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 pro-illegals must also believe that since not all murderers can be caught, or not all rapists can be caught, or since not all shoplifters can be caught -- that we should eliminate all the laws against homicide, rape and shoplifters. Just open the stores up, remove all security guards and cameras, realize the shoplifters are just trying to have a better life and no matter how hard you try you won't catch 100% of shoplifters so just let them take whatever they please.
God only knows why these people think amnesty is a positive thing. It was tried twice in Spain, it has been tried in France, Germany etc etc and all it has done is to encourage a new wave of illegal immigrants with the hopes that they too will become beneficiaries of amnesty.
That is the flaw with amnesty. It sounds good on the surface, and I had came to conclude that is maybe the only practical solution in a few posts of mine. However, what it does is, like you said, encourages people to come here illegally, worse when even more have come than in the previous amnesty. And in addition, it makes the USA, Spain, France, and Germany appear weak and will compromise when under pressure. You almost have to ask your self this: What is the point of having immigration laws, if all it takes is a few million(referring back to 1986), maybe not even a million, undocumented people to make America compromise?
Last edited by Chicagoland60426; 01-21-2012 at 06:07 PM..
Many pro-illegal people suggest that some kind of amnesty is needed because 12-20 million illegal aliens (or however many there are) simply can't all be rounded up and deported. While I agree that this is infeasible, it still isn't indicative of a need for amnesty.
If all taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal aliens were ended and employers started being penalized more severely and in much larger numbers for hiring illegals, many would self-deport. So, pro-illegal people, what's wrong with that?
The issue is pure politics. Employers (small business owners, corporations) tend to be run by conservatives who vote Republican. These are the same Republicans who bring the bulk of the political contributions that fund campaigns. First rule of politics: Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
From their perspective, the status quo is the best option. By hiring illegal labor, they:
- Skirt all those pesky labor laws and regulations, as well as deal with labor organizations. [Less regulations!]
- They profit from keeping the money they would have spent on taxes and benefits for legal labor [less taxes!]
- They create an issue that drives working-class conservatives to vote. [Deport the illegals!]
This is why most of the illegal immigration debate is focused on the supply, and not on the demand. Try this: the next time you attend a political debate, ask the conservative candidate if they support jail time or felony punishment for employers who hire illegal labor. Watch them tap-dance or squirm.
The pro-illegals must also believe that since not all murderers can be caught, or not all rapists can be caught, or since not all shoplifters can be caught -- that we should eliminate all the laws against homicide, rape and shoplifters. Just open the stores up, remove all security guards and cameras, realize the shoplifters are just trying to have a better life and no matter how hard you try you won't catch 100% of shoplifters so just let them take whatever they please.
I remember overhearing that a member got banned making an open-ended claim about support of Mexican cartels decapitating people...
That is the flaw with amnesty. It sounds good on the surface, and I had came to conclude that is maybe the only practical solution in a few posts of mine. However, what it does is, like you said, encourages people to come here illegally, worse when even more have come than in the previous amnesty. And in addition, it makes the USA, Spain, France, and Germany appear weak and will compromise when under pressure. You almost have to ask your self this: What is the point of having immigration laws, if all it takes is a few million(referring back to 1986), maybe not even a million, undocumented people to make America compromise?
You're right: amnesty for illegals is a sign of weakness.
Some of the ones hiring illegals off the books could be caught too. Obviously it would be harder, but if a few of these employers were given huge fines and lengthy jail terms, hiring of illegals off the books would decrease significantly.
Maybe - but the immediate problem is that you start putting small business men out of business. That is not politically acceptable. In many neighborhoods you would take out virtually every restaurant. You close every small motel.
You could have a set of inspectors that hit randomly but sufficiently often to prevent illlegal employment without getting nailed once a month and a $1,000 fine each time. Note though that you need a flexible work force...the illegals stop when they are regularly inspected and start up as soon as you lower the inspection rate. You can pay for the inspectors when they catch lots of aliens...but what do you pay them with when the aliens vanish.
Quote:
How would amnesty or "regularization" prevent or curtail the establishment of this "class" that works outside the system? I presume that employers would be required to comply with minimum wage and labor laws with respect to the current illegals and pay required taxes for the current illegals after they were given amnesty or "regularized."
Employers who want cheaper labor will still want cheaper labor, so wouldn't new illegals come in and fill the current illegals' place (especially with amnesty attracting more illegals to the country...look at what happened after the 1986 amnesty)?
Has to be coupled with a rock hard enforcement campaign. That did not happen in 86 thanks to Reagan and Bush and their successors. If we don't enforce it will certainly behave in a similar fashion now. Not as bad perhaps as the number of Mexicans in the likely demographic will run out reasonably quickly.
The regularization would have to be coupled with required reporting of employment. I would also suggest deportation on any association with a new illegal.
Quote:
A lot of people think birthright citizenship should be ended.
Nevertheless, even with birthright citizenship being the law, taxpayer-funded benefits should be only made available to adults if they are legal themselves, regardless of whether they have illegal children who they are receiving benefits on behalf of. I believe this is already the law in a few states, at least to some degree.
I would have little problem with the legal childrens funding being directed through a legal sponsor or a government agency. Note though that you might easily double the cost of the aid as you paid for these delivery channels.
After reading your post, it is obvious that not only are you uninformed, but your delusional thinking that America has a need legalize shoddy, cheap labor is astounding.
You are easily astounded! Perhaps something in your childhood...scared by a possum or something.
Quote:
I am a former tax fraud investigator for the IRS. Those who "pay taxes" not only do so fraudulently, they only do so in anticipation of a huge refund. If they were legalized in any way, the outcome would be the same. Just as they are in their home countries, economically, they are a net zero.
So you are a green eyeshade accountant. Like many of the breed you are expert at all you got to do is....
Kindly describe the mechanism whereby some poorly educated illegal alien is going to pay taxes to achieve a huge refund. This should be interesting.
Quote:
Believe me if a sincere crackdown were ordered and instituted, this country would be illegal alien free in less than 3 years.
Why don't you just wish us each ten million dollars? As likely to suceed as the above.
Quote:
As an over zealous supporter of illegal immigration, it is obvious that not only do you not know what is best for America's survival, you really don't care as long as those of you here illegally get a free pass and are allowed to remain in this country and milk it dry.
I don't support illegal immigration and never have. I want to get rid of it in the face of you strange people who want to maintain it.
I have no interest in the outcome other than as a concerned American who wants to see the thing brought to a conclusion. I don't hire them. I am not ethnically involved and my heart stopped bleeding years and years ago.
Quote:
Not only is amnesty not a requirement, neither is it necessary for the US to regularize or sign up a bunch of illegal alien criminals to work in this country. Nor are we obligated in any way to provide jobs, social services, reduced tuition or anything else to those who are in this country illegally, including, but not limited to those here breeding and/or running across the border dropping anchors.
In general we don't provide them anything other than limited humanitarian help.
The question as to what is limited to citizens and legals is much more complex than you imply. We tax them but then won't provide services?
Quote:
This statement is nothing more than wishful thinking. In light of the fact that anchor babies nor those who breed them are legally "under the jurisidiction thereof" (the US) that deliberate misinterpretation of the 14th by the corporate masters and the OBL can be overturned in one election cycle. There are many in congress working diligently to pass legislation to ensure that the illegal alien party will end.
Utter garbage. There is a simple test for "under the jurisdiction". Can you be arrested by the authorities.
Is it really your considered opinion that we cannot arrest illegal aliens?
Quote:
Deportation of millions of illegal aliens is not only feasible, it's totally possible, but not necessary. The vast majority of females are here to give birth as often as possible and collect a lifetime of taxpayer funded benefits. The correct intepretation of the 14th amendment would end the farse of birthright citizenship and save the taxpayers billions in welfare, WIC, Section 8 and medical bills. The mandatory institution of E-verify in every state would take care of the rest.
The fourteeth says what it says. You don't have to like it but it is the law of the land. You can leave if you don't care for it I suppose.
Illegal aliens are actually a cheap ride. One of the big arguments made by CIS against amnesty is that the bill for the illegals would more than double if they were made legal. So if you replace the illegals with legals of any sort you double the likely welfare bill.
Quote:
As more Americans become unemployed, homeless and hungry the wider awake and aware they become. You naively underestimate the intelligence, patience, anger and will of the American people.
The time bomb is ticking . . ..
And the ticking is getting slower and slower and slower.
The economy is clearly recovering. Likely enough to get Obama reelected given the quality of the opposition.
The more interesting question is whether the illegal immigration starts reviving in 2012 or 2013 as the economy picks up. Having done little to limit it one would suspect that it will modulated a little perhaps by a better economy in Mexico.
The pro-illegals must also believe that since not all murderers can be caught, or not all rapists can be caught, or since not all shoplifters can be caught -- that we should eliminate all the laws against homicide, rape and shoplifters. Just open the stores up, remove all security guards and cameras, realize the shoplifters are just trying to have a better life and no matter how hard you try you won't catch 100% of shoplifters so just let them take whatever they please.
Actually I think it more like the mortgage crisis. There are a few hundred thousand people out there who make bad loans and broke the law by falsifying documents to banks.
The crime leaves a paper trail that makes it rather easy to find and prove. A good prosecutor could probably build the base case on 20 to 30 people a day.
But they are not going to. Why not? They don't want to send a few hundred thousand people to prison nor do they want to spend the money to run the cases.
The prosecutors have never prosecuted all crimes in any category. Sometimes they walk away because the case is too difficult or would cost too much for a result no one cares for.
And that is the problem with the illegal aliens. Too expensive, difficult and disruptive to deal with. Should have been fixed in 1987 and 1988. It would have been easy and not terribly expensive to bring the curtain down hard at that point. But we did not. Now it is out of control big.
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.
