Your feeling on Illegal Immigration into the U.S.

[Divinus Arma]

Well? What do you think?

[Samurai Waki]

I think the Soviets had the right idea in regards to the Berlin Wall.

[Papewaio]

GC --- Click the little arrow button to the right of the page 5.

[Es Arkajae]

Regarding the problem in the US, I present (fresh from a similar argument elsewhere)


The Arkajaean Solution.

Step1) Declare a one off amnesty for all illegals (and their immediate/live in families) inside the US who can prove that they have lived there for 5 years or more. These people must then register with the tax department and either apply for citizenship or operate under the laws applying to foreigners living inside the US. Then start tracking down the rest who don't qualify, no more amnesties in future.


Step 2) Declare a single mandatory minimum wage for BOTH US citizens and non-US citizens, also give both equal or near equal rights in such things as employer provided insurance etc.. This eliminates the incentive for businesses to hire foreigners over American citizens. At the same time vastly increase the penalties for hiring illegal immigrants providing a disincentive.

Step 3) Increase border patrol budget to allow for proper surveillance and policing of border. It doesn't have to be the Great Wall of China, it just has to prevent any largescale movement and provide a genuine barrier to criminals.

Step 4) Announce bounty program, giving rewards to any person (US citizen or not) who provides information leading to the arrest of an illegal immigrant. All tip offs and payments can be kept anonymous.

Step 5) Bring in laws allowing local governments to seize assets in excess of $1000 USD acquired in the US by illegal immigrants.

Step 6) Create waystations for processing illegal immigrants, before returning them to their country of origin.


Now the beauty of this solution?

Lefties can't complain about the wages part, unless they want to argue against non-citizens getting higher wages. The only way they could do so would be to argue that non-citizens wages should be kept low, now the only people who would argue such are corporations/businesses etc. who exploit cheap labour etc.

That is the exact same people the PC whiners are usually whining about for giving miniscule wages to their employees.

Another beautiful thing about my suggestions is the Amnesty for all immigrants and their immediate families who have lived in the country 5 years or more.

Studies have repeatedly found that often the people MOST against further immigration are immigrant families themselves.

By making these people citizens, legitimising them and giving them security in the country one can most likely then rely on their support in the voting booths for measures to curb or stop further illegal immigration. Hows that for an enormous blow to the PC brigade?

As for my bounty deal you'll notice I mentioned US citizens AND non-US citizens, by doing such one can then have watchers SOUTH of the border, one can actually have Mexicans spying on Mexicans and turning their fellow countrymen in for the bounty.

Think of that border patrol deal those civillian types started up a while back (which was enormously successful) and now imagine that one had people on the Mexican side of the border doing just that for the bounties they could then recieve. People could even set up businesses hunting down illegals and collecting the bounties after reporting them to authorities.

[Al Khalifah]

I think the Soviets had the right idea in regards to the Berlin Wall.
The Berlin Wall was far more to do with preventing emmigration rather than immigration. To seperate the US from Mexico with a wall would be nearly the equivalent of building a wall around Iraq to keep the insurgents from entering.

[Zalmoxis]

Somebody had a good idea awhile back, where the US wouldn't give money to Mexico unless they tightened the borders excessively.

[Samurai Waki]

The Berlin Wall was far more to do with preventing emmigration rather than immigration. To seperate the US from Mexico with a wall would be nearly the equivalent of building a wall around Iraq to keep the insurgents from entering.

Well I know that. I was just being facetious.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Talking as a LEGAL immigrant who gets to do all the hoop jumping:
It [snip] me off.
The people who employ illegals are [snip]. Take a small cut in your super high standard of living and employ a U.S. citizen/visa holder/green card holder you spoilt [snip].
Know what? when I was a kid (about 12 or so, which was in the 90s so it's not that long ago) we used to be paid a pitiful amount to bring in the harvest but it was fun; if you want cheap fruit and veg then employ school kids. Parents should be forced to encourage their kids to get a work ethic anyway because I'm so sick of all the lazy idiots who are U.S. citizens.

GAH!!!

EDIT by Ser Clegane: I would highly appreciate if the language here could be less "colourful" :stare:
Thanks

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Like I said in the Conservative Club this maybe the biggest issue in the next elections. Already the Govenor of New Mexico, a democrat, said he will tighten the border. If either party can take the lead on this issue and show the amwerican public their serious they will win in a lanslide. Both parties are quilty of not listening to the people of their parties and are only intersted in the democrats case of expanding their base and in the republicans case getting cheap labor for buissines. I say lock down the border and deport those you find here. Why should we reward them for breaking our laws? Let them get on line just like everyone else. I like the plan where if they go back voluntarily you sort of put them to the top of the list and give them a work permit to work here.

[Redleg]

Regarding the problem in the US, I present (fresh from a similar argument elsewhere)


The Arkajaean Solution.

Step1) Declare a one off amnesty for all illegals (and their immediate/live in families) inside the US who can prove that they have lived there for 5 years or more. These people must then register with the tax department and either apply for citizenship or operate under the laws applying to foreigners living inside the US. Then start tracking down the rest who don't qualify, no more amnesties in future.


You realize of course this has been done once in completly by Ronald Regean. Regean granted a general immirgration amnesty back around 1985 if I remember correcty, and it has lead to some of the current immigration problems concerning illegals - especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances.

[Redleg]

Like I said in the Conservative Club this maybe the biggest issue in the next elections. Already the Govenor of New Mexico, a democrat, said he will tighten the border. If either party can take the lead on this issue and show the amwerican public their serious they will win in a lanslide. Both parties are quilty of not listening to the people of their parties and are only intersted in the democrats case of expanding their base and in the republicans case getting cheap labor for buissines. I say lock down the border and deport those you find here. Why should we reward them for breaking our laws? Let them get on line just like everyone else. I like the plan where if they go back voluntarily you sort of put them to the top of the list and give them a work permit to work here.


Governer Richardson has declared a state of emergency because of the violence and illegal crossings of the border between his state and Mexico

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/12/newmexico/


In announcing the state of emergency, Richardson -- a Democrat who served in President Clinton's Cabinet -- criticized the "total inaction and lack of resources from the federal government and Congress" in helping protect his state's residents along the border.

If Richardson is serious he can now deploy the New Mexico National Guard along the border to secure his state - which is allowed under the Regulations governing the Guard and the state's control over them.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

If Richardson is serious he can now deploy the New Mexico National Guard along the border to secure his state - which is allowed under the Regulations governing the Guard and the state's control over them.

Yes an he is also likely to run in 2008. Heck if he did that even Id consider voting for him.

[Redleg]

Yes an he is also likely to run in 2008. Heck if he did that even Id consider voting for him.

Its okay if he ran under the democratic ticket for President - I would vote for him also - he is a moderate conserative by his own policies.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Governer Richardson has declared a state of emergency because of the violence and illegal crossings of the border between his state and Mexico

Looks like hes not alone


Napolitano declares border emergency

Associated Press
Aug. 15, 2005 05:57 PM

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano declared an emergency Monday in four border counties because of problems related to lax border enforcement and moved to provide local governments in those counties with up to $1.5 million in state funding.

Napolitano's order directly released $200,000 from the state's emergency fund for disasters while her emergency council released an additional $1.3 million, spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer said.

The money is intended for use by counties and municipalities for a variety of purposes, including overtime pay for law enforcement officers, repairs of border fences, costs related to illegal immigrants' deaths, L'Ecuyer said.
advertisement


Napolitano's action followed by three days a similar declaration by New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

LINK (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0815borderemergency-ON.html)

Of course she governs just the opposite vetoing bills like the one requiring picture ID to vote and many others proposed by conservtives to address this issue.

[Redleg]

Looks like some interesting politicial moves by two state governors on the border issue. It will be interesting to see if Texas and California does the same thing. However I don't think Arnold has he political clout in California to get away with his state in doing something like this.

