Where Do Democrats Go From Here

[HillaryFan420 121]

16 hours ago, staboner said:

this type of shit shows you the poison that is the current political system. its so wildly ineffective that it is actually working against you.

the output of the system is not only garbage, but it is the largest waste of wealth and power the world may have ever seen. 

we just shoved billions into TV adds to get the expected 50/50 result. just astoundingly dumb waste of resources and faith. the fact that American society just continues to do this is astonishing to me. the complete lack of anything resembling rational thinking seems to get exponentially worse every 4 year manufactured cycle of election hatred and doom. 

the failure the Ds isn't that they didn't talk progressively enough, but rather that no matter what they talked they would fail to connect into the correct vibe that actually gets anyone thinking critically. they are poisoned. as are the republicans. as we all know. 

 

If something looks irrational then you likely don't understand the intent of the actors involved.  A big reason why the parties love raising money even if it fails to get people elected is that it gets their consulting and media buddies paid.  The entire McGrath campaign was a jobs program for these remoras.  

[gmr548 16576]

Your position is to crush small business by falsely inflating wages.
 
Not appealing at all. You’re just working your agenda

I'm a small business owner, but hey whatever.

AFAIK, G650 owns a small business that's pretty lucrative for him and employs a lot of people.  This is all reading between the lines.
I'm also pretty sure that G650 leans right, but is not suckered by GOP orthodoxy.
The agenda claim would seem to be false and G650s "anecdotes" are also more valid than yours.
 

Quite accurate.

I believe the term is “slorched.”

Also, to answer the thread question, let’s not forget an accurate answer is “the White House.” It might have not been the best case scenario, but we got the most important thing done. Let’s build on it.

[SilasCoade 2622]

19 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

I don’t  “have mine” and I’m hardly a boomer. I’m 42. 

You seem to be espousing a boomer ideology. One that is going to become progressively ill suited to the challenges of the future. Adapt or die.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Joe Biden: 77
Nancy Pelosi: 80
Steny Hoyer: 81
Jim Clyburn: 80
Chuck Schumer: 69 (nice)
 

They, like their hero RBG, will die before they allow this to happen.

At least we don't have to wait that long for that to happen.

[immamac 42839]

IMHO Joe needs to let Kamala be the face of the executive. He gets final say, but let her "run shit" effectively. Get her real, on-the-job experience and mentor her on how to get shit done in a bipartisan way that is effective for all Americans. 

Surround Kamala with young, talented, hungry progressives with a diverse background and ideology. Get real change done even if it's small and make it look like a team win.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

2 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

Listen to Andrew Yang.

Pour resources into Charlotte, Atlanta, Miami, Houston, Austin, Columbus, Madison, Philly, and Phoenix.

Give airtime to young leaders (they are doing an ok job at this).

 

Yang is right. Also, he rarely gets called the dirty word socialist in spite of being one.  Don't embrace labels.  Especially ones that most of America was trained to hate instinctively for 75 years.  Embrace ideas instead.  Understand the word is dirty and use it that way too. Call Republicans evil socialists as well for corporate bailouts.  Eventually the word will be buried as an attack possibility. 

[SilasCoade 2622]

If Biden doesn't give Yang a prominent cabinet position he's an idiot. Let him run HHS or HUD at a minimum.

[Firemans4Horn 18038]

Richard Trumka would be my pick for secretary of Labor. 

[immamac 42839]

2 minutes ago, Llogg said:

If Biden doesn't give Yang a prominent cabinet position he's an idiot. Let him run HHS or HUD at a minimum.

I think Pete gets HUD and I think he'd be damn good at it.

Yang shouldn't have a cabinet position, but should lead a charge to investigate UBI in a real bipartisan committee. 

[BradInATX 9208]

Just now, Dr. Beeper said:

Second, mine is extremely nuanced 

"Fuck everyone else pay me" 
 

Such nuance. We'll never be able to wrap our tiny brains around it.

[G650 14248]

33 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Its really not. One is not related to another in my case. 

You print your own fiat currency and trade with other nations exclusively? Interesting.

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

 

 

 

 

I believe the term is “slorched.”

