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.
First, you wouldn't have to remove 11 million. If you remove all the incentives and support systems we have created, and make life very difficult as an illegal, many of them would depart voluntarily.
Second, any form of amnesty is off the table for many of us until AFTER the border is secured and these benefits removed. It isn't going to be like 1986 where we agree to implement amnesty first then the secure border never materializes.
Bingo!
I've been in "The City of Industry" in CA....there are signs all over town that say, we will help you get your benefits, inquire within.....
First, you wouldn't have to remove 11 million. If you remove all the incentives and support systems we have created, and make life very difficult as an illegal, many of them would depart voluntarily.
Second, any form of amnesty is off the table for many of us until AFTER the border is secured and these benefits removed. It isn't going to be like 1986 where we agree to implement amnesty first then the secure border never materializes.
So couple amnesty for any illegal immigrant with no criminal record and a payment of some level of back taxes while simultaneously dropping the hammer on any employer who employs illegal immigrants post-amnesty and eliminating all virtually post-amnesty social programs for illegal immigrants? In general this sounds reasonable to me.
So couple amnesty for any illegal immigrant with no criminal record and a payment of some level of back taxes while simultaneously dropping the hammer on any employer who employs illegal immigrants post-amnesty and eliminating all virtually post-amnesty social programs for illegal immigrants? In general this sounds reasonable to me.
You first. End birthright citizenship. End sanctuary cities. End driver licenses for illegals. End tax-paid lawyers for illegals. End ESL programs. When I see that we can discuss the details of amnesty.
How many times do people have to tell you that the 2006 bill was for a fence, not a massive wall? There was no wall bill in 2006. People have posted the link for the fence bill.
No it wasn't! It was for 700 miles of double wall along the most porous areas of our border. How many times do I have to tell you and yours that?
You first. End birthright citizenship. End sanctuary cities. End driver licenses for illegals. End tax-paid lawyers for illegals. End ESL programs. When I see that we can discuss the details of amnesty.
What do you mean "me first"? I'm not in charge. I thought we were discussing realistic possibilities for immigration reform, not demanding that a random internet poster with no legislative authority "blinks" first.
But what you are proposing will do nothing to alleviate the situation. "Strip everyone of everything and then we will talk" is going to be an anathema for too many people to be viable. If you're looking to realistically discuss a reasonable compromise, that is not a realistic starting point and, frankly, most of the things you have listed cannot be legislated on the Federal level. End ESL programs and birthright citizenship? You're going to propose that the Constitution be amended and that Congress strip school districts of the right manage their curriculum? Come on.
Broadly speaking, you cannot just eliminate all social programs without first addressing how we will deal with the presence of illegal aliens first.
Take health care, for example. Want to station ICE agents at hospitals or pass a law prohibiting them from treating illegal aliens? If even logistically possible, all you'd do is deter illegals from seeking treatment. And although that might sound good in theory (hey! we're saving money [probably not]!) we will have people dying in the streets, an increase to "underground" unlicensed health care, and an increased likelihood that major contagions will manifest themselves in the legal and illegal populations. The social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
Drivers licenses are another example. Sure, some illegal aliens will take the bus instead of driving (Yay! less traffic!). But others would just end up as more-dangerous unlicensed and uninsured drivers to the major detriment of the legal and illegal populations. Again, the social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
These things require more than just bumper-sticker "no more benefits" thought. You have to think them through in light of the fact that there are 11-13 million illegal aliens here already.
What do you mean "me first"? I'm not in charge. I thought we were discussing realistic possibilities for immigration reform, not demanding that a random internet poster with no legislative authority "blinks" first.
But what you are proposing will do nothing to alleviate the situation. "Strip everyone of everything and then we will talk" is going to be an anathema for too many people to be viable. If you're looking to realistically discuss a reasonable compromise, that is not a realistic starting point and, frankly, most of the things you have listed cannot be legislated on the Federal level. End ESL programs and birthright citizenship? You're going to propose that the Constitution be amended and that Congress strip school districts of the right manage their curriculum? Come on.
Broadly speaking, you cannot just eliminate all social programs without first addressing how we will deal with the presence of illegal aliens first.
Take health care, for example. Want to station ICE agents at hospitals or pass a law prohibiting them from treating illegal aliens? If even logistically possible, all you'd do is deter illegals from seeking treatment. And although that might sound good in theory (hey! we're saving money [probably not]!) we will have people dying in the streets, an increase to "underground" unlicensed health care, and an increased likelihood that major contagions will manifest themselves in the legal and illegal populations. The social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
Drivers licenses are another example. Sure, some illegal aliens will take the bus instead of driving (Yay! less traffic!). But others would just end up as more-dangerous unlicensed and uninsured drivers to the major detriment of the legal and illegal populations. Again, the social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
These things require more than just bumper-sticker "no more benefits" thought. You have to think them through in light of the fact that there are 11-13 million illegal aliens here already.
If you make it easy for them to function in the USA while illegally in the country then you should not be surprised if more come in to take part in the gravy train. Maybe that's what you want? I don't know.
