Literally Socialism

dbjork6317

Heisman
Dec 3, 2009
18,230
70,955
113
Not saying its good or bad, but let’s call it what it is

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115074444617901812
 

TigerGrowls

Heisman
Dec 21, 2001
44,596
33,699
113
Not saying its good or bad, but let’s call it what it is

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115074444617901812
I guess we can reserve seats on the Trump Train for you and @dpic73 ???
 

dpic73

Heisman
Jul 27, 2005
30,106
22,478
113
19 states getting national guard. No doubt they’ll be deployed to blue cities everywhere for “election security” in 2026
Exactly and that's why he's starting now so that by the time the election rolls around he will have normalized the sight of militarized streets under the guise of a crime emergency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,842
4,302
113
Not saying its good or bad, but let’s call it what it is

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115074444617901812
yea, not a fan. Might work out in the end, but the government ownership - even partial - seems a little off to me. Admittedly don't understand all the details, so maybe somebody knows more than me. I would think this might put a dent in the "corporate welfare" debate as instead of just giving Intel money through the CHIPS act, the government is actually getting something in return.

We'll have to see how this ends up..
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatpiggy

johnhugh

Heisman
Dec 23, 2003
74,053
34,447
98
I seem to recall MAGA window lickers having mental breakdowns about when the government controls the means of production. There was some word that encapsulates this, but I can’t quite put my finger on it
 
  • Like
Reactions: hopefultiger13

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
Do any of you leftists understand how this works. There are several “private” companies the government has its tentacles in. This isn’t new or novel. Do some research on Oracle or Grumann. This isn’t something Trump came up with, this has been going on for decades.
 

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
I seem to recall MAGA window lickers having mental breakdowns about when the government controls the means of production. There was some word that encapsulates this, but I can’t quite put my finger on it
Was it - concentration camp. That’s the words you use when you’re having mental breakdowns.
 

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,842
4,302
113
I seem to recall MAGA window lickers having mental breakdowns about when the government controls the means of production. There was some word that encapsulates this, but I can’t quite put my finger on it
as I posted, I haven't seen all the details. I do think this same concept has happened before, but I wouldn't swear to it. I can see both sides, and I get your point. From the way you posted I can't tell if you're in favor of this government stake in a US business or just making a point about potential hypocrisy on the part of some on the right. Care to elaborate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatpiggy

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
as I posted, I haven't seen all the details. I do think this same concept has happened before, but I wouldn't swear to it. I can see both sides, and I get your point. From the way you posted I can't tell if you're in favor of this government stake in a US business or just making a point about potential hypocrisy on the part of some on the right. Care to elaborate?
He wants rainbow sidewalks to cover the country. Aside from that he just drops in to whine.
 

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
Why are you upset with reducing crime?
I’m upset with him wasting tax dollars on cities that have the lowest crime rates in 30 years. Stop using my tax dollars for political stunts.

regarding intel, I think it was smart. We made a ton of money off the bailouts in the GFC and could do the same here. Not to mention how strategic that company is to our future.
 

dpic73

Heisman
Jul 27, 2005
30,106
22,478
113
August 7, 2025: Trump calls for the resignation of Intel's CEO ("no other solution"), calls him "highly conflicted"

August 23rd, 2025
: Intel CEO agrees to give Trump and the US government 10% of the company, Trump calls him "highly respected"

Totally normal stuff
 

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
I’m upset with him wasting tax dollars on cities that have the lowest crime rates in 30 years. Stop using my tax dollars for political stunts.

regarding intel, I think it was smart. We made a ton of money off the bailouts in the GFC and could do the same here. Not to mention how strategic that company is to our future.
Were you upset at how many tax dollars were wasted on illegals the last 3 years? Talk about political stunts lol. At least the citizens get a safe town. What did we get with the millions of illegals? Child labor, tax funded benefits going to non-citizens that don’t contribute, broken healthcare.
 

clempzenbill

Heisman
Mar 10, 2006
38,823
10,557
113
Not saying its good or bad, but let’s call it what it is

It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future. I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars. This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115074444617901812
That actually, (much as I hate to say it), is more akin to fascism than socialism. Although socialism and fascism are kissing cousins. Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist party for 12 years, before he became a fascist dictator. His manifesto was co-written by a neo-Hegelian philosopher, Giovanni Gentile, considered by many to be the father of fascism. He had this to say of fascism. “ Fascism is a form of socialism, in fact, it is, its most viable form..”
At one point during Mussolinis reign he attempted to rebrand his party as socialist but backed out.
Edit yes I am conservative and I’m not thrilled with this, but since Trump is a classic moderate liberal along the lines of JFK, and not a fascist, I don’t see this as any prelude to mass takeover of businesses. Just go back and look at the Democrat party platform from 1960 if you disagree. The entire political spectrum has shifted to the Left. It’s just that people don’t know their political history to understand this.
 