Also, to answer the thread question, let’s not forget an accurate answer is “the White House.” It might have not been the best case scenario, but we got the most important thing done. Let’s build on it.

 

 

 

 

Raise minimum wage to $50k a year.  Everyone deserves it.  Magic and fairy dust for everyone...

[Guest]

22 hours ago, G650 said:

I'm a small business owner, but hey whatever.

How many of your employees make minimum wage? Percentage is Ok.

Do you feel offering minimum wage jobs gets you the Level labor you need?

Edited November 6, 2020 by slorch

[Firemans4Horn 18038]

Dr. Beeper & Slorch,

Just so we’re all clear: you are not the voter the Democratic Party is trying to win over now or in the future. 
 

[G650 14248]

7 minutes ago, slorch said:

How many of your employees make minimum wage? Percentage is Ok.

Do you feel offering minimum wage jobs gets you the Level labor you need?

0%. Which is my point. Everyone in employing minimum wage workers is being subsidized by my taxes that allow those people to survive with the benefits provided therefrom. Because that is about the level of income it takes to survive. Put that money into the economy through wages instead of subsidies.

[bad_teammate 13193]

21 minutes ago, slorch said:

Raise minimum wage to $50k a year.  Everyone deserves it.  Magic and fairy dust for everyone...

t-shirt slogan brain

1 minute ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Lol. I already know that. It is interesting when you start throwing real world applications that cannot be academically explained away that you get fatigued and basically say fuck off.

If your business can't survive without having to pay workers starvation wages that are subsidized by social welfare programs funded by everyone else then your business should die unless that business provides some worthy good or service to society at large.

You sound like a welfare queen, honestly.

Facts, feelings and all that.

[bad_teammate 13193]

1 minute ago, Dr. Beeper said:

I never said this isn’t sensible. I said I’m not gonna do it. 

And no one asked whether or not you were. Go scream into a pillow.

[Firemans4Horn 18038]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Lol. I already know that. It is interesting when you start throwing real world applications that cannot be academically explained away that you get fatigued and basically say fuck off. 

I’ll continue to not vote if GOP’s dipshit wing continues to put deplorable candidates for my consumption.  

I am highly entertained, by the way, at how twisted off our idiot president is and how much more he’ll become unhinged. 

I’m telling you that on a thread titled “Where Do Democrats Go From Here” you add no value to the conversation. 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, G650 said:

0%. Which is my point. Everyone in employing minimum wage workers is being subsidized by my taxes that allow those people to survive with the benefits provided therefrom. Because that is about the level of income it takes to survive. Put that money into the economy through wages instead of subsidies.

Lolz...if only that were true.  We ain’t backing out any taxes ever again.  You know it. i know it.  Everyone knows it.

If tax reductions are part of the discussion, then sure, I’m all ears.

[BradInATX 9208]

9 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

I’ll continue to not vote if GOP’s dipshit wing continues to put deplorable candidates for my consumption.  

I am highly entertained, by the way, at how twisted off our idiot president is and how much more he’ll become unhinged. 

And that's fair.

[G650 14248]

11 minutes ago, slorch said:

Lolz...if only that were true.  We ain’t backing out any taxes ever again.  You know it. i know it.  Everyone knows it.

If tax reductions are part of the discussion, then sure, I’m all ears.

Not what I said.

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, Dr. Beeper said:

It can survive just fine. I’m just not going to pay a person that wage. What about this do you not understand?  I am not giving an opinion on minimum wage. I’m offering anecdotal evidence of its adverse impact. That’s it.  

There are mountains of evidence that disprove your stupid little anecdotal take.

[bad_teammate 13193]

He's not trying to make an argument of any kind, he's just wanting to let people know he owns a business. That's basically how sad and pointless this entire sidetrack is.

[bad_teammate 13193]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Okay.  I’ll leave with this...the Dems flipped some very shocking people to me this election. This was an anti-Trump vote to be sure. But they have a real, real opportunity in Texas with the wealthier white demographic. As long as they espouse the above attitude, they’ll immediately lose that traction. No sweat off my back. I was simply offering perspective on how they could guarantee themselves landslides for decades to come. 

Self-serving bullshit served up as analysis that makes zero sense.

