[Thelonious]

On one other thread Magi put forward the view that part of the health care problem is that undocumented immigrants with no insurance don't pay their bills raising insurance rates for the rest of us. (and somehow this is Hillary Clinton's fault, which I don't quite get)

What can be done about this?

[Wafflepudding]

Legalize them and tax them, that way they don't drive the wages down and pay for their own services. Also, the legal pathway to immigration needs a serious overhaul, it takes (literally) years to get even the most inane headway going, and when obtaining LPR status takes a decade or half a decade and thousands of dollars you KNOW this is somehow contributing.

[FDRfollower]

Ban the HMO's. That would be the sane thing to do. Get the parasites off the back of the health system.

Dump all free trade policies/globalization and allow nations to actually develop. The immigrant "crisis" would dissapear quickly allong with all the economic refugees (misnamed as Illegal Imigrants) who would go back to their families.

[Wafflepudding]

Exactly how are these nations supposed to develop fast enough to meet their population's demands without significant exporting and importing? More than that, this problem has been going on before NAFTA, back when tariffs applied both ways and far from quickly dissapearing it escalated into the huge problem it is right now.

Thousands of new jobs south of the border involve the manufacturing sector that was made possible with the signing of NAFTA, scaling the treaty back would crash those industries by reintroducing tariffs on both parts sent to Mexico to be assembled and the finished goods returning to the US. Exactly how would this improve employement levels and thus, reduce illegal immigration to the US? what about the jobs product of American franchises expanding south of the border? gone too, shrimp exports? ditto.

I'm not saying it's okay for international corporations to exploit workers on the third world and screw the working class in America at the same time. I'm saying doing what you advise would crash those foreign economies, thereby aggravating the crisis and sending more immigrants to America while their economy gets off the ground by itself, which could take decades.

[MAGI]

Thelonious

MAGI= blue, sometimes red

On one other thread Magi put forward the view that part of the health care problem is that undocumented immigrants with no insurance don't pay their bills raising insurance rates for the rest of us.
True!
(and somehow this is Hillary Clinton's fault, which I don't quite get)
Well T., Since Hillary made a big production about National Health Care in 1992 & 3, and still cannot, or more to the point, will NOT, present a plan; ("maybe", she thinks "something can get done in "8 years or so", .......) I just don't feel very confident that we'll see anything for We The People on National Health Insurance for EVERY U.S. CITIZEN, should we elect Corporate darlin' Hillary.........

What can be done about this?

You watch CNN, you say.
Lou Dobbs Tonight by any chance?
I pretty much agree with him on the illegal alien issue...........

1. Document them, after finding them wherever they are employed.
2. Enforce the laws on the books; which says no one should employ Illegal Aliens! Give notice that all businesses SOON will be checked within a fair period of time, and WILL BE FINED BIG TIME, then SHUT DOWN (for a time period) as well as an even larger fine the second time, then closed down if further infraction!
3. SECURE OUR BORDERS!
4. IF U.S. citizens cannot fill the jobs, the law is such that they CAN come in legally wherever and whenever they are needed.

As WP says, this will have illegal aliens and their employers paying the taxes they should legally be paying, for the services they are receiving NOW!
They would then be legal immigrants...............

It would also be helpfull to you, to listen to Lou Dobbs (no liberal, by the way,)
on his views of how lucrative our economy is for 98% of U.S. employees, NOT, by the way!. Pay particular attention to his feelings of Corporate America and outsourcing also, please.

:) :thumbup:

[Thelonious]

Magi, for a good progressive democrat you seem a bit fascist here. Sounds like police state methods to me. (It will also be outrageously expensive, arguably more expensive than giving them all expensive multiple by-pass operations)

How many cops does it take to arrest 12 million people? (sorry for using the number I read in the British press. Magi pulling numbers out of the air just doesn't impress me)

[Thelonious]

From the Economist magazine 14 Mar 2007

"On the face of it, chances for an immigration overhaul have improved now that Democrats control Congress. They are more amenable to some of Mr Bush’s proposals—such as expansion of a guest workers programme and establishment of a path to legalisation for many of the 12m undocumented aliens in the US. Indeed, immigration is one of the few issues on which the White House and Democrats see a basis for co-operation."

[MAGI]

Thelonious
MAGI='s blue

Magi, for a good progressive democrat you seem a bit fascist here. Interesting! :D Sounds like police state methods to me. (It will also be outrageously expensive, arguably more expensive than giving them all expensive multiple by-pass operations)You sound like a hopeless pessimist with a brainwashed mind, to me.

How many cops does it take to arrest 12 million people? You know better. If there is no illegal employment, there will be No illegal aliens.(sorry for using the number I read in the British press. That's O.K., I use MANY Sources to come to a conclusion though. Magi pulling numbers out of the air just doesn't impress me)Thelonious, me neither.

They are more amenable to some of Mr Bush’s proposals—such as expansion of a guest workers programme and establishment of a path to legalisation for many of the 12m undocumented aliens in the US. Indeed, immigration is one of the few issues on which the White House and Democrats see a basis for co-operation."

That's precisely what I'm talking about, Bush & SOME Democrats protecting Corporate America and turning their backs on We The People!

[Wafflepudding]

Exactly how is legalizing the immigrants already here protecting corporate America? If they are legalized, they won't have to work for less than minimum wage. And when you talk about taking employement away from 12 million people with families to support, uprooting people that have been living here for years, and separating families that sounds fascist to me as well.

They're already here, they have lives going and they contribute to our economy and your solution is to send them packing to starve, live in shacks and die of easily preventable diseases because it's "driving wages down". That sounds conservative and regressive to me.

[MAGI]

WP,
Employers have long loved illegal aliens because they come cheap and are easily exploited and abused because they fear exposure.

This issue is NOT new. the U.S. had amnesty for them before and laws are on the books to bring in workers if and when there is need................legally and documented.

My grievance is not with the hard working illegals. It is with the Employers that are taking advantage of them by hiring them illegally. It is a burden on the taxpayer when they are not making enough money to cover the cost of services provided them.

I will say it again, document all workers now here, in a given period of time.
Fine the employers thereafter if they hire newcomer undocumented workers. Close down the company if they continue to hire illegals!

Obviously there will have to be a case by case study of the workers now here, but they will be registered and accounted for at the very least.

Since they will be documented, they will be here legally, and fairly, and complying to reasonable immigration laws. Employers will not hire them on the cheap as they are doing now all over the country and wages will be fairer to ALL.

[Wafflepudding]

Then what is wrong with the guest worker program?

[MAGI]

Then what is wrong with the guest worker program?

WP,
We must follow our legal guest worker program, I agree. I don't think I ever said we shouldn't, anywhere.
It is the only way illegal immigration can be halted.

Get everyone documented and legal, asap, which will put the decent honorable people legally on the payroll and contribute toward their own welfare and stop the exploitation.

Not an open-ended AMNESTY, as we did in 1986. It didn't work because the law wasn't enforced again. The procedure is already on the books. Just put all employers on notice, NOW, to document their employees. No arrests or deportation if there is a decent background history. Documentation, to begin the legal process. Then, no excuses thereafter.
Visa, green card, employer need.................. a road to citizenship.

[Wafflepudding]

I was talking about Bush's guest worker initiative. And it was a serious question, not a rethorical one, I haven't gone through it but as I understand it it basically means registering and legalizing the people already here, which would start bringing in tax revenue and stop exploitation of those workers.

There are many problems with our current legal immigration scheme. The costs are high, the tramits are lenghty and basically it's designed to make it hard for both workers and employers to discourage immigration. Quite simply gone are the days where you could come legally into this country with the will to work honestly to pursue the American dream, now it's a red tape nightmare with tramit charges higher than most illegal immigrants can afford.

Proper enforcement is crucial, yes, but this will get us nowhere without a comprehensive immigration system overhaul. Look up the process of worker visa and green card applications here: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis and you'll see why merely enforcing the laws already in the books will not work.

[MAGI]

WP,
It was in 1986 that Reagan gave Amenesty to illegal immigrants. Do you wonder why the laws have not been simplified since then?

I know people who came in on the H 1B visa. who went through the process. He is working and his wife, a teacher, can not. They have been in this country legally for three years and she hopes to be able to apply for a work permit, I believe she said, in another year. Yet we are throwing names in a hat, so to speak, and allowing 65,000 work visas for unskilled laborers (saw this on TV a few weeks ago), and wonder at what my friend is going through to work legally.

Did you read how many of the workers get lost in the system and we have no idea where they are or how many are here after their work visas expired?

Why do you suppose the laws are as they are? I believe they are set up so, for the purpose of cheap labor.
What is even worse is: How easy is it for terrorists to come into our country?

Have you ever crossed the border to Mexico &, or, Canada? I have in several places from CA. to New Mexico. From Maine to Washinton.

It is NOT hard to do, illegally.

Amnesty is not FAIR or Right!

It's been 21 years .

Document the illegal aliens already here. The criminals won't be applying for sure. And begin a process, for cryin out loud, Congress!

It is THE only FAIR and LEGAL way .....................!

[Thelonious]

Proper enforcement is crucial, yes, but this will get us nowhere without a comprehensive immigration system overhaul. Look up the process of worker visa and green card applications here: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis and you'll see why merely enforcing the laws already in the books will not work.

Waffle,
You are absolutely right about this. Good on you for stating it well, and not tolerating populist oversimplification. It doesn't take a lot of brains to repeat the hackneyed slogans like "Secure our borders!" "Secure our borders!""Secure our borders!""Secure our borders!"

America needs more people like you who actually think about these things. I'm going to try to rip apart Magi's arguments now. In many places they are self-contradictory, in others just so muddled that one can't really tell what she's for or against. It must pain her terribly that she can't find a way to blame Hillary for the fact that American life is good and many Mexicans what to come here... Well... I won't give up hope... Magi will find a way. :)

[Thelonious]

WP,
We must follow our legal guest worker program, I agree. I don't think I ever said we shouldn't, anywhere.
It is the only way illegal immigration can be halted.

So you agree with Mr Bush and the Congresspeople who support this initiative. (including me and aparently Waffle). A few lines ago you were ranting about how this is a Corporatist plot to impoverish Americans.

[Thelonious]

So just for clarity:
Amnesty is bad, right?
"to document" immigrants is good, right?
"to legalize" immigrants, is.... mnnnnn?
Isn't this just a lot of different words for the same thing? You cannot legalize someone's residence without documenting him or her. And He or She will not be too keen on being documented when He or She is threatened with deportation (aha, so we stop threatening deportation, which is just like amnesty, but it sounds better to voters who don't bother to think)

[Thelonious]

... Obviously there will have to be a case by case study of the workers now here, but they will be registered and accounted for at the very least.


