U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-21-2011, 06:42 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,158,884 times
Reputation: 2130

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Tell me how early immigrants entered the United States the "legal way"...

Didn't you tell me at one time that you had your U.S. citizenship from your "bloodlines", that your ancestors were citizens, so you were a citizen?...

If my Great Great Grandfather (of the certificate earlier in this thread) became a U.S. citizen after only 3 years and 11 months, did he get his citizenship improperly?...

What effect of whether it was or wasn't would that have on any of the rest of his life?...
Again, this is the illegal immigraton forum. If you wish to discuss legal immigration both past and present I suggest you find the proper forum for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-21-2011, 07:00 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,015,841 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbartlebee View Post
Different times, different era, different century, and different laws.
So a wholly different perspective that no "foreigner" has a God-given right to come and live in the United States now, as compared to the past? They were foreigners then too you know. Please expand on what limitations and why you don't want any foreigners now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 07:20 PM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,824,744 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickDros View Post
No need for you to write up anything, I'll rehash it again for you right now.

As just one example, you claimed the following in post #68 of this thread:
It was then pointed out that the decreased wages you were talking about also benefit everyone who buys products sold by people being paid lower wages. (Post #71 and others)

You then replied that this is wrong because you see prices of goods and services increasing. (Post #75, again in Post #88, Post #109 and elsewhere)

We then explained, in numerous posts and in great detail, how decreased labor costs DO benefit the consumer even if the total price of the good or service increases.

You then moved on to steps 5 [Posts #92 and #99] and 6(a) [Post #119 and thereafter]


When making your arguments you contradict yourself and make bold assertions supported only by your own bias and a few anecdotes, yet then turn around and ask for precise, detailed information from your detractors when they point out how questionable the claims you're making are. Congressional Budget Office, Social Security Administration reports are all thrown aside, deemed useless by you, yet you continue to link to things like "Taylor Inspection Services" website, the "Contractor Insurance and Risk Management Blog" and Monterey County Weekly. Do you not see the hypocrisy and result-seeking nature of this methods you're employing here?


What will suffice, then? Surely not random newspaper articles and youtube videos. I mean, if the government is biased and inept you must obviously see that reporting from the newspaper industry, which is arguably more inept than the federal government, is just as likely to be biased and error prone?

And if you, here (in the italicized portion above), admit that there is NO actual data, how in the world do you come to the conclusion that the costs associated with illegal immigration are what you claim? If you really believe that there is no actual data, then you cannot take a position that illegal immigration costs society great sums of money, since you've just claimed it's impossible to know that with certitude.

Finally, the "blatant fabrications" aren't restricted to one side of this debate, and I'd argue appear more often in the anti-immigration supporters claims. Have you provided any evidence for that nonsensical "...but they pocket the savings!" meme? Or how about when you've slyly insinuated that using undocumented workers automatically makes an employer more likely to cut corners and produce shoddy products? And remember, if you're going to provide proof, it must be irrefutable, verifiable, and from an unbiased source - ie. held to the same level of scrutiny that you would apply to sources supporting the other side.


These are just some of the assumptions you make about groups with whom you disagree, supported by a few anecdotes found in various newspaper and industry reports. You don't apply nearly the same level of skepticism to those sources as you do the ones provided by your opponents, which is the harbinger of someone who is merely looking to verify their opinion, not come to an objective truth.
Okay, let’s deal with the facts. Your Econ 101 synopsis simply indicated what “could” or “should” result from the employment of cheap labor. But, you failed to provide concrete evidence to support your assertion. You cannot simply assume consumers are benefiting from the wages paid to illegals solely based on economic principles. Irrefutable evidence would consist of actual records from a large segment of illegal employers to show a direct correlation between wages paid and prices offered. Otherwise, it is pure speculation.

Now, from a behavioral perspective, one could assume that those with a proclivity for unethical/unlawful behavior, i.e. the willful violation of employment laws, tax evasion, etc, would also have a tendency to inflate prices. But, again, that would be based on principle, not necessarily practice.

We do not have an accurate accounting of the costs incurred by taxpayers for illegal immigration. Nor is there any possible method to accurately determine the amount illegals pay in taxes, or whether their employers are meeting their tax obligations. But, we do know the actual costs for specific benefits and services, such as the annual K-12 cost per student, ESL classes, breakfast/lunch programs, WIC, welfare, etc.

Bottom line: The veracity of a report is determined by the reliability of the data. Unfortunately, the government, by its own admission, does not maintain records on the illegal alien population, with the exception of their recent decision to identify incarcerated illegal aliens. Therefore, the Census Bureau, SSA, IRS, and USCIS have no data from which to compile reports -- none whatsoever. So, how can their reports possibly be considered credible? In other words, junk in, junk out.

Clearly, if the government does not even know who they are, or where they’re employed, they certainly can’t tell us what they earn, their tax contributions, or for that matter, anything, other than they are here, and they number in the millions.

