What should be done about illegal immigration?

You see, it's very simple; if you want to work on the farm, you must go to the farm to seek work. They need workers. Same goes for working in restaurants or anywhere else.

0 Replies

So if I am unemployed, and if I am only trained to make buggy whips, I will remain unemployed forever I suppose? Great reasoning, imposter. Laughing

0 Replies

HokieBird wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

I do, however, agree that the bill would be a disaster. Anyone who can't afford a $5,000 fine and a vacation to nowhere they don't need; would end up in the same position they're in now... and that's got to be a large percentage of the illegals. I could understand back taxes being charged, in cases where they haven't already been paid (which I believe to be the majority of the time), but only by way of garnishing future wages.

Kennedy had included a provision on back taxes being paid, but the White House asked that it be removed.

Quote:
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said, "Determining the past tax liability would have been very difficult and costly and extremely time consuming."

Link

Legal immigrants and US citizens wouldn't get that same consideration, however.

Could be things like this is why Reid wants the bill passed so quickly.

Actually, that makes a lot of sense. It probably would be impossible to properly determine the debt. IF that's what the $5,000 represents... and IF they're willing to stretch the bill out through garnishments... and IF they're willing to wave it for any and all who can prove they've already paid their taxes (again, I believe that's actually the majority); THEN I will withdraw my objection to that part of the bill. However, I cannot for the life of me think of ONE DECENT reason to force them to travel from point A to point B only to return to point A. That remains idiotic and likely to prove more problematic than it's worth (especially since it has no worth).

0 Replies

okie wrote:

So if I am unemployed, and if I am only trained to make buggy whips, I will remain unemployed forever I suppose? Great reasoning, imposter.

I always had the intuition that you were only trained to make buggy whips. I'm not sure why it didn't occur to me much sooner!

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

You see, it's very simple; if you want to work on the farm, you must go to the farm to seek work. They need workers. Same goes for working in restaurants or anywhere else.

You are catching on, imposter. If you need a job, go apply where the jobs are available. Pretty simple concept.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

So if I am unemployed, and if I am only trained to make buggy whips, I will remain unemployed forever I suppose? Great reasoning, imposter.

What are you babbling about? CI simply stated that if the unemployed applied to pick fruit or wash dishes; they'd soon find themselves employed. They choose not to.

0 Replies

That's a nice twist, okie, but it doesn't pass the laughter meter.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

However, I cannot for the life of me think of ONE DECENT reason to force them to travel from point A to point B only to return to point A. That remains idiotic and likely to prove more problematic than it's worth (especially since it has no worth).

I don't think that's in the current bill, either.

You can read it here:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation.cfm

0 Replies

The reason we require illegals to return home is to reinforce the principle that only those admitted legally will be able to live and work in this country from this time on. Under every single amnesty program in the past, especially Carter and Reagans, allowing the illegals to stay on the theory we would then protect the border only opened the floodgates to quadruple the illegals that were here before. It's that neon sign flashing over America "Ya'll come and if you get in, they'll keep you."

To provide amnesty to those who successfully broke our laws is also blatantly unfair to those waiting patiently for legal admission to the USA and a disincentive for people to use that process in the future.

At least if they have to go home and come back legally, we know who is here, eliminate a lot of the stolen social security numbers and other I.D., can refuse those with criminal records, etc. And those who choose not to use that opportunity to become legal and just stay will mean there will be that many fewer who will need to be arrested and deported later on.

0 Replies

HokieBird wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
However, I cannot for the life of me think of ONE DECENT reason to force them to travel from point A to point B only to return to point A. That remains idiotic and likely to prove more problematic than it's worth (especially since it has no worth).

I don't think that's in the current bill, either.

You can read it here:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation.cfm

Thanks. I gave it a good start... but I don't have 326 pages in me today. And whats all this talk about it being 800 and 1000 pages already?

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

okie wrote:
So if I am unemployed, and if I am only trained to make buggy whips, I will remain unemployed forever I suppose? Great reasoning, imposter.
What are you babbling about? CI simply stated that if the unemployed applied to pick fruit or wash dishes; they'd soon find themselves employed. They choose not to.

