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.
Just like when we had all those poor irish moved to the US and turned it into a dump, just like the english said would happen.
The difference being that the Irish actually entered using the approved method or system. They had a right to be here. Illegals on the other hand do not have a right to be here.
The difference being that the Irish actually entered using the approved method or system. They had a right to be here. Illegals on the other hand do not have a right to be here.
Wait, so legal vs. illegal entry is the difference between "building a great nation" and "turning this place into a toilet"?
If that's actually the difference, then why would anyone OPPOSE legalization???
The difference being that the Irish actually entered using the approved method or system. They had a right to be here. Illegals on the other hand do not have a right to be here.
Wait, so legal vs. illegal entry is the difference between "building a great nation" and "turning this place into a toilet"?
If that's actually the difference, then why would anyone OPPOSE legalization???
Words in my mouth? I said that?
Legal v.s illegal is the difference between having a right to be here and not having a right to be here.
Correct me if Im wrong but this great nation is already built and without the help of the current crop of illegals.
If illegals are such great nation builders whats up with their country of origin? Why the need to leave? let them work that nation building magic at home.
YES because the needs were different and the nation was young and less populated.
When I built my house I need to plant a lawn. I planted the lawn. Should I keep seeding even though I have a lush lawn? I did it in the past so using your logic I should just keep seeding because I did it in the past.
Needs change. We have high unemployment and no end in sight. The reality is we simply don't need millions of immigrants.
Lets also not forget that in the day in question we didnt have all these social systems to finance and support.
The reality is its a different nation today than 100 or 200 years ago or even 50 years ago for that matter.
We can afford to be very selective and set very high standards.
Words in my mouth? I said that?
Legal v.s illegal is the difference between having a right to be here and not having a right to be here.
Well, the implication was that Mexicans are turning this place into a third world country. I pointed out that people said basically the same thing about european immigrants. And your response to that was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01
The difference being that the Irish actually entered using the approved method or system. They had a right to be here. Illegals on the other hand do not have a right to be here.
So is "right to be here" the difference or not? That's what you said, the difference is legality. How am I putting words in your mouth here?
Quote:
Correct me if Im wrong but this great nation is already built and without the help of the current crop of illegals.
The need can be dictated by demand. How could government guesswork possibly do a better job?
How can lack of standards be a better answer?
The problem I have with your postion is that it relies completely on the hope that immigration would be self leveling. In other words as opprotunity lessoned so would the flow of immigration.
I dont believe this to be true.
I have been in other countries seen the long lines at our embassies of people wanting to come here. They still believe that we are the land of plenty. They will keep coming in spite of the reality. They will come in mass, and we wont be able to absorb them quickly enough. Our infra structure will be maxed out as will our social services. We wont be able to keep up let alone afford the strain. The potential revenues will come long after the burdon. The majority will be minmum wage earners so federal revenues will only be drained no gain.
This is the reality of opening immigration on such a large scale.
Well, the implication was that Mexicans are turning this place into a third world country. I pointed out that people said basically the same thing about european immigrants. And your response to that was:
So is "right to be here" the difference or not? That's what you said, the difference is legality. How am I putting words in your mouth here?
We're all done? Nothing more to do?
Nothing unskilled undereducated labor will significantly impact. But they will impact our reserves what little we have.
I never implied mexicans would turn us into a 3rd world country. In fact I didnt even say anything about mexicans. So yes words in my mouth.
How can lack of standards be a better answer?
The problem I have with your postion is that it relies completely on the hope that immigration would be self leveling. In other words as opprotunity lessoned so would the flow of immigration.
We actually know it to be true. Immigration has lessened since 2008, for example.
When there is no demand, supply WILL dwindle. Now things like entitlements are effectively artificial supply. And I'm fully open to limiting them for immigrants (though I'd rather pay up and, say, cut military spending).
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.