What should be done about illegal immigration?

Quote:

k) You don't care that those who have played by the rules to immigrate legally are punished while illegal activity is rewarded.

The "rules" have consistently been arbitrary and capricious, noone is punished. This is an old "zero-sum" argument used by the south during the 50's and 60's to demonstrate that giving addition civil rights to black americans would somehow result in the loss of civil rights to whites. It was bullshit then and remains bullshit today.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

g) You don't care if a few terrorists slip across the border along with ordinary people

I do care, but 1) the terrorists of 9/11 entered the US legally, and 2) most of them were middle-class or wealthy professionals with college degrees, a category of foreigners your immigration policy seeks to attract. Their intermingling with Mexican immigrants is a strawman by the Department of Homeland Security, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service has become part of.

0 Replies

I tend to agree with Thomas on illegal drugs; an oxymoron from the inception on the "war on drugs."

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

Quote:
k) You don't care that those who have played by the rules to immigrate legally are punished while illegal activity is rewarded.

The "rules" have consistently been arbitrary and capricious, noone is punished. This is an old "zero-sum" argument used by the south during the 50's and 60's to demonstrate that giving addition civil rights to black americans would somehow result in the loss of civil rights to whites. It was bullshit then and remains bullshit today.

And (this becoming my campaign slogan): You can't play by the rules if the rules say "you can't play".

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

e) You don't care that all students suffer from so many special needs kids who can't speak any English being admitted to the schools to receive a free education

I admit the cost of schooling is problematic. On the one hand, you can't reward law-brakers by schooling their kids for free; on the other hand the kids had no part in their parents' decision, so there are moral problems with taking it out on them.

But the "special needs" part is not.a problem in a voucherized school system, which I advocate as a libertarian, and which would lead to the emergence of specialized schools catering to children who speak Spanish at home.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

e) You don't care that all students suffer from so many special needs kids who can't speak any English being admitted to the schools to receive a free education

I admit the cost of schooling is problematic. On the one hand, you can't reward law-brakers by schooling their kids for free; on the other hand the kids had no part in their parents' decision, so there are moral problems with taking it out on them.

But the "special needs" part is not.a problem in a voucherized school system, which I advocate as a libertarian, and which would lead to the emergence of specialized schools catering to children who speak Spanish at home.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
f) You don't care that 40 to 60% of the prison populations of the border states are made up of illegals who have committed serious crimes

You gave that percebtage already a couple of times before.

As of 2003, there were in New Mexico (in federal, state, county/town and private prisons) a total of about 12,000 inmates. (Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics) [etc. etc.]

Even the worst conclusions made by newsmax a couple of weeks ago gave much lower numbers.

(Up to a third of the prison poplulation is non-citizens, but not all of these are here illegally!)

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
If we use your logic eBrown we will have to conclude:
k) You don't care that those who have played by the rules to immigrate legally are punished while illegal activity is rewarded.

Legalization of all (non-criminal, healthy) immigration solves that issue, becaue there will be no more illegal immigrants.

Okay, so I've been told it's extremely unfeasable to round up and deport 12 million people. But, evidently it's not unfeasable to do backround and health checks on 12 million?

One thing we should all be able to agree on is that we aren't going to solve this issue. It will remain front page for a few more months and then die away as the election recedes with no satisfactory laws or regulations put into place.

0 Replies

Walter, it's not unfortunate you don't receive Lou Dobbs in Germany (I realize germans don't take baths regularly) Lou is quite adept at pulling stats out of his ass (especially from extreme rightwing orgs) to prove his point and cares not if it's accurate. Apparently Foxfyre supports Lou Dobbs to the same degree she supports JustGiggles in imaginary numbers.

0 Replies

Too many posts. I'll sum up the rest in one.

Foxfyre wrote:

a) You want as many illegals to move here as want to move here

I want to legalize all immigration along similar lines of pre-1921 immigration laws. (Minus the discrimination against Chinese immigrants.)

Foxfyre wrote:

b) You don't want the government to do anything to stop them or do anything but welcome them with open arms when they come

I want the government to let them in, and leave the welcoming to charities, which is the way it was before 1921.

Foxfyre wrote:

c) You don't mind that hard working people who have played by the rules all their lives are, against their choice, having to support many of the illegals who get here

I do mind, and propose to solve the problem by legalizing immigration, abolishing much of the welfare state, and abolishing even more of it for recent immigrants.