Last edited:

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
Were you upset at how many tax dollars were wasted on illegals the last 3 years? Talk about political stunts lol. At least the citizens get a safe town. What did we get with the millions of illegals? Child labor, tax funded benefits going to non-citizens that don’t contribute, broken healthcare.
You are a ******* idiot if you don’t understand the economic benefits we get with illegal labor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheValley91

dbjork6317

Heisman
Dec 3, 2009
18,230
70,955
113
That actually, (much as I hate to say it), is more akin to fascism than socialism. Although socialism and fascism are kissing cousins. Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist party for 12 years, before he became a fascist dictator. His manifesto was co-written by a neo-Hegelian philosopher, Giovanni Gentile, considered by many to be the father of fascism. He had this to say of fascism. “ Fascism is a form of socialism, in fact, it is, its most viable form..”
At one point during Mussolinis reign he attempted to rebrand his party as socialist but backed out.
Edit yes I am conservative and I’m not thrilled with this, but since Trump is a classic moderate liberal along the lines of JFK, and not a fascist, I don’t see this as any prelude to mass takeover of businesses. Just go back and look at the Democrat party platform from 1960 if you disagree. The entire political spectrum has shifted to the Left. It’s just that people don’t know their political history to understand this.
You don’t get to compare Trump’s political philosophy to JFK’s and then criticize other people’s understanding of political history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
24,404
22,994
113
I’m upset with him wasting tax dollars on cities that have the lowest crime rates in 30 years. Stop using my tax dollars for political stunts.

regarding intel, I think it was smart. We made a ton of money off the bailouts in the GFC and could do the same here. Not to mention how strategic that company is to our future.
The lowest crime rate in 30 years.

Thas like saying someone who weighs 500 lbs is doing a great job because they lost 20 lbs.
 

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
24,404
22,994
113
You are a ******* idiot if you don’t understand the economic benefits we get with illegal labor.
Consider me an idiot.

illegals undercut the wages of Americans, overload our healthcare system, increase housing prices, crowd our schools. I do not consider those benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
24,404
22,994
113
You don’t get to compare Trump’s political philosophy to JFK’s and then criticize other people’s understanding of political history.
The had some similar philosophies in certain areas.

Comparing the policies of Donald Trump and John F. Kennedy is challenging due to their vastly different historical contexts, political environments, and governing styles. Kennedy, the 35th U.S. president (1961–1963), operated during the Cold War’s peak, focusing on civil rights, space exploration, and containment of communism. Trump, the 45th and 47th president (2017–2021, 2025–present), has prioritized economic nationalism, deregulation, and immigration enforcement. Despite these differences, some parallels and contrasts emerge when examining their policies, based on their approaches to key issues like the economy, foreign policy, and governance style.


Economic Policy


Kennedy: Kennedy advocated for tax cuts to stimulate economic growth, culminating in the Revenue Act of 1964, passed after his death, which reduced personal and corporate tax rates. His administration promoted a “New Frontier” agenda, emphasizing economic expansion, job creation, and investment in technology and infrastructure, like the Apollo program. He also intervened in the steel industry in 1962, pressuring companies to roll back price increases to control inflation, a move some saw as heavy-handed.


Trump: Trump also pursued tax cuts, notably the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which slashed corporate tax rates and reduced individual taxes for many, though critics argued it disproportionately benefited the wealthy. His “America First” economic policy emphasized deregulation, energy independence (e.g., expanding fossil fuel production), and tariffs on foreign goods (10–20% proposed in his second term). Trump’s approach to corporate intervention, like pressuring Carrier Corp to keep jobs in the U.S., echoes Kennedy’s steel industry tactics, though driven by job retention rather than price control.


Similarity: Both pursued tax cuts to boost economic growth and intervened directly in corporate decisions to align with national interests. Their economic policies aimed at stimulating growth through supply-side measures, though Kennedy’s were more tied to industrial stability and Trump’s to trade protectionism.


