U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 08-22-2012, 10:06 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,720,931 times
Reputation: 299

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
Basically he said they are a wash. 14billion is an estimate and in an economy that is 15trillion is literally a rounding number.

Again, the majority of economists say immigration is a net positive for the economy. I know you hate illegals, they are blah, blah, blah.

Why waste time? I don't care.
Again, "skilled" immigration is fine, "unskilled" is not. Thanks for admitting that finally.

Again, "skilled" immigration is a net positive, all economists agree, to include me and many so called "conservatives" you claim are lying. Now, Again, all economists also state that "unskilled" immigrants detract from the economy, you now also admit to it.

If you don't care then why have you continued to claim otherwise?

 
Old 08-22-2012, 10:12 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,720,931 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
You make no sense. The discussion is about expanding legal immigration. The H2A visas don't do that at all. Employers have to hire a foreigner and then tell the government why and it is temporary. If you think such a program could ever lead to but a few thousand additional immigrants...... Well I can't say I am surprised you'd believe in a fairytale.
The H2A visa allows people to legally immigrate to the USA, how is that not part of the discussion of expanding legal immigration? So you disqualify it for being a temporary visa but then claim it may lead to but a few thousand additional immigrants. Kinda contradicts your first claim, now doesn't it? In prior comments you claimed not all the world would want to come here. Are you now claiming we should allow in all those that do want to come simply because they want to? You continue to argue in circles.

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 08-22-2012 at 10:20 AM..
 
Old 08-22-2012, 10:18 AM
 
32,029 posts, read 14,790,353 times
Reputation: 8555
I would just like to interject a point here. There is no wrong nation to come from. The valid argument is that too many coming from just one nation (regardless of what nation it is) is not diversity and makes assimilation more difficult. Too many coming from any nation that lack education and skills is another valid argument for picking and choosing what immigrants we allow in. We don't want immigrants that will burden our tax coffers and drive down wages for Americans and this would apply to all immigrants regardless of the sending nation.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 70,296,277 times
Reputation: 27525
When the economists talk about immigration, they are talking about the legal way, not the illegal way.

There aren't any economists saying that illegal immigration of uneducated, unskilled poor (which is what illegal immigration brings) is good for a nation.

Go ahead..show one link that says illegal immigration is good for a nation.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,639 posts, read 26,362,501 times
Reputation: 26780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
Look, if you think that every person in every nation wants to migrate you are not thinking rationally. There is a finite number of people who want to immigrate to any nation. That is all I wrote. So your disagreement is what exactly?

Now in terms of who gets let in or not and how that impacts illegal immigration, you all keep missing my point.

I'll restate it, conservatives have a problem with more than illegal immigration, they have a problem with what they believe are too many people coming from the wrong kinds of nations who are destroying this nation.
The issue is that you are ignoring the magnitude of the number of people who would immigrate if given the opportunity. Please give us a number that you think should be allowed to immigrate to the US annually. One million, five million, ten million? Do you not think that there are ten million people who would move to the US if they could?

If we allowed in ten million a year, who should they be? Should we have any educational requirements? Should anyone allowed to immigrate be able to bring in as many relatives as he wishes? Should he be required to show that he can support everyone in his family? Do we allow someone to immigrate who cannot work and make him eligible for public assistance of every kind that is available to people with citizenship?

You keep saying that increasing legal immigration will decrease illegal immigration, but none of your links have given any evidence to support your opinion. The pool of potential legal immigrants and the pool of potential illegal immigrants are two separate pools. The legal immigrants meet certain criteria; the illegal immigrants do not. Increasing the number of legal immigrants gains people with certain skills. The pool of illegal immigrants is not affected. They do not have those skills. So you have nothing to defend your thesis that increasing legal immigration decreases illegal immigration. It is your opinion. That does not make it a fact.

You lose credibility when you insist that "conservatives have a problem with more than illegal immigration, they have a problem with what they believe are too many people coming from the wrong kinds of nations who are destroying this nation." Who are these "conservatives"? Can you quote one? From which nations do these "conservatives" think we should not accept legal immigrants? Benicar already pointed out that Mexico has the most applications for legal immigration and the most illegal immigrants. Others have told you they are Democrats but do not believe what you are saying.

As far as legal immigration is concerned, do you not think there can be an argument made for limiting visas for certain fields if there are citizens who are unable to find work in those fields? Or should we continue to allow immigrants to come in and compete for those jobs? What do you think would happen to the salaries for those positions?

Quote:
And then you run down you litany of why you think too many immigrants from the wrong kinds of countries are coming here destroying the nation. Where do we disagree?
What "litany"? Where did I mention any country except Mexico, my daughter-in-law's home country? The US could use thousands like her.

We disagree because you keep repeating the same two or three sentences over and over without anything to support your opinions.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 11:45 AM
 
8,399 posts, read 5,115,036 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Most (60%) are EWI's, roughly 40% are visa overstays.

