TitanTiger.

You’re a fool and I’ll call you such. 

[AUDub 11,784]

5 hours ago, Tigermike said:

So how many women and children sold into the sex trades are OK with you?

If this sort of loaded rhetoric is allowed from a moderator, then this is not a “serious” forum. 

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

9 hours ago, AUDub said:

Could be many reasons. Maybe their family is already here. Maybe their family was abusive. Maybe there was something constraining their family from coming with them.

Either way you have to admit that it’s a trauma kids don’t deserve. 

I never said it wasn’t traumatic for the kids and that’s the point.  There at least 100,000 traumatized kids out there lost and the number you speak of in your post would only cover a few hundred.  The numbers don’t add up without the trafficking.  Ignoring is not an option.

[AUDub 11,784]

52 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I never said it wasn’t traumatic for the kids and that’s the point.  There at least 100,000 traumatized kids out there lost and the number you speak of in your post would only cover a few hundred.  The numbers don’t add up without the trafficking.  Ignoring is not an option.

Where did they get that number? I know. Do you? 

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

Where did they get that number? I know. Do you? 

Aren’t you special.  There was an article in The NY Times that indicated the HHS had lost contact with 85,000 children and that article was in 2023, so it is not hard to see it grow to 100,000 in a year.

https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/alone-and-exploited-migrant-children-work-brutal-jobs-across-the-u-s

Evidently the *sponsors* don’t care too much for the kids welfare.

[AUDub 11,784]

Just now, I_M4_AU said:

Aren’t you special.  There was an article in The NY Times that indicated the HHS had lost contact with 85,000 children and that article was in 2023, so it is not hard to see it grow to 100,000 in a year.

https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/alone-and-exploited-migrant-children-work-brutal-jobs-across-the-u-s

Evidently the *sponsors* don’t care too much for the kids welfare.

It’s based on non-contact. i.e. they didn’t pick up the phone lol.

It’s always gonna be a mess, being a big bureaucratic nightmare given the volume. We background check the sponsors nonetheless. 

[AUDub 11,784]

So your solution is, rather than accept them and give them to sponsors that have at least been background checked (not saying it’s foolproof), is to close the border and let the Juarez cartel have them. 

[AUDub 11,784]

There are no easy answers here. Republicans are pants on head dumb. 

[I_M4_AU 8,888]

2 hours ago, AUDub said:

It’s based on non-contact. i.e. they didn’t pick up the phone lol.

It’s always gonna be a mess, being a big bureaucratic nightmare given the volume. We background check the sponsors nonetheless. 

One has to wonder if our background checks/vetting is adequate and if there is any follow through.  The numbers that are being posted I would believe there wasn’t much of either.

And we thought contract tracing was going to work.

[E'Town4Bama 170]

On 7/11/2024 at 7:11 AM, AUDub said:

I mean he doesn’t run the countries from which they’re fleeing. There’s a reason these people come here hoping for a safer, happier existence. Can’t fault folks from Venezuela for example from fleeing Maduro’s socialist, authoritarian hell hole on the brink of economic collapse for safer waters. Hell I’d argue it’s rational. 

He doesn't run those countries but our government gives those countries money from our taxes to help those countries but they still keep coming to get more money from our tax paying butts. I'm sorry but I don't understand. I hate Trumps arrogance but we didn't have this mass migration under him. Can you explain?

[AUDub 11,784]

13 minutes ago, E'Town4Bama said:

He doesn't run those countries but our government gives those countries money from our taxes to help those countries but they still keep coming to get more money from our tax paying butts. I'm sorry but I don't understand. I hate Trumps arrogance but we didn't have this mass migration under him. Can you explain?

I mean damn Venezuela lives under practically a perpetual threat of embargo lol.

There’s no easy solution here. We did have a nice bipartisan bill that would hopefully have addressed some of these concerns, but, well, Republicans would prefer it remain a problem. 

[Cardin Drake 2,074]

14 hours ago, AUDub said:

I mean damn Venezuela lives under practically a perpetual threat of embargo lol.

There’s no easy solution here. We did have a nice bipartisan bill that would hopefully have addressed some of these concerns, but, well, Republicans would prefer it remain a problem. 

That nice bipartisan bill does a pretty good job of explaining why Trump is the Republican nominee and why he is going to win.  Nobody wants a bill that would enshrine into law that 5000 illegal immigrants crossing the border per day would be just fine, which was it's main feature.  Yet democrats wanted to inflict that on us and enough Republicans were going to go along with it that it was going to pass until Trump shined a light on it and the roaches scurried back under their rock. This how Washington operates.  They pass a bill that doesn't fix a problem and they go out and celebrate and claim it did.  And then they like to rub our face in it. Like the Dodds-Frank bill. It fixed nothing that caused the financial collapse of 2009 but just to stick it to us, they named it after the two people most responsible for the collapse.  

Edited July 13 by Cardin Drake

[homersapien 12,172]

1 hour ago, Cardin Drake said:

That nice bipartisan bill does a pretty good job of explaining why Trump is the Republican nominee and why he is going to win.  Nobody wants a bill that would enshrine into law that 5000 illegal immigrants crossing the border per day would be just fine, which was it's main feature. 

Can you please quote that part of the bill?