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.
Hmmm I dealt with INS for my wife as well. The initial process I hired a lawyer who specialized in immigration. $1200.00. Best money I ever spent because everything went smooth and trouble free. Even during her adj. status she was allowed to travel outside of the USA and we did.
Suzie my wifes physical was nothing like what you described. I think maybe you had a perv for a doctor.
The reason I was not allowed to leave the country was because I had to apply for permission. Something called parole. The couldn't grant it because they had lost my file. They have now changed this and there is a new visa for people in that situation.
Regarding the physical I am describing what I read were the requirements before looking for a doctor. The actual exam is not that bad. Much easier that any pap. It is the principal that bother me. I had pretty much lived in the US since I was a senior in high school. Any disease I could have had I would've gotten here.
I don't need to go "down" to the parts of town where the day laborer's hang out. I live and work in the areas you avoid, or lock your doors in. Giving out my SSN would not make anyone a legal resident. Buying insurance and giving out my number would likewise solve nothing. I would be better off tossing wads of cash to anyone who wants one. It will not make a difference in their legal status, and it would not encourage them to commit a crime (like giving out my SSN or other ID might).
Yeah, you live where I would avoid or lock my doors in? I lived in a very high latino area of my city. My car was broken into so much I eventually just left it unlocked to avoid a broken window. Oh, and I was in Lobos territory, if that means anything to you. You are right, I did leave after a little gangbanger threatened an elderly neighbor (who liberated death camps in wwII) with a gun because the old man didn't want the kid to 'tag' his garage....again.
But that is not the point, and I'm sure you brought up the whole "you don't live here' crap to prove that I'm an ignorant racist? While you are an enlightened soul who lives in the trenches? Give me a break!
Then again, I want to give illegal alien residents a chance to legalize and become documented, productive, tax-paying citizens. They are prevented from doing so by lacking a piece of paper that says they can legally live and work here. That document is what they actually want and need, not any other sort of handout.
And it comes down to fairness. Why should those who cheated the system get to 'cut in line' from those that follow the rules? We tried that in the eighties, and look ----- more illegals then ever.
(1) If that is the OP's point, then let me ask this in response: For those who are anti-ILLEGAL alien, why are you so against giving people a fine and a piece of paper that will allow them to work at a fair wage and have their labor taxed, thus PAYING THEIR OWN bill for schools, hospitals, social services, etc? If supporting social services is your only concern, then you should be 100% for an amnesty plan that brings all that illegal labor into the tax system!!
How many people would you give that little piece of paper to? Millions? And then what, in ten years we will have another 20 million or so illegals --- would you solve the problem by making more citizens?
(2) You, and the OP, and the vast majority of people--who have ancestors who immigrated generations ago when immigration controls were lax and have not dealt with USCIS recently--giving their uninformed opinions, have no idea about how the legal immigration system works. By supporting the current archaic immigration system and protesting against immigration reform, you are indeed taking an anti-immigrant stance. Saying you want immigration laws enforced means that you want immigration only for relatives of US citizens and PR's and a tiny handful of refugees.
As has been pointed out many many times, immigration was never lax. There have always been quotas of some sort or another plus the physical/mental/financial exams once on Ellis Island --- fail one of those and you will find yourself back on a ship to your homecountry. Plus, once in the country those immigrants that had it so much easier in your opinion had no social services to fall back on. No free lunch programs, no free medical benefits, nothing. They sank or swam on their own. A bit different nowadays, isn't it?
But no skilled laborers, no unskilled laborers, no high-tech workers or college graduates. You want to exclude the types of immigrants who--in the past--fired the economic engines of this country and continue to let in only those with family connections to US citizens. How do you support such a position, or do you simply not understand what you are talking about?
What are you talking about? Skilled labor is a valued trait in immigrants. Please try to immigrate to anywhere within the European Union, or Asia or even Canada and say "I have a fifth grade education, no money to speak of, a wife whose pregnant with our fourth child and oh yeah --- I can only do manual labor". Do you think they would let you in? That answer would be no. We have the right to determine who can be citizens. We as a country have the right to determine what type of citizens we need. The US has plenty of working poor. They are struggling as it is, what sense does it make to bring in more people who will flood an already crowded labor pool?