Difference: Kennedy’s policies operated within a post-war industrial economy with a focus on global competitiveness, while Trump’s reflect a modern, globalized economy with an emphasis on reversing trade imbalances and deregulation. Kennedy’s interventions were more about price stability; Trump’s focused on job preservation and trade wars.


Foreign Policy


Kennedy: Kennedy’s foreign policy centered on Cold War dynamics, balancing confrontation with diplomacy. He faced the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962), averting nuclear war through a secret deal with the Soviet Union, and initiated the Bay of Pigs invasion, a failed attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro. He was skeptical of military escalation, notably resisting advisors’ calls for deeper involvement in Vietnam, and championed the Peace Corps and Alliance for Progress to counter communism through soft power. His distrust of the “military-industrial complex” led him to question career diplomats and military leaders.


Trump: Trump’s foreign policy emphasizes “America First,” withdrawing from multilateral agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and renegotiating trade deals like NAFTA (replaced by the USMCA). His approach to immigration includes stringent border security, mass deportation plans, and policies like “Remain in Mexico.” Trump has been less interventionist militarily, avoiding new wars but maintaining a hardline stance on adversaries like China and Iran. Like Kennedy, he’s shown skepticism of the “deep state,” prioritizing loyalty from advisors and family over career bureaucrats.


Similarity: Both displayed distrust of entrenched government establishments—Kennedy toward the military-industrial complex, Trump toward the broader “deep state.” Both pursued bold, sometimes risky foreign policies (Kennedy’s Cuban initiatives, Trump’s trade wars and North Korea summits) and favored direct communication with adversaries (Kennedy’s backchannel to the Kremlin, Trump’s negotiations with Kim Jong-un).


Difference: Kennedy’s policies were rooted in Cold War ideology, balancing global leadership with containment, while Trump’s focus on unilateralism and economic nationalism rejects globalist frameworks. Kennedy’s foreign policy missteps (e.g., Bay of Pigs) were covert and ideological; Trump’s are overt and economic, like tariffs or withdrawing from international agreements.


Social Policy


Kennedy: Kennedy laid the groundwork for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, addressing racial inequality, though it was passed under Lyndon Johnson. His administration supported desegregation and voter rights but moved cautiously due to political constraints. He also expanded federal investment in education and science, notably through the space race, and promoted cultural initiatives like arts funding.


Trump: Trump’s social policies are more conservative. He’s taken credit for the 2018 First Step Act, a bipartisan criminal justice reform reducing some prison sentences, but his administration has opposed policies like critical race theory and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, framing them as divisive. On abortion, Trump celebrated the overturning of Roe v. Wade but has avoided committing to a federal ban, preferring state-level decisions. His education policy includes proposals to eliminate the Department of Education and use federal funding to influence school curricula.


Similarity: Both engaged with transformative social issues—Kennedy with civil rights, Trump with criminal justice reform—though their approaches reflect their eras’ priorities. Both used federal authority to shape social outcomes, whether through Kennedy’s civil rights advocacy or Trump’s push for merit-based education reforms.


Difference: Kennedy’s social policies leaned progressive, focusing on expanding rights and federal investment in social programs, while Trump’s are conservative, emphasizing deregulation, state autonomy, and traditional values. Kennedy’s civil rights legacy contrasts sharply with Trump’s opposition to progressive social policies like DEI.


Governance Style and Media


Kennedy: A master of television, Kennedy was the first president to use live press conferences effectively, projecting charisma and eloquence. He maintained close ties with journalists, like Ben Bradlee, despite occasional tensions, and cultivated a glamorous, youthful image (“Camelot”). His administration was criticized for improvisation and relying on a tight circle of loyalists, including family members like Robert Kennedy.


Trump: Trump revolutionized political communication through social media, particularly Twitter (now X), bypassing traditional media to reach voters directly. He’s labeled the press “the enemy of the people,” a stark contrast to Kennedy’s cordial media relationships, yet maintains frequent informal contact with sympathetic outlets like Fox News. Like Kennedy, Trump relies heavily on family (e.g., Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner) and loyalists, distrusting career bureaucrats.


Similarity: Both were pioneering communicators—Kennedy with TV, Trump with social media—using new platforms to shape public perception. Both relied on family and loyal advisors, often sidelining traditional government structures, and were underestimated by political elites during their campaigns.


Difference: Kennedy’s polished, intellectual persona contrasts with Trump’s combative, populist style. Kennedy courted the press; Trump antagonizes it, except for aligned outlets. Kennedy’s governance, while improvisational, was grounded in historical knowledge; Trump’s is more reactive and instinct-driven.