Oh, so a case by case study. How many Federal officials will it take to document 32 million (I hope that's the number you used) immigrants? Yes, and how will they find them? Will you send bureaucrats door to door? Will you use police officers, who have been trained to track down suspicious people and businesses?

I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm saying it will be a hugely expensive project. And I'm also saying that if it is done badly most of the money spent will be wasted. Any program with goals like this one has to contain carrots and sticks.

Americans are pissed off right now, so they keep talking about the sticks. I believe that is truly counterproductive.
Americans are pissed off right now, So there is a lot of "Blame the immigrants" mentality going around.

In fact the wacko right, (and conservative mr Dobbs) would like you to believe that immigrants are to blame, so you won't realize that it was mostly sheer incompetence on the part of Dubya, Gingrich, and Reagan that got us to where we are now.

"Blame the immigrants" is nothing new. Irish and Italian immigrants used to get blamed for everything. They used to get beat up too. For taking jobs from Good Anglo-saxons. I, for one, refuse to play the "Blame the immigrants" game. And I think it is very sad that a POL Senator has gotten sucked into the wacko-right proganda machine to the extent that she has.

[Thelonious]

.... If there is no illegal employment, there will be No illegal aliens.

Magi,
You say I'm pessimistic, but I'm afraid that your above statement is HOPELESSLY naive. :)

[Thelonious]

Magi

I noticed a little technic you used on a different thread. I liked it, so I'll try it here. I call it "Ignore the response and repeat the inane question".... here I go...

How many cops does it take to arrest 12 million people?

[MAGI]

Thelonious:



When Employers start paying MAJOR Fines and are closed down or jailed for hiring ILLEGAL ALIENS,

You'll be seeing a bit of change in illegal aliens coming to the U.S.A.............

So you think the only way to document illegal aliens at the workplace can only be done with police arresting the illegal aliens? I happen to think a letter of notification to EMPLOYERS from the IRS will begin the process of documentation and fining the Employer , then closing down more than a few workplaces using the former INS, now, (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis )will get the process rolling.

Amnesty will only encourage more of the same ole, same old. Good records can pave the way toward citizenship!


Is that large enough to see? Clear enough to read?
What is your problem, Sweetpea?


:thumbup: :sunny:

[Wafflepudding]

Have you ever crossed the border to Mexico &, or, Canada? I have in several places from CA. to New Mexico. From Maine to Washinton.

It is NOT hard to do, illegally.

Amnesty is not FAIR or Right!

It's been 21 years .

Document the illegal aliens already here. The criminals won't be applying for sure. And begin a process, for cryin out loud, Congress!

It is THE only FAIR and LEGAL way .....................!

Excuse me, but if it's not hard why do dozens of immigrants die on the attempt to cross over every year?

As long as the proposals include removing aliens already here for years, even if it's just for a couple of months (which considering the time it takes the NCIS to do ANYTHING is impossible) it will fail, because the immigrants don't trust our government and rightly so. They lied to us about the Iraq war, they lied to the world about WMD, why wouldn't they lie to them about registration and later kick them out?

Even more to the point you keep talking about enforcement and documentation. That is all well and good but the problem isn't that we have no legal way for immigrants, it's that the legal way to do things IS NOT WORKING!

We all can read what you say, making your font larger does not make what you say more correct. As long as Pedro Lopez has starving kids and is living in a shack, he'll try to cross the border and we'll have immigration, and as long as we charge him hundreds or thousands of dollars, make him jump through hoops and pretend he can wait for months for the paperwork so that MAYBE he can work, we'll have ILLEGAL immigration.

[MAGI]

Where have I said to remove illegal aliens already here?

alrighty then, let's see when & how the illegal alien situation will be solved........................

As long as employers employ illegal aliens with no penalty, as the law states, we will have illegal aliens!

[Wafflepudding]

It was in 1986 that Reagan gave Amenesty to illegal immigrants. Do you wonder why the laws have not been simplified since then?

Did you read how many of the workers get lost in the system and we have no idea where they are or how many are here after their work visas expired?

Amnesty is not FAIR or Right!

Where have I said to remove illegal aliens already here?

The way I understand it, if we do not remove them as the current laws require, we are in fact practicing amnesty. So for the record are you for amnesty or for removal of the aliens?

[MAGI]

I am against Amnesty, and for documenting illegal aliens at the workplace in a fixed period of time, and enforcement of fines on the employer who does not follow that law!
If there is no employment of illegal aliens thereafter, those hired will be legal needed immigrants .........when needed.

There then will be fair wages for all with tax money going into our system, paying for their own education, healthcare, ect. and taking the tax burden off the tax payer.

Our government has allowed the situation to explode. bush has given
Fox of Mexico the wrong message these last years and closed his eyes to enforcing laws, especially in the interior causing this massive problem, that lets employers have their cake and eat it too; giving both the illegal aliens and the taxpayers GRIEF!

I applaud your feelings for all the people of the world and I feel as you.
If only we could run the world..........................and Jen & James &,&,&,& all the caring folks in the world.
But we don't, and I will continue to speak out against those that have greed and power and could not care less about We The People.

[Wafflepudding]

Alright, I don't understand, please explain to me how forgetting that those people came in here illegally, giving them documents and letting them stay is not amnesty?

Yes, you are correct that he has not enforced current laws, but how could he? he's been cutting back on every expense save the war and subsidies all across the board. Enforcement takes more than attitudes and statements, it needs FUNDING, funding that we do not have with the Iraq war (of which he's responsible) and handouts to corporations sapping federal resources.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_5886973

You keep saying that you do not want a repeat of the Reagan era mistakes and proceed to advocate documenting and thus legalizing the people already here (amnesty) and punishment for employeers of illegal immigrants.

Now nevermind exactly how are you gonna fund this (my guess is it would require billions of taxpayer dollars in a time where the deficit is already soaring), or why are you so sure that this would stop immigration (You can get fake documents for 1000 bucks or less, the same price of a green card REQUEST that can be denied). What do we do afterwards? Do we keep the laws we already have?

Finally this is all really, a futile discussion. Lets say we keep the immigrants out, does this mean salaries will go up?

Or will the factories simply go towards those immigrants and relocate south of the border?

If the cheap labor does not come to corporate America, corporate America will outsource to where this cheap labor is, and not only do we miss out on the taxes paid by the workers, now we miss out on ALL taxes since we no longer charge tariffs on industrial imports.

And by the way, I thought most of the immigrants worked on the service sector, which is dominated by small businesses not corporations.

[JamesP]

I would suggest:

1 - Control the borders.

It can be done if we want to.... just a matter of will, technology and resources... and the taxpayer money we spend to so do will be spent here in the USA and the jobs we create to do so will put more Americans to work & be located here in the USA.

2 - no change in status for illegals already here:

Those that came here illegally will remain "illegals" and, if apprehended, will be dealt with accordingly. This is no more or less than they bargained for originally and is fair to both the illegal immigrants and those that followed the law to come here.

3 - If it is determined that we need even more foreign workers, and the American electorate agrees, increase the allotment, ease the restrictions and make it possible for more workers to enter the USA legally.

4 - Enforce labor laws, minimum wage laws, workplace safety regulations, etc so that all working here are treated with respect, dignity and are not endangered or exploited.

5 - Work toward fair trade and minimum wage, health and safety laws abroad.

[MAGI]

Wafflepudding =black type:
MAGI-blue & red:

Alright, I don't understand, please explain to me how forgetting that those people came in here illegally, giving them documents and letting them stay is not amnesty?

Yes, you are correct that he has not enforced current laws, but how could he? he's been cutting back on every expense save the war and subsidies all across the board. Enforcement takes more than attitudes and statements, it needs FUNDING, funding that we do not have with the Iraq war (of which he's responsible) and handouts to corporations sapping federal resources.

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_5886973

You keep saying that you do not want a repeat of the Reagan era mistakes and proceed to advocate documenting and thus legalizing the people already here (amnesty) and punishment for employeers of illegal immigrants.


Documenting, requiring registering illegal aliens, keeping tract of their addresses and progress, taxing them as we should, will put those that are being responsible decent people on record, and doesn't mean they are free to remain in the USA forever, esp. if they break the law and become undesirable.
The others that do not and will not register, are probably undesirables and when apprehended should be deported.
Also, employers, paying the penalties; fines and jail time will be deterrents, and will decrease the exploitation of illegal immigrants; and stop cheap untaxed wages.

Again, no Amnesty, but, documentation of every working illegal alien, a one time thing........then closed, forever!

If there is proven need for employees, change the law to fit the need. Document and follow that employee.
Enforce the laws, thereafter.

Now nevermind exactly how are you gonna fund this (my guess is it would require billions of taxpayer dollars in a time where the deficit is already soaring), or why are you so sure that this would stop immigration (You can get fake documents for 1000 bucks or less, the same price of a green card REQUEST that can be denied).

I guess I have more faith than you when I say record illegal aliens at the workplace. If it will cost billions, illegal aliens and their Employers will be paying taxes (at last) and make up for much of the cost to register them. Undoubtedly there will continue to be "fake documents" so they must be made as secure as possible. When Employers pay those heavy fines and are closed down, employers will do serious checks, I'm sure. The cheap exploitive incentive will be gone. The need for illegal aliens will be gone.

What do we do afterwards? Do we keep the laws we already have?

IF there is proven need for employees, we increase our legal immigrant quota, register them and make sure the law is followed. It's ridiculous that 50% of the legal immigrants get lost in the system (making them therefore: illegal aliens)! It will be prevented some by requiring every worker to be documented.

Finally this is all really, a futile discussion. Lets say we keep the immigrants out, does this mean salaries will go up?

It is a futile discussion. But very convenient at election times, esp.!
Especially CA, AZ, TX, N.M., NV, citizens are up in arms over wage stagnation and their tax bills because of the illegal alien problem and the Repubs are playing to that. Democrats want to appear to be the guys with the heart to their voters, but it's gone too far, because John & Jane USA also are getting hurt, therefore wise, with wage stagnation and ever increasing TAXATION.
Illegal aliens are all over the country. From nannies, to housekeepers, gardeners, cleaners contracted by big business hire them on the cheap, restaurant workers, field workers, meat packers, trade workers, you name it.

