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

[Surfdaddy]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

If we're going to go on a "this is illegal!" crusade, I'd like all the people who speed excessively, swerve from lane to lane and tailgate to get tossed in jail for a month for endangering my property and my life for pretty much no reason or benefit.

So let's just forget about rule of law, right? Since so many laws are unreasonable, break them at will. Why, if I feel like murdering somebody, why not?

Let's change the laws that don't make sense, please don't suggest that we ignore our basic legal foundations.

[tryan]

Interesting thread (just read it top to bottom). Having rented to countless illegal immigrants over the last 20 years I can attest these people are simply a cross section of humanity. Most good (helped and have been helped-by many); some bad (drug, gangs , got screwed out of rent, ...). Point being, I could make the same statement about "legal" residents.

If the "illegals" are getting bennies not afforded to the "legals" (e.g. healthcare, tax exemptions) this is a separate problem are should be treated as such.

Any broad brush ideas/reforms (ship 'em back, secure the boarder ... make 'em legal) is too toxic to work at this time.

[unclemick]

This is probably the wrong thread for - Pssst Wellesley BUT if anyone actually thinks this is serious I suggest they mentally prepare themselves by meditating on the sound of one hand clapping and then dive into the intricacies of Dr Deming's:

The Red Bead Experiment.

heh heh heh - love the UTube music connection. .

[Rustic23]

Originally Posted by tryan

Any broad brush ideas/reforms (ship 'em back, secure the boarder ... make 'em legal) is too toxic to work at this time.

Agree. As I said earlier there are no simple solutions to complex problems. But to stick our heads in the sand and say there is not a problem is just as ridiculous. Illegals are costing us, the tax payers, money.

By JAMES PINKERTON
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle


The U.S. Homeland Security department has launched an ambitious nationwide effort that would cost $2 billion to $3 billion a year to identify and deport the estimated 300,000 to 450,000 illegal immigrants locked up each year in jails and prisons.

Now I don't know why it would cost $3 billion a year to deport 450,000 illegal immigrants that are already locked up. I have also see the studies as to what illegal immigrants are costing the Harris County Hospital system. I have seen reports from Del Rio, Laredo and several other border cities as to the estimated cost of medical care.

I also agree that the Republicans want the illegals for cheap labor, and the Democrats want to make them citizens for votes. Both parties want to be the 'friend' of the Hispanic community.

I can understand a guest worker program. I can understand documenting who is coming in the country. I don't believe breaking the law should be a short cut to citizenship.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Originally Posted by youbet

So why, when folks suggest we gain control over immigration and have folks move in legally, do you resist saying that that would lead to higher wages and devastate the economy?

I dont think I'd characterize it as "resisting". I merely pointed out the implications of the act and noted that we have fairly non-existent data on the matter.

Its fairly stupid to react and cause a significant problem in order to effect a solution to a problem that didnt actually exist, or one that was blown out of proportion.

No more, no less.

Originally Posted by Rustic23

Your entire case is based on 'I talked to some people that work in a hospital'

No, my entire case is based on the fact that there are no facts, yet people bite on the headlines and run with them. Thats if they already had a problem with furriners.

Harris County officials estimate

Key word being "estimate". And wow, it'd be very unlike politicians to estimate something being much higher than it actually is, particularly when they stand to get increased funding for health care, law enforcement, yada yada yada. And shoot! Nobody can say they're wrong or lying, because theres no actual data to contradict their assertions. There isnt much of a "pro illegal alien" task force, retired group or PAC thats going to step up and correct them or provide any alternative data either, is there?

While they may not ask, they do have a fairly good idea

REALLY! You tell me how that works. You look at two mexicans and one is a 5th generation american citizen and one just ran across the border 10 minutes ago.

How DO you tell?

Maybe it'd help if you pointed out the course that the doctors, nurses and admitting people can take that enables them to spot the tell-tale signs that someone doesnt have a green card?

Originally Posted by Surfdaddy

So let's just forget about rule of law, right? Since so many laws are unreasonable, break them at will. Why, if I feel like murdering somebody, why not?

Let's change the laws that don't make sense, please don't suggest that we ignore our basic legal foundations.

