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.
The problem IS the current law. Undocumented immigration (I know, it's a trigger word for you ) is not a black or white issue, but a continuum.
Who should be stopped? Well obviously criminals. But after that it gets fuzzy. Perhaps Canada's point system needs to be looked at. Perhaps the guest worker program needs to be expanded.
What about family reunification? Should it be wide open, of course not! But if that family unification means that there is a sponsorship for those coming in, say for 5 years by the sponsor, then the taxpayer exposure comes close to nothing.
You know more than most that it's complicated. I bet you can come up with some modifications and improvements that allow more people to come in, yet keep those that shouldn't be in out. What about extending and renewable visas? Say one year visas, and renewable based on a defined set of circumstances.
I don't have the answers, I have some suggestions and some questions.
An activity is a defined activity, such as the prohibition of alcohol back in the early part of the last century. First it was illegal, and then common sense made it a regulated legal activity. The same thing is happening with marijuana. Taking Canada as an example, they legalized and regulated marijuana use and sale some years ago. It was illegal, and people went to jail for using and selling it. Now? Nobody cares, just don't stink up my neighborhood please with everyone smoking around a BBQ. There is a clear indication that illegal sales are now rapidly declining... in other words, citizens are not interacting with the criminal element that may offer a cornucopia of drugs, many of them dangerous.
Now imagine revamping and improving immigration law in the USA, and in three years getting a chart that looks similar to that as the illegal element of immigration declines, and legal increases?
Would that be a better solution than the current black and white... illegal or legal?
Methinks yes. Everyone wins. The USA taxpayer wins. The immigrants win. The employers win. CBP wins by being able to use limited resources to concentrate on those that truly should be excluded.
It's not a white or black issue.
If you think illegals should be able to come here at will then yes you are pro-illegal immigration as they aren't following the laws that are on the books and there is nothing fuzzy about them nor is there a gray area. Our laws don't state that unless you are a criminal you can come here without following the legal process nor does it say that if you haven't been a "convicted" criminal that you get to stay here. It is a black and white issue and should continue to be.
There is no win for the taxpayer by allowing millions of poor, uneducated and unskilled into our country. They are a burden to our society. The only immigrants we should be allowing in are those with skills that we actually need and even then we have to consider population growth and making sure they aren't competing with Americans for jobs, housing, resources, etc.
The problem IS the current law. Undocumented immigration (I know, it's a trigger word for you ) is not a black or white issue, but a continuum.
Who should be stopped? Well obviously criminals. But after that it gets fuzzy. Perhaps Canada's point system needs to be looked at. Perhaps the guest worker program needs to be expanded.
What about family reunification? Should it be wide open, of course not! But if that family unification means that there is a sponsorship for those coming in, say for 5 years by the sponsor, then the taxpayer exposure comes close to nothing.
You know more than most that it's complicated. I bet you can come up with some modifications and improvements that allow more people to come in, yet keep those that shouldn't be in out. What about extending and renewable visas? Say one year visas, and renewable based on a defined set of circumstances.
I don't have the answers, I have some suggestions and some questions.
An activity is a defined activity, such as the prohibition of alcohol back in the early part of the last century. First it was illegal, and then common sense made it a regulated legal activity. The same thing is happening with marijuana. Taking Canada as an example, they legalized and regulated marijuana use and sale some years ago. It was illegal, and people went to jail for using and selling it. Now? Nobody cares, just don't stink up my neighborhood please with everyone smoking around a BBQ. There is a clear indication that illegal sales are now rapidly declining... in other words, citizens are not interacting with the criminal element that may offer a cornucopia of drugs, many of them dangerous.
Now imagine revamping and improving immigration law in the USA, and in three years getting a chart that looks similar to that as the illegal element of immigration declines, and legal increases?
Would that be a better solution than the current black and white... illegal or legal?
Methinks yes. Everyone wins. The USA taxpayer wins. The immigrants win. The employers win. CBP wins by being able to use limited resources to concentrate on those that truly should be excluded.
It's not a white or black issue.
Again, I am not asking for YOUR OPINION about the current status immigration law.
I am asking if you are against or for illegal immigration as defined under Title 18 United States Codes as of May 2022.
Why are you so afraid to say “yes, I am for illegal immigration”?
Stick with your principles and beliefs. Be a man. Honestly, I don’t think you even believe what you say.
If you think illegals should be able to come here at will then yes you are pro-illegal immigration as they aren't following the laws that are on the books and there is nothing fuzzy about them nor is there a gray area. Our laws don't state that unless you are a criminal you can come here without following the legal process nor does it say that if you haven't been a "convicted" criminal that you get to stay here. It is a black and white issue and should continue to be.
