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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2008, 10:02 PM
 
Location: US, California - federalist
2,795 posts, read 3,100,935 times
Reputation: 479

Advertisements

I think it is more about public policy, not the inherent illegality of "jaywalking" across a state line.

Hypothetically, a market friendly work visa could solve the problem of migrant, black market labor participation in the US. In practice, if anyone is here illegally, they could simply be fined and issued a work visa. That would end the illegal status and the illegality people are so concerned about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2008, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,148 posts, read 36,643,200 times
Reputation: 3785
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
I think it is more about public policy, not the inherent illegality of "jaywalking" across a state line.

Hypothetically, a market friendly work visa could solve the problem of migrant, black market labor participation in the US. In practice, if anyone is here illegally, they could simply be fined and issued a work visa. That would end the illegal status and the illegality people are so concerned about.
If we were discussing maybe up to 100K illegals; I would tend to agree-----amnestying upwards of 7 million is way too much.

Besides: as macmeal has pointed out; once a person has broken several laws by simply being here illegally (crossing the border, probable identity theft and so on)------said individual will probably have much less respect for other laws even if now 'legal'.

Those sorts of lawbreakers are nothing but future trouble for the most part------be they Mexican, Irish, Sudanese, Chinese or any other race/ethnicity
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2008, 10:28 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,622,827 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielpalos View Post
I think it is more about public policy, not the inherent illegality of "jaywalking" across a state line.

Hypothetically, a market friendly work visa could solve the problem of migrant, black market labor participation in the US. In practice, if anyone is here illegally, they could simply be fined and issued a work visa. That would end the illegal status and the illegality people are so concerned about.
People are ALSO concerned that the huge presence of illegals has proved to be a temptation beyond the ability of many employers to resist, and has thus served to depress the wages in large areas of the American economy. In THAT respect, it is certainly having a negative impact upon society.

What would be the safeguards for existing American labor in the "visa" scenario you propose? Would it just be the current "free-for-all" and anyone stupid enough to get caught would just be 'forgiven' by paying a nominal fine, and then 'back to work'? Would there be any documentation required that demonstrated a need to import foreign labor BEFORE visa were issued? What about family members? Would the visa-holder's entire family be entitled to enter the US permanently, on the strength of that visa? If so, there would be costs associated with this, put upon society, that would FAR outweigh the benefit to the employer. Wouldn't this just be like the current situation..a 'perk' for the benefit of the businessman, subsidized many times over by the taxpayer? How would we differentiate between an employer's "not being ABLE to find local help", and an employer's "unwillingness to pay sufficient wages to ATTRACT local help"?

What you are proposing sound essentially just like sanctioning the current "mess" without addressing any of its problems. Would visa holders be entitled to US-level wages....and, if so, wouldn't this make them more 'expensive' for employers, reduce their 'appeal' as cheap labor, and even result in their layoffs? Would these visa holders be protected from competition from American workers who wanted their jobs BACK, now that the employers were FORCED to start paying 'scale'?

I see LOTS of inconsistencies here...and very few solutions to the mess we're in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 01:57 AM
 
Location: California
3,172 posts, read 5,999,351 times
Reputation: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
The cartoon characters were indeed offensive, as intended. The Mexican government knew exactly what those images implied; as much as it would realize the inaptness of displaying a swastika on a stamp -- so please don’t patronize me. Mexico’s depiction of blacks has been traditionally negative; and the negative stereotypes are instilled in its citizens -- ergo, the feelings of ‘superiority’ exhibited toward black Americans by illegal Mexicans currently in this country. It would be laughable if not so tragic.

Indecency? You stated they are “ignorant” to what’s acceptable. I merely responded by offering my opinion of acceptable behavior, which involves treating people with decency.

Soapbox? Give me a break.

Back on topic. The race/ethnicity of "immigrants" is irrelevant. They simply need to be LEGAL, and necessary.
Your basing what Latin-Americans feel about blacks based on the tension between Mexicans and Blacks in America.

Here, Blacks and Latinos are at the bottom, and are going to squabble. Just like the Irish and Italians did.

Blacks have been victimized by the American government and by the American people in many ways for many years.

But racial tension doesn't equal being victimized by another poor group.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 02:06 AM
 
335 posts, read 931,874 times
Reputation: 140
I agree with most of the posters but then pray do tell when it comes to illegals why does it always become a Mexican issue? btw I am not hispanic! I know that there are parts of this country experiencing an influx of immigrant though their legal stat may not be obvious, I am just so sick and tired of the the posters that connect illegal with Hispanic...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,148 posts, read 36,643,200 times
Reputation: 3785
Quote:
Originally Posted by DD70 View Post
I agree with most of the posters but then pray do tell when it comes to illegals why does it always become a Mexican issue? btw I am not hispanic! I know that there are parts of this country experiencing an influx of immigrant though their legal stat may not be obvious, I am just so sick and tired of the the posters that connect illegal with Hispanic...
Simple.

