Close The Gates?

[Dr. Haight]

In the US, and particularly in California, border/immigration policy is a hot issue. I have thought about this one for a long time and have yet to reach a comfortable conclusion; maybe one just does not exist...I don't know.
So I am reaching out to you, fellow INTPs, for understanding and the need to put this one to bed.

What is the best border/immigration policy? Should the border be closed permanently? Should they be open completely?
Is the "slow leak" policy, which the US employs, the best possible scenario?
Or, are arbitrary quota systems the way to go?

And finally, if you want to get rid of all the illegal immigrants--11 million in the US--how do you accomplish this task?

(Stephen Colbert suggests that we invite all the illegal immigrants in the US to a water park in San Diego. The catch is, the slide ends in Mexico City..."Wow, that would be a hell of a swimsuit wedgie.")

[KuJo]

i always thought that we should help mexico with domestic problems so that people wouldnt want to leave so bad. But Bush is not helping the situation.

[papertrail]

i think those who come | came over illegally should be deemed as criminals. it should be a misdemeanor not a felony. i don't know how this helps in the long run though...it's an emotional reaction.

i do think we should stifle the flow of illegals -- not immigration. many of the proposals are nothing more than indentured servitude. they oppress the illegals and adversely affect poor communities.

i don’t think it is realistic to deport millions of illegals and would do more harm than good. i think they should be required to work toward citizenship and made to pay higher taxes for a the first X no. of years to help alleviate the strain on resources. once citizens, i don’t think they should be allowed to bring over their extended family…but i think that should be the case for all immigrants.

i got nothing on border security…shy of an electric fence how can you keep everyone out or maybe the collective would be satisfied with simply decreasing the percentage.

oh and get our shit together when it comes to immigration staffing levels and procedures here and abroad.

eta..and focus on hiring illegals.

[charred_heart]

I say put in less restrictive immigration requirements so that those who want to get into the US would be encouraged to work at meeting these requirements rather than resorting to more desperate measures. I don't know a lot about US immigration laws (not intersted in going there atm) but isn't the green card a form of lottery?

EDIT: By restrictive I am referring to what I have heard from people where the US disqualifies certain nationalities from applying for immigration or reduces eligibility if they are from a certain country. What about mexico? How easy is it for a young, professional Mexican to get his application accepted?

[Dr. Haight]

I don't know.
My position is the expected one if you are a radical leftist thinker--or non-thinker depending on your position. I feel that the issue, with Mexico in particular, is more about why they need to come here, rather than what to do now; maybe dealing with the former will help solve the later.

For example, they are here because businesses want them here; cheap labor is the fuel for US economic growth, and for all of US history for that matter (Oh yeah...and the occasional annexation of other nation). Therefore, if the agricorps would not have went to Mexico, bought up their lands (in most cases), kicked the workers off the lands, and forced a supply and demand catastrophe that could only result in the need to migrate, then the situation would be quite different.

So, in my opinion, it is a cycle of exploitation that I cannot figure out how to rectify in any practical sense.

[Snowflake]

Leave the borders open, but find a way to make the immigrants pay their way rather than getting a free ride.

This country was founded on freedom, and it shall stay that way.

[papertrail]

I don't know.
My position is the expected one if you are a radical leftist thinker--or non-thinker depending on your position. I feel that the issue, with Mexico in particular, is more about why they need to come here, rather than what to do now; maybe dealing with the former will help solve the later.

For example, they are here because businesses want them here; cheap labor is the fuel for US economic growth, and for all of US history for that matter (Oh yeah...and the occasional annexation of other nation). Therefore, if the agricorps would not have went to Mexico, bought up their lands (in most cases), kicked the workers off the lands, and forced a supply and demand catastrophe that could only result in the need to migrate, then the situation would be quite different.

So, in my opinion, it is a cycle of exploitation that I cannot figure out how to rectify in any practical sense.
in some respect i think it's a little too late for that. i would rather we didn't mettle in mexican politics. i mention politics because on the other side of agribusiness in mexico is mexican politics. i can imagine how mired the whole thing would become if we did. i do think it's necessary to focus on the hiring of illegals and penalize businesses and corporations if we're to make any headway.

i was listening to diane rehm some time ago. she had a caller explain that mexicans were the best workers...better than any other group (i.e. blacks) he's hired. i forgot if it was the diane or one of her guests called him on it and explained that it was a matter of working illegals 7 days a week, 12 hour days, no benefits, sub standard conditions, fear of repraisals, etc...

i love people.

[Dr. Haight]

Leave the borders open, but find a way to make the immigrants pay their way rather than getting a free ride.

This country was founded on freedom, and it shall stay that way.

See...I think I agree with that for the following reason:
The "close the border" position seems to be saying, "Now that I'm in...shut the gates." And that does not feel justifiable, or fare (for lack of a better word).

[Dom]

Leave the borders open, but find a way to make the immigrants pay their way rather than getting a free ride.

This country was founded on freedom, and it shall stay that way.

Too right,

Asylum must always be without quotas.

Illegals?

and how to treat them, firstly, in Britian here, they get no recourse to public funds and are not allowed to work legally (so repectable employers wont employ them) this forces them into the underground criminal world or the gangmasters.

They can have a free flight home, but most stay, of course offer them support and thousands more come, but we do end up forcing them into criminality, (which they see as more benifcial than going home)

[Dr. Haight]

in some respect i think it's a little too late for that. i would rather we didn't mettle in mexican politics. i mention politics because on the other side of agribusiness in mexico is mexican politics. i can imagine how mired the whole thing would become if we did. i do think it's necessary to focus on the hiring of illegals and penalize businesses and corporations if we're to make any headway.


I am suggesting that we give them back their land, or, pay retribution for screwing with their political institutions in the first place. I believe that both suggestions will result in a happier Mexico, a happier California-Texas-Arizona citizenry, and a pissed off business community--the best of all possible outcomes in my opinion. Because, in the end, South American citizens want to be with their families, culture, and lands rather than in a country that seems to despise their presence (the illegals anyways).

[papertrail]

I am suggesting that we give them back their land, or, pay retribution for screwing with their political institutions in the first place. I believe that both suggestions will result in a happier Mexico, a happier California-Texas-Arizona citizenry, and a pissed off business community--the best of all possible outcomes in my opinion. Because, in the end, South American citizens want to be with their families, culture, and lands rather than in a country that seems to despise their presence (the illegals anyways).
http://images17.fotki.com/v296/photos/1/128447/2594528/rofl2-vi.gif

dude...??! this is america.

