2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 4,298 comments
  • 228,764 views

Have you voted yet?

  • Yes

  • No, but I will be

  • No and I'm not going to

  • I can't - I don't live in the US

  • Other - specify in thread


Results are only viewable after voting.
"Heads you lose, tails I win—by lawlessness, fraud, and violence if necessary—is not a stance compatible with peaceful political competition in an electoral democracy. You can’t have a free election when one side is allowed to use anti-democratic means with impunity. There can’t be a fair election when those following the law and respecting the rules are forced to compete with those who don’t."

Many say that voters should decide. It would seem that they forget voters did decide and a large swathe of Republicans, legislators and voters alike, reject that decision wholesale and that rejection manifested in direct efforts to subvert the will of the majority. It would seem that they forget, but the reality is that they want others to.
Conservatives valued democracy in that it was part of their world view, and at one time they could legitimately claim to be the majority faction. Now that it's an obstacle for their world view, it's not desirable. The crazier the GOP gets, the less the center wants to have anything to do with it, and the more anti-democratic the GOP has to become to win elections - whether that's gerrymandering, threats of violence, stacking courts, insurrection, etc. The GOP wants to acquire political power, but they want to do while carrying an extreme political agenda that 75%+ of America does not want...and that infuriates them causing the cycle of intensifying craziness and anti-democracy to continue/accelerate. It's not that the GOP couldn't get the support of the majority of America, it's that this version of it cannot but they are too far down the rabbit hole to change course.

-You can't win the election on the platform of burning puppies for energy!
-Well I want to stay in office!
-You could try moderating your position.
-Screw that! I'll just get a favorable redistricting plan approved by the state supreme court that I also control and win the "election" with 40% of the puppy hating vote!
 
Last edited:
"Heads you lose, tails I win—by lawlessness, fraud, and violence if necessary—is not a stance compatible with peaceful political competition in an electoral democracy. You can’t have a free election when one side is allowed to use anti-democratic means with impunity. There can’t be a fair election when those following the law and respecting the rules are forced to compete with those who don’t."

Many say that voters should decide. It would seem that they forget voters did decide and a large swathe of Republicans, legislators and voters alike, reject that decision wholesale and that rejection manifested in direct efforts to subvert the will of the majority. It would seem that they forget, but the reality is that they want others to.
It's mostly the paradox of tolerance. You can tolerate people who have different views up to a point, but if they're unwilling to play by the same rules as everyone else then they cannot be tolerated.

If this was a sport, it wouldn't even be in question. Someone who attempted to subvert the rules of the game by external means in order to "win" would be kicked out of the sport and never allowed to play again. There are numerous examples of this, and almost everyone thinks that these people are colossal arseholes. Everyone intuitively understands that someone who has already demonstrated that they will cheat to win should then just not be allowed on the field at all in the future.

But with something substantially more important than moving a ball around a piece of grass, suddenly that comes into question.
 
Conservatives valued democracy in that it was part of their world view, and at one time they could legitimately claim to be the majority faction. Now that it's an obstacle for their world view, it's not desirable.
The Republican Party was basically founded as a woke party by anti-slavery activists. Now they are liberal only with respect to economy and gun ownership (cherry-picking the constitution), while in the social domain they are moving further and further towards an extreme conservatism and authoritarianism, mixed with fascistoid elements such as anti-intellectualism, rejection of democratic processes, the myth of the national decline and the saviour in the form of a strong and ruthless leader to save the nation from a weak and traitorous elite, the glorification of violence as a political instrument. Trump doesn’t 100% align with Hitler’s “Mein kampf”, but there is definitely cause for concern, especially now that he allegedly believes the previous election was stolen from him.
 
Trump doesn’t 100% align with Hitler’s “Mein kampf”, but there is definitely cause for concern, especially now that he allegedly believes the previous election was stolen from him.
I may have posted this link before, where Tony Schwartz, (author of "Art of the Deal") speaks at the Oxford Union and predicts that in the 2016 election, he would never concede that he lost if he was beaten by Clinton.

 
He was basically the only person with an actual spine in the race. Pretty wild to think about lol.

I agree that Trump voters are absolute animals and are extremely numerous. Republican friends of mine still talk about him all the time but it's become so ubiquitous that I can't tell if they're joking or not. There's been zero discussion of the primaries or candidates, not that I'm going to prompt such a discussion. I mean, these aren't people who will ever be attending any sort of rally and yet I think they're still probably staunch Trump supporters.

