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.
I didn't quote all of this very good post for space reasons. I agree with most of it. However, we need to do two things to make that work to our benefit: 1) Increase the number of "openings"; and 2) Ramp up and staff up the application and deportation process. We are forced to use "catch and release" because we can't hold people in camps for years awaiting a hearing. And by the time that hearing happens either the person has disappeared, or had children so that removal would be perceived as heartless. I don't think its wrong, by the way. See Solution for Problem of "14th Amendment" Birthright Babies:
However, we should be holding hearings for people who cross at other than a port of entry within a few weeks, not years. This concededly costs money but that is the price of living by rule of laws, not men.
In the beginning we should be holding such hearings at the point of entry. Yes that'll take lots of judges and/or temp judges but It'll taper off once the word gets out. For those that cross at points other than a point of entry, toss 'em back PERIOD, no excuses, no waiting. End chain migration as well.
And as I've repeatedly said, EVerify should be made mandatory with jail time attached.
In the beginning we should be holding such hearings at the point of entry. Yes that'll take lots of judges and/or temp judges but It'll taper off once the word gets out. For those that cross at points other than a point of entry, toss 'em back PERIOD, no excuses, no waiting. End chain migration as well.
And as I've repeatedly said, EVerify should be made mandatory with jail time attached.
Great idea. The problem comes with "vacation overstays." People coming in for the day to go shopping can simply disappear. Maybe handle those the way that you recommend that a "cross at points other than a point (should be port) of entry is handled.
Seems like the core divided issue on the immigration debate is which matters more: the needs of the people wanting to immigrate or the needs of people already living in the host nation. Which matters more? Should both be considered equally? Should only one need be the deciding factor?
It's possible to feel empathy for the plight of illegal immigrants but know that a country's first duty is to its own citizens and LEGAL immigrants (A distinction that almost always seems to be absent in this debate). Borders exist for a reason and immigration laws exist for a reason.
We are coming from a long period of stagnant wages for the working class of this country. And illegal immigration has a documented effect on the ability of the average working-class American to both find a job and earn a competitive wage. When you have too many unskilled or semi-skilled workers, wages goes down. This isn't rocket science. It's the Law of Supply and Demand at its most brutal, and its effects have been documented by a host of research from all perspectives, from the Federal Reserve to academia.
If you look at the ones most vocal about the rights of illegal immigrants, have you noticed something? They invariably are the ones whose livelihoods are not affected. They don't swing a hammer on construction sites or clean hotel rooms or work in restaurants. The supports of illegals are people such as lawyers or professors or clergy, professions where there is no chance their jobs will be taken away. Meanwhile, the kind of labor illegals perform today used to be that those were decently-paying wages for those on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. So the pro-illegals can do all the public virtue signalling all they want. After all, it's no skin off their own collective noses.
Essentially, if you endorse illegal immigration in this country, you are telling the working-class of this country to drop dead. What's more, you are, in truth, supporting the transfer of wealth from the working class of this country to their potential employers.
Finally, there is corrosive effect caused by a culture that believes our nation's laws don't matter. Mind you, I think the current immigration laws need serious revision. Maybe we should allow more immigrants into the country. Maybe we should have a provision for temporary workers in seasonal businesses such as agriculture. Maybe we have elastic quotas that are pegged to current unemployment rate, with specific timetables for how long a worker may stay in this country.
But simply winking at illegals in this country is to show callous disregard for the working people of this country. We have our own humanitarian needs, you know.
Last edited by MinivanDriver; 08-06-2018 at 12:50 PM..
It's possible to feel empathy for the plight of illegal immigrants but know that a country's first duty is to its own citizens and LEGAL immigrants (A distinction that almost always seems to be absent in this debate). Borders exist for a reason and immigration laws exist for a reason.
We are coming from a long period of stagnant wages for the working class of this country. And illegal immigration has a documented effect on the ability of the average working-class American to both find a job and earn a competitive wage. When you have too many unskilled or semi-skilled workers, wages goes down. This isn't rocket science. It's the Law of Supply and Demand at its most brutal, and its effects have been documented by a host of research from all perspectives, from the Federal Reserve to academia.
If you look at the ones most vocal about the rights of illegal immigrants, have you noticed something? They invariably are the ones whose livelihoods are not affected. They don't swing a hammer on construction sites or clean hotel rooms or work in restaurants. The supports of illegals are people such as lawyers or professors or clergy, professions where there is no chance their jobs will be taken away. Meanwhile, the kind of labor illegals perform today used to be that those were decently-paying wages for those on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. So the pro-illegals can do all the public virtue signalling all they want. After all, it's no skin off their own collective noses.
Essentially, if you endorse illegal immigration in this country, you are telling the working-class of this country to drop dead. What's more, you are, in truth, supporting the transfer of wealth from the working class of this country to their potential employers.
Finally, there is corrosive effect caused by a culture that believes our nation's laws don't matter. Mind you, I think the current immigration laws need serious revision. Maybe we should allow more immigrants into the country. Maybe we should have a provision for temporary workers in seasonal businesses such as agriculture. Maybe we have elastic quotas that are pegged to current unemployment rate, with specific timetables for how long a worker may stay in this country.
