Quote :

"So I am free to move into your house? Right...."

No, but I'm free to go to Virginia or South Carolina.

Quote :

"Freedom of movement between two sovereign states is NOT a basic human right."

It should be. Borders between nations are stupid.

5/1/2007 3:22:51 PM

Quote :

"You are joking right? Did you actually read the link/reference? Tell me, is that legal or illegal immigration? Illegal = Undocumented."

yes. i didn't distinguish between the two. and there's a reason why there are so many illegal immigrants from latin america right now. WE'RE LETTING VERY FEW PEOPLE IN LEGALLY. if we really wanted to solve the problem of people coming here illegally, we'd provide a realistic way for them to come legally with documentation. i swear it would make border SO much more safe, because we'd know that the people who were crossing were more than likely trying to do something illegal and probably not just crossing so that they can do landscaping work.

5/1/2007 3:26:40 PM

^^^ The issue is much more complicated than "my daddy's daddy immigrated and so did yours" There are different levels of skilled laborers and unskilled laborers needed in the late 1800s economy and now...

Furthermore, many of the people who are advocating immigration reform at the level of massive amnesty programs, seem to not notice that what they're advocating will massively widen the gap between the rich and poor in this nation.

The way the current system is, as well as Bush's work visa concept, we let in thousands of unskilled laborers from Mexico and other points South, and meanwhile only a tiny percentage of that number skilled workers are allowed from all other countries combined.

The plan basically props up the economy on the backs of unskilled laborers in a way similar to the pre civil war era south, except the profiteers in this game are big corporate execs & wallstreet types. And of course we go from absolute slavery to simply really really low wages. Bringing in a massive influx of unskilled labor, who will work cheaper (for now) becomes a massive issue in the long run when that huge chunk of the population demands the equal rights guaranteed by our constitution.

[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 3:30 PM. Reason : ^^^^^]

5/1/2007 3:30:25 PM

the way it already happens now except with legal paperwork instead of under-the-table untaxed wages? (not to mention stolen identities and other unsavory things that illegal immigrants will do to get into the country)

5/1/2007 3:34:07 PM

^ That's correct, and it means that a lot of things need to change in addition to enforcing current immigration law before we can discuss large scale amnesty programs. Simply allowing more workers in today through legal means does nothing to deal with the future concerns about fair wages, current issues of substandard housing, or the artificially low prices of goods and services due to these workers (which will jump drastically at whatever future date the fair wages demand happens)

5/1/2007 3:38:23 PM

Illegal immigration is a pretty solid argument for a national sales tax to replace the income tax.

5/1/2007 3:46:43 PM

^cash, Im a huge fan of a national sales vs income tax.

Have any of you considered that a broad amnesty for this one group will create a tremedous amount of resentment for the legal immigrants who jumped through the hoops and wanted to become citizens? This is basically cutting in line at the grocery store, then when you get up there find out they left you the bill too. Its total bs

5/1/2007 4:27:47 PM

Quote :

"everyone's an immigrant what's the big fucking deal. My family came here from somewhere else and so did yours.....get the fuck over it"

My family came here legally.

Quote :

"No, but I'm free to go to Virginia or South Carolina. "

Only because the constitution and federal laws prohibit states from restricting that sort of movement.

Quote :

"It should be. Borders between nations are stupid."

Without borders, you would have everyone under the same rule of law. And which rule of law should prevail? American? French? Mexican? Chinese? Korean? Borders exist in part because we recognize that sovereign states should have the power to determine their own method of rule, and as a consequence, restrict their obligations to the people subject to that rule.

5/1/2007 5:40:37 PM

Quote :

"Only because the constitution and federal laws prohibit states from restricting that sort of movement."

Such an agreement between countries would be ideal.

Quote :

"Without borders, you would have everyone under the same rule of law."

Sounds good to me.

5/1/2007 6:05:11 PM

Then lets bring back imperialism.

American rule for all.