Maybe they choose not to because of substandard wages and working conditions compared to every other line of work in this country. I will guarantee you that people will work, given the jobs pay what they are worth. If you have to resort to hiring illegals to do your dirty work that everybody else deems beneath their dignity, who is bigoted here?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

The reason we require illegals to return home is to reinforce the principle that only those admitted legally will be able to live and work in this country from this time on. Under every single amnesty program in the past, especially Carter and Reagans, allowing the illegals to stay on the theory we would then protect the border only opened the floodgates to quadruple the illegals that were here before. It's that neon sign flashing over America "Ya'll come and if you get in, they'll keep you."

To provide amnesty to those who successfully broke our laws is also blatantly unfair to those waiting patiently for legal admission to the USA and a disincentive for people to use that process in the future.

At least if they have to go home and come back legally, we know who is here, eliminate a lot of the stolen social security numbers and other I.D., can refuse those with criminal records, etc. And those who choose not to use that opportunity to become legal and just stay will mean there will be that many fewer who will need to be arrested and deported later on.

This is what Kay Bailey Hutchison had to say on Bloomberg this morning:

Quote:

Well, the compromise bill has some good points, but it also has some big holes in my opinion. I think that not having any requirement that a person go home to apply before coming in legally is a gaping hole. And I'm concerned about the impact on our Social Security system of people who got quarters credited illegally being able to use those quarters to go into our Social Security system. Those are two areas where I think we must strengthen the bill.

(From Hugh Hewitt at Townhall)

Her comment on Social Security stem from the provision in the Totalization Treaty with Mexico, which qualifies former illegals with just 6 qtrs(18 mo) even if worked illegally, the benefits that we had to work 40 qtrs(10 yrs) to qualify for.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

The reason we require illegals to return home is to reinforce the principle that only those admitted legally will be able to live and work in this country from this time on. Under every single amnesty program in the past, especially Carter and Reagans, allowing the illegals to stay on the theory we would then protect the border only opened the floodgates to quadruple the illegals that were here before. It's that neon sign flashing over America "Ya'll come and if you get in, they'll keep you."

No, that's nonsense that'll help people like you sleep at night. Potential amnesty is WAY down on the list of priorities of the poor hungry man on the other side of the fence. He wants work... and regardless of what Reagan, Carter or Bush do; he's going to do what he feels he's got to do to get it. You really should try to use your God-given common sense and stop absorbing all the garbage you read (or hear).

Foxfyre wrote:

To provide amnesty to those who successfully broke our laws is also blatantly unfair to those waiting patiently for legal admission to the USA and a disincentive for people to use that process in the future.

This is somewhere between nonsense and irrelevant. We're not going to send 12 to 20 million people anywhere. Even on the new bill; they are guaranteed re-entry so if you want to be fair to those on the waiting list; call their names off too (I would). Either way, they're not waiting any longer because someone else got in sooner.

Foxfyre wrote:

At least if they have to go home and come back legally, we know who is here, eliminate a lot of the stolen social security numbers and other I.D., can refuse those with criminal records, etc. And those who choose not to use that opportunity to become legal and just stay will mean there will be that many fewer who will need to be arrested and deported later on.

All of that can be accomplished (to the extent it can be) by stopping at the local Sheriff's office. Further, by making it easier, they are much more likely to comply which makes the transition more effective and efficient.

(A->B->A=IDIOCY)

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
The reason we require illegals to return home is to reinforce the principle that only those admitted legally will be able to live and work in this country from this time on. Under every single amnesty program in the past, especially Carter and Reagans, allowing the illegals to stay on the theory we would then protect the border only opened the floodgates to quadruple the illegals that were here before. It's that neon sign flashing over America "Ya'll come and if you get in, they'll keep you."
No, that's nonsense that'll help people like you sleep at night. Potential amnesty is WAY down on the list of priorities of the poor hungry man on the other side of the fence. He wants work... and regardless of what Reagan, Carter or Bush do; he's going to do what he feels he's got to do to get it. You really should try to use your God-given common sense and stop absorbing all the garbage you read (or hear).

Foxfyre wrote:
To provide amnesty to those who successfully broke our laws is also blatantly unfair to those waiting patiently for legal admission to the USA and a disincentive for people to use that process in the future.
This is somewhere between nonsense and irrelevant. We're not going to send 12 to 20 million people anywhere. Even on the new bill; they are guaranteed re-entry so if you want to be fair to those on the waiting list; call their names off too (I would). Either way, they're not waiting any longer because someone else got in sooner.