Broader Context and Sentiment


Some sources note superficial similarities: both were wealthy, second sons of ambitious fathers, faced polarizing elections, and leveraged their outsider status to win. Kennedy’s 1960 campaign as a young, Catholic senator and Trump’s 2016 run as a non-politician tapped into public desire for change. Posts on X reflect polarized views, with some claiming Kennedy would align with Trump’s vision today, while others argue he’d oppose Trump’s policies, particularly on civil rights and internationalism. These sentiments are inconclusive but highlight ongoing debates about their legacies.


Conclusion


While Trump and Kennedy share some policy approaches—tax cuts, distrust of entrenched government, and direct corporate interventions—their priorities, methods, and ideologies differ significantly. Kennedy’s policies were shaped by Cold War liberalism and progressive ideals, while Trump’s reflect modern conservatism and economic nationalism. Their governance styles show parallels in media innovation and reliance on loyalists, but their public personas and historical contexts set them apart. For a deeper dive into specific policy areas, I can generate a chart comparing their stances on key issues like taxes or foreign policy—just let me know!
 

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
You are a ******* idiot if you don’t understand the economic benefits we get with illegal labor.
Oh no. I’m an idiot for not supporting slave labor and wages. You guys are the best. lol.

Speaking of idiots, did you figure out why those eight red states have high crime or you still lost there too?
 

johnhugh

Heisman
Dec 23, 2003
74,053
34,447
98
as I posted, I haven't seen all the details. I do think this same concept has happened before, but I wouldn't swear to it. I can see both sides, and I get your point. From the way you posted I can't tell if you're in favor of this government stake in a US business or just making a point about potential hypocrisy on the part of some on the right. Care to elaborate?
Hypocrisy from the right. Constantly crying about communism and socialism. But when they actually present themselves they all of a sudden can’t recognize it or don’t care. This is probably because their dear supreme leader is advocating for it and in the daily cult monothink bulletin they are told that he can do no wrong
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,842
4,302
113
Hypocrisy from the right. Constantly crying about communism and socialism. But when they actually present themselves they all of a sudden can’t recognize it or don’t care. This is probably because their dear supreme leader is advocating for it and in the daily cult monothink bulletin they are told that he can do no wrong
what do you think about the corporate welfare point of view? What I mean is that instead of just giving Intel $10billion (or whatever the amount was in the CHIPS act) this time we're getting a 10% stake. Still don't like it and don't think it will end well.

By the way, there's plenty of hypocrisy from both sides. Neither seems to have much shame
 

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
Oh no. I’m an idiot for not supporting slave labor and wages. You guys are the best. lol.

Speaking of idiots, did you figure out why those eight red states have high crime or you still lost there too?
You guys? Is there more than one of me?

Have you complained about groceries prices in the last couple years? Because if you want to get rid of “slave labor”, then get ready for groceries to reach another huge level. Produce was up 40% last month.
 

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
I understand the word "illegal"....why have laws if we're just going to ignore them? If we want "illegal" labor then let's make it legal
Fair, but that’s probably a bigger issue with us using the word “illegal”, because in my lifetime we have always knowingly had illegal immigrants who are employed and who the government knows about.

We could have systems that track all of these folks and require more supervision, but that costs a lot of money. Personally, I’ve never had a problem with the “illegal” immigrant population in this country. It’s just never impacted my life so I don’t know why it became such a big deal all of a sudden.
 

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
Consider me an idiot.

illegals undercut the wages of Americans, overload our healthcare system, increase housing prices, crowd our schools. I do not consider those benefits.
Do illegals add to the demand for healthcare, housing, schools - absolutely. But they also provide a huge economic boost to the economy - they add about $1T a year in GDP. Pay $100B in taxes every year, and contribute $25B to social security.

They also are a huge share of the construction industry, building those new schools and healthcare facilities. And there is also the obvious agriculture contribution.

Americans have proven time and time again they don’t want those jobs. Your unemployed neighbor is not moving to California to pick tomatoes all day in 95 degree heat. I’d venture to say that you could double HIS last salary and he still wouldn’t move for that job, let alone do it for a couple bucks an hour.

I don’t have a problem providing these people with healthcare and their kids with education. It’s good for the economy and we are constantly investing tax dollars in places that get a lower return. Look at all the incentives given for things like sports arenas, or new office parks. Those will put much more of a strain on infrastructure than the illegals who are building them and cleaning them.
 

