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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-27-2012, 06:35 PM
 
1,922 posts, read 1,448,104 times
Reputation: 794

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Foreign Nationals voting in "Presidential" (as opposed to also including other candidates) elections if they are only renting an apartment every four years? On its own, no (and it has the same potential to happen without "open borders"). If that becomes the discussion there is the parallel sub-forum of "Elections".

The largest aspect in relation to immigration enforcement is the hyperbole, including our borders as currently being "wide-open". I have experience crossing "the border", and I will be more confident in that observation than someone away from the border region hearing about it second-hand. In reality, our border with Canada (and how their citizens can transit back and forth to the United States with relative ease) are more "open" than elsewhere.

To phrase it as a Straw Man in the form of a question:

"What, you are strangely not as worried about a Canadian voting in our "Presidential" elections (because they are quite able to rent an apartment every four years) as much as you are worried about a Mexican voting in them?"

You provided what policy you would like to see, but I didn't see it mention anything about family-based immigration. Being two-thirds of all current immigration, would you prefer to strike that to a more employment-based structure? Consider all of the posts on the topic so far, in particular to the others I have responded to.
Some of you are lost on this straw man point.

So after piecing things together through various posts, I have to assume that open borders applies to travel, but not residence and citizenship. If this is incorrect, feel free to correct me.

 
Old 07-27-2012, 07:34 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
Without biometrics, illegals will continue to produce quality fake documents capable of fooling even the most experienced HR department. They will also continue to pass E-Verify by using a valid SSN and the owner's name. Clearly, there is nothing they won't do to remain in this country, as evidenced by the recent reports of having their fingerprints surgically removed. But, they certainly can't fake DNA, or produce "new" fingerprints.

So, my immigration law would include biometrics, and no one could be employed without having their ID verified. We would also need to have adequate staffing to check current employees to ensure no one without legal authorization to work is employed. Every industry known to employ illegals, such as, landscapers, construction, hospitality, agriculture, and restaurants would be subjected to thorough audits to ensure all taxes and insurance are being paid for every employee, and their recordkeeping is in compliance with applicable laws...
Doesn't "immigration law" currently (for Legal Permanent Residents over the age of 14) have biometric data? Would you retain the current Resident Card parameters, or expand a similar form of picture/biometric ID to U.S. citizens as well? What about non-immigrants and Visa Waiver Program countries?

Most of all, if your ID program requires it for more than LPRs, how is it funded? Does the ID card always need to be carried, and presented to law enforcement on request? What funds the work-enforcement program?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...Any employer found guilty of employing illegals, either knowingly or unknowingly, would face a minimum fine of $20M plus $100k per illegal employee, 10 years in prison without the possibility of parole, forfeiture of all ill-gotten assets, revocation of business license, and in cases of flagrant violations, closure of business. The risk of employing illegal aliens must exceed the benefit.

Sanctuary cities, counties, and states would be fined a minimum of $500M, and forfeit all federal funds for a period of 5-15 years depending on the level of aiding and abetting.

A legal presence would be required to rent or purchase real property. Any landlord, bank, or mortgage company violating this law would face stiff penalties, determined by their number of violations, but not less than $10 million.

A legal presence would also be required to rent or purchase a car. Rental agencies or car dealerships found guilty of violating the law would face stiff penalties, including fines, revocation of business license, and in cases of flagrant violations, forfeiture of business...
Are all fines cycled back into the agency / law enforcement? By "legal presence", do you also mean a valid non-immigrant visa type (for such things as foreign tourists/investors)? How many hits to a mortgage company or an employer unknowingly employing illegal aliens would it take before they shut down voluntarily?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...I would rescind Plyler v Doe. A legal presence would be required to attend our public schools. Tax-funded school meals would be restricted to citizens. Non-citizens would be required to pay tuition to enroll their children in our public schools. They would also be required to pay for ESL classes for their children...
Would I have any penalty for withholding my non-citizen children from school, rather than paying into the system? Are they able to resume at their age level once they are citizens, or are they dropped back to the highest grade completed? Why are you penalizing my school funding (my wife and I also paying property tax) for having a family in compliance with all other employment and immigration law?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...Illegal aliens and all non-citizens would be classified the same as diplomats and their staff for purposes of Birthright Citizenship, realizing they could hold no allegiance to this country as defined by the U.S. Oath of Allegiance. Therefore, their children born on U.S. soil would not be conferred U.S. citizenship. In other words, unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen, their children would not be eligible...
Would you allow those (like Canadians, since 1977) with citizenship elsewhere to become U.S. citizens?...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...Illegal aliens would be eligible for life-saving emergency medical treatment only, unless they are prepared to pay in advance for all services rendered. LPRs would also be excluded from tax-funded medical treatment, unless they can prove they have paid enough taxes to cover the costs. In other words, tax-funded medical benefits and services would be reserved for U.S. citizens. Others must pay...
Is a non-citizen allowed to have a medical insurance plan? If an LPR is determined to have paid enough taxes for medical assistance, can they draw those benefits like Social Security at a later time? If the LPR feels that they would not gain anything from paying into the tax-funded system, can they withhold from those programs in tax filings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...Those determined to be in this country in violation of our laws would be immediately detained, and deported within 72 hours. If they return after deportation, their country of origin will forfeit aid in the amount equal to the costs to incarcerate the violator for a period of 10 years in a federal facility.

This may sound harsh, but illegals have mocked our laws and abused taxpayers long enough. It's time to get serious, and send a message to the world that if you enter the U.S. illegally, you will not be accommodated, your children will not be conferred U.S. citizenship, and you will be summarily deported if caught. If you choose to return after deportation, you will serve a 10-year prison sentence, no exceptions. It's time to take off the gloves, and stop encouraging illegal immigration.
And to stop encouraging legal immigration as well it seems...
 
Old 07-27-2012, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_IA View Post
Some of you are lost on this straw man point.

So after piecing things together through various posts, I have to assume that open borders applies to travel, but not residence and citizenship. If this is incorrect, feel free to correct me.
Why did you scale back after admonishing a comment about "open borders"? Do you think our relatively "open border" with Canada should be tightened up, because they are able to easily rent an apartment every four years, and thus could attempt to vote in a "Presidential" election? Are Canadians less likely to attempt to vote (they fit in fairly well in most areas of the United States) than other nationalities?

You have not responded to what changes you would make to the majority of legal immigration, family-based sponsorship...
 
Old 07-27-2012, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,857,919 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Doesn't "immigration law" currently (for Legal Permanent Residents over the age of 14) have biometric data? Would you retain the current Resident Card parameters, or expand a similar form of picture/biometric ID to U.S. citizens as well? What about non-immigrants and Visa Waiver Program countries?
Thanks to massive illegal immigration, our longstanding system of ID for work authorization and other transactions is totally ineffective. Illegals and their accomplices have rendered the SSN null and void. Consequently, we must have a tamper-proof system of identification for ALL who wish to live and work in this country. This is what happens when a government allows a country to be overrun by reprobate foreign invaders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Most of all, if your ID program requires it for more than LPRs, how is it funded? Does the ID card always need to be carried, and presented to law enforcement on request? What funds the work-enforcement program?
Nothing will change. Our current law requires ALL non-citizens over the age of 18 to carry on their person AT ALL TIMES documentation proving their legal presence. It will be funded by the card holder. Or, do you think U.S. citizens should foot the bill?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Are all fines cycled back into the agency / law enforcement? By "legal presence", do you also mean a valid non-immigrant visa type (for such things as foreign tourists/investors)? How many hits to a mortgage company or an employer unknowingly employing illegal aliens would it take before they shut down voluntarily?
You know the definition of legal. Or, you should. If not, Google.

