- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 10,348
- Reaction score
- 2,426
- Location
- The anals of history
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Yeah, let's just ignore those people that go on to get PhDs and to discover cures for diseases, develop new technologies, etc.
I don't think that we should have 100% open boarders, but we should have very liberal immigration policies. Immigrants are important to a healthy culture and economy. With immigration we're pretty much right on replacement with our population as well.
Closed boarders are stupid and harmful to the Republic, most calls to closed boarders are typically rooted in ignorance, emotion, and hysteria.
wooptee **** for you.
In my youth I watched the textile industry of the South collapse and get sent overseas. I watched as millions of people lost good-paying jobs and ended up working for peanuts, or on welfare, or losing their homes. The economy in many parts of the south has STILL not recovered.
In 1980 you could make a GOOD living in home construction. Now most of those jobs are taken by illegals and pay miniumum wage and houses STILL cost four times what they cost in 1980.
Yeah we're winning just great.
Next we should let those Ph.D engineers in India who make $5,000 a year compete with American engineers accustomed to making $100,000 a year or more...
You just drank a little too much of the open borders koolaid which purports that to be against illegal aliens is to be against immigration and immigrants. It's a lovely meme but entirely false.
No, nor do we need to. With current law we could refuse pretty much all services to illegals, we do NOT do that now. The IRS could easily report the source and destinations of that income that is taxed and not claimed to the INS for investigation. Currently by law one must identify themselves if they are sending 10K to someone. Adjust that require to cover ANY amount sent to a foreign destination. Levy the fines, levy the fines, levy the fines. Enforce, enforce, enforce.
We have seen what happens as states start to enforce their laws against illegals - the illegals leave and go to a state that doesn't enforce.
Honestly don't know. My speculation is that it's a papa knows best move, but there are so many [conspiracy] theories as to why presidents do this (we're not the first to notice) that I find it hard to speculate.
And brings me to my next thought. We should amend the constitution to rescind the automatic citizenship rule. Made sense when we were nation-building in the 1800's and early 1900's (when nearly all immigrants came through Ellis Island and were processed).
Does not make sense now, especially when "anchor babies" (yes, I know some people get uppity about the term, but that's exactly what it is) encourage illegals to give birth here to American citizens, which are then immediately afforded access to entitlements... otherwise known as taxpayer money. I'd rewrite the law to state that at least one biological parent must already be a citizen, by birth or naturalization.
You think Al Qaeda doesn't have money to pay off the drug lords? LOL! The cartels will do almost anything for money.Exactly. Put yourself in their shoes. If I'm a drug cartel king in Mexico, and some towel-wearing dude with sandals comes in to my barrio trying to build bombs and whatnot, I'm not exactly going to welcome him with open arms.
People tend to operate on the basis of self-interest, and it's against their self-interest to allow Muslim extremists in to their country.
The whole idea is nothing but a xenophobic scare tactic. Fear is the worst motivator.
I'd rather be driven by the opportunity that the influx of new workers, new ideas, etc could bring than be driven by the fear of xenophobia.
You think Al Qaeda doesn't have money to pay off the drug lords? LOL! The cartels will do almost anything for money.
:lamo That's about the most naive view of drug lords I've seen yet. :lamoYes and no. They're greedy, immoral, but not stupid. The last thing they want to do is provoke the United States in to coming after them. This is why you don't see drug violence spill over the border from the border towns. They know that they can get away with quite a bit in Mexico by paying off or intimidating local politicians/police, but if they fight their drug wars in the United States, it's curtains for their organization.
Similarly, they wouldn't be stupid enough to accept money from Al Qaeda. It's bad for business.
:lamo That's about the most naive view of drug lords I've seen yet. :lamo
They don't have to do that. All they have to do is put one more illegal in the same truck with all the other illegals - and they'll probably charge him more to do it. They're making more money than they would off a Mexican illegal so they're happy. This is what drug lords do, they smuggle illegal goods across the border, which includes people.Anybody with any brains at all knows the number one way to provoke the wrath of the United States is to get in to bed with Al Quaeda. Everyone knows that.
They don't have to do that. All they have to do is put one more illegal in the same truck with all the other illegals - and they'll probably charge him more to do it. They're making more money than they would off a Mexican illegal so they're happy. This is what drug lords do, they smuggle illegal goods across the border, which includes people.
They don't have to do that. All they have to do is put one more illegal in the same truck with all the other illegals - and they'll probably charge him more to do it. They're making more money than they would off a Mexican illegal so they're happy. This is what drug lords do, they smuggle illegal goods across the border, which includes people.
You really think we'll figure out they came through Mexico? LOL! I think you give us too much credit.Yeah, but nobody cares about another gardener, but they know damn well that if they smuggle a terrorist they will have the full attention of the USA. Goodbye lucrative drug business. That's a very poor business decision.
I still don't understand why some people are suggesting that all immigration be halted. Like I said, I want to live there, I can take care of myself, and I don't mind opening another business to employ a few people if the market conditions are right for it. Why shouldn't I be allowed in? I have a slightly dodgy haircut, but apart from that there is nothing defective about me. I believe in peace, love, and being nice to people. What's the big deal?
I also still think my "citizenship trade" is a good idea. You have lots of socialists who would be very happy in England, and I think I'd be happier in America, so why can't we be allowed to just trade places? Everyone would win out of it.
Edit,
You really think we'll figure out they came through Mexico? LOL! I think you give us too much credit.
They take risks all the time. That's what their customers them pay so much to do.They would be stupid to take that risk.
Yeah, but nobody cares about another gardener, but they know damn well that if they smuggle a terrorist they will have the full attention of the USA. Goodbye lucrative drug business. That's a very poor business decision.
I mentioned more research...
Congressional report ties terrorists to Mexican drug cartels | The Daily Caller
Mantenlo prendido = Keep it turned on.
Interesting, Grimm
Wanna explain what that means in the context of this thread?
That's called groundwork. If a terrorist is ever smuggled in to the US by the drug cartels, now we can declare war on the drug cartels.
A congressional report like that is a warning shot.
"She said "Iranian agents and members of Hezbollah" are thought to be learning Spanish in Hugo Chavez-run Venezuela before trying to obtain false documents to enter the United States as purported Mexicans."
Read more: Congresswoman Raises Red Flag on Hezbollah-Cartel Nexus on U.S. Border | Fox News
Can you tell the difference?
We should abandon our silly and futile notion of trying to "seal the borders" and just "let the markets work," so to speak.
I think there should be two conditions that, if satisfied, should allow anyone and everyone to enter or exit the United States at will. First, do they have a job? If yes, then they are productive, and they should be allowed to stay. If not, is there someone willing to claim them as a dependent? Is there someone willing to feed, clothe, school them? If so, there is no reason to keep them out of the country. The second condition is that they don't have a criminal record.
Why not seal the border? Well, for one, futility. No matter what we do, people find ways to enter the country. So really, we're kicking and screaming, we're pouring countless resources in to fight a "problem" that is probably never going to be resolved.
Second, aside from pure xenophobia and/or racism, I haven't heard a good argument yet for why we should try to stem the tide of immigrants in to this vast country of ours. You have to admit, that's part of the equation. Nobody would complain if a bunch of blond hair, blue eyed, English speaking Canadians were crossing the border en masse. So I think we need to be mature and ask ourselves if xenophobia is really a good enough reason to literally build a fence between ourselves and our neighbors.
No. Population migrations are a natural phenomenon. It's been going on forever. Massive governments and their laws and walls are artificial phenomenon. Nature will find a way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?