If other countries close their borders to America how is Trump going to deport?

[purplepoppy]

Trump is claiming he's going to deport millions of illegal immigrants. But that would mean arrangements would have to be made with the receiving countries. They could simply refuse to let passengers off the plane/bus/or whatever or even refuse them permission to cross the border.

Given these immigrants won't have documents a country could easily argue they weren't originally from there thus they have no legal responsibility to take them.

A migrant could also argue he was born in the USA but the government wiped his proof of citizenship. Given so much such as driving licences are stored on computer that wouldn't be hard.

[CalmUntilAbused]

Oh, I suppose that President-elect Donald Trump plans to run this in a brute force fashion. After all, no Latin American country could face the USA in a violent struggle. In case of need, there's always a DNA check available to make sure what country a migrant came from (by comparing the result with potential family), to make it feel less forceful and more justified. As much as I personally hate it, since I believe in absolute justice, brute force is one of US' fortes.

And as for wiped records... I imagine that government data is heavily backed-up, and some critical documents are still stored in the old-fashioned paper format as well as in digital format, in many copies. A wipeout would have to be either global and easily noticeable or specifically targeted to spare certain individuals, who under Trump wouls still be easily evaluated and chucked into jail if need be.

[Anonymous]

There are SO many problems with Trumps idea of deportation.

For starters, citizenship cannot just be revoked, and doing away with Birth right citizenship would require a 2/3 majority vote and 3/4 of the states to ratify, which he doesn't have.

Next is his numbers are off, by a lot. But even with the real, lower numbers conservative estimates say they would have to hire 3x the current number of LEOs that are already in the US, then have them ONLY do ICE work. Not enough people want to do this, we can't afford them, and they'd require specialized training.

Then there is paying for the actual deportation which we cannot afford.

But before those flights can be chartered, the other nations have to agree to receive them, which they don't have to do.

All the while your food will be dying in the fields because white boys don't pick vegetables at $5/ hr

... seems like a lot of trouble just to be a bigot.

[IslaTheWitch]

deportation is not about open borders... there must be an agreement between two countries (or more), and then the country with illegal immigrants can send them back... but only if other countries want them back :D

the reality in Germany... over 60% of illegal immigrants avoid deportation by hiding themselves and/or losing their documents :D

[lorenzomichael]

Like they say at closing time at a bar, “you don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here.”
Trump is gonna do whatever the fuck he wants to do. He preached deportation throughout his campaign and you can best believe that he’s gonna deport every motherfucker man woman, and child that is here illegal back to wherever they came from. and if people have a problem with that, maybe they should take a homeless Person off the street and let them live in there backyard. My point is if it doesn’t affect you then mind your own fucking business American or not.

[phraseology]

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but illegal aliens aren't the only ones that can invade countries. Not to toot my own horn, but America is basically the All Star team when it comes to invading nations. We're kind of a big deal. Shit we innovated a way to invade forests with beavers by air drop before.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/YcdvP8CYPB0

[Syntosi]

Its even funnier if you consider that Trump want to revoke the US citizenship of some immigrants who would no longer be recognized in their original country because they are no longer a citizen there. This whole thing is going to become a shitshow.

[Amur8711]

When has he ever said he would revoke the US citizenship of some immigrants?

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 Its part of project 2025.

[Joshydavid25]

"Its part of project 2025." No it's not.. Project 2025 is literally just about re-establishing all the government beauracracies and limiting Federal government power and giving more back to the states.. And Trump is not apart of that..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 ... What the hell are you talking about? That is not at all what Project 2025 is trying to do.

[Joshydavid25]

Yeah it is if you actually read it or listened to a non bias source who read it and not listen to media talking points about it..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 I have read a decent bunch of it as well, including watching their incredibly dumb "training videos" for future staff of Trumps administration and other government positions.

Project 2025 is (among other things) about undermining federal institutions and find loopholes which would allow the president (which would be conservative for Project 2025 to work) to implement any policy they want as well as a list of pre-planned policies.

It is also about "motivating" the president to do what these people want. Do you know why Trump is not involved? Because the people who wrote Project 2025 became sick and tired of trying to manipulate Trump the first go-around that they decided to try streamline the process for next time. Trump is the victim and this is the plan for how to screw him over in a way that he will think it was his idea and that it was a great idea.

[Joshydavid25]

Those Federal institutions aren't helping the American people.. They basically trying to clean the government up and make it smaller.. That's basically what Project 2025 is about..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 That is literally not what its about.