Also: OBL? Are you seriously trying to equate an immigration discussion with a Saudi Arabian terrorist? Wow. You should apply for the job of White House Press Secretary.
My question for you is......what makes the US so much different then any and all other countries on the face of this Earth that we and we alone should have little if any type of immigration policies? Why not other nations? Why not say, Mexico? How about Argentina? We already know Canada is hard to get into legally.....why the guilt trip on the US alone? How did the poor of every country become the US sole responsibility?
My question for you is......what makes the US so much different then any and all other countries on the face of this Earth that we and we alone should have little if any type of immigration policies? Why not other nations? Why not say, Mexico? How about Argentina? We already know Canada is hard to get into legally.....why the guilt trip on the US alone? How did the poor of every country become the US sole responsibility?
Societal guilt...stems from a puritan, Protestant culture, now gone 'secular', in which guilt is equated with having a conscience. The vast majority of the world is free from such guilt, but it's easy to 'sense', and it makes us a great 'target'. If I can CALL you a xenophobic racist...and get you to RESPOND...I will.
Ever hear of a Japanese "guilty" over the way Japan treated its POW's, or the Chinese?....Ever hear of a "guilty" Russian? A "guilty" Muslim? How about a "guilty" Chinese communist, or a 'guilty' white Latin American..(or even a 'guilty' Aztec)? You probably never have. Most cultures have a record of inhumanity and atrocities to their credit...very FEW, though, have any sense of 'guilt" in the matter. We do, and it shows. Others 'pick up on' this, and are happy to agree with us...about OUR guilt.
The message from much of the world to America is like this: "You Americans are SOMETIMES nice people, and you've done a FEW nice things. And it's a shame to hear you sit around, feel guilty, criticize yourselves, and dwell on the 'bad' things you've done. So sit back, relax, and take a break. It's MY turn to tell you why you should feel guilty, to criticize you, and to emphasize the 'bad' things you've done. You shouldn't have to do ALL the criticizing. I'll be GLAD to help."
But that is not the point, and I'm sure you brought up the whole "you don't live here' crap to prove that I'm an ignorant racist? While you are an enlightened soul who lives in the trenches? Give me a break!
Your words, not mine. Why did you suggest I share my SSID with my neighbors?
Quote:
And it comes down to fairness. Why should those who cheated the system get to 'cut in line' from those that follow the rules? We tried that in the eighties, and look ----- more illegals then ever.
The rules are crap. They are not in the best interest of our country. The reality of the situation is that the current system created a shadow population of 12 million + illegals. It would be cheaper, easier, and better for the economy if we found a way to fine and legalize them, rather than waste the time, expense, social unrest, and all the other problems that make mass deportation a fool's fantasy.
I don't give two s**ts about fairness. I want to do what's in the best interest of the country. There are ~10M+ gainfully employed illegals in this country and ~2M criminal, unemployed, etc illegals. Let's make a system that fines and taxes the useful 10M, and makes it easier for ICE to deport the undesirable 2M.
Quote:
How many people would you give that little piece of paper to? Millions? And then what, in ten years we will have another 20 million or so illegals --- would you solve the problem by making more citizens?
Everyone who is gainfully employed above the poverty line without a criminal record. Then institute a system that allows labor immigration on a sensible scale (subject to the same criteria). Then, in 10 years, YES, we will have an additional 20M immigrants, but they will be legal, employed, taxpaying, documented permanet residents who went through our reformed immigration system. However, 20M in 10 years is 2M/year, which is 0.7% of the population per year. That's a reasonable immigration rate. People are going to immigrate. You can gain from it by taxing them, or you can loose from it by chasing them around and deporting a small % of them. (Or a large % if you want to spend 500B dollars on it, plus the resources wasted by the civil unrest, etc.)