5/1/2007 6:07:07 PM

the difference would be that the only way this would work is if both parties agreed and changed their laws accordingly

5/1/2007 6:09:34 PM

If we must have borders, we should at least reduce their negative effects by allowing basically anyone to come into the country.

5/1/2007 6:10:47 PM

Quote :

"If we must have borders, we should at least reduce their negative effects by allowing basically anyone who can contribute to come into the country."

I aggree with this.

5/1/2007 6:15:00 PM

Which articles of the constitution reference immigration? Does the constitution ever refer to the rights of the citizens or does it refer only to the rights of the people?

I'm not meaning to be facetious; I just don't know. It seems relevant enough to the discussion.

5/1/2007 6:56:46 PM

Quote :

"If we must have borders, we should at least reduce their negative effects by allowing basically anyone who can contribute to come into the country."

And because we are a FREE MARKET economy, it should not be the job of government to determine who "can contribute." It should be decided by the preferences expressed by everyone collectively buying and selling goods, since we know this is the much more efficient, responsive, and correct way of making decisions.

Conveniently, this is already what exists with loose enforcement of immigration laws. All problems with the loose enforcement comes from the government's unwillingness or inability to do its job of supporting the correct level of immigration that the market has already decided.

People who are arguing for the government to go against the market even more than it already is are simply morons or communists.

----
^some places mention citizens, some places mention the people.

[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 7:17 PM. Reason : hjk]

5/1/2007 7:16:28 PM

Such blind allegiance to the market makes no mention of the the distributed costs to society; economically, socially and environmentally.

5/1/2007 7:24:46 PM

Quote :

"I fail to see how we're fucking someone over. They fucked themselves over when they broke the law."

This reasoning assumes that they deserve such treatment. If they do deserve it, then it's not fucking them over. If they don't deserve it, then it is fucking them over.

The fact that their immigration was illegal is nullified by the fact that the laws are wrong in the first place. Furthermore, despite the BLEATINGS of some people, the ACTIONS of all Americans tell immigrants that we want them here.

Wrong law + revealed preference to the contrary = don't deserve that treatment

5/1/2007 7:39:05 PM

Quote :

"Such blind allegiance to the market makes no mention of the the distributed costs to society; economically, socially and environmentally."

Perfect example of someone who is a communist or a moron. If you understood how a market works, you would know that I made no mention about those costs because I don't have to. The decision of the market ALREADY prices those factors in. (As an aside, only a communist or a moron could so blithely *assert* that the collective decision of hundreds of millions of people is incorrect)

If taking advantage of the benefits of illegals (increased home ownership, economic activity, productivity) actually hurt us overall, then people would stop taking advantage of those benefits. Surely you are not suggesting that ALL Americans are collectively making irrational decisions?

What actually happens is that the costs economically, socially, and environmentally are so small, people simply don't care enough about them to change their ACTIONS. Actions reveal what people actually believe, not words.

There is a very natural, economic, and effective way to get rid of illegals: Stop purchasing any good or service that was made by illegals. If you are not willing to do this with ACTIONS, then that means you want the illegals to stay more than you want them to go.

[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 8:00 PM. Reason : dsf]

5/1/2007 7:50:21 PM

all these people posting "against" ...

are they "against the law" or "against the repeal"

5/1/2007 8:31:37 PM

just able to watch the video rainman. Scary stuff. Certainly dont seem like immigrants but invaders in that video.

5/1/2007 11:07:22 PM

i do not feel like reading everyones responses but i think an amendment is needed. I understand why the founding fathers created the automatic citizenship but i think it can be too easily abused in this age with the speed of transit of modern transportation.

I do not think little Carlos should get all the privileges and rights of an American citizen b.c his mom hopped the fence and popped out a baby while the INS is chasing her down the highway.

5/1/2007 11:39:05 PM

^ Somebody may be able to correct my history....but I don't believe the concept of citizenship by birth was covered in the original Constitution. It was added following abolition so that there would be no ambiguity about the citizenship of former slaves.