I think I suggested that perhaps we tackle the legal violations that have clear, demonstrable and measurably major effects in terms of huge loss of life and property damage...I dont think that forgetting the rule of law came into any part of the discussion. I used the mass hysteria on the highway as a simple example. Unless of course the **** for brains that flew over into my lane and almost cleaned me and my whole family out wants to drop by and cut my lawn and trim all my hedges, in which case I'm okay with it.

But if you'd rather focus on rounding up all the deadbeat dads, solving all the rapes and murders or something more useful than trying to round up 7 million mexicans and sending them back to mexico and seeing what happens, be my guest.

Oh, and immigration issues are not particularly 'evident in our basic legal foundations'. Go read the plate on the statue of liberty.

That the government and law enforcement enact only lip service to the issues says that a) they know its not that big a deal, b) that 'solving' it will creat bigger problems than turning their backs, c) that its beneficial to the economy or d) that they cant do anything about it anyhow.

You may pick from any or all of the above. Since the folks making and executing the laws dont deal with the 'problem' much seems to me to mean that they dont consider it a crucial element of our basic legal foundation...


Heres another one for ya. Tomorrow GW announces that he's signed an amnesty act and made everyone who's already here an official american citizen. And that anyone who wants to walk in is welcome and automatically a citizen too.

Still have a problem with anything?

[bpp3]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

Heres another one for ya. Tomorrow GW announces that he's signed an amnesty act and made everyone who's already here an official american citizen. And that anyone who wants to walk in is welcome and automatically a citizen too.

Still have a problem with anything?

Sounds like an elegant solution. Why do the defenders of the status quo not push for something like this instead?

Would you go for that? Wouldn't that have made life easier for your FIL than the present system?

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Well you see BPP, the problem isnt the legal/illegal issue, really.

I just wanted to take that off the table to see which direction the next spasm would take.

[Texarkandy]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

No, my entire case is based on the fact that there are no facts, yet people bite on the headlines and run with them.

There are no facts OK -let me give ya just one - Here's a fact - in 2005 ICE raided one shift of a poultry plant with approx 500 workers. They arrested 119 illegal aliens - most from Mexico & 20 or so from Central America. 118 of those 119 were using the identities (names, dob's & ssn's) of genuine US citizens. Most had been employed over three years. The plant replaced all the workers with actual US citizens from the community within three weeks - most of them lower income African Americans but whites too. Starting wages increased $2.00 per hour. Overtime started being properly paid. On the job injuries started getting actually reported & documented.

The fact is these plants prefer illegals because, granted they work hard & generally show up on-time - but more importantly because they easily succumb to subtle pressure to not report injuries, work unpaid overtime, come to work when sick, etc

In many industries now the illegal alien presence has become so overwhelming that employers won't hire US citizens because they don't speak Spanish & thus cannot communicate with the other workers!!

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

REALLY! You tell me how that works. You look at two mexicans and one is a 5th generation american citizen and one just ran across the border 10 minutes ago.

How DO you tell?

How do you tell? Oh, please! But OK, I'll play along for a bit. Well, first you just ask them - works 90% of the time believe it or not.

Do you really think many Americans have a problem identifying if someone was not raised in the US?

However, without asking, then usually inability to speak English is a good indicator in most places. Not proof of course - but an indicator and basis for further inquiry into citizenship & immigration status.

As for non-Hispanics, well Europeans tend to stick out like a sore thumb in America, as do most Africans. "Hi sir, I couldn't help but notice that's an interesting accent you have there - where you from?"

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

Maybe it'd help if you pointed out the course that the doctors, nurses and admitting people can take that enables them to spot the tell-tale signs that someone doesnt have a green card?

See my previous response.

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

Oh, and immigration issues are not particularly 'evident in our basic legal foundations'. Go read the plate on the statue of liberty.

Statute of Liberty, huh? That was a gift from France in, I think, the 1880's - nothing to do with our "basic legal foundations". Besides, the world is a different place nowadays.

[bpp3]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

Well you see BPP,

Aw shucks, don't have to capitalize the whole thing. Big Bee, little peepee is fine. On second thought...

the problem isnt the legal/illegal issue, really.
I just wanted to take that off the table to see which direction the next spasm would take.

Ok, but for some of us, the legal/illegal issue IS the real issue. And in any case, that is the only part that the government can really directly address anyway.

