Illegal Immigrant Births - At U.S Taxpayer's Expense

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by armor99

I cannot speak for others, but as far as I am concerned... this has nothing to do with race or religion, gender, or anything else for that matter. If there were canadians (or any other group) streaming accross the border illegally, I would feel exactly the same way. Just because someone speaks a different language than I do, or has skin of a different shade, makes no difference. As a matter of fact, I see this as a tactic by some to get what they want, even though most of the time it is intellectually dishonest.
It is the easiest thing in the world today to call someone a racist, homophobe, xenophobe, etc, whether it is based in fact.... or nothing at all. Nothing ever happens to the people that make a false accusation. Yet those that are accused, are tainted forever for a crime not committed at all. It is the same as calling someone a child molester, a rapist, or a wife beater. Once the accusation is made you are never looked at the same way again, reguardless of any wrong doing on your part or not. In my opinion, people that engage in this sort of activity are far worse than any racist could ever be, because even a racist will be honest with you about their hatred towards a particular group. Those that choose to "brand" people are not even being honest about what their true motivations are. For them, it was just the most expediant way to get whatever it is that they wanted.

Well you're not speaking for others; others speak for themselves and they speak in loud tones of bigotry -- that's my point! No one is branding anyone else, but surely you're not serious if you think that bigotry does not creep into the debates. And it's precisely why it's difficult to figure out the legitimacy of certain positions. BTW, I find your self-righteous indignity a bit too much to handle -- no one branded you a racist or threw down the race card -- and your notion that "racists" are honest folks and those who brand others as racist are dishonest is baffling and mind-boggling! You paint racists as "honest" in their views about race and those who "brand" others as "dishonest" -- you're tripping over your words and your agenda, which appears to discount the significance that bigotry has in the debate. It might not be what you're debating, but then again, you don't speak for others!

[samclem]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

This issue, like other wedge issues involving race, culture or religion, is very difficult to debate because there is an element of bigotry that motivates a lot of people's views.

Maybe bigotry plays a big role, or maybe it doesn't. The truth is, it's impossible to tell how much of the pro- and anti-open imigration sentiment is driven by bigotry/preference for one's own ethnic group, etc. Luckily, we don't have to figure this out because the issue of bigotry is not relevant, it is just a tired old blunderbuss used to blast away at the other side.

There are people in this country illegally. Illegally. That means they are here against the laws we have agreed, as a nation, to enact. It does not matter what their color is--should it? Why do we want to make that an issue, except as an expedient means to blackmail/denigrate those who are on the other side of this issue.

Just because we can find close-minded people on either side of the issue does not mean that there's nothing more to the debate.

[armor99]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

Well you're not speaking for others; others speak for themselves and they speak in loud tones of bigotry -- that's my point! No one is branding anyone else, but surely you're not serious if you think that bigotry does not creep into the debates. And it's precisely why it's difficult to figure out the legitimacy of certain positions. BTW, I find your self-righteous indignity a bit too much to handle -- no one branded you a racist or threw down the race card -- and your notion that "racists" are honest folks and those who brand others as racist are dishonest is baffling and mind-boggling! You paint racists as "honest" in their views about race and those who "brand" others as "dishonest" -- you're tripping over your words and your agenda, which appears to discount the significance that bigotry has in the debate. It might not be what you're debating, but then again, you don't speak for others!

You might want to re-read what I said.... because it certainly is not any of what you have claimed. I have no "agenda" whatsoever. I was just pointing out that people are often accused of things of which there is no fact or reality, and rarely if ever are there consequences to be paid by the one doing the calling, when these claims are proven baseless. The real problem in america is that no one of a non-minority group can say anything negative about any member of a protected minority group, for fear of being branded a "racist, homophobe, etc. " even if the point the individual is trying to make is true, and based on facts. Obviously, racist people are truly the most loathsome form of person that humanity has to offer. I never claimed otherwise in my posting, and I am making it obvious once again. Does bigotry exist... sure it does, and all of these folks are repulsive, but there are just as many people out there on a permanent "witch hunt" to find people to burn at the stake for no logical reason. People continually try to frame the immigration issue as a "race" issue.... which it is most certainly not. It is a security issue, and a law issue, both of which points I have previously made. If there was a massive population of illegals here from the UK or France, or anywhere else in the world, I would feel exactly the same way.
I also believe that I am entitled to my opinion, just as you are entitled to your own. I believe that I presented a well thought out argument, and did so in a fairly calm and cohesive manner. You on the other hand seem to have a sore spot on this issue... I am sorry if it has offended you...