[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 11:50 PM. Reason : ]

5/1/2007 11:48:59 PM

Quote :

"There is a very natural, economic, and effective way to get rid of illegals: Stop purchasing any good or service that was made by illegals. If you are not willing to do this with ACTIONS, then that means you want the illegals to stay more than you want them to go."

Either that or there is a collective action problem because we have too many people who cannot afford to do so, so purchasing lower priced illegally produced goods is the only rational choice.

5/2/2007 12:12:43 AM

Quote :

"HURI do not think little Carlos should get all the privileges and rights of an American citizen b.c his mom hopped the fence ..."

man, you know what? fuck you.

what the hell have you done to deserve the "priveledge and rights" of citizenship? what have you done worthwhile for this country besides soak up public tax money in your free public education, and then your heavily subsidized college education.

how have you affected society at all except to consume resources and complain about others?

and what the fuck did your parents do to make you so goddamn special? what the hell did they ever do besides the bare minimum necessary on their income tax returns?

i'll take 10 mexican immigrants any day over one peckerwood "america first" bigot.

5/2/2007 1:01:44 AM

^ i'll bet you one thing: his parents probably didn't break umpteen laws in order to get him his US citizenship. that ought to count for something. call me crazy

5/2/2007 1:05:29 AM

Quote :

"his parents probably didn't break umpteen laws "

damn, thats a pathetic attempt at trolling.

at least be original.

5/2/2007 1:07:21 AM

It is a legitimate point. illegal immigrants are breaking the law and burdening our government. Their children are using a lot of resources and tax dollars in the form of education and health care.

The automatic citizenship should be tied to some sort of mandatory work visa program for the parents as a way to bring illegal immigrants into mainstream society.

5/2/2007 1:30:38 AM

Quote :

"Either that or there is a collective action problem because we have too many people who cannot afford to do so, so purchasing lower priced illegally produced goods is the only rational choice."

What world do you live in where what you just said makes logical sense?

First of all, how in the fucking hell does it make sense to help poor people by getting rid of low-priced goods and services??? I hope you aren't so foolish to think that any price increase will lead to a proportionally equal wage increase for poor people.

It's plainly obvious that you don't understand even how economics works. I suggest you take a class or two to get up to speed. Particularly, examine how quotas and tariffs hurt the economy.

Higher real prices mean mean less productivity, hence, economic contraction. Economic contraction is a medicine that is worse than the sickness. If average construction worker salary goes up but construction projects are eliminated, construction workers and the rest of the economy that depends on construction projects are hurt. We already know that the contraction consequence is greater than the wage benefit because the market still demands illegal labor (this is even despite the barriers and costs of circumventing the law).

Second of all, who are these "too many people" you are talking about? Since you are too lazy or ignorant to support your own argument, let's address the possible cases. If you are talking about the poor, their actions wouldn't affect the demand for much of illegal labor, anyway. Because the middle class is very large, the vast majority of demand for labor comes from the middle class (construction, food services, farming).

You are telling me that the middle class can't afford to give up some luxuries if they really wanted to get rid of illegal goods and services? That's a joke, but it's not surprising coming from one who seems so ill-informed.

-----------------------

Quote :

"It is a legitimate point. illegal immigrants are breaking the law"

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's harmful. The debate is ultimately over whether the law is correct and beneficial; we are not assuming that the law is a holy edict that can't be changed.

Furthermore, laws don't exist solely as passages in law books. Laws are realized by their enforcement. Enforcement of laws are determined by the people. The people as revealed by their ACTIONS are willing to do very little to change this loose enforcement. The enforced law is the real law and its in tune with that people want. (This is why the real speed limit is 10 over in most places)

Quote :

"and burdening our government. Their children are using a lot of resources and tax dollars in the form of education and health care."

The fact of the matter is that illegal immigration is more helpful than it is harmful. That's why it exists in the first place. If the extra costs of supporting illegals were crippling, we'd be -- well -- crippled. Instead, it turns out that illegals cause economic expansion that is worth many times more than the extra services that they consume.

