Amnesty fo illegals

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

you'd think, we would realize, just 'anybody' can cross our borders

You'd think we'd realize that immigrants commit less crime on average than native-born Americans, and that terrorism has nothing to do with immigration reform.

It's so far over the top that it's hard to fathom--immigrants make better citizens than the native-born. And yet we persist with deliberate self delusions based on pride and ignorance.

______________________________

Are you referring to 'legal' immigrants or are you referring to 'illegal' immigrants? I'm talking only about 'illegal' immigrants. I have absolutely nothing against those folks from other countries who come here 'legally'. Just those who sneak across our borders and break our laws in the process.


Chuck

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

Are you referring to 'legal' immigrants or are you referring to 'illegal' immigrants?

I'm referring to immigrants. For most of our history there was no class distinction between sanctioned and unsanctioned immigrants, they were all unsanctioned. Those laws are superior to our current set--they are substantially responsible for our emergence as a world power--and we should revert to a similar configuration.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Neil Diamond is on board....

http://mustseedaily.com/content/view/86/1/

Good one. Thanks for the laugh.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Are you referring to 'legal' immigrants or are you referring to 'illegal' immigrants?

I'm referring to immigrants. For most of our history there was no class distinction between sanctioned and unsanctioned immigrants, they were all unsanctioned. Those laws are superior to our current set--they are substantially responsible for our emergence as a world power--and we should revert to a similar configuration.

_____________________________________

That was then... this is now. Our laws have changed over the years and now, we have a new set of laws concerning immigration. The people I'm referring to are breaking those laws and should be dealt with. We keep letting folks pour into this country by the tens of thousands... do the math! It won't be long till we have an over-crowding situation like you would not believe. Damnit! We have laws in this country as do other countries. Folks can live by the laws or face the consequences. If, we break another country's laws, we face the consequences. As for those old laws being superior to laws today... why don't we still have those laws??? The best law was the I&NS Act of 1952!


Chuck

[billvon 2,991]

Has anyone seen the text of this proposal? Everyone is talking about it but I haven't seen what it actually says. And given the amount of hoo-ha over it I don't really trust anyone's summary.

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

Neil Diamond is on board....

http://mustseedaily.com/content/view/86/1/

Good one. Thanks for the laugh.

Sure.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

We keep letting folks pour into this country by the tens of thousands... do the math!

Yeah, we used to let them in by the hundreds of thousands and millions, and all it did was make us a superpower. Then we tightened things up and all of a sudden we're facing the EU and China looming over our shoulder in a few years' time.

If half a billion of those Chinese could have immigrated to the US, our economy wouldn't be running out of gas steam*, and we could probably afford at least another iraq or two.

Overcrowding is another strawman, we've got plenty of room and the greatest capital resources in the world already. All we're doing with immigration restrictions is encouraging capital flight. Capital is harder to move than people--people will move if you let them. Once it's gone, it's gone. Factories tend to stay put, and rust.

* sorry, bad choice of metaphor

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[billvon 2,991]

Here's what I've been able to dig up so far about this bill.

---------------------------------
Z visa green cards:

People who are here illegally can get a Z visa; this allows them to apply for a green card. To do this they have to:
-pay a $4000 fine
-go home
-file a green card application
-go to the "end of the line" for green cards
-demonstrate merit, like a diploma or specific skills.

I've got no problem with that. It gets them out of the country, penalizes them and then puts them at the back of the line for legal immigration.
-------------------------------
Z visa privileges:

People who are here illegally can get a Z-visa if they entered before Jan of this year. If they don't apply for a green card they can stay in the US and work. They have to renew every 4 years and pay a $1000 fine.

This is the one I have a problem with. It allows criminals to stay here - and doesn't even solve the immigration problem because it's not valid for people who come here from here on out! It also encourages new illegal immigration by holding out the promise of a future amendment to help all these "poor people who were discriminated against just because they weren't here by a specific date."
-----------------------------------
English speaking:

It's encouraged and there will be free training. Fine.
-------------------------------------
Immigrant selection:

Immigrant selection preference will be given to skilled applicants instead of relatives of US citizens. Good idea.
---------------------------------
Border security cut-in:

Provisions of this bill will not become law until certain border security requirements are met, including more fencing and more agents. Sounds great if it's real, but I've heard that one before.
---------------------------
Guest worker program:

Guest workers can come here to work for three two-year terms (up to 400,000 of them) and they'd have to spend at least a year outside the United States between each term. They can bring in immediate family members if they can prove financial ability to support them and can maintain health insurance. This sounds like a good compromise between the need for cheap labor and the need to keep borders secure, although I'd have to see the details of how this is policed/enforced.
------------------------

So there's some good stuff in there, but I can't support giving illegal aliens visas that allow them to (basically) ignore immigration laws. But if they changed that one provision I'd support it.