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
24,404
22,994
113
Do illegals add to the demand for healthcare, housing, schools - absolutely. But they also provide a huge economic boost to the economy - they add about $1T a year in GDP. Pay $100B in taxes every year, and contribute $25B to social security.

They also are a huge share of the construction industry, building those new schools and healthcare facilities. And there is also the obvious agriculture contribution.

Americans have proven time and time again they don’t want those jobs. Your unemployed neighbor is not moving to California to pick tomatoes all day in 95 degree heat. I’d venture to say that you could double HIS last salary and he still wouldn’t move for that job, let alone do it for a couple bucks an hour.

I don’t have a problem providing these people with healthcare and their kids with education. It’s good for the economy and we are constantly investing tax dollars in places that get a lower return. Look at all the incentives given for things like sports arenas, or new office parks. Those will put much more of a strain on infrastructure than the illegals who are building them and cleaning them.
* Americans absolutely want those jobs, just not at the price the illegals are willing to do them. The illegals undercut American wages. I don’t buy the “American won’t do that work” bullsh!te. When the company in Nebraska had their illegals removed, there were lines of Americans applying for jobs the very next day.

I’m for immigration, it just needs to be on terms that help our citizenry. The free for all was a disaster and it overwhelmed many of our communities.

We need a smart, efficient, immigration program.

Unfortunately we need to reverse years of open border policies and then we can talk about what we need and how to best help America
 

dbjork6317

Heisman
Dec 3, 2009
18,230
70,955
113
* Americans absolutely want those jobs, just not at the price the illegals are willing to do them. The illegals undercut American wages. I don’t buy the “American won’t do that work” bullsh!te. When the company in Nebraska had their illegals removed, there were lines of Americans applying for jobs the very next day.

I’m for immigration, it just needs to be on terms that help our citizenry. The free for all was a disaster and it overwhelmed many of our communities.

We need a smart, efficient, immigration program.

Unfortunately we need to reverse years of open border policies and then we can talk about what we need and how to best help America
where is this “Americans need higher wages” attitude when Democrats push for raising minimum wage?

it’s like yall will support any standard Democrat position as long as it gives you a reason to get rid of the brown people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnhugh

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
1,151
1,458
113
* Americans absolutely want those jobs, just not at the price the illegals are willing to do them. The illegals undercut American wages. I don’t buy the “American won’t do that work” bullsh!te. When the company in Nebraska had their illegals removed, there were lines of Americans applying for jobs the very next day.

I’m for immigration, it just needs to be on terms that help our citizenry. The free for all was a disaster and it overwhelmed many of our communities.

We need a smart, efficient, immigration program.

Unfortunately we need to reverse years of open border policies and then we can talk about what we need and how to best help America

how much do you think you would need to pay an American to live in Fresno CA and pick strawberrys for 10 hours a day in 95 degree heat?
 

fatpiggy

Heisman
Aug 18, 2002
24,404
22,994
113
where is this “Americans need higher wages” attitude when Democrats push for raising minimum wage?

it’s like yall will support any standard Democrat position as long as it gives you a reason to get rid of the brown people.

No need for artificial minimum wages. If you get rid of the illegals the wages will rise naturally.

It’s just simple economics.

You did see the part where I am pro immigration, yes even for brown people. It just needs to be a system that works for America and helps our communities instead of hindering them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

MTTiger19

All-American
Sep 10, 2008
5,827
8,957
113
Fair, but that’s probably a bigger issue with us using the word “illegal”, because in my lifetime we have always knowingly had illegal immigrants who are employed and who the government knows about.

We could have systems that track all of these folks and require more supervision, but that costs a lot of money. Personally, I’ve never had a problem with the “illegal” immigrant population in this country. It’s just never impacted my life so I don’t know why it became such a big deal all of a sudden.
You are drastically understating what went on under Biden at the border. Never have we seen the hordes of migrants looking to come into the country, some to work and some to cause trouble. Moreover, the Biden administration removed BP officers from normal LE duties to migrant caretaker. The problem was this wasn’t done for labor, it was done to destabilize the country and wreak havoc, specifically in elections. Finally, shame on you for celebrating the exploitation of these people to work for pittance. It’s gross. If it’s so important to you to have cheap avacados that you’d send kids to work on farms you probably should check yourself. As others have stated. Immigration should be reserved for those that want to assimilate and contribute, not sneak in and send money back to their countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls