What should be done about illegal immigration?

U-oh -- I quoted Squinney from inside your quote. Sorry, e_brown, my mistake.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

i wonder if the disparity between e.u. members is the same as it is with usa/canada and the rest of the american continent ?

Actually, I'm not sure what you mean by that.

We have in our town council a Spanish and a Dutch town councillor, and in the various committes there are members from six different (than German) nationalties (town of 70,000 inhabitants).

well, according to my euro friends here, the e.u. members are more or less on the same footing in terms of quality of life. is that true ?

there's a huge difference in the quality of life (economics, schools, health care, crime etc.) between canada/usa and that of mexico. and between mexico and and some of the other s.a. countries.

at least that's what i'm told by friends who've traveled there. and it seems that if it were untrue, there wouldn't be so many people who want to leave their native countries and move to the usa.

and that topic is one of theings a=i'm surprised that there isn't more discussion about; how can the usa help those countries improve their lot ?

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

well, according to my euro friends here, the e.u. members are more or less on the same footing in terms of quality of life. is that true ?

It's mostly true now -- but Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain were much poorer than Germany when immigration opened. Moreover, workers from the ten new members (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary ...) will be able to freely immigrate from 2007 on -- and the differences between them and us are about as large as the ones between Mexico and the US.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
well, according to my euro friends here, the e.u. members are more or less on the same footing in terms of quality of life. is that true ?

It's mostly true now -- but Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain were much poorer than Germany when immigration opened. Moreover, workers from the ten new members (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary ...) will be able to freely immigrate from 2007 on -- and the differences between them and us are about as large as the ones between Mexico and the US.

what's the process for free immigration ?

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

what's the process for free immigration ?

You drive your car to the country of your choice, rent or buy a place to live, get a job, and get registered as an inhabitant if your host country requires it. At no point do you have to get anyone's permission. Currently, people from outside the EU and from the 10 new countries need a work permit, which the state may or may not issue. They won't need that anymore come 2007, and even now they can come to the 'old' EU and do anything but work.

0 Replies

EEU/EA Immigration in Denmark

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

-- and the differences between them and us are about as large as the ones between Mexico and the US.

Are you sure about that? I'm not disputing that you know better than i, i was just surprised by such a contention.

Additionally, Mexico is conduit for people from all over Latin America--is that so with the former Warsaw pact nations? Many of the people here focus on Mexico and Mexicans, but this not soley an issue of Mexicans. Many from nations such as Guatamala, El Salvador or Nicaragua claim that their nations' economies and societies were destroyed by US support for repressive regimes, as well, and it happens to be a good argument. Finally, the Mexican border is a major smuggling area, and especially as regards drugs. Do these situations apply with the EU?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Are you sure about that? I'm not disputing that you know better than i, i was just surprised by such a contention.

I just looked it up in the CIA World Factbook, which is a useful compendium of such data. It turns out that it depends on a heavy stretch of my word "about". If you compare per capita GDP adjusted to purchasing power, Mexico's is $10,000, Poland's $12,000, Germany's $30,000, and the US $42,000. (Rounded to thousands as my short term memory is too leaky to hold the hundreds.) So while there is a great discrepancy within Europe and my assessment wasn't total fantasy, the numbers do confirm some of your skepticism. (The difference shrinks even more when you look at the smaller new EU countries.)

Setanta wrote:

Additionally, Mexico is conduit for people from all over Latin America--is that so with the former Warsaw pact nations? Many of the people here focus on Mexico and Mexicans, but this not soley an issue of Mexicans. Many from nations such as Guatamala, El Salvador or Nicaragua claim that their nations' economies and societies were destroyed by US support for repressive regimes, as well, and it happens to be a good argument. Finally, the Mexican border is a major smuggling area, and especially as regards drugs. Do these situations apply with the EU?

Well, kind of. We have a lot of Ukrainians, Belarussians and Russians. But the legal barriers are higher for them than they are for EU citizens, so the direct immigration from EU members dominates the conduit effect. I'd have to look up the precise numbers though, and I'm not sure where.