Richardson is a very popular governor in New Mexico and can afford to do something like this as a politicial statement.

Don't know about the Arizona governor to much.

THe knucklehead here in Texas can't even get the House and Senate to pass a school tax budget - so I doubt he has the political clout to do something like this.

I wish all four would though - it would send a strong message to Washington that there is a severe problem along the border.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Illegal immigration is going to be the death of our fine nation.
We must stop it at all costs, no matter the amount of money it takes, or the human lives lost to stop it. The greater good for our nation is more important.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Make a line across the border if they cross that line they can be shot....Just make sure they know where it is and what it is for.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

That's not right. They're still humans - catch them and deport them. Though I like Es Arkajae's solution a lot.

[Redleg]

Make a line across the border if they cross that line they can be shot....Just make sure they know where it is and what it is for.

Oh so many ways that this statement is wrong. So your advocating the killing of men, women, and children because of the harmful actions of a small portion of the illegals that cross the border.

Yes get the border under control - but without going to a police state.

Then again think about what happens when you live on the border and cross that line - absolutely no way can this be a policy along the border.

Build a fence, provide more manpower for the Border Patrol - so that they can activitly patrol the border, get the National Guard to fill in until the Border Patrol is re-organized for accomplishing their mission the right way.

But do not shoot people because they attempt to come to this country in violation of immigration laws because they wish for a better life then their home countries can offer them.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Oh so many ways that this statement is wrong. So your advocating the killing of men, women, and children because of the harmful actions of a small portion of the illegals that cross the border.

Yes get the border under control - but without going to a police state.

Then again think about what happens when you live on the border and cross that line - absolutely no way can this be a policy along the border.

Build a fence, provide more manpower for the Border Patrol - so that they can activitly patrol the border, get the National Guard to fill in until the Border Patrol is re-organized for accomplishing their mission the right way.

But do not shoot people because they attempt to come to this country in violation of immigration laws because they wish for a better life then their home countries can offer them.


OK maybe killing them is a little heavy handed...but if we just send them back they will try again....we need to find a way to make them so scared they will not want to come here... but what?

[Redleg]

To be honest, as long as there was fair warning given, a little bit of shooting wouldn't bother me.

But it'd be political suicide for whoever proposed that policy.


Shot to kill on the border happens a lot because of the other criminal activities along the border - the coyotoes running people across, the drug runners, and in some instance even gun runners. To have a shot kill policy - with a fair warning - also creates a danger to the law enforcement agencies who must patrol the border or respond to the criminal activities along the border.

Its a lose - lose scenerio either way you look at it.

[Papewaio]

Is the border patrol a subset of the coast guard? Or is it more like local cops?

[Redleg]

Is the border patrol a subset of the coast guard? Or is it more like local cops?

If my memory serves me correctly it is a branch of the same governmental department that also controls some of the functions (if not all) of the Coast Guard. However after 9/11 they have renamed, reorganized and generally confused some of the chain of command/responsibility of different departments.

However I believe both fall under the US Customs Branch of Service.

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/about/

[Devastatin Dave]

I would vote Democrat as well if they had a real policy to keep the illegals out. Bush is doing poorly with this problem. I love immigrants and welcome all with open arms if they want to come here legally and become fellow Americans, as for the illegals, i wouldn't piss on them even if they were on fire...

[Red Harvest]

Is the border patrol a subset of the coast guard? Or is it more like local cops?

It used to be part of the Immigration Service, but it is now under the Dept. of Homeland Security in a section called U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It has been a Federal force, not local.

[Papewaio]

Put up tighter border controls. That is fair enough... we have even used the SAS here in Australia.

Have more specific useful immigration controls. Australia is advertising around the world at the moment for 20,000 extra skilled immigrants.

[Del Arroyo]

I think too much is made of the distinction between "legal" and "illegal"-- I mean, if it were really illegal, we'd be enforcing it. Currently it's sort of like the make-believe 55mph speed limit we had for so many years.

When I lived and worked in Mexico I was totally mojado, I didn't even have a valid tourist visa, but granted that was a little different.

IMO what really needs to be done, instead of moralistically demonizing "illegals" (a distinction which currently has no real meaning), is to actually get a handle on the immigration situation and get a set of rules that people are going to enforce. Higher quotas for workers are definitely needed. Some amnesty deal should probably be worked out.

Once these aspects are taken care of, strict enforcement, penalization of offending employers, and deportations would definitely be necessary if the policy is going to have any meaning. If it is a serious policy, seriously enforced, it will have moral weight and people will respect it.

..

One other aspect that I think could really use some work would be an official recognition of Mexicans as a group and the role they play here, and the establishment of free english classes, information/counseling, etc. It would even be good to establish some sort of assistance program which would require participants to be learning and eventually pass a test in English-- thus pushing immigrants to learn English without the red tape of establishing it as an official language.

Anyway, just my 2 cents.

DA

[bmolsson]

I read this statement on US immigration a while ago:

The indians did not restrict immigration, now they live in the reservations...

Most of the US posters here seems to forget who their ancestors where........

[PanzerJaeger]

I personally think illegal immigrants are nothing but criminals, but they help business.. so im conflicted.

[Divinus Arma]

I personally think illegal immigrants are nothing but criminals, but they help business.. so im conflicted.

They don't really help business.

They help businesses that are criminals. So criminal illegals help criminal businesses that hire them.

[PanzerJaeger]

hehe, anyone in real estate will tell you mexicans are a godsend. ~;)

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

I'm pretty entertained by the construction industry hiring relatively unskilled Mexicans to do skilled jobs only to have to then go employ skilled U.S. workers to fix the mess that had been made. I don't know if those Mexicans are illegals or not but they are definitely being used to get cheaper labour than that offered by long established U.S. businesses. I suppose if you use any non-skilled workers to do unskilled jobs you'd get the same results.

Talking of unskilled workers doing skilled jobs, I'm currently doing a special offer on heart surgery if anybody's interested, much cheaper than an actual surgeon.

Disclaimer: this is not always the case with Mexicans in the construction industry but it is definitely something that I have observed (in one case whilst sitting in a coffee shop in a half completed strip mall, wondering what the heck a couple of Mexican workers were doing on the uncompleted half: you had to be there, it was like Laurel and Hardy spend a day on a building site).

[bmolsson]

I'm pretty entertained by the construction industry hiring relatively unskilled Mexicans to do skilled jobs only to have to then go employ skilled U.S. workers to fix the mess that had been made. I don't know if those Mexicans are illegals or not but they are definitely being used to get cheaper labour than that offered by long established U.S. businesses. I suppose if you use any non-skilled workers to do unskilled jobs you'd get the same results.

Talking of unskilled workers doing skilled jobs, I'm currently doing a special offer on heart surgery if anybody's interested, much cheaper than an actual surgeon.

Disclaimer: this is not always the case with Mexicans in the construction industry but it is definitely something that I have observed (in one case whilst sitting in a coffee shop in a half completed strip mall, wondering what the heck a couple of Mexican workers were doing on the uncompleted half: you had to be there, it was like Laurel and Hardy spend a day on a building site).

You would be surprised how nice houses they have in Mexico, all built by Mexicans. Furthermore, the surgeons in Mexico knows how to do hearts as well..... ~:grouphug:

[Idaho]

Regarding the problem in the US, I present (fresh from a similar argument elsewhere)


The Arkajaean Solution.

...

That is the exact same people the PC whiners are usually whining about for giving miniscule wages to their employees.

...

Hows that for an enormous blow to the PC brigade?

Your suggestions are fairly reasonable compared to most. (I have more fundamental ideological disagreements, but I won't go into those).

However you do spoil the effect with meaningless references to PC Brigades.

[Adrian II]

None.

I have no feeling on illegal immigration into the United States.

