News Should Mexicans Focus on Improving Mexico Instead of Immigrating Illegally?

[Anttech]

There are a wide variety of second tier visas available which allow for temporary residency only. Mexicans can apply for these under the NAFTA agreement but there are strict rules re eligibilty.

Its interesting that America will allow people from the other side of the world to immigrate easier than someone who lives right next door, very neighbourly

 

[BobG]

Its interesting that America will allow people from the other side of the world to immigrate easier than someone who lives right next door, very neighbourly

There's a reason for that, at least theoretically. The idea is for immigrants to disperse throughout the country and blend into American culture, not for immigrants to create a subculture. In fact, that's one of the fears of Mexican immigration. If they just cross the border and go no further, they form a strong political base and have more effect on US laws and culture.

 

[Dawguard]

There's not much left to say here, since SOS2008 (wow, I never thought I'd agree with you on politics, but now I completely do on this ), Ivan Seeking and the others seemed to have made a very solid case for their positions. Just adressing some of the general problems or questions with the issue:

It is a fallacy that they are good for the economy. Sure they provide cheap labor, but isn't it true we have unemployment amongst citizens? If citizens took these jobs instead of being unemployed or collecting welfare then we could vastly drop our unemployment problem. They don't pay taxes, but they can get free schooling, free healthcare, etc. This sucks a large amount of money from our already messed-up budget, while putting none back in.

There is no inherent right to live in the U.S. We have always had a quota system, and for very good reasons. Do immigration laws need changing? Most certainly, but the answer to the problem is not to blast the door off and let anyone in. What about criminals fleeing from the law in Mexico? We don't want them in our country, but now they can come in almost freely. Another myth is that they all want to come here to work. A good majority of them maybe, but definately not all.

That's just my two incomplete cents. I think others can do a better job of explaining it, but I thought I'd chime in and give them my support.

 

[SOS2008]

Do you support rounding up families looking for a better life like they're felons and deporting them? Sending them back to the place where they were willing to risk injury and arrest to escape and now have nothing because they have used it all to get here? Same with people who perhaps came here legally but once they had made a life for themselves, had a job paid taxes and kids were in school, they were told their visa won't be renewed?

I do not support making illegal entry a felony, but rather treated as any other country does--Yes I support deportation of those who do this. Why should we feel sympathy for those who knowingly take risk of injury to enter a country illegally any more than those who take such risks to break any law, such as trafficking drugs? No one makes them do it--they choose to do it knowing full well the risk. Technology has lessoned the risk (you can be trucked across) and has contributed to the explosion of illegals. The problem is there is not enough deterrence.

However working in the U.S. with fake ID and other fraudulent activity should be a felony.

NIV Fraud
By all accounts — GAO reports, State Department OIG reports, Congressional hearings, anecdotes, and the hard evidence of the presence of 3.2 million NIV overstayers — fraud is rampant in the non-immigrant visa program. Problems include identity fraud, document fraud, counterfeiting, corrupt employees (both American and foreign), and widespread lying and misrepresentation on the part of applicants.

The INA states clearly that visa fraud must not be tolerated: "Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible," and permanently so (Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i)). Yet consular officers have few tools at their disposal to help detect and deter fraud.

http://www.cis.org/articles/2003/back103.html

People say it is impossible to enforce anything at this time because of the sheer numbers involved:

Demographers believe that the undocumented population in the United States numbers close to 10 million people, with Mexicans accounting for 55-60 percent of this total.

http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=205

Hmm... Suppose we put the same kind of effort/funding into this as the NSA Spying program? We should at least be able to track fraudulent Social Security numbers. Also, studies of building a wall along the border show it is feasible and a fraction of the cost for the invasion/occupation of Iraq.

TSA, people come here precisely for purposes of having children who will be granted automatic citizenship--some women barely make it across the border in time to a county hospital. One individual comes here knowing they will be separated from loved ones. When he gets the money he sends for the rest of his family, then other relatives, then neighbors--there is no end. Moonbear has already addressed this issue well.

They are using such arguments for sympathy to get your support, and it works.

Characterizations of the illegal alien range from the sympathetic to the xenophobic. Such characterizations contribute to the confusion about the illegal alien problem. The media usually portrays the plight of the illegal alien in the United States using the historical view of a nation of immigrants. Often, the media resists portraying the illegal alien as anything but the hard working border-crosser that simply wants to feed his family.

...participants in the general environment, such as politicians and religious groups, have a vested interest in not enforcing interior immigration laws. Such groups stand to receive benefits from a larger alien population--one for votes, the other for potential converts. The implied powerlessness may be a strategic attempt to soften the impact of an amnesty program. Skerry compares the two perspectives of the illegal living in the shadows contrasted by those that are more vocal about their plight. In his opinion, the latter is a more accurate characterization. (Skerry, 2001) More recently, advocates compared the plight of illegal aliens to the civil rights movement and organized an immigrant worker’s freedom ride to rally support.

http://www.immigration-usa.com/george_weissinger.html

The "civil rights" argument -- that's just rich isn't it? These people do not have the same rights as legal citizens, nor do Americans when they go abroad. TSA, you and I have had this discussion before. I stand by my position that people are confusing U.S. law on civil rights ("held by individuals and groups derived from the social contract - the common consent of society at large to the rules under which its members live") with International law on human rights ("rights possessed by all human beings derived from nature. These are thus distinct from the rights derived from membership in society derived from a changeable social contract. The "right" to a free education, for example, cannot be a natural right since it depends on contingent factors such as the wealth of a given society.") -- while there are some similarities, these are two different things. - http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/virtual/glossary.htm

So let's get back to the "open border" utopian BS. tuco brought up the comparison about immigration into other countries. Let us not forget recent violence in France from immigrants there. I've brought up the importance of homogeneity and harmony in a "melting pot" society in earlier threads on the topic (and which BobG touched upon above). This is not to say people cannot still enjoy their own ethnic backgrounds, but that they share a common national identity (such as the flag, language, etc.) that the illegals are not embracing. As a result, we are now experiencing new racial tensions.

Those of you from other countries who have no sympathy for the wealthiest country in the world (well for now that is), tell us how the U.S. compares to your country in regard to the number of immigrants allowed in, and strictness of requirements for citizenship. The U.S. is known for accepting immigrants more than any other country. There is no room for criticism on this point.

There's not much left to say here, since SOS2008 (wow, I never thought I'd agree with you on politics, but now I completely do on this )

LOL (We agree on a lot more things than you know).

We agree, but perhaps not always for the same reason. I despise Bush and his catering to Big Business and the religious-right to obtain and retain power, and this is just more of the same. Some Republicans are concerned for reasons of security and feeling a little burned by their earlier leader Ronald Reagan and his disastrous amnesty program--and rightfully so. I've said it before that Bush's broadcast of the word "amnesty" was incredibly irresponsible. Now his base is splitting, so he is taking a harder line, but he still advocates a guest worker program.

As stated earlier, if you look at history you will see what has been successful and what has not. Amnesty of any kind has never worked, and in fact has always resulted in an exponential increase in the flood across the border. The worker visas are no longer limited to migrant workers for seasonal, low-end agricultural work, but for any industry where there are shortages--shortages due to low wages?! Women are still battling unequal pay (which has dropped to 74 cents to a man's dollar), and minorities such as blacks face even stiffer competition for unskilled jobs. I support worker visas, but only if it is very limited, strictly monitored, and fairly granted, for jobs Americans really won't do -- meeting qualifications and no reward for cutting in line.

Otherwise who knows how far reaching these effects will have in the long run. Southpark already did an episode about how the boys lost their jobs mowing the neighbor's lawns to illegal aliens. But seriously, because we pay Jose less than our kid's allowance, our kids aren't learning work ethic and entrepreneurship as children, so are living at home until the age of 28.

I have my own view of what should be done, but no time to submit it as legislation. Long ago I wrote to one of my congressmen, John McCain suggesting payment of back taxes, etc., which I believe are in his proposal. For a side-by-side comparison of current legislation:

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...ws+and+visas+granted&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=7

In the meantime, if there are any legal Americans who plan to take to the streets, please let me know so I can join in.

 

[Art]

Those of you from other countries who have no sympathy for the wealthiest country in the world (well for now that is), tell us how the U.S. compares to your country in regard to the number of immigrants allowed in, and strictness of requirements for citizenship. The U.S. is known for accepting immigrants more than any other country. There is no room for criticism on this point.

Ireland with a population of 4 million takes in 70,000 legal immigrants a year. The USA with a population of 290 million takes in 700,000 legal immigrants a year.

When compared per capita we (Ireland that is) take in the equivalent of ~4,500,000 immigrants p.a. The only country in europe who takes in more in respect of their population is Luxembourg where 1/3 of the population is now foreign born.

Ireland also has the same problem as all other wealthy countries with regard to illegal immigration. Currently that figure is estimated to be around 16,000 per annum which would equate to ~1,100,000 in the US. As you can see the US are by no means alone with regard to this problem as some here appear to think.

The heavy influx of non-nationals here has given rise to many of the same arguments cited above. Ultimately though these arguments have no merit. For example a very common complaint is that migrant workers who will work for very little adversely affect the indigenous workers pay and conditions. However this is fallacious. It is not a valid argument to justify keeping them out. It is an argument for the gov't to enact legislation to prevent unscrupulous employers from taking advantage of immigration. Thus people's anger should be directed at the gov't, and not at the immigrants, for allowing immigrants to be exploited.

 

[Art]

Another question people commonly ask is why their gov'ts don't do more to stem immigration (both legal and illegal). The answer is simple, it's not that they can't, it's that they don't want to.

The reason why so many developed countries have turned a blind eye to illegal and semi-illegal immigration is because they know the majority of their electorate are fundamentally racist and it would be political suicide to openly promote a policy of encouraging widespread immigration. However gov'ts are also realists so they do it by the back door, they realize the birth rate in western societies is dropping dramatically to the point where in countries like Germany population growth is now negative and they know they need these new workers coming in.

They need the influx of young people and their children to provide the economic base for the future to support an aging population which is living longer than ever. Expenditure in the short term on education and health may appear as a drain on the country's resources initially but it is in reality an investment for the future.

Whilst I am in favour of immigration for the reasons stated I do believe all countries who have a heavy influx of migrant workers do need to drop the taboo and have a serious debate on the subject. This fear of appearing too 'moderate' in their approach to immigration and thus total avoidance of the subject leads to a disorganised and chaotic situation which exacerbates the social problems. This is an international problem as evidenced by the total inabilty of the UN and all other international groupings to reach agreement even in a limited area such as how to manage asylum seekers.

I also believe in the saying 'when in Rome do as the Romans do' and so immigrants should understand they can't import their entire culture with them. They need to understand exactly what is and is not allowed before they enter a country and if they find certain laws or customs totally unacceptable to their personal viewpoint then they should look elsewhere for a home.

I also believe immigrants as guests in one's country should show exemplary behaviour and so their admittance should be on a probationary basis. If they misbehave they should be told to leave.

In return they should be entitled to the same rights and privileges as their adopted country's citizens.

 

[Smasherman]

I'm fairly certain that the Californian economy depends on illegal immigrants at this time (I know no specifics for other states). It's a shame, but it's true. Unless the minimum wage is increased, and employment laws enforced better, a lot of immigration is necessary to keep California afloat.