You know as well as I, wages will go up and that some LEGAL DOCUMENTED immigrants are needed.

Let's stop the dishonesty, and the politics, and set up fair laws that will be followed.

:thumbup:

Or will the factories simply go towards those immigrants and relocate south of the border?

If the cheap labor does not come to corporate America, corporate America will outsource to where this cheap labor is, and not only do we miss out on the taxes paid by the workers, now we miss out on ALL taxes since we no longer charge tariffs on industrial imports.

This hasn't and isn't happening already? You know very well I have been talking about making things for the U.S. citizen lawfully FAIR!

And by the way, I thought most of the immigrants worked on the service sector, which is dominated by small businesses not corporations.

Uh, No, I don't consider Walmart (for instance) a small business. Corporate America farms out contracts to businesses which CTA's. That should be clearly established law.

[Thelonious]

Magi,
Your naiveté is just adorable. I can already see the long lines of hard-working law-abiding undocumented immigrants lining up to register and pay taxes (and get deported), even though they have absolutely no incentive to do so. Your plan is a joke. LOL.

[MAGI]

The governor of Oklahoma is doing something about it, a few towns around the country are moving on documentation of illegal aliens. We'll see how how naive I am, T.

Stangely jobs at a raided packinghouse were immeiately filled by US citizens (which employed illegal aliens .....because supposedly there weren't enough US citizens the company said).............we'll see.....................T.

[Thelonious]

ILLEGAL ALIENS,

Maybe we should clarify our terms here. We are talking about PEOPLE aren't we? Why do you insist on calling them Aliens? Aliens are from other planets, they are green, have antennas, or get shot by Sigourney Weaver. But the immigrants that we are talking about on this thread are People. Or Humans if you prefer.
So is the subject of this thread "Illegal Humans", no because that is ridiculous. They are people who don't have the same papers as some other people. They are Humans.
I remember a time when Liberals and Progressives stood up for Human Rights. I remember a time when the KKK spread around the scare tactics to try to get "the true righteous deserving" Americans to hate the immigrants. Who needs the KKK when we've got 'liberals' like Magi. Our country is in trouble, but not because of "Illegal Humans" taking jobs from good Anglo-saxons. Our country is in trouble because massive numbers of Americans have gotten sucked into Rush Limbaugh's philosophy of 'if you're white and rich then your the victim'.
This entire thread is full of 'wages going down', 'taking our jobs', 'not fair' - Fair. FAIR? Is it fair that my friend Raul has to risk his life to cross a border to get the same job that is mine for the asking? Is it fair that I was born into a middleclass family in Connecticut and Raul to a poor one in Chiapas? NO boys and girls. There is nothing much fair in this world. It is however amusing that when I wrote that globalisation was inevitable everyone said "How convenient to say that when it serves your interests?" as if I owned sweat shops in the Phillipines.
But now, isn't it amazing that the "Fair Solution" is the one that benefits you and your families and your ethnic group???
Was it "Fair" when President Polk intentionally started a war with Mexico and stole over half of Mexico's land? This is a fact that every Mexican is well aware of. Americans just seem to conveniently forget it. Did they teach you in school about the excuse Polk used for starting that war? Any objective observer would say that the "fair" solution here would be to give that land back to the Mexicans. (that land by the way includes all of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and most of Colorado) So don't be telling me what is fair and what is not fair. If you want to throw out the wetbacks then just say it. If you want to deny the fact that they are human, why not call them parasites, or rats, or leeches? (that would be too much, huh? Better stick with 'illegals' or 'aliens') But don't pretend that you are fighting for "fairness" (I'm sorry about that... I have no right to tell you what to do. Go ahead and pretend that you are fighting for fairness, but do NOT expect me to believe any of that crap)

And while we're on the subject, we damned well better change that inscription on the Statue of Liberty. We'll cross out "Give us your tired and your hungry...." and we will write "Only those who will not take our jobs or risk our well-being in any way will be allowed in our country which we stole from the Indians most of whom we killed or let rot in concentration camps so that we could have FAIR title to this land and make FAIR laws to keep all the brown Spanish-speaking out."

[MAGI]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Illegal+aliens&btnG=Google+Search

Illegal Immigration IS A CRIME! About half of the illegal alien population is comprised of visa overstayers--people who entered the country legally, but became illegal aliens by their ...
www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/isacrime.html - 10k - Cached - Similar pages


Illegal Immigration is a Crime

Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or

Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or

Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.

Thelonious, I did not invent the words

[JamesP]

Thelonious: you're spinning wildly out-of-control. Take a few moments to read back what you've written....

You argue for chaos ....

We'd all like to advance the interests and well-being of all people the world over. The way to get there is the challenge.

There's probably a homeless family nearby who wants to move into your apartment and permanently avail themselves of the contents of your checking account & refrigerator.... I'd like those people to be comfortable. Maybe we can find another way to help them. I don't know if the issue is "fairness", "legality", "morality" of some combination thereof, but these are complex issues.

Do you really believe racism is at the core of the anit-illegal-immigration argument in this forum?

[JamesP]

Another aspect of lax enforcement of immigration laws:

Three of the Fort Dix suspects entered the United States illegally more than two decades ago. Tighter immigration enforcement might have prevented the possible plot before it was ever dreamt up.

[FDRfollower]

From an economic expert:

The economic health of every country is a proper matter of concern to all its neighbors near and far.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

[MAGI]

#1.

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 18, 2007; Page A01

The Bush administration and a bipartisan group of senators reached agreement yesterday on a sprawling overhaul of the nation's immigration laws that would bring an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants out of society's shadows while stiffening border protections and cracking down on employers of undocumented workers.

The delicate compromise, 380 pages long and three months in the making, represents perhaps the last opportunity for President Bush to win a major legislative accomplishment for his second term, and it could become the most significant revision of the nation's immigration system in 41 years. Bush hailed the agreement as "one that will help enforce our borders, but equally importantly, it will treat people with respect."

Key components of the compromise immigration plan:

All illegal immigrants who arrived before Jan. 1, 2007, could stay and work after paying a $1,500 fee, passing a criminal background check, and showing a strong work record.

They would also have to pay a fine of $5,000.

After eight years, they could apply for a green card.

A new visa category would be created for parents of U.S. citizens, allowing them to visit for up to 100 days per year.

A temporary-worker program would allow 400,000 immigrant workers to enter on two-year visas, after which they would have to return home for a year before reapplying. The visas could be renewed up to three times.

A new point system would add factors for green-card eligibility to lessen the "chain migration" of family members.

The Border Patrol and interior enforcement would be expanded, and a new security perimeter would be created. Such border enforcement provisions would have to be implemented before immigrant-rights measures take effect.


But though immigration proponents and opponents lauded the work done to reach a deal, both sides -- including Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate -- said they could torpedo the legislation in the end, after the Senate begins debate on the bill next week and after the House considers its version in July.

The Senate deal would grant temporary legal status to virtually all illegal immigrants in the country, while allowing them to apply for residence visas and eventual citizenship. A temporary-worker program would allow as many as 400,000 migrants into the country each year, but they would have to leave after two years. And the current visa system, which stresses family ties, would be augmented by a complex point system that would favor skilled, educated workers. Most of those changes would take effect only after the implementation of tough new border controls and a crackdown on the employment of undocumented workers.

"The question is, 'Do you want to solve the problem, or do you want to complain about it?' " said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "There will be people who want to complain and will miss the problem if they can't complain about it. This is about solving it."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) pleaded: "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

But the compromises needed to win the support of a liberal lion such as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and a conservative illegal-immigration foe such as Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) have made the bill extremely complex and have opened it to attacks from all sides.

Democratic leaders were leery of three pivotal concessions to the conservatives. The first would make illegal immigrants' access to long-term visas and the new guest-worker program contingent upon the implementation of the border crackdown. Before those immigrant-rights measures could go into effect, the government must deploy 18,000 new Border Patrol agents and four unmanned aerial vehicles; build 200 miles of vehicle barriers, 370 miles of fencing, and 70 ground-based radar and camera towers; provide funds for the detention of 27,500 illegal immigrants a day; and complete new identification tools to help employers screen out illegal job applicants.

Skeptics say those would take years, but Chertoff stressed yesterday that they could be done in 18 months.

Another sticking point came from the proposed replacement of an immigration system primarily designed to reunify families with a point system that would give new emphasis to skills and education. Automatic family-reunification visas would no longer apply to the adult siblings and children of U.S. citizens, and visas for parents would be capped. Instead, points would be granted to migrants with work experience in high-demand occupations and who have worked for a U.S.-based firm. Additional points would be awarded based on education levels, English proficiency and family ties.

"We need to find a system that values and honors the work of all," said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (Ill.), who is one of the Democrats entrusted by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) with developing a House bill. "The landscaper is just as important as the computer scientist."

Finally, immigrants coming into the country under the temporary work program would have to leave when their permits expire, with no chance to appeal for permanent residence. Labor unions say such a system would depress wages and create an underclass.

[MAGI]

#2.
Deal on Immigration Reached
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) expressed serious concerns about the temporary-worker provision and the family migration structure in a tepid response to the deal. Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), a key Democrat on the issue, refused to sign the deal he had helped negotiate for months.

And Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), a White House hopeful, warned that "the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guest workers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers."



Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., left, and Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, participate in a news conference on agriculture and immigration reform, Tuesday, May 15, 2007, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Susan Walsh - AP)

Highlights

Key components of the compromise immigration plan:

All illegal immigrants who arrived before Jan. 1, 2007, could stay and work after paying a $1,500 fee, passing a criminal background check, and showing a strong work record.

They would also have to pay a fine of $5,000.

After eight years, they could apply for a green card.

A new visa category would be created for parents of U.S. citizens, allowing them to visit for up to 100 days per year.

A temporary-worker program would allow 400,000 immigrant workers to enter on two-year visas, after which they would have to return home for a year before reapplying. The visas could be renewed up to three times.

A new point system would add factors for green-card eligibility to lessen the "chain migration" of family members.

The Border Patrol and interior enforcement would be expanded, and a new security perimeter would be created. Such border enforcement provisions would have to be implemented before immigrant-rights measures take effect.


Conservatives were no less skeptical. The immigration overhaul that passed the Senate last year identified three categories of illegal immigrants, based on the length of time they had been in the country, and would have granted immediate legal status only to those who had been here the longest. Others would have had to return home or would have faced deportation.