[TelecomClone]

"Kicking them all out" or "closing the border" aren't viable options anyway. Unless we wanted to waste x billion dollars building a 'reverse Berlin Wall' absurdity across the whole border. Or take up the policy of shooting them all on sight. Running illegals through a criminal system, then, in addition to some kind of 'nationalization program' is also a waste of money. So, the naturalization/work visa approach by itself seems to be one of the only real options. That said, I've no idea how something like that could or should work.

[nottaprettygal]

As others have mentioned, it's impossible to close the borders. Even though the idea itself is impractical, I doubt that jailing illegals caught crossing the border would actually curtail immigration.

I think that the only way to slow immigration is to create more jobs in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. We would have to make it easier for them to sell their products in the U.S., and tightening border security would make it harder to move these goods across the border (since every truckload may contain hidden illegal migrants). So any idea involving border security is not a good one.

While we're creating new jobs elsewhere, we should invoke stiffer penalties and make it less profitable for employers to hire illegal immigrants. First though, we'd have to create a system for easily identifying those who are legally able to work in the United States. This way employers cannot falsely claim that they attempted to determine a person's legal status.

The bottom line is that we should offer amnesty to illegals already here, but under the condition that a system is created to easily identify legal immigrants. Those found hiring illegal immigrants would face harsh penalities. And in an attempt to create a long-term solution we would help to create jobs elsewhere.

I've done a decent amount of reading on immigration, and these are the best solutions that I have read.

[tinribz]

Get rid of all 'borders' they exist only in your head. And that is all of them world wide. I really can’t see the point in them and consider them offensive in all their forms.

A united states of the world with devolved local federal government, total freedom of movement, and give me one moral reason not to?

There may be some initial tooing and frowing but probably not as much as you fear, look at W&E Germany.

The redistribution of wealth will be for the good and settle down to an equilibrium soon enough. It is a natural progression of the path we have been taking for years.

Problem solved.

[cjs55]

A hugely growing lower class separate subculture that doesn't assimilate, who may shortly become bitter against the status quo? Bad news for multiculturalism. Seems paradoxical, but then again, multiculturalism is itself paradoxical. But America is so entrenched in multicultural capatalism (because cheap labor is great!) that it could never say no, so here we are.



A united states of the world with devolved local federal government, total freedom of movement, and give me one moral reason not to?

The repression of any culture opposed to the global one, resulting in a brutal diversity-crushing conformity across the globe. That's the only way globalism can operate. If someone blocks themselves off from it, then they are being nationalistic and evil, right?

[Dom]

Get rid of all 'borders' they exist only in your head. And that is all of them world wide. I really can’t see the point in them and consider them offensive in all their forms.

A united states of the world with devolved local federal government, total freedom of movement, and give me one moral reason not to?

There may be some initial tooing and frowing but probably not as much as you fear, look at W&E Germany.

The redistribution of wealth will be for the good and settle down to an equilibrium soon enough. It is a natural progression of the path we have been taking for years.

Problem solved.

Ahh but both east and west germansm, were ahh germans, they already had a common identity.

Human as an Identity isn't that solid. Asked who I am I'd say moridin, Britsh European, part French and Italian. Human doesn't even enter it yet.....

There would be lots of toing and froing and then lots of killing and the reforming of borders within 25 to 200 years after the whole thing starts.

Edit: Like democracy for this kind of thing to work it has to evolve from what was there before.

[dubbeltop]

Build a highway from mexico to US and hope for the best. Remove all borders and greet your mexican neighbours with a smile. There yr fricking neighbours.
Anyway you can only keep people out for so long. And this has been going on for ages and ages and people get in anyway so in the end the walls will come down because that what happens to walls. Chinese wall anyone?

[Kilby]

Some others might say:

Walls and better enforcement will hinder illegal immigration greatly. Some wait to become citizens, others force their way in and expect to be given it, or do they even want citizenship?

It is a matter of principle: they are illegal and broke the law and they know it. This issue is going to be big in the elections, so the right thing may not be done by everyone b/c of political pressure.

If we do need workers, then they can be here on temporary status. Remove illegals here slowly. We spend money in Iraq to protect our country, we can spend the money here to protect our country by removing law-breakers. How would they enforce the current Senate plan? Is it too much paperwork? Is blunt force needed? Is it too much like the plan of 1986? Do demonstrations with foreign flags flying help your cause or lead to hostility from American citizens indignant at these displays?

Again: not necessarily all of my views but ones out there worth considering.

[ApeTheDog]

Eliminate all borders. They are pointless constructs meanth to divide power that rightfully belongs to each and every person in equal share.

I should own an equal degree of the iraqi oil wells as sheik whatever. Or not, of course - because that oil does belong in an equal share to all people who are still to be born as well. But since they cannot vote...

[Snowflake]

So what about the oil in those wells? If everyone gets an equal share, what about the people who don't want their share and/or can't use it? And what about the people who use large amounts of oil beyond their fair share?

[nottaprettygal]

Walls and better enforcement will hinder illegal immigration greatly. Some wait to become citizens, others force their way in and expect to be given it, or do they even want citizenship?

Eh. Some people may say that better enforcement will hinder immigration, but those people are totally misinformed. Regarding whether or not immigrants actually want citizenship, about 1/3 of immigrants specifically plan to return to their home country.

[mgb]

Eh. Some people may say that better enforcement will hinder immigration, but those people are totally misinformed. Regarding whether or not immigrants actually want citizenship, about 1/3 of immigrants specifically plan to return to their home country.

Why not have a pain free work visa system setup then?

[booyalab]

doing away with the minimum wage would greatly decrease illegal immigration (and also decrease unemployment)

[Kilby]

Eh. Some people may say that better enforcement will hinder immigration, but those people are totally misinformed. Regarding whether or not immigrants actually want citizenship, about 1/3 of immigrants specifically plan to return to their home country.

Why won't better enforcement and wall(s) reduce illegal immigration?

It seems the logic behind this argument is that they wouldn't have the land border to go through, so they would have to go by sea, being more difficult.
Tell me where this is wrong.

[nottaprettygal]

Why won't better enforcement and wall(s) reduce illegal immigration?

I guess if a physical border was built, it would stop immigration at least temporarily until people figured out a way around it. I think that the INS figures that it catches about 1/3 of people who try to cross the border. But all that happens is that these people are returned and are free to try to cross again. So, if a person wants to get across, it's going to happen eventually. And there is no way our government would decide to jail the people caught crossing the border. Without question, voters would turn against that idea.


Why not have a pain free work visa system setup then?
I believe that this is what is currently being proposed. Undocumented immigrants will be able to stay in the country for six years under a temporary work visa after paying $1000 and passing a background check. I'm not sure what the current status of this is.

