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.
My honest answer is that we need to limit all immigration for a while. Call me a xenophobe if you like.
OK, you're a xenophobe ....but, seriously, my feeling is simply that, as we almost ALWAYS do, we've 'taken a good thing too far'....and in the case of offering asylum, and in blurring the lines between legal and illegal immigration, and the lines between the desperately hungry, and the true victims of oppression, as opposed to those 'seeking a better job", we've allowed our natural, "all-American" compassion to be hijacked into areas where it MAY not always be a legitimate point of argument.
I think there are very few people on this forum who, if a hungry family appeared at their door in a snow storm, infants crying and their car stalled, would not invite the family in, feed them, and probably 'bed them down for the night', until things could get straightened out in the morning.
This same compassionate homeowner, though, may feel differently if this began happening severasl times per week...or if a whole BUSLOAD of people showed up, because they were lost...or if people just stopped by to ask to 'use the restroom', or the telephone.....even that compassionate homeowner would eventually run out of compassion, and begin to set limits, and would maybe even have to say "no" now and then....and at THAT POINT, someone would undoubtedly say he's "mean", and "cold" and "uncaring", and that he "didn't care about families".
That does not necessarily mean he really WAS a 'meanie', though. That's just what some people might say....
But for legal, I am not into the refugee or asylum thing, people need to confront problems in their own country and prepare to face the consequences when they stir the pot, not look to a foreign government for help.
So an average citizen with fewer rights than an American should confront Pol Pot or Kim Jong Il? They do that all the time. And DIE. Or are IMPRISONED. And/or TORTURED. That's the reason there IS Asylum or refugee status. They do stand up and confront the problems in their own country and are persecuted for trying to overthrow tyranny. The consequences they face is inhumane treatment, but not for ethical wrongdoing, but standing up against the wrongdoing of their government.
Essentially, what you're saying, is: Stand up against the wrongs in your country, but if you're prosecuted/persecuted/tortured for it, accept it as the rightful consequence of your "right"-doing. Don't look at America to support you and your stance against persecution and human rights violations.
OK, you're a xenophobe ....but, seriously, my feeling is simply that, as we almost ALWAYS do, we've 'taken a good thing too far'....and in the case of offering asylum, and in blurring the lines between legal and illegal immigration, and the lines between the desperately hungry, and the true victims of oppression, as opposed to those 'seeking a better job", we've allowed our natural, "all-American" compassion to be hijacked into areas where it MAY not always be a legitimate point of argument.
I think there are very few people on this forum who, if a hungry family appeared at their door in a snow storm, infants crying and their car stalled, would not invite the family in, feed them, and probably 'bed them down for the night', until things could get straightened out in the morning.
This same compassionate homeowner, though, may feel differently if this began happening severasl times per week...or if a whole BUSLOAD of people showed up, because they were lost...or if people just stopped by to ask to 'use the restroom', or the telephone.....even that compassionate homeowner would eventually run out of compassion, and begin to set limits, and would maybe even have to say "no" now and then....and at THAT POINT, someone would undoubtedly say he's "mean", and "cold" and "uncaring", and that he "didn't care about families".
That does not necessarily mean he really WAS a 'meanie', though. That's just what some people might say....
I think we need more market friendly public policies. We would not have an illegal problem today with a market friendly work visa scheme as public policy. People who are more motivated to work will be looking for work. Revenue generated from such a scheme could allow the general government of the Union to ensure the solvency of any state schemes to provide for the general welfare of the state.
Is it really only about illegal immigrants or does it matter, to you, were immigrants comes from? Do you rather see immigrants from Northern Europe, South America,The Middle East. Asia or from Africa? Just to name a few.
Let say they all came here legally.
I am just curious what your honest answer is.
i dare to be honest. that's what i'm known for. and, out of nothing more than honesty, i will, on behalf of those who say that it doesnt matter, call them out as being dishonest.
seriously, folks, when we talk about illegal immigration, we're talking about Mexico and Latin America. end of story. cut and dried. we're certainly not talking about Canadians and Frenchmen.
so, what's the difference? the differences are (in generalities):
1. when people immigrate from overseas, they are forced to integrate because there is a whole big ocean between them and the homeland, which also precludes them from coming here in large numbers.
2. there arent 30 million Chinese living here illegally, and illegally crossing our border by the tens of thousands every day. therefore, they have little impact on our society.
3. you dont see illegal aliens from Ethiopia coming here and making demands on our government and on our society while waving a foreign flag.
4. basically, when it comes to everyplace in the world except Latin America, the United States is not an, or rather, the socio-economic safety valve for the excess population of the world. as Americans, we dont like feeling like we're being forced to take on that burden because our government and our society lacks the political will to do enforce our immigration laws.
i dare to be honest. that's what i'm known for. and, out of nothing more than honesty, i will, on behalf of those who say that it doesnt matter, call them out as being dishonest.
seriously, folks, when we talk about illegal immigration, we're talking about Mexico and Latin America. end of story. cut and dried. we're certainly not talking about Canadians and Frenchmen.
so, what's the difference? the differences are (in generalities):
1. when people immigrate from overseas, they are forced to integrate because there is a whole big ocean between them and the homeland, which also precludes them from coming here in large numbers.
2. there arent 30 million Chinese living here illegally, and illegally crossing our border by the tens of thousands every day. therefore, they have little impact on our society.
3. you dont see illegal aliens from Ethiopia coming here and making demands on our government and on our society while waving a foreign flag.
