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.
Americans would never leave. We would stay, suffer and fix it. Because we would have to. I don't think I've ever heard of American refugees or economic migrants.
We don't have any sort of dream country to go to, where we could get 10 times the pay for manual labor, food stamps, language training, use their emergency rooms, free lawyers. Could you imagine? It seems insane looking at it from that angle.
Maybe that is part of the reason the US is at the top economically. We have to solve our problems, so we do.
Even our poor would be as badly off or worse off anywhere else.
That is why, like all the other countries, we need a rational immigration policy with merit at its core. You must be of a certain basic quality to be admitted. Here are the qualities I would like to see:
1) You MUST speak English fluently.
2) You must have enough money for you, or you and your family, to exist for 2 years with no job. So that would be somewhere in the range of 50 grand for a single person. Maybe 25 grand per person for a family.
3) You must have decent job prospects. Demonstrable skills. A record of independent existence.
4) You must support the American economic system of Capitalism. And you must be able to show support for the Constitution, free speech, individual rights, private property rights. So yes, some kind of Civics test, and it should be essay based.
5) You must have private health insurance.
6) You must contractually agree to be ineligible for any welfare program for 20 years.
7) You must agree to immediate deportation upon conviction for any non-trivial crime for 10 years. So you are a probationary pre-citizen for awhile.
Is this exclusionary, discriminatory, and prejudiced toward the best and brightest? ABSOEFFINGLUTELY. The Statue of Liberty is revoked. We no longer want huddled masses of useless people. That might have flown in a time when the country was young and we needed endless amounts of basically unskilled labor. That is no longer the case. WRETCHED REFUSE IS BARRED FROM ENTRY.
So, basically, acceptable immigrants are nice, educated, independent people who are not going to suck off the existing citizenry and vampire off their neighbors. Show me that you are independent and functional, show me that you can communicate with me in the de facto OFFICIAL language of my country, aka English, and guess what? You are welcomed in with open arms!
How about a Socialist paradise. How about England?
So, seeing how it’s done in the nice “civilized” Western countries, it becomes obvious that allowing a mob of unknown illegals to “caravan” across our border and invade our country without going through a vetting process similar to Canada, Australia, and the UK is counterproductive to our rational self-interest. Barring entry is rational, correct, moral, and good. Citizenship must be earned. It is not a right for foreign nationals. And it is not guaranteed. Getting a “no” is a real possibility. So make sure you read the requirements. Speak English. Be Very Independent and Competent. Then you can come in and receive a warm, earned, welcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by max210
Look up the immigration requirements for Mexico. Lol.
This is a refugee or asylum seeker situation. Canada certainly has an active program for such. England accepts citizens of the EU and the EU accepts asylum seekers and refugees from outside the EU.
Doubtful anyone in the caravan would meet the US immigration requirements.
Nobody is talking about this, but I suspect that a big part of the caravan already crossed the border illegally. Most people in Central America have relatives in the US, those people still in Mexico are in terrible conditions and they either have to go back or cross illegally. Once at the border, the most difficult part is through so...
This is a refugee or asylum seeker situation. Canada certainly has an active program for such. England accepts citizens of the EU and the EU accepts asylum seekers and refugees from outside the EU.
Doubtful anyone in the caravan would meet the US immigration requirements.
So all this discussion is irrelevant.
No, it’s exactly relevant. The asylum bull$hit is just that. They are seeking immigration, not asylum. The asylum nonsense is them GAMING the system. The GAME needs to be over.
No, it’s exactly relevant. The asylum bull$hit is just that. They are seeking immigration, not asylum. The asylum nonsense is them GAMING the system. The GAME needs to be over.
There is a process in place to deal with asylum seekers. All that we need to do is execute it.
It is of course true that the US immigration system is so screwed up that it may not work as it should. And that is because we refuse to fix the system. So we basically chose to not enforce our immigration laws.
So we continue to maintain the myth that we have immigration laws when in fact we do not.
That is why, like all the other countries, we need a rational immigration policy with merit at its core. You must be of a certain basic quality to be admitted. Here are the qualities I would like to see:
1) You MUST speak English fluently.
2) You must have enough money for you, or you and your family, to exist for 2 years with no job. So that would be somewhere in the range of 50 grand for a single person. Maybe 25 grand per person for a family.
3) You must have decent job prospects. Demonstrable skills. A record of independent existence.
4) You must support the American economic system of Capitalism. And you must be able to show support for the Constitution, free speech, individual rights, private property rights. So yes, some kind of Civics test, and it should be essay based.
5) You must have private health insurance.
6) You must contractually agree to be ineligible for any welfare program for 20 years.
7) You must agree to immediate deportation upon conviction for any non-trivial crime for 10 years. So you are a probationary pre-citizen for awhile.
Is this exclusionary, discriminatory, and prejudiced toward the best and brightest? ABSOEFFINGLUTELY. The Statue of Liberty is revoked. We no longer want huddled masses of useless people. That might have flown in a time when the country was young and we needed endless amounts of basically unskilled labor. That is no longer the case. WRETCHED REFUSE IS BARRED FROM ENTRY.
So, basically, acceptable immigrants are nice, educated, independent people who are not going to suck off the existing citizenry and vampire off their neighbors. Show me that you are independent and functional, show me that you can communicate with me in the de facto OFFICIAL language of my country, aka English, and guess what? You are welcomed in with open arms!