This year's legislation would grant undocumented workers who came into the country before January a permit to remain. They could then apply for a new, four-year "Z Visa," renewable indefinitely, as long as they pay a $5,000 fine, a $1,500 processing fee, show a clean work record and pass a criminal background check.

The new bill's authors "seem to think that they can dupe the American public into accepting a blanket amnesty if they just call it 'comprehensive' or 'earned legalization' or 'regularization,' " said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a presidential candidate who is a strong opponent of illegal immigration. "The president is so desperate for a legacy and a domestic policy win that he is willing to sell out the American people and our national security."

Bush has wanted to include immigration changes to his legacy since he was governor of Texas. And it is one of a few issues in which he has been willing to buck key factions in his party to achieve a compromise. At one point, Bush had been hopeful that the issue would lead to a realignment of American politics, with more Hispanics joining the Republican Party.

White House officials viewed yesterday's breakthrough as a sign that the president can still have an impact on domestic policy despite the poisoned relations between the administration and congressional Democrats over Iraq. It was the second major bipartisan deal struck by Bush in the past week, following a deal with House Democrats last Friday to move ahead with several free-trade pacts.

But the deal is far from done. The compromise's authors asked both sides to consider the alternative. With an election year approaching, Democrats and Republicans said the coming weeks offer the last window of opportunity for Congress to act. If the bill fails, an immigration system that both sides see as hopelessly broken would go unremedied for years.

"Year after year, we've heard talk about reforming our system. We've heard the bumper-sticker solutions, the campaign ads, and we know how divisive it is," Kennedy said. "Well, now, it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system."

Staff writer Michael Abramowitz contributed to this report

[MAGI]

and the beat goes on...............

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/18/AR2007051801970_2.html?nav=rss_politics

Immigrant Legislation Splits GOP
Right Lashes Out At Bush and Senate Over Compromise

By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 19, 2007; Page A01

President Bush's embrace of compromise immigration legislation has split the Republican Party, as several GOP presidential candidates quickly came out against the deal and the conservative base reacted with fury.

Key figures on the right, including conservative talk radio hosts, analysts at the Heritage Foundation and National Review columnists, derided the agreement as a sellout of conservative principles, while GOP presidential candidates criticized the plan as a form of amnesty -- a characterization rejected by the White House.

snip

"It is completely within the control of the Democratic leadership whether this bill passes or not," said this official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss strategy.

The danger for the White House is that any change in the delicately crafted compromise could cause the whole deal to collapse. The administration has already angered traditional allies in the business community with the concessions aimed at mollifying conservative senators.

Employers do not want a guest-worker program that would offer work visas for only two years at a time. The visas could be renewed up to three times, but workers would have to leave the country for a year between renewals. Business groups said such interruptions would defeat the purpose of the program, which is to attract and retain a stable workforce in industries in which U.S. workers are scarce.

Meanwhile, most Republican candidates for president besides McCain strongly condemned the deal. Former senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee, who is mulling a White House bid, urged Congress to "scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway." Former House speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, who also may run, called the arrangement a "disastrous bill" and said the upcoming Senate vote would be a "defining moment" for the Republican party.

"I can't imagine anybody running for president being nominated if they support this bill," Gingrich said in an interview.

Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has been an outspoken immigration advocate, speaking frequently to pro-immigration groups and opposing federal measures to crack down on illegal immigration. But a statement from his communications director offered no endorsement of the new bill and stressed the security implications of immigration: "Rudy's top priority and main objective is to ensure our borders are secure and to stop potential terrorists and criminals from coming in."

Staff writers Jonathan Weisman, Spencer S. Hsu and Michael D. Shear and washingtonpost.com staff writer Paul Kane contributed to this report.

[MAGI]

Senate Hands Down a Major Defeat on Immigration Bill

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 28, 2007; 11:54 AM

The most dramatic overhaul of the nation's immigration laws in a generation was trounced this morning by a bipartisan filibuster, with the political right and left overwhelming a coalition of Republicans and Democrats who had been seeking compromise on one of the most difficult social and economic issues facing the country.

The 46-53 tally fell dramatically short of the 60 votes needed to overcome opponents' dilatory tactics and parliamentary maneuvers that have dogged the bill for weeks.


How the Senate Voted

Senate Blocks Immigration Bill, 46-53

The failure marked the second time in a month the bill was pulled from the Senate floor, and this time, Democratic leaders of the Senate indicated it would not be back.

The vote was a major defeat for President Bush, dealt largely by members of his own party. The president made a last-ditch round of phone calls this morning to senators in an attempt to rescue the bill, but with his poll numbers at record lows, his appeals proved fruitless. Bush has now lost what is likely to be the last, best chance at a major domestic accomplishment for his second term.

Both of Maryland's Democratic senators voted to keep the bill alive, while Virginia's Democrat, Jim Webb, and its Republican, John Warner, voted to kill it.

A flood of angry phone calls from reform opponents shut down the Capitol switchboard ahead of the vote, overwhelming the message of a small klatch of immigrant-rights demonstrators urging passage outside the Capitol. Latino lawmakers from the House flooded onto the Senate floor to encourage the Senate to keep the legislation alive and let the House have a turn. But it was not even close.

Opponents of the bill painted the fight as a battle between the people of the United States against a government that has grown insensitive to an illegal immigrant invasion that threatens the fabric of the nation. Proponents said the Senate had succumbed to the angry voices of hate, venom and racism.

"This immigration debate has become a war between the American people and their government," proclaimed Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who led a small group of Republican senators who used every parliamentary maneuver they could find to stymie progress on the bill over the past month. "It transcends anything about immigration. It has become a crisis of confidence."

"We know what they're against. We just don't know what they're for," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), one of the bill's main architects, thundered about his opponents. "Are we going to respond to the voices of fear? That is the issue."

The bill would have coupled tough border enforcement measures and a crackdown on employers of illegal immigrants with a pathway to citizenship for 12 million illegal immigrants, a new guest worker system for foreigners seeking entry and dramatic changes to the system of legal migration.

But in crafting a delicate compromise, the bill's 12 architects created a measure that was reviled by foes of illegal immigration, opposed by most labor unions and unloved by immigration advocates. Opposition came not only from talk radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage, but from the American Civil Liberties Union and the AFL-CIO.

Conservatives saw the measure as amnesty for law breakers who had sneaked into the country. The ACLU objected to provisions that denied immigrants many legal rights. And labor unions saw its guest worker program as a license for big business to import cheap labor and drive down wages.

Even Latino organizations were split, with the League of United Latin American Citizens saying the guest worker program and new green card system were too punitive to support, while the National Council of La Raza pleaded with lawmakers to keep the legislation alive while its lobbyists sought changes.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), one of the bill's authors, mustered only a tepid defense when he called the legislation "the very best that can be done as of this moment."

"This is an accommodation," he said. "And the art of politics is to compromise and accommodate."

Against that was the rhetoric of opponents, such as Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who declared: "Americans feel they are losing their country."




Now,

1. Will our Senate and Congress finally enforce the laws already on the books?

2. Will our gov't bring in the NEEDED immigrants legally?

3. Will our gov't see to it that immigrants register, and follow them (as citizens in our country are?.......Something like our Social Security cards........)? How many came in on visas that have expired and are still (lost) in our country?

4. Will our government see that immigrants are taxed as we citizens are?

5. Will our gov't see that immigrants are protected from exploitation........... which the business world won't hold very dearly?

6. Will our gov't finally protect our borders and all points of entry?

7. Will our government see that everyone gets paid a living wage?

8. Will our gov't get off the corporate payroll and start representing We The People?

:confused:
:rolleyes:

[Thelonious]

4.5 percent

[Wafflepudding]

Thelonious: you're spinning wildly out-of-control. Take a few moments to read back what you've written....

You argue for chaos ....

We'd all like to advance the interests and well-being of all people the world over. The way to get there is the challenge.

There's probably a homeless family nearby who wants to move into your apartment and permanently avail themselves of the contents of your checking account & refrigerator.... I'd like those people to be comfortable. Maybe we can find another way to help them. I don't know if the issue is "fairness", "legality", "morality" of some combination thereof, but these are complex issues.

Do you really believe racism is at the core of the anit-illegal-immigration argument in this forum?

I'm not Thelonius, but as far as I know, a job is not private property, thus making the fridge and apartment analogy quite flimsy. It's your fridge, it's your apartment, it's your money, but the job isn't yours, it's the company's/owner's, if you don't like it found your own business or find a different employeer.

I think there's a very simple solution to the problem, and that's enforcing labor laws over immigration laws.

Now, I can already hear some responding "That's chaos! NO AMNESTY! MORE WILL COME!"; well if you're right and the reason why they're hired is because they're exploitable (not because they work harder, or not enough workers here want a crack at it) then subjecting them to the same labor standards would cut off the incentive to hire illegal immigrants and the problem would take care of itself. It would also be much easier and require no major changes in legislation, and would be far less controversial than jailing or fining business owners.

If you're wrong, then, well, I don't really need to explain why that would be positive do I?

Finally, I can see where Thelonius is coming from. After all, weren't similar and in some cases the exact same arguments used against Italian and Irish immigrants at one time? that they drove down wages and brought crime and poverty? How much of that was true? how much of that was scapegoating? How similar is the current situation to that one?

[MAGI]

WP,
We are talking about Illegal immigrants here!

Here's a homework assignment for you.

http://www.google.com/search?q=How+have+the+labor+laws+been+weakened+sin ce+Bush%3F&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N

Please understand, the middleclass is going down the tubes with the shenanigans of our present fascist administration and some very encumbering incumbents who are in the pockets of Corporations.

see:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/sirota



skip


Montana State Senate, which overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan resolution asking him to reject President Bush's request to reauthorize fast-track trade authority--the authority that Presidents have used to do the bidding of K Street lobbyists and strip out all labor, wage, environmental and human rights provisions from trade deals. To date, Max has refused to move fast-track through his committee and he should be congratulated for that. No version of fast-track should be acceptable to any member of Congress.


skip

Workers know that with a trade policy that has no protections, if they try to fight for their share of economic benefits, companies can just say "See you later." And Big Money interests know how to leverage that fear. As Cornell University researchers documented, immediately after NAFTA was passed, corporations began loading equipment onto trucks marked "Mexico" outside of factories whenever labor disputes sprang up.