There is no win for the taxpayer by allowing millions of poor, uneducated and unskilled into our country. They are a burden to our society. The only immigrants we should be allowing in are those with skills that we actually need and even then we have to consider population growth and making sure they aren't competing with Americans for jobs, housing, resources, etc.
OG, I wouldn't expect too much from a non-U.S. citizen who dislikes the U.S. but doesn't hesitate to make a tidy profit off American real estate, wants increased migration to the U.S. but complains about more infrastructure built to accommodate a burgeoning U.S. population, has no idea what it's like to live in a border state, continually deflects and obfuscates straightforward questions, and doesn't realize that Mexico, like most places, is very friendly and welcoming to rich gringos.
Last edited by Bentonite; 05-24-2022 at 10:46 AM..
Reason: Left out one word
OG, I wouldn't expect too much from a non-U.S. citizen who dislikes the U.S. but doesn't hesitate to make a tidy profit off American real estate, wants increased migration to the U.S. but complains about infrastructure built to accommodate a burgeoning population, has no idea what it's like to live in a border state, continually deflects and obfuscates straightforward questions, and doesn't realize that Mexico, like most places, is very friendly and welcoming to rich gringos.
Open-border globalists should go to a foreign country or any country and tell the Customs officer to his face: “I have the right to be in your country and you can’t stop me!”
Open-border globalists should go to a foreign country or any country and tell the Customs officer to his face: “I have the right to be in your country and you can’t stop me!”
Du Ma, I know how that would play out in a number of countries worldwide. Reactions would range from polite incredulity to firm dissent to open hostility to a violent slap in the face to dragging the offender off to prison.
Last edited by Bentonite; 05-24-2022 at 11:51 AM..
Reason: Typo
Again, I am not asking for YOUR OPINION about the current status immigration law.
I am asking if you are against or for illegal immigration as defined under Title 18 United States Codes as of May 2022.
Why are you so afraid to say “yes, I am for illegal immigration”?
Stick with your principles and beliefs. Be a man. Honestly, I don’t think you even believe what you say.
I said what I said because current law, although it defines what now is illegal immigration (there, I used your term!) is not facing reality that the immigration system as currently being defined and enforced just doesn't make sense.
The problem isn't illegal immigration, it is how it is defined. It is too broad, and because the label of "illegal" can be put on what is happening, it is easy to be against it.
What changes would you make? Would you leave them the same and increase enforcement? Or do you have suggestions to change them to be more realistic, improve cost to the taxpayer, enhance the economy and keep the real bad people out.
Or would you rather just beat the drum "are you against illegal immigration or not"?
The left IGNORES the 1st amendment "freedom of SPEECH", is now and ACTION. The ACTION of burning our flag is NOW speech.
"The RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR ARMS shall NOT be INFRINGED"
With over 20,000 gun "laws"!
The left CHANGES what the authors say and meant. We HAVE their writings explaining what they MEANT and the left IGNORES it!
The Supreme Court has CHANGED previous rulings over the years.
According to you, we should destroy ALL of the Founding Father writings because who cares what they ACTUALLY meant and thought when they wrote things.
What only matters is what the LEFT "thinks" they meant.
Just look at the 1st Trump "impeachment". The ONLY thing that mattered is what the left THOUGHT he meant on the telephone conversion. Even though the other person on the call DISAGREED with the dems "interpretation".
If the left doesn't like what the writing of a law says, they simply set out to change the meanings of the words. Ether it now fits their agenda, or the original language is now rendered useless and the law can be butchered, misused and ultimately overturned by a leftist judge.
We've seen this tactic used again and again. The left will simply make up new words and definitions to bludgeon their opponents with.
I said what I said because current law, although it defines what now is illegal immigration (there, I used your term!) is not facing reality that the immigration system as currently being defined and enforced just doesn't make sense.
The problem isn't illegal immigration, it is how it is defined. It is too broad, and because the label of "illegal" can be put on what is happening, it is easy to be against it.
What changes would you make? Would you leave them the same and increase enforcement? Or do you have suggestions to change them to be more realistic, improve cost to the taxpayer, enhance the economy and keep the real bad people out.
Or would you rather just beat the drum "are you against illegal immigration or not"?
I'm sure Du Ma is asking the same straightforward question I did: do you condone illegal migration or not? We're not asking for your opinion of present U.S. immigration laws, nor whether they're right or wrong, nor whether they're facing reality, nor any of the other deflective obfuscations you trot out. We're asking if you condone illegal migration to the U.S. under this nation's current laws.
Yes, we are beating that drum. You dance around the question and won't give a direct answer, so your answer is obvious: you condone illegal migration to the U.S. There. I said it for you. All done.
(BTW, it's illegal "migration," not illegal "immigration.")
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.
) is not a black or white issue, but a continuum.