[papertrail]

does anyone know if that proposal guarantees worker rights and or wage levels?

[mgb]

I believe that this is what is currently being proposed. Undocumented immigrants will be able to stay in the country for six years under a temporary work visa after paying $1000 and passing a background check. I'm not sure what the current status of this is.

Isn't the whole idea of them being in the US that they don't have $1000 for a visa?

And who pays for the background check?

[libertarianjim]

doing away with the minimum wage would greatly decrease illegal immigration (and also decrease unemployment)

Wow. That gets me so unbelievably hot.

I also believe that abolishing the social welfare system would do wonders -- but as that's politically impractical, simply denying all but non-emergency services and benefits to illegals would probably do a lot to help.

[nottaprettygal]

Isn't the whole idea of them being in the US that they don't have $1000 for a visa?

And who pays for the background check?

Yeah. And if they want to be considered for actual citizenship within that six years, they also have to pay another $1000. I'm guessing that you and I will pay for it.

[Kilby]

What about the protests? Are people here at INTPC vexed by them?

[mgb]

Yeah. And if they want to be considered for actual citizenship within that six years, they also have to pay another $1000. I'm guessing that you and I will pay for it.

Well, you.

And it seems like they are needed as much as they are despised.

[Architectonic]

but as that's politically impractical, simply denying all but non-emergency services and benefits to illegals would probably do a lot to help.

A two tier system is probably the best intermediate solution (before massive devolution of government) - but I was under the impression that this was already the case (I don't know much about US law though) - illegals are denied most non-emergency services.

[libertarianjim]

What about the protests? Are people here at INTPC vexed by them?

I'm incredibly vexed. I'm torn on the issue of immigration (between being an economic libertarian and a foriegn policy conservative) and the protests are turning my attitudes more toward the conservative response.

[mgb]

I'm incredibly vexed. I'm torn on the issue of immigration (between being an economic libertarian and a foriegn policy conservative) and the protests are turning my attitudes more toward the conservative response.

Why? Because people should have the right to protest?

[charred_heart]

As others have mentioned, it's impossible to close the borders. Even though the idea itself is impractical, I doubt that jailing illegals caught crossing the border would actually curtail immigration.

I think that the only way to slow immigration is to create more jobs in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. We would have to make it easier for them to sell their products in the U.S., and tightening border security would make it harder to move these goods across the border (since every truckload may contain hidden illegal migrants). So any idea involving border security is not a good one.

While we're creating new jobs elsewhere, we should invoke stiffer penalties and make it less profitable for employers to hire illegal immigrants. First though, we'd have to create a system for easily identifying those who are legally able to work in the United States. This way employers cannot falsely claim that they attempted to determine a person's legal status.

The bottom line is that we should offer amnesty to illegals already here, but under the condition that a system is created to easily identify legal immigrants. Those found hiring illegal immigrants would face harsh penalities. And in an attempt to create a long-term solution we would help to create jobs elsewhere.

I've done a decent amount of reading on immigration, and these are the best solutions that I have read.

The ones who disagree with you are the ones who have more say on the issue. So the problems will never end! hurray!

When issues like this can only be resolved by the side with more influence/strength, it makes me feel like we live in a jungle.

[charred_heart]

doing away with the minimum wage would greatly decrease illegal immigration (and also decrease unemployment)
There's a job opening at microsoft. care to work as a software programmer for $3 a week?
the minimum wage doesn't just apply to mexicans. all those 'interesting' jobs that do not fall under any legal guidelines would undergo a dramatic change if there was no minimum wage. That includes anything in the media/arts, tourism, engineering, computer industries

why do you think all the russians are trying to get to the US?

[libertarianjim]

Why? Because people should have the right to protest?

Of course people have the right to protest. Don't be silly. But we all know that many of the protesters are illegals and do NOT have the right to be here. I find it particuarly galling that they would take to the streets in public protest to influence a process that the have no legal standing to influence in the first place.

[Wotton]

If someone really wants to work in software, he'll find some way to finance himself so he can afford to work there for $3 a week.


I'm conflicted on the issue of illegal immigrants. I think everyone should have to jump through the hoops to get visas and citizenship before they switch countries, because the one thing about joining a new country is that you play by their rules whenever possible--why else would you go (but because their rules are better)? Then again, it's not like every person who enters the US takes half of my share of "Opportunity" from me. Rather than tolerating awful situations out of fear, I'd prefer that illegal aliens pay their taxes, have the chance to work in decent conditions, and feel confident enough to get (relatively cheap) preventative medical care if they need it. It's fine to try to keep the numbers down low enough that we can absorb the new blood without too much difficulty; trying to keep people out just to follow the letter of the law or because of thoughtless xenophobia sounds ridiculous.

[Dr. Haight]

Of course people have the right to protest. Don't be silly. But we all know that many of the protesters are illegals and do NOT have the right to be here. I find it particuarly galling that they would take to the streets in public protest to influence a process that the have no legal standing to influence in the first place.

But are they not protesting the very fact that they are deemed,"illegal," in the first place; their options seem to be limited in this respect.

Don't be fooled libertarianjim, the government and its business partners want them to be here, they just want them to STFU and work for minimum wage, or less. And they do have a legal standing, in my view, because they pay sales tax and income tax in most instances.

[mgb]

Of course people have the right to protest. Don't be silly. But we all know that many of the protesters are illegals and do NOT have the right to be here. I find it particuarly galling that they would take to the streets in public protest to influence a process that the have no legal standing to influence in the first place.

I think the stance is funny. Who DOES have the right to be in the US? These people are poor as dirt and come to the US to work all the shitty jobs Americans are too good for, isn't accepting those people kind of one of the foundations of what America is?

And I wouldn't be so naive as to think this is only illegal immigrants protesting. It's probably their friends and families as well, all who are probably legal citizens. I think the size of the protests are a testement to their importance to those these issues affect.

Or would you prefer just to never see them as they wash your dishes and pick your fruit?

[nottaprettygal]

When issues like this can only be resolved by the side with more influence/strength, it makes me feel like we live in a jungle.

What I like about the immigration debate is that it's only hurting the Republican party. Democrats are just sitting pretty while members of the Republican party argue amongst themselves over where their interests lie. It's nice to see them divided for once. What's it going to be? Protection of jobs* and national security or protection of corporate interests?


*Although there is no evidence that immigration increases unemployment for American-born workers.

[sbw]

...and a pissed off business community--the best of all possible outcomes in my opinion.

we don't DO that here. perhaps you should check out france.

Scott

[sbw]

doing away with the minimum wage would greatly decrease illegal immigration (and also decrease unemployment)

most people hate this answer. but it would be a huge step in the right direction.