How about a Socialist paradise. How about England?
So, seeing how it’s done in the nice “civilized” Western countries, it becomes obvious that allowing a mob of unknown illegals to “caravan” across our border and invade our country without going through a vetting process similar to Canada, Australia, and the UK is counterproductive to our rational self-interest. Barring entry is rational, correct, moral, and good. Citizenship must be earned. It is not a right for foreign nationals. And it is not guaranteed. Getting a “no” is a real possibility. So make sure you read the requirements. Speak English. Be Very Independent and Competent. Then you can come in and receive a warm, earned, welcome.
Marc, not a bad start, here are my opinions
1) You MUST speak English fluently. I would amend this to say you either speak it fluently, or you speak some, and are enrolled in English speaking classes.
2) You must have enough money for you, or you and your family, to exist for 2 years with no job. So that would be somewhere in the range of 50 grand for a single person. Maybe 25 grand per person for a family. No, we should let in some poor people if they are of good character, willing to work, and aren't going to drain the system.
3) You must have decent job prospects. Demonstrable skills. A record of independent existence. Agree.
4) You must support the American economic system of Capitalism. And you must be able to show support for the Constitution, free speech, individual rights, private property rights. So yes, some kind of Civics test, and it should be essay based. Agree
5) You must have private health insurance. Not sure on this one.
6) You must contractually agree to be ineligible for any welfare program for 20 years. Interesting idea, I'd put some limited exceptions here but generally I agree.
7) You must agree to immediate deportation upon conviction for any non-trivial crime for 10 years. So you are a probationary pre-citizen for awhile. Agree. Any misdemeanor or felony -- you are gone. Hit the road, and don't come back no more.
ALSO 8) You must agree to a full health care screening to make sure you aren't bringing in disease.
Marc, not a bad start, here are my opinions
1) You MUST speak English fluently. I would amend this to say you either speak it fluently, or you speak some, and are enrolled in English speaking classes.
2) You must have enough money for you, or you and your family, to exist for 2 years with no job. So that would be somewhere in the range of 50 grand for a single person. Maybe 25 grand per person for a family. No, we should let in some poor people if they are of good character, willing to work, and aren't going to drain the system.
3) You must have decent job prospects. Demonstrable skills. A record of independent existence. Agree.
4) You must support the American economic system of Capitalism. And you must be able to show support for the Constitution, free speech, individual rights, private property rights. So yes, some kind of Civics test, and it should be essay based. Agree
5) You must have private health insurance. Not sure on this one.
6) You must contractually agree to be ineligible for any welfare program for 20 years. Interesting idea, I'd put some limited exceptions here but generally I agree.
7) You must agree to immediate deportation upon conviction for any non-trivial crime for 10 years. So you are a probationary pre-citizen for awhile. Agree. Any misdemeanor or felony -- you are gone. Hit the road, and don't come back no more.
ALSO 8) You must agree to a full health care screening to make sure you aren't bringing in disease.
Ok, I’m willing to work with you on all areas of disagreement. For example, I’ll bring down the money requirements if they are ineligible for welfare. And I’ll agree to the English classes. I just want it made clear that if you come here, you intend to assimilate, not ghettoize.
Now why can’t the Democrats and Republicans do this? It would not be that difficult to hash out something reasonable that prevents the financial rape of American citizens. Hell if Canada can do it, anyone can.
There is a process in place to deal with asylum seekers. All that we need to do is execute it.
It is of course true that the US immigration system is so screwed up that it may not work as it should. And that is because we refuse to fix the system. So we basically chose to not enforce our immigration laws.
So we continue to maintain the myth that we have immigration laws when in fact we do not.
There we agree. We have no cogent immigration laws. We have to establish them, and if they are firm and non-gameable, I would compromise on some kind of limited amnesty. At some point we have to punish ourselves for not being man enough as a society to pass and enforce a decent immigration law. If that means we implicitly encouraged illegal entry through our own incompetence and cowardice, I am ready to admit that with an amnesty and deal with it, as long as we stop illegal entry firmly going forward.
There we agree. We have no cogent immigration laws. We have to establish them, and if they are firm and non-gameable, I would compromise on some kind of limited amnesty. At some point we have to punish ourselves for not being man enough as a society to pass and enforce a decent immigration law. If that means we implicitly encouraged illegal entry through our own incompetence and cowardice, I am ready to admit that with an amnesty and deal with it, as long as we stop illegal entry firmly going forward.
Without some serious combination of border security and removal of illegals arriving by plane (overstays) any form of amnesty is just rewarding criminal behavior. We'd be better off doing nothing than adding them to the full menu of social services.
There is a process in place to deal with asylum seekers. All that we need to do is execute it.
It is of course true that the US immigration system is so screwed up that it may not work as it should. And that is because we refuse to fix the system. So we basically chose to not enforce our immigration laws.
So we continue to maintain the myth that we have immigration laws when in fact we do not.
We have immigration laws, over 1 million people go through it every year. The reality is you resist every effort to deport the illegals that are already, instead wanting to give amnesty because you claim it's just too big. It's not, quit whining and get out of the way, let law enforcement do their jobs. Write to your rep, vote for politicians that want to implement everify, remove sanctuary city laws, build a wall, that you supposedly support.
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.