There's one captain I fly with who goes on about Biden this and Biden that...never mentions anything about his affiliations, only anti-Biden stuff. I don't really engage in that conversation, and he never goes so far as to bring up the obvious complex issues. I don't doubt complaints have been made to the company that made him stop doing that.

Haley says she would pardon Trump....


As if the Civil war comments weren't enough, Nikki Halley basically destroys her chances of winning a general election with this one. I can't imagine any independents with a strong sense of law and order willing to vote for her after this.
Haley: "the last thing we want to see is an 80-year-old former president sitting in jail"
The last thing who wants to see? Radical domestic terrorists? Or rational people who know that justice needs to be served when crimes are committed? Nixon being pardoned was one of the biggest political mistakes in American history because it cemented the fact that our system has zero integrity, and learning about that and other examples is largely the reason younger generations have zero faith in the system and want to see our justice system overhauled from the top down. That's precisely why us young people want to see the hammer dropped on Trump, affiliates, and even unimaginably rich people via economic justice. We know they buy their freedom and nobody should be able to afford to do that.
 
Last edited:
A Texas man [John Anthony Castro] who filed more than two dozen challenges to former President Trump’s ballot eligibility was arrested Tuesday on charges alleging he filed 17 sets of false tax documents to the IRS.
Castro is also a 2024 GOP presidential candidate
Say Word Lol GIF by Desus & Mero
 
45,000 people in Iowa prefer Trump to other Republican candidates.


Trump campaign:

cohen baron GIF
 
Last edited:
The coverage is strange. You'd swear he won the electoral votes in California and New York the way this is being presented. I think in general the way the likely candidates are pushed, promoted and portrayed in the media is quite something; Biden is deeply unpopular for... reasons... despite being a distincly average, competent President yet presented like he's James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson rolled into one. Trump is presented as some sort of colossus (well, he is a colossal something) despite the fact that he shouldn't even be on the ballot and anybody with an atom of decency and sense wouldn't be within 10 miles of him.
 
Last edited:
anybody with an atom of decency and sense wouldn't be within 10 miles of him
Speaking of which, his lawyers in the E. Jean Carroll appeal and the Manhattan fraud case have withdrawn - Joe Tacopina and partners Chad Seigel and Matthew DeOreo - and they have exactly one atom of decency between them.
 
Biden is deeply unpopular for... reasons... despite being a distincly average, competent President yet presented like he's James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson rolled into one.
The problem with Biden is that very visible problems are being pinned on him (some legit, others not). The southern border is a big one with many people since people are flooding over. I don't believe it's at the levels Republicans claim, but it is a problem. Trump's solution was a wall, which is terrible and expensive, so it's not like he was any better, but there's got to be something that can be done.

Inflation and the economy are being pinned on Biden too, which isn't exactly his fault. The problem is, Biden has promoted "Bidenomics" which hasn't exactly worked as intended. Yes, people have jobs and the unemployment rate is low, but things are incredibly expensive across the board and people can't see to afford things like cars or homes. While the economy isn't solely Biden's fault, his branding of it didn't help his image.

Some people think Biden is corrupt, which seems iffy at best. He might've been involved with his son's business dealings, but despite investigation after investigation, there hasn't been any evidence. I think, like all politicians, Biden's hands aren't clean, but without evidence, it's just a guess, and we shouldn't be attempting to impeach someone on a guess.

I think Biden's biggest problem is still his age and his mental capacity. I know the White House has said numerous times Biden is healthy and mentally competent, but I see way too many similarities between Biden and second-term Reagan to believe that. He seems like he's in mental decline, which makes sense, considering he's under enormous stress and is old. That right there is enough for me not to want to vote for him. The problem is Trump has mental issues too, but not in the way of dementia, his are more manic and could even be considered schizophrenic given how he's living in a delusional reality.

The fact that Trump won Iowa and that Biden will be the Democratic Party's nominee is problematic at best and downright tragic at worst. We're also left with the very real possibility if Biden wins, he dies in office and we have to have Kamala Harris as president, who would be awful.

Somehow, the 2024 election seems categorically worse than the 2020 election.
 