Quote :

"The automatic citizenship should be tied to some sort of mandatory work visa program for the parents as a way to bring illegal immigrants into mainstream society"

That's essentially what illegals want and what they should get! Amnesty and increased issuance of legal immigration papers.


[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 1:52 AM. Reason : sdf]

5/2/2007 1:33:05 AM

Quote :

"The fact of the matter is that illegal immigration is more helpful than it is harmful. That's why it exists in the first place."

I find your logic to be fact-tacular.

That and utterly retarded. Try again.

Illegal immigration is helpful to illegal immigrants. It's also helpful to the business community. However, it puts such a burden on border states and local governments that many of them have been declaring a state of emergency. It burdens our education, health care and prison systems, among others. I could go on, but you get the idea. Whether illegal immigration is beneficial depends on your perspective, area of residence, employment, and possibly your hair style. Among other things. It is a topic that divides everyone. Suffice it to say that it's not a cut and dry issue.

Amnesty for all is not the answer. A tiered program with temporary visas for some and a path towards citizenship for others based on the number of years they have lived in the country is probably the best bet at this point.

Quote :

"Instead, it turns out that illegals cause economic expansion that is worth many times more than the extra services that they consume."

Cheap labor is nice, but lets not overstate it's impact. I'd love to see you back that statement up, but it's next to impossible. A PhD in economics could spend years trying to prove it in his thesis, so save yourself the trouble and admit that you pulled that one out of your ass.


[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 2:20 AM. Reason : 2]

5/2/2007 2:07:26 AM

damn joe, ease up. The fact that Hur's parents were law abiding tax paying citizens that help covered his "free" education, sent him to college, so he could also become a productive citizen is a good start. I have no idea the background of Hur, but im sure he isnt trying to make europe two over here, or romania two. You get my point. If we didnt have a welfare system and a national sales tax instead of income tax, their wouldnt be a burden. Past immigrants came here to work, if they didnt they died. So you kinda had a natural weeding out process. Im not suggesting we go back to that, but you just cant have EVERYONE rushing in to sign up. Eventually you will run out of workers to pay for an increasing low to no income group. Letting in millions more, who dont even speak the language arent going to be filling CEO jobs anytime soon. They too will mostly find unskilled labor, at least initially.

Joe, what did you think about my idea about handling the anchor babies? Just curious

5/2/2007 9:20:13 AM

Quote :

"Suffice it to say that it's not a cut and dry issue."

It should be. It's a matter of basic freedom. If it makes us cut social programs, so be it.

(I'd rather just tax the rich, though.)

5/2/2007 12:52:14 PM

^Tax the rich, hard working americans to help out illegals from another fucking country? GTFO you bleeding heart, sweet jesus.

Quote :

"The fact that their immigration was illegal is nullified by the fact that the laws are wrong in the first place. Furthermore, despite the BLEATINGS of some people, the ACTIONS of all Americans tell immigrants that we want them here. "

Wow, so now you have the gall to state which laws are right and wrong?

5/2/2007 1:10:24 PM

Quote :

"^Tax the rich, hard working americans to help out illegals from another fucking country? GTFO you bleeding heart, sweet jesus."

At least I dont, you know, hate freedom.

We should cut services if we really have to. Freedom's worth the price.

[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 1:15 PM. Reason : ha]

5/2/2007 1:14:51 PM

take away freedoms from american citizens

to give freedoms to non citizens

does not compute

5/2/2007 1:16:11 PM

Quote :

"take away freedoms from american citizens"

Services are freedoms? You fucking commie!

Quote :

"to give freedoms to non citizens"

All men (and women) are created equal. We're all world citizens.

5/2/2007 1:18:10 PM

Quote :

"We're all world citizens"

no i'm an american citizen

you however were born in the country of Trollsylvania

5/2/2007 1:19:06 PM

I'm completely serious. Everyone in the world deserves freedom, not just American citizens.