Underage drinking and smoking? I have yet to see an under aged person given a misdemeanor for doing those let alone any type of ticket, it's usually an adult that allows the drinking and may be charged, underage smoking has no criminality. Under age drinking is usually a slap on the wrist and a fine to the adult providing the alcohol or community service with no jail time, an infraction and not a misdemeanor. Speeding is an infraction and not a misdemeanor, equivalent to a visa overstay.

Proving your point? You can't even get the info correct, calling infractions misdemeanors, calling misdemeanors and felony's infractions.... You need to first understand what you are attempting to claim, you don't even understand basic law.
The bottom line is the most common ways in which people come here illegally one is a civil infraction and the other is a misdemeanor.

You refer to people as "criminals" for civil infractions and misdemeanors? NO, that is the point to be made.
Now please deal with reality.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 11:47 AM
 
8,399 posts, read 5,115,036 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
You didn't prove anything other then you re-iterated what he said and are now attempting to somehow lay claim to being the one who is right. LMFAO SFM
You really don't read for comprehension. That poster made a false claim, it was disproven, then someone else makes another claim about what the other poster really meant, blah, blah, blah.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 11:52 AM
 
5,037 posts, read 4,211,197 times
Reputation: 2348
How the hell is it un-constitutional to ask people if rules are being obeyed when these schools are PAID FOR BY TAX PAYERS!?

Can we secure are damn borders already? My God, it isnt that difficult.
 
Old 08-22-2012, 11:58 AM
 
8,399 posts, read 5,115,036 times
Reputation: 2314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Again, "skilled" immigration is fine, "unskilled" is not. Thanks for admitting that finally.

Again, "skilled" immigration is a net positive, all economists agree, to include me and many so called "conservatives" you claim are lying. Now, Again, all economists also state that "unskilled" immigrants detract from the economy, you now also admit to it.

If you don't care then why have you continued to claim otherwise?
First, conservatives are lying. If you think the conservatives complaints about so called illegals have anything to do with economic data. LOL

There is a disagreement between economists over low skilled immigrants and their impact on the economy, but the general consensus is if they have a negative impact it is very very small and that very very small impact does not fit the filthy garbage said about them.

Economists don't say their presence is overburdening the nation and that they are financially destroying America like conservatives rant.

You are taking economists' disagreement where some say they are a net positive and other say they are either neutral or a minor negative to justify the lies and smears thrown out about them.

That is dumb. Again you are running around in circles trying to prove something that is irrelevant to the discussion and doesn't even prove anything about conservative opposition to immigration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
The H2A visa allows people to legally immigrate to the USA, how is that not part of the discussion of expanding legal immigration? So you disqualify it for being a temporary visa but then claim it may lead to but a few thousand additional immigrants. Kinda contradicts your first claim, now doesn't it? In prior comments you claimed not all the world would want to come here. Are you now claiming we should allow in all those that do want to come simply because they want to? You continue to argue in circles.
It doesn't GREATLY expand immigration. Man, you stay trying to make irrelevant points that don't mean anything.

My point is this for the 100th time. Conservatives are lying about immigration when they say they have no problem with legal immigration only illegal immigration.

My contention is they don't want legal immigration greatly expanded because they think too many people from the wrong kinds of nations are coming here.

I have had conservatives engage me and basically this is their position and your position as well. Everything else is just running in circles lying and pretending otherwise.

[QUOTE=suzy_q2010;25753859]The issue is that you are ignoring the magnitude of the number of people who would immigrate if given the opportunity. Please give us a number that you think should be allowed to immigrate to the US annually. One million, five million, ten million? Do you not think that there are ten million people who would move to the US if they could?

If we allowed in ten million a year, who should they be? Should we have any educational requirements? Should anyone allowed to immigrate be able to bring in as many relatives as he wishes? Should he be required to show that he can support everyone in his family? Do we allow someone to immigrate who cannot work and make him eligible for public assistance of every kind that is available to people with citizenship
?



I don't have a firm number in mind. I think US immigration policy should be first to improve our nation and secondly to improve the global economy which will help our economy. So a hard number is irrelevant.

It is amazing to me how people whose families migrated to this nation where there were almost NO requirements in skills, or education.
I'd love to see all of the people who want these high standards for new immigrants admit that THEIR families would never have come here if they had to endure what we now expect of new immigrants. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy from many people.