[Wags]

There's a great article in the NY Times - Legal Immigrants, Until They Sought Citizenship

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/12/us...in&oref=slogin#

Excerpts from the article

SELINSGROVE, Pa. — Dr. Pedro Servano always believed that his journey from his native Philippines to the life of a community doctor in Pennsylvania would lead to American citizenship.

But the doctor, who has tended to patients here in the Susquehanna Valley for more than a decade, is instead battling a deportation order along with his wife.

The Servanos are among a growing group of legal immigrants who reach for the prize and permanence of citizenship, only to run afoul of highly technical immigration statutes that carry the severe penalty of expulsion from the country. For the Servanos, the problem has been a legal hitch involving their marital status when they came from the Philippines some 25 years ago.

Largely overlooked in the charged debate over illegal immigration, many of these are long-term legal immigrants in the United States who were confident of success when they applied for naturalization, and would have continued to live here legally had they not sought to become citizens.

End of excerpts.

Why should poor devils like this who have followed the rules and are here legally be treated unfairly by the system?

It just does not make any sense.

GOD BLESS US ALL

[Texarkandy]

Originally Posted by Wags

There's a great article in the NY Times - Legal Immigrants, Until They Sought Citizenship

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/12/us...in&oref=slogin#

Excerpts from the article

SELINSGROVE, Pa. — Dr. Pedro Servano always believed that his journey from his native Philippines to the life of a community doctor in Pennsylvania would lead to American citizenship.

But the doctor, who has tended to patients here in the Susquehanna Valley for more than a decade, is instead battling a deportation order along with his wife.

The Servanos are among a growing group of legal immigrants who reach for the prize and permanence of citizenship, only to run afoul of highly technical immigration statutes that carry the severe penalty of expulsion from the country. For the Servanos, the problem has been a legal hitch involving their marital status when they came from the Philippines some 25 years ago.

Largely overlooked in the charged debate over illegal immigration, many of these are long-term legal immigrants in the United States who were confident of success when they applied for naturalization, and would have continued to live here legally had they not sought to become citizens.

End of excerpts.

Why should poor devils like this who have followed the rules and are here legally be treated unfairly by the system?

It just does not make any sense.

GOD BLESS US ALL

Just a little "legal hitch involving their marital status" according to the article, huh? Well, that's not quite right is it?

Followed all the rules? Can you say "woman beater"?

Convicted of Domestic Violence, albeit reduced to a misdemeanor as those things usually go.

This has nothing to with backlogs of natz applications, overburdened examiners, or technicalities. This guy is flat statutorily ineligible for naturalization & is further prima fascie deportable. He'll be seeing an Immigration Judge - not a CIS Adjudications Officer.

Seems this poor fellow has run afoul of the federal Violence Against Women's Act of 1994 (VAWA)(can you say "Bill & Hillary Clinton"?) Any alien convicted of a crime of domestic violence is deportable - period - that's the law.

The VAWA was followed up by the Lautenberg Amendment that banned guns for anyone convicted of any crime of Domestic Violence (even misdemeanors) or under a restraining order.

Many long time US Police Officers lost their jobs over the Lautenberg Amendment.

So if it's OK to fire Police Officers - (regardless of their personal & professional record otherwise) for even one misdemeanor crime of Domestic Violence (& I in no way condone domestic violence & do support the Lautenberg Amendment) - however, why should foreign citizens get a pass?

As far as I'm concerned he can take his woman beating ways back to the Philippines. We've got enough home-grown ones already, thank you, & thank goodness we are finally starting to change our culture in that respect.

(Frankly, I'm a little more concerned about tbe situations of Border Patrol Agents Ramos & Compean & their families than I am about Dr Servano)

[Independent]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

And restaurants, house and commercial cleaning, landscaping, child care...and did you know that a surprising percentage of the people working at movie and network studios are illegal aliens? Who do you think puts the sets together, tears them down, feeds the masses and cleans up after them?

Could be, but all together they are still a small percent of the 150 million people in the civilian labor force.

You complain that people are blowing the taxpayer costs out of proportion. Could be true.

But you are equally guilty of blowing the economic benefits out of proportion.