We also know that our current trade policy prevents jobs that don't yet exist from ever being created--our corporate leaders all but admit this.

skip


Like NAFTA and China PNTR, this deal has been almost universally trumpeted by reporters and pundits, even though the actual text of the deal remains secret, even though rank-and-file Democratic lawmakers have been kept in the dark about the deal--and even though the deal has been roundly condemned not just by leaders of organized labor but by a diverse coalition that includes environmental groups like the Sierra Club, small business groups like the US Business and Industry Council and agriculture advocacy groups like R-CALF. Just like during NAFTA, we are being told that workers shouldn't worry, and that this deal is great for them--even though the people who made this deal are refusing to release the actual legislative language of the deal.

skip

That means the enforcement of any labor or environmental protections will be left to the Bush Administration. That's exactly what corporate America wants, because we all know trusting George Bush to enforce protections for workers and the environment is about as smart as trusting Tony Soprano when he asks you to take a long boat ride.

If this all sounds familiar, that's because it is. As writer Matt Stoller eloquently put it this week, "This is surely a sequel from NAFTA: a slowing economy, a President named Bush, a decimated labor force, a neoliberal group in Congress, strong business coalitions, a Clinton running for the Democratic nomination promising to be on the side of the people while surrounding the campaign with corporate-allied operatives, a country looking for change, and a secretive trade deal on the table."


skip

Or will we slink back in a corner? Will we be too afraid to make enemies? Will we try to avoid having our supposed "friends" get mad at us? Will we, in other words, get busy dying?

I'm sure many of you have read the book Labor's Untold Story. It is the story of a movement whose greatest moments were those where people joined together to get busy living, regardless of which politicians were made uncomfortable, regardless of the intimidation tactics of whichever Big Money interest happened to be abusing its power. This is a story that is gut-wrenching at times, tragic at others--but always inspiring and ultimately a critical part of what has made this nation so great.

This country needs a labor movement that continues to be unafraid to fight back, one that jealously guards the interests of those it represents, even if it makes people in power uncomfortable. Because here's the thing: Labor doesn't just represent its members, it represents the middle class, and we cannot afford to let etiquette or personal friendships get in the way of fighting back. To do so would be to disrespect the generations that came before us--the workers who every day went down those mine shafts outside this hall so that they could put food on their families' table and build this country from scratch.

skip

But make no mistake about it, the decision about whether to get busy living or get busy dying is one fraught with peril. Even a cursory look at our country's history shows that you can't make real change without making real enemies--whether they are lobbyists, executives, legislators, congressmen or senators. But we also know that the path of least resistance that may be lined with happy smiles and big campaign contributions and pats on the back by those in power is the way to get busy dying--the way to perpetuate what has become an intolerable status quo for millions of Americans.

skip

[Wafflepudding]

That's completely beside the point. The American middle class is overburdened and being reduced every year because of free trade agreements and outsourcing, not illegal immigrants.

Interestingly enough, neither that article nor any of the following 10 pin the blame on the immigrants, make a reference to the immigrants (except the one about Alberto Gonzalez but that wasn't about labor at all).

In fact, here's a bit of your own "homework" that supports my point.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/may/18/dollars_cents_border_enforcement_vs_wage_law_enfor cement

Here's the core reason why I think most (not all, but most) of those saying they oppose immigration because of its effects of lower-income native workers are not really serious or, worse, just covering straight-up nativism with a faux charitable concern.

In the Bush 2007 budget, a grand total of $177 million was appropriated to enforce our wage and hour laws. Compare that to the $13 billion in the 2008 Bush budget for border enforcement -- nearly ONE HUNDRED TIME AS MUCH spent for border enforcement as for wage enforcement.

With a majority of workers in industries like nursing homes and restaurants having wages stolen from them through illegal violations of wage and hour laws, you would think there would be an outcry from those bemoaning the fate of low-wage workers over this paltry appropriation for wage enforcement, yet all you hear are calls for more money for border enforcement and none to actually help workers enforce their rights to higher wages.

And ironically, cracking down on sweatshops and illegal wage payers would probably be a far more effective deterrent to employers recruiting undocumented immigrants. If all employers had to pay a decent wage, the attraction of hiring undocumented immigrants would diminish tremendously.

But the fact that wage enforcement is barely part of the immigration discussion nationally is just proof that giving a shit about low-wage workers has little to do with the goals of the anti-immigrant movement. If I ever see an immigration enforcement group calling for real increases in minimum wage and overtime enforcement budgets, I might take their concerns for low-wage US workers seriously.

[MAGI]

That's completely beside the point. The American middle class is overburdened and being reduced every year because of free trade agreements and outsourcing,

and illegal immigrants would make that statement correct. Explanation below.
It is completely the point because you stated in your last post:

I think there's a very simple solution to the problem, and that's enforcing labor laws over immigration laws.
and
Interestingly enough, neither that article nor any of the following 10 pin the blame on the immigrants, make a reference to the immigrants (except the one about Alberto Gonzalez but that wasn't about labor at all).

I pointed out labor laws because they have been broken for the very purpose of dumping workers earning a living wage. And because there are illegal immigrants waiting at sites all over the country, willing to fill those jobs at incredibly lower wages.

They are the employer's dream..........no benefits, long hours, no taxes, and the illegal immigrant dare not complain........... because they are illegal.

Weakened labor laws + illegal immigrants ='s people such as these.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=9970


skip

She and her husband were laid off from their construction jobs and lost their health insurance last year, shortly before Austin's leukemia was diagnosed. That's also about when Bert cut his thumb to the bone. He couldn't afford a doctor's visit, so he sat at the kitchen table and stitched it himself. A severe diabetic, he wears an insulin pump, but often can't afford the insulin and related equipment.

"We've been the average working family," she said. "We made our own way. We built our own home."

Because of that home and other assets, they were turned down for Medicaid.

skip


Illegal immigrants have replaced people such as these all over our country.
Many illegal immigrants have no assets, hence are eligible for free healthcare, free education for their children (who become legal citizens if born in our country) and they contribute little or nothing in taxes unless they have fraudulent documents................. because they are here illegally


In fact, here's a bit of your own "homework" that supports my point.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/may/18/dollars_cents_border_enforcement_vs_wage_law_enfor cement

See above, they are not all lettuce pickers............
and I sure as heck want fair wage laws for all laborers as my past posts attest to.

[JamesP]

I'm not Thelonius, but as far as I know, a job is not private property, thus making the fridge and apartment analogy quite flimsy. It's your fridge, it's your apartment, it's your money, but the job isn't yours, it's the company's/owner's, if you don't like it found your own business or find a different employeer.

I think there's a very simple solution to the problem, and that's enforcing labor laws over immigration laws.

Finally, I can see where Thelonius is coming from. After all, weren't similar and in some cases the exact same arguments used against Italian and Irish immigrants at one time? that they drove down wages and brought crime and poverty? How much of that was true? how much of that was scapegoating? How similar is the current situation to that one?

Waffle - I apologize for the blunt-ness, but your entire post and the mind-set it reflects are "quite flimsy". Maybe you need more rest.

Your assertion that jobs are the property of businesses has no relevance to the question of illegal immigrants taking jobs from hard-working American citizens.

Similarly, the Italian and Irish immigrants that you speak of came here "legally". There is no valid comparison between legal immigrants & illegal immigrants. It's the "illegal" part that is at the root of the problem and from which all of the other problems result.

But, having said all of the above, I do agree that enforcing labor laws for "all that work here" is the right thing to do and would be a partial solution.

I'm not clear on why you prefer not to enforce immigration laws, other than the fact that you think a job is not a refrigerator and you like the idea of cheap, desperate labor competing for other people's jobs. Apparently this does not threaten your standard of living and you might in some way benefit from it, so "illegal is A-Ok with you" in this case.

I know - no need to repeat: "the jobs belong to the employer" and those that ask the government to enforce laws preventing an unlimited supply of illegal immigrants competing for those jobs should "found their own business or find another employer" - presumably an employer who doesn't break the law and hire illegal workers - but of course, such an employer can not compete with the lawbreakers lower cost. Quite a quandry for unskilled American workers...... but just fine with you.

[Wafflepudding]

Your assertion that jobs are the property of businesses has no relevance to the question of illegal immigrants taking jobs from hard-working American citizens.

On the contrary, no one can "take" away something that wasn't yours to begin with. If the job wasn't YOURS, then the immigrants can't be taking "your" job. Of course, if you conceded that the job is not yours property then the argument would be about someone else beating you to a job.

I've seen, personally, that when both immigrants and citizens work in manual labor, illegals are the ones that stay putting in overtime. It's not just that they're exploitable (indeed many of them work and live in deplorable conditions), it's that they (usually) work MORE and HARDER than the native citizen that takes jobs for granted. There are some exceptions on both sides of course, but the awful truth is that they're not just "cheaper", they're more productive.

Similarly, the Italian and Irish immigrants that you speak of came here "legally". There is no valid comparison between legal immigrants & illegal immigrants. It's the "illegal" part that is at the root of the problem and from which all of the other problems result.

Hardly. If all of those immigrants were legal, they would still be competing in the marketplace against natives, so they would still be (according to that logic) "Taking our jobs", many of them would still need medical attention and be too poor to afford health insurance, and would still have low income.

Italian and Irish immigrants indeed came here legally, but the requirements and proceedures for legal entry and citizenship were MUCH less strict and cheaper. If we registered and legalized immigrants en masse with lax restrictions and checks like they did with these two ethnic groups back in the late 19th/early 20th century, there would be a lot less illegal immigrants to begin with.

I'm not clear on why you prefer not to enforce immigration laws, other than the fact that you think a job is not a refrigerator and you like the idea of cheap, desperate labor competing for other people's jobs. Apparently this does not threaten your standard of living and you might in some way benefit from it, so "illegal is A-Ok with you" in this case.

I prefer to enforce labor laws over immigration laws because (and you apparently ignored this) if indeed the sole reason why employeers pick illegal immigrants over native citizens is because they are illegal and thus exploitable, forcing employeers to give them equal pay and benefits would level the playing field and make them hire who's best for the job.

This is strictly my personal opinion, but you sort of asked for it. I like the idea of jobs going to the best worker for the job. I like the idea of honest, hardworking people coming here and realizing the American dream. I like the idea of honoring the "New Colossus"

"Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Over that petty, nativist, discriminatory and self-serving logic that somehow is "ethical" because it's legal and socially accepted. I prefer Pedro with starving kids at home to get a job working hard here and feeding his kids back home instead of my college buddy who wants to do yardwork to supplement the beer budget. I don't see why being born here or going through intentionally impractical hoops to discourage legal immigration entitles you to a job regardless of how qualified or hardworking the other person might be.