4. basically, when it comes to everyplace in the world except Latin America, the United States is not an, or rather, the socio-economic safety valve for the excess population of the world. as Americans, we dont like feeling like we're being forced to take on that burden because our government and our society lacks the political will to do enforce our immigration laws.
Well, this is largely what many of us have been saying all along, and I agree with your points, as far as they go. It's like saying "why don't Americans get as mad at Lithuanian illegals as they do at Mexican illegals". Part of the answer, of course, (and this can't be denied) is that SOME Americans are racists, and Lithuanians are white, and Mexicans are not (remember, this thread is about 'daring to be honest'). It's up to each reader to determine how much this factor weighs in on the issue. (It might be relevant to point out that a number of Americans who share the illegals' ethnicity are also not happy with their being here....racism?...hmmmmm)
ANOTHER factor, though, is this....Americans WOULD be 'mad' at illegal Lithuanians, if they were here in the millions, making demands, and generally 'acting like' the illegals from Mexico are acting. But they aren't. And MANY Americans wouldn't be 'mad' at the Mexicans, if they were here illegally in tiny, insignificant numbers, keeping out of the 'limelight', and generally 'behaving themselves'.
Do I just "think" this? No, it's more like I KNOW it, because, in fact, I've experienced it. I've known Mexican illegals for many decades, and they USED to be pretty agreeable people, they lived 'below the radar', and they got almost NO negative attention...probably because they didn't deserve any. Despite their technical status as 'lawbreakers', they were very well 'tolerated', (yes, even 'liked'), and that was pretty much that.
Today, things are different. Why? Oh, a number of reasons, I suppose. But a LOT of those reasons are pointed out in your post.
And MANY Americans wouldn't be 'mad' at the Mexicans, if they were here illegally in tiny, insignificant numbers, keeping out of the 'limelight', and generally 'behaving themselves'
And this is blatantly overlooked by the pro illegal side.
Ultimately all immigration, legal or illegal should be STOPPED.
Each new person adds to the cost of fuel, housing and food costs. Each new person puts more cars on the road and more pollution and destroys more pristine untouched land. America's already been colonized north and south, west to east coast and there's already an infrastructure. We don't need immigrants to build rail roads or skyscrapers any more.
In terms of ethnic groups (I believe that's what you're referring to) I do think it matters. What were the original founders of the US in terms of ethnic groups? Who were the soldiers (99%) who went to war in WW I & II? It's a spit in the face to their memory to turn what they willed to their offspring into New Zimbabwe/Brazil/Pakistan.
That said, I go back to my first point. We don't need new immigrants 300 million and growing is more than enough. $4 a gallon sucks. Pollution sucks. A vast sea of strip malls and urban sprawl sucks.
Ultimately all immigration, legal or illegal should be STOPPED.
Each new person adds to the cost of fuel, housing and food costs. Each new person puts more cars on the road and more pollution and destroys more pristine untouched land. America's already been colonized north and south, west to east coast and there's already an infrastructure. We don't need immigrants to build rail roads or skyscrapers any more.
In terms of ethnic groups (I believe that's what you're referring to) I do think it matters. What were the original founders of the US in terms of ethnic groups? Who were the soldiers (99%) who went to war in WW I & II? It's a spit in the face to their memory to turn what they willed to their offspring into New Zimbabwe/Brazil/Pakistan.
That said, I go back to my first point. We don't need new immigrants 300 million and growing is more than enough. $4 a gallon sucks. Pollution sucks. A vast sea of strip malls and urban sprawl sucks.
OK. This is just nuts. You can't blame legal immigrants for the cost of gas or pollution. Natives are just as responsible for that issue, as well as urban sprawl. Stop using legal immigrants and ethnic diversity as a red herring for the nation's ills. There is no divine right to the land we occupy. Not to my land. I earned it, and I have to earn the right to retain it.
Ultimately all immigration, legal or illegal should be STOPPED.
Each new person adds to the cost of fuel, housing and food costs. Each new person puts more cars on the road and more pollution and destroys more pristine untouched land. America's already been colonized north and south, west to east coast and there's already an infrastructure. We don't need immigrants to build rail roads or skyscrapers any more.
In terms of ethnic groups (I believe that's what you're referring to) I do think it matters. What were the original founders of the US in terms of ethnic groups? Who were the soldiers (99%) who went to war in WW I & II? It's a spit in the face to their memory to turn what they willed to their offspring into New Zimbabwe/Brazil/Pakistan.
That said, I go back to my first point. We don't need new immigrants 300 million and growing is more than enough. $4 a gallon sucks. Pollution sucks. A vast sea of strip malls and urban sprawl sucks.
Oy, Herr Palpatein!
My family on my fathers side have been here since the Mayflower. They went west to California in 1850s. My father who is 73 is a fifth generation native born Californian, and as I said his family was here before the birth of this country.
I say again your thinly disquised racism is spitting on the memories of those killed in action in all of our wars --- revolutionary to now. You should be ashamed to call yourself American. I know I am ashamed to call you one!
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.
....but, seriously, my feeling is simply that, as we almost ALWAYS do, we've 'taken a good thing too far'....and in the case of offering asylum, and in blurring the lines between legal and illegal immigration, and the lines between the desperately hungry, and the true victims of oppression, as opposed to those 'seeking a better job", we've allowed our natural, "all-American" compassion to be hijacked into areas where it MAY not always be a legitimate point of argument.