This is a great relief to me. I saw this thread earlier and automatically skipped it. I consciously skipped it again half an hour ago, in between work assignments, and then it occurred to me that it is highly unusual and quite pleasant that I have no feelings on a subject, none whatsoever. That hasn't happened to me in a long, long time. And it never happens, to my own chagrin, since I have become a journalist. And low and behold, here it does. As I look into this thread, my mind is like an empty cup full of oneness.

Thank you, friend. :bow:

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I have no feeling on illegal immigration into the United States.

Why should you as it dosent concern you ?


This is a great relief to me.

Isnt this a contratidiction considering you just said you have no feelings on the matter?

[Adrian II]

Why should you as it dosent concern you ?



Isnt this a contratidiction considering you just said you have no feelings on the matter?Oooommmmm... ~:)

[Es Arkajae]

You realize of course this has been done once in completly by Ronald Regean. Regean granted a general immirgration amnesty back around 1985 if I remember correcty, and it has lead to some of the current immigration problems concerning illegals - especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances.

...unbloody believable.

Did you even read my damned post or did you just post the above nonsense as soon as what passes for your brain thought of it?

Whatever it is you said Reagan did is nothing like what I brought up.

I suggest next time you 'snip' my post after you've actually read it.

[Es Arkajae]

Your suggestions are fairly reasonable compared to most. (I have more fundamental ideological disagreements, but I won't go into those).

However you do spoil the effect with meaningless references to PC Brigades.

My solution is either reasonable or it is not ~;) , my mention of 'PC brigades' is a very real concern as in a supreme act of irony, it is those fools along with big businesses who stand most in the way of proper border control in the US.

The type of people who cry 'racism' when anyone dares to question their own country's immigration and border control policies. 'PC brigade' is a rather tame description for such ignorant people I would think.

You're entitled to dislike it though.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Did you even read my damned post or did you just post the above nonsense as soon as what passes for your brain thought of it?

Get out on the wrong side of the bed today? No need to personally assualt the man.


Whatever it is you said Reagan did is nothing like what I brought up.

Im afraid he did declare amesty. If we do it again others will keep sneaking in here waiting for the next.


Step 2) Declare a single mandatory minimum wage for BOTH US citizens and non-US citizens, also give both equal or near equal rights in such things as employer provided insurance etc.. This eliminates the incentive for businesses to hire foreigners over American citizens. At the same time vastly increase the penalties for hiring illegal immigrants providing a disincentive.

We already have a single mandatory minimum wage.


Another beautiful thing about my suggestions is the Amnesty for all immigrants and their immediate families who have lived in the country 5 years or more.

Studies have repeatedly found that often the people MOST against further immigration are immigrant families themselves.

By making these people citizens, legitimising them and giving them security in the country one can most likely then rely on their support in the voting booths for measures to curb or stop further illegal immigration. Hows that for an enormous blow to the PC brigade?

This is exactly what the Reagan administration claimed and you can see it was wrong. Though you claim he did no such thing. The rest of your plan is ok but the republicans already have such a plan and its better then yours.

[Proletariat]

Did you even read my damned post or did you just post the above nonsense as soon as what passes for your brain thought of it?


Holy Uncouth Rejoinder, Batman!
:batman:

[Redleg]

...unbloody believable.

Did you even read my damned post or did you just post the above nonsense as soon as what passes for your brain thought of it?

Whatever it is you said Reagan did is nothing like what I brought up.

I suggest next time you 'snip' my post after you've actually read it.

okay the proof about your point number one being tried before.

To refresh your memory the point I was refering to is this

Step1) Declare a one off amnesty for all illegals (and their immediate/live in families) inside the US who can prove that they have lived there for 5 years or more. These people must then register with the tax department and either apply for citizenship or operate under the laws applying to foreigners living inside the US. Then start tracking down the rest who don't qualify, no more amnesties in future.

Some interesting information for the un-informed and stupidty in your above rant. (again if you make it personal - I make it personal)

In 1986 under President Ronald Reagan, a general-amnesty program was put in place whereby approximately 2.7 million illegal aliens were granted legal status. In addition, Congress enacted a new set of laws and policies aimed at eliminating illegal immigration. The result? Rather than looking at 2.7 million illegal aliens, we now are faced with the problem of 8 million to 12 million people who are inside the United States illegally. Clearly the efforts did not end illegal immigration, but rather sent the message that illegal behavior can be rewarded. Is that really the message the United States wants to send again?

Opps forgot to link that one

President Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to illegal immigrants when he signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 that affected mostly Latino immigrants living in the United States since 1982.

Of the nearly 4 million illegal immigrants eligible to apply for legal residency under the 1986 law, 55 percent were from Mexico, according to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. The law gave immigrants who came to America before 1982 one year, between May 1987 and May 1988, to apply for temporary resident status and permits for employment.

Gee that does look like a five year time period does it not. 1987 minus 1982 = 5 years. You should be feeling a little weak about now for making such an idiotic statement.

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/US/07/16/bush.mexico/

And in all fairness the Clinton adminstration also purposed something along the same lines

Democrats have sought passage of what they call the Latino and Immigrant Fairness Act. It would grant amnesty to illegal aliens from Honduras, Guatemala, Haiti and El Salvador who arrived before Dec. 1, 1995. Immigrants from Nicaragua and Cuba received such consideration through legislation passed by the Republican-led Congress in 1996.

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/27/220423.txt


And in even more recent news dating around the 2001 timeframe - President Bush also talked about doing the same thing

The Bush administration is considering a proposal to give the more than 3 million illegal Mexican nationals in the United States legal status to remain, senior administration officials said Monday.

Which is linked already for the Regean Adminstration amnesty program

I suggest you learn how to argue the point not the individual. Try researching a little more before accusing others of Did you even read my damned post or did you just post the above nonsense as soon as what passes for your brain thought of it?

To criticize the rest of that point - how are you going to prove that an illegal has been living in the United States for 5 years - when they have been living in the United States illegally.

Boy should I rachet up the personal insults because of your actions?

[Idaho]

Yeah there are some people on the boards it is fair game to have a poke at - me, Jag, panzer, gawain. Redleg is not one of them :no:

[Redleg]

Yeah there are some people on the boards it is fair game to have a poke at - me, Jag, panzer, gawain. Redleg is not one of them :no:

He is new to the boards - and idealistic in his comments - only time one can accuse me of spouting off at the mouth is anti-war protestors and communists. ~D

[Devastatin Dave]

Yeah there are some people on the boards it is fair game to have a poke at - me, Jag, panzer, gawain. Redleg is not one of them :no:

**pokes Idaho**

[Es Arkajae]

Redleg you deserved every singleounce of scorn I poured on your last post. and the manner in which I addressed you was as tame as hell, grow some skin.

I present a PROGRAM for addressing the illegal immigrant problem and you focus on ONE point amongst SIX and then what?...

"especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances."


Did you then completely MISS the rest of my post?, the other FIVE points?


The ONE OFF amnesty is to remove a glut, it is also to helps avoid the politically damaging and problematical issue of removing deeply entrenched illegals and their families (some of whom have been born in the US).

i.e. it makes the subsequent job of cleaning out the house somewhat easier and also helps to undermine arguments against any campaign to clean out illegals. By removing a potentially vexing problem.

As for proving residency for five years that is the illegal immigrants problem and not the US governnments, electricity or phone bills or medical records etc. should be enough proof I would imagine in the large majority of cases.


You have the discourtesy to ignore most of my post, then reply to it and now it appears you're so bloody ignorant that you don't even realise the problem.

Wake up to yourself.

[Redleg]

Redleg you deserved every singleounce of scorn I poured on your last post. and the manner in which I addressed you was as tame as hell, grow some skin. Then you sir need to learn to be more civil and read the rules of the forum.




I present a PROGRAM for addressing the illegal immigrant problem and you focus on ONE point amongst SIX and then what?...


And all I was responding to was that the amnesty has been tried before, because that is the issue I initially wished to address.



"especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances."


Did you then completely MISS the rest of my post?, the other FIVE points?