Quote:
As has been pointed out many many times, immigration was never lax. There have always been quotas of some sort or another plus the physical/mental/financial exams once on Ellis Island --- fail one of those and you will find yourself back on a ship to your homecountry. Plus, once in the country those immigrants that had it so much easier in your opinion had no social services to fall back on. No free lunch programs, no free medical benefits, nothing. They sank or swam on their own. A bit different nowadays, isn't it?
Quotas which were measured in entire % points of the total population and not enforced in any way, shape, or form. "Exams" which consisted of a visual inspection and a sworn statement. Lip service, in other words.
Explain to me how one can apply for all these "free lunch" programs without so much as a social security number. Have you ever tried it?
Quote:
What are you talking about? Skilled labor is a valued trait in immigrants.
Not according to our current system, which refuses visas to 200,000+ non-native talented white collar college graduates per year, and grants indentured servitude to 65K others who work for companies who exploit their H-visa status to drastically underpay them, despite the unenforced regulations, reducing wages for everyone.
A system that values skilled labor would issue an automatic Green Card to any college graduate with a high enough GPA in a useful technical field.
Quote:
Please try to immigrate to anywhere within the European Union, or Asia or even Canada and say "I have a fifth grade education, no money to speak of, a wife whose pregnant with our fourth child and oh yeah --- I can only do manual labor". Do you think they would let you in? That answer would be no.
The tried-and-untrue straw man of the anti-immigration crowd again? Try re-reading every thinking person's proposal for immigration reform which requires gainful taxable employment and support for one's family above the poverty line.
Quote:
We have the right to determine who can be citizens. We as a country have the right to determine what type of citizens we need. The US has plenty of working poor. They are struggling as it is, what sense does it make to bring in more people who will flood an already crowded labor pool?
No one disputes that right. Our current system is not in the best interests of the US and should be reformed. Please cite some evidence that the US has "plenty" of unskilled labor--without the need for immigrants, since the system does not allow for permanent immigration of skilled or unskilled laborers. If that is true, then why are there visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary guest and agricultural workers issued constantly?
Quote:
My question for you is......what makes the US so much different then any and all other countries on the face of this Earth that we and we alone should have little if any type of immigration policies? Why not other nations? Why not say, Mexico? How about Argentina? We already know Canada is hard to get into legally.....why the guilt trip on the US alone? How did the poor of every country become the US sole responsibility?
My response is that labor is not a burden. Labor is an asset. Importing labor benefits our country. Importing laborers who demonstrate the ability to remain gainfully employed, pay taxes, and keep their family above the poverty line is a positive thing for the economy. Look at the problems of economic stagnation Japan faces with a projected 30% reduction in total population over the next few decades due to their restrictive immigration policies.
Maintaining an arcane system of restrictive immigration that forces laborers to sneak over the border and work at below-market wages to unscrupulous employers is a negative economic policy.
Restricting immigration and wasting billions of dollars deporting a segment of the population that provides useful labor is idiotic economic policy.
Last edited by sponger42; 06-06-2008 at 04:02 PM..
Reason: fixed it
Please try to immigrate to anywhere within the European Union, or Asia or even Canada and say "I have a fifth grade education, no money to speak of, a wife whose pregnant with our fourth child and oh yeah --- I can only do manual labor". Do you think they would let you in? That answer would be no.
Well if you read my earlier post you'll see the EU has different rules. I come from a small town in Spain. My family was able to legalize an immigrant when they hired her to be a full time care taker to my grandmother. She treated my grandmother in such a loving way. My 90yo grandmother was in such bad shape that she had to be cared for as an infant. I don't know what her education level was but she is the most caring person I've ever met. A lot of immigrants are now taking care of the aging population in Spain. Also small towns that were in decline for 30+ years are now full of immigrants. They do all the agricultural and service jobs. You can not do that here. The people are here and are not going anyway, they have anywhere to go.
Well if you read my earlier post you'll see the EU has different rules. I come from a small town in Spain. My family was able to legalize an immigrant when they hired her to be a full time care taker to my grandmother. She treated my grandmother in such a loving way. My 90yo grandmother was in such bad shape that she had to be cared for as an infant. I don't know what her education level was but she is the most caring person I've ever met. A lot of immigrants are now taking care of the aging population in Spain. Also small towns that were in decline for 30+ years are now full of immigrants. They do all the agricultural and service jobs. You can not do that here. The people are here and are not going anyway, they have anywhere to go.