But you're right, it would (probably) not affect my living standard, you wanna know why? because I've busted my ass (and brains) at school, took loans that i'll be paying for years to come, and unpleasant part time jobs to avoid becoming unskilled labor. I've sponged off no one, I'm not from a rich family, I've actually worked HARD to have what (little btw) I have now, and I'll be damned if I let some crusader run around shouting "they're taking jobs from hardworking Americans!" because he didn't have the brains and/or the determination to go to a tradeschool or community college. I'm a hardworking American, and I say that's bullshit.

It would also not affect me because I'm proud of what I do, I plan to be great on my profession (because I love it, not because they pay me to do it), and if anyone thinks they can do a better job than me at it, they're welcome to try, legal or otherwise.

[Jane of Arc]

Why do we have immigration laws?

Why do we have borders?

Why do we have sovereign nations at all?



To hell with the immigation laws! To hell with the borders! What borders? They're a joke anyway. (But aren't we scared of terrorist coming into the country? Oh sorry.) To hell with being a "sovereign" nation. Who "owns" this country now anyway? Let's just make it easy. Why don't we just give the world elite what they want and let them have their New World Order already. It would be SO much easier for them to have the one world government they've been tediously implementing. The world banks would be thrilled. Global corporations estatic. The World Police, the U.S. military, has been doing one helluva job, with militay bases in 130 of the 190 "sovereign" nations on earth at this time. They're almost there. Let them put the microchips, that the FDA has already approved, in each and everyone of us and be done with it.


Oh, sorry. This sounds "too out there", doesn't it. Too "conspiracy theory like", right? Sorry, sorry. I forget myself.

We have honest elections. We live in a democracy. America is spreading democracy all over the world. We have honest elections. We live in a democracy. America is spreading democracy all over the world. We have honest elections. We live in a democracy. America is spreading ...

Can I have my soma now, please?

:binkybaby:

[Wafflepudding]

Keep going Jane, maybe if you keep talking about corporate America, the NWO and national sovereignty enough, I'll eventually forget that we're talking about closing our doors and turning our back on people that were exploited and screwed over by our own corporations and are just looking for a better quality of life for their families and a chance to earn back some of the national capital the multinationals siphoned off in the first place.

Good to know you draw the line of your compassion at the end of our territory.

[MAGI]

Page 2.
Washington is currently focused on building democracy in Iraq at a cost of $4 billion per month. But should this effort really be at the top of our national priorities?

A much smaller investment could bring our southern border under control and would lower the threat of terrorists entering there. The expanding power of lawless elements in Mexican society, e.g. narco-traffickers, must be recognized as a security threat - particularly with recent reports of connections between Mexican drug cartels and terrorists, including al Qaeda. Border control is now critical to national security.

There's no reason why Mexico cannot evolve from being a parasite state into an adult nation. Washington was optimistic when opposition party candidate Vicente Fox won the presidency.

But the Fox administration has only displayed more of the same tiresome dependence.

Apparently the current system is just too easy and profitable for the insatiable ruling class.

Tough immigration enforcement from the United States is the only way to force Mexico to get its act together.

If Mr. Bush still thinks of Vicente Fox as his good friend, the President will help wean his pal from the distasteful immigration addiction that keeps Mexico mired in the Third World.

Tough love - border and interior enforcement – is the true expression of caring.

Faced with the unavoidable necessity of fixing their country, Mexicans would have to insist that the country be run for the benefit of all - not for the gluttonous few.

Brenda Walker [email her] is a writer living in California. She publishes two websites, LimitsToGrowth.org and www.ImmigrationsHumanCost.org. She recently advanced the ingenious suggestion that remittances be taxed in order to pay for illegal immigrant healthcare costs borne by border hospitals. [/QUOTE]

[MAGI]

Page 1.
We are headed in the direction of Mexico. The elite will be very rich, very small middleclass, the rest, impoverished. I heard today that Mexico is the richest of all Latin American countries.
Google brings this:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Is+Mexico+the+richest+Latin+American+country%3F&btnG=Google+Search one of which is:
http://www.vdare.com/walker/mexico_the_rich.htm

[QUOTE]September 12, 2003

Mexico’s Rich Don’t Like To Pay Taxes – They Think You Should
By Brenda Walker

[More by Brenda Walker]

“Poor Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States" is an early example of the now-familiar annoying whine, first voiced by Mexican President Porfirio Diaz .

Pathetic loser, mooch, social basket case, criminal narco-state: these are Americans' mental pictures of Mexico.

But more than any other, the image is one of staggering poverty. Anyone who has been to a Mexican border town is immediately overwhelmed by the Third World - the oppressive dirt, decay, too many underfed children.

However, the truth is that Mexico is a very wealthy country. It is blessed with abundant natural resources and a fortunate location. Mexico is the richest nation in Latin America when measured by GDP, and by a wide margin: in 2001, Mexico's GDP was the highest in Latin America, a substantial 22.5 percent more than runner-up Brazil. When GDP per capita is the gauge, Mexico is second only behind Argentina.

Half of all Latin American billionaires, 11 out of 22, are Mexicans.

Mexico is the quintessential banana republic—a corrupt oligarchy of arrogant rich, a tiny middle class and millions of poor people, around half of whom live in poverty.

But Mexico is not poor overall. It has the resources to improve itself.

Economist Gary Hufbauer of the Institute for International Economics recently noted that Mexico has tax collections that amount to only 14 percent of the country's gross domestic profit, compared with the U.S. level of 25 to 28 percent.

Hubauer’s conclusion: "Basically the wealthy classes do not want to tax themselves, period."

Hufbauer further remarked:

"Basic social services and infrastructure are awfully lean for a country that wants to move ahead. While I'm not usually an advocate for larger government, Mexico is a country where public investment, done wisely, could pay huge dividends."

Arguably, with adequate taxation of its freeloader rich, Mexico could follow the example of the Asian tiger nations and invest its way into economic progress by building industrial infrastructure and educating its workforce. The recent loss of Mexican jobs to China was partially due to the lack of capital spending on education, ports, roads and industrial parks.

But investment would cost money. And Mexico refuses to take responsibility for the social needs of its population. It's so much easier to let the Americans care for Mexico's poor.

Indeed, the Mexican propaganda war to convince Americans of the need to support poor Mexico has been largely successful.

Washington's current degree of solicitude for the well being of Mexicans is quite astonishing, particularly at a time when Americans are suffering the highest unemployment in nine years. Congress and the President are considering various welfare packages for Mexico; such as Sen. McCain's "guest worker" plan (where the "guests" never leave).

On July 10, the Senate passed a bill to provide $100 million in microloans for the poorest regions of Mexico. It's stunning that Congress would vote to provide financial aid to wealthy Mexico when 47 U.S. states have severe budget deficits and federal red ink is the highest ever.

Central to Mexican strategy is maintaining the billions of dollars in remittance money flowing south, thereby keeping a lid on social unrest among the masses. In that way, the oligarchy preserves its enormous power and riches.

The immigration scam is very successful: the rulers export their unemployment to the United States and get back billions in remittance cash annually— 2003 is on track to rack up a record $11 billion.

Talk about easy money: the worse the oligarchy run the country, the more people leave and send back money.

Furthermore, every social service for illegal aliens and legal immigrants financed by the American taxpayer—medical care, K-12 education, college tuition breaks, housing vouchers and food stamps—frees up more money for remittances.

Recent surveys show half of Latino immigrants send money home, with a monthly average amount of $250.

Mexico's propaganda effort is helped enormously by the annual carnage of unprepared walkers who die in the desert as they illegally cross into the U.S. Predictably, the May death of 19 people in an unventilated truck in Texas incited anti-borders extremists to pile blame on American immigration law.

Mexico would prefer that all its excess workers could cross an unenforced border to keep remittance dollars flowing.

[JamesP]

I've seen, personally, that when both immigrants and citizens work in manual labor, illegals are the ones that stay putting in overtime. It's not just that they're exploitable (indeed many of them work and live in deplorable conditions), it's that they (usually) work MORE and HARDER than the native citizen that takes jobs for granted. There are some exceptions on both sides of course, but the awful truth is that they're not just "cheaper", they're more productive.

[B]I prefer Pedro with starving kids at home to get a job working hard here and feeding his kids back home instead of my college buddy who wants to do yardwork to supplement the beer budget.

But you're right, it would (probably) not affect my living standard, you wanna know why? because I've busted my ass (and brains) at school, took loans that i'll be paying for years to come, and unpleasant part time jobs to avoid becoming unskilled labor. I've sponged off no one, I'm not from a rich family, I've actually worked HARD to have what (little btw) I have now, and I'll be damned if I let some crusader run around shouting "they're taking jobs from hardworking Americans!" because he didn't have the brains and/or the determination to go to a tradeschool or community college. I'm a hardworking American, and I say that's bullshit.



Waf: I've only skimmed your "self-justifying Ode to your own greatness". I knew who you were from the start:
- part modern-day Archie Bunker
- part elitist capitalist sans soul: part of the "poor deserve to be poor" gang
- part arrogant, self-congratulating "hero-in-your-own-mind"

You value hard-work.
Actually there's no limit for you as to how hard the unwashed should work for you and to how little they deserve for doing it.
You've no respect for labor and way too much regard for yourself.

You are part of the new breed of "hooray for me & f*ck you" Americans that made a George W Bush presidency possible.

You'd like nothing better than to have an endless supply of desperate laborers crawling over each other for the minimum-wage job you're offering out of the goodness of your heart... after all your a generous person.... just as long as they don't get "uppity" and start asking for "more" or "better" (we must keep in mind that they are not deserving - particularly the American-born workers who have the audacity to expect a living wage)).

I've seen you before. Everywhere. Mostly in third-world countries, but, lately, sadly, also here in the USA.

[JamesP]

Page 1.
We are headed in the direction of Mexico. The elite will be very rich, very small middleclass, the rest, impoverished. I heard today that Mexico is the richest of all Latin American countries.


Magi - great post.

There's some that would like nothing better than for America to be more and more like Mexico: a rich country with highly concentrated wealth.... and an endless supply of desperate, low-cost laborers.

[Jane of Arc]

Dear WaffleAsparagus,

It's not like you to launch personal attacks. You said, "Good to know you draw the line of your compassion at the end of our territory." So I say to myself, "Self, this issue is very close to WP's heart." And that is fine. I respect your passion and your compassionate nature. I also have enormous compassion and I don't draw the line at our borders for crying out loud.