Scott

[mgb]

most people hate this answer. but it would be a huge step in the right direction.

Scott

Maybe you'd care to explain why it would be such a huge step in the right direction?

[libertarianjim]

But are they not protesting the very fact that they are deemed,"illegal," in the first place; their options seem to be limited in this respect.

Don't be fooled libertarianjim, the government and its business partners want them to be here, they just want them to STFU and work for minimum wage, or less. And they do have a legal standing, in my view, because they pay sales tax and income tax in most instances.

If they don't want to be deemed illegal (no quotes necessary, because that's what they are) they should go through the visa or citizenship process.

I'm know you're right about business wanting illegal immigrants. That doesn't mean I'm cool with it. There are laws on the books against hiring illegals, and employers who do should be fined.

Tourists pay sales tax too. Should they be influencing domestic policy? And I don't buy for a second that most illegals pay income tax. That would require the use of an SSN -- which, if an illegal has one, has been fraudulently obtained.


I think the stance is funny. Who DOES have the right to be in the US? These people are poor as dirt and come to the US to work all the shitty jobs Americans are too good for, isn't accepting those people kind of one of the foundations of what America is?

Who has the right to be here? Whoever the US Government says is a citizen or otherwise here legally. Countries have the right to control their borders and admit or exclude individuals as they see fit, and the US is no exception. There are legal avenues for immigrants to come here, and they are welcomed. And for the record, that system of legal avenues needs overhauling and expansion.


And I wouldn't be so naive as to think this is only illegal immigrants protesting. It's probably their friends and families as well, all who are probably legal citizens. I think the size of the protests are a testement to their importance to those these issues affect.


...But we all know that many of the protesters are illegals and do NOT have the right to be here.

Many. Not all. Maybe not even most. Don't insinuate that I'm "naive" by misrepresenting what I say. I'm quite sure there are a good many citizens there -- some out of concern for family or friends that are here illegally and some are anti-administration protesters (International ANSWER was on hand at one of the rallies).


Or would you prefer just to never see them as they wash your dishes and pick your fruit?

Nice use of the race card. Reeeeeeeeal subtle.

[mgb]

Nice use of the race card. Reeeeeeeeal subtle.

I try. But let's face it, it's a pretty racially motivated issue. These aren't well spoken Englishmen we are talking about here.

It's funny, for a libertarian, you sure give a lot of power to governments? Shouldn't you be fundamentally opposed to any sort of government intervention on the workforce of your country? Sounds like you want freedom and liberty, but only if it's for you. Wouldn't allowing immigrants into the US on a more fluid basis (getting rid of the word "illegal" in front of immigrant for a start) be more along the lines of a libertarian point of view?

I know it seems like I'm just talking to you, but addressing your libertarian-ness, but there is a bigger picture too.

[libertarianjim]

I try. But let's face it, it's a pretty racially motivated issue. These aren't well spoken Englishmen we are talking about here.

It's funny, for a libertarian, you sure give a lot of power to governments? Shouldn't you be fundamentally opposed to any sort of government intervention on the workforce of your country? Sounds like you want freedom and liberty, but only if it's for you. Wouldn't allowing immigrants into the US on a more fluid basis (getting rid of the word "illegal" in front of immigrant for a start) be more along the lines of a libertarian point of view?

I'll concede that my position here is inconsistent with my professed ideology. You're absolutely correct there. As I did say above, I would like to see an expansion of the immigration policy, which is horrbly outdated. But the fact is, border control matters, and steps to that effect must be taken. Call it Thomas Hobbes' influence on me at a young age.

[coffeezombie]

most people hate this answer. but it would be a huge step in the right direction.

Yeah, that's all we need is people making less money than they already do. The "loss of jobs" story is a myth. Companies hire as few workers as possible no matter what. If the minimum wage goes up, all it means is that business owners will be walking away with less money.

I recommend the first episode of Morgan Spurlock's "30 Days" series to anyone who thinks that a living wage, let alone a minimum wage, is a bad idea.

[Lucas]

It is a matter of principle: they are illegal and broke the law and they know it.

If we do need workers, then they can be here on temporary status. Remove illegals here slowly. We spend money in Iraq to protect our country, we can spend the money here to protect our country by removing law-breakers.

Protect our country? Ha! From what?

The economies of CA, AZ, NM and TX are completely dependent on that labor. Govenor Napolitano (AZ) has said that the two biggest industries, hospitality and tourism, would effectively collapse without the illicit labor force. Secondly, how are you going to 'remove' people who have children here (many American citizens who have never seen Latin America)????

These people literally support, clean, and build America. And they DO pay taxes. They pay taxes everytime they buy something. The ones that have fake social security cards/green cards put into the system, yet can not take out benefits. In the end, they put in more than they take out. They are an asset, not felons!

Amnesty, followed up with stricter control of illegal immigration, would better protect our country than the xenophobic and fascist knee-jerk reactions currently proposed. Get real all you immigrant haters.

[Dr. Haight]

Protect our country? Ha! From what?

The economies of CA, AZ, NM and TX are completely dependent on that labor. Govenor Napolitano (AZ) has said that the two biggest industries, hospitality and tourism, would effectively collapse without the illicit labor force. Secondly, how are you going to 'remove' people who have children here (many American citizens who have never seen Latin America)????

These people literally support, clean, and build America. And they DO pay taxes. They pay taxes everytime they buy something. The ones that have fake social security cards/green cards put into the system, yet can not take out benefits. In the end, they put in more than they take out. They are an asset, not felons!


You got it! :cheers:

[mgb]

Amnesty, followed up with stricter control of illegal immigration, would better protect our country than the xenophobic and fascist knee-jerk reactions currently proposed. Get real all you immigrant haters.

I have to ask, they already tried the amnesty thing and it still became a "problem" later. Why not just be more accepting of them in the first place rather than trying to control them? If there is a place for them, why not just fit them in?

I can see the automatic reaction: they are stealing jobs from Americans. But they just aren't, like any economy the US economy isn't a zero-sum operation.

[Kilby]

Protect our country? Ha! From what?

The economies of CA, AZ, NM and TX are completely dependent on that labor. Govenor Napolitano (AZ) has said that the two biggest industries, hospitality and tourism, would effectively collapse without the illicit labor force. Secondly, how are you going to 'remove' people who have children here (many American citizens who have never seen Latin America)????

These people literally support, clean, and build America. And they DO pay taxes. They pay taxes everytime they buy something. The ones that have fake social security cards/green cards put into the system, yet can not take out benefits. In the end, they put in more than they take out. They are an asset, not felons!

