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 01-07-2009, 04:30 PM
 
7,020 posts, read 9,895,366 times
Reputation: 1094

Advertisements

Immigration will be responsible for more than 80 percent of the spending needed to expand infrastructure capability between now and mid-century, according to the report. Ed Rubenstein examines 15 categories of infrastructure: airports, border security, bridges, dams and levees, electricity (the power grids), hazardous waste removal, hospitals, mass transit, parks and recreation facilities, ports and navigable waterways, public schools, railroads, roads and highways, solid waste and trash, and water and sewer systems.

The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that $1.6 trillion dollars is needed to repair and maintain U.S. infrastructure in next 5 years. The massive influx of immigrants into the U.S. is increasing the demands on an overburdened infrastructure, much of which was built shortly after World War II and is outdated and deteriorating.


Press release - New Report: U.S. Infrastructure Overwhelmed by Influx of Immigrants
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2009, 04:33 PM
 
4,828 posts, read 6,790,161 times
Reputation: 620
So much for we are against only illegal immigrants argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:03 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,612,395 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknight04 View Post
So much for we are against only illegal immigrants argument.
It's a matter of practical neccessity. We seem unable, or unwilling, to address the fact that illegal immigrants are anything other than just "immigrants", period. Therefore, if we're trying to limit the impact of illegal immigrants, we're going to have to do so at the expense of ALL immigrants.

Like being in the third grade....if Billy marks on the wall, and the other kiddies are unwilling to point out his guilt (i.e.' to 'rat on' him), then the teacher has no choice but to keep ALL the kiddies after class. As long as the wall-marking Billy is regarded as "just a regular student" instead of a smirking, property-damaging little vandal, then EVERYONE will have to bear the stigma, and pay the penalty, for Billy's property crime. And this will CONTINUE until such time as the students grow weary of Billy, decide to grow a backbone, and say "Enough already! WE didn't mark on the wall, BILLY DID ! And WE shouldn't be stigmatized for what HE did !! WE didn't get Billy in trouble, he did !!" When THAT happens, Billy can be dealt with, while the OTHER kiddies can go out to play.

When we reach the point of seeing ILLEGALS as 'offenders', instead of 'just immigrants', then we'll be able to deal with one group differently than the other. Until then, I'm afraid we're stuck. "Immigrants are having a negative impact"...right?...(sigh)...OK, whatever you say. "Immigrants"..yes.

(The hypothetical "Billy" is used here only for the sake of illustration...it could be "Susie" as well. No resemblance is made, nor is one intended, with any real person)

Last edited by macmeal; 01-07-2009 at 05:15 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:28 PM
 
4,828 posts, read 6,790,161 times
Reputation: 620
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmeal View Post
It's a matter of practical neccessity. We seem unable, or unwilling, to address the fact that illegal immigrants are anything other than just "immigrants", period. Therefore, if we're trying to limit the impact of illegal immigrants, we're going to have to do so at the expense of ALL immigrants.

Like being in the third grade....if Billy marks on the wall, and the other kiddies are unwilling to point out his guilt (i.e.' to 'rat on' him), then the teacher has no choice but to keep ALL the kiddies after class. As long as the wall-marking Billy is regarded as "just a regular student" instead of a smirking, property-damaging little vandal, then EVERYONE will have to bear the stigma, and pay the penalty, for Billy's property crime. And this will CONTINUE until such time as the students grow weary of Billy, decide to grow a backbone, and say "Enough already! WE didn't mark on the wall, BILLY DID ! And WE shouldn't be stigmatized for what HE did !! WE didn't get Billy in trouble, he did !!" When THAT happens, Billy can be dealt with, while the OTHER kiddies can go out to play.

When we reach the point of seeing ILLEGALS as 'offenders', instead of 'just immigrants', then we'll be able to deal with one group differently than the other. Until then, I'm afraid we're stuck. "Immigrants are having a negative impact"...right?...(sigh)...OK, whatever you say. "Immigrants"..yes.