[Joshydavid25]

It is really.. There's no boogeyman components to it.. It's literally just conservatives wanting the government to do it's job better.. And getting rid of or re establishing all the fluff from those agencies like the FBI, CIA, and the education system..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Pffft! AHAHAHAHA! "wanting the government to do it's job better". When will the belief that conservative politicians wanting a functional government die? No matter, this will backfire spectacularly in the future so I can't fucking wait for you to get egg on your face.

[Joshydavid25]

"When will the belief that conservative politicians wanting a functional government die?"
It'll die when it's not true.. 😎👉.. I'm not even a Conservative anymore, but I'll believe them over people who lie about Project 2025..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 When was the last time the Conservative party actually solved a problem in society?

[Joshydavid25]

A lot of ideas in Project 2025 like privatization of the school system and allowing school choice is certainly one.. Getting all the government red tape and restrictions off of the people also helps..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Hahah! Privatizing schools sounds like such a good idea! After all, it worked so well with healthcare, the fire department and the police!

Man, you sound absolutely insane.

[Amur8711]

@Syntodi @Joshydavid25 The goal with this administration is to get public schools to be state run and not federally funded and run. Also, school choice is the other big factor they want. They don't want the government dictating where you go to school, currently if you want your kids to go to a certain school you have to pay tax on your local school as well as pay for attending the school your sending your child to. What this does is it gives no insentive for schools to become better, because they are getting your money regardless.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 Its really not their priority. They want to take away public funding of education and also the school choice is just meant for stealthily authorizing more religious schools over schools that actually teaches you something.

But this is just a digression, I was asking what the Republican party has actually accomplished recently because as far as I am concerned, they have just complained a bunch and then done nothing to actually solve the situation once in power.

[Amur8711]

I agree that last time we didn't take advantage of the situation, I think that won't happen again this time.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 And the time before that.. and the time before that.. and the time before that..

Want me to go on?

[Amur8711]

We got stuff done when Ronald Reagan was in office, leading to a huge growth to our economy. We won all chambers that time round.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 I would argue that he is responsible for one of the worst times in American history but whatever. So you need to go back to 1981-1989 until you find a conservative government that actually did something for you (Which I find to be incredibly damaging to the nation but whatever). Do you see why this might be a problem for someones view of the Republican party?

[Amur8711]

No matter what I say or no matter what we do, you will always say that it's damaging to the US. Meanwhile, all you Democrat run cuties are literal hell wholes. With crime that rivals 3rd world countries.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 So once again, "When will the belief that conservative politicians wanting a functional government die?"

After all, its not like they have done anything since the 1980's according to you.

[Amur8711]

I like how you acuss us when you been in powered longer. We only get brief periods.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 I like how you think I support Democrats because I think they are good. They are just less bad.

But again, the Republicans have done nothing for the American people for at least as long as I have been alive (I argue longer). This is just a fact. It speaks volumes about you that you refuse to admit this to yourself.

[Amur8711]

So are Democrats good or less bad?

We were the ones that pushed for civil rights and we got them after that there isn't much more we could had done. We also were the party responsible for abolishing slavery. Democrats apposed all of that at every step of the way. They still treat blacks as slaves as a voter base to keep themselves in power by offering promises they then give to illegal immigrants.

[Syntosi]

@Amur8711 Oh, the Democrats are just less bad.

If you want to try go back and take credit for civil rights and abolishing slavery, which is not true due to the party switch, that still portrays your modern party in a very bad light since you have to go back so far to actually justify your loyalty to the party.

The Republican party has not done anything for you during your entire lifetime. Meanwhile, I can actually give some amount of credit to the Democrats for some achievements such as Obama care or the Chips act or the infrastructure bill or whatever. Things that were actually done and has helped people.

[Joshydavid25]

"Hahah! Privatizing schools sounds like such a good idea! After all, it worked so well with healthcare, the fire department and the police!"

When they were privatized I'm sure they were much better.. And yes because private schools do so much better than public schools.. Which is failing the kids horribly.. Even Charter Schools are doing much better.. Anytime the government gets its hands on something they either mess it up or it's subpar..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Wow, you are delusional. Every time market forces gets hold of something, such as education or healthcare or whatever, they ruin in.

More specifically, they have a profit motive of providing a worse service for a higher cost. That is literally how capitalism works and that is what has always happened in history.