0 Replies

This thread is taking too much of my time and energy and I have said everything at least once.

I want to leave now with one thing very clear.

I am as serious about immigrant rights as my parents were about civil rights. Above all else, this is my political focus.

As a white American citizen this movement is very important to me for many if the same reasons-- from my desire to oppose racism to my hatred of the injustice of pinning problems on a vulnerable population. Most of all is my belief of what the United States means and my hope that we can live up to our ideals as a compassionate and diverse society.

I understand the arguments about the law. I don't feel like this makes sense for the call for deportation, or cover the fact that there is a large racial component to the anti-"illegal"-immigrant movement.

Don't think for a moment that this is a battle of Americans versus immigrants illegal or otherwise.

To this American, this is a fight for justice and for the meaning of what it means to be American. I plan to carry out this struggle, the same as my parents did-- God willing, with the same results.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Anon-Voter wrote:
California passed Prop. 187 while Gov. Pete Wilson was in power. It was later declared unconstitutional.

Under the California or the US constitution?

California, with Federal complications. Here is kind of a quick and dirty.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/03/19/prop.187/

While searching for an answer, I see Arizona has Prop. 200 which is very much the same.

Anon

0 Replies

Anon-Voter wrote:

Thomas wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
California passed Prop. 187 while Gov. Pete Wilson was in power. It was later declared unconstitutional.

Under the California or the US constitution?

California, with Federal complications. Here is kind of a quick and dirty.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/03/19/prop.187/

While searching for an answer, I see Arizona has Prop. 200 which is very much the same.

Anon

Wilson was voted out, however, and Gray Davis and key figures in his administration were 100% opposed to Prop 187 and made sure no appeal ever saw the light of day. Most believe the Supreme Court would have ruled in favor of Prop 187 and the opponents did not want the SCOTUS to consider the issue.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Anon-Voter wrote:
Thomas wrote:
Anon-Voter wrote:
California passed Prop. 187 while Gov. Pete Wilson was in power. It was later declared unconstitutional.

Under the California or the US constitution?

California, with Federal complications. Here is kind of a quick and dirty.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/03/19/prop.187/

While searching for an answer, I see Arizona has Prop. 200 which is very much the same.

Anon

Wilson was voted out, however, and Gray Davis and key figures in his administration were 100% opposed to Prop 187 and made sure no appeal ever saw the light of day. Most believe the Supreme Court would have ruled in favor of Prop 187 and the opponents did not want the SCOTUS to consider the issue.

Pop Quiz!!

What do you think was one of the MAIN reasons Wilson was voted out??

Special credit for a correct answer!!

Anon

0 Replies

- Walter

EU citizens can travel from country to country, but you do have problems with illegal aliens, right? In Spain and Italy I remember seeing many arabs and turks, which I'm not sure if they where there legally or not, hehe.

- Squinney

Comparing the inmigrant problem between US and Mexico to other countries in the world just doesn't cut it. A solution that fits the special circumstances of the situation needs to be created. For good or evil, we are neighbors.

- Dont Tread on Me

How the US can help Mexico? That would be interesting, specially if our left candidate wins the presidential spot...

BTW. I suddenly remembered a Simpsons episode about deporting inmigrants. Homer finally felt sorry for Apu, the hindu store clerk.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

This thread is taking too much of my time and energy and I have said everything at least once.

I want to leave now with one thing very clear.

I am as serious about immigrant rights as my parents were about civil rights. Above all else, this is my political focus.

As a white American citizen this movement is very important to me for many if the same reasons-- from my desire to oppose racism to my hatred of the injustice of pinning problems on a vulnerable population. Most of all is my belief of what the United States means and my hope that we can live up to our ideals as a compassionate and diverse society.

I understand the arguments about the law. I don't feel like this makes sense for the call for deportation, or cover the fact that there is a large racial component to the anti-"illegal"-immigrant movement.

Don't think for a moment that this is a battle of Americans versus immigrants illegal or otherwise.