Foxfyre wrote:
At least if they have to go home and come back legally, we know who is here, eliminate a lot of the stolen social security numbers and other I.D., can refuse those with criminal records, etc. And those who choose not to use that opportunity to become legal and just stay will mean there will be that many fewer who will need to be arrested and deported later on.
All of that can be accomplished (to the extent it can be) by stopping at the local Sheriff's office. Further, by making it easier, they are much more likely to comply which makes the transition more effective and efficient.

(A->B->A=IDIOCY)

Yeah, but that would make the Conservatives feel as if they've lost, which is really the issue here, isn't it?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Foxfyre - if it's any comfort, Kay Bailey Hutchison feels exactly as you (and many, many others) do, so if you're both idiots (according to some name-calling hotheads weighing in here), at least you're in good company Smile

0 Replies

If this bill passes in its current form, it's not just Conservatives who lose - we all lose.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
okie wrote:
So if I am unemployed, and if I am only trained to make buggy whips, I will remain unemployed forever I suppose? Great reasoning, imposter.
What are you babbling about? CI simply stated that if the unemployed applied to pick fruit or wash dishes; they'd soon find themselves employed. They choose not to.

Maybe they choose not to because of substandard wages and working conditions compared to every other line of work in this country. I will guarantee you that people will work, given the jobs pay what they are worth. If you have to resort to hiring illegals to do your dirty work that everybody else deems beneath their dignity, who is bigoted here?

Here we see Okie demonstrating his ignorance. Again. The Nation has a minimum wage, and I can tell you first hand NO ONE but kids in relatively prosperous communities work for it. In Wisconsin, the minimum wage is quite a bit higher than the Fed; yet even fast food restaurants have starting wages that are higher. Still, there is a shortage of workers and I know of few restaurants that don't frequently run short staffed for this reason... even with the thousands of immigrant workers (all of whom earn according to their skill, for the 100th time).

0 Replies

OBill, You know that old saying, you can't teach and old dog new tricks? okie is one of those; he comes up with the most ignorant, uninformed, ideas on A2K, and I'll betcha dollars to donuts he'll continue on.

0 Replies

HokieBird wrote:

Foxfyre - if it's any comfort, Kay Bailey Hutchison feels exactly as you (and many, many others) do, so if you're both idiots (according to some name-calling hotheads weighing in here), at least you're in good company

Thank you HokieBird and yes. The reason I know Obill and the little dog yapping bravely from behind him are completely out of ammo is they are incapable of arguing any point without being personally insulting as well as a broken record reciting the same flawed lyrics. (Come to think of it, Little Dog did make a valid point earlier--I meant to compliment him on it though I disagreed with him somewhat--but he is still incapable of not piling on when he can make it a pack attack. At least he seems to agree with me that Obill is now fully integrated into the liberal camp. Smile

)

But for those who actually do care about getting this right, they need to be listening to the Kay Bailey Hutchinson's, etc. who don't have an ax to grind here and who want to accomplish the best possible deal for all concerned including those who actually will want to become legal give the opportunity to do so. We sure won't accomplish that by rewarding those who have been illegal while those waiting for legal admission continue to wait and the American people are stuck with the bill without any of the benefits.

Certainly those who have applied for legal admission through proper channels should be given preference over those who have flouted the law. Everybody else should have to get in line behind them AFTER they have become legal by going home and applying through proper channels.

Neither Carter nor Reagan offered a comprehensive guest worker program and that certainly has to be in place to accommodate whatever labor we need to import for the good of everybody. We haven't had that since Johnson discontinued Eisenhower's guest worker program in the 1960's. Johnson caved in to union pressures and I'm sure the unions are resisting a guest worker program now. Congress needs to stand strong against that.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

At least he seems to agree with me that Obill is now fully integrated into the liberal camp. )

That has to be about your dumbest talking point yet. I think you'd agree that Deb is among the most notable liberals on A2K, and the last time we engaged on a subject; she suggested I kill myself. Laughing

Don't kid yourself; I remain fiercely independent and you are simply wrong.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know