Do you know why your idea of "private schools" such as Harvard or whatever works so well? Because they get SO much resources that their inefficiency does not matter.

If you take the same amount of resources that Harvard has and gives it to a public school then that public school would be amazing on the levels of science fiction.

[Joshydavid25]

"More specifically, they have a profit motive of providing a worse service for a higher cost. That is literally how capitalism works and that is what has always happened in history."

That is literally the opposite of how Capitalism works.. The whole point of Capitalism is that the buyers have as much power as the sellers.. I would say that the buyers have a bit more power. Incentives and competition makes businesses of any kind wanna give the best services if they wanna keep their customers.. If they know that their customers can just take their money else where for better, maybe even cheaper services, that'll incentivize businesses. Hence why Capitalism works..

I don't know if Harvard is a truly private school.. A lot of Universities get money from the government which is why they charge more up the bootyhole each year.. Public schools also get plenty of funding, so throwing more money at it won't solve the problems it has.

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 How naive.

Alright. Thought experiment time!

You are the owner of a business. You sell a physical product. One day your RnD team has a meeting with you where they demonstrates a new material they just invented that is worse quality but 50% cheaper to produce.

Do you A:) Tell them that lowering the quality of the material would undermine your product
or
Do you B:) Switch material for your product and make it more of a cheap piece of shit than it already was

Bonus question: If you switch out for the budget material, would you lower the price of your product or maintain the same price and therefore increase corporate profits?

[Joshydavid25]

The customers would notice the drop in quality and would eventually stop buying my product especially if I kept it at the same price.. You mentioned the keywords, I'm trying to make a profit.. With Capitalism if you wanna make a profit you gotta keep the customer happy or make them feel like it was a fair trade.. Corporatatism is not Capitalism.. Therefore I'll probably choose to keep the same material unless I wanna lower the price of my goods..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Have you noticed the drop in quality on the products that you buy?

[Joshydavid25]

I have noticed a difference in quality, and shrinkflation, but we can thank the government for inflation as to why products altogether are going up.. There's a lot that goes into it..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 You can't have a functioning economy without inflation. It is required. The question is, why have you not changed which product you buy?

[Joshydavid25]

Yeah sure some economist believe that a little inflation is good for economic growth, but high inflation only decreases the value of any currency.. Since inflation is only that there's too much money and not enough product..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 That is a gross oversimplification of the monetary system and every economist I have ever heard of agrees that inflation is REQUIRED for our current understanding of an economy to function.

[Joshydavid25]

Nobody should have to spend $300 for food.. High Inflation is not necessary.. And it is pretty simple once you think about it..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 The times we have had zero inflation or even negative inflation are usually times which are important enough to give names. Names such as the great depression for example. They are not happy times.

[Joshydavid25]

The Great depression is an example of too much Government intervention.. Also, I did agree that a little but of inflation is good for the economy.. Just not what we have now, because it means that there's too much money and not enough goods and products, so because of scarcity they have to raise prices..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 "Too much government intervention" my ass but whatever. The current rate of inflation in USA is like 2.4%. The ideal rate of inflation according to almost all economists is 2%.

Also you have completely misunderstood what inflation is. The inflation is the CHANGE in the value of money and has absolutely nothing to do with the actual value itself. It does not matter if eggs costs 2 dollars or 200 dollars if the price is kept stable with a 2% inflation. Granted, if eggs costs 200 dollars then its very likely that the government will redefine the currency and move the decimal which is again normal.

The supply of money compared to goods in the economy is a complete misunderstanding on your part.

[Joshydavid25]

"The supply of money compared to goods in the economy is a complete misunderstanding on your part."

No that's a big part of the inflation rate.. It devalues the currency.. Also it became 2.6% not too long ago.. And yes the government hardly contributes to a thriving economy because it doesn't make any money... All the money comes from the population via a freer market for businesses to thrive and people to spend money.. It's why many countries in Africa can't seem to thrive.. Too much government intervention.. The government mostly takes and takes and takes..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 The value of the currency only really matters if you are importing or exporting to other countries. If you are importing it is better if your currency is worth more, if you are exporting, like China, then it is better if your currency is worth less. Hence why 1 US dollar is worth 7.2 yuan. That is literally intentional. It has nothing to do with the actual value of your wage and how much eggs are worth because those numbers will correct themselves.