The book Reefer Madness outlines some aspects of the United States black market, including illegal immigrants (specifically strawberry pickers).

To conclude, I recommend attaching a new minimum wage law ('course, I recommend a command economy, but realistically...) to the immigration bill.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

They are using such arguments for sympathy to get your support, and it works.

I'm really just taking the other side only because there isn't anyone else aside from Tuco and Art doing so. The fact is that I think a lot like you on the matter but I am a bit conflicted. I've known people that were illegal and they are mostly very nice people and not the selfrighteous types you see waving mexican flags at protests. It's like the difference between realizing that military action will likely result in 'collateral' loses and really thinking about the poor people whose lives are being ruined (or taken).

I do not support making illegal entry a felony, but rather treated as any other country does--Yes I support deportation of those who do this.

Entering the country illegally is a federal offense and hence a felony. As far as I know there are no federal offenses that carry a charge of less than felony. Also, per the law, no person can be taken into custody for anything less than a felony. As far as the US legal system is set up it is necessary to make these people felons if they are to be deported by force.
This is one of the very issues which makes things like the PATRIOT Act and a constitutional amendment against things like flag burning so dangerous. It makes people felons for things that may otherwise be lesser charges and gives the federal government that much more authority to step into legal matters.

Why should we feel sympathy for those who knowingly take risk of injury to enter a country illegally any more than those who take such risks to break any law, such as trafficking drugs? No one makes them do it--they choose to do it knowing full well the risk. Technology has lessoned the risk (you can be trucked across) and has contributed to the explosion of illegals. The problem is there is not enough deterrence.

Immigration and drug trafficing are very different issues. The main difference is that immigration in and of itself is not illegal. Drug trafficing under any circumstances is illegal. There's also quite a disperity between the intentions of these two groups of 'criminals'.

So let's get back to the "open border" utopian BS. tuco brought up the comparison about immigration into other countries. Let us not forget recent violence in France from immigrants there. I've brought up the importance of homogeneity and harmony in a "melting pot" society in earlier threads on the topic (and which BobG touched upon above). This is not to say people cannot still enjoy their own ethnic backgrounds, but that they share a common national identity (such as the flag, language, etc.) that the illegals are not embracing. As a result, we are now experiencing new racial tensions.

Do you think that these racial tensions may be from the fact that these people generally are not welcome and don't feel welcome? How many of the "spicks/beaners/wetbacks/what have yous" that people ***** about are actually illegals do you think? Most people seem to have a low opinion of Mexicans in general and the issue of illegal immigration just makes them feel that much more justified in their racism.

 

[SOS2008]

To Art:

I agree workers should unite against exploitation, which INCLUDES legal citizens who's wages are being depressed by illegals and outsourcing. In regard to population control (or lack of it) I would rephrase this to say the birth rate is out-of-control in third-world nations, and why they can't support their own population. And where are the stats for lack of labor in the U.S. Vis-à-Vis unemployment rates?

I agree governments don't want to stop the flow, but not for the same reasons you state. Mexico depends economically on the money illegals send back to their families:

Despite the relative stagnation of the US economy, this flow of money keeps growing, according to recent data. In 2003 it increased by 35% - the total amount sent that year to Mexico was more than $13bn.

Remittances from Mexicans in the US have become one of Mexico's most important sources of income - second only to oil and surpassing the traditional tourism industry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3582881.stm

As well as Big Business like Western Union and First Data Corp. that profit from wire transfers of money from millions of illegals in the U.S. to Mexico. http://www.Americas.org/item_25908

Like I said, look at where the support for recent protests is coming from, and you'll find the organizations and motives very unsavory.

To continue, Big Business in America needs to stay competitive with other countries that have no labor laws. Wonderful.

High Immigration Harms Many American Workers

Federal policies of high immigration interfere with market forces that otherwise would cause corporations and other employers to find ways to maximize American wages and working conditions while also maximizing productivity.

The result has been a decades-long wage depression in many occupations and even in some professions.

America has become less of a middle-class nation because of the quadrupling of immigration since 1965. And it has become more of a society of wide economic disparities.

Virtually all studies of this phenomenon have concluded that the greatest harm is to those American workers who already are the most vulnerable: those without high school degrees, those with lower intrinsic intelligence, those with fewer skills. The harm also is disproportionately felt by native-born minorities, especially Hispanics and Blacks, and by recent immigrants. For instance, a study by Harvard professor Dr. George J. Borjas finds that, by increasing the supply of labor, immigration between 1980 and 2000 cost native-born American men an average $1,700 in annual wages by the year 2000. However, the effects of immigration on wages were most profoundly felt by native-born black and Hispanic Americans who suffered 4.5-5% wage reductions as compared with the 3.5% wage loss felt by native-born white Americans.

https://www.numbersusa.com/interests/amerworkers.html

I wish I had year-by-year by industry wage comparisons at hand, but I assure you wages are being depressed, and this IS hurting American workers. Perhaps I will have time to do more fact-finding later (though I am a bit miffed that as usual I am the only one backing up my statements with data), but I agree with Smasherman that the minimum wage needs to be increased along with enforcement of legal entry.

To TSA:

I have not been aware of illegal entry being a felony, but deportation of the offending individual is the minimum action that should be taken. As for enforcement of law, you make a contradictory comparison of drug trafficking and immigration. This is another trend that REALLY annoys me, and that is the confusion (often on purpose if you ask me) between legal immigrants and illegal aliens. We are discussing illegal entry, which is ILLEGAL.

And don't get me wrong about national identity. I am not in favor of suppressing freedom of speech via flag-burning laws. I am referring to the use of the Mexican flag in these protests, and display of such flags smack of secession, not unlike the Confederate flag, which many Americans don't appreciate either. As for racism, this is perpetuated by the minority who sets themselves apart. The reason is not just skin color, but resistance to assimilation.