The problem with Biden is that very visible problems are being pinned on him (some legit, others not). The southern border is a big one with many people since people are flooding over. I don't believe it's at the levels Republicans claim, but it is a problem. Trump's solution was a wall, which is terrible and expensive, so it's not like he was any better, but there's got to be something that can be done.
Gotta be honest I never hated the wall idea and think it'll probably be effective in controlling where people cross, if not how they cross, which helps us consolidate border control efforts. The fact of the matter is that Mexico is completely incapable of enforcing anything, and doesn't seem to want to if they could, so we're on our own. The "something than can be done" is getting Mexico and other Central American countries to quit messing around and do something.
Inflation and the economy are being pinned on Biden too, which isn't exactly his fault. The problem is, Biden has promoted "Bidenomics" which hasn't exactly worked as intended. Yes, people have jobs and the unemployment rate is low, but things are incredibly expensive across the board and people can't see to afford things like cars or homes. While the economy isn't solely Biden's fault, his branding of it didn't help his image.
People are too impatient with "the economy" and love to pin it on the "president" rather than on policy. They have very short memories and little knowledge of global events and how they effect us here at home. A lot of Biden's policy on inflation will only come into effect throughout 2024 and notable comparisons won't be able to be made until 2025, after the election, at which point people will immediately associate the results with whatever president is in office.
I think Biden's biggest problem is still his age and his mental capacity. I know the White House has said numerous times Biden is healthy and mentally competent, but I see way too many similarities between Biden and second-term Reagan to believe that. He seems like he's in mental decline, which makes sense, considering he's under enormous stress and is old. That right there is enough for me not to want to vote for him. The problem is Trump has mental issues too, but not in the way of dementia, his are more manic and could even be considered schizophrenic given how he's living in a delusional reality.
He's old as hell but that is not an existential threat to America. We've got written legal methods of dealing with that. Vice presidents taking over for the rest of the term has happened before, no big deal, as long as we've got people in the system who actually care about following rules.

With a straight face you're comparing an old man to an evil man in the same paragraph. Obviously not every post can be a scholarly article but any mental "issues" that either of these two candidates have are not even remotely comparable. One of them is old, the other one is sick and twisted and dangerous.
The fact that Trump won Iowa and that Biden will be the Democratic Party's nominee is problematic at best and downright tragic at worst. We're also left with the very real possibility if Biden wins, he dies in office and we have to have Kamala Harris as president, who would be awful.

Somehow, the 2024 election seems categorically worse than the 2020 election.
The fact Trump won Iowa just proves that the Republican party dug its own hole and has completely lost control of its constituency. The Party is completely lost and is at the mercy of liars and scoundrels, aka your neighbor up there in small-town Michigan. And Biden ever getting the nomination during 2020 is likewise further proof that the Democratic Party just cannot find a broadly appealing candidate worth a damn.

Frankly, I don't think Democratic voters know what they want. There are a lot of "moderate" Democrats, whatever the hell that means, basically suburban parents who are spineless and afraid to offend any of their neighbors, which is why they can't fathom sticking a Bernie Sanders et al sign in their yard. And speaking of Bernie Sanders, I'm not sure how many people realized that the old man looks like Bill Clinton compared to his actual core supporters, most of whom are as near to communists as you can get without being abducted by the CIA. All those moderate Democrats were horrified by Bernie "Bill Clinton" Sanders, and I don't think it was because almost every word out of his mouth was pure truth, but because of his supporters who are largely jobless and unshowered Woodstock hippies. Practically speaking, Sanders would not have been able to do anything differently than Biden has done, although his words would've been vastly more coherent. Instead, the Democratic Party promoted the inoffensive guy which was not the correct choice. What they should've done is rallied around Sanders, and somehow separated the man and his policies from his idealistic Bolshevik supporters. Technically Sanders was highly agreeable but he was being dragged down by a bunch of college kids who honestly still probably haven't graduated all these years later. Or maybe they've gone back for a third Masters in something else that can't pay the bills. The only upside to Biden over Sanders is that at least Biden didn't completely destroy the Party like Trump did his.

Screw it, Bernie Sanders 2024 lfg.
 
Last edited:
Gotta be honest I never hated the wall idea and think it'll probably be effective in controlling where people cross, if not how they cross, which helps us consolidate border control efforts. The fact of the matter is that Mexico is completely incapable of enforcing anything, and doesn't seem to want to if they could, so we're on our own. The "something than can be done" is getting Mexico and other Central American countries to quit messing around and do something.
The wall relies on eminent domain, which can 🤬 all the way off forever and always. But I still don't see how a wall works, it might slow someone down slightly, but it won't deter anyone.