As for the inflation, it quickly dropped since the end of covid19 and incidentally Trumps economic mismanagement. You also apparently have no idea what the role of the government is in the economy nor about Africa. That is not why Africa is struggling.

[Joshydavid25]

I don't think so.. It also matters because, you know, currency is what gets us goods and products, and like I mentioned inflation is just when there's more money or currency than there are products..

And no there inflation shot up with the Biden administration.. I think in 2021 it was as high as 8.00.. It only came down once people started going back to work, or not getting free money from the government.. And the government shouldn't have any role in the economy.. So yes I know.. And yes that's why countries in Africa are struggling.. Because of corrupt government intervention..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 The relationship between the amount of money and products in the economy establishes the value of the money. But money is really just the middleman, the medium of trade, it does not actually represent value. As such, when you work and earn a wage that value you are providing is translated into money which is then translated into buying eggs or whatever.

If the economy suffers inflation that does not really change the fact that you produce value at your job. As such your wage will just be converted into the new exchange rate of the currency and you get more cash that buys the same amount as previously. The problem comes with fast changes at which point wage increases does not keep up and you get less in return for the same amount of work for a while until wages catches up again and it stabilizes.

As for the covid19 inflation, it started in 2021 and ended in 2022 at which point inflation dropped to 3.4% in 2023 and down to 2.6% in 2024 and is now down to 2.4%.

And your views on government spending and the economy is still wrong and it has still nothing to do with the situation in Africa.

[Joshydavid25]

"The relationship between the amount of money and products in the economy establishes the value of the money."

Well yeah, that's what I was saying.. We don't disagree on that.. Also we're talking about inflation specifically and money value as it pertains to the economy not so much my value as a worker.. That pertains to how much currency I will get..

When the economy suffers inflation it simply means that I'm have to work twice as hard to earn more just to get groceries and keep the lights on.. The dollar has been so valuable over the past century that no new type of currency is sufficient enough for a long time..

As for all those numbers, I don't need em to know that the inflation rate is too high if groceries cost too much.. Maybe you have money like that where you don't have to worry, and can act like the economy is doing well, but the rest of us can recognize a problem when we see it.

And it has everything to do with the situation in Africa.. Too many restrictions and red tape for the people to actually thrive.. Along with other things, but that's a big part of the reason in many countries..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 *sigh* How to make you understand this? Money is a middleman between you and someone else when you make an exchange. It you convert your work into money and exchange money into goods then the value of the money in-between is irrelevant as long as the exchange rate is the same when going from work to money as from money to goods.

If there is 2% inflation then your wage would also increase 2% and the price of eggs would increase 2% etc.. In the end, nothing changed except that those who owned money during the inflation lost 2% of their value. As long as you are not sitting on savings in the form of money then inflation strictly speaking does not effect you under normal circumstances.

Also the value of the dollar has absolutely nothing to do with why it is the reserve currency in other countries. You need a serious lesson in economics dude. The reason why the dollar is the reserve currency is partially because it has been of a stable value historically (not so much these days) but also because other countries accepts it in international trade which makes it very liquid.

And again, you know nothing about Africa. For starters, what part of Africa do you think has "many restrictions and red tape"? It is literally a case of their governments not being large enough to effectively govern their own territories which means the exact opposite. They can't put in restrictions or red tape because they are physically too weak.

[Joshydavid25]

"How to make you understand this? Money is a middleman between you and someone else when you make an exchange. It you convert your work into money and exchange money into goods then the value of the money in-between is irrelevant as long as the exchange rate is the same when going from work to money as from money to goods."

Okay, no disrespect, I'm not gonna say that that doesn't make sense, but uh, it doesn't seem like sound economical reasoning.. My labor is valuable, but my labor isn't going to exchange for goods for the most part..

"If there is 2% inflation then your wage would also increase 2% and the price of eggs would increase 2% etc.."

Generally more money than goods causes inflation.. It could be that wages unjustifiably go up, or that some external force outside the market is just giving money put making it less scarce..

And exactly no new currency as it pertains to the U. S has been sufficient enough, not the World..

I've listened to people from certain African countries actually talk about it.. There's a woman who owns businesses in Senegal I believe, who travels the world to talk about all the government Red tape, and the handouts from other countries that's ruining businesses and stopping the country from thriving.. There's different problems in different countries..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 And if your labor is not exchanged for goods or services, what are they going to? If you are just sitting on a pile of money then yes you are going to suffer inflation. That is kind of the point, nobody wants you to sit on unspent money because that is bad for the economy. Inflation is a motivation to spend the money before it loses value.