So, you base your opinion on government data, and I will continue to rely on published reports from hospital administrators, school districts, Social Services, and those directly impacted by illegal immigration.

I have to leave, but would love to continue this discussion later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,015,841 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
...As for Roosevelt's remark perhaps he was just trying to reiterate to new immigrants what was expected of them. That doesn't mean that many or most weren't assimilating in a timely manner.
Theodore Roosevelt, quoted in the New York Times, 1 February 1916:

..."If I could I would have the kind of restriction which would not allow any immigrant to come here unless I was content that his grandchildren would be fellow-citizens of my grandchildren. They will not be so if he lives in a boarding house at $2.50 per month with ten other boarders and contracts tuberculosis and contributes to the next generation a body of citizens inferior not only morally and spiritually but also physically."...

Quoted in the Washington Post, 1 June 1916:

..."The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of national origin is certain to a breed of spirit of bitterness and prejudice and dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as German-Americans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans, and every such banding together, every attempt to make for political purposes a German-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means down at the bottom an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an effort to bring into our nation the bitter Old World rivalries amid jealousies and hatreds."...

Quoted in the Boston Daily Globe, 5 July 1917:

"...During the present war all newspapers published in German, or in the speech of any of our foes, should be required to publish, side by side with the foreign text, columns in English containing the exact translation of everything said in the foreign language. Ultimately this should be done with all newspapers published in foreign languages in this country."...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 08:05 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,158,884 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Theodore Roosevelt, quoted in the New York Times, 1 February 1916:

..."If I could I would have the kind of restriction which would not allow any immigrant to come here unless I was content that his grandchildren would be fellow-citizens of my grandchildren. They will not be so if he lives in a boarding house at $2.50 per month with ten other boarders and contracts tuberculosis and contributes to the next generation a body of citizens inferior not only morally and spiritually but also physically."...

Quoted in the Washington Post, 1 June 1916:

..."The effort to keep our citizenship divided against itself by the use of the hyphen and along the lines of national origin is certain to a breed of spirit of bitterness and prejudice and dislike between great bodies of our citizens. If some citizens band together as German-Americans or Irish-Americans, then after a while others are certain to band together as English-Americans or Scandinavian-Americans, and every such banding together, every attempt to make for political purposes a German-American alliance or a Scandinavian-American alliance, means down at the bottom an effort against the interest of straight-out American citizenship, an effort to bring into our nation the bitter Old World rivalries amid jealousies and hatreds."...

Quoted in the Boston Daily Globe, 5 July 1917:

"...During the present war all newspapers published in German, or in the speech of any of our foes, should be required to publish, side by side with the foreign text, columns in English containing the exact translation of everything said in the foreign language. Ultimately this should be done with all newspapers published in foreign languages in this country."...
And your point is?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,015,841 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
And your point is?
Even though he is now dead, do you think Theodore Roosevelt's opinion of the time was relevant, then or now?...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 10:49 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,158,884 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Even though he is now dead, do you think Theodore Roosevelt's opinion of the time was relevant, then or now?...
You were implying that he made the statements that he did because the immigrants at that time weren't assimilating. I beg to differ. He made them to reiterate what it meant to become an American. I agree, with his statements, however.

Now could we get back to the subject of illegal immigration instead of this constant derailment of discussing legal immigrants past and present?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2011, 11:35 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,015,841 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
You were implying that he made the statements that he did because the immigrants at that time weren't assimilating. I beg to differ. He made them to reiterate what it meant to become an American. I agree, with his statements, however.
But you think his statements are more relevant now than when he made them! The first reference is very interesting, as the objection is to the immigrant living in a crowded boarding house, which makes him (and his descendants!) a lesser quality ("inferior not only morally and spiritually but also physically"). A blast from the past!

Indulge me, I think if the OP has struck with the thread the original questions have been answered, and a great discussion has taken place...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2011, 02:14 AM
 
Location: In this horrid OBOMINATION
321 posts, read 305,357 times
Reputation: 154
IBM getting PWNED ITT AIAEC IMO.

Dude, this is now. 14.1 Trillion in debt now. 9.2 unemployment now. Moody's Rating on Obama's Watch to go down now. First downgrade now. Apocalypse NOW.

Seriously though, the border is a big problem and immigration reform needs to be addressed if we still have a county left after Obamanomics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2011, 11:50 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,158,884 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
But you think his statements are more relevant now than when he made them! The first reference is very interesting, as the objection is to the immigrant living in a crowded boarding house, which makes him (and his descendants!) a lesser quality ("inferior not only morally and spiritually but also physically"). A blast from the past!

Indulge me, I think if the OP has struck with the thread the original questions have been answered, and a great discussion has taken place...
No, his statements are just as relevant today as they were yesterday. The problem is that today we have a severe problem with illegal aliens not assimilating and their advocates colonizing right along with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top