Amnesty, followed up with stricter control of illegal immigration, would better protect our country than the xenophobic and fascist knee-jerk reactions currently proposed. Get real all you immigrant haters.

I haven't seen anyone post here who is an immigrant hater, though I may have missed something or perhaps you're referring to others. I think "fascist" is a little extreme considering some people just want the law(or new laws) to be enforced. People can't agree on religion and culture half the time, but should law rule supreme? There is certainly contention about how important illegal immigrants are for our country, but many will say that they broke the law, plain and simple. Therefore, we should use legal immigrants. Others will say that it is tough luck for the families, b/c they knew they were breaking the law and they will just have to deal with it. Again I'm merely answering as others would, don't take this to be my viewpoint, as I am still gathering facts on the matter to form my viewpoint.

[Dr. Haight]

I'll concede that my position here is inconsistent with my professed ideology. You're absolutely correct there. As I did say above, I would like to see an expansion of the immigration policy, which is horrbly outdated. But the fact is, border control matters, and steps to that effect must be taken. Call it Thomas Hobbes' influence on me at a young age.


Oh, no. Big Jim...you may have to change your User Name, because I think you just ran into the wall that I hit back when I was 25. For you to be a Libertarian, with a capital L, you have to open the borders and pull in the military from all those bases (170 of them, the last time I checked). Jim, I think your about two years away from crossing over to the dark side, where consistency exits, even though practicality most often does not.

Peace, my friend.

[mgb]

I haven't seen anyone post here who is an immigrant hater, though I may have missed something or perhaps you're referring to others. I think "fascist" is a little extreme considering some people just want the law(or new laws) to be enforced. People can't agree on religion and culture half the time, but should law rule supreme? There is certainly contention about how important illegal immigrants are for our country, but many will say that they broke the law, plain and simple. Therefore, we should use legal immigrants. Others will say that it is tough luck for the families, b/c they knew they were breaking the law and they will just have to deal with it. Again I'm merely answering as others would, don't take this to be my viewpoint, as I am still gathering facts on the matter to form my viewpoint.

Maybe the laws are wrong? Isn't that's what is at hand here?

[Kilby]

I think many US citizens don't want people just walking in here as they please. I sense you don't agree with this, but hey, neither does our congress, so I don't how a compromise is going to come about. I just feel like regular Americans (throughout the heartland, if you will) are going to become or already have become quite angry about two things, 1) they came in without following the rules 2)they are protesting and saying and doing things that aren't helping their cause.

[Dr. Haight]

Maybe the laws are wrong? Isn't that's what is at hand here?

Dude...blonde, good looking, reasonable, and insightful...where the hell did you come from. I suspected that you were an alien (from another planet, not tan-hard working guy from the south), it just took me awhile to make a positive confirmation.

[mgb]

Dude...blonde, good looking, reasonable, and insightful...where the hell did you come from. I suspected that you were an alien (from another planet, not tan-hard working guy from the south), it just took me awhile to make a positive confirmation.

Awww shucks. :blush:

[Kilby]

I think it is funny that the title is "close the gates?". I keep thinking of a US map with these big gates swinging down from Utah and Missouri, think of the devastation. Perchance the gates would be better left open.

[Dr. Haight]

I think it is funny that the title is "close the gates?". I keep thinking of a US map with these big gates swinging down from Utah and Missouri, think of the devastation. Perchance the gates would be better left open.

I wrote that because I recall hearing someone respond to Pat Buchanan by saying, "Yeah, now that were in...let's close the gates." It has stuck with me as being very insightful and concise. And, of course, I love sarcasm; especially when it's intelligent.

[Kilby]

I like it. It is a good title. Buchanan for president?

[C.J.Woolf]

I don't pretend to have any solutions, but my suspicious and cynical self asks: Why is this a high-profile issue now? I smell another Republican wedge issue to distract people from the ongoing clusterfuck in Iraq, the President's cherry-picked propaganda for it, the corruption, etc.

Only, as nottaprettygal observed, this time the wedge is cutting against the GOP.

[libertarianjim]

Buchanan for president?

That's already been tried. Primary voters said no in 92 and 96, and general election voters said hell no in 2000 when he ran on the Reform ticket.

Well, except in Palm Beach County where people can't read ballots.

[eyebyte_atWork]

From everything I have seen this is an interesting issue.... mainly because it is very confusing as to what we are all talking about.

1. On the one hand we have people who believe this legal issue is a moral one.
2. Those in government politics will have us believing this is a security issue.
3. No one has any real solutions - but that does not stop the rhetoric.
4. Crazy rantings about jobs and welfare... mainly to incite emotions and remove logic.


Ok - Here is my take on this....

1. This is a legal issue... not a moral one.

Many people support criminalizing this indicating that this is immoral. "They broke the law and as should should be punished - not rewarded". Complete crap. The founders of this country were criminals by English standards when they decided to break away(the term treason comes to mind - is there any worse crime than the breaking of trust?). Big deal. Yes they broke the law (the illegals) but generally contribute more than they destory while here. Morality is a completely different issue.

2. Security Issue - Solution is simple - document them with a complete background verification check. This can be a new industry here - paid by tax dollars.

"But thats my tax money being wasted..."

NO - ITS not. The tax money will be paid to American personell who will spend the money supporting his/her family in accordance to the American way of life (over spending and shit). This has been done with the building of prisons - it creates jobs based on a social need.

3. Real Solutions - Certainly exporting, killing, inprisoning illegals are not viable solutions. The solution I tend to agree with is one where we document them - and allow them to work with a temporary visa.


4. Crazy Rants - These rantings seem to be more inflamitory than constructive and largely inaccurate or completely wrong. Anyone who believes that illegals come here for a free ride believes that blacks have lower IQ's than whites. Illegals come here and work jobs we hate to do... and get paid much less than they legally should. If they have to subsidize this income with welfare it is OUR FAULT for not enforcing better (legal) pay. But then again - we want cheap housing and products. Certainly we do not want to pay our maids and janitors double what we pay them now. Like someone else mentioned here - they cannot recieve retirement or other benefits that they pay for when paying their taxes - but pay sales tax on everything they buy here just like the rest of us.

I also agree with other posters that this all seems to be coming up as a political obscuring event.

[Dr. Haight]

--eyebyte,

Your practical approach is right on the money. Again, your observations are right on the money as well. And yes, it is necessary to separate political rhetoric from real solutions, however our politicians are rather good at mixing the two for purposes of confusing the voters. With that said, in my theoretical world, what would be the best solution for America--or any other nation for that matter--philosophically?

In other words, what is the best political philosophy for addressing the issue of border/immigration policy? For instance, give me a "perfect world" scenario and let me work with it.