As for Africa, I have also heard stories along those lines but they had nothing to do with government red tape. Yes there are complaints about "handouts" as you call them which in reality is various forms of humanitarian aid. Obviously that is going to impact local businesses in the area but at the same time, if their economy was working then they would not need humanitarian aid in the first place so the question is sort of moot.

[Joshydavid25]

Okay, we agree that that is what economist say helps the economy, at least some of them, not all agree that inflation is a good thing even a tiny bit.

I think humanitarian aid is a good thing, just that too much of it stifles people's growth and is not good for an economy to grow.. There are African countries that get millions in aid from other countries, and yet they still seem to be suffering.. There's not enough businesses to really help the economy flourish in the first place..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 To my knowledge there is not a single group of economists in the world outside of maybe the Islamic world (which has religious beliefs entangled with economic policies but that is an entirely different conversation) that do not believe inflation is good. Having a positive inflation is literally fundamental to our understanding of an economy.

And humanitarian aid is a complicated issue that we will not benefit from discussing today. Suffice to say that we can't force someone to improve without using violence AKA military/governmental forces. Since they are their own sovereign countries then we dont have that luxury, hence why we are not the ones who will ultimately solve their problems for them. All we can do is provide assistance to help the process.

[Joshydavid25]

There's actually not a consensus on it. In economic circles it's still a highly debated topic.. Some economicist believe a low level is a good thing, and some don't.. But they Definitely don't agree on it. So I don't know if it is a fundamental principle of economics..

Well, we don't need to do much of anything for another country to prosper.. It's up to the country to do that on its own.. Assistance is good, but ultimately what has been recorded to help a country prosper is a freer market able to regulate itself.. It helped with China, and India, to get certain parts out of
poverty.. It seems like places like Nigeria are slowly integrating it as they are seeing some form of prosperity as well..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Show me a respected organization of economists that does not support an inflation rate of around 2%. If there are any, I dont know them.

As for government regulations and economic growth, to a point a free market does have advantages but it also lacks control which means once it runs into problems it will not be able to resolve them. Monopolies is a good example which requires government intervention to realistically resolve.

Historically the most successful economic models have been a hybrid system where you have a free market with government oversight and regulations. Some good examples are standardization, health and safety regulations or even going as far as to have publicly run businesses such as fire departments or energy companies.

[Joshydavid25]

www.investopedia.com/.../...on-be-good-economy.asp
Apparently according to this article it's not Universally agreed on.. There's no consensus to it..

"Monopolies is a good example which requires government intervention to realistically resolve." Government intervention actually is one of the main causes of monopolies.. In a truly free market a Monopoly couldn't form or would be hard to because of the constant competition coming around all the time.. The consumers have all or most of the power in a free market.. Huge companies can lobby the government for restrictions and some red tape..

America has somewhat of a mixed economy and it seems to somewhat mess things up.. Some rules and regulations are probably needed, but also incentives are the most important factor here.. If a person want their business to flourish they'll do everything to make sure their customers are happy and loyal..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Reading through that I dont actually see a single example of anyone disagreeing. They just keep saying "some people" or whatever without actually substantiating it.

You could argue that it is hard to form monopolies in a "truly free market" (its not) but the fact remains that the free market or capitalism has no inherent mechanism for breaking up a monopoly. Monopolies are permanent without outside interference such as governmental oversight. If one ever forms then they will stay there forever and destroy that entire industry. It is also worth pointing out that it is the constant capitalist competition that leads to monopolies because as with every competition, it has a winner and in a capitalist market the winner will keep winning.

And no, if a person wants their business to flourish they won't do everything to make sure their customers are happy and loyal. That is a romanticized view of what is actually happening. From the view of the corporation, the consumer is an obstacle between them and your money. There are many ways to defeat an obstacle, making them willingly hand over their money is just one way but it is not the BEST way. The best way from a corporations point of view is to simply remove you entirely so that they have direct access to your money. That is what a monopoly essentially is but there are also other forms that this can take.

For example, subscriptions. If you get them to sign an automatic subscription then you dont need the person anymore. In that case its actually beneficial if you make the customer service as bad as you can so it becomes a struggle to unsubscribe again. From the view of a corporation, you are a customer until you sign an automated subscription. After you sign that contract you are no longer a customer, they have already gotten what they wanted from you. Now you are the "enemy" which they need to prevent from cancelling the subscription using any means necessary.