[Lindsey 0]

You'd think we'd realize that immigrants commit less crime on average than native-born Americans

well....in terms of illegal immigrants, every single one of them has committed a crime by coming into our country illegally.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Here's what I've been able to dig up so far about this bill.

---------------------------------
Z visa green cards:

People who are here illegally can get a Z visa; this allows them to apply for a green card. To do this they have to:
-pay a $4000 fine
-go home
-file a green card application
-go to the "end of the line" for green cards
-demonstrate merit, like a diploma or specific skills.

I've got no problem with that. It gets them out of the country, penalizes them and then puts them at the back of the line for legal immigration.
-------------------------------
Z visa privileges:

People who are here illegally can get a Z-visa if they entered before Jan of this year. If they don't apply for a green card they can stay in the US and work. They have to renew every 4 years and pay a $1000 fine.

This is the one I have a problem with. It allows criminals to stay here - and doesn't even solve the immigration problem because it's not valid for people who come here from here on out! It also encourages new illegal immigration by holding out the promise of a future amendment to help all these "poor people who were discriminated against just because they weren't here by a specific date."
-----------------------------------
English speaking:

It's encouraged and there will be free training. Fine.
-------------------------------------
Immigrant selection:

Immigrant selection preference will be given to skilled applicants instead of relatives of US citizens. Good idea.
---------------------------------
Border security cut-in:

Provisions of this bill will not become law until certain border security requirements are met, including more fencing and more agents. Sounds great if it's real, but I've heard that one before.
---------------------------
Guest worker program:

Guest workers can come here to work for three two-year terms (up to 400,000 of them) and they'd have to spend at least a year outside the United States between each term. They can bring in immediate family members if they can prove financial ability to support them and can maintain health insurance. This sounds like a good compromise between the need for cheap labor and the need to keep borders secure, although I'd have to see the details of how this is policed/enforced.
------------------------

So there's some good stuff in there, but I can't support giving illegal aliens visas that allow them to (basically) ignore immigration laws. But if they changed that one provision I'd support it.

Yaeh. That's about the same as I can find. If they go home and try to come back LEGAL I have LESS of a problem w/ it. We'll see. Nobody ever gave me amnesty or a pardon.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[dorbie 0]

Z visas will begin before DHS certifies border security measures have been met.

Immigrants do not have to leave to get a Z visa, which will allow them to stay and work indefinitely (4 year renewable), but leaving is hardly an issue since a z visa lets you return at will.

As for jumping the queue, they did that when they crossed the border illegally, the rest is semantics. They're here working and never applied for legal status, a Z visa grants that status, if you think that is not skipping the queue then you are denying the very nature of illegal immigration and what legalization of it does.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

As for jumping the queue, they did that when they crossed the border illegally, the rest is semantics. They're here working and never applied for legal status, a Z visa grants that status, if you think that is not skipping the queue then you are denying the very nature of illegal immigration and what legalization of it does.

Aren't you the same guy who showed his sophisticated understanding of the world outside the U.S. when you called Vancouver B.C. a "shithole across the border"?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[mnealtx 0]

I'd be more willing to support it if they were to tighten up the border security first and evaluate it, before jumping whole-hog into the rest of it.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

American's are not eliminating other people's jobs it's the other way around.

American's aren’t eliminating other people's jobs but the US government sure do a good job of eliminating basic levels of living for Mexicans through trade agreements.

Well they're Mexicans

Which means?

Quote

the various trade agreements do more to help Mexico than harm it,

No, they don't.

Quote

and they're the Mexican government's responsibility not the USA's.

If they didn't accept NAFTA and other "free trade" agreements they probably wouldn't be the Mexican government.

Quote

Why do you even bother replying to that ghost above you.

Says the person who thinks international war is bad for the US economy

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

well....in terms of illegal immigrants, every single one of them has committed a crime by coming into our country illegally.

Indeed. And that's the sum-total of criminality for the overwhelming majority of them. So we fix the problem by adjusting the label to read legal instead of illegal.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

well....in terms of illegal immigrants, every single one of them has committed a crime by coming into our country illegally.

