Donald Trump: The Man And The Myth

[James_Gale]

David Brooks (no raging "liberal", remember) has an op-ed column in The New York Times about the "wall." Some excerpts:

"The number of illegal immigrants flowing into this country is dropping, not rising. The flow of total immigrants peaked in 2005 and has been dropping since. The share of immigrants coming from Latin America is falling sharply. Since 2008, more immigrants have come from Asia than Latin America, and the disparity is growing."

"There are more Mexicans leaving the United States than coming in. According to the Pew Research Center, there was a net outflow of 140,000 from 2009 to 2014. If Trump builds his wall, he’ll lock more Mexican immigrants in than he’ll keep out."

"Trump plays up the alleged threat of crime committed by immigrants. But the overall evidence is clear. Immigrants make American streets safer. Roughly 1.6 percent of immigrant males between ages 18 and 39 wind up incarcerated, compared with 3.3 percent of native-born American men of the same age. Among native-born men without a high school diploma, about 11 percent are incarcerated. Among similarly educated Mexican, Guatemalan and Salvadoran men here, only 2 or 3 percent get incarcerated."

"One study of 103 cities between 1994 and 2004 found that violent crime rates decreased as the concentration of immigrants increased. Numerous studies have shown that a big share of the drop in crime rates in the 1990s is a result of the surge in immigration."

"Trump plays up the threat of terrorism. But the real threat is that our border agencies spend so much time tracking down people who want to be gardeners that they don’t have the resources to track down the people who want to be suicide bombers. Fighting terrorism by going after the whole swath of immigration policy is like fighting germs with a sledgehammer."

"There’s a reason Republicans from Reagan to Bush supported reasonably open immigration policies. They are and have always been good for America."

"A new summary of the research from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine found that immigrants are integrating into society as well as ever. The bulk of the evidence shows that immigrants have a hugely positive effect on total American G.D.P. while having little effect on overall wages. The surge in Asian immigration will bring a gigantic number of highly skilled people, who end up with higher education levels than the American average, higher productivity levels and higher incomes.   "

And from this humble correspondent: The animus against immigrants is a combination of racism, paranoia, idiocy and misinformation. Certain politicians or would-be politicians hook these things and stir up unfounded fears, ride the sheet-tails of racism, and spread misinformation to preserve the idiocy and build their support from the worst and most erroneous feelings within us.

Why is it that your persistent boasts of humility so frequently accompany ad hominem attacks?  You quote at length from David Brooks, who makes a substantive pro-immigration argument.  Instead of adding to (or critiquing) Brooks's argument, you simply dismiss those who disagree with Brooks (and you) as being idiotic, ill-informed, paranoid racists.  Perhaps instead of demonizing others, you should reflect on the implications in your own life of the Pope's comments about bridges and walls.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Is it not "reasonable" that any immigration policy includes a mandatory requirement that all who want to immigrate to America MUST do so in compliance with the law? Changing laws is how one deals with laws one believes are unreasonable. Ignoring them and ignoring the violation of them is not reasonable.

What we have are immigration lawS. The rules differ depending on which country is being discussed. To immigrate legally from England is much easier than from Mexico. For instance, there is a lottery system in England where those who want to immigrate can submit their names and be chosen to legally immigrate. There's no such system for Mexicans. They have to have family members in the U.S. Those family members have to prove that they can support the immigrant. Then after at least a seven year wait, the immigrant might get the legal documents to immigrate. Seven years is a long time to wait for a father who was deported, but whose children are American citizens.


Often the immigration issue is talking about two separate issues: the transportation of illegal drugs is different than preventing immigrants from entering illegally. Drug mules aren't seeking to be immigrants, but want to freely move between countries. Many of those who want to immigrant without going through all the paperwork are seeking a better economic life for themselves and/or seeking to be with family who are here legally.

[Charles Austin]

 Those words, Mr. Gale, are  only intended for those who have a hatred of immigrants and those who buy in to the obscene rhetoric being used by Mr. Trump. If you don't, they don't apply to you.

[peter_speckhard]

Those words, Mr. Gale, are  only intended for those who have a hatred of immigrants and those who buy in to the obscene rhetoric being used by Mr. Trump. If you don't, they don't apply to you.

Not sure I've met anyone who bore hatred toward immigrants. While I could never vote for Trump and do not particularly care that much about immigration as an issue, I know of some fine Christian people who support Trump, want a wall, etc. but whom I would never describe as hating immigrants. Does Bernie Sanders have to hate CEOs to think there is a problem with how various corporations are run?

How much immigration our country can handle and how we keep tack of who is coming here are valid isues for debate. But neither side has to be fueled by hatred to arrive at their contrary conclusions.