Though ultimately I feel all these peripheral issues tend to obfuscate the bottom line: I cannot accept any argument in favor of illegal entry into the United States. It's illegal, and reason enough for it to be brought under control.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I have not been aware of illegal entry being a felony, but deportation of the offending individual is the minimum action that should be taken. As for enforcement of law, you make a contradictory comparison of drug trafficking and immigration. This is another trend that REALLY annoys me, and that is the confusion (often on purpose if you ask me) between legal immigrants and illegal aliens. We are discussing illegal entry, which is ILLEGAL.

And don't get me wrong about national identity. I am not in favor of suppressing freedom of speech via flag-burning laws. I am referring to the use of the Mexican flag in these protests, and display of such flags smack of secession, not unlike the Confederate flag, which many Americans don't appreciate either. As for racism, this is perpetuated by the minority who sets themselves apart. The reason is not just skin color, but resistance to assimilation.

Though ultimately I feel all these peripheral issues tend to obfuscate the bottom line: I cannot accept any argument in favor of illegal entry into the United States. It's illegal, and reason enough for it to be brought under control.

Sorry I had believed that all federal crimes were automatically felonies. I was wrong. Here are the actual penalties for illegal immigration though even though it isn't a felony...

Section 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to
enter) the United States at a time or place other than as
designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
penalty of -
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or
attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of
an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under
this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not
in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be
imposed.
(c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the
purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than
$250,000, or both.
(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise
for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws
shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance
with title 18, or both.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=8&sec=1325

Any offense after the first is a felony and there are people trying to make it a felony.

The INS estimates that 7.0 million unauthorized immigrants resided in the United States in January 2000. The total population estimate is somewhat higher than INS’ previous estimate. In its last set of estimates, INS estimated the population to be 5.0 million in October 1996; the new estimates produced a total of about 5.8 million for the same date. Estimated annual population growth was variable in the 1990s; on average, however, the population grew by about 350,000 per year from 1990 to 1999, about 75,000 higher than INS’ previous annual estimate of 275,000 for the 1990s. In addition to the total population, estimates were compiled for each State of residence and for 75 countries of origin. As expected, California is estimated to have the most unauthorized residents in January 2000, about 2.2 million, or 32 percent of the national total. The States with the largest numerical increases in unauthorized population in the 1990s were California, Texas, Illinois, Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina.
http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/2000ExecSumm.pdf

U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s top priority is to keep terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States. While welcoming all legitimate travelers and trade, CBP officers and agents enforce all applicable U.S. laws. CBP prevents narcotics, agricultural pests and smuggled goods from entering the country and also identifies and arrests those with outstanding criminal warrants. On a typical day last year, CBP officers welcomed 1.2 million people at the nation’s 314 land, air and seaports while denying entry to more than 3,000 inadmissible visitors.
http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/antiterror_initiatives/border_sec_initiatives_lp.xml

In FY 2005, Border Patrol Agents made almost 1.2 million arrests of people for illegally entering the country.

Considerable success has been achieved in restoring integrity and safety to the Southwest border, by implementing our border-control strategy. These include Operation Gatekeeper in San Diego, CA, Operation Hold the Line in El Paso, TX, Operation Rio Grande in McAllen, TX, Operation Safeguard in Tucson, AZ, and the Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI) along the Arizona border.
http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/overview.xml

It seems that regardless of how much we try to control the borders people will get in anyway. Just what do you propose we do with them? So we spend billions on a wall which needs to be maintained and can likely be gotten past anyway. We boost the number of people working on the CBP which already numbers at least 11,000. Then apparently we boost the number of INS workers so we can investigate, track down, round up, and process 7 million plus people that need to be deported. How any more do you think that will take and how long?
This paints a rather grizly picture. A country walled in and rounding up people by the millions taking them out of their homes because they don't have their papers so that they can be imprisoned and deported sounds a lot like a fascist state to me.

I'm not supporting illegal immigration. I'm just not supporting deportation as a proper means of dealing with the issue.

 

[X-43D]

Nativism is hypocritical. If businesses can move their capital around the world freely, then workers should also have at least some of this freedom.

More:

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_063900_nativism.htm
http://www.campusprogress.org/features/270/the-new-nativism

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Note how many photos of the rallies are like this
http://www.examiner.com/images/ap/small/small_LA10503242342.jpg

What is wrong with this picture?

This is not immigration, this is an invasion.

 

[Art]

Note how many photos of the rallies are like this
http://www.examiner.com/images/ap/small/small_LA10503242342.jpg

What is wrong with this picture?

This is not immigration, this is an invasion.

People showing pride in their heritage does not symbolize an invasion.

There are 40 million americans who claim Irish ancestry. Many of these are second, third or more generation american. Every St. Patrick's day they turn out in their thousands swathed in Ireland's national colours to celebrate Ireland's patron saint. Do you think the parades held in New York, Boston and elsewhere constitute an invasion? Do you think these parades threaten America's national identity?

Every year many thousands (if not millions) of people in the US celebrate Halloween with kids going door to door trick or treating. Again this is an Irish custom dating from 5 BC introduced into America through Irish immigrants. Do you think following this Irish custom detracts from the americanism of the participants?

If your answer to the above questions is yes then I'll grant you consistency at least but if not then can you explain why it is okay for the Irish to celebrate their roots and customs but not okay for the mexicans?

The Irish were once in the same position in the US as the mexicans are now with waves of illegal immigrants entering America. Far from damaging America's economy these immigrants helped in no small way to make America the world economic leader it is today. This despite the fact that they too sent money home to take care of families left behind.

