- #1
drankin
If this goes through... say goodbye to the America you once knew.
McGyver said:I mean, the Church remains firmly opposed to gay and lesbian partnerships, birth control, abortion, and enumerable free-speech expressions, yet they continue to support mass unlawful "elective" migration of people from Mexico to the U.S. - most arguably based on "lies" and "sins."
arunma said:Interesting issue. I say this because the Congress seems to be taking an action that finds very little support among the people. Republicans oppose it because they tend to believe in an "America for Americans." Democrats oppose it because it drives down wages. And yet here we have the Congress supporting the immigration bill. My guess is that this bill is being driven by big business interests and corporate greed.
edward said:It finds little support among the people because it is a back door amnesty program.
It is partly driven by both sides because we have about 12 million illegals that we don't know what the heck to do with. Regardless, any form of amnesty is going to open the flood gates at the border.
arunma said:Again I don't personally oppose immigration from Mexico, but there's a much easier way to deal with the 12 million illegals without deporting them. If corporations are severely punished for hiring illegals, then they won't find employment in America, and they'll simply leave. It seems to me like the people who pose this as an either/or scenario (either deport them all or give them amnesty) are presenting a false dichotomy in order to make the immigration bill seem logical.
ray b said:jail the officals who hire illegals
ray b said:jail the officals who hire illegals
lunarmansion said:There is a bill to decrease the number of highly skilled people allowed to immigrate. The immigration laws here are just driven by a desire to win votes and not rationality or good logic. The latter makes you unpopular with certain voters.![]()
arunma said:Nonetheless, even I can tell that shipping jobs to India and bringing people here to occupy the few jobs that remain can't be good for the economy.
ShawnD said:I think you're trying to tie 2 independent ideas together. What's good for people and what's good for the economy are not always the same thing. Just as an example, my province apparently has a good economy and a shortage of workers (McDonalds is paying $13/h just to get people to apply). What's good for the economy is to have lots of in-country immigration to my province, but that's bad for the people already living here because over the past 2-3 years the cost of rent has doubled. Relating that to what you are saying, it might be good for the economy to have a huge surge of skilled immigrants, but most Americans will not benefit from this "good economy".
lunarmansion said:The criteria for immigration ought to be loyalty to the country, the ability to contribute economically and not be a burden to the country and the ability to assimilate into the culture.
The "I-Bomb" refers to the proposed immigration policies and actions of former President George W. Bush, specifically his plan to increase border security and provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already living in the United States.
The term "I-Bomb" was coined by political commentators and critics of President Bush's immigration policies to describe the potential impact and controversy surrounding his proposed changes to immigration laws.
The goal of the "I-Bomb" was to address the issue of illegal immigration in a comprehensive and compassionate manner, providing a pathway for undocumented immigrants to become legal citizens while also increasing border security to prevent further illegal immigration.
While President Bush did push for immigration reform and increased border security, his proposed policies were met with resistance from both sides of the political spectrum and were ultimately not fully implemented.
The concept of the "I-Bomb" is often referenced in current discussions and debates about immigration, particularly in regards to the role of the government in addressing the issue and finding a solution that balances border security with compassion for undocumented immigrants.