If the illegal immigrants had never come to the US, we'd still have janitors, child care workers, restaurants, movies, etc. On average, the large number of middle and high income Americans would have to get along with just a little less in consumer goods. But the small number of low income Americans would have significantly more income.

YouBet says that he's willing to make that trakeoff. You've said that you don't want to. That's a value judgement for both of you that I'm not arguing (yet).
I'm simply trying to point out the tradeoff.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

First off, can we stop putting words into my mouth?

I didnt say anything about being unwilling to "make the tradeoff". I said it was impractical and had serious consequences.

There is a bit of a chasm between pointing out fallacious "data", implementation problems and consequences and being a supporter or unwilling to do something.

Trying to establish a framework of issues <> championing a cause. But I understand the implications of being the guy taking the convenience away and leaving just the emotion.

Once again...throughout history pretty much every civilization has employed a variety of exploitive labor. Slaves, children, women, immigrants.

Every societies people of wealth and power simpered and moaned about the negative impacts these people brought to their society. And then employed them in droves. None has ever stamped out the 'scourge' to a beneficial outcome.

I'm now trying to correlate that on one hand the immigrant impact can be so small when it comes to economics, yet so large in almost every other aspect.

Do they have a footprint or not? I keep hearing people waving around numbers in the high single to high double digit millions when it comes to the immigrants "taking away our jobs". That sounds like a big percentage of 150 million.

I think you're guilty of the fallacy that if all the immigrants went away, there'd be a bunch of legal citizens lining up to take their jobs for minimum wage and we'd have full employment.

Good luck with that.

I guess on the matter of footprint, one needs to selectively determine which guesses one accepts and which ones one wont accept around numbers of immigrants, how many are working, how many are having babies and how many are leeching money out of the system.

Stealthy people, these tens of millions of sub minimum wage earners infiltrating every aspect of our lives who can be wished away with no economic impact.

Do we even want to broach the fact that the majority of the land these people are "ruining" was theirs in the first place?

[Walt34]

Originally Posted by Rustic23

5. There are no simple solutions to complex questions, and this is one that affects each state differently. Folks in Minnesota don't have the same problems as those in Arizona.

This guy disagrees: Casa D' Ice - North Versailles Fine Dining and Live Entertainment

Ya gotta love the independent-minded American small businessman.

[youbet]

Originally Posted by Wags

Why should poor devils like this who have followed the rules and are here legally be treated unfairly by the system?

It just does not make any sense.

The part I don't understand is why they don't just handle it by driving down to Mexico, ditching their car, walking back into the USA, hitchhiking home and going on with life as non-persued illegals?

[Wags]

Originally Posted by Texarkandy

Just a little "legal hitch involving their marital status" according to the article, huh? Well, that's not quite right is it?

Followed all the rules? Can you say "woman beater"?

Convicted of Domestic Violence, albeit reduced to a misdemeanor as those things usually go.

This has nothing to with backlogs of natz applications, overburdened examiners, or technicalities. This guy is flat statutorily ineligible for naturalization & is further prima fascie deportable. He'll be seeing an Immigration Judge - not a CIS Adjudications Officer.

Seems this poor fellow has run afoul of the federal Violence Against Women's Act of 1994 (VAWA)(can you say "Bill & Hillary Clinton"?) Any alien convicted of a crime of domestic violence is deportable - period - that's the law.

The VAWA was followed up by the Lautenberg Amendment that banned guns for anyone convicted of any crime of Domestic Violence (even misdemeanors) or under a restraining order.

Many long time US Police Officers lost their jobs over the Lautenberg Amendment.

So if it's OK to fire Police Officers - (regardless of their personal & professional record otherwise) for even one misdemeanor crime of Domestic Violence (& I in no way condone domestic violence & do support the Lautenberg Amendment) - however, why should foreign citizens get a pass?

As far as I'm concerned he can take his woman beating ways back to the Philippines. We've got enough home-grown ones already, thank you, & thank goodness we are finally starting to change our culture in that respect.

(Frankly, I'm a little more concerned about tbe situations of Border Patrol Agents Ramos & Compean & their families than I am about Dr Servano)

Per excerpts of the NY Times article

In the early 1980s, their mothers came separately to the United States as legal immigrants and petitioned for residence visas, known as green cards, for Pedro and Salvacion under the category of unmarried children. But between the time the visas were requested and when they were issued in 1985, Pedro and Salvacion, hoping to escape conflicting parental demands, secretly married in the Philippines.

Unaware that their marriage could have violated the terms of their green cards, the Michael Gilhooly, a spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which handles deportations, said the Servanos’ removal had been suspended based on new information from Mr. Specter about their humanitarian role. Other immigration officials said the Servanos could recover their legal status by applying for new green cards as parents of citizen children. s settled in the United States. He completed a second medical residency here and began to practice in blue-collar towns where he made house calls and was known for attention to everyday ills. He and Salvacion married in New Jersey in 1987. They renewed their green cards punctually.

“My goal is to be fully functional and integrated into the society,” Dr. Servano said. They presented their 1991 naturalization applications without seeking a lawyer.

Immigration inspectors reviewing their applications discovered a record of their Philippine marriage. Accused of lying, they were ordered deported. In years of immigration court appeals, the Servanos had no opportunity to present broader evidence of their character, their lawyers said.

Following an outcry from neighbors, patients and local officials, Department of Homeland Security officials in December temporarily suspended the Servanos’ deportation. The Servanos and their supporters, including Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, are using the unusual reprieve to pursue new legal efforts to resolve the couple’s case.

Michael Gilhooly, a spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which handles deportations, said the Servanos’ removal had been suspended based on new information from Mr. Specter about their humanitarian role. Other immigration officials said the Servanos could recover their legal status by applying for new green cards as parents of citizen children.

End of excerpts

As you can see from the article it was not Dr. Servano, who was the wife beater.

Excerpts from the article

It’s no wonder there are so many illegal immigrants,” said Brad Darnell, an electrical engineer from Canada living in California who applied for citizenship but is also now fighting deportation. “The legal method is so intolerant and confusing.”

A legal immigrant since 1991, Mr. Darnell is married to an American and has two American-born sons. But after he presented his naturalization application last year, Mr. Darnell discovered that a 10-year-old conviction for domestic violence involving a former girlfriend, even though it had been reduced to a misdemeanor and erased from his public record, made him ineligible to become a citizen — or even to continue living in the United States.

End of excerpts.

The article was talking about Mr. Brad Darnell.

NO it's not right to fire Police Officers and to give foreign citizens a pass.

Domestic violence is UNACCEPTABLE.

IMO Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean were wrongly prosecuted by our own Federal Government. They were then found guilty and sent to prison. Both of these men along with their families are having to suffer greatly. Instead of giving Mr. Scootter Libby a clear slate what Mr. Bush should have done and should do is order these two men released or given a pardon.

GOD BLESS US ALL

[Independent]

Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny

Trying to establish a framework of issues <> championing a cause. But I understand the implications of being the guy taking the convenience away and leaving just the emotion.

I think you're guilty of the fallacy that if all the immigrants went away, there'd be a bunch of legal citizens lining up to take their jobs for minimum wage and we'd have full employment.

Good luck with that.

It looks like we're both "trying to establish a framework". I tried to give an overview of mine in post #60.

Note that I didn't say "there'd be a bunch of legal citizens lining up to take their jobs for minimum wage". In fact, I said almost the exact opposite.

Here's my example. Suppose there's a meat packing plant in Colorado that currently employs about 75% legal and 25% illegal workers. Suppose that the illegal workers had never come to the US. What would be different?

The way I understand free markets, with a smaller supply of workers, the price of workers (wages) goes up, and the cost of meat goes up. Consumers respond to this by buying less. No additional workers come out of the woodwork, we would have a smaller real GDP.

In the simplest (though unlikely) case, the consumers would spend exactly as much on the meat from that plant as they do now. But they would only get 75% as much. The retail price would be 33% higher. Since wages at the plant are only a fraction of the total retail price of the meat, wage increases would be more than 33%. Each consumer would lose a little of his/her total consumption (because meat is just a small part of their total budget), but each worker gets a large increase in pay.

In the real world, there are many products with a wide variety of unskilled labor content, and real consumers would shift their spending in complex ways, but the principle is the same. A smaller supply of unskilled labor shifts real income from middle and high income workers to low income workers. The percentage lost at the top is much smaller t