Would greatly increasing LEGAL Immigration of unskilled workers from Latin America decrease Illegal Immigration? (green card, visa)

[Tough Questions]

A major plan in Comprehensive Immigration Legislation is to greatly increase the amount of slots available for UNSKILLED POORLY EDUCATED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. The complaint is that there are few if any slots available for unskilled immigrants from Latin America under the current system, so this type of individual is forced to come to America illegally to get the American Dream.

They immigration advocates believe that if we would increase the number of Visa's and Green Cards for unskilled Mexicans, the amount of illegal immigration would decrease substantially. Critics on the other side say that America does not need more unskilled workers and the social problems they would bring to America and increasing the number of LEGAL slots for unskilled workers would not have any impact on the number of people who would come her illegally because there are potentially billions who would love to come any way they can.

What do you think?

[chicagonut]

Originally Posted by Tough Questions

A major plan in Comprehensive Immigration Legislation is to greatly increase the amount of slots available for UNSKILLED POORLY EDUCATED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. The complaint is that there are few if any slots available for unskilled immigrants from Latin America under the current system, so this type of individual is forced to come to America illegally to get the American Dream.

They immigration advocates believe that if we would increase the number of Visa's and Green Cards for unskilled Mexicans, the amount of illegal immigration would decrease substantially. Critics on the other side say that America does not need more unskilled workers and the social problems they would bring to America and increasing the number of LEGAL slots for unskilled workers would not have any impact on the number of people who would come her illegally because there are potentially billions who would love to come any way they can.

What do you think?

Check your proported facts. Asians are allowed the highest quotas for legal immigration and Latinos are second only by a small margin. So where is this discrimination in "slots" against Latinos? The problem is that there are far many more poor, uneducated and unskilled Latinos that want to come here than we can accomodate so they come anyway. Are we to lift our quotas to allow them to come in any numbers just because they want to even though we don't need them? The critics are correct.

[DontH8Me]

Originally Posted by Tough Questions

A major plan in Comprehensive Immigration Legislation is to greatly increase the amount of slots available for UNSKILLED POORLY EDUCATED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. The complaint is that there are few if any slots available for unskilled immigrants from Latin America under the current system, so this type of individual is forced to come to America illegally to get the American Dream.

They immigration advocates believe that if we would increase the number of Visa's and Green Cards for unskilled Mexicans, the amount of illegal immigration would decrease substantially. Critics on the other side say that America does not need more unskilled workers and the social problems they would bring to America and increasing the number of LEGAL slots for unskilled workers would not have any impact on the number of people who would come her illegally because there are potentially billions who would love to come any way they can.

What do you think?

Whose complaint is that? So are you saying that any other (non-Latin American) countries' "unskilled immigrants" have more slots than the ones from Latin America?

Why unskilled Mexicans specifically? Why not unskilled from other countries? We are already taking more legal immigrants from Mexico than nearly every other country in the world combined. Don't you think other nations should get a chance at the American dream?

[macmeal]

Is this a trick question? Increasing the LEGAL entry of unskilled workers from Latin America would essentially amount to LEGALIZING those people who are presently arriving illegally. You'd be taking an illegal act and making it legal. So of COURSE, if you said the people entering over the border were no longer illegal, but henceforth legal, it would serve to 'decrease illegal immigration'. But the net result would still be huge numbers of unskilled Latin Americans arriving here each year, competing for jobs and social services with the local population. Changing the 'label' wouldn't change what's happening.

Would 'allowing people to take stuff from stores without paying' serve to reduce the incidence of shoplifting? Probably it would...but the net result would still be 'stuff' being taken from stores at the owners' expense. You'd merely be 're-labeling' what was already happening.

If you changed the legal 'BAC' limit in cases of drunk driving from .08 to 1.6, you'd have fewer drivers in violation of the DUI laws. But you'd still have people driving under the influence, crashing into each other, and causing accidents....it would just be 'legal' now instead of illegal. Alcohol is alcohol. Stealing is stealing. Unskilled, impoverished immigrants are still unskilled and impoverished.

Trick question.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by Tough Questions

A major plan in Comprehensive Immigration Legislation is to greatly increase the amount of slots available for UNSKILLED POORLY EDUCATED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. The complaint is that there are few if any slots available for unskilled immigrants from Latin America under the current system, so this type of individual is forced to come to America illegally to get the American Dream.

They immigration advocates believe that if we would increase the number of Visa's and Green Cards for unskilled Mexicans, the amount of illegal immigration would decrease substantially. Critics on the other side say that America does not need more unskilled workers and the social problems they would bring to America and increasing the number of LEGAL slots for unskilled workers would not have any impact on the number of people who would come her illegally because there are potentially billions who would love to come any way they can.

What do you think?

Frankly; immigration from Mexico needs to be lessened and priority given to English speaking nations (Ireland, UK, Jamaica, South Africa, India, Belize, Kenya, etc.).

[UrbanQuest]

Originally Posted by ArizonaBear

Frankly; immigration from Mexico needs to be lessened and priority given to English speaking nations (Ireland, UK, Jamaica, South Africa, India, Belize, Kenya, etc.).

I second that idea.

Illegal immigrant labor is now deeply woven into the U.S. small business work model. It would be a catastrophe to legal citizens and residents in this country to increase legal immigration of anykind. It would be the death knell to the middle and working classes. I can now begin to see how this boondoggle does really serve the interests of not only certain ethnic interest groups, but it has a much more intense net effect for the neo-conservative capitalist elites. It helps them in these very important long-range missions.

1. Population Growth
a. more consumers
b. larger pool of military capable assets

2. Increased Labor supply
a. cheaper labor
b. employer advantage in workplace power structure
c. assett in competition with global economies with surpluss labor advantages

3. Multiculturalism
a. dilute the monocultural advantage the average population would have to assemble and challenge the ruling elite.
b. consumerisms rise as the sole tie that binds in general population
c. mild fracturing of general society thus weakening the "power of the vote"
d. weaken the persuasive power of minority advocacy groups by not only pitting minorities against each other, but for the white population to perceive themselves as under-attack, thus deflecting their attention from (war on terror, deregulation, etc.)

4. The illegal-immigration arguement in and of itself
a. Elites engage in a massive battle to enable illegal immigration and the subsequent amnesty of said group.
b. The assault is so large, the American people may be strong enough to repel another amnesty, but it leaves them weakened and perhaps with a feeling of guilt for weilding even a small semblence of power of self-preservation.
c. In the meantime, LEGAL IMMIGRATION garners an almost sacred level of protection at whatever level. For a matter of fact, it will be attempted to blame the problem of illegal immigration on not having enough LEGAL IMMIGRATION. (the golden grail).
d. Legal immigration not only continues at it's massive level of 1+ million per year, the prospects for it's increase are sacrocant.
e. In an almost snake salesman style campaign, icreased LEGAL IMMIGRATION will actually be sold as a compromise to pass amnesty for illegal immigrants.



In the end.