(The hypothetical "Billy" is used here only for the sake of illustration...it could be "Susie" as well. No resemblance is made, nor is one intended, with any real person)
The story didn't blame only illegal immigrants, it blame ALL immigrants in general. So... i don't know what you are talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:34 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,612,395 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknight04 View Post
The story didn't blame only illegal immigrants, it blame ALL immigrants in general. So... i don't know what you are talking about.
Exactly..there ARE no illegal immigrants, so therefore ALL immigrants are "immigrants in general"....and there are no illegal humans, either. (Except for my neighbor's rotten, punk 15-year old kid)...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:50 PM
 
7,020 posts, read 9,895,366 times
Reputation: 1094
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmeal View Post
Exactly..there ARE no illegal immigrants, so therefore ALL immigrants are "immigrants in general"....and there are no illegal humans, either. (Except for my neighbor's rotten, punk 15-year old kid)...
Agreed. They can high 5 and thank: The PC crowd, the catholic church, LaRaza, LuLac, Maldef and the masses of legal hispanics who claim "no human being is illegal" and deliberately and consistently refer to their illegal alien friends, and family members as "immigrants". They seem to want it both ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 05:58 PM
 
Location: rain city
2,956 posts, read 11,042,170 times
Reputation: 4865
Not sure why everyone is focusing on immigrants?

This tells it all "..... overburdened infrastructure, much of which was built shortly after World War II and is outdated and deteriorating."

So there has been little to no investment in infrastructure since right after WW2? This has nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with federal and local government squandering 50 years worth of revenue and giving the country nothing in return.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,809,199 times
Reputation: 3028
As usual, macmeal is right on the money. Pro-illegals have created this “immigration” monster. Whenever anti-illegals have attempted to differentiate between legal immigrants and illegal aliens, we have been accused of xenophobia or racism. You can’t have it both ways -- they are either legal or illegal. The preferred euphemism of “immigrant” may sound warm and fuzzy, but it is a disservice to legal immigrants who have a right to reside in this country, and do not deserve to be treated as interlopers.

Even pro-illegal posters on this forum rarely refer to those opposed to illegal immigration as anti-illegal. It’s usually anti-“immigrant.” How many times have we corrected posters by proclaiming we are not anti-IMMIGRANT, we are anti-ILLEGAL? Well, you have made your beds. . . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,809,199 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by azoria View Post
Not sure why everyone is focusing on immigrants?

This tells it all "..... overburdened infrastructure, much of which was built shortly after World War II and is outdated and deteriorating."

So there has been little to no investment in infrastructure since right after WW2? This has nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with federal and local government squandering 50 years worth of revenue and giving the country nothing in return.
Not true. Common sense dictates that our aging infrastructure will deteriorate more rapidly with 20+ million additional “citizens.” Likewise, a 2-bedroom house built in 1950 will fare better with a family of four occupying the residence, than a 3-bedroom house built in 2000 in which five families are living simultaneously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2009, 06:17 PM
 
7,020 posts, read 9,895,366 times
Reputation: 1094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
As usual, macmeal is right on the money. Pro-illegals have created this “immigration” monster. Whenever anti-illegals have attempted to differentiate between legal immigrants and illegal aliens, we have been accused of xenophobia or racism. You can’t have it both ways -- they are either legal or illegal. The preferred euphemism of “immigrant” may sound warm and fuzzy, but it is a disservice to legal immigrants who have a right to reside in this country, and do not deserve to be treated as interlopers.

Even pro-illegal posters on this forum rarely refer to those opposed to illegal immigration as anti-illegal. It’s usually anti-“immigrant.” How many times have we corrected posters by proclaiming we are not anti-IMMIGRANT, we are anti-ILLEGAL? Well, you have made your beds. . . .
I'm always amazed when people want to have the cake, ice cream and the whole party when it's NOT their birthday. You can't have it both ways, any more than you can ride 2 donkeys with one ass. Yet too many legal hispanics seem to think illegal aliens of their race/ethnicity are so special that they are above the law and that they have the right to twist all words and American laws to suit their needs. That is until it backfires.

Your post is dead on, I couldn't agree more.

Last edited by JDubsMom; 01-07-2009 at 06:30 PM..
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
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