[Joshydavid25]

I don't think that the point of the article was to give specific examples but to let the readers know that there isn't a consensus on the matter and that there are economist who disagree..

You're looking at big corporations, which are not necessarily private businesses since they have investors and are generally opened to the public via that. I'm talking about most businesses which are small or smaller.. If they don't want loyal and happy customers to keep coming back then how will they flourish? The whole point is to make money off of people, and if people aren't willing to give you their money, you have no business.. In a free market with little to no government Red tape or intervention, businesses have incentives to give the best deals to get more customers.
If the customers feel like they aren't getting the best deals, they could just take their business elsewhere to a competitor.. Thus you can't create monopolies if there are other competitors.. Competition & incentives are the real winners here.

Also to subscriptions are still a customer.. Especially since Competition among subscription services seem to be high at the moment, and the amount of people subscribing are dwindling down slightly..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 Since the article is contradicting what I believe I am not inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt on this. If they do not back up their statements then I will just disregard them as hyperbaley or even as lies that is not worth me considering.

I am talking about the majority of the economy and also the essence of capitalism rather than small businesses that has atypical business models and strategies. I am pointing out systematic problems which means that the bigger they grow the more the pressure will become for them to conform with these positions.

And no, in a free market without regulation there is no such incentives. Competition gives some incentives but it also gives corporations the incentive to KILL competition and establish things like monopolies. In a monopoly after one business has successfully killed its competition, which they will inevitably do without outside interference, there will no longer be any incentives in favor of the customer. Instead there will be an incentive to exploit the consumer as much as possible as if they themselves were a natural resource you are extracting wealth from.

And even in a free market there is still scenarios where it makes business sense to screw over the customer such as in subscriptions. For example there is currently a major issue with gym memberships being intentionally difficult to cancel because they pray on people with bad motivation who live unhealthy lifestyles because they can't bring themselves to working out, hence they are less likely to struggle through the process of cancelling a troublesome membership.

[Joshydavid25]

Don't think there's anything controversial or crazy about them saying that there is basically no consensus inflation, but whatever floats you boat..

"In a monopoly after one business has successfully killed its competition, which they will inevitably do without outside interference, there will no longer be any incentives in favor of the customer."

That's not how that works.. The customers drive the free market, because they decide what's valuable and what isn't.. If something is not selling well, they lower the price and eventually take it off the shelfs if hardly anyone wants it.. If something is selling well a business focuses on getting more of it.. A monopoly can't form if the business is not catering to the customers who will then make or break them..
That may be true to an extent, because like everything else, it's not perfect.. But in a fee market the customers can find out that they've been screwed and mess business up by letting everyone else know..

[Syntosi]

@Joshydavid25 No that is exactly how this works. If corporations did not have a reasonable amount of control over how consumers behave then they would not waste so much money on things like advertisements or PR campaigns trying to persuade you to purchase their products or services.

They keep spending money because these strategies works and if they work then consumers are not in as much control over their own spending and behavior as you claim.

Also if you are going to claim that consumers will hold corporations to account, how would you even know? Do you claim to be an informed customer? Do you know how much your bag of chips weighed last year? Do you remember the prices over time or have you noticed when they change recipes or the process of manufacturing?

You are simply not in a position where you can have that responsibility to hold them to account. From time to time maybe you can catch one out but those are the exceptions, not the majority.

[abc3643]

YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.

Waaaaayyyy too many conservatives think stuff is mindlessly simple. It's not. Many of these people will not be accepted back into their country. For instance, many people think all of these crossing the border are Hispanics. While most of them are, there are a lot of Chinese who are now crossing through Mexico also and China will not take them back.

[jshm2]

True, Trump is full of shit about his immigration claims. He is of course going to spend at least three years blaming "Democrats" for his incompetence and false promises.

No government anywhere can do much about illegal immigration, only legal migration. Also, most illegal migration into the US is by plane, not border. People fly in on visit visa's... then abscond.

[mandyfire98]

You ready for this? He won't get done what he promised.

He also promised a completely built wall his First term. It never happened.

I'll literally eat my phone if he successfully deports every man, woman and child that are here illegally. EVERY man, woman and child. He can pull that off? That's hilarious people believe that lol.

Almost like politicians will promise anything to get elected. Like building a wall or universal healthcare. It never gets done. It never will.