I do agree we should be getting countries in Mexico and Central America to do something, but they won't. Although, past Kamala Harris going down there and telling them not to cross the border illegally, I'm not sure what, if anything, we've tried regarding that approach.
People are too impatient with "the economy" and love to pin it on the "president" rather than on policy. They have very short memories and little knowledge of global events and how they effect us here at home. A lot of Biden's policy on inflation will only come into effect throughout 2024 and notable comparisons won't be able to be made until 2025, after the election, at which point people will immediately associate the results with whatever president is in office.
People are rightfully impatient with the economy. When you can't afford things like groceries, it makes sense to be annoyed. The problem is changing the economy is a huge ordeal and a ton of people get really beat up in the process. That's going to cause issues for the president, whether they are the driving force or not. But Biden kind of shot himself in the foot by labeling it "Bidenomics" because the average person just sees it as things getting more expensive. They also look and see that things were much cheaper under Trump and they're going to assume it'll return that way if they elect him. It won't, but the average person doesn't understand that because economics is difficult for even highly educated people.
He's old as hell but that is not an existential threat to America. We've got written legal methods of dealing with that. Vice presidents taking over for the rest of the term has happened before, no big deal, as long as we've got people in the system who actually care about following rules.

With a straight face you're comparing an old man to an evil man in the same paragraph. Obviously not every post can be a scholarly article but any mental "issues" that either of these two candidates have are not even remotely comparable. One of them is old, the other one is sick and twisted and dangerous.
It can be a threat depending on who is pulling the strings. Reagan didn't have control of anything in his second term; someone else was clearly doing the string-pulling. It could either work out great, or it could work out horrible depending on who's running the show behind the scenes.

And I don't trust the legal methods to deal with it. Trump was not mentally competent to finish out the few weeks after the election as president, but Congress didn't want to do anything. Hell, Trump led a half-assed coup attempt and is still the leading candidate with huge support from members of Congress. The legal methods just aren't strong enough.

Both of them have mental issues though and that's a problem. Dementia and cognitive decline are not a desirable quality for a leader to have just as much mania and be delusional. I agree Trump is evil on some level and Biden isn't, but neither man is fit to be president based on their mental capacities.
The fact Trump won Iowa just proves that the Republican party dug its own hole and has completely lost control of its constituency. The Party is completely lost and is at the mercy of liars and scoundrels, aka your neighbor up there in small-town Michigan. And Biden ever getting the nomination during 2020 is likewise further proof that the Democratic Party just cannot find a broadly appealing candidate worth a damn.
Ya this is Trump central up here, but people in Northern Michigan are also pretty uneducated, racist, and nationalistic. But that was a thing before Trump. Hell, we have the Michigan Militia that's an outright terrorist organization that been going for decades.

I'm not entirely sure if it's the Republican Patry's doing though. The right leaning media has done more to push forward Trumpism than most politicians. People don't want to actually look into anything anymore. They want to listen to their friend's cousin's girlfriend's husband who posts the most asinine BS on social media and says things like "it makes you think?" or "I'm just asking the questions" when they don't goddamn thing. COVID is a perfect example of just how stupid people are.
 
If I remember, wasn't "the wall" during the Trump error actually inland from the border, thus defeating its own purpose? You're in the USA by the time you get to it.

And only 200 or so miles got built.
And there was already a wall in places.
And it wasn't even a wall, it was a fence.
And Mexico hasn't paid for it.

etc.
etc.
 
The wall relies on eminent domain, which can 🤬 all the way off forever and always. But I still don't see how a wall works, it might slow someone down slightly, but it won't deter anyone.

I do agree we should be getting countries in Mexico and Central America to do something, but they won't. Although, past Kamala Harris going down there and telling them not to cross the border illegally, I'm not sure what, if anything, we've tried regarding that approach.
The only thing that can be done is to nurture other economies around the world into places that refugees want to go but that is likely way more expensive than building a wall and concentrating our border patrol services around fewer points of entry.
I'm not entirely sure if it's the Republican Patry's doing though. The right leaning media has done more to push forward Trumpism than most politicians. People don't want to actually look into anything anymore. They want to listen to their friend's cousin's girlfriend's husband who posts the most asinine BS on social media and says things like "it makes you think?" or "I'm just asking the questions" when they don't goddamn thing. COVID is a perfect example of just how stupid people are.
Throughout Trump's rise, the Republican party basically sat idly by and watched what happened. Before they knew it things were completely out of control. Latent assholism has always existed in America, like your militia folks but literally until we had a black president most people had never even heard of them, and when Trump came along and immediately acted as mad as any poor, dumb schmuck in America it just went off the rails. People treated him like he was just another guy drinking beers in a dive bar bitching about politics, completely ignoring the fact that he drinks champaign and would never be seen in a dive bar with poors. He acts like one of them, and he did it in public, which meant they were now free to do it in public as well. Just by existing and speaking into a mic he unlocked the Pandora's box of conservative anger across the country. If it were somebody like Nixon or Reagan or GWB in office none of that ever would've happened because although they were Republicans they were not deranged.
If I remember, wasn't "the wall" during the Trump error actually inland from the border, thus defeating its own purpose? You're in the USA by the time you get to it.