5/2/2007 1:23:01 PM

well i dont think the US can sustain 6 billion people

5/2/2007 1:27:10 PM

^^I got news for you, it won't work. You've lost your mind and gone off the deep end into some kind of fictional utopia in your head.

[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 1:36 PM. Reason : American citizens before anyone else, you unpatriotic sob]

5/2/2007 1:36:21 PM

Quote :

"American citizens before anyone else, you unpatriotic sob"

You realize this will only encourage me, right?

If we'd just start treating everyone as if he or she were an American, a lot of the world's problems would end.

There is no Other. We're all humans, and deserve the same rights. The United States should work to make her borders as open as possible. Let them all come.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

5/2/2007 1:42:26 PM

Quote :

"You know the aclu would jump all over this, if we "split families". Its a decision that the parents make. If they knew that they wouldnt be able to stay in the US with thier anchor baby, or would just have to take thier baby back to mexico, you basically take away the incentive for coming in illegal, at least one avenue. "

I highly doubt illegals come here just to have babies and they think it will make them stay.

It's probably a tiny percentage of the illegals that think this method might work. Even if we started to kill their babies on sight, apart from the fear of us this would instill, the immigration rate would remain same.

The only reason to be so bitter about their families is pure racism or hatred. It's the wrong tree to bark up if you want to stop illegal immigration.

5/2/2007 10:55:03 PM

^^ I would agree with you if we didn't have social welfare programs and various other discounted government services paid for with our taxes. Also we would need extradition treaties with all other countries. Once both of those are true, then sure, open borders for all. Utill then though, we need some form of flow control.

5/2/2007 11:01:21 PM

Quote :

"I highly doubt illegals come here just to have babies and they think it will make them stay."

This practice is quite uncommon. For one, the overwhelming majority of illegals are male. For another, it's decidedly difficult to smuggle a heavily-pregnant chick across the border, and bringing a girl over early in pregnancy (or just getting her pregnant here) means you have to work to support yourself and a pregnant lady for several months. These are just the main two reasons.

Now, I almost agree with the principle of this thread in the sense that I think it's atrocious that we make immigrants learn more about Americanism than we truly do our own citizens, but to remove automatic citizenship for people born here would, in my mind, be one of the most dangerous and un-American ammendments ever passed in our history.

Quote :

"I would agree with you if we didn't have social welfare programs and various other discounted government services paid for with our taxes."

It has been demonstrated a number of times, I believe, that illegals pay more into the system than they take out of it. At the very least, they would pay substantially more if we let them come in and file all of their taxes properly. You can't blame a guy for not paying in come tax when doing so would result in a possible deportation.

Quote :

"If we'd just start treating everyone as if he or she were an American, a lot of the world's problems would end."

I don't agree with this. There are many people in the world -- including some in the United States -- who are inherently un-American, and there is a great deal to be said for supporting people with the same basic ideologies before you support those with opposing ones.

What I do believe, and very firmly, is that any individual who shares the fundamental ideals of basic human liberty, of economic opportunity, of rule of law, and of freedom from fear -- with some more specifics left out for brevity's sake -- is essentially as American as I am, and I hold all of these beliefs and can trace my ancestory in this country to before the Revolution.

I want to help the world's people, sure, but ultimately I will take Americans first -- I just differ with some of these others about what defines an American. You aren't one for having been born here. steve9194 was born here, and he's about as un-fucking-American as you can get. Hell, if you ask me, probably most people in this country until recently were un-American Americans. Being American is an idea, one that we in this geographic location may not always have lived up to, but one towards which we have been striving.