Here is how I see this so far:

On one side, we have the closed border advocates. However, I feel that closing the border will raise labor costs, strain corporate profits, and eventually leave American citizens with an inability to purchase the goods and services that American Corps produce. This would ultimately lead to a ballot box revolution, ending in forced redistribution of corporate profits in order to meet the basic needs of the US populace. Yes?

On the other end, we have the open border advocates. I can see the fear of draining resources and the us paying for them mentality, yet cannot this be overcome by tax reform. For example, what about an increase in sales tax, and, a flat personal income tax to offset the tax train on public social programs. Is it that simple? I think that it might be.

In reality, however, the third way (ironically) will be the only way, simply because it represents the status quo. And in general, people prefer security and familiarity to that of liberty and change. Hence, everything will remain as it has with the partnership of govt. and biz maintaining its slow leak policy to meet the cheap labor needs of corporations who feed the campaign coffers of our government representatives--...and the wheel...goes round...and round.

So, what am I missing here?

[sbw]

Buchanan for president?

biden over mccain. I put a few bucks on biden +4.

Scott

[eyebyte_atWork]

Hence, everything will remain as it has with the partnership of govt. and biz maintaining its slow leak policy to meet the cheap labor needs of corporations who feed the campaign coffers of our government representatives--...and the wheel...goes round...and round.


True - very true.

[Kilby]

That's already been tried. Primary voters said no in 92 and 96, and general election voters said hell no in 2000 when he ran on the Reform ticket.

Well, except in Palm Beach County where people can't read ballots.

Yeah, I was joking, I should of used one of those emoticons.

[Kilby]

biden over mccain. I put a few bucks on biden +4.

Scott

That's ballsy. The confidence you exude this early in the ballgame is impressive

[mgb]

biden over mccain. I put a few bucks on biden +4.

Scott

Hey, what happened to you telling me all about the benefits of a minimum wageless system?

[sbw]

Hey, what happened to you telling me all about the benefits of a minimum wageless system?

I didn't say I WANTED him to win. he's kind of a tool, actually. but--he's more charismatic than mccain...and you'd think there would be some kind of anti-present-ruling-party backlash, as the war drags on and the nation goes bankrupt, even though the democrats have done a terrible job of capitalizing on such things.

also, nobody wants hilary, so the dems probly won't let her run.

Scott

edit: did anyone see biden on bill maher last week?

[sbw]

That's ballsy. The confidence you exude this early in the ballgame is impressive

does anybody know if you really can bet on this shit in england? might be worth a vacation.

I want to get in early--the detroit pistons were 5-1 before the season started, but only 6-5 now.

Scott

[htb]

What is the best border/immigration policy?Make Mexico worth living in.

You only need know one naturalized citizen to feel very little sympathy for those who intrude and break justified laws instead of following, from their homes, the sacrifices of those who made the northern country more prosperous.

[libertarianjim]

Yeah, I was joking, I should of used one of those emoticons.

I would have said it anyway.

[mgb]

I didn't say I WANTED him to win. he's kind of a tool, actually. but--he's more charismatic than mccain...and you'd think there would be some kind of anti-present-ruling-party backlash, as the war drags on and the nation goes bankrupt, even though the democrats have done a terrible job of capitalizing on such things.

also, nobody wants hilary, so the dems probly won't let her run.

Scott

edit: did anyone see biden on bill maher last week?

Hey, what happened to you telling me all about the benefits of a minimum wageless system?

[Hustler]

None of this stuff really matters. In due time, Mexico and America will be the same country (as will Canada and possibly one or more of the northernmost Central American nations), and the North American-Central American border will be much smaller and easier to maintain.

By the way, I know an illegal Panamanian immigrant who is making $300,000/year. They don't all low-wage jobs.

[Kilby]

Ann Coulter was talking about the immigration situation on O'Reilly. I know everyone watched it. She makes a good case, no?

[nottaprettygal]

Ann Coulter was talking about the immigration situation on O'Reilly. I know everyone watched it. She makes a good case, no?

She makes a good case for why some people shouldn't reproduce, yes.

[Kilby]

She makes a good case for why some people shouldn't reproduce, yes.


:sadbanana:

[Pooja]

She makes a good case for why some people shouldn't reproduce, yes.
:cheers:
She recently came to my college to give a talk..I snuck out early, because the woman makes me nauseous.
Here's a quote from her (it's actually a relatively tame one):

"Cheney is my ideal man. Because he's solid. He's funny. He's very handsome. He was a football player. People don't think about him as the glamour type because he's a serious person, he wears glasses, he's lost his hair. But he's a very handsome man. And you cannot imagine him losing his temper, which I find extremely sexy. Men who get upset and lose their tempers and claim to be sensitive males: talk about girly boys. No, there's a reason hurricanes are named after women and homosexual men, it's one of our little methods of social control. We're supposed to fly off the handle. "

*She needs to be deported to a 3rd world country...

[Kilby]

:cheers:
She recently came to my college to give a talk..I snuck out early, because the woman makes me nauseous.
Here's a quote from her (it's actually a relatively tame one):

"Cheney is my ideal man. Because he's solid. He's funny. He's very handsome. He was a football player. People don't think about him as the glamour type because he's a serious person, he wears glasses, he's lost his hair. But he's a very handsome man. And you cannot imagine him losing his temper, which I find extremely sexy. Men who get upset and lose their tempers and claim to be sensitive males: talk about girly boys. No, there's a reason hurricanes are named after women and homosexual men, it's one of our little methods of social control. We're supposed to fly off the handle. "

*She needs to be deported to a 3rd world country...

:sadbanana: :rant:

:mad:

[C.J.Woolf]

"And you cannot imagine [Cheney] losing his temper..."
BWAHAHAHAHA! I can, easily. Has Coulter never seen the snarl he affects in his less guarded moments? The kind of snarl that says "I'd bite your head off if the cameras weren't on me." He looks perpetually paranoid and pissed-off.

Bush has a well-documented volcanic temper (which he keeps out of the public eye), and Coulter digs him too.

Coulter looks like someone who likes her men mean.

[Kilby]

May 1 boycott. How do you think this will affect things?

[wildcat]

The Congress lost it a long time ago. They do not live in the real world.
And how are they going to arrange the expulsion of eleven million Americans?
And then you buid the wall, ha? In Germany they built a wall to keep the people in.
They will arrive straight via the Californian Coast.
Your descendants will not speak English.
Languages come and go.
There is nothing wrong with Spanish, though. It is easier to learn than English.