Given the chance I'm sure the mexicans will contribute in the same way to america's future.

Some posters have said they have no problem with legal immigration and it is only illegals they object to but as Evo pointed out mexicans have zero access to legal permanent residency visas and so they resort to illegal entry.

Illegal immigration should be curtailed but this should be done in the context of fair employment laws to reduce demand for their labor and prevent their exploitation and fair immigration laws to facilitate legal immigration coupled with an orientation program for new entries to minimise social disruption.

To address the issue of whether or not immigrant labor is required - well that depends on how many new jobs are being created each year but given America's natural population growth rate of .6% if it's more than 870,000 then the answer is yes.

ps I'm not sure what SOS means by this

(though I am a bit miffed that as usual I am the only one backing up my statements with data)

I have provided data to support my statements.

 

[Burnsys]

Note how many photos of the rallies are like this
http://www.examiner.com/images/ap/small/small_LA10503242342.jpg

What is wrong with this picture?

This is not immigration, this is an invasion.

Every action has a reaction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War
The Mexican-American War was fought between the United States and Mexico between 1846 and 1848. In the U.S. it is known as the Mexican War or Mr. Polk's War; in Mexico, it is known as the U.S. Intervention, the U.S. Invasion of Mexico, or the United States War Against Mexico.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Art, the problem is not two generations from now, the problem is now. Estimates ranging from 11 to 20 million illegals at any moment means that we are talking about up to 6% of the population. The load on our social programs and public services is intolerable. For example, this has a lot to do with the collapse of the medical system back in the eighties; when hospitals began even refusing emergency patients, with the system still in crisis today.

And no one can argue that this situation is conducive to national security. In a post 911 world, this is absolute insanity.

 

[BobG]

Another question people commonly ask is why their gov'ts don't do more to stem immigration (both legal and illegal). The answer is simple, it's not that they can't, it's that they don't want to.

The reason why so many developed countries have turned a blind eye to illegal and semi-illegal immigration is because they know the majority of their electorate are fundamentally racist and it would be political suicide to openly promote a policy of encouraging widespread immigration. However gov'ts are also realists so they do it by the back door, they realize the birth rate in western societies is dropping dramatically to the point where in countries like Germany population growth is now negative and they know they need these new workers coming in.

They need the influx of young people and their children to provide the economic base for the future to support an aging population which is living longer than ever. Expenditure in the short term on education and health may appear as a drain on the country's resources initially but it is in reality an investment for the future.

Whilst I am in favour of immigration for the reasons stated I do believe all countries who have a heavy influx of migrant workers do need to drop the taboo and have a serious debate on the subject. This fear of appearing too 'moderate' in their approach to immigration and thus total avoidance of the subject leads to a disorganised and chaotic situation which exacerbates the social problems. This is an international problem as evidenced by the total inabilty of the UN and all other international groupings to reach agreement even in a limited area such as how to manage asylum seekers.

I also believe in the saying 'when in Rome do as the Romans do' and so immigrants should understand they can't import their entire culture with them. They need to understand exactly what is and is not allowed before they enter a country and if they find certain laws or customs totally unacceptable to their personal viewpoint then they should look elsewhere for a home.

I also believe immigrants as guests in one's country should show exemplary behaviour and so their admittance should be on a probationary basis. If they misbehave they should be told to leave.

In return they should be entitled to the same rights and privileges as their adopted country's citizens.

Good post. I agree with you on immigration, in general. If illegal immigration is controlled, then legal immigration has to be increased at the same rate.

In spite of my feeling about immigration, illegal immigration across the border is bad for a different reason. It's a pretty good indicator that border security isn't very good, which means at least an easy way to import illegal drugs, even if heightened concern since 9/11 isn't considered.

 

[SOS2008]

It seems that regardless of how much we try to control the borders people will get in anyway. Just what do you propose we do with them? So we spend billions on a wall which needs to be maintained and can likely be gotten past anyway. We boost the number of people working on the CBP which already numbers at least 11,000. Then apparently we boost the number of INS workers so we can investigate, track down, round up, and process 7 million plus people that need to be deported. How any more do you think that will take and how long?

We need to secure our borders and stop the flood as best we can NOW. The money spent on additional security measures will be worth it.

But ultimately we need to remove incentive. If these people can't get a job once they enter, they will return home. Business must not only collect ID, but must verify that the ID is not fake, and then prosecute those committing fraud. Businesses not abiding by this need to face large fines.

For those who are already here, they need to be screened. If they have a criminal record, contagious disease, are unemployed and/or relying on public services, or can't speak English, they need to be deported immediately. The rest need to do public service (military time will work) if they have committed fraud (used fake ID), pay any back taxes owed, and fined for illegal entry (to help with costs for border security, detention facilities, plane tickets, etc). Then they need to get in line for citizenship, which should move fairly quickly due to original screening. Those who do not come forward willingly will be automatically deported if caught. If these kind of requirements are not made, it will equate to amnesty and send a very wrong message. And once again, the cost to process these people will be worth it--we will pay the piper sooner or later.

And as stated above, for jobs where migrant labor really is needed, these people can apply for guest worker visas. To keep it honest and to prevent wages from being depressed, the businesses hiring them should pay minimum wage.

Nativism is hypocritical. If businesses can move their capital around the world freely, then workers should also have at least some of this freedom.

I do not see the logic in this thinking. Incentives to American companies to operate in (or should I say return to) Mexico and other countries to our south (instead of outsourcing to India/China) would be a better idea. This was in part the original intention of NAFTA and CAFTA, no?

People showing pride in their heritage does not symbolize an invasion.

Americans celebrate Cinco de Mayo along with Hispanics. These protesters, especially those who are illegal, are protesting against U.S. laws, not celebrating their heritage.