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Originally Posted by Independent

I recall something about how certain industries would be "crippled" if we didn't have illegal immigrants. I inferred that indicated you thought illegal immigration is "good or desirable".

I tried to change your mind, maybe I succeeded.

My mind hasnt changed about anything. Probably because theres no data to change it. Sure, they're committing a crime. So are a lot of other people. Control of crime and the issues associated costs money. Is controlling this crime the best we can do with our money? I personally dont think so. And without any actual information supporting the decision one way or the other, I'd rather focus on real problems that we have real data on. Like I suggested back about 12 pages ago.

Will we all feel good if we solve the illegal immigration problem once and for all, but social security is allowed to lapse in 30 years because we didnt put the money into that? Is that a good trade? How about if you cant drive from where you live to certain locations because the bridges fell down and there was no money for that. How about if China and Mexico buy the united states outright 30 years from now because their kids were better educated and heck, they're making everything for us as it is.

As far as the bigotry issue, come on. Isnt that fairly self evident? If everyone liked the illegal immigrants, nobody would have a problem with them. Yet we have funny press stories and studies where people guess at the implications and a lot of people have no problems grabbing onto that bad data, followed by their torches and pitchforks. If you want to believe someone is committing evil against you, even though the rational and available data suggests otherwise, that means you DONT LIKE THE PEOPLE. If you know them and dont like them for a valid reason that has nothing to do with race, creed, color or religion, then you're not a racist. If you dont like them because their smelly, dirty, poor, non-english speaking, disease spreading, suckers of the public teat....well....then you're a racist. Because half of that stuff is subjective and the other half is unsupported by the data.

I'll be bowing out of this discussion at this point. I believe the issues in each of our heads are what they are and wont be swayed by dataless discussions or other points of view.

The data that is in evidence is that any cultural, social or economic downsides arent that major, and there are significant benefits to the existing arrangement. Thats different from being an advocate for the situation or believing that its all "good".

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by armor99

You might want to re-read what I said.... because it certainly is not any of what you have claimed. I have no "agenda" whatsoever. I was just pointing out that people are often accused of things of which there is no fact or reality, and rarely if ever are there consequences to be paid by the one doing the calling, when these claims are proven baseless. The real problem in america is that no one of a non-minority group can say anything negative about any member of a protected minority group, for fear of being branded a "racist, homophobe, etc. " even if the point the individual is trying to make is true, and based on facts. Obviously, racist people are truly the most loathsome form of person that humanity has to offer. I never claimed otherwise in my posting, and I am making it obvious once again. Does bigotry exist... sure it does, and all of these folks are repulsive, but there are just as many people out there on a permanent "witch hunt" to find people to burn at the stake for no logical reason. People continually try to frame the immigration issue as a "race" issue.... which it is most certainly not. It is a security issue, and a law issue, both of which points I have previously made. If there was a massive population of illegals here from the UK or France, or anywhere else in the world, I would feel exactly the same way.
I also believe that I am entitled to my opinion, just as you are entitled to your own. I believe that I presented a well thought out argument, and did so in a fairly calm and cohesive manner. You on the other hand seem to have a sore spot on this issue... I am sorry if it has offended you...

I can read; perhaps you don't like what I read from your posts. And you have not offended me at all. Do I have a sore spot on issues of this sort? Well, I confess that I do because it's annoying to me that many folks want to intellectualize about the issue, and neglect the emotional content of the issue that moves many people to some of these positions. Bigotry or race might be intellectually irrelevant to the issue, but in the real world, issues are seldom, if ever, solved or divorced from their emotional (and sometimes irrational) content.