Read history. The Romans built a wall too. It was called the Hadrian wall. They built it in a wrong place.
Latin died soon after.

ps. Not that we are any wiser. You do not face a real dilemma: America is western and Christian in its entirety. The only policy for you is to let them come and you should settle them peacefully. Then the US. will survive. If you do not let them come you will be drowned in blood.
We are far worse off. The people who come in here and who will take over us are Arabs. Our descendants will speak Arabic.

Actually I envy you.

[C.J.Woolf]

And how are they going to arrange the expulsion of eleven million Americans?
And then you buid the wall, ha?
There will be no mass expulsion, and there will be no wall. I'm afraid the elected U.S. government truly represents the people: they piss and moan about this or that problem, but the only solutions they propose are simpleminded, impractical, and just plain mean. Then they do nothing about it. Pissed-off drunks in a bar say kick 'em all out and build a wall. I expect better from the government, but we're not getting it.

[25fd]

I am talking as an outsider. I live in Canada.
First question I would ask is: Are they a burden? Do the US governments support these people in any way? I remember the same thing happening in Germany, which I think, gets a lot more people than US and Germany has less than half the US population. After a study was conducted it showed that these people were contributing immensely to the German economy. They actually need them. The same story is happening in UK. They need them as well. I tend to believe we have the same case in US.
We need each other. I love Americans for being such big spenders. They even get into debt in order to buy mostly things they don't need. Things manufactured in other countries. That debt finances the growth in places like China, India, and even Canada. They use the Mexicans as we use the Americans.

[eyebyte_atWork]

There will be no mass expulsion, and there will be no wall. I'm afraid the elected U.S. government truly represents the people: they piss and moan about this or that problem, but the only solutions they propose are simpleminded, impractical, and just plain mean. Then they do nothing about it. Pissed-off drunks in a bar say kick 'em all out and build a wall. I expect better from the government, but we're not getting it.

THere is probably something greater at work here - I fail to believe that this issue is all that important all of a sudden. Why now? This has been going on for a long time (it took a while for 11 million to cross the border).

I think you are right about not getting our tax dollars worth from lawmakers. But then again - maybe they are working a different agenda. Who benefits from all of this contraversy? Who? We find the answer to that and we may also find the answer why this is a big thing nowdays.

It has been a political trick to call upon the population's patriotism in order to manipulate them. Patriotism means different things to different people and as such the call to patriotism may be in play to shake the tree to see what works and who is on what side. Then again - patriotism may be being used to divide the population (which also works for controlling people). In any case - this call to patriotism is a bullshit move by someone (or a group of someones) who does not have the populations interest at heart.

Look at us - we have devoted time on the forum, in this thread to talk about an issue that lacks clarity and instills confusion. We are being pwned.

[Dr. Haight]

--eyebyte,
You are so reasonable.

(On a side note:
Stephen Colbert had an episode the other day in which he quoted a white house official regarding the number "11 million" immigrants. He noted the time that statement was made, then he quoted Ted Kennedy who said three minutes later, "There are 12 million illigal immigrants in the US."
Colbert commented, "That's one million in three minutes...at this rate, the entire country of Mexico will be here by the end of the month...OH MY GOD!")

[eyebyte_atWork]

--eyebyte,
You are so reasonable.

(On a side note:
Stephen Colbert had an episode the other day in which he quoted a white house official regarding the number "11 million" immigrants. He noted the time that statement was made, then he quoted Ted Kennedy who said three minutes later, "There are 12 million illigal immigrants in the US."
Colbert commented, "That's one million in three minutes...at this rate, the entire country of Mexico will be here by the end of the month...OH MY GOD!")


lol - I love the Colbert Report.

[C.J.Woolf]

It has been a political trick to call upon the population's patriotism in order to manipulate them. Patriotism means different things to different people and as such the call to patriotism may be in play to shake the tree to see what works and who is on what side. Then again - patriotism may be being used to divide the population (which also works for controlling people). In any case - this call to patriotism is a bullshit move by someone (or a group of someones) who does not have the populations interest at heart.
This particular con game is called nativism, and it's a very old one. I'm sure Wikipedia has an article on it, but I'm too lazy to link.

[Kilby]

interesting...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/20/AR2006042000842.html

[charred_heart]

interesting...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/20/AR2006042000842.html
lol Minuteman !! The worst name for an organisation since Micro-Soft!!!!

This is stupid. Fences don't keep people out. Fences with land mines on the other side however could do the trick :thumbup:

... people should try to THINK before talking (and making up names like Minuteman!)

[Kilby]

The minutemen were a group in our revolutionary war. Maybe you know this and were joking, but if you are in the Sudan, I wouldn't expect you to know such a little tidbit about American history. But yes, Microsoft is quite an odd name, but it worked, so will the minutemen make things work?

I will not let this thread die. I guard it will valor under the auspices of Doctor Haight.:bigguns: :llama: :duel: :laser: :vader:

[charred_heart]

The minutemen were a group in our revolutionary war. Maybe you know this and were joking, but if you are in the Sudan, I wouldn't expect you to know such a little tidbit about American history.
Didn't know about that, but associating grand historical events to their fruitless efforts is even more proof of their impotency! MWAHAHAHA!

...I don't know why I'm going on anymore. Americans, be good. I'll shut up now.

[awesome]

None of this stuff really matters. In due time, Mexico and America will be the same country (as will Canada and possibly one or more of the northernmost Central American nations), and the North American-Central American border will be much smaller and easier to maintain.

Why is this without doubt?

[Neville]

Get rid of birthright citizenship.

[C.J.Woolf]

Get rid of birthright citizenship.
It would be fun to watch native-born Americans sweat a citizenship test. :popcorn:

[MadamI'madaM]

It would be fun to watch native-born Americans sweat a citizenship test. :popcorn:

I've recently had that thought as well.

Although I would prefer an intelligence based suffrage test to a history/government based citizenship test. Even morons deserve protection under the Bill of Rights.

[Neville]

It would be fun to watch native-born Americans sweat a citizenship test. :popcorn:

There would still be blood right.

[mchampagne]

In the US, and particularly in California, border/immigration policy is a hot issue. I have thought about this one for a long time and have yet to reach a comfortable conclusion; maybe one just does not exist...I don't know.
So I am reaching out to you, fellow INTPs, for understanding and the need to put this one to bed.

What is the best border/immigration policy? Should the border be closed permanently? Should they be open completely?
Is the "slow leak" policy, which the US employs, the best possible scenario?
Or, are arbitrary quota systems the way to go?

And finally, if you want to get rid of all the illegal immigrants--11 million in the US--how do you accomplish this task?

(Stephen Colbert suggests that we invite all the illegal immigrants in the US to a water park in San Diego. The catch is, the slide ends in Mexico City..."Wow, that would be a hell of a swimsuit wedgie.")