Oh I didn't miss the rest of your post at all - I was again was responding about the amnesty point. Your scorn and idiotic outburst was directed at the individual - not at reading to the point I was responding to.


The ONE OFF amnesty is to remove a glut, it is also to helps avoid the politically damaging and problematical issue of removing deeply entrenched illegals and their families (some of whom have been born in the US).


And has stated it has been done before - same problems still exist from the previous attempt at amnesty.



i.e. it makes the subsequent job of cleaning out the house somewhat easier and also helps to undermine arguments against any campaign to clean out illegals. By removing a potentially vexing problem.

Nope the amnesty creates other problems also.



As for proving residency for five years that is the illegal immigrants problem and not the US governnments, electricity or phone bills or medical records etc. should be enough proof I would imagine in the large majority of cases.


Then you don't know much about how illegal immigrants live.



You have the discourtesy to ignore most of my post, then reply to it and now it appears you're so bloody ignorant that you don't even realise the problem.
Wake up to yourself.

You assume to much. Try again. You want to make it personal I see.

So to point out the flaws and other idiotic and already tried points in your issue. It seems that you failed to research to see how many of your points are either already in place and failing - or have already been tried and failed. However they were so unimportant that I didn't bother to respond to them because of civility.


The Arkajaean Solution.

Step1) Declare a one off amnesty for all illegals (and their immediate/live in families) inside the US who can prove that they have lived there for 5 years or more. These people must then register with the tax department and either apply for citizenship or operate under the laws applying to foreigners living inside the US. Then start tracking down the rest who don't qualify, no more amnesties in future.

See the last two post.




Step 2) Declare a single mandatory minimum wage for BOTH US citizens and non-US citizens, also give both equal or near equal rights in such things as employer provided insurance etc.. This eliminates the incentive for businesses to hire foreigners over American citizens. At the same time vastly increase the penalties for hiring illegal immigrants providing a disincentive.

The minimum wage is already mandatory for all legal workers in the United States. All one has to do is enforce the already established labor laws. You might want to check out the wording on the Minimum Wage Acts. Their is no incentive for businesses to hire foreigner workers over American Citizens in the United States - unless the labour is here illegal - and there are laws already in place to fine business that do so - the problem once again is enforcement not new legislation.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor standards affecting full-time and part-time workers in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments. Covered nonexempt workers are entitled to a minimum wage of not less than $5.15 an hour. Overtime pay at a rate of not less than one and one-half times their regular rates of pay is required after 40 hours of work in a workweek.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/23/news/companies/walmart_worker_arrests/?CNN=yes

Courtney said the penalty for knowingly hiring illegal workers can run up to $10,000 per person. He declined to give the names of the contractors who hired the workers picked up Thursday.

"People have to be authorized to work in the United States," said Courtney. "We are serious about enforcing the law



Step 3) Increase border patrol budget to allow for proper surveillance and policing of border. It doesn't have to be the Great Wall of China, it just has to prevent any largescale movement and provide a genuine barrier to criminals.

Care to explain the recent hiring of an additional Border Patrol agents already in the works - and about the only point of yours that I agreed with that needs even more then the current amount of agents.


Step 4) Announce bounty program, giving rewards to any person (US citizen or not) who provides information leading to the arrest of an illegal immigrant. All tip offs and payments can be kept anonymous.

So advocating the Wild Wild West approach - the bounty idea is wrong on so many points that its not worth addressing because it is ridiculous on its face



Step 5) Bring in laws allowing local governments to seize assets in excess of $1000 USD acquired in the US by illegal immigrants.

Violates the Constitution by the way - Unlawful searches and seizures by the government - amd so hard for the government to prove. Then once again there are already laws about what the government can take from the illegal as part of the deportation process. No need for new laws - when the already established laws just need to be enforced.



Step 6) Create waystations for processing illegal immigrants, before returning them to their country of origin.

Already in place and functioning in many places - something you would know if you bothered to check the immigration and border patrol sites.

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/overview.xml

Oh by the way - have a nice day

[Ser Clegane]

Redleg you deserved every singleounce of scorn I poured on your last post. and the manner in which I addressed you was as tame as hell, grow some skin.

Actually I would prefer it if the patrons here develop a civilized posting style instead of other patrons having to "grow some skin".

Please stick to discussing the issue instead of resorting to personal attacks :bow:

[Mongoose]

So advocating the Wild Wild West approach - the bounty idea is wrong on so many points that its not worth addressing because it is ridiculous on its face


Perhaps you could explain this part of your post alittle more?

Not that i like the idea of having armed mobs searching the streets or anything....

[Redleg]

Perhaps you could explain this part of your post alittle more?

Not that i like the idea of having armed mobs searching the streets of anything....


Well I was using an emotional appeal form of arguement - but what it means do we really want to reward people for doing what they are suppose to do anyway. If you see an illegal activity - as a citizen you should be reporting it to the authorities without expecting the government to reward you for doing what you are suppose to do anyway.

Illegal immigrants are not reported for the most part - because they try not to break the law other then the one they broke to come into the United States - and how are you going to determine if that person is illegal.

This advocates citizens calling the law on other citizens because their skin color might be different. It advocates citizens going up and asking others if they are illegal citizens.

And so many more issues with it - hell people could try to make a living just turning every hispanic in that they see - it will overload the already overloaded Border Patrol.

[scooter_the_shooter]

I dont like the illegals because they compete with my dads roofing company...for about half price :furious3: But the shingles are all out of line and they dont flash the chimneys right....so no one will hire them any more ~:cheers:


If we just deport them they will come back....what the hell can we do to make them stay where they belong ~:confused:

[Mongoose]

Well I was using an emotional appeal form of arguement - but what it means do we really want to reward people for doing what they are suppose to do anyway. If you see an illegal activity - as a citizen you should be reporting it to the authorities without expecting the government to reward you for doing what you are suppose to do anyway.

Illegal immigrants are not reported for the most part - because they try not to break the law other then the one they broke to come into the United States - and how are you going to determine if that person is illegal.

This advocates citizens calling the law on other citizens because their skin color might be different. It advocates citizens going up and asking others if they are illegal citizens.

And so many more issues with it - hell people could try to make a living just turning every hispanic in that they see - it will overload the already overloaded Border Patrol.


I agree. Though i think that the opposite would work (IE: Heavier consequences for companies that intentionally hire Illegal immigrants)


Why do i only see the typos in my posts after people have quoted me?:sad:

[Redleg]

If we just deport them they will come back....what the hell can we do to make them stay where they belong ~:confused:

An old issue - where our economic growth is like a shinning bright light of hope to those who have nothing - and their governments are so corrupt that the people do not see any benefit in remaining in their country of birth.

[Idaho]

**pokes Idaho**

Oh - no there.. just a little to the left.. no.. a bit more.. down a bit - BINGO! :dizzy2:

[Redleg]

I agree. Though i think that the opposite would work (IE: Heavier consequences for companies that intentionally hire Illegal immigrants)

That is way the current laws need to be enforced - there are hefty fines and business can be shut down that continually violated the law. The problem is that these laws are not enforced to the extend to make it painful to employers that hire illegal immigrants



Why do i only see the typos in my posts after people have quoted me?:sad:

Hell I often don't see mine even after people quote me - I need lots of help sometimes with my typos :help:

[Es Arkajae]

Then you sir need to learn to be more civil and read the rules of the forum.

And strangely enough it seems you need to learn how to read.




And all I was responding to was that the amnesty has been tried before, because that is the issue I initially wished to address.

LOL!

More like thats the only bit you read before you posted your silly reply.




Oh I didn't miss the rest of your post at all - I was again was responding about the amnesty point. Your scorn and idiotic outburst was directed at the individual - not at reading to the point I was responding to.

Add lying to your list of faults then Redleg.

Your reply:

"especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances."

Clearly indicates that you didn't have a damned clue what the rest of my post reffered to else you wouldn't have made such a stupid comment after supposedly 'reading' it.