A wealthy white person's vote counts the same as a working class person's vote and there are a lot more of the latter than the former.

Trump got 1.2M more votes in 2020 than 2016.

Trump won more counties in 2020 than 2016.

Trump made huge inroads with blacks and Latinos.

Cornyn won way more comfortably than Cruz.

What "traction" are you fucking talking about?

[CHIEF 5079]

A big topic for me, voted Obama twice, but not for Hillary or Joe,  is I don't think you can have progressive ideas implemented with open borders. You can't offer expensive social programs with unchecked illegal immigration, and open doors to every uneducated refugee that wants to come to the good ol' USA. Every liberally social Western country that we talk about wanting to emulate has strong requirements for citizenship and staying in the country. If you are over 60, it's gonna cost you over $100k to immigrate to Canada, or you ain't getting in. Same way with Europe. Everything was fine until they started getting overrun with North Africans and Middle Easterners. You end up with more people in the cart than can push it.

Do we need a wall on the southern border with Mexico? I don't know. I do know that being in construction, 90-95% of my daily interactions are with Mexicans, we have a long history, and great friendship. I go to Quinceañeras, and they come to crawfish boils. Illegal immigration is the reason most are swinging right. Not a one of them makes less than $200 a day, but they understand a never ending supply of cheaper labor could jeopardize that. A slow down in the economy and a slow construction market jeopardizes their employment, as they see themselves as the lowest rung on the ladder. Most if not all want illegal immigration to stop, despite about half coming here illegally.

CHIEF

[bad_teammate 13193]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Oh, I guess we can expect that black and Latino to the GOP trend to hold or build.

If the Democrats continue to ignore or extend a middle finger to them, absolutely. Biden made no inroads in Texas. He got washed. The Democrats LOST ground in Texas relative to 2018 and even 2016 especially in terms of momentum and growth.

As Ice Cube was talking about, at least Trump bothered to lie to him about the Platinum Plan. Biden wouldn't even talk to him. I don't like the guy who lies to me, but if the other guy won't even take a meeting with me what choice do I really have?

8 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

Do we need a wall on the southern border with Mexico? I don't know. I do know that being in construction, 90-95% of my daily interactions are with Mexicans, we have a long history, and great friendship. I go to Quinceañeras, and they come to crawfish boils. Illegal immigration is the reason most are swinging right. Not a one of them makes less than $200 a day, but they understand a never ending supply of cheaper labor could jeopardize that. A slow down in the economy and a slow construction market jeopardizes their employment, as they see themselves as the lowest rung on the ladder. Most if not all want illegal immigration to stop, despite about half coming here illegally.

And the Republican Party is the only one selling them ANY solution to the problem. The wall is obviously a stupid idea that won't work, but it's something.  The Democratic Party's answer is to scream "THAT'S RACIST!" at people who express these concerns.

The Democrats need an easy-to-understand plan to make sure those legal immigrant workers are going to remain financially secure and that their kids will have great opportunities. That's ALL they want and we can give it to them.

Regarding open borders, no one is proposing open borders. Everyone proposes controlled immigration. The Democrats need to get good at being unafraid of "OPEN BORDERS!" "SOCIALISM!" "ABORTION!" They need to be able to field those expertly. That's why Pete Buttigieg is so effective; he's an ice-cold psycho murderer who wouldn't blink if a FOXNews interviewer said he ate babies.

- "'Open borders' is a phrase used to scare people. It doesn't represent anything anyone is advocating, it's just used by dishonest people to distract and dismiss. It's a way for politicians and their cronies to ignore the real problems of real Americans. No one is advocating whatever 'open borders' means, but the Republicans don't care about the working people of America so they just say that phrase over and over again instead of coming up with REAL solutions to working America's REAL problems."

[Nope 3114]

If Joe doesn’t make it through his term, who does Kamala nominate for VP?

[CooterBrown 18005]

5 minutes ago, Nope said:

If Joe doesn’t make it through his term, who does Kamala nominate for VP?

Pete, Stacey, or Yang.

 

[CHIEF 5079]

Not really "Open Borders" but just very lax border enforcement. We have 12 million illegal aliens in our country, so 3.2-3.6% of our population. I'm all for throwing work visas and green cards to people and opening paths to citizenship, but those need to be tied to having viable candidates that are contributors to our society, not just manual laborers. That's what other Western countries do.