:Given the chance I'm sure the mexicans will contribute in the same way to america's future.

Some posters have said they have no problem with legal immigration and it is only illegals they object to but as Evo pointed out mexicans have zero access to legal permanent residency visas and so they resort to illegal entry.

Illegal immigration should be curtailed but this should be done in the context of fair employment laws to reduce demand for their labor and prevent their exploitation and fair immigration laws to facilitate legal immigration coupled with an orientation program for new entries to minimise social disruption.

To address the issue of whether or not immigrant labor is required - well that depends on how many new jobs are being created each year but given America's natural population growth rate of .6% if it's more than 870,000 then the answer is yes.

I do not argue that immigrants can't/don't have the ability to contribute to American society.

If Mexicans have zero access it is because of quotas that are overwhelmingly exceeded by illegal entry--they are shooting themselves in the foot. CNN was running a special on the topic last night. It was reported that on the border of Tucson, Arizona alone there are 2,000 people crossing each day (minus the few who are caught)! When interviewed they complain that legal immigration is too slow and backlogged. HELLO, there is no way these extremely high numbers can be accommodated. And BTW, there are people from the south in the process of becoming legal citizens every day. Those who earn enough money get immigration attorneys to expedite matters.

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: FEBRUARY 2006

Unemployment (Household Survey Data)

Both the number of unemployed persons, 7.2 million, and the unemployment
rate, 4.8 percent, were little changed in February. A year earlier, the num-
ber of unemployed was 8.0 million, and the jobless rate was 5.4 percent.

http://jobsearch.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=jobsearch&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bls.gov%2Fnews.release%2Fempsit.nr0.htm

It's not true Americans don't want jobs. They just don't want to live 12 people to an apartment to do it.

 

[Art]

SOS I am trying hard to understand exactly what your position on immigration is. Are you agreeing that legal immigration should be increased whilst the influx of illegal immigration should be stopped? Would you be happy if the same total quantity of immigrants entered America as do now provided they all had green cards?

BTW FYI 4% unemployment is classified as full employment as this is the figure calculated to comprise of those 'churning' i.e. between jobs and those who just will not work or are working invisibly in the black economy and claiming benefits.

 

[SOS2008]

SOS I am trying hard to understand exactly what your position on immigration is. Are you agreeing that legal immigration should be increased whilst the influx of illegal immigration should be stopped? Would you be happy if the same total quantity of immigrants entered America as do now provided they all had green cards?

BTW FYI 4% unemployment is classified as full employment as this is the figure calculated to comprise of those 'churning' i.e. between jobs and those who just will not work or are working invisibly in the black economy and claiming benefits.

Look at the numbers--I just stated that 2,000 try to cross through Tucson alone each day. Go look at other numbers as well, for example currently 1 in 20 workers are illegal with birth rates to match. No, I do not agree that legal immigration should be increased indiscriminately to match all those who want to live in the U.S. It simply cannot be sustained, and why there are caps, and to be fair, why there are quotas so people from other parts of the world can come here too.

For seasonal work, I feel migrant workers are a great source of labor, but it needs to be monitored and wages need to be fair.

Bottom line, anything Bush favors makes me wary. He acts so sympathetic to these people "who want to feed their family" yet look how he and his family behaved toward our own citizens in New Orleans. It is BS just like WMD were not the real reason for the invasion of Iraq. Vicente Fox has been running our borders since Bush became president, and Bush has enabled Fox in order to increase his own base.

Bush’s Hispanic share grew 5 points in Colorado, 7 in Florida, 9 in Arizona, and 12 in New Mexico. The sample size in these four states is still a healthy 1,503. Weighting these states by Hispanic population, so that the GOP’s 12-point increase in New Mexico is not treated equally with, say, Florida’s 7-point increase, the weighted GOP increase in the 4-state sample is 7.60 percent — a shift of better than 15 votes per hundred for President Bush.

This performance was broadly consistent with the 2002 results of similar pro-GOP Spanish-language broadcast campaigns, which saw top-line Republican performance in Senate and gubernatorial races increase 6.14-percentage points.

In other words, when Republicans have aggressively courted Hispanic votes, they have won them.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/nadler200412080811.asp

 

[X-43D]

The best way to reduce immigration is to fight poverty.

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_3648346

 

[gravenewworld]

Illegal immigrants spit in the face of everyone who has ever entered this country legally. Why should they be able to cut ahead of the line in front of everyone else? What makes them so special that they should be granted automatic citizenship?

 

[deckart]

The best way to reduce immigration is to fight poverty.

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_3648346

It is the poverty of Mexico. That isn't our fight. We have enough battles as it is. Most of the world agrees that we meddle in other countries affairs enough right now.

 

[Art]

Look at the numbers--I just stated that 2,000 try to cross through Tucson alone each day.

Doesn't this number seem a little strange to you? Is it likely the authorities stood and counted them over a period of time to arrive at this figure without apprehending them? Personally I'd take this with a large pinch of salt.

Go look at other numbers as well, for example currently 1 in 20 workers are illegal with birth rates to match. No, I do not agree that legal immigration should be increased indiscriminately to match all those who want to live in the U.S. It simply cannot be sustained, and why there are caps, and to be fair, why there are quotas so people from other parts of the world can come here too.

This paragraph seems to be full of contradictions. To try and piece it together first you say 'No you are not in favour of indiscriminate immigration' yet nobody has suggested this should be the case, then you are saying stop illegal immigration, do not replace it with legal immigration but allow more people from other countries to enter America legally??
You will also note that if your figures are correct that 1 in 20 workers are illegal and you throw them out without replacing them with legal immigrants there will be a massive shortfall in the workforce.