About 85% of illegal immigrants happen to be some variety of 'Hispanic' (of any race) hence Latinos as a group being the lightning rod.

Trust me: if the above offenders were of mostly Swedish lineage; I would feel exactly the same way-----and, I look like a Swede.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 08:30 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,752,909 times
Reputation: 22163
The USA has more legal immigration than any other country in the world. It's ridiculous to think we can be the only nation in the world without immigration laws and borders, and it's stupid to have laws that are not at all enforced.

Immigration must be limited to those people who with to be American, who have the ability to learn English and adapt to American culture, and who can be productive citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 09:26 AM
 
Location: US, California - federalist
2,795 posts, read 3,100,935 times
Reputation: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArizonaBear View Post
If we were discussing maybe up to 100K illegals; I would tend to agree-----amnestying upwards of 7 million is way too much.

Besides: as macmeal has pointed out; once a person has broken several laws by simply being here illegally (crossing the border, probable identity theft and so on)------said individual will probably have much less respect for other laws even if now 'legal'.

Those sorts of lawbreakers are nothing but future trouble for the most part------be they Mexican, Irish, Sudanese, Chinese or any other race/ethnicity
I am not implying that amnesty works as a form of public policy designed to stop migrant, black market labor participation in the US. It has not worked historically, and will probably only be a politically motivated ploy if repeated.

A market friendly work visa would end the concept of illegals, as we currently know it, since anyone who doesn't have the proper documentation in the US labor market could simply be fined and issued a work visa.

I am not sure I can agree with your position on habitual lawbreaking. An analogy would be someone who has received a "fixit" ticket. You are implying the same of anyone who has broken those laws, paid a fine, and resolved that form of illegality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 09:42 AM
 
Location: US, California - federalist
2,795 posts, read 3,100,935 times
Reputation: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmeal View Post
People are ALSO concerned that the huge presence of illegals has proved to be a temptation beyond the ability of many employers to resist, and has thus served to depress the wages in large areas of the American economy. In THAT respect, it is certainly having a negative impact upon society.

What would be the safeguards for existing American labor in the "visa" scenario you propose? Would it just be the current "free-for-all" and anyone stupid enough to get caught would just be 'forgiven' by paying a nominal fine, and then 'back to work'? Would there be any documentation required that demonstrated a need to import foreign labor BEFORE visa were issued? What about family members? Would the visa-holder's entire family be entitled to enter the US permanently, on the strength of that visa? If so, there would be costs associated with this, put upon society, that would FAR outweigh the benefit to the employer. Wouldn't this just be like the current situation..a 'perk' for the benefit of the businessman, subsidized many times over by the taxpayer? How would we differentiate between an employer's "not being ABLE to find local help", and an employer's "unwillingness to pay sufficient wages to ATTRACT local help"?

What you are proposing sound essentially just like sanctioning the current "mess" without addressing any of its problems. Would visa holders be entitled to US-level wages....and, if so, wouldn't this make them more 'expensive' for employers, reduce their 'appeal' as cheap labor, and even result in their layoffs? Would these visa holders be protected from competition from American workers who wanted their jobs BACK, now that the employers were FORCED to start paying 'scale'?

I see LOTS of inconsistencies here...and very few solutions to the mess we're in.
I am of the opinion, that the conditions you are referring to are more the result of current public policy than those of normal market tendencies. Markets usually respond to supply and demand. Red tape is usually invented by politicians. To the extent red tape influences supply and demand, the markets will usually try to find some equilibrium.

Firstly, a market friendly work visa scheme is not an amnesty scheme. I am not advocating any changes to current naturalization policies. Secondly, paying a nominal fine is a form of market recognizable disincentive to avoid going through normal channels. Most foreign labor market participants will want to avoid the expense of paying a fine when obtaining a market friendly work visa. Thirdly, the US would be generating revenue from every fine and work visa, that could be used to defray public and private sector costs. If some form of catastrophic insurance component is included with the work visa, those costs could be reduced even further. Some of the proceeds from a market friendly work visa scheme could be used for unemployment compensation for native labor market participants in the US; who would be able to go to school to improve their marketability.

A market friendly work visa would work according to market principles, not command economics as is currently being employed most forms of public policy regarding migrant labor participation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2008, 09:47 AM
 
Location: US, California - federalist
2,795 posts, read 3,100,935 times
Reputation: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
The USA has more legal immigration than any other country in the world. It's ridiculous to think we can be the only nation in the world without immigration laws and borders, and it's stupid to have laws that are not at all enforced.

Immigration must be limited to those people who with to be American, who have the ability to learn English and adapt to American culture, and who can be productive citizens.
How does your view account for simple participation in the US market for labor? Naturalization and labor market participation are two different things, and not necessarily mutually inclusive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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