CHIEF

[SilasCoade 2622]

The solution to illegal immigration is to remove the incentive. Invest in creating sustainable industries in countries that these immigrants are coming from. Invest in stable government in these countries, even if the current government does not align with american policies. Stability is a pre requisite to growth. Attack the cause not the effect. Building a wall or complaining about the illegals is attacking the effect.

[CHIEF 5079]

23 minutes ago, Llogg said:

The solution to illegal immigration is to remove the incentive. Invest in creating sustainable industries in countries that these immigrants are coming from. Invest in stable government in these countries, even if the current government does not align with american policies. Stability is a pre requisite to growth. Attack the cause not the effect. Building a wall or complaining about the illegals is attacking the effect.

Who is going to invest? Are you talking private or public funds? Private funds have invested before, only to see those investments nationalized, mainly in the oil and gas industry. Its going to take industries that will do it despite the clear possibilities that they could loose their whole investment due to civil unrest, or a change in government policy for the worse.

CHIEF

[TwiceHorn 31446]

2 hours ago, CHIEF said:

A big topic for me, voted Obama twice, but not for Hillary or Joe,  is I don't think you can have progressive ideas implemented with open borders. You can't offer expensive social programs with unchecked illegal immigration, and open doors to every uneducated refugee that wants to come to the good ol' USA. Every liberally social Western country that we talk about wanting to emulate has strong requirements for citizenship and staying in the country. If you are over 60, it's gonna cost you over $100k to immigrate to Canada, or you ain't getting in. Same way with Europe. Everything was fine until they started getting overrun with North Africans and Middle Easterners. You end up with more people in the cart than can push it.

Do we need a wall on the southern border with Mexico? I don't know. I do know that being in construction, 90-95% of my daily interactions are with Mexicans, we have a long history, and great friendship. I go to Quinceañeras, and they come to crawfish boils. Illegal immigration is the reason most are swinging right. Not a one of them makes less than $200 a day, but they understand a never ending supply of cheaper labor could jeopardize that. A slow down in the economy and a slow construction market jeopardizes their employment, as they see themselves as the lowest rung on the ladder. Most if not all want illegal immigration to stop, despite about half coming here illegally.

CHIEF

Agree that open borders is unrealistic.

[TwiceHorn 31446]

5 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

Who is going to invest? Are you talking private or public funds? Private funds have invested before, only to see those investments nationalized, mainly in the oil and gas industry. Its going to take industries that will do it despite the clear possibilities that they could loose their whole investment due to civil unrest, or a change in government policy for the worse.

CHIEF

It's a great idea and from a macro perspective is the answer.

Those countries are so corrupt though that it will be really hard to pull off.  "It" being creating a decent standard of living in Central American countries and Mexico.

[bad_teammate 13193]

48 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

Not really "Open Borders" but just very lax border enforcement. We have 12 million illegal aliens in our country, so 3.2-3.6% of our population. I'm all for throwing work visas and green cards to people and opening paths to citizenship, but those need to be tied to having viable candidates that are contributors to our society, not just manual laborers.

Why "not just manual laborers"? I'm not saying it's necessary to have a bunch of cheap non-skilled labor, but I need it demonstrated that it's an actual problem beyond some kind of broad moral issue.

The extent to which it is a real problem determines how much its potential solutions are worth investing in. Why are we supposed to care that there are 12 million "illegal aliens"?

Are they actually a drain on our public services? Are they actually a drain on our economy?

 

[workswithseed 2097]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Why "not just manual laborers"? I'm not saying it's necessary to have a bunch of cheap non-skilled labor, but I need it demonstrated that it's an actual problem beyond some kind of broad moral issue.

The extent to which it is a real problem determines how much its potential solutions are worth investing in. Why are we supposed to care that there are 12 million "illegal aliens"?

Are they actually a drain on our public services? Are they actually a drain on our economy?

 

Yep, just bring in more welders to bring down my wages. 

[bad_teammate 13193]

1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

Yep, just bring in more welders to bring down my wages. 