For seasonal work, I feel migrant workers are a great source of labor, but it needs to be monitored and wages need to be fair.

Allowing in seasonal workers doesn't address the problems caused by the declining birthrate or allow for America to collect on it's investment in migrants health and education. Why do you see a problem in granting people permanent residency provided they go through the screening process for health, crime etc..

Have you ever flown coast to coast in America and looked out the window. Most of America is completely empty. States like Wyoming have tiny populations (494,000) so it's not as if overcrowding is an issue which is why I am struggling to see what the issue is??

Bottom line, anything Bush favors makes me wary. He acts so sympathetic to these people "who want to feed their family" yet look how he and his family behaved toward our own citizens in New Orleans. It is BS just like WMD was not the real reason for the invasion of Iraq. Vicente Fox has been running our borders since Bush became president, and Bush has enabled Fox in order to increase his own base.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/nadler200412080811.asp

Obviously Bush is interested in pandering to big business who are looking for more workers, preferably as cheaply as possible but even if his motives are impure it does't mean the end result is totally wrong.

In the absence of immigration will you explain how you see America continuing it's economic development and social support system given the very low and still declining birthrate resulting in an ever worsening dependancy ratio.

To summarise my opinion -

Employment laws need to be radically overhauled. Employers should be severely punished if they employ illegal workers without due dilligence. They should also have to pay immigrants the same rate of pay as an american born citizen would receive for doing the same job.

Illegal immigration should be eliminated mainly through pressure on employers as detailed above and also through greater policing including spot checks with perhaps financial penalties on their country of origin to cover the cost of repatriation and so encourage foreign gov'ts cooperation in eliminating the problem

Official quotas need to be increased to match economic demand. Like it or not America NEEDS a high level of immigrants to enable it's continued economic growth and to provide children as the workers of the future. Candidate immigrants should be screened for health, criminal backgrouns etc..

Permanent residency visas should be greatly increased. Bringing in guest workers does little for them and even less for America in the longterm. Permanent residency gives people a stake and therefore a pride in the country. The first few years should be probationary and misbehaviour responded to with revocation of their visa and expulsion.

Immigrants should be directed to states that require their labour. One of the key problems IMO with immigration is that certain areas such as the border states end up with a vastly disproportionate amount of newly arrived immigrants living in their locale at levels that cannot be intergrated into the existing community. Eliminating illegal immigration would solve a lot of this problem but nevertheless there should be a national plan to determine where immigrants should be assigned at least initially.

I don't really see what is particularly controversial about any of these suggestions as it addresses all of the issues raised by the anti-immigration lobby without the need to adopt what would on the surface appear to be racist policies?

 

[Gokul43201]

And as stated above, for jobs where migrant labor really is needed, these people can apply for guest worker visas.

What exactly is a "guest worker visa". Is it different from the current H1 visa that permits foreign nationals from working here ?

If it isn't, I can't see how this will be implementable (in its present form). A large chunk of the illegal immigrant population works on some John Smith's farm in So Cal (or wherever). To apply for an H1 visa, Mr. Juarez will have to submit to the US High Commission in Mexico (in addition to other things) a letter from Mr. Smith stating that Mr. Juarez's particular skills make him unique and this set of skills have not been found amongst the Americans interviewed for the position.

How is Mr. Juarez to pull off such a scam ?

 

[rachmaninoff2]

Immigrants should be directed to states that require their labour. One of the key problems IMO with immigration is that certain areas such as the border states end up with a vastly disproportionate amount of newly arrived immigrants living in their locale at levels that cannot be intergrated into the existing community. Eliminating illegal immigration would solve a lot of this problem but nevertheless there should be a national plan to determine where immigrants should be assigned at least initially.

Since when does our government tell people where to live and where to work? Are we communists?

 

[Evo]

What exactly is a "guest worker visa". Is it different from the current H1 visa that permits foreign nationals from working here ?

If it isn't, I can't see how this will be implementable (in its present form). A large chunk of the illegal immigrant population works on some John Smith's farm in So Cal (or wherever). To apply for an H1 visa, Mr. Juarez will have to submit to the US High Commission in Mexico (in addition to other things) a letter from Mr. Smith stating that Mr. Juarez's particular skills make him unique and this set of skills have not been found amongst the Americans interviewed for the position.

How is Mr. Juarez to pull off such a scam ?

I don't think people realize what the criteria is for getting work visas. I didn't until a friend of mine from Italy wanted to come over. It's tough.

 

[edward]

Mexicans are not about to apply for any kind of visa's. They just keep coming. 42 of them were found piled on top of each other and locked in a horse trailer yesterday, the smuggler who brought them to the south side of Tucson simply took the $1000 per head he had charged them, unhitched the trailer and left it along the side of the road.

I know the numbers that are coming through the Tucson sector. It averages 1000 per day caught and an estimated 1000 per day who get away. Every time there is talk of an amnesty the numbers explode. But Border patrol agents I have talked to feel the number that is detained is more like 15 to 20 percent rather than 50 percent.

A lot of them stay in Souther AZ to be close to home. According to the Governors office, one in 12 people in Southern AZ is an illegal.

How Rapists Prey on Vulnerable Border Crossers
By Jerry Seper, The Washington Times, Dateline Jacumba, California, September 21, 2005
A growing number of women who illegally cross the southern U.S. border with Mexico are being raped by the same human smugglers who charge them $1,500 to $2,000 for safe passage. They find they have no legal recourse because they themselves seek to enter the United States illegally.
Seper writes: "U.S. authorities said some Mexican border police have taken part in the violence, often targeting migrants headed to the United States from central and South America."
The rapes are part of a growing pattern of violence on the U.S. southern border. There are more assaults and robberies of illegals, and there has been a fivefold increase in attacks on Border Patrol agents.