They can close immediately if they'd like. Frankly, if they can't operate without employing illegal workers or relying on unethical business practices, they need to close.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Would I have any penalty for withholding my non-citizen children from school, rather than paying into the system? Are they able to resume at their age level once they are citizens, or are they dropped back to the highest grade completed? Why are you penalizing my school funding (my wife and I also paying property tax) for having a family in compliance with all other employment and immigration law?
You are certainly free to home school your children. If they later wish to resume studies in our public school system, and pass the entrance exam for a specific grade level, they will be placed accordingly.

Sorry, but citizenship has its privileges. Others will be required to pay tuition. Do you consider Mexico's policy punishment? I am sure legal immigrants also pay taxes there. Nonetheless, they are still required to pay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Would you allow those (like Canadians, since 1977) with citizenship elsewhere to become U.S. citizens?...
I do not endorse dual citizenship. Either sh**, or get off the pot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Is a non-citizen allowed to have a medical insurance plan? If an LPR is determined to have paid enough taxes for medical assistance, can they draw those benefits like Social Security at a later time? If the LPR feels that they would not gain anything from paying into the tax-funded system, can they withhold from those programs in tax filings?

Sure, they may have medical insurance, as long as they pay. Otherwise, citizens will be forced to pay their bills. After all, our immigration laws will not change EMTALA.

As you know, I already answered the social security question in another thread. Why rehash it here? My opinion has not changed.

This is an immigration law, not an IRS law. Check with the IRS for filing requirements.



Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
And to stop encouraging legal immigration as well it seems...
If foreigners don't like our immigration laws, they are free to remain in their country.
 
Old 07-27-2012, 08:37 PM
 
1,922 posts, read 1,448,104 times
Reputation: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post

Why did you scale back after admonishing a comment about "open borders"?
I asked a question. I want to know what open borders means. Does it mean we are all citizens of the world? Does it mean anyone is free to visit the USA anytime they want? Does it mean anyone can move here to live as a full-fledged citizen with rights (as in voting)?


Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post

Do you think our relatively "open border" with Canada should be tightened up, because they are able to easily rent an apartment every four years, and thus could attempt to vote in a "Presidential" election? Are Canadians less likely to attempt to vote (they fit in fairly well in most areas of the United States) than other nationalities?
I went back and looked to see if I specifically mentioned Mexico or Canada, and I don't see where I did, so I don't know why you are rambling on about Canada.

I will say that since most of the illegal alien problem comes from the south, that is where we should focus most of the effort to stop it. The Canadian border needs to be watched also.


Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post

You have not responded to what changes you would make to the majority of legal immigration, family-based sponsorship...
I didn't realize I was asked to do so.

As far as legal immigration, I mentioned my views on that when I started this thread.
 
Old 07-28-2012, 01:34 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
Thanks to massive illegal immigration, our longstanding system of ID for work authorization and other transactions is totally ineffective. Illegals and their accomplices have rendered the SSN null and void. Consequently, we must have a tamper-proof system of identification for ALL who wish to live and work in this country. This is what happens when a government allows a country to be overrun by reprobate foreign invaders.

Nothing will change. Our current law requires ALL non-citizens over the age of 18 to carry on their person AT ALL TIMES documentation proving their legal presence. It will be funded by the card holder. Or, do you think U.S. citizens should foot the bill? ...
You're not being clear, it also sounds like you would need U.S. citizens to carry that same ID...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...They can close immediately if they'd like. Frankly, if they can't operate without employing illegal workers or relying on unethical business practices, they need to close...
Say you have a landlord, renting to that LPR housecleaner for years. But she stepped out one day without her Resident Card. What happens to her and the landlord for that immigration violation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
...Do you consider Mexico's policy punishment? I am sure legal immigrants also pay taxes there. Nonetheless, they are still required to pay...
You aren't understanding Mexico's taxation system...
 