Nothing is going to happen. Why do illegal immigrants come here? Generally for work. Why can they find jobs? Because employers like cheap labor. Why do they like cheap labor? Because it reduces cost. How much does it reduce cost? Why don't ya ask these guys I saw up the street the other day, fighting each other to get in a van to take whatever cash the developer's willing to offer. Imagine the price of everything from real estate to fresh produce doubling or quadrupling, with no equivalent profit increase for the employer. Not going to happen. You're talking about widespread, cost-driven price inflation and a Wall Street nightmare.

Immigration has been the US's economic policy for at least the past 20 years. The powers that be wouldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole. Notice I haven't even gotten to the politics of this yet.

[lowtech redneck]

It would be fun to watch native-born Americans sweat a citizenship test. :popcorn:

Yes, but I think Neville was talking about citizenship on the basis of being born in the United States, not on the basis of being born to at least one American citizen.

I agree with Neville on this, though I think such a policy should also include free entry (basically a monitored version of "open borders") and residency for Mexican citizens without a criminal record.

[Architectonic]

I personally would like non-US born citizens to be eligible to become president of the USA. I don't like this unfair discrimination!

[doob]

Close the gates? Hell yeah! Then deport all non citizens from south of the U.S. border to their home country (cause when we talk 'bout illegal immigrants we're not talkin' 'bout Canadians and Europeans). Then we Americans can have our jobs back, and the price for a head of lettuce will jump to $55, strawberries will be $13.99 a pound, a good ol' steak will cost, I dunno... $153 a pound.

I think this is closer to the truth:


I don't know.
My position is the expected one if you are a radical leftist thinker--or non-thinker depending on your position. I feel that the issue, with Mexico in particular, is more about why they need to come here, rather than what to do now; maybe dealing with the former will help solve the later.

For example, they are here because businesses want them here; cheap labor is the fuel for US economic growth, and for all of US history for that matter (Oh yeah...and the occasional annexation of other nation). Therefore, if the agricorps would not have went to Mexico, bought up their lands (in most cases), kicked the workers off the lands, and forced a supply and demand catastrophe that could only result in the need to migrate, then the situation would be quite different.

So, in my opinion, it is a cycle of exploitation that I cannot figure out how to rectify in any practical sense.

The U.S. has to rethink it's policies, and guide the IMF and World Bank to stop it's predatory policies that induce poor countries to privatize profitable industries and drive foreign farmer's off their land by creating an environment where they can't compete with U.S. agribusiness because of subsidies.

I dunno, Bill Clinton's recent admission* how U.S. Agriculture Policy hindered Haiti those policies are similar to those in NAFTA which has devastated Mexico's farmer's (esp. corn). I do think his admissions are very modest in contrast to the damage they created.

*
Since 1981, the United States has followed a policy, until the last year or so when we started rethinking it, that we rich countries that produce a lot of food should sell it to poor countries and relieve them of the burden of producing their own food, so, thank goodness, they can leap directly into the industrial era. It has not worked. It may have been good for some of my farmers in Arkansas, but it has not worked. It was a mistake. It was a mistake that I was a party to. I am not pointing the finger at anybody. I did that. I have to live every day with the consequences of the lost capacity to produce a rice crop in Haiti to feed those people, because of what I did. Nobody else.

That's a remarkable statement. He later referred to the destruction of Haiti's rice farmers as a "devil's bargain. He added this:

And it's [the old ag policy] failed everywhere it's been tried. And you just can't take the food chain out of production. And it also undermines a lot of the culture, the fabric of life, the sense of self-determination.

[Gnome]

The U.S. has to rethink it's policies, and guide the IMF and World Bank to stop it's predatory policies that induce poor countries to privatize profitable industries and drive foreign farmer's off their land by creating an environment where they can't compete with U.S. agribusiness because of subsidies.

I dunno, Bill Clinton's recent admission* how U.S. Agriculture Policy hindered Haiti those policies are similar to those in NAFTA which has devastated Mexico's farmer's (esp. corn). I do think his admissions are very modest in contrast to the damage they created.

This. We created a great deal of the problem through Nafta. We destroyed their ability to make a living farming, and now we complain because they came here for work, which was a key intended consequence of Nafta.

I see most of the anti-immigration stuff as the usual scapegoating of a population by the elite to deflect responsibility for the economic woes folks are suffering in this country, largely again because of the policies of the corporations and the elite.

Some poor migrant worker coming over here to work crap jobs for crap pay is not the cause of American's economic woes. Studies consistently show that these workers pump much more money into the US economy than they draw out through social welfare programs. The hype to the contrary is reminiscent of all the "welfare queen" propaganda that served the same exact purpose during the Reagan years.

[Melody]

the proposal that obama would likely promote has an interesting way of treating illegal immigrants. it asks them to admit they have commited wrongdoing, and then offers them ways to repent, like doing community service. it's an approach that has the superficial tenets of both sides of the debate but only actually delivers what the protagonists want while daring the antagonists to ask for what they really want. ahahahah

[pangolin]

the proposal that obama would likely promote has an interesting way of treating illegal immigrants. it asks them to admit they have commited wrongdoing, and then offers them ways to repent, like doing community service. it's an approach that has the superficial tenets of both sides of the debate but only actually delivers what the protagonists want while daring the antagonists to ask for what they really want. ahahahah

Perhaps the penalty should just be to pay all their back taxes (calculated as if they had full time minimum wage jobs for the entire period of residence). And/or, we could fine businesses along a similar line, basically making it non-cost effective to hire illegal workers. Let us please at least require them to learn English and such if they're allowed to stay.

[Gnome]

Perhaps the penalty should just be to pay all their back taxes (calculated as if they had full time minimum wage jobs for the entire period of residence). And/or, we could fine businesses along a similar line, basically making it non-cost effective to hire illegal workers. Let us please at least require them to learn English and such if they're allowed to stay.

Not all taxes are paid on tax day. Every time they buy something, they paid sales tax. Also, I have met many illegals that do pay taxes using something called a Tax ID. Just think on that a minute. Our government is so against them being here, that they created a vehicle for illegals to pay taxes.

The US doesnt have an official language, so until that law is passed, I see no reason to demand anyone learn a particular language.

[kendoiwan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-PII2rSLVo

[Melody]

i like maddox's take:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v259/tocca/ena/immigrant.gif (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=walmart)

[Zelda]

What is the best border/immigration policy?

Set up landmines across the US/Mexico border? Inhumane, yes, but that will keep people out, if that's the goal. Just don't send the illegal immigrants already in the US to Canada.

[kendoiwan]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/281867/april-21-2010/the-word---no-problemo