I don't think that the legitimacy of anyone's arguments on this debate suffer because of "branding" the race card -- I think we've really moved beyond prior tactics of discrediting an argument by "race card" proxy. I just wish you would recognize that and stop the old tirade against people who raise the emotional baggage associated with the debate.

[armor99]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

I can read; perhaps you don't like what I read from your posts. And you have not offended me at all. Do I have a sore spot on issues of this sort? Well, I confess that I do because it's annoying to me that many folks want to intellectualize about the issue, and neglect the emotional content of the issue that moves many people to some of these positions. Bigotry or race might be intellectually irrelevant to the issue, but in the real world, issues are seldom, if ever, solved or divorced from their emotional (and sometimes irrational) content.

I don't think that the legitimacy of anyone's arguments on this debate suffer because of "branding" the race card -- I think we've really moved beyond prior tactics of discrediting an argument by "race card" proxy. I just wish you would recognize that and stop the old tirade against people who raise the emotional baggage associated with the debate.

Ok then agreed.... race is not the issue for illegal immigration in America. Maybe I can learn from you as well. What are some of the things that you would do to help solve the problem? Obviously the way it is going now is just not working for either side. What are some of your ideas to help make a fair equitable solution for everyone? I outlined some of the policies that I thnk the US would have to enact, to make things better. Maybe you agree, maybe not. What do you think?

[samclem]

ChrisC,
You mentioned that we need to move beyond the present policies, because they are not working. But you write:

Originally Posted by ChrisC

Conditional amnesty appears to me to be appropriate under certain circumstances.

Amnesty is perhaps the past policy that has failed most agregiously. We've done it, and all it did was encourage a flood of more illegal aliens.

You've asked what "we should do about" all the illegal aliens here now. I'm in favor of having them self-deport. No need for mass roundups and an inquisition, just thorough screenings by employers with real penalties for those who hire illegal aliens. They came here due to economics, and that's the best way to get them to leave. It's also the most humane way. The border fence and other physical barriers will not likely be very effective, and dollar-for-dollar will not be nearly as efficient as turning off the magnet.

If we need guest workers or other non-citizens to perform work, then there should be a system to allow that to happen. The system would allow those who want to work in the US to apply, and allow us to screen those we admit. It will provide protection for those who participate--something they get none of today. More importantly, we'll be selecting for those people willing to follow our laws. The present "system" automatically selects those who are willing to break our laws.
Go home, get in the back of the line (behind those who've already been waiting) and come here at our invitation. And, we need to fix our system so that the invitations actually come.

[Independent]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

My mind hasnt changed about anything. Probably because theres no data to change it. Sure, they're committing a crime. So are a lot of other people. Control of crime and the issues associated costs money. Is controlling this crime the best we can do with our money? I personally dont think so. And without any actual information supporting the decision one way or the other, I'd rather focus on real problems that we have real data on. Like I suggested back about 12 pages ago.

Will we all feel good if we solve the illegal immigration problem once and for all, but social security is allowed to lapse in 30 years because we didnt put the money into that? Is that a good trade? How about if you cant drive from where you live to certain locations because the bridges fell down and there was no money for that. How about if China and Mexico buy the united states outright 30 years from now because their kids were better educated and heck, they're making everything for us as it is.

As far as the bigotry issue, come on. Isnt that fairly self evident? If everyone liked the illegal immigrants, nobody would have a problem with them. Yet we have funny press stories and studies where people guess at the implications and a lot of people have no problems grabbing onto that bad data, followed by their torches and pitchforks. If you want to believe someone is committing evil against you, even though the rational and available data suggests otherwise, that means you DONT LIKE THE PEOPLE. If you know them and dont like them for a valid reason that has nothing to do with race, creed, color or religion, then you're not a racist. If you dont like them because their smelly, dirty, poor, non-english speaking, disease spreading, suckers of the public teat....well....then you're a racist. Because half of that stuff is subjective and the other half is unsupported by the data.