[Kristenxoxo]

My thoughts exactly

[HighValue]

Other countries are mostly pathetic and rely on billions of dollars each year as free handouts from the USA to survive. All Trump needs to do is stop giving them money if they don't comply. He could also do heavy trade terrifs. Plus he could stop having the USA military defend them too.

[Joshydavid25]

That's a big if they close their borders off.. I doubt they will since I'm sure they don't want any trouble with the U. S.. Also, Spanish has accents, and they could just have the immigrants speak and see where their particular region of Latin America is.. I'm sure they have ways around the weird hypothetical scenario..

[goaded]

They'll just keep them in concentration camps in Texas.

Note to the ignorant: the Jews were systematically murdered in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camps , although a million people died in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camps .

[PsychicBoobs]

Does he ever do anything himself? His style is to encourage others to do for him so when it goes south he can claim he wasn't a party to it. They might just see the mass desert graves from space. Sorta like the nuke holes, project which didn't cease until 1996.

[Jersey2]

They can walk back to their country, leave however they came or end up in a cheaply built camp on the cold prairies like a wooden POW camp, armed guards and all.

They all should be given a date leave by such as 45 days after the inauguration. Stay past that date and they are permanently banned from the country, even for layover flights.

[Ladsin2]

They have to take back their citizens. They want to piss off the strongest country on the planet after sending their people to invade our borders? They want to piss off the strongest economy? Not gonna happen. Re: What happened just a few years ago.

[Surely]

If Trump did as he said. Last term. He told the countries that didn’t want their people back. He would cut off the free money to those countries. I am sure that they will change their minds quickly!
Or just put them on the south side of the border wall and let find their way back home. But then they could legally apply to come into the United States!

[Cat67]

Oh stop please don't say that please don't say that because don't we need them don't we need them to go back I mean it's already a mess for us now it's got to happen can we just drop off from a airplane funny right for them forget to close the borders off please don't say that

[katiesmuff]

My guess they will be returned similar as to how they got here in the first place. Boarded on planes or busses and shipped back to their home countries.

[Zack-Bann]

Realistically impossible. Countries that people flee illegally are often poor and don’t want beef with the US as that would cripple whatever tiny economy they have

[exitseven]

Trump will withhold foreign aid or threaten some other kind of sanction and they will gladly accept all the illegal aliens he wants to dump.

[lightbulb27]

true, they could try to refuse.

I suspect USA holds the cards as they hold the $.

yes, prepare for lots of games...

[Dargil]

Clandestinely. Maybe they should be air dropped from a C-130.

[exitseven]

works for me.

[Jamie05rhs]

Leave them on the beach. re-state//background_color_rgba (0, 0, 0, 0), font_color_rgb (77, 77, 77), justifyLeft

[nawtee_me]

Just put them in jail and send them all to wales…. lol.

[jahaims]

America can just enact economic sanctions on those countries to force them to take their own citizens back. Or I don't know... use the world's strongest military

[Avicenna]

Sounds like tariffs might come in handy in these negotiations.

[Anonymous]

Old school

[WatchedPot]

He'll probably change his mind on a lot of promises now voted in and has what he wants. He never agreed to actually following through with any of it. That would require work.

[Pohjolan]

USA could just threaten to shut down development aid to countries refusing to take their citizens back.

They like too much their fine cars and corruption money to let that happen.

[Filthy_Immigrant]

that's not how deportation works. no matter where you deport people once you kick them out of your country they are on their own

[Anonymous]

You think countries will refuse to take back their citizens?

[KostasKouvalis]

That problem can be easily solved by attaching parachutes to them and air dropping the fuckers,

[OddBeMe]

Snickering, these trump idiots are shoving shiny things in front of us to misdirect from rich fucks robbing you blind.

[Anonymous]

by simply cutting off foreign aid to those countries

[AviatorTom]

He has Elon. Remember Starship and Mars?

[dragoblack]

You just mentioned one of the reasons trump would cause WW3

[Anonymous]

Bro these people don't look like they were born in the US. 💀

[BoopBoopBeep]

FinCEN is a pretty big motivator.

[NewWaves]

That's an interesting question.

[Staximus]

That's not how it works in the real world

[noohair]

We can send them all to England. Cheers.

[Pterodon]

Don’t care. Push them out of the plane

[seeyounexttuesday]

Sorry, not sorry, they don't get to refuse.

[Delia2005]

Into camps. Kids in cages.