But simply winking at illegals in this country is to show callous disregard for the working people of this country. We have our own humanitarian needs, you know.
I believe you stated the feelings of the majority of U.S. citizens if they were asked. I don't know anyone who's absolutely against immigration nor have I met anyone who's not understanding and sympathetic to the reasons the people are fleeing wherever they came from. Most I've spoken with and/or listened to understand the damage that's being done to the U.S. under past/current policies.
We can't fix everywhere nor can we save everyone...
I believe you stated the feelings of the majority of U.S. citizens if they were asked. I don't know anyone who's absolutely against immigration nor have I met anyone who's not understanding and sympathetic to the reasons the people are fleeing wherever they came from. Most I've spoken with and/or listened to understand the damage that's being done to the U.S. under past/current policies.
We can't fix everywhere nor can we save everyone...
You're right. But the pro-illegals keep keep trying to conflate illegal and legal immigration. They love to toss the 'racist' and 'bigot' labels around, never realizing how lazy and tired that argument is. I don't know a soul who has a problem with immigrants who go through legal channels.
It's a dishonest tactic, because everyone understands the distinction. It's kind of like the euphemism "undocumented workers." They want to soften it so it sounds as if the person in question just hasn't filled out the forms correctly. Yet that "undocumented worker" is de facto illegal, and taking a job from someone, either native born or a legal immigrant, who has done everything by the rules.
We continue to try and complex what is in fact a simple issue. Our immigration control system does not work and cannot with 11 million illegal aliens.
The only rational fix is to legalize them until we get to a population we can deal with. Under a million so that all illegals are tracked down in months and resolved swiftly.
Has nothing to do with a fondness for illegals or any belief they have a right to be here.
And we need to do it now so the over stayers do not get completely out of control.
We continue to try and complex what is in fact a simple issue. Our immigration control system does not work and cannot with 11 million illegal aliens.
The only rational fix is to legalize them until we get to a population we can deal with. Under a million so that all illegals are tracked down in months and resolved swiftly.
Has nothing to do with a fondness for illegals or any belief they have a right to be here.
And we need to do it now so the over stayers do not get completely out of control.
Actually, it's even simpler than that: Prosecute the employers of illegals. Throw the book at a few hundred contractors, restaurateurs, and the whatnot, and the problem will resolve itself. Because illegals would not be coming here at all unless there were employers willing to hire them.
That's kind of the contradiction in the pro-illegal camp. The people who want to take the side of illegals are, ideologically speaking, more likely to take the side of a union on strike for better wages. If a company brought in scabs to do the work, they'd be outraged. Yet, in a way, that's exactly what's going on with the job market for illegals.
Actually, it's even simpler than that: Prosecute the employers of illegals. Throw the book at a few hundred contractors, restaurateurs, and the whatnot, and the problem will resolve itself. Because illegals would not be coming here at all unless there were employers willing to hire them.
That's kind of the contradiction in the pro-illegal camp. The people who want to take the side of illegals are, ideologically speaking, more likely to take the side of a union on strike for better wages. If a company brought in scabs to do the work, they'd be outraged. Yet, in a way, that's exactly what's going on with the job market for illegals.
Nonsense pretty much. Investigating and prosecuting employers for hiring illegals is complex, time consuming and expensive. And that would only reach a small portion of them. Something like 45% are already in the gray market. And the Feds will never be able to get at the dishwasher in the local restaurant.
On top of that there is virtually zero probability that any tough version of Everify is going to happen. The Chambers of Commerce are quite good at fending such attempts off. It may be possible to tighten the hiring somewhat in an overall immigration reform but otherwise it is not going to happen.
Nonsense pretty much. Investigating and prosecuting employers for hiring illegals is complex, time consuming and expensive. And that would only reach a small portion of them. Something like 45% are already in the gray market. And the Feds will never be able to get at the dishwasher in the local restaurant.
On top of that there is virtually zero probability that any tough version of Everify is going to happen. The Chambers of Commerce are quite good at fending such attempts off. It may be possible to tighten the hiring somewhat in an overall immigration reform but otherwise it is not going to happen.
Hardly. All you have to do is arrest a few and the rest will dump their illegals and run like scalded dogs. Just find the worst offenders and make an example of them under existing law.
Meanwhile, your original contribution to legalize them only perpetuates the problem that illegals already constitute in this country. It solves absolutely nothing.
Hardly. All you have to do is arrest a few and the rest will dump their illegals and run like scalded dogs. Just find the worst offenders and make an example of them under existing law.
Meanwhile, your original contribution to legalize them only perpetuates the problem that illegals already constitute in this country. It solves absolutely nothing.
Has no real impact. The recent one in Tennessee a prime example. Pretty clear they were after the factory people for tax evasion not the employ of illegal aliens. And that is the pattern. No charges filed even though the violations would appear clear. They likely find it difficult if not impossible to prove anything against the upper management. So they can likely get some low level manager or foreman but no one else.
Of course it solves something. It gives us the opportunity to enforce our immigration laws...something flatly impossible now. Not that we might not blow it again...but one hopes we learned from the last time.
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.