I'll be bowing out of this discussion at this point. I believe the issues in each of our heads are what they are and wont be swayed by dataless discussions or other points of view.

The data that is in evidence is that any cultural, social or economic downsides arent that major, and there are significant benefits to the existing arrangement. Thats different from being an advocate for the situation or believing that its all "good".

Much of this post amounts to "Most of the people concerned about illegal immigration are bigots". I'll ignore that part.

But your "bottom line" in the last paragraph is that the benefits outweigh the costs. I'll follow up on that.

Would we improve the situation if we made the existing illegal immigrants legal? What about admitting more unskilled workers, do you think we should admit everyone who wants to come, or should we put some caps on the number that we take?

[ChrisC]

Originally Posted by samclem

ChrisC,
You mentioned that we need to move beyond the present policies, because they are not working. But you write:



Amnesty is perhaps the past policy that has failed most agregiously. We've done it, and all it did was encourage a flood of more illegal aliens.

You've asked what "we should do about" all the illegal aliens here now. I'm in favor of having them self-deport. No need for mass roundups and an inquisition, just thorough screenings by employers with real penalties for those who hire illegal aliens. They came here due to economics, and that's the best way to get them to leave. It's also the most humane way. The border fence and other physical barriers will not likely be very effective, and dollar-for-dollar will not be nearly as efficient as turning off the magnet.

If we need guest workers or other non-citizens to perform work, then there should be a system to allow that to happen. The system would allow those who want to work in the US to apply, and allow us to screen those we admit. It will provide protection for those who participate--something they get none of today. More importantly, we'll be selecting for those people willing to follow our laws. The present "system" automatically selects those who are willing to break our laws.
Go home, get in the back of the line (behind those who've already been waiting) and come here at our invitation. And, we need to fix our system so that the invitations actually come.

Samclem, perhaps you're getting me confused with someone else. My initial post was to reference a blog by Becker-Posner. One is a Nobel Prize winning economist; the other, a highly regarded Federal Judge. The issues are discussed a lot on their blog, though CFB merely quoted one alternative mentioned by Judge Posner to the current problem. Other alternatives were mentioned in the blog; and Becker suggests that immigrants, legal and illegal, pay a tariff for residency status, as part of the solution to the problem, while Posner suggests that this be combined with conditional amnesty and improved border controls.

We should all be faithful to the rule of law; however, when the rule of law isn't working well, we should come up with practical solutions to treat the problem that the rule of law is not solving. Amnesty is not the total solution to the problem -- I view it as a part of the solution. In my view, conditional amnesty is more humane and more practical to "self-deportation" as a way of dealing with the current status of illegal aliens.

[Wags]

If limited amnesty or full amnesty was granted to illegal immigrants would you favor amnesty to those individuals that came to this country legally but for whatever reason have overstayed their welcome?

How about the people who were or have green cards where do they stand in the case for amnesty? Should people already in the system receive some type of path to citizenship before those who came here illegally?

GOD BLESS US ALL

[volga]

This is what I would suggest:

Enforce all laws equally. I know if I do not file my taxes the IRS will enforce the law. Mexicans crossing into the US should know that the DHS will (or should) arrest and deport them without trial. Children born in this country of illegal aliens remain citzens of their parent/s country and are treated the same way that diplomats on station in the US are, their children are never granted US citizenship despite being born here, as they and their parents are on diplomatic mission. Anyone who comes into this country under false or illegal pretense should be deported as well without rights derived from a criminal act of border trespass. To allow otherwise is to reward crime and punish legal petitioners who have just as a legimate need and are acting in good faith with the laws of the host country for immigration into the US. Its insanity to do this and no good comes of unequal law enforcement. That is why the equal protection section is drafted into the Constitution. Citzenship by being born here is not articulated in the Contitution, but was derived from a poor misaaplication of the 16th Ammendment, which was specific and drafted to address the rights of freed slaves in the 19th century as they went from being chattle to citizens.