The immigration issue is a very complicated one. I don't have an opinion that's 'set in stone' on this. My last post was to point out that American laws aren't respected by the ruling elite for a miriad of reasons, all benefiting them.

But, allow me to play devil's advocate seeing that you played the "compassion card".


Are the millions of illegal aliens pouring into this country over the Mexican border coming here for the welfare of American citizens or their own self-interest?
Do they have compassion for the people of this country and how their presence effects us?

Do they consider or care that the vast majority of Americans don't want this illegal invasion?

If millions of Americans poured into Canada or any other country, would that country have the right to enforce laws prohibiting such events?

Why don't they repair/ revolt against their extremely corrupt government because Mexico is a rich nation that desperately needs reform. America is heading for the exact same place with their help.

[Wafflepudding]

JamesP: Oh thank you, I love you too. FYI, I'm against hydrocarbon energy subsidies, for taxing luxury items, some sort of voucher system or socialized healthcare (tax funded), taxing the top 10% of the highest per capita income recipients. I didn't vote for Bush, and I rarely waste an opportunity to trash him, even back in 2000 before 9/11, before Iraq and before Abu Ghraib. Yeah, even as a kid, even more so since back then I was interested on socialism. Oh well, I grew up eventually.

And as I said before, enforcing labor laws and fair wages, regardless of citizenship status. Oh yeah, I'm completely against the "worker". Or maybe you're against the people without proper paperwork, but you know, whatever, I wouldn't want you to slip off your soapbox and chip a tooth or something. When you're done lecturing and insulting me, wake me up.

I particularly resent the "elitist" charge, I dislike everyone regardless of economic standing, religious creed, gender, race, country of origin or any other issue. I'm an equal opportunity jackass, ask around.

But actually, you're right in one thing, I do have a personal interest that conflicts with neutral and proper reasoning in this discussion.

Jane: Yes, I have considered these things, and they don't make it any easier, but I suppose in the end, blood is thicker than water.

I broke my own rules, I got emotional, and I let my own bias into my arguments. I apologize to you, and to Magi.

I'll just say this, and be done with the topic altogether: It's hardly "playing a card", Jane. I'm hispanic, the son of Mexican immigrants. I should not have come in here and said... anything, since whatever I say, it's biased and tainted. But know this, if I have a conflicting interest it's between the country of my blood and the country of my birth. Purely emotional, not financial; But I suppose at the end of the day, it's still self-interest and so, I apologize.

This is the last thing I say on this particular subject. I'm just not capable of separating reason and emotion on this one, and I've proven it consistently.

[Wafflepudding]

Actually the dislike part wasn't true. I just wish it was. Then I wouldn't feel a thing about saying screw them both.

For me, this is scapegoating: because all the manufacturing firms are moving their operations to countries with cheaper labor now that tariffs on finished goods have been cut, there are less unskilled jobs. The government subsidizes farming products and eliminates foreign taxes on American agro exports, and so creates more poor peasants that eventually come here and perform unskilled labor for less money than the American unskilled laborer would. Then Joe Sixpack complains and wants the borders shut regardless of what happens to these people because "They're here illegally" and "they're taking our jobs". You don't know how many times I've heard "Well they should fix things back in Mexico". Well we haven't done shit about Abu Ghraib, sweatshops and Colombia (which is largely the product of a drug policy that makes crack cheaper than most antibiotics), but since it's not in our backyard then what the hell.

From my own empirical observation, it turns out that in spite of being exploited, many immigrants not only make a living but manage to set up shops, support families and improve their quality of life while they subsist on a meager (because it IS meager and unfair) income while the guys demanding more don't cut it, or say the wages are too low because they'll be damned if they're taking the bus to work or cutting back their expenses (once again, nothing directed at anyone, I just know folks like these).

Hell no, I WISH I didn't give a crap about the unskilled, then I could just say screw them both, that would be my opinion. I can't back the "citizens first" crowd because I don't think being born here should be part of your resume and legal immigration, well, if you know the process you know it's made so that people get here illegally instead. And I can't turn my back on people like my parents in good conscience either.

I can't back the immigrants and say we should naturalize everyone because yeah, that would be chaos, and not everyone comes here looking for a better life, some of them ARE criminals, thugs, etc. Besides where does that leave the American worker? we have a right to control our own borders, and open borders are a huge security risk. I'm not even talking about terrorism but plain crime, smuggling, kidnappings, etc.

So my solution is probably not ideal, but it's the one I can live with:

Either make a comprehensive immigration bill that tackles the needs of both the people that want to come work (and possibly settle) here and us. Call me a hopeless optimist but I think this country's big enough for all of us.

Or don't do anything at all, but enforce labor laws, fair wages, the right to unionize, etc. to level the playing field and let the best man win.

JamesP: You decided I'm "elitist", "made a George W Bush presidency possible", I want to exploit the "unwashed" (my mother and father were "unwashed" illegals) and part of the problem from the contents of a single post, not even all of them mind you.

I guess it takes an arrogant to know one. I was gonna share a bit of my story, ask if Archie Bunker had friends and/or family deported or had to go with a single pair of shoes and 3 pairs of pants through highschool but, hell you'll think I'm patting myself on the back and your god knows I wouldn't want to do that. Besides, it's just not worth it... You're just not worth it. It's personal, it's ugly, and it's pointless because until they come up with a way of choking someone to death over the internet, I doubt I can express what I'm feeling right now accurately. Yeah, lower my karma I know I earned it, I had to get it off my chest regardless.

[MAGI]

Sorry WP,
You happen to be very wrong about all U.S. citizens having so much more than "one pair of shoes and three pairs of pants throughout highschool".

There will always be those who are or have been discriminated against in school (and elsewhere) for any number of reasons. Sadly, there are many Paris Hiltonlikes and other types of bullies, which can make life difficult during those school years (and other years......). That, unfortunately, is, how it is....................
and let's work to get free or reasonable college/trade education for all that want it, so we will have capable A students as well as the C (I wonder if it was a fair C, gwb) graduates, some children of the rich elite who can afford those costly education centers.

Many of us on this site are working to change that.


and.............WP, You have a huge problem separating illegal immigrants from legal immigrants.

Here's what we have with legal entry to the U.S.:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=How+many+types+of+U.S.+visas+are+there%3F&btnG=Google+Search
Here's one on the first page of the googled question:
http://kyrgyz.usembassy.gov/student_visas.html

another: http://www.immigration-bureau.org/

Let us work to change that if need be.
Let us work to change all the BS all over our planet!

We have the huge problem of thousands of legal (to begin with) immigrants, who are now lost in the U.S. system and now illegal, because "we got big government out of our lives" and do not have enough government workers to do the job(s) properly. That goes for all systems that once were in place and working adequately. Like the FDA, and VA, and EPA and on and on.
Privatizing hasn't worked very well.........................
I can really imagine how it will be with a private Military esp. with the leadership now in place!

We must control our borders and re-establish our government, now or there will be Anarchy as is happening in South Africa momentarily, thanks to Open Borders there now. People are leaving that country because of the disorder. Their systems are both broke and broken and there is chaos!

We all, except Native Americans, are the children of immigrants. We all weren't fortunate to have parents who didn't have to struggle to get what they had (or didn't). I also worked very diligently and earnestly to get what I have. It's not much but it's paid for and I own it. I didn't ever have government welfare...............I was lucky..........I had good health and determination. So it worked. My children had it better than I and will be alright if they keep their jobs and their health..................................

[JamesP]

JamesP: You decided I'm "elitist", "made a George W Bush presidency possible", I want to exploit the "unwashed" (my mother and father were "unwashed" illegals) and part of the problem from the contents of a single post, not even all of them mind you.

I guess it takes an arrogant to know one. I was gonna share a bit of my story, ask if Archie Bunker had friends and/or family deported or had to go with a single pair of shoes and 3 pairs of pants through highschool but, hell you'll think I'm patting myself on the back and your god knows I wouldn't want to do that. Besides, it's just not worth it... You're just not worth it. It's personal, it's ugly, and it's pointless because until they come up with a way of choking someone to death over the internet, I doubt I can express what I'm feeling right now accurately. Yeah, lower my karma I know I earned it, I had to get it off my chest regardless.


Waf: I realize that I was a bit excessive in my rhetoric and over-personalized my post for dramatic effect. I apologize. There's lots of "passion mixed with in with the principle" around this issue. I understand a bit better now where you are coming from.

[Michael DeM]

I'd have to say that Wafflepudding is completely right on this issue. None of the major plans floating around these days--indentured servitude (aka "guest worker") program, border fence, penalizing companies that hire illegal immigrants-- really addresses root of the problem which is basically the question of what makes people so desperate to come here illegally to begin with. Just telling the Mexican government to take care of its people is one thing, but is it really enough? Is there anything the U.S. can do to help matters? There's really no simple solution to the problem, but I think granting amnesty to the immigrants that are already here is probably the right thing to do in the short run. Imagine if America had the same economic problems as Mexico, and Americans started pouring into Canada in search of a decent job. Wouldn't we want the Canadian government and its people to sympathize with their circumstances and treat them with the utmost respect?

[JamesP]

Michael: I totally disagree, my friend.

Any form of amnesty is totally the "wrong thing to do".

It's wrong:
- for all of those waiting in line and playing by the rules.
- because it encourages and will result in more lawbreaking.
- because it plays directly into the hands of those for whom cheap labor and low wages is the main goal.
- because it will further increase inequity in America.

Illegal immigrants should get in line like everyone else. There is a path to American citizenship that should be the same for all - not easier for those that break the law than for those that don't.

If we want more immigrants, let's simply increase the number of legal immigrants we accept annually and start from the front of the legal applicants line.

Let's put it to a vote in our democratic America and let the people decide.
And let's press hard on the Mexican government to enlarge opportunity for working people in Mexico.

There is a government in Mexico that loves inequality, cheap labor and further enriching the rich at the expense of the poor....
and one just like it right now here in the USA.
They both support the amnesty concept.
Don't fall into their well-set trap.

[Michael DeM]

James,
To address your third and fourth points about amnesty, I would argue that making undocumented workers into legal citizens would prevent big businesses from being able to exploit them for cheap labor the way they are doing now.

To your second point, granting amnesty could indeed create the problem of sending a message to potential immigrants that they can just cross the border illegally and get away with it. However, even without amnesty many people are driven to come here illegally simply because the job opportunities are better here than they are in Mexico.