Illegals Dying at Record Rate in Arizona Desert
By Dennis Wagner, USA Today, August 19, 2005
Two hundred and one illegal immigrants have died along Arizona's 389-mile border with Mexico -- a new, tragic high for the state.
This past July was the third-hottest on record for Arizona. Nonetheless, the state's brutal deserts have become more attractive to human smugglers since border controls got tougher in California and Texas.
Wagner writes: "Many from Mexico's interior cannot comprehend the desert, where summer temperatures reach 115 or higher. Despite Spanish-language media campaigns warning of death, they are spurred by dreams of employment -- and by the knowledge that millions have made it before them."
Since October 1, 2004, U.S. Border Patrol agents have caught more than Illegals Dying at Record Rate in Arizona Desert
By Dennis Wagner, USA Today, August 19, 2005
Two hundred and one illegal immigrants have died along Arizona's 389-mile border with Mexico -- a new, tragic high for the state.
This past July was the third-hottest on record for Arizona. Nonetheless, the state's brutal deserts have become more attractive to human smugglers since border controls got tougher in California and Texas.
Wagner writes: "Many from Mexico's interior cannot comprehend the desert, where summer temperatures reach 115 or higher. Despite Spanish-language media campaigns warning of death, they are spurred by dreams of employment -- and by the knowledge that millions have made it before them."
Since October 1, 2004, U.S. Border Patrol agents have caught more than 500,000 illegal border crossers in Arizona. No one knows how many successfully evaded detection.
Of the bodies found in the desert, about 30 percent are never identified, even though U.S. police and medical examiners take pains to identify them using clothing, fingerprints and DNA samples illegal border crossers in Arizona. No one knows how many successfully evaded detection.
Of the bodies found in the desert, about 30 percent are never identified, even though U.S. police and medical examiners take pains to identify them using clothing, fingerprints and DNA samples

http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/east_asia_pacific/chinese_human_smuggling/smuggling_in_the_press/scams_abuse_deaths.html

This current system is unfair for both the illegals and for those of us who are paying for their medical care and social services. Nor are they all humble people looking for work. one in ten has a criminal record. Locally most of them work in an underground economy and do not pay taxes.

Most of the local illegals work in construction, when the current housing boom crashes we are going to be looking at some serious social welfare problems.

This is much more than a simple right or wrong issue.

 

[Art]

Since when does our government tell people where to live and where to work? Are we communists?

Since years ago. To obtain one of the more generally available visas, of the 70 different types available, wouldbe immigrants need to show they have a job lined up to go to. The visa they obtain is specific to that job. I don't think this makes you communists though.

Seems Bush and me finally agree on something

Bush calls for 'civil' immigration debate
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush said Monday that overhauling the nation's immigration laws "is not going to be easy" and warned critics against stoking anti-immigrant feelings by calling them a threat to the nation's identity or a burden to the economy
<snip>
"No one should play on people's fears or try to pit neighbors against each other," Bush said. "No one should pretend that immigrants are threats to America's identity because immigrants have shaped America's identity.

"No one should claim that immigrants are a burden on our economy because the work and enterprise of immigrants helps sustain our economy," the president said. "We should not give into pessimism. If we work together I am confident we can meet our duty to fix our immigration system and deliver a bill that protects our people, upholds our laws and makes our people proud."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-27-immigration_x.htm

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

We need to secure our borders and stop the flood as best we can NOW. The money spent on additional security measures will be worth it.

But ultimately we need to remove incentive. If these people can't get a job once they enter, they will return home. Business must not only collect ID, but must verify that the ID is not fake, and then prosecute those committing fraud. Businesses not abiding by this need to face large fines.

For those who are already here, they need to be screened. If they have a criminal record, contagious disease, are unemployed and/or relying on public services, or can't speak English, they need to be deported immediately. The rest need to do public service (military time will work) if they have committed fraud (used fake ID), pay any back taxes owed, and fined for illegal entry (to help with costs for border security, detention facilities, plane tickets, etc). Then they need to get in line for citizenship, which should move fairly quickly due to original screening. Those who do not come forward willingly will be automatically deported if caught. If these kind of requirements are not made, it will equate to amnesty and send a very wrong message. And once again, the cost to process these people will be worth it--we will pay the piper sooner or later.

And as stated above, for jobs where migrant labor really is needed, these people can apply for guest worker visas. To keep it honest and to prevent wages from being depressed, the businesses hiring them should pay minimum wage.

Tightening border security a good idea. From what I understand the CBP are a bit understaffed though during the Minutemen contraversy there were promises of increasing staff by about 20,000 I think. I'll have to look that up. A wall would be a disasterous proposition though. With the enormity of the undertaking our own government's incompetence would likely be enough to have it well sabatoged but beyond that they will also have to deal with protestors, coyotes, drug runners, and the mexican mafia. The minutemen were just watching and they got shot at a couple times. Here in CA they were attacked several times and I think were forced to abandon their post before they intended to.

As far as the deportations and screenings I'm pretty sure that if such things were to go into action there would be riots and that would be some scary ****. I was in Santa Ana for new years once and the amount of ammo being shot off in celebration was scary enough. Recently the INS made a couple raids to arrest some illegals and people freaked. It was plastered all over the news every where and the latino civil rights community made it sound like the worst thing since Wako.

I don't think that the CA state and city governments would take very nicely to it either...

Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval introduced a resolution Tuesday urging San Francisco law enforcement agencies to ignore federal illegal immigration legislation if the bill now in Congress becomes law...
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/29/BAGUCHVM6J1.DTL

 

[X-43D]

Since when does our government tell people where to live and where to work? Are we communists?

But that is fascism, not really communism.