Foxfyre wrote:

d) You don't mind that hospitals close emergency room and deny everybody emergency care because they can no longer afford to provide free services for so many

I do mind, and admit this is a valid and hard problem. T

You're getting a score of one for eleven from me.

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

Okay, so I've been told it's extremely unfeasable to round up and deport 12 million people. But, evidently it's not unfeasable to do backround and health checks on 12 million?

It is feasible for the newcomers. I would amnestize those who are already here. Yes, this brings back the problem of punishing those who followed the rules when the rules were stupid, but its a lesser problem than continuing to criminalize immigration.

squinney wrote:

One thing we should all be able to agree on is that we aren't going to solve this issue. It will remain front page for a few more months and then die away as the election recedes with no satisfactory laws or regulations put into place.

This is a political thread. We're not supposed to solve anything, we're supposed to hurl invectives at each other Smile

Other than that, agreed.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
g) You don't care if a few terrorists slip across the border along with ordinary people

I do care, but 1) the terrorists of 9/11 entered the US legally, and 2) most of them were middle-class or wealthy professionals with college degrees, a category of foreigners your immigration policy seeks to attract. Their intermingling with Mexican immigrants is a strawman by the Department of Homeland Security, which the Immigration and Naturalization Service has become part of.

The majority of Americans consider hundreds of thousands of illegals entering the U.S. through our southern border to be an unacceptable risk. Most aren't even aware of anything Homeland Security has said on the matter. Are you suggesting that terrorists are too stupid to see this as an opportunity?

0 Replies

As far as the other negatives of illegal immigration, here are just a few (most previously posted) sources outlining and/or providing links to data, statistics, research, etc. on this subject.

Yes, you can find self-serving articles disputing this data, but none that can back it up with any serious research.

To acknowledge this in no way suggests that all or even most illegals in the U.S. are part of the problem. To fail to acknowledge that the problem exists is naivete to the extreme.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_1_the_illegal_alien.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/27/114208.shtml

http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/mexico/release.html

http://www.cairco.org/econ/econ.html

(acknowledging immediately that some of you will object to or challenge the sources without checking to see if the informaton is correct. I will not further deal with that, but go ahead if you feel you must.)

0 Replies

very adept segue Foxfyre, the one FoxNews uses is "some people say." Also called innuendo sans facts.

0 Replies

So only illegals and Indians are in New Mexico's prisons.

0 Replies

Thomas - Background and health checks on people applying to come here legally (after amnesty is granted to those already here) only goes back to the red tape and backlog that was the reason given for people crossing the border unchecked to begin with. Not to mention, you've just added major payroll to the government.

0 Replies

I don't know how you arrive at that conclusion Walter, but maybe they do math differently in Germany.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I don't know how you arrive at that conclusion Walter, but maybe they do math differently in Germany.

40% to 60% illegals for serious (!) crimes out of 12,000 (official numbers from 2003 - latest I could find online).
Add illegal inmates for not serious crimes (which should outnumber those for serious, I think) ...

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

Okay, so I've been told it's extremely unfeasable to round up and deport 12 million people. But, evidently it's not unfeasable to do backround and health checks on 12 million?

It is feasible for the newcomers. I would amnestize those who are already here. Yes, this brings back the problem of punishing those who followed the rules when the rules were stupid, but its a lesser problem than continuing to criminalize immigration.[/quote]
On reflection, I think it is possible to do background checks on 12 million people. The difference is that in a mass deportation, you have to round up 12 million people who don't want to be found. I in the background check scenario, going by the historical percentages, you have 11.8 million people who want to be found and to demonstrate that they have nothing to hide, leaving you with 0.2 million people who don't want to be found that you have to round up. That's much easier.

Foxfyre wrote:

The majority of Americans consider hundreds of thousands of illegals entering the U.S. through our southern border to be an unacceptable risk.

(1) If you legalize immigration, they are no longer illegals.
(2) That wasn't your original claim. Your original claim about security concerned terrorists, not illegal immigrants.

Foxfyre wrote:

Are you suggesting that terrorists are too stupid to see this as an opportunity?

No, I am suggesting that the Southern border isn't the limiting factor to the influx of terrorists. For all I know, the terrorists knew your border security before 9/11, and still didn't enter illegally through Mexico. Most of them came in with tourist visa and overstayed them, a problem you don't fix by monitoring the southern border.

0 Replies

When you got your mind made up it's hard to reason with facts. Say it ain't so Fox.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know