And drop the victim rubbish, you show complete discourtesy by responding to my post without having even read it properly, you then compound this with further ignorance when you don't even see what you've done and now you're just flat out lying about it.




And has stated it has been done before - same problems still exist from the previous attempt at amnesty.


And?, were these part of a larger plan such as I envision?

That would be no. Keep coming up with those irrelevent points mate.




Nope the amnesty creates other problems also.

Welcome to the real world where nothing is perfect, the one off amnesty is neccessary in a program such as I envision to get around the problem I have already pointed out. If the best you can do is say "its not perfect" then you may as well stop posting and change your title to 'captain obvious' whilst you're at it.




Then you don't know much about how illegal immigrants live.

Is that the best you can do?

As I said, it is their problem to prove their residency not the US governments. I pointed out some means for them to do this. If I could I'd throw every single illegal back across the border on general principle and to hell with how long they'd lived there, however the reality of the situation dictates this measure. However I see no reason for the US government to exert itself to do these people any favours.




You assume to much. Try again. You want to make it personal I see.

So to point out the flaws and other idiotic and already tried points in your issue. It seems that you failed to research to see how many of your points are either already in place and failing - or have already been tried and failed. However they were so unimportant that I didn't bother to respond to them because of civility.


You didn't address the other points because you skipped over them, BECAUSE you skipped over them you made a non-sensical post on the first STEP and I called you on it and you have been backpeddling ever since.




See the last two post.

I've already shot down your last two posts.




The minimum wage is already mandatory for all legal workers in the United States. All one has to do is enforce the already established labor laws. You might want to check out the wording on the Minimum Wage Acts. Their is no incentive for businesses to hire foreigner workers over American Citizens in the United States - unless the labour is here illegal - and there are laws already in place to fine business that do so - the problem once again is enforcement not new legislation.

I highlighted the important parts.. see below




http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor standards affecting full-time and part-time workers in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments. Covered nonexempt workers are entitled to a minimum wage of not less than $5.15 an hour. Overtime pay at a rate of not less than one and one-half times their regular rates of pay is required after 40 hours of work in a workweek.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/23/news/companies/walmart_worker_arrests/?CNN=yes


Courtney said the penalty for knowingly hiring illegal workers can run up to $10,000 per person. He declined to give the names of the contractors who hired the workers picked up Thursday.

And so since your first passage is made redundant by the fact that it applies only to legal workers your entire counter-point resolves to the fine.

BUT as it would seem I already acknowledged that the fine exists and that I argued for its INCREASE, this point is rendered moot as well.

You're not having a good day are you mate?





"People have to be authorized to work in the United States," said Courtney. "We are serious about enforcing the law

Sure just like the US Federal government is serious about keeping out illegals LOL!




Care to explain the recent hiring of an additional Border Patrol agents already in the works - and about the only point of yours that I agreed with that needs even more then the current amount of agents.

Care to explain two State governorss declaring emergencies to try and provide funding to protect the US border from foreign intrusion, something supposedly the Federal governments job?

Care to explain anything upto and above 8 million illegal immigrants in the US?




So advocating the Wild Wild West approach - the bounty idea is wrong on so many points that its not worth addressing because it is ridiculous on its face

Translation: I have no proper counter-argument for this and so must bleat some emotionalist claptrap and then avoid it.

Its no different than police offering rewards for information leading to the capture of criminals, in fact thats EXACTLY what it is.




Violates the Constitution by the way - Unlawful searches and seizures by the government - amd so hard for the government to prove. Then once again there are already laws about what the government can take from the illegal as part of the deportation process. No need for new laws - when the already established laws just need to be enforced.

This law would allow the freezing of bank accounts and all significant funds and assets procured brought about by the illegals activities. Pretty good incentive for local governments to get in on the 'dob in an illegal' campaign I'd say. An illegal can go from well off to broke in an instant and the local government reaps the rewards and the money goes back to the US people where it belongs. I doubt the current laws go so far into it as that, if so thoug I'd love to see it. Consider it an excuse for you to post some more links to try and impress people.




Already in place and functioning in many places - something you would know if you bothered to check the immigration and border patrol sites.

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_security/border_patrol/overview.xml

Oh by the way - have a nice day

Nice try redleg, I'm afraid you'll have to do more than just post a link to the 'border patrol' website homepage and then go "so there!"

Considering the US has up to 8 million illegals in the country I think its fairly safe to say that illegal immigration hasn't been pursued properly.

A system such as Australias where illegal immigrants and asylum seekers are placed in detention centres and not allowed out until being sent home (or in rare cases allowed in) works as a great disincentive, it also keeps them out of the community.

Initially after my Solutions implementation probably many large detention centres would have to be set up to handle the glut, overtime though one would expect the number of inmates to decline as many were sent home, and the numbr of incoming illegals dropped.

Oh and I've been having a wonderful day thankyou.

[Redleg]

And strangely enough it seems you need to learn how to read.

LOL!

More like thats the only bit you read before you posted your silly reply.

Add lying to your list of faults then Redleg.


More personal insults - someone is after a warning from the moderators I think


Your reply:

"especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances."

Clearly indicates that you didn't have a damned clue what the rest of my post reffered to else you wouldn't have made such a stupid comment after supposedly 'reading' it.


Again with the insults - I see maybe I should respond in like manner? However again this comment only shows that you didn't like my comment - not that I did not read your post. Seems someone has a problem with arguing the position verus the person



And drop the victim rubbish, you show complete discourtesy by responding to my post without having even read it properly, you then compound this with further ignorance when you don't even see what you've done and now you're just flat out lying about it.


Oh the insults just keep coming - prove that I am lying about reading the whole post before posting. You can not show it. However you are showing that you have a problem with someone that disagrees with your position. There is a word for that - and since its often used incorrectly on this forum - you are providing a perfect examble of the true meaning of the word bigot.



And?, were these part of a larger plan such as I envision?


Well since all of your measures other then the bounty concept are already establish laws - your vision is already been thought off by Regean.



That would be no. Keep coming up with those irrelevent points mate.


LOL



Welcome to the real world where nothing is perfect, the one off amnesty is neccessary in a program such as I envision to get around the problem I have already pointed out. If the best you can do is say "its not perfect" then you may as well stop posting and change your title to 'captain obvious' whilst you're at it.


Like I said you show poor research skills - all your points are already existing law.



Is that the best you can do?


Not at all - however you might want to first understand where the majority of the illegal immigrants work. On the west coast they are primary migrant workers travelling from California to Washington picking crops - ie no address, then the ones in the rural areas of the country work on farms where the rancher and farmer provide them with housing - again no address in their names, then the construction workers also follow the same migrantion pattern as the work. Only those in the service area might have an address - but even that is doubtful.

However if you want me to be uncivil and argue the person verus the issue - I can be much worse. Your just a little child compared to some of the individuals I have had little battles with. Hell Idaho and Tribesman would present a worthy challenge at insults for me - your just a little child compared to them.



As I said, it is their problem to prove their residency not the US governments. I pointed out some means for them to do this. If I could I'd throw every single illegal back across the border on general principle and to hell with how long they'd lived there, however the reality of the situation dictates this measure. However I see no reason for the US government to exert itself to do these people any favours.

LOL - that is the difference - I know what these people go through to get into the United States. And its up to the government to prove the case against them before they deport them. That is the nature of innocent until proven guilty. I see someone is in favor of suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus just to deport illegal immigrants



You didn't address the other points because you skipped over them, BECAUSE you skipped over them you made a non-sensical post on the first STEP and I called you on it and you have been backpeddling ever since.


You haven't seen me backpeddle yet - your other four points like I stated were not worth discussing after the first one. Hell only two people on this board have ever gotten me to backpeddle - again see how Tribesman or Adrian have argued issues with me - and Adrian is the only one that has come close to getting me to back peddle.



I've already shot down your last two posts.