Old 07-28-2012, 01:41 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_IA View Post
...As far as legal immigration, I mentioned my views on that when I started this thread.
On another thread a commenter mentioned that her father immigrated from Canada under a PhD program. He is attributed to benefiting our society. The foreign national spouse of a U.S. citizen may not need to be employed here, and may not be classified at the same level.

Should that spouse be able to immigrate?...
 
Old 07-28-2012, 07:18 AM
 
1,922 posts, read 1,448,104 times
Reputation: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
On another thread a commenter mentioned that her father immigrated from Canada under a PhD program. He is attributed to benefiting our society. The foreign national spouse of a U.S. citizen may not need to be employed here, and may not be classified at the same level.

Should that spouse be able to immigrate?...
Why not?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_IA View Post
I would really like to know.

Should we let anyone who wants to enter, do so?

I think it should be tightly controlled.

Unless you are likely able to support yourself, you don't get in.

Do you fill a need that we can't fill within? If not why should we let you in?

Have a criminal record.... you're not getting in.

Want to come in and start a business.... probably, depends on the business.

I am tired of letting refugees in. Let the UN find another place for refugees. It will give the UN something to do other than worry about my guns.

This is just a general idea of what I think we should do. There could be exceptions to the rules, but not many.
 
Old 07-28-2012, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,857,919 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
You're not being clear, it also sounds like you would need U.S. citizens to carry that same ID...
The tamper-proof ID would replace our ineffective SS card and used for the same purposes. I thought I made that clear.

I said the current law would stand relative to documentation for non-citizens, which requires them to carry their documents AT ALL TIMES. Are U.S. citizens now required to carry ID proving citizenship status? No. Neither would they with the new law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Say you have a landlord, renting to that LPR housecleaner for years. But she stepped out one day without her Resident Card. What happens to her and the landlord for that immigration violation?
You're being silly. Although failing to comply with the law by not carrying her documents at all times, she would still have legal status and be in possession of legal documents, which could easily be produced for authorities; similar to a licensed driver who leaves her DL at home. Does one cease being a licensed driver simply because the license is not on their person while driving a car? It is a violation of motor vehicle laws, but it doesn't change the status of the driver. However, unless she committed an act that would bring her to the attention of law enforcement, why would she need to prove her status? This isn't the German Gestapo.

The landlord is only responsible for ensuring the rental property is being leased and occupied by a person or family with a legal presence. He/she is not responsible for the failure of said person(s) to comply with our laws. Would a landlord be responsible for a citizen who speeds, drives drunk, robs a bank, or commits any unlawful act? Of course not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
You aren't understanding Mexico's taxation system...
Mexico's tax system is irrelevant. The fact remains, only citizens of Mexico and LEGAL immigrants may enroll in their public schools. And, legal immigrants are required to pay tuition. Unlike the doormat USA, that forces taxpayers to pay for the K-12 education of every child living here, regardless of immigration status, the children of illegal aliens living in Mexico are denied a public school education. Yet, Calderon has the audacity to whine about the "draconian" immigration law in Arizona, and considers our attempts to enforce our laws "inhumane."

Last edited by Benicar; 07-28-2012 at 09:19 AM..
 
Old 07-28-2012, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,029,168 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
The tamper-proof ID would replace our ineffective SS card and used for the same purposes. I thought I made that clear.

I said the current law would stand relative to documentation for non-citizens, which requires them to carry their documents AT ALL TIMES. Are U.S. citizens now required to carry ID proving citizenship status? No. Neither would they with the new law...
You said that the cardholder would pay for card issue, even if citizens are not required to carry it, there is a cost and a process to implement the system. Current Social Security cards are replaced at no cost at first lost. A current Resident Card is at least $10 to make the card itself, and costs close to $400 (with biometric data) to be replaced.

Purely as a replacement to a Social Security card, in its hiring verification, the costs would be higher than what it would provide...
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.


Closed Thread

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
Similar Threads
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