To this American, this is a fight for justice and for the meaning of what it means to be American. I plan to carry out this struggle, the same as my parents did-- God willing, with the same results.

this is a total cop out.

take deportation and real/imagined racism off the table on this issue and you think that there's nothing else that needs working out ?

that's really disappointing.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
what's the process for free immigration ?

You drive your car to the country of your choice, rent or buy a place to live, get a job, and get registered as an inhabitant if your host country requires it. At no point do you have to get anyone's permission. Currently, people from outside the EU and from the 10 new countries need a work permit, which the state may or may not issue. They won't need that anymore come 2007, and even now they can come to the 'old' EU and do anything but work.

okay, so really, the only requirement is/will be to let the government know that you are coming. is that correct ?

0 Replies

I had a dream last night, it was 1958, father knew best and mom wore the keenest starched dresses. The coloured folk stayed on their side of town after dark and everyone went to church on sunday. Normal Rockwell was a hit and Readers Digest was in every bathroom. Communists were under my bed along with Playboy and dad drove a Desoto.

0 Replies

A few takes on the subject:

1. There are laws that can feasibly be forced and there are laws that cannot possibly be forced.
Imagine if everyone who smokes pot in the US was busted, filed and jailed, as the laws say.

So what do the authorities do to curb the problem? They usually go after the dealers, close an eye on the average consumer and attack social groups who may be a menace to society for other reason.

Same thing with illegal immigration. Do you honestly think it's possible to deport 12 million people, and respect the rights of the legal aliens and the rights of the American citizens with a Latino face and last name? If so, you are dreaming.

2. The USA is obssesed with security since 9-11, and perhaps rightly so. The security and immigration issues are bound together, but cannot be solved by force. Right now, there are 12 million people in the US the government can't account for. With an orderly process of legalization of the bulk of this people the others can be dealt with with relative ease.

3. A rational bipartisan solution has been proposed. Documentation of those who have been living in the US for at least 5 years; temporary visas, and a throughout checking of whose who have lived in the US between 2 and 5 years (including law abiding checkings and an English skills test); deportation without harassment to those who arrived later.
It's not the whole enchilada for either side, but it's workable.

4. If such a legislation is not approved (mainly because of right wing Republicans trying to soothe their electorate) the problem will get only worse. But populist politicians don't want to solve problems, they want to woo their constituency.

5. I have felt hatred, racism and anger among some of the anti-immigrant posters here on A2K. They often react to facts with their guts, not with their brains (let alone their hearts). It only means they have lost.
If you can actually see what's going on in yhe marches of the immigrants and the people who support them, then you'll notice that the prevailing sensation is similar to the great civil rights movement of a generation ago.
It only means history is on their side. And they shall overcome.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Interestingly enough, today's front page of the Seattle newspaper featured a photo of the crowd waving five & dime store American flag miniatures, but at the forefront of the picture was a huge red banner bearing the image of none other than Che Guevera. A couple of rows back were signs which seemed to suggest illegal Mexican immigrants were, somehow, political refugees.

The whole time I watched the parade, I never saw such banners or signs so it's possible that the front page pictures spoke more to the editorial bias of the newspaper than the prevalent sentiment among the marchers.

That's interesting, indeed.

Avtually, there are two papers in Seattle.
Both had a slightly different frontpage yesterday:

"The Seattle Times" (seems you referred to it):

and the "Seattle Post-Intelligencer"

And your point is?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
All people who - according to Foxfyre "may or may not have the best interests of the United States at heart".

When I go to a demonstrations, the last what I think about is the interest of Germany - I demonstrate to express my own opinion.

I am most pleased to hear that every single person in Germany, especially those demonstrating, have the best interest of Germany at heart as they express their own opinions, Walter. I'm sure that no German has ever had a notion that was not in the interest of the greater good.

I am also most pleased that everybody present in those demonstrations are fully educated on what the issues are. I'll admit, we Americans tend to be far less superior on that score. Many Americans, some present company included, seem to have a blind eye re what most Americans believe the real issues to be and keep beating whatever drum they're beating that reflects only a portion of the larger picture.

We should probably take lessons from the Germans I suppose. How do you manage to get everybody there to think alike on these things?

0 Replies

Nod/fbaezer

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know