Indeed. And that's the sum-total of criminality for the overwhelming majority of them. So we fix the problem by adjusting the label to read legal instead of illegal.

Have you lived in the same area as larger groups of illegal immigrants? I have, and there was plenty of other crimes that were committed by that group. Is it representative of ALL illegal immigrants? I'm sure it wasn't, but you can't say that breaking the border is the "sum-total of criminality" of the entire group, either.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

As for jumping the queue, they did that when they crossed the border illegally, the rest is semantics. They're here working and never applied for legal status, a Z visa grants that status, if you think that is not skipping the queue then you are denying the very nature of illegal immigration and what legalization of it does.

Aren't you the same guy who showed his sophisticated understanding of the world outside the U.S. when you called Vancouver B.C. a "shithole across the border"?

That is a deceptive claim highlighted by the fact that I am not American. I'm a legal immigrant from Europe. I think I understand quite a bit about the world outside U.S. borders and immigration into the USA.

I once made the opposite error about you so you're excused. Do you intend to address the point being made instead of making inane attacks?

[narcimund 0]

Quote

... but you can't say that breaking the border is the "sum-total of criminality" of the entire group, either.

Nor is that what he said. But it IS fun to exaggerate other people's words then knock down the argument they didn't make, isn't it?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Why do you even bother replying to that ghost above you.

Says the person who thinks international war is bad for the US economy

Please learn to quote clearly and make it clear who you are responding to when replying. I might get the impression you appended this irrelevant drivel to give the false impression you're replying to me simply to falsely impugn. It is quite amazing to hear someone claim that NAFTA does not help Mexico and Mexican labor.

But none of this gives the USA responsibility for citizens in Mexico, feel free to exercise self-determination or howl at the moon, whichever you prefer.

[nathaniel 0]

Quote

Have you lived in the same area as larger groups of illegal immigrants?

Certain dropzones come to mind. But during the weekdays too, yes, I grew up in a largely hispanic neighborhood, and illegal sweatshops down the street, etc.

There was crime, but it was better than many of the other neighborhoods in the city. What's striking to me now is that until recently our cities were waxing about having extra eyes on the street to encourage sense of community and safety, now we want immigrants to stop bringing their families over. My street was kept safe by hispanic and italian old ladies sitting on their porches and in their yards, at least some of whom must have been illegal.

They're not hardened criminals, they're old ladies.

My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

... but you can't say that breaking the border is the "sum-total of criminality" of the entire group, either.

Nor is that what he said. But it IS fun to exaggerate other people's words then knock down the argument they didn't make, isn't it?

I hope you realize it is impossible for you to make that statement sarcastically.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

I once made the opposite error about you so you're excused. Do you intend to address the point being made instead of making inane attacks?

You once made the minor error of thinking I was an immigrant in the U.S. But you also made the MAJOR error of presupposing that wherever I must have moved from was automatically a "shithole" (without, of course, bothering to find out what that place was.)

Then when you learned I was an immigrant who LEFT the U.S., you immediately presupposed that I must live in a "shithole" now (again without knowing where you were describing).

Since you made these statements without first bothering to identify where you were talking about, you must think EVERYWHERE outside of the U.S. is automatically a "shithole."

I think this is a pretty clear demonstration that you've got a massively emotional reaction to the issues of immigration and perhaps you should consider the effect these FEELINGS have on your THINKING about the topic.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I'd be more willing to support it if they were to tighten up the border security first and evaluate it, before jumping whole-hog into the rest of it.

They're trying to pretend this is what the bill says, but like I said, it is misleading, Z Visas begin without DHS certification of the border security measures.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

I hope you realize it is impossible for you to make that statement sarcastically.

Uh... if I could figure out what this means maybe I could realize it.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

It is quite amazing to hear someone claim that NAFTA does not help Mexico and Mexican labor.

Maybe it wouldn't be so amazing if you looked into it, start with the price of corn or Mexican farmers and go from there.

Quote

But none of this gives the USA responsibility for citizens in Mexico, feel free to exercise self-determination or howl at the moon, whichever you prefer.

Yes neo-liberal free trade agreements are the responsibility of the US when they force them onto other nations.

Clearly there is a direct relationship between economic agreements with Mexico which result in further poverty for a large section of the population and having greater influxes of Mexicans trying to sneak into the US, their wealthier neighbour with better living standards and a large boarder, where while enjoying a similar level of poverty will still have access to these better standards of living.