[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 11:15 PM. Reason : ]

5/2/2007 11:08:45 PM

3 million children born in US last year to illegal immigrants. Which means roughly 3 million more families a year are eligible for social programs. A reward for breaking the law.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigtexas27feb27,0,6925334.story?coll=la-home-headlines


Whoever mentioned racism please rethink your position. People are talking about ILLEGAL immigrants. Not necessarily a race, just whoever breaks the law, cut line, then demand rights and services is what many people have a problem with. It also creates resentment for alot by rewarding people for doing the above, it basically spits in the face of those who did follow the law and jumped through the hoops and LEGALLY wanted to be a part of this great country, not set up thier own country with higher pay and benefits.

5/3/2007 9:52:00 AM

Quote :

"I want to help the world's people, sure, but ultimately I will take Americans first -- I just differ with some of these others about what defines an American."

When it comes to helping, I can perhaps accept that argument, but everyone, American or otherwise, should at least have the same negative rights. We're still not past letting our government abuse and kill foreigners

But, in any case, I don't believe Americans need that much help. As a whole, we're doing pretty well. Even if immigration did hurt Americans economically, it would be immoral to use force to prevent folks from poorer countries from coming here to work and thus improve their material status.

5/3/2007 4:16:44 PM

Quote :

"There is no Other. We're all humans, and deserve the same rights. The United States should work to make her borders as open as possible. Let them all come"

Well of course, but we need to take care of our own first. Last time I checked there were plenty of welfare issues within the US that need to be addressed before we can go around making things better for others.

5/4/2007 1:22:42 PM

^ The issues we have with welfare aren't due to lack of resources (in general), so it doesn't make sense to claim that we can't handle the illegals because of this.

Generally, spanish immigrants pull out of poverty at a faster rate than our native poor, because the barrier to entry provides a selective pressure to only allow the motivated ones through (kind of like evolution/darwinism).

5/4/2007 2:20:22 PM

^ I can't believe you just used that analogy, you need to rethink that train of though... maybe brush up on your late 19th/early 20th century history before EVER using "evolution/darwinism" in a social context.

Working to make the US easier to immigrate to is great, make it fair to everyone who wants to come to this country. Our system is completely screwed up right now, restraints on legal immigration will never be relaxed because of the illegal immigration problem.

I hardly think it would be immoral to prevent someone to come into this country to work. If they citizens of a country don't want them to come, then they shouldn't be allowed to enter the country. The government is suppose to reflect the wishes of the citizenry, and in this case it appears that the majority of citizens of the US would prefer to stem the tide of illegal immigrants, but yet their government refuses to act. THAT is immoral.

5/4/2007 2:34:42 PM

Quote :

"^ I can't believe you just used that analogy, you need to rethink that train of though... maybe brush up on your late 19th/early 20th century history before EVER using "evolution/darwinism" in a social context. "

que? (that means "what" in Spanish)

I was merely trying to say that immigrants who will traverse the desert at night, swim across a river, climb a fence, or hide in a coyote van/bus crammed with other immigrants aren't going to sit around and pick their navels, like what many accuse our poor of doing. The "darwinism" thing was to provide a context for the phrase "selective pressure" since I don't expect everyone here to know what that means.

Quote :

"The government is suppose to reflect the wishes of the citizenry, and in this case it appears that the majority of citizens of the US would prefer to stem the tide of illegal immigrants, but yet their government refuses to act. THAT is immoral."

The people of the US now want to pull out of Iraq. Are you saying the Republican leadership and Bush are doing the immoral thing by not acting on this?

[Edited on May 4, 2007 at 2:41 PM. Reason : ]

5/4/2007 2:40:41 PM

My parents came over legally (political asylum for the Hmong ethnic group for helping the CIA during the Vietnam war). Obviously, my parents were not citizens (they are now) when I was born. But, I was born a citizen. From my perspective, I don't think it'd be morally right to totally repeal the automatic citizenship law.

If that was the case, I would have to go back to a country where my ethnic group is a target of genocide. Taking into fact that I went to school here, pay taxes, have pride in America, and grew up with American culture and customs. It would be morally disturbing and absolutely wrong.

I say you could probably amend the law to protect legal immigrants. But, to totally repeal it, would be illogical and heartless.

5/4/2007 3:12:45 PM