And only 200 or so miles got built.
And there was already a wall in places.
And it wasn't even a wall, it was a fence.
And Mexico hasn't paid for it.

etc.
etc.
Most fences are inside your own property, that's how property works. Yes I know it's a dumb idea but the alternatives involve either police crackdowns and mass deportation and all the optics that come with that, or decades upon decades of nurturing foreign economies to be attractive to refugees, or government building, etc etc.

It makes more sense for these people to be homeless in Los Angeles than it does to get a factory job in Mexico. That's how bad Mexico sucks. These people trek through every country between Tuscon and the Darien Gap and apparently don't spy a single attractive opportunity along the way.

I don't care who is president, the rules have got to be enforced by us and everybody else. Even people from China are coming here now apparently which is preposterous. Have you heard the stories of Chinese folks spending $10,000 or more to get to the US illegally? If they had $10,000 to spend then...why the hell didn't you stay where you were and do something useful with it lol. It makes absolutely zero sense.
 
Last edited:
The only thing that can be done is to nurture other economies around the world into places that refugees want to go but that is likely way more expensive than building a wall and concentrating our border patrol services around fewer points of entry.
In the short term perhaps, but it's probably much better in the long term. While it's hard to say how long a time span that would cover, I'd say chances are good it could be within the average person's lifetime.
 
The southern border is a big one with many people since people are flooding over. I don't believe it's at the levels Republicans claim, but it is a problem. Trump's solution was a wall, which is terrible and expensive, so it's not like he was any better, but there's got to be something that can be done.
I figure there are two distinct problems where the border and "flooding" are concerned and individuals can be placed into appropriate camps.

Some are dissatisfied that a system which was carefully designed to be difficult to navigate and perilous so as to deter immigration is predictably overburdened because of the hurdles that were placed deliberately, and others want the system to remain difficult to navigate and perilous, with hurdles left in place, so they're dissatisfied that it's not a sufficient deterrent and the wrong people still seek opportunities for a better life here.

There's plenty that can be done and the nativist parasites will never allow it.
 
Last edited:
I don't care who is president, the rules have got to be enforced by us and everybody else. Even people from China are coming here now apparently which is preposterous. Have you heard the stories of Chinese folks spending $10,000 or more to get to the US illegally? If they had $10,000 to spend then...why the hell didn't you stay where you were and do something useful with it lol. It makes absolutely zero sense.
Or at the very least use it to immigrate to the US LEGALLY.
 
Or at the very least use it to immigrate to the US LEGALLY.
I mean sure one who manages to successfully navigate the immigration system is likely to have spent somewhere around there in doing so, but those individuals make up a tiny fraction of those who try.

"Legally" is meaningless here. The law, which dictates what it takes for one to complete the process, is designed to keep people out and dissuade attempts.
 
I mean sure one who manages to successfully navigate the immigration system is likely to have spent somewhere around there in doing so, but those individuals make up a tiny fraction of those who try.

"Legally" is meaningless here. The law, which dictates what it takes for one to complete the process, is designed to keep people out and dissuade attempts.
Making the laws more sensible wouldn't do anything about the refugee flooding. The vast majority of these people are dirt poor and wouldn't be able to attempt legal immigration anyway, and they're coming for literally any reason you could possibly think of, apparently from almost everywhere in the world. In some cases there are arguably no reason for people to even try it - a Chinese person with more cash on hand than an American airline pilot for example - but they do it anyway.
 
In some cases there are arguably no reason for people to even try it - a Chinese person with more cash on hand than an American airline pilot for example - but they do it anyway.
Do you need a reason to move? What specifically is the problem in this case?
 