There is no virtue in theft, be it goods or services, from anyone, and all of us in general . Every thief has an excuse..."no one was going to miss the samll amount of money I stole from the bank, as they has plenty"...well the US is specifically tired of being burdened with Mexico's class based social problems. They need to stay where they are and fix their own county. We will do the same with ours, and believe me, both the US and mexico have plenty of problems on their own!

[Surfdaddy]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

I'll be bowing out of this discussion at this point. I believe the issues in each of our heads are what they are and wont be swayed by dataless discussions or other points of view.

...like the lack of data that proves any significant portion of the people arguing the other side have any racism whatsoever? You can say that illegal immigration is not a problem because we have no data, yet you can call people's racism "self evident" with no data? I find that quite hypocritical.

[Wags]

There is an interesting article "All God's Children", in Townhall.com by Linda Chavez, a conservative.

Townhall.com::All God's Children::By Linda Chavez

Excerpt from the article

The pope is not suggesting that the United States does not have a right to set its own immigration policies -- but he is calling for those policies to be implemented in a way that respects the dignity of all human beings. And what is happening in many communities across America today clearly violates this Christian principle.

End of excerpt.

Even the Pope is weighing in on this sensitive issue of illegal immigration.

GOD BLESS US ALL

[haha]

Originally Posted by Wags

Even the Pope is weighing in on this sensitive issue of illegal immigration.

Hate to bust your bubble, but the Pope has an agenda. The Catholic Church in America is struggling, and guess who fills up the pews?

Anyway, since the Pope doesn't live in the US, or pay US taxes, why should we pay any attention to what he says about a sovereign US issue?

Let him work on admitting these folks to Vatican City.

JMHO, of course.

Ha

[chinaco]

More and more Illegals are being hired to do higher skilled jobs (e.g., construction). Matter of fact, in Arizona one business that had to fire most of its employees was a metal fabrication shop. This business uses skilled welders and metal workers to fabricate tanks and other metal structures. Typically those jobs pay fairly well. Many US citizens would take the job.

As the phenomenon becomes more common, business will find a way to exploit the low pay of an illegal worker and displace US citizens (of all color and creed). Business will do this by training illegal how to do these mid-skill jobs and pay the low wage.

[kathyet]

Originally Posted by Wags

There is an interesting article "All God's Children", in Townhall.com by Linda Chavez, a conservative.

Townhall.com::All God's Children::By Linda Chavez

Excerpt from the article

The pope is not suggesting that the United States does not have a right to set its own immigration policies -- but he is calling for those policies to be implemented in a way that respects the dignity of all human beings. And what is happening in many communities across America today clearly violates this Christian principle.

End of excerpt.


Even the Pope is weighing in on this sensitive issue of illegal immigration.

GOD BLESS US ALL

Of course he is trying to set our immigration policies. They need more members to fill the churches coffers people here are leaving the Catholic Church in droves. The Pope needs to clean his own house first before telling America what we need to do..If he is so concerned on human right issues maybe he needs to go to some of these others countries that all these illegals are fleeing to America from and chastise them on thier soil about thier human right abuses. One of my christian principle's say we do not molest children. Until he fires, demotes or just plain kicks these abusers and condoners out of the church he shouldn't say anything. Weighing in on a sensitive issue..my eye.

[volga]

The Pope is a political as well as a "religious" leader. American catholics have left the church in huge numbers, as so many recognized that like so many religions, this is about preservation of the worldly organization as it is spiritual development, and to many native born americans of european descent, the catholic church is an old world fuedal system that has little appeal in its authoritarian dicta that defy the rule of reason enjoyed in other aspects of american policy.

So illegal immigration of culturally programmed "willing followers of the church flock" (read peasants from latin america who know little of self governance) is the Popes equivalent of 'cheap labor' to fill the empty pews and collection baskets. Its all about money, power, and inherent social license derived from head count in this and so many religions. The Pope is not the spokes person for the american population anymore than any other religious leader, such as the dali lama, the TV Preachers, and countless others who REALLY NEED TO MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS!