45
   

What should be done about illegal immigration?

 
 
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 08:09 am
what's the point of even becoming president if you can't have a few people killed

there have to be some perks to the job, i mean flying around in airforce one probably gets pretty boring after a while
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 08:22 am
@OCCOM BILL,
Inmates are also "people." However, we confine them and, sometimes, even execute them.

Do you have any authority showing that the left tolerates illegals in order to get votes? I have my doubts on this.

It is a convenient myth that illegals do the work that citizens don't want to do. Citizens would happily take all those jobs were they properly compensated for them. For instance, citizens would do farm work for decent pay, and the price of the products would not go up that much. Moreover, farmers could switch to produce that lends itself to automated harvesting, and leave the production of produce requiring hand labor to Mexico and similar countries. Construction work used to produce prized jobs. However, since builders found that they could underpay illegals, 42 % of such jobs go to illegals. Etc.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 08:27 am
@High Seas,
Dear Helen, I know this will seem radical you because it's a very conservative idea and I am a very radical liberal but, we, here it goes. a basic premise of conservative economics is supply-demand. "illegal" immigration is an element of that premise "demand for labor results in supply" of that labor. restricting supply (closing the borders) drastically alters the "natural" economic self-leveling demand. I suggest to you Helen that an unfettered labor supply (legalize immigration) would result in the needs for labor (demand) balanced with immigrants seeking employment(supply).
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:28 am
@dyslexia,
That idea would only be true if wages stood at minimum subsistence level and all transfer payments (aka externalities like education, medical care, pensions) were abolished. Your model works fine for prices of non-subsidized commodities with highly elastic supply and demand, but not for labor.
rabel22
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:33 am
@High Seas,
Have you researched Anwar Awlaki? He is a terroist advocate who preached the violent overthrow of our government and has encouraged others to kill innocent civilians and military. You qripe about obama but ok baby bushes lies and destruction of a whole country over oil and excuse his lies about weapons of mass destruction. Lady, you need a brain transplant!
rabel22
 
  0  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:38 am
@High Seas,
If the conseratives hadent destroyed the effectiveness of unions, labor would be doing fine. But of course big business dont want labor to have a voice in their government.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:44 am
@rabel22,
You have obviously not read the ACLU lawsuit I just linked - why not start by reading? Understanding is the next step, then commenting Smile
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:53 am
@High Seas,
Helen, that's not even marginally acceptable spin, you sticking with it?
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 09:55 am
@dyslexia,
That's my story and I'm sticking to it, yes Smile You'll never find an economist to say anything different.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 10:34 am
@High Seas,
So are you arguing that Presidents have to enforce every law? or do you agree with me that it would be impossible for them to do that?
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 10:36 am
@parados,
Another one who doesn't bother reading before arguing - that habit gets tiresome at times, sorry:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MnYI3_FRbbQ/THuu6HKDKbI/AAAAAAAAClE/YUgC5Dp5q7g/s1600/aclu.png
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 10:46 am
@High Seas,
labor has been considered a fungible commodity since, at the very least, the days of Hammurabi.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 11:04 am
@djjd62,
Tyrants love to torture too!
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Sep, 2010 03:20 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
Another one who doesn't bother reading before arguing - that habit gets tiresome at times, sorry:

If you are tired of your habit then change it.

You jumped into an argument. I merely asked which side of that argument you were trying to support with your post since it wasn't clear. If you weren't supporting either side then it would mean you didn't bother to read before arguing or you were just posting a non sequitor.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 02:05 pm
Quote:
Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama renewed his call for comprehensive immigration reform Tuesday, citing America's legacy as a nation of immigrants and calling the need to find a solution for the millions of undocumented workers critical to the country's common future.
"We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants -- a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America's precepts," Obama said during a visit to El Paso, Texas.
"It doesn't matter where you come from. What matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded, that you believe all of us are equal. .... In embracing America, you can become American. That is what makes this country great."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/10/obama.immigration/index.html?hpt=T1

ONe of those American values that must be embraced is a willingness to follow the laws, illegal immigrants already are indicating that they are not the kind of people who we should welcome with open arms....a point the Obama refuses to respect.
Quote:
n terms of more extensive immigration reform, Cook said there "doesn't have to be a pathway to citizenship" for undocumented immigrants. There should, however, be at least "a pathway to legalization."


Only if we are going to embrace the idea that we long ago cast off, which is that possession is 9/10 of the law. Are we really going to codify into law that those who manage to get themselves into America illegally should have an easier path to being here legally than do those who respect the laws and stay out until they can come legally?? Cook is clearly saying we should.....one would hope that we have the good sense to realize that what he wants to do does not follow our values, and to tell him no. If we are going to champion the ignoring of our immigration laws then what are the next set of laws that we will do so with? The correct thing to do is certainly to rewrite the laws if we think that they are wrong, we should not be advocating ignoring them...ever.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 02:28 pm
Quote:
What should be done about illegal immigration?


Drop a few as they are crossing the border and leave their bodies right
there as a message to others thinking of entering the country illegally.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 02:34 pm


It sounds like Obama feels that he needs the illegal votes to win in 2012

Obama Turns Victory Lap Toward Texas, Immigration Reform

hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 02:43 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



It sounds like Obama feels that he needs the illegal votes to win in 2012

Obama Turns Victory Lap Toward Texas, Immigration Reform


I assume you are referring to Obama saying that he will not release photo proof that we got Osama because he does not need to do a victory lap but then within days he is up at ground zero and releasing home video's of Osama...IE he has been doing a victory lap. However, highlighting that American has failed at immigration control at a time when just about everyone is in agreement that there is no will in Washington to fix the problem is not exactly a great move. We already know that Washington sucks, tyvm.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 03:14 pm
@hawkeye10,


In a nut shell, I am saying it sounds like Obama feels that he needs the illegal votes to win in 2012
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 04:11 pm
It seems to me that there are at least 3 issues in play:
Immigration >>>>>> Illegal Immigration >>>>>> Illegal voting by illegal immigrants.
This is not an issue I am following closely. If you have the time, H2O, please contrast and compare what Obama said today vs what Bush 2 said when he was in office. It will probably take you only an hour or two of research. Do you have the time to do that?
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
Obunga's "Red Line(TM)" - Discussion by gungasnake
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2013 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.26 seconds on 05/24/2013 at 04:33:30