Your opinion - however it seems you didn't realize Regean granted an amnestity that covered a five year period like your initial suggestion - which was exactly my first post.



I highlighted the important parts.. see below


I noticed you highlighted the exact point I made. Very good - your not as idiotic as I first assumed.




And so since your first passage is made redundant by the fact that it applies only to legal workers your entire counter-point resolves to the fine.

BUT as it would seem I already acknowledged that the fine exists and that I argued for its INCREASE, this point is rendered moot as well.


Not at all since I advocate the enforcement of the already established laws.



You're not having a good day are you mate?


Its sunny, dog is fed, step-son taken to work, dressed, showered, and unshaven, feeling real healthy today. No flashbacks or stress from anything today - so yes indeed a good day all around.



Sure just like the US Federal government is serious about keeping out illegals LOL!


the Federal government has not been concerned about working the issues along the border - they never have - that is way the current laws need to be enforced - not new ones on the books. Its amazing you still don't get it - all of your points except for the bounty are already on the books.




Care to explain two State governorss declaring emergencies to try and provide funding to protect the US border from foreign intrusion, something supposedly the Federal governments job?


Sure and in big letters to help you understand - the Federal Government has never enforced the current laws to the extend that the legislation states for the government to do, the Federal Government does not enforce the laws because it will cost votes in the next election



Care to explain anything upto and above 8 million illegal immigrants in the US?


Sure - an open and pourous border that has been open since the foundation of the United States. A set of immigrantion laws that have never been enforced by the Federal Government along the southern border because of a fear of losing the hispanic vote.



Translation: I have no proper counter-argument for this and so must bleat some emotionalist claptrap and then avoid it.


Someone needs to take their own advice on this point.



Its no different than police offering rewards for information leading to the capture of criminals, in fact thats EXACTLY what it is.


A big difference - for instance Texas is about 50% Hispanic - care to see how overloaded the system will become when over 5,000,000 people who are citizens are being arrested and released because of bad information.



This law would allow the freezing of bank accounts and all significant funds and assets procured brought about by the illegals activities. Pretty good incentive for local governments to get in on the 'dob in an illegal' campaign I'd say. An illegal can go from well off to broke in an instant and the local government reaps the rewards and the money goes back to the US people where it belongs. I doubt the current laws go so far into it as that, if so thoug I'd love to see it. Consider it an excuse for you to post some more links to try and impress people.

Again most illegals don't have bank accounts - because they are paid in cash and do not have social security numbers.




Nice try redleg, I'm afraid you'll have to do more than just post a link to the 'border patrol' website homepage and then go "so there!"


You might want to actually read the link - there is mention of internment camps and penalties

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has full authority to assess penalties and liquidated damages claims, seize merchandise for violation of CBP laws or those of other federal agencies that are enforced by CBP, remit forfeitures, mitigate penalties, decide petitions, and cancel claims. Seizures and Penalties include the establishment of National policies and procedures for processing fines, penalties, and forfeiture cases. The processing and disposition of these cases are strictly governed by laws, regulations, and mitigation guidelines designed to afford the claimant the greatest possible due process. The publications within this section provide the public with the information necessary for compliance.



Considering the US has up to 8 million illegals in the country I think its fairly safe to say that illegal immigration hasn't been pursued properly.


My point exactly - enforce the current laws



A system such as Australias where illegal immigrants and asylum seekers are placed in detention centres and not allowed out until being sent home (or in rare cases allowed in) works as a great disincentive, it also keeps them out of the community.

The United States has land borders with multiple points of entry. Comparing Australia's illegal or legal immigrantion policies with the United States is comparing Apples to Oranges - both are fruits - but they are different types of fruit.



Initially after my Solutions implementation probably many large detention centres would have to be set up to handle the glut, overtime though one would expect the number of inmates to decline as many were sent home, and the numbr of incoming illegals dropped.

Again shows a lack of knowledge of how open the United States border is, and how many people try to get into this country every year.

[yesdachi]

Lets get back on topic by stirring the pot. It seems like just about everyone is against illegal immigration and are ready to go as far as killing anyone that tries to set foot into the land of opportunity. Now, I don’t support illegal immigration and think there should be increased efforts to strengthen out boarders for a number of reasons but I cant blame anyone for wanting to come to the US, our prisons are better than many of their homes but I really think there should be a bigger penalty for employing illegal immigrants. Those business owners are the ones that are really messing things up.

What about the idea of making Mexico the 51st state? There wouldn’t be anymore illegal Mexican immigrants, and millions of our manufacturing jobs are already going there anyway. If so many people are breaking a law maybe that law shouldn’t be. Are you afraid of the economical repercussions? Do you think it would dilute our culture? What’s so bad about opening the doors again? Why not let out Latino brothers and sisters play on our snow covered mountains, amber waves of grain, etc.

I have my own reasons why I don’t think it would work out but what better way to stop people from doing something illegal than by making it legal.

[Redleg]

Lets get back on topic by stirring the pot. It seems like just about everyone is against illegal immigration and are ready to go as far as killing anyone that tries to set foot into the land of opportunity. Now, I don’t support illegal immigration and think there should be increased efforts to strengthen out boarders for a number of reasons but I cant blame anyone for wanting to come to the US, our prisons are better than many of their homes but I really think there should be a bigger penalty for employing illegal immigrants. Those business owners are the ones that are really messing things up.

Before any new laws are passed - the current ones need to be enforced to see if they are adequate to reduce the problem



What about the idea of making Mexico the 51st state? There wouldn’t be anymore illegal Mexican immigrants, and millions of our manufacturing jobs are already going there anyway. If so many people are breaking a law maybe that law shouldn’t be. Are you afraid of the economical repercussions? Do you think it would dilute our culture? What’s so bad about opening the doors again? Why not let out Latino brothers and sisters play on our snow covered mountains, amber waves of grain, etc.

That would both help and create additional problems. Last estimate I have seen on illegals is that close to 40% are from other nations besides Mexico. By making Mexico an additional state - we make it that much harder for the Coast Guard to police the seas of smugglers and criminals.



I have my own reasons why I don’t think it would work out but what better way to stop people from doing something illegal than by making it legal.

And that is the main reasoning why doing another amnesity program will not work - its been done at least twice in the last 25 years - and the problem still remains because the current laws are not adequately enforced.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Bmolson:

you did notice my disclaimer didn't you?

I did not say that Mexicans are all useless and unskilled. I did say that I'd observed U.S. construction companies using insufficiently skilled Mexican labourers, that were cheaper to hire than U.S. citizens, to perform skilled construction jobs. I also happen to know carpenters who have been employed to fix the messes made on some of these building sites: is that something that you see quite often when you use people with the appropriate skills for the job?

I was just amused that it probably cost the construction companies more in the long run.

Unsurprisingly there are also plenty of Mexicans who have the skills for the jobs they are doing and do a good job of it.

As for the legal statues of those Mexican labourers....I don't know but I met a plumber working on one of the sites who played a joke and yelled that the immigration officials were coming down: there were alot of people who started to run away.

Anyway, my post was primarily intended to point out some of the stupid practices that some employers of illegal/semi-legal immigrants do to save costs in the short term. Thanks for trying to make me sound like I was suggesting that Mexicans were all somehow sub-standard.

[Del Arroyo]

GAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cuts off head.

[Strike For The South]

10 foot high electric fence barbed wire on top guard post every half mile check points only at designated areas cut off aid to mexico that should do it

[Xiahou]

Has this poll been brought up yet?
WASHINGTON, Aug. 17 (UPI) -- Forty-six percent of Mexicans would like to move to the United States and more than 20 percent would do so illegally if they had the chance, a survey says. link (http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20050817-16434000-bc-us-mexicopoll.xml)

Unbelievable really- almost half the population of Mexico wants to move to the US and more than a fifth would do so illegally given the chance?? ~:eek:

[Strike For The South]

~:cheers: :charge: take the motherland back :charge: ~:cheers:

[scooter_the_shooter]

My uncle told me a funny joke about the illegals.