[RDPreus]

It is unfair to accuse folks who oppose immigration of being racists.  Mass immigration depresses wages and hurts working men.  The wage for the working man hasn't kept pace with the cost of living, pressuring women who would rather care for their children to get jobs and consign the children to the care of day care centers.  Mass immigration hurts the working poor by keep wages artificially low.  Also, "free" trade with nations (for example, China) that wouldn't know freedom if it bit them on the backside sends decent paying jobs overseas to be done more cheaply.  Again, the working man gets the shaft.  I do not support Donald Trump and I hope he doesn't get the Republican nomination, but he has his finger of the pulse of dissatisfaction on these issues, and what animates his supporters has nothing at all to do with racism.  It has to do with working men feeling that their government, whether Republican or Democrat, doesn't care about their interests. 

[Charles Austin]

Peter writes:
But neither side has to be fueled by hatred to arrive at their contrary conclusions.

I comment:
The word, "has," in that sentence is important. But there is hatred and fear of immigrants, Peter, perhaps not among your "fine Christian people" supporting the foul-smelling, trash-talking, fear-mongering Trump, but it is out there; along with racism and sexism, BTW.
And to reinforce my words just upstream to Mr. Gale, I am not ad-homineming anyone here or any person in particular. I am only commenting on the moods, trends, and attitudes that I see and hear. And should I hear or see or sense certain things - like a quack, feathers, and waddle - I am allowed to say "that is a duck" even if the creature says he is one of the "fine Christian people."

[Charles Austin]

The study cited just upstream, Pastor Preus, concludes the immigrants have little effect on overall wages in this country. If you would blame immigrants for low wages, you do not have the data to back up that claim.
As for wages keeping "pace with the cost of living," might there not be a finger pointed at the cost of living, rising prices, greater corporate income?
Our loss of manufacturing jobs, a loss that cannot be recovered, is a reality. Howling about free trade or China is useless rhetoric. Our desire for more "stuff" at less cost is what sent those jobs overseas in the first place. We can blame our own selfishness.
And if the "working man" (do you know there are working women, too) is concerned about such things and what the government does, a look at corporate tax breaks, government aid to big industries (like oil), and the influence of those commercial mega-powers on legislation might be worth considering.

[RDPreus]

I don't have the time to search this long thread to find the study that disproves the law of supply and demand, but if the outsourcing of jobs is the result of the desire to have more stuff at less cost then one wonders how it is that we ever had good manufacturing jobs in America since folks have always and everywhere wanted more stuff at less cost.  It's human nature.  The reason jobs have gone overseas is because it costs too much to do business here in America.

[John Mundinger]

The wage for the working man hasn't kept pace with the cost of living, pressuring women who would rather care for their children to get jobs and consign the children to the care of day care centers.

Decline of the union influence, in part, facilitated with the help of conservative legislators, has had something to do with that.

The reason jobs have gone overseas is because it costs too much to do business here in America.

That is an interesting half-truth.  The rest of the story is that corporations would rather abuse their employees than treat them like real people.

[Donald_Kirchner]

The rest of the story is that corporations would rather abuse their employees than treat them like real people.

What an outrageous generalization.    Feeling the bern, Mr. Mundinger?

[Norman Teigen]

Has any one noticed that Donald Trump and Pope Francis look at the problems of the world from different points of view?

 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/world/europe/pope-francis-donald-trump.html?hpw&rref=world&action=

"The Francis-versus-Trump dynamic is undeniably a made-for-media clash. But overlooked in that frame is that each man has diagnosed the same currents in society, fishing for followers in seas churning with anger, dislocation, spiritual alienation and economic inequality."

[Steven W Bohler]

The rest of the story is that corporations would rather abuse their employees than treat them like real people.

What an outrageous generalization.    Feeling the bern, Mr. Mundinger?

I don't know about that.  I heard that almost 75% of the time spent in corporate boardrooms is devoted to figuring out more and better ways to abuse employees.  Even if it hurts the company's bottom line.  Because all executives and board members are, at heart, evil.  By the way, the other 25% of time is spent twirling their handle-bar moustaches and doing their Snidely Whiplash impersonations.

[RDPreus]

Donald Trump has plans to make the Vatican great again. 

https://romancatholicworld.wordpress.com/2016/02/18/donald-trump-wants-to-make-the-vatican-great-again/

[LutherMan]

The rest of the story is that corporations would rather abuse their employees than treat them like real people.

What an outrageous generalization.    Feeling the bern, Mr. Mundinger?

I don't know about that.  I heard that almost 75% of the time spent in corporate boardrooms is devoted to figuring out more and better ways to abuse employees.  Even if it hurts the company's bottom line.  Because all executives and board members are, at heart, evil.  By the way, the other 25% of time is spent twirling their handle-bar moustaches and doing their Snidely Whiplash impersonations.

*LIKE*

[Robert Johnson]

You see we take in all kinds of people, from the horribly corrupt to salt of the earth Midwesterners.

And then you corrupt them as well.