Uh; we have lots of Americans who have been forced out of the labor market due to their wages being undercut by illegals and the enablers of the above.
Being that most of the illegals happen to be from Mexico-------it should not be that difficult to deport them along with building a fortified fence along our southern border. If Spain can do so against its illegal immigrant problem; why not the USA?
Your words, not mine. Why did you suggest I share my SSID with my neighbors?
I suggested you share it with illegal immigrants.
The rules are crap. They are not in the best interest of our country. The reality of the situation is that the current system created a shadow population of 12 million + illegals. It would be cheaper, easier, and better for the economy if we found a way to fine and legalize them, rather than waste the time, expense, social unrest, and all the other problems that make mass deportation a fool's fantasy.
Lots of rules are crap, so what? What would be better, anarchy? I do agree with you that the current system created this problem, but I fail to see how it would better the economy to give citizenship for 12+million illegals as oppossed to deporting them or better yet finally cracking down on their employers.
I don't give two s**ts about fairness. I want to do what's in the best interest of the country. There are ~10M+ gainfully employed illegals in this country and ~2M criminal, unemployed, etc illegals. Let's make a system that fines and taxes the useful 10M, and makes it easier for ICE to deport the undesirable 2M.
Deport the criminals absolutely. But what line will you draw for criminal behaviour? Stolen ssns? Unpaid debt(medical) or bad checks? Many illegals do stoop to other illegal behaviors once in the states as a matter of life.
Everyone who is gainfully employed above the poverty line without a criminal record. Then institute a system that allows labor immigration on a sensible scale (subject to the same criteria). Then, in 10 years, YES, we will have an additional 20M immigrants, but they will be legal, employed, taxpaying, documented permanet residents who went through our reformed immigration system. However, 20M in 10 years is 2M/year, which is 0.7% of the population per year. That's a reasonable immigration rate. People are going to immigrate. You can gain from it by taxing them, or you can loose from it by chasing them around and deporting a small % of them. (Or a large % if you want to spend 500B dollars on it, plus the resources wasted by the civil unrest, etc.)
Civil unrest for whom? Your numbers sound good, but if amnesty is all it would take......why didn't it take after Reagan gave it back in the 80s?
Quotas which were measured in entire % points of the total population and not enforced in any way, shape, or form. "Exams" which consisted of a visual inspection and a sworn statement. Lip service, in other words.
That shows how much you know of history. Plenty of people were deported at Ellis Island, and if first hand recollections are to be believed the physical exams were very thorough and made people feel like animals in a line. But since they were European immigrants, it had to be easier right? I would hope that is not your position.
Explain to me how one can apply for all these "free lunch" programs without so much as a social security number. Have you ever tried it?
See, this is where your ssn comes into play
Not according to our current system, which refuses visas to 200,000+ non-native talented white collar college graduates per year, and grants indentured servitude to 65K others who work for companies who exploit their H-visa status to drastically underpay them, despite the unenforced regulations, reducing wages for everyone.
A system that values skilled labor would issue an automatic Green Card to any college graduate with a high enough GPA in a useful technical field.
But how many educated immigrants do they approve? How many are applying? As far as the unskilled who end up being exploited (like the illegals) it would be better to allow no unskilled labor in at all. Perhaps then corporations would have to deal with the working poor already in this country. If companies hired US citizens they would be more likely to pay fair wages and to comply with OSHA standards.
The tried-and-untrue straw man of the anti-immigration crowd again? Try re-reading every thinking person's proposal for immigration reform which requires gainful taxable employment and support for one's family above the poverty line.
Nope, not anti immigration just anti illegal immigration. Is the distinction too hard for you to remember? At anyrate what is the poverty line these days? Still insanely low. Why bring in more destitute people?
No one disputes that right. Our current system is not in the best interests of the US and should be reformed. Please cite some evidence that the US has "plenty" of unskilled labor--without the need for immigrants, since the system does not allow for permanent immigration of skilled or unskilled laborers. If that is true, then why are there visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary guest and agricultural workers issued constantly?
And I have no problem with visa holders -- temporary or otherwise. The US does in fact have plenty of unskilled labor, however they are not interested in making crap wages with no benefits. Illegals are. The playing field is not level and businesses take advantage of it. Look at the Iowa packing house for example. The illegals were making $5 an hour!! That is absolutely disgusting and completely exploitive. What US citizen would take on dangerous and gross work for $5 an hour? And remember, this is rural Iowa we are talking about....the people in those towns are generally hunters and farmers -- butchering animals is nothing new to them. But to work for peanuts, no they wouldn't. But the illegals would -- to their own detriment.
My response is that labor is not a burden. Labor is an asset. Importing labor benefits our country. Importing laborers who demonstrate the ability to remain gainfully employed, pay taxes, and keep their family above the poverty line is a positive thing for the economy. Look at the problems of economic stagnation Japan faces with a projected 30% reduction in total population over the next few decades due to their restrictive immigration policies.
We are not Japan or Italy or Spain with an aging population.
Maintaining an arcane system of restrictive immigration that forces laborers to sneak over the border and work at below-market wages to unscrupulous employers is a negative economic policy.
Restricting immigration and wasting billions of dollars deporting a segment of the population that provides useful labor is idiotic economic policy.
No, what is a shortisided economic policy is to let in millions of people who will work for next to nothing and think that it would not impact the economy as a whole.
Societal guilt...stems from a puritan, Protestant culture, now gone 'secular', in which guilt is equated with having a conscience. The vast majority of the world is free from such guilt, but it's easy to 'sense', and it makes us a great 'target'. If I can CALL you a xenophobic racist...and get you to RESPOND...I will.
Ever hear of a Japanese "guilty" over the way Japan treated its POW's, or the Chinese?....Ever hear of a "guilty" Russian? A "guilty" Muslim? How about a "guilty" Chinese communist, or a 'guilty' white Latin American..(or even a 'guilty' Aztec)? You probably never have. Most cultures have a record of inhumanity and atrocities to their credit...very FEW, though, have any sense of 'guilt" in the matter. We do, and it shows. Others 'pick up on' this, and are happy to agree with us...about OUR guilt.
The message from much of the world to America is like this: "You Americans are SOMETIMES nice people, and you've done a FEW nice things. And it's a shame to hear you sit around, feel guilty, criticize yourselves, and dwell on the 'bad' things you've done. So sit back, relax, and take a break. It's MY turn to tell you why you should feel guilty, to criticize you, and to emphasize the 'bad' things you've done. You shouldn't have to do ALL the criticizing. I'll be GLAD to help."
Yes. All the other nations of the world have immigration laws and have no guilt feelings about a law that simply makes sense.
Only the USA believes that immigration can be unlimited, that they whole world's population has a right to simply move into the USA, no matter what problems it causes for the citizens here.
Some of it of course is the greed for cheap labor which brings quick profits to the employer but some of it is actually some kind of misguided bleeding heart syndrome that believes that relative few American taxpayers can support the billions of people of the world and that the whole world's population can crowd together here, destroying what's left of farm lands, have plenty of heating fuel, food and so on, and there would be no bad effects from this.
The ignorance of the original poster is astounding. There is no way to "sponsor" anyone but an "Immediate Relative" (IR) for a Permanent Residence (PR). IR's include; spouses, siblings, and children.
You can pledge to financially support someone who already has a US-citizen relative (or possibly someone who has obtained a student or diversity lottery visa), so they will be allowed to apply for a PR, but you cannot get a visa for someone who is unrelated to you.
So, unless the original poster is suggesting that everyone marry a potential immigrant--and this does not apply to illegal immigrants, as entering without inspection bars them from applying for a PR within the US--this is simply another excellent example of the ignorance of a large portion of the anti-immigrant crowd.
And your RUDENESS is showing, but then what is to be expected from someone who sees no problem with others breaking our laws.
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.