He said "In every illegal there is an American wanting to get out....you just have to put the hole there" I said "what do you mean"? He said "you gotta shoot em'!


I thought it was pretty funny most of the politically correct crowd won't think so though ~D

[Papewaio]

**pokes Idaho**

Umm does poke in the USA mean the same thing as in Aus?

[bmolsson]

One thing I would like to ask is:

How about illegal American immigrants in to Mexico ?

It seems like every criminal always tries to run away to Mexico. Is that the case or is that only in Hollywood productions ?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Umm does poke in the USA mean the same thing as in Aus?

Yes it does but were not talking about its sexual conotation here. At least I hope not as my name was also mentioned. ~;)


Unbelievable really- almost half the population of Mexico wants to move to the US and more than a fifth would do so illegally given the chance??

Yeah I heard it on Rush's show today. I was like OMG were in trouble.

[Papewaio]

You keep saying how good your country is... surely that will mean it is more attractive destination... :balloon2:

[Redleg]

My uncle told me a funny joke about the illegals.


He said "In every illegal there is an American wanting to get out....you just have to put the hole there" I said "what do you mean"? He said "you gotta shoot em'!


I thought it was pretty funny most of the politically correct crowd won't think so though ~D

So are you and your uncle both xenophobic?

[AntiochusIII]

Hmm...I'm a legal immigrant of the United States (damn I hate being in Las Vegas and being too young to live on my own..duh..waiting to go the California, Ohio, or Maine someday...) and though I'm not emotional about the issue it is true that the influx of illegal immigrants creates LOTS of problems. The immigrants are forced to live in sub-standart social/economic position and therefore crime rate is increasing.

Perhaps the federal government has to intervene in the situation and try to force the Mexican government to take action in the many aspects that gives both motives and ways for possible illegal immigrants to enter the United States. In short version: Mexico...er...it's government and current condition...sucks. They are so corrupted, so troubled, so problematic that many naturally desire to left the country up towards "the better place". Their weak half-hearted attempt at stopping such influx of people means that the United States can only do so much.

To suggest something like building a wall seems xenophobic, desperate, and, somehow, that reminds me Israel-Palestine conflict. ~;)

[scooter_the_shooter]

We both have no problem with immigrants with green cards or visas etc.

We both dislike illegals very much(and a few legals) because of the tax breaks and other things they can get away with.


For example

Legals


Some people from a (some arab country) made a store in my home town. My uncle was talking to them about how they opened it up.


Sense they are immigrants they got a very good loan on it(and other benefits) that last 3 years. After it runs out they sell it to some one else in their family for the loan and so one :furious3:

another one

There are colleges in the US funded by tax dollars dedicated to foreigners they will not let any one born in the USA in.

...................




Illegals

They can go to hospitals with out paying....I saw a thing on fox news.

The hospitals are required to help them and (most) cannot pay....so they get it for free basically....the hospitals lose money and have to shut down causing real american citizens to not have a hospital to go to.



All of those things make me very angry and any US citizen that it doesn't is crazy!

[AntiochusIII]

People make it sound as though the US Government goes to great pains to shove Immigrants into some kind of bad situation. The basic facts of the matter are that when you move to another country, you can't expect them to provide for you--especially when they come in such numbers as Mexicans. You have no more money than when you left your old place--heck, probably less due to exchange rates. It's not the governments fault, and the government should not be expected to provide for Immigrants. YOU came HERE. It's not a paradise, it's America.Who did say so?

Don't look at me.

Edit: Oh, and Caesar, I believe you are perfectly entitled to your opinion but perhaps, when situation demands, one must forego the desire of vengeance, even righteous ones, and do good even if those who recieve the care may not deserve, or even abuse it? Such as healing the sick?

Speaking like this makes me want to watch an anime called "Fruit Basket." ~D
warning: the show is not for the violent, the strong, and hippy-haters

Oh, and not all immigrants are like that, you know. You sound really xenophobic.

[Redleg]

People make it sound as though the US Government goes to great pains to shove Immigrants into some kind of bad situation. The basic facts of the matter are that when you move to another country, you can't expect them to provide for you--especially when they come in such numbers as Mexicans. You have no more money than when you left your old place--heck, probably less due to exchange rates. It's not the governments fault, and the government should not be expected to provide for Immigrants. YOU came HERE. It's not a paradise, it's America.

Oh but it is the governments fault for the situation - why do you ask.

Because the Federal Government has failed to enforce the law in regrads to immigration. The Federal Government has failed to coordinate the activities of all law enforcement agencies along the border to insure adequate border protection - along with a failure to do what the constitution states for the Federal Government to do in regards to the border. All because politicians want to get voted into office and stay into office. So in essence the Federal Government over the last 30 years has allowed the situation to get to the point that it is now.

[Es Arkajae]

More personal insults - someone is after a warning from the moderators I think

I accept your concession on this point.

If all you can do is try and cry foul to the moderators to try and bail you out of the hole you've dug for yourself then its fair to say that you've conceeded the argument in that regard.




Again with the insults - I see maybe I should respond in like manner? However again this comment only shows that you didn't like my comment - not that I did not read your post. Seems someone has a problem with arguing the position verus the person

What insult?, I called your comment stupid and I pointed out how, quit playing the martyr.

I accept your concession on this point too since all you seem able to do is cry instead of defend your arguments. You've had ample opportunity.




Oh the insults just keep coming - prove that I am lying about reading the whole post before posting. You can not show it. However you are showing that you have a problem with someone that disagrees with your position. There is a word for that - and since its often used incorrectly on this forum - you are providing a perfect examble of the true meaning of the word bigot.

I already have proven it, I have quoted the relevant passage TWICE the passage which makes no sense if you had read the rest of my post.

You're not doing so well are you?




Well since all of your measures other then the bounty concept are already establish laws - your vision is already been thought off by Regean.

Funny I don't recall my list being an exclusive list of legislation, I recall it being a plan to be implemented, if the best you can do is say "well some of those measures already exist in law books somewhere" well its inane isn't it.




LOL

Like I said you show poor research skills - all your points are already existing law.

Not at all - however you might want to first understand where the majority of the illegal immigrants work. On the west coast they are primary migrant workers travelling from California to Washington picking crops - ie no address, then the ones in the rural areas of the country work on farms where the rancher and farmer provide them with housing - again no address in their names, then the construction workers also follow the same migrantion pattern as the work. Only those in the service area might have an address - but even that is doubtful.

I'm well aware of where many seek employment, the fact that this is common knowledge should make proper enforcement and implementation of my plan rather simple in that regard.

And you bring up the housing issue no doubt for the 'proof of 5yrs residence' matter again, and once again it is irrelevent, it is the illegals problem to find proof, not the government, if they can't then tough.




However if you want me to be uncivil and argue the person verus the issue - I can be much worse. Your just a little child compared to some of the individuals I have had little battles with. Hell Idaho and Tribesman would present a worthy challenge at insults for me - your just a little child compared to them.

Oh 'battles'!, and 'insults'! , this coming from the guy who has spent the last few posts of his in this thread crying for help from the mods to bail him out of the hole he keeps digging deeper for himself.




LOL - that is the difference - I know what these people go through to get into the United States. And its up to the government to prove the case against them before they deport them. That is the nature of innocent until proven guilty. I see someone is in favor of suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus just to deport illegal immigrants

Spare us the sob story, they're either in the country illegally or not.

When you do actually manage to come up with on-topic counter-arguments isn't it amazing how they all seem to be based on nothing more than emotional heart string pulling.




You haven't seen me backpeddle yet - your other four points like I stated were not worth discussing after the first one. Hell only two people on this board have ever gotten me to backpeddle - again see how Tribesman or Adrian have argued issues with me - and Adrian is the only one that has come close to getting me to back peddle.