No DL for illegals, detention at hospitals might result in some unwanted deaths and some crazies driving illegally but you can say that about any law. Hey, why not make everything legal because someone will break it? Point being, it will be tougher for them to function in the USA and at some point costs will outweigh benefits and they will stop coming.
Nearly all illegal aliens are criminals even if they haven't been caught and "convicted" of it yet. How do they work if not by using a fake or stolen SS number or working for cash evading taxes? Are those felonies just to be swept under the rug and then rewarded with amnesty. Huh? Americans need their jobs back. How does that happen if millions of illegal aliens are allowed to remain here?
I'm for a total package of ridding our country of illegal aliens and not rewarding any of them. E-verify, removing benefits for them, birthright citizenship for their kids and building the wall to deter more from coming here (which will include criminals and terrorists) should end illegal immigration as we know it. We'll always have some but the above will go a long ways in fixing most of the problem. Amnesty just encourages more to come here which is evidenced by the 1986 one.
Nearly all illegal aliens are criminals even if they haven't been caught and "convicted" of it yet. How do they work if not by using a fake or stolen SS number or working for cash evading taxes? Are those felonies just to be swept under the rug and then rewarded with amnesty. Huh? Americans need their jobs back. How does that happen if millions of illegal aliens are allowed to remain here?
And yet unemployment is at a historic low.
Which Americans are having their jobs stolen by illegal aliens? Most studies find that the answer is nearly none. And how many jobs will be eliminated if 12 million consumers disappear from the economy? How many jobs will be lost if produce prices increase and, as a result, consumers have less disposable income to spend on non-essential goods and services?
Incidentally, the bipartisan Partnership for the New American Economy finds that legal immigrants actually create jobs and are driving the increase of small businesses. Imagine how many jobs could be created if illegal immigrants could be legalized and create even more small businesses and jobs affiliated with them.
As I pointed out before, simply removing these people from the economy will reduce American GDP by roughly $500 billion per year. Explain to me how that is of benefit to the American job market.
What do you mean "me first"? I'm not in charge. I thought we were discussing realistic possibilities for immigration reform, not demanding that a random internet poster with no legislative authority "blinks" first.
But what you are proposing will do nothing to alleviate the situation. "Strip everyone of everything and then we will talk" is going to be an anathema for too many people to be viable. If you're looking to realistically discuss a reasonable compromise, that is not a realistic starting point and, frankly, most of the things you have listed cannot be legislated on the Federal level. End ESL programs and birthright citizenship? You're going to propose that the Constitution be amended and that Congress strip school districts of the right manage their curriculum? Come on.
Broadly speaking, you cannot just eliminate all social programs without first addressing how we will deal with the presence of illegal aliens first.
Take health care, for example. Want to station ICE agents at hospitals or pass a law prohibiting them from treating illegal aliens? If even logistically possible, all you'd do is deter illegals from seeking treatment. And although that might sound good in theory (hey! we're saving money [probably not]!) we will have people dying in the streets, an increase to "underground" unlicensed health care, and an increased likelihood that major contagions will manifest themselves in the legal and illegal populations. The social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
Drivers licenses are another example. Sure, some illegal aliens will take the bus instead of driving (Yay! less traffic!). But others would just end up as more-dangerous unlicensed and uninsured drivers to the major detriment of the legal and illegal populations. Again, the social repercussions would outweigh the benefits.
These things require more than just bumper-sticker "no more benefits" thought. You have to think them through in light of the fact that there are 11-13 million illegal aliens here already.
You collectively, as in those of you that call for amnesty. Don't take it so personal.
We can't do this, we can't do that. In other words, you really don't want to end the benefits. You say you do but then you go down the line making a case for why we can't.
We can "talk" about the details of reform but I won't support implementing them first THEN hope there is action on border security and removing illegal support. This time, the action must come first.
School districts can manage their own curriculum but don't have the right to federal grants and subsidies to cover them.
Hospitals can treat to stabilize a patient then report them to ICE if they are illegal and don't pay their bill in full. All they need to do is run their SS through eVerify. Such a proven case of using public welfare should be grounds for expedited removal.
An illegal that gets caught driving illegally has committed a crime which should be grounds for expedited removal. Fewer illegals would be driving without insurance in a system where getting caught doing so meant expedited removal, versus now where the police are banned from even asking about your status and the only risk they face is a ticket.
Nearly all illegal aliens are criminals even if they haven't been caught and "convicted" of it yet. How do they work if not by using a fake or stolen SS number or working for cash evading taxes? Are those felonies just to be swept under the rug and then rewarded with amnesty. Huh? Americans need their jobs back. How does that happen if millions of illegal aliens are allowed to remain here?
You realize that right now the USA has virtually full employment, right? What do you think will happen if "all those illegals" are not around? Want roofing done? Join the wait list; we might be able to get to you next year. Want paving done? We have another wait list, maybe we can slot you in in 2020. Want a reservation at your favorite restaurant? Sorry, it closed, no workers available.
But, you know... illegals, welfare, Medicare, ESL, etc. etc. Right?
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.