* citation needed

[gmr548 16576]

A big topic for me, voted Obama twice, but not for Hillary or Joe,  is I don't think you can have progressive ideas implemented with open borders. You can't offer expensive social programs with unchecked illegal immigration, and open doors to every uneducated refugee that wants to come to the good ol' USA. Every liberally social Western country that we talk about wanting to emulate has strong requirements for citizenship and staying in the country. If you are over 60, it's gonna cost you over $100k to immigrate to Canada, or you ain't getting in. Same way with Europe. Everything was fine until they started getting overrun with North Africans and Middle Easterners. You end up with more people in the cart than can push it.
Do we need a wall on the southern border with Mexico? I don't know. I do know that being in construction, 90-95% of my daily interactions are with Mexicans, we have a long history, and great friendship. I go to Quinceañeras, and they come to crawfish boils. Illegal immigration is the reason most are swinging right. Not a one of them makes less than $200 a day, but they understand a never ending supply of cheaper labor could jeopardize that. A slow down in the economy and a slow construction market jeopardizes their employment, as they see themselves as the lowest rung on the ladder. Most if not all want illegal immigration to stop, despite about half coming here illegally.
CHIEF

A physical wall is laughably stupid from a cost benefit standpoint, really any way you look at it. It isn’t even worth debating. It’s only purpose is as a symbol contrary to everything America holds itself to be. Progressives

You’re also acting like we don’t already have free healthcare for these people in the most expensive way possible: hospital ERs.

A simple guest worker program would solve a lot of our immigration problems. I think everyone wants illegal immigration to stop. Some think we should have less immigration (awful idea), some think the process should be smoother and more humane.

[CHIEF 5079]

31 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Why "not just manual laborers"? I'm not saying it's necessary to have a bunch of cheap non-skilled labor, but I need it demonstrated that it's an actual problem beyond some kind of broad moral issue.

The extent to which it is a real problem determines how much its potential solutions are worth investing in. Why are we supposed to care that there are 12 million "illegal aliens"?

Are they actually a drain on our public services? Are they actually a drain on our economy?

 

When they are out of work, I would tend to answer yes. If they have children born in the US, those children received citizenship at birth and are entitled to all the benefits that go with it (Medicaid, WIC, free school lunches, education, etc..). I don't begrudge them. The US and Canada are the only 1st World countries that confer citizenship to newborns. It is a Western Hemisphere phenomenon. Probably because both countries are relatively new compared to other 1st World Countries. If anything needs to change, it is Anchor Babies. How do you deport a dependent citizen with their family? That goes against everything our country stands for. 

CHIEF

Edited November 6, 2020 by CHIEF

[gmr548 16576]

And the Republican Party is the only one selling them ANY solution to the problem. The wall is obviously a stupid idea that won't work, but it's something.  The Democratic Party's answer is to scream "THAT'S RACIST!" at people who express these concerns.
The Democrats need an easy-to-understand plan to make sure those legal immigrant workers are going to remain financially secure and that their kids will have great opportunities. That's ALL they want and we can give it to them.

This. Democrats correctly identified that the wall is dumb and sends a terrible message. And no doubt there are absolutely trumpkins who circle jerk to their hatred of non whites while chanting “build the wall.” But Democrats haven’t really put anything on the table to solve the problem. The messaging is completely focused on that one element of it. It may be right, but it’s woefully incomplete.

[bad_teammate 13193]

8 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

When they are out of work, I would tend to answer yes.

But are they out of work?

You seem to be operating in kind of a theoretical space when talking about a concrete issue. I understand that, but it's impractical to just think about the values part of a problem when the real problem costs money and has data involved.

Quote

I don't begrudge them. The US and Canada are the only 1st World countries that confer citizenship to newborns. It is a Western Hemisphere phenomenon. Probably because both countries are relatively new compared to other 1st World Countries. If anything needs to change, it is Anchor Babies. How do you deport a dependent citizen with their family? That goes against everything our country stands for. 

Why does it need to change?

