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.
The point is you can't compare the migration of citizens to that of illegals. We have the right to move about freely in this country and they do not. They might wish otherwise but that is not reality.
You dont care about the fact that every nation has immigration laws. But as a nation it is our legal right to also have such.
As far burdening ourselves with anyone. I feel with high standards we minimize the risk of burden.
I dont feel I own the USA as I do my private property. But as a legal citizen I do have a degree ownership of my nation. I would expect my fed gov to restrict and control who enters. They may not live in my home but I will be forced at some point shoulder atleast a measure of the burden of those they allow that dont pan out. They drive on our roads, they occupy our prisons, their children attend our schools and they use our hospitals to name but a few areas.
To be honest I am not sure what you mean by the term normatively.
A normative discussion is a discussion about the way things ought to be.
A positive discussion is one about the way things are. You are having a positive discussion here when you start talking about the rights we have, immigration laws in other countries, etc. But I've been trying to have a normative discussion in comparing migration between states/towns and migration between countries.
A normative discussion is a discussion about the way things ought to be.
A positive discussion is one about the way things are. You are having a positive discussion here when you start talking about the rights we have, immigration laws in other countries, etc. But I've been trying to have a normative discussion in comparing migration between states/towns and migration between countries.
ahhhhhhhh Thank you for the education.
Ill try to do the normative.
I would say that states should be able to chose not allowing say felons and such to migrate to their states.
In my perfect world. I would want parents who are here legally to just say I am ready for our child to immigrate now and that fast a VISA is approved. Age should not be a factor because a parents love normally doesn't change due to age.
This is difficult for me because I tend to be quite literal.
Migration of peoples to and from countries. A nation should always be allowed to determine who qualifies and on what basis. I might never agree with that country but I will respect their choice. Who am I to dictate to another country? who are they to impose their ideals on us and try to force us to take those they dont want?
For example I don't agree with most if any dictators. So I wont go to those countries.
ahhhhhhhh Thank you for the education.
Ill try to do the normative.
I would say that states should be able to chose not allowing say felons and such to migrate to their states.
In my perfect world. I would want parents who are here legally to just say I am ready for our child to immigrate now and that fast a VISA is approved. Age should not be a factor because a parents love normally doesn't change due to age.
This is difficult for me because I tend to be quite literal.
Migration of peoples to and from countries. A nation should always be allowed to determine who qualifies and on what basis. I might never agree with that country but I will respect their choice. Who am I to dictate to another country? who are they to impose their ideals on us and try to force us to take those they dont want?
For example I don't agree with most if any dictators. So I wont go to those countries.
I know I have failed. I gave it a shot.
This is what I was looking for, more or less. You didn't fail as long as we're on the same page.
So why do you think that you should have the right to impose yourself onto another state but not another country? Let's take welfare out of the question - assume that by migrating you wouldn't be taking any social services in either case. Do you think that you inherently should be less able to cross national borders? Or maybe a more interesting question is, should one state be able to prevent people from another state from entering?
Thats an example. They have a trade and a skill we need.
This as opposed to allowing a stampede to get into our country seems to make more sense
Sure, it sounds great, we'll just have really good planners and everything will be neat and orderly.
Just like every other group of well-meaning bureaucrats who claimed they would GET IT RIGHT this time.
The mechanisms for allocating resources already exist - supply and demand, prices, markets. Centrally planned attempts to improve upon them have historically been colossal failures. How is your plan going to avoid the failures of the past?
This is what I was looking for, more or less. You didn't fail as long as we're on the same page.
So why do you think that you should have the right to impose yourself onto another state but not another country? Let's take welfare out of the question - assume that by migrating you wouldn't be taking any social services in either case. Do you think that you inherently should be less able to cross national borders? Or maybe a more interesting question is, should one state be able to prevent people from another state from entering?
I think that every country is unique in their perspective of what is right wrong and what is just or unjust. Where as states answer to the fed to some degree. this was a what if or should of excercise.
I believe I as the individual cant impose my belief systems upon another state. However if I could I would ban 1 state from exporting their criminals to my state. Or in the case of new jersey I would ban them from moving to my state completely LOL. They cant seem to get along with anyone. LOL
In the case of national borders. Some countries do have more than others a higher standard of living more modern or robust infrastructure etc. This is achieved due to the balance of population versus resourses and revenue. If for example we opened to unlimited migration from canada and say 25% of that population migrated to the usa I would imagine that we would be overwhelmed. we simply can not obsorb such a mass migration and continue as we are. The other factor is what would the impact be on Canada? What if most of their higher skilled and educated people made the migration?
I believe and always will believe that every individual nation should determine whats best for them and never the immigrants. Immigrants know what might be good for them as individuals but care little what impact they may or may not have. Nor do they consider the impact of a mass migration. Its only human nature to care about their own interests above all else.
I just had to post this for those in here that keep claiming that we anti-illegals only blame the illegal workers and not the greedy employers. Of course they want to absolve the illegals of any wrongdoing and only blame the employers. So it is kind of hypocritical, isn't it? Both the employers and the illegals are to blame and we all know that.
"On Tuesday, Rasmussen Reports released the results of a recent poll showing that an overwhelming majority of American voters want tough sanctions imposed on businesses which hire illegal aliens".
"The national telephone survey found that 75 percent of ‘likely U.S. voters’ favor strict government sanctions against those who hire illegal aliens, while just 16 percent oppose such sanctions (The telephone survey of 1,000 likely U.S. voters was conducted between July 14-15, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.)"
I believe and always will believe that every individual nation should determine whats best for them and never the immigrants. Immigrants know what might be good for them as individuals but care little what impact they may or may not have. Nor do they consider the impact of a mass migration. Its only human nature to care about their own interests above all else.
Really ? The way things are currently in this country doesn't seem very positive to me. Wouldn't that better be termed a "negative discussion" ?
I was gonna lol, but then I realized that I genuinely can't tell if you are serious.
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.
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.