Redleg, I am completely uninterested in your supposed past 'achievements', they mean nothing to me, it seems you're more interested in appealing to what you think is your 'reputation' then actually arguing the matter at hand.




Your opinion - however it seems you didn't realize Regean granted an amnestity that covered a five year period like your initial suggestion - which was exactly my first post.

I'm well aware that amnesties have been granted before, thats why I made it clear in my initial post that the amnesty I propose would be a once off affair with no more to follow.

Once again your laziness in not reading before replying has come back to bite you.




I noticed you highlighted the exact point I made. Very good - your not as idiotic as I first assumed.

I'll be accepting your concession on this point too, if you can't even remain internally consistent...



Not at all since I advocate the enforcement of the already established laws.

So do I, what has that got to do with your so far flimsy argument against my multi-step plan for fronting the problem?




the Federal government has not been concerned about working the issues along the border - they never have - that is way the current laws need to be enforced - not new ones on the books. Its amazing you still don't get it - all of your points except for the bounty are already on the books.

And???, I'm sorry were you trying to make a point?

I never claimed my solution was all 100% original, it combines several good ideas into a concrete list of things to do to tackle the problem.

I get the impression that you don't even have a concrete objection to my plan. Rather I think you just read the first point, ignored the rest and then posted your nonsensical post and upon being brought up on this you've been backpeddling and trying to baffle everyone with some kind of chewbacca defence ever since.



Sure and in big letters to help you understand - the Federal Government has never enforced the current laws to the extend that the legislation states for the government to do, the Federal Government does not enforce the laws because it will cost votes in the next election

Glad to see you agree with my scorn of the "we take it seriously" comment.




Sure - an open and pourous border that has been open since the foundation of the United States. A set of immigrantion laws that have never been enforced by the Federal Government along the southern border because of a fear of losing the hispanic vote.

Also glad to see you've noticed the problem, my solution would work wonders on it.

It also rather shoots down your "stuff is already being done!11" nonsense.



Someone needs to take their own advice on this point.

A big difference - for instance Texas is about 50% Hispanic - care to see how overloaded the system will become when over 5,000,000 people who are citizens are being arrested and released because of bad information.

Why would you arrest someone who could prove that they're a US citizen with something as simple as a state drivers license or social security card?



Again most illegals don't have bank accounts - because they are paid in cash and do not have social security numbers.

Any assets in excess of $1000 to local authorities, what about this don't you understand?





You might want to actually read the link - there is mention of internment camps and penalties

It is not my job to do your research for you, give me direct links to pertinent information if you want it to be read.



U.S. Customs and Border Protection has full authority to assess penalties and liquidated damages claims, seize merchandise for violation of CBP laws or those of other federal agencies that are enforced by CBP, remit forfeitures, mitigate penalties, decide petitions, and cancel claims. Seizures and Penalties include the establishment of National policies and procedures for processing fines, penalties, and forfeiture cases. The processing and disposition of these cases are strictly governed by laws, regulations, and mitigation guidelines designed to afford the claimant the greatest possible due process. The publications within this section provide the public with the information necessary for compliance.

Wow~!, a mission statement! and?...

I don't see local authorities confiscating assets, I don't see massive internment camps for processing the millions of illegals in the US.



My point exactly - enforce the current laws

Thats 'a' point, its not an argument against my solution which is not just a list of laws to be invoked, it also includes how to go about it and take sinto account political realities.

Once again you don't have any real counter-argument, you're making stuff up on the fly after I called you on your earlier ignorance.




The United States has land borders with multiple points of entry. Comparing Australia's illegal or legal immigrantion policies with the United States is comparing Apples to Oranges - both are fruits - but they are different types of fruit.

I don't recall comparing the two respective systems as a whole at all, I do recall pointing out the disincentive provided by detention centres which is completely 'apples and apples'.

Deliberatly misreading your opponents argument and then arguing against that misreading is rather lame of you redleg.




Again shows a lack of knowledge of how open the United States border is, and how many people try to get into this country every year.

I believe I mentioned the number of illegals in the US already, I'm well aware of how large the influx is, and the US is the worlds most powerful country, to suggest that it cannot protect its own southern border is laughable.

[Redleg]

Deleted by me because in interest of calming the discussion down a tad.

[Redleg]

Just for the record Es Arkajae You actually made a big deal over nothing especially by making it personal verus sitting down and actually reading what was written. You assumed that I did not read your post completely - and then decided to go on a little personal attack. Notice the two statements next to each other.



Step1) Declare a one off amnesty for all illegals (and their immediate/live in families) inside the US who can prove that they have lived there for 5 years or more. These people must then register with the tax department and either apply for citizenship or operate under the laws applying to foreigners living inside the US. Then start tracking down the rest who don't qualify, no more amnesties in future.



You realize of course this has been done once in completly by Ronald Regean. Regean granted a general immirgration amnesty back around 1985 if I remember correcty, and it has lead to some of the current immigration problems concerning illegals - especially since every administration since then has not attempt to enforce the immigration laws or man the border to prevent illegal crossings. Then one must address the states who when they do a traffic stop - find the illegal - do absolutely nothing to that illegal under those circumstances.


Notice that you went on a personal attack on a post that was not even a criticism of your point. Just a statement that the Amnesty program has been attempt before and did not work in the past, and that local law enforcement must also particpate in any enforcement.

However believe what you will - it seems however that its not me with the problem in this case.

[Es Arkajae]

Just for the record Es Arkajae You actually made a big deal over nothing especially by making it personal verus sitting down and actually reading what was written. You assumed that I did not read your post completely - and then decided to go on a little personal attack. Notice the two statements next to each other.


Notice that you went on a personal attack on a post that was not even a criticism of your point. Just a statement that the Amnesty program has been attempt before and did not work in the past, and that local law enforcement must also particpate in any enforcement.

However believe what you will - it seems however that its not me with the problem in this case.

You responded to my article countered one of my points implying it wouldn't work and then displayed the fact that you clearly hadn't in fact read the entire post in question. It was discourteus in the extreme and your subsequent base denials, fabrications and ploys to try and wiggle off the hook were disreputable.

I think some people need to develop some skin if they genuinely think any of my statements in this thread have been in any way 'out of line'. I don't think you really did and you just played to the stultified atmosphere enforced here as a ploy to end the argument. My comments were no more and probably less straightforward then what anyone would encounter in a genuine debate in real life. An inability to deal with straightforwardness and honesty in a debate is not a virtue.

I've made my case and proven A) That your earlier 'counter' was irrelevent to the point I made which was part of a larger plan and B) That you didn't even bother to read that plan before responding. All your recent posts have been driving these truths home.

I consider this matter now closed.

I wish you well Redleg.

[Redleg]

You responded to my article countered one of my points implying it wouldn't work and then displayed the fact that you clearly hadn't in fact read the entire post in question. It was discourteus in the extreme and your subsequent base denials, fabrications and ploys to try and wiggle off the hook were disreputable.

And again you would be incorrect in your assumption about what I did or didn't do in regards to your initial post.



I think some people need to develop some skin if they genuinely think any of my statements in this thread have been in any way 'out of line'. I don't think you really did and you just played to the stultified atmosphere enforced here as a ploy to end the argument. My comments were no more and probably less straightforward then what anyone would encounter in a genuine debate in real life. An inability to deal with straightforwardness and honesty in a debate is not a virtue.


When you make personal attacks verus arguing the position you violate the forum rules. You must play within the boundries established by the moderators and owners of the forum.



I've made my case and proven A) That your earlier 'counter' was irrelevent to the point I made which was part of a larger plan and B) That you didn't even bother to read that plan before responding. All your recent posts have been driving these truths home.

Again you would be incorrect in my opinion - but don't let that interfer with your reasoning.



I consider this matter now closed.


The matter was closed when you incorrectly made an assumption about my reasoning or my post.



I wish you well Redleg.

And you should have a good day also. ~:cheers: