@ThomasCArthur Interesting initial thread from Tom. And an equally interesting response from yourself. But I'm afraid I think you just don't get the point of Tom's thread or understand Nicola's approach. Let me explain.

What follows is a thread.

@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 1. Firstly, you should know I'm a Yoon who voted No in 2014. I've followed the split in the Yes side with great interest. It may help to see this from a Yoons perspective.

*I hate the term Yoon, but I'll use it here for ease.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 2. I'll start by telling you, imo, what the biggest threat to the Union is; Brexit. Many of us moderates and undecided were turned off Indy by the blood & soil stuff was so prevalent on the run upto 2014.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 3. The blood and soil stuff returned with vengeance during the Brexit campaign and many of us who were turned off by Indy because of this started to question Britishness.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 4. The shambolic exit and bumbling Boris government has compounded this and many of us moderates and pragmatic have started to become open to the idea of Indy.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 5. Meanwhile, while all this has been happening over the course of a few years...Nicola has been biding her time in the background, patiently allowing Boris and Co to give themselves enough rope to hang themselves.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 6. While Boris has been turning many of us off, Nicola has been trying her best to play down the decisive them & us approach so favoured of her predecessor and many high profile bloggers.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur So where are we Today? Is it 20 polls in a row showing Indy in the lead? Many of us ready to open up to the idea of Indy. SNP in commanding lead. Nicola has bided her time brilliantly and is about to strike at precisely the right moment.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 8. When SNP get their landslide later this year, they will go out for a ref. And when Boris refuses that, support will go through the fkn roof. Boris telling us what we can & cannot do? Many will support Indy purely on a point of principle.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 9. HOW CAN YOU GUYS NOT SEE THAT?
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 10. Now here's the biggest threat to Indy. Salmond. The Rev. Hardcore bloggers. Tommy. AUOB. I could go on. Us moderates and floaters, we don't care that the UK government has built an office complex in Edinburgh.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 11. We don't consider ourselves to be a repressed colony of England. We don't care about any of the decisive shit they constantly bang on about. We genuinely wants what what's best for Scotland. In 2014 that may well have been remaining in the UK
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 12. Today, though... what's best for Scotland may well be as an independent nation, and members of the EU.
@SandyWito1 @ThomasCArthur 13. I think and hope I've made my point... I'm in danger of rambling now. But seriously, the decisive them and us, the hardcore approach, trying to put the idea that the English are c**ts and we are repressed didn't work in 2014. It wont work today, either.

More from Society

This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?

My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.

But what if that wasn't true?

Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.

The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!

I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.
We finally have the U.S. Citizenship Act Bill Text! I'm going to go through some portions of the bill right now and highlight some of the major changes and improvements that it would make to our immigration system.

Thread:


First the Bill makes a series of promises changes to the way we talk about immigrants and immigration law.

Gone would be the term "alien" and in its place is "noncitizen."

Also gone would be the term "alienage," replaced with "noncitizenship."


Now we get to the "earned path to citizenship" for all undocumented immigrants present in the United States on January 1, 2021.

Under this bill, anyone who satisfies the eligibility criteria for a new "lawful prospective immigrant status" can come out of the shadows.


So, what are the eligibility criteria for becoming a "lawful prospective immigrant status"? Those are in a new INA 245G and include:

- Payment of the appropriate fees
- Continuous presence after January 1, 2021
- Not having certain criminal record (but there's a waiver)


After a person has been in "lawful prospective immigrant status" for at least 5 years, they can apply for a green card, so long as they still pass background checks and have paid back any taxes they are required to do so by law.

However! Some groups don't have to wait 5 years.

You May Also Like