[JFKFC 4878]

 

[SilasCoade 2622]

32 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

When they are out of work, I would tend to answer yes. If they have children born in the US, those children received citizenship at birth and are entitled to all the benefits that go with it (Medicaid, WIC, free school lunches, education, etc..). I don't begrudge them. The US and Canada are the only 1st World countries that confer citizenship to newborns. It is a Western Hemisphere phenomenon. Probably because both countries are relatively new compared to other 1st World Countries. If anything needs to change, it is Anchor Babies. How do you deport a dependent citizen with their family? That goes against everything our country stands for. 

CHIEF

They're not anchor babies. They're just babies.

[SilasCoade 2622]

1 hour ago, CHIEF said:

Who is going to invest? Are you talking private or public funds? Private funds have invested before, only to see those investments nationalized, mainly in the oil and gas industry. Its going to take industries that will do it despite the clear possibilities that they could loose their whole investment due to civil unrest, or a change in government policy for the worse.

CHIEF

These are all good points that highlight the difficulty of the problem. But the difficulty level is not a persuasive argument against trying to find solutions to the problem. And yes have the US government directly invest in the nationalized industries of these countries. Why not? Become a literal stakeholder in the success and stability of the country.

[mycox 582]

3 hours ago, Dr. Beeper said:

Oh, I guess we can expect that black and Latino to the GOP trend to hold or build. 

Three things Latinos strongly support in Texas.

1. Pro life
2. Border security
3. Low taxes

You aren't getting any of those with a democratic candidate. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan Patrick gets the same  Latino support in 2022 even with his constant immigrant bashing. 

[CHIEF 5079]

16 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

But are they out of work?

You seem to be operating in kind of a theoretical space when talking about a concrete issue. I understand that, but it's impractical to just think about the values part of a problem when the real problem costs money and has data involved.

Why does it need to change?

Yes, they are out of work. When the housing market came to a halt in 2008, we gave them food, helped with house payments, paid utility bills, bought diapers, and formula. These are subs, but you still care about them. Luckily I had the savings to help where I could. They lived on what charity could provide and the benefits that their children were entitled to.

As for anchor babies, again, no one in Europe confers citizenship to newborns. Why do you think that is? If Switzerland offered it, I would have loaded up Mrs. CHIEF and flew into Lucerne to have CHIEF Jr., he would have been a citizen they would not deport, would they have deported Mrs. CHIEF and I? Would have had free healthcare and other benefits, and therein lies the cost. You can't have expensive social programs where people can just move in and establish a citizenship barrier that cannot be removed, they have never paid into, and immediately start taking advantage of it. There is a reason that European countries are so tough to get citizenship, Switzerland is the worst, its to keep people from taking advantage of their social programs.

CHIEF

 

[Orale 1087]

Pete, Stacey, or Yang.
 

Now that we would have had a black man and a woman as President, it would be good to have an openly gay VP.

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

3 minutes ago, Orale said:

Now that we would have had a black man and a woman as President, it would be good to have an openly gay VP.

Lindsey Graham isn’t going to switch parties.

[LCHorn 2616]

2 hours ago, Nope said:

If Joe doesn’t make it through his term, who does Kamala nominate for VP?

Probably whoever she considers most threatening in a 2024 primary.  

[SilasCoade 2622]

4 minutes ago, Orale said:

2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

Pete, Stacey, or Yang.
 

Now that we would have had a black man and a woman as President, it would be good to have an openly gay VP.

I'm as left as it gets but this a stupid statement. How sexual orientation has zero bearing on his fitness for office. It will only be cool when it is not notable that he's gay.

[bad_teammate 13193]

2 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

Yes, they are out of work. When the housing market came to a halt in 2008, we gave them food, helped with house payments, paid utility bills, bought diapers, and formula. These are subs, but you still care about them. Luckily I had the savings to help where I could. They lived on what charity could provide and the benefits that their children were entitled to.

You're talking about a specific situation and I'm talking about the overall situation. We shouldn't make national policy based on your individual experiences, we should make it based on the entire picture of circumstances.

Quote

If Switzerland offered it, I would have loaded up Mrs. CHIEF and flew into Lucerne to have CHIEF Jr.,

No you wouldn't have.

Quote

You can't have expensive social programs where people can just move in and establish a citizenship barrier that cannot be removed, they have never paid into, and immediately start taking advantage of it.

This presumes that the people involved aren't contributing enough to cover the cost.