My honest "feeling" is that new immigrants should have the same standards for all the immigrants that mostly came from Europe in the earlier part of the century. And it would be the HEIGHT of hypocrisy for the family member of those immigrants to impose a standard that wouldn't have allowed their own family to enter this nation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You keep saying that increasing legal immigration will decrease illegal immigration, but none of your links have given any evidence to support your opinion. The pool of potential legal immigrants and the pool of potential illegal immigrants are two separate pools. The legal immigrants meet certain criteria; the illegal immigrants do not. Increasing the number of legal immigrants gains people with certain skills. The pool of illegal immigrants is not affected. They do not have those skills. So you have nothing to defend your thesis that increasing legal immigration decreases illegal immigration. It is your opinion. That does not make it a fact.

.
If you greatly increase immigration to allow more people in the nation then illegal immigration will drop that is an objective fact.

That is a fantasy position that zero percent of the undocumented immigrants couldn't meet the criteria to enter the nation. You all have got to stop making stuff up. I doubt if you all even know what the issues are regarding immigration of course you don't. You just imagine a bunch of poor immigrants who are unskilled moving into this nation and destroying it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post

You lose credibility when you insist that "conservatives have a problem with more than illegal immigration, they have a problem with what they believe are too many people coming from the wrong kinds of nations who are destroying this nation." Who are these "conservatives"? Can you quote one? From which nations do these "conservatives" think we should not accept legal immigrants? Benicar already pointed out that Mexico has the most applications for legal immigration and the most illegal immigrants. Others have told you they are Democrats but do not believe what you are saying.

As far as legal immigration is concerned, do you not think there can be an argument made for limiting visas for certain fields if there are citizens who are unable to find work in those fields? Or should we continue to allow immigrants to come in and compete for those jobs? What do you think would happen to the salaries for those positions?



What "litany"? Where did I mention any country except Mexico, my daughter-in-law's home country? The US could use thousands like her.

We disagree because you keep repeating the same two or three sentences over and over without anything to support your opinions.

To the first part, I say read this thread for conservatives who believe that or any immigration thread for that matter.

An argument can be made for anything. It doesn't mean the argument makes sense. There will always be a field were an American isn't working. Using that thinking to justify limiting immigration is dumb.

If we want higher salaries as Americans we should use the government to make sure there is more transparency within companies over pay. I think one of the reasons salaries are so low in this nation is because most workers have no idea how far behind they are from their bosses or supervisors.

I think a very simplistic solution would be to make that information know company wide. Immigrants are scapegoated as lower wages when the reality is US companies don't want to pay their workers.

Last edited by Yac; 08-23-2012 at 04:17 AM.. Reason: 5 (!) posts in a row merged
 
Old 08-22-2012, 12:51 PM
 
3,493 posts, read 2,398,657 times
Reputation: 2345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post


I don't have a firm number in mind. I think US immigration policy should be first to improve our nation and secondly to improve the global economy which will help our economy. So a hard number is irrelevant.

It is amazing to me how people whose families migrated to this nation where there were almost NO requirements in skills, or education.
I'd love to see all of the people who want these high standards for new immigrants admit that THEIR families would never have come here if they had to endure what we now expect of new immigrants. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy from many people.

My honest "feeling" is that new immigrants should have the same standards for all the immigrants that mostly came from Europe in the earlier part of the century. And it would be the HEIGHT of hypocrisy for the family member of those immigrants to impose a standard that wouldn't have allowed their own family to enter this nation.
Oh please.



Educate yourself about this topic before making such accusations.

The notion there were no immigrant requirements during the Second Great Wave of Immigration before 1924 is sheer pro-illegal fantasy and pathetic ignorance. Back then you couldn't even get on a boat unless you were healthy. Once here you were expected to work, learn English and contribute to society. If you couldn't meet those requirements you went home. In fact about a third of all Italian immigrants did just that.

Today it's cross the border pregnant without permission, give birth to three anchor babies, get money from the government even though you pay nothing in taxes and whine Americans don't speak Spanish. Worse, in the middle of a recession demand the same rights as natives and legal immigrants.

The only hypocrisy is your own. Worse, the true ignorance is yours. Americans did not welcome millions of foreigners during the Great Depression. Why the hell should we welcome them under similar economic conditions today?

We have the right to set standards and demand anyone who voluntarily wants to move here meet those standards. I'm sorry so many selfish, amoral, birdbrained illegals and their misguided supporters seem to believe otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
If you greatly increase immigration to allow more people in the nation then illegal immigration will drop that is an objective fact.

That is a fantasy position that zero percent of the undocumented immigrants couldn't meet the criteria to enter the nation. You all have got to stop making stuff up. I doubt if you all even know what the issues are regarding immigration of course you don't. You just imagine a bunch of poor immigrants who are unskilled moving into this nation and destroying it.
It's not imagination. It's a fact. Less than HALF of all illegals have a high school diploma compared with over 80% of all Americans. They are largely unskilled and uneducated. When we have 23 million unemployed Americans we don't need to add more barely educated foreigners who have willfully broken our laws.

Last edited by Yac; 08-23-2012 at 04:18 AM.. Reason: 2 posts merged
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
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