Do you need a reason to move? What specifically is the problem in this case?
If they've got that much money, or even access to that much money, then they're living life just fine. And they aren't just "moving", they're risking their lives to get stuck in a refugee camp. There are much easier ways to move to the US than applying for citizenship, like employer sponsorship.
 
Making the laws more sensible wouldn't do anything about the refugee flooding.
Why would it need to? By all means reasonably effort to determine that they don't represent a legitimate threat to individuals here but otherwise let them in and let them work.

All you're saying to me is that you fit neatly into the second camp that I identified, which is to say that you're unhappy with existing immigration law and enforcement thereof not sufficiently deterring the wrong people.

Those who purport to advocate for legal immigration without a change in law to make the process less monolithic aren't meaningfully removed from those who would deny being racist while insisting that laws which prohibit miscegenation remain effective and subject to enforcement--"I have no problem with the coloreds so long as they don't mix with us whites."

The vast majority of these people are dirt poor and wouldn't be able to attempt legal immigration anyway,
What is the specific financial barrier before individuals seeking legal status* imposed by these hypothetical "more sensible laws"? Why is it that?

*This is meaningless because the law is only the law because it's the law, which is to say founded upon political interests rather than the protection of individual rights.

and they're coming for literally any reason you could possibly think of, apparently from almost everywhere in the world.
Gosh. Okay. And?
In some cases there are arguably no reason for people to even try it - a Chinese person with more cash on hand than an American airline pilot for example - but they do it anyway.
Hit me. What's your argument that there "are no reason" for people to even try?

Are...are you completely ignorant of the fact that China isn't necessarily great for the people who live there, even for those with means? (Not that one having $10,000 to spend on immigration, legal or otherwise, is any real indicator that one has means.)

And...lol..."for example." Spare me your personal grievance. I've witnessed, on multiple occasions, your particular bitchfit with regard to choices you've made and how they haven't worked out as you'd have liked, and I have no real desire to again.

If they've got that much money, or even access to that much money, then they're living life just fine.
Swing and a miss. Could they be? Sure. Are they sure to be? Not at all.
And they aren't just "moving", they're risking their lives to get stuck in a refugee camp.
Things are going so great for them that they're taking such a risk. That's interesting...logic?
There are much easier ways to move to the US than applying for citizenship, like employer sponsorship.
Hmm...
5. Employer Sponsorship: Backlogs Wrapped in Red Tape

Employer sponsorship is the one chance where, in theory, it should be open to anyone with an employer sponsor in the United States. In practice, the procedures are so backlogged, so costly, and so time‐consuming that very few employers are willing to attempt it except for the highest‐paid workers in America. Aside from a few specific occupations, employers must advertise the job to U.S. workers. The process takes years, and even if no U.S. worker applies, very few employers can afford to keep a job open for such a prolonged period.

[embedded chart]

This is why nearly all employer‐sponsored green cards go to people already in the United States who can start working on a temporary work visa, such as the H‑1B visa, much sooner while they go through the lengthy green card process. But the H‑1B visa is capped at just 85,000. The odds of winning the lottery and ultimately getting an H‑1B visa were just 16 percent in 2022. But the even bigger problem for potential immigrants is that the H‑1B visa requires a bachelor’s degree, and only 10 percent of the world’s population has a bachelor’s degree.

[embedded chart]

Even if you have a bachelor’s degree, win the lottery, and convince the employer to pay for the green card processing, the employment‐based annual cap is massively oversubscribed. There was a backlog of about 1.4 million in 2020 for a cap of just 140,000. Because every country has the same cap, and immigrants from India account for half of all applicants, the backlog is overwhelmingly Indians who face a lifetime of waiting for a green card.

[embedded chart]
 
If they've got that much money, or even access to that much money, then they're living life just fine.
Money certainly helps, but it's the only factor in a good life. If your government has a poor rights record, being paid well might not make up for that.
And they aren't just "moving", they're risking their lives to get stuck in a refugee camp. There are much easier ways to move to the US than applying for citizenship, like employer sponsorship.
Well again, it's up to the person. to choose what makes sense for them. Though I'm a little confused because you started off saying that not having access to money is a problem because it bars taking legal steps to enter to the country, but then in a case where money is not a barrier, there is still a problem. Either way, relocating shouldn't bankrupt you or be a risk to your life, so in each case it sounds like at least some of the major issues could be solved by refining the process.
 
Back