[Michael DeM]

Hi James. To address your third and fourth points about amnesty, I would argue that making undocumented workers into legal citizens would prevent big businesses from being able to exploit them for cheap labor the way they do now.

To your second point, granting amnesty could indeed create the problem of sending a message to potential immigrants that they can just cross the border illegally and get away with it. However, even without amnesty many people are driven to come here illegally simply because the job opportunities are better here than they are in Mexico. I'm afraid it's going to remain that way until the economic situation in Mexico drastically improves.

To your first point, I do realize that giving amnesty to illegal immigrants seems unfair to the immigrants trying to come here legally. But consider that a lot of the people who come here illegally are just trying to escape from poverty. Maybe a fair portion of them just couldn't afford to wait in line and simultaneously sustain their families. They took matters into their own hands.

I agree that we should increase the number of legal immigrants, and I'm all for pressing hard on the Mexican government. I just don't want to punish the working people in the process.

[Michael DeM]

James,
To address your third and fourth points about amnesty, I would argue that making undocumented workers into legal citizens would prevent big businesses from being able to exploit them for cheap labor the way they are doing now.

To your second point, granting amnesty could indeed create the problem of sending a message to potential immigrants that they can just cross the border illegally and get away with it. However, even without amnesty many people are driven to come here illegally simply because the job opportunities are better here than they are in Mexico.

Sorry about this post. I accidently hit the enter button and sent it before I was finished.

[FDRfollower]

Hi everyone. I just put up on YouTube, a video about immigration from a historical standpoint (of course). Yes, you can see actually see me. {waves hi}

video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oyhURosRog)

Tell me what you think.

[Jane of Arc]

WaY CoOL!!!! WaY to Go!!!! YoU RoCK FDRfollower!!! :sunny:

[MAGI]

Hi everyone. I just put up on YouTube, a video about immigration from a historical standpoint (of course). Yes, you can see actually see me. {waves hi}

video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oyhURosRog)

Tell me what you think.

Waves to you..................FDRfollower,
:)

Well, the video inspired me to write my senator, Dodd, and send copies of this
e mail to some family, and myself, so I can easily copy it for my other Washington Reps..:

Hi All,

This video was inspiration for me to write to Senator Dodd and I'll copy the e mail to send to, cough cough, Senator Lieberman and my representative.

Dear Senator Dodd,
I write because I am concerned about immigration and what is has & is doing to the middleclass laborer.
The space between the obscenely rich and the common worker grows by leaps & bounds daily.

The opportunity to a better life for our children and ourselves is growing bleaker by the day.

Free Trade, the Global world, Immigration- both legal and illegal has put the laborer between a rock and a hard place. Wages are degraded, inflation is crippling and the future bleak for so many of us now.

Pensions, going and gone, cause the elderly, sick and sole supporter a life of work until that person can no longer manage because of ill health!
College is too expensive now for so many ......hopeless.... in our very wealthy
U. S. of A.

Where is the conscience of CONGRESS? Why have they forsaken We The People?

Look back to the days of HOPE. Where a working person could look to brighter days for their generation and the following, where a day of hard labor brought a decent wage and benefits and hope for a better future!

Look back to FDR and all the good his Four Freedoms brought us!

Restore our Rights....our Constitution, and above all, THE FAIR MEDIA!

Please take the time to view the truth about immigration, please, and help restore America to American OWNERSHIP!

Bring back FAIR TARRIFS to put America back to work! Incentive is crushed by cheap foreign imports, where once American companies have established, and now have broken competiton!

AND ABOVE ALL, give us UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE as other industrial countries did for their people. I speak for those of us burdened to our last dollar with the 6.2 tax on 100% of OUR earning because most of us are nowhere near the income of $97,500 annually.

We pay and pay taxes on everything, outrageous insurance costs because we must to keep our pitiful assets, and so many of us must work until death to keep them!

We The People ask you and the rest of our representatives (including Senators) to bring back the American Dream, where an honest day's work brought an honest day's wage and hope, to better our future.

Here's a short video on immigration and cheap labor.......a good place to start..........and please remember to get real with S.S. because We The People pay for it!

Now let those over $97,500 pay the same................ WHAT GLORIOUS THINGS WE COULD DO WITH ALL THAT MONEY!

which could restore our US of A to a prosperous and educated nation for ALL.

http://www.youtube.com/share?v=6oyhURosRog

My guess is that most of you are fortunate to earn lots more than $97,500 annually because no one has ever responded to this (the 6.2% tax on those making $97,500 or less) annually, whenever i mentioned it.

So, have a heart, how about working to reduce that 6.2% S.S. burden on those of us that can least afford it, and extending it to an income that would enable education and healthcare and security for the majority of those of us who have the problems I mention above................

[Michael DeM]

Hi everyone. I just put up on YouTube, a video about immigration from a historical standpoint (of course). Yes, you can see actually see me. {waves hi}

video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oyhURosRog)

Tell me what you think.

Yes, it was a good video. It's amazing how the words of Frederick Douglass all those years ago are still so pertinent in today's world. Thanks.

[FDRfollower]

Thank you all. Your comments are much appreciated.

@magi ha ha :)

@Michael, free trade exists for the purpose of denying humanity the means of playing a meaningful role in the world for our posterity. In that sense, its as old as the idea of empires. It only got "codified" when Shelburne had Adam Smith collect the various doctrines into a bore-you-to-death tome.

The trouble is, is that kind of a system always brings about its own destruction in the basic axiomatic way it runs by supressing human creativity.

Frederick Douglas just happens to have been a victim of that system and escaped to bloom to his full potential in organizing for Lincoln and the American system against the British free trade slave empire.

James G. Blaine in the Congress got a lot of flack (on the Dem side) for pushing anti Chinese legislation, but it was based on the economic issue Douglas laid out.

[MAGI]

Re: Immigrants documented or otherwise

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDRfollower
Hi everyone. I just put up on YouTube, a video about immigration from a historical standpoint (of course). Yes, you can see actually see me. {waves hi}

video link

Tell me what you think.


MAGI: Waves to you..................FDRfollower, :)



Well, the video inspired me to write my senator, Dodd, and send copies of this
e mail to some family, and myself, so I can easily copy it for my other Washington Reps..:

Hi All,

This video was inspiration for me to write to Senator Dodd and I'll copy the e mail to send to, cough cough, Senator Lieberman and my representative.


Quote MAGI:
Dear Senator Dodd,
I write because I am concerned about immigration and what is has & is doing to the middleclass laborer.
The space between the obscenely rich and the common worker grows by leaps & bounds daily.

The opportunity to a better life for our children and ourselves is growing bleaker by the day.

Free Trade, the Global world, Immigration- both legal and illegal has put the laborer between a rock and a hard place. Wages are degraded, inflation is crippling and the future bleak for so many of us now.

Pensions, going and gone, cause the elderly, sick and sole supporter a life of work until that person can no longer manage because of ill health!
College is too expensive now for so many ......hopeless.... in our very wealthy
U. S. of A.

Where is the conscience of CONGRESS? Why have they forsaken We The People?

Look back to the days of HOPE. Where a working person could look to brighter days for their generation and the following, where a day of hard labor brought a decent wage and benefits and hope for a better future!

Look back to FDR and all the good his Four Freedoms brought us!

Restore our Rights....our Constitution, and above all, THE FAIR MEDIA!

Please take the time to view the truth about immigration, please, and help restore America to American OWNERSHIP!

Bring back FAIR TARRIFS to put America back to work! Incentive is crushed by cheap foreign imports, where once American companies have established, and now have broken competiton!

AND ABOVE ALL, give us UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE as other industrial countries did for their people. I speak for those of us burdened to our last dollar with the 6.2 tax on 100% of OUR earning because most of us are nowhere near the income of $97,500 annually.

We pay and pay taxes on everything, outrageous insurance costs because we must to keep our pitiful assets, and so many of us must work until death to keep them!

We The People ask you and the rest of our representatives (including Senators) to bring back the American Dream, where an honest day's work brought an honest day's wage and hope, to better our future.

Here's a short video on immigration and cheap labor.......a good place to start..........and please remember to get real with S.S. because We The People pay for it!

Now let those over $97,500 pay the same................ WHAT GLORIOUS THINGS WE COULD DO WITH ALL THAT MONEY!

which could restore our US of A to a prosperous and educated nation for ALL.

http://www.youtube.com/share?v=6oyhURosRog


My guess is that most of you are fortunate to earn lots more than $97,500 annually because no one has ever responded to this (the 6.2% tax on those making $97,500 or less) annually, whenever i mentioned it.

So, have a heart, how about working to reduce that 6.2% S.S. burden on those of us that can least afford it, and extending it to an income that would enable education and healthcare and security for the majority of those of us who have the problems I mention above................

- edited by MAGI: Today at 07:50 am.

.................................................. .................................................. .................

Remember CA. is three hours behind me. This ( http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/07/30/true-compassion/#more-10639 ) from firedoglake three hours later than my post today. I hope you read the article and comments which pertain to the state of We The People in our beloved U.S.of A.,..........................

C'mon now, Tell me where I'm offbase with my letter to Dodd, please...................
:( :confused:

[FDRfollower]

Your letter is perfect Magi. Send it by all means.

I was laughing at your lieberman crack. :laughing:

[The Shadow]

First, I want to apologize for resurrecting an old thread, but it was either this or start a redundant thread. The reason for doing so is that “illegal” immigration has become such a hot topic that I have been trying to wrap my mind around what exactly is the problem. Anytime a specific “problem” becomes a hot topic in a political campaign, it sets my BS radar off.
Likely I am over simplifying things (everyone always mentions how complex this issue is) and am a bit naive, but looking at the numbers (I admit to being something of a stat freak), 12 million so-called illegals, using approximately $10 billion of budgetary resources (the budget numbers I have used are from 2002 ). $10 billion represents about .5% of the total budget and roughly 10% of the various aid type items (Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, WIC, etc.) Is this really that big a drain on our budgetary resource? Now, 12 billion folks is about 4% of the total population of this country, so as I see it 4% of the population is using .5% of the federal budget or 10% of the budgets aid items. What am I missing here? It seems to me we spend more money trying to fix the so-called problem then the so-called problem costs. I mean it must be a much larger problem than I am seeing, correct? The way folks go on and on about it and all it has to be a much larger problem. So what am I missing? If this is indeed the case, then it would seem that a general amnesty and as Wafflepudding mentioned, enforcing the labor laws already on the books would fix the “illegal” problem. Then one could go about the business adjusting the hoops we make one jump thr