Is there really an illegal immigration crisis in the US?
 

Or is it a creation of the neo-conservative wing of the Republican party?

If you listen to Rush Limbaugh/Bill O'Lielly/Sean Hannity/John Gibson or other conservative talking heads and radio show hosts, you'd think that the legal US population is tearing their hair out because of all of the illegal immigrants pouring across the Southern border. And thus, the politicans were stirred to act and have a pointless debate and put forth an utterly meaningless immigration bill that will do nothing, except give them an excuse to point and say, "See, we tried to do something, but our hands were tied."

In my part of the country, New Englandish, there is virtually no talk about immigration, illegal or otherwise and my brother out in California doesn't hear anything about it from his friends either.

So is it a bullshit illusion or what?

Coming from the southwest, no it is NOT a bullshit illusion. There may be an exaggeration in some cases, but in general, it's there. Do a Google on how many emergency rooms have closed because they simply can't afford to stay open with the dearth of uninsured, which includes a large portion of illegals. Better yet, try to get care in an emergency room in LA and see what you're up against.

I'm not even going to try and be politcal on this topic, but there is enough factual evidence to make me know that there is a problem....

I'd say that 10 - 20 million people thumbing their noses at our borders and sovereignty is a problem.

Yeah, but in fairness, illegal immigration probably isn't as big of an issue in places like New England that probably don't have as many illegal immigrants. And what your brother hears or doesn't hear from his friends doesn't necessarily mean much. Just because people aren't talking about something doesn't mean it isn't going on. My friends don't say much about the war in Iraq, for example, but it's still happening. I live in California and I hear plenty about illegal immigration.

Push-Pull, I took your advice and Googled the topic, and what I found was a lot of opinion pieces about it, but precious little news coverage (there was a Fox News piece on it, but it was light on research and long on opinion). Either the MSM doesn't want to cover this story, or it's not as much of an issue as certain people are making it. Perhaps it's being inflated for political purposes?

I see less ill effects than a lot of media outlets are laying out. The health care thing is BS. The idea that they commit more crimes (besides simply being here, which is victimless) is BS. The idea that they are a source of gang crime more than our own citizens is BS. The idea that it's easy to get here legally is BS (at least from impoverished countries).

Yes, there are concerns, mainly that they are breaking a law, but civil disobedience to bring about positive change in law or society is what I'm all about. I'm not saying they're all consciously doing this, but that's the effect.

Still, it'd be nice if more made the effort to learn English. My Spanish is still pretty bad.

I'm not convinced that millions of people undermining America's sovereignty by ignoring our borders constitutes "positive change".

International corporations are a bigger threat to sovereignty than any number of Mexicans. Positive change is mutually beneficial economic and social change between allies and neighbors. If we kick out all the Mexicans, their economy would collapse and we could see a Mexican civil war spill into SoCal, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Do you really want that to happen? Are you pro war on American soil?

Uh, I didn't say anything about kicking out all the Mexicans, or about Mexicans at all. Not all illegal immigrants are Mexican and not all Mexicans are illegal immigrants. I said I'm not convinced that millions of people undermining America's sovereignty by ignoring our borders constitutes "positive change". To borrow a quote from you, "I'm not saying they're all consciously doing this, but that's the effect."

I believe that America needs to maintain its sovereignty. If that results in a civil war in Mexico that spills into parts of America, our government will just have to deal with it. Sometimes sovereignty comes at a price.

I usually use them, as they are a good example.
They aren't just undermining our sovereignty. They're contributing to the GNP. They're doing work that most Americans wouldn't do. I'd hardly call that negative.
Oh man, do I really sound like that?
Sovereignty has changed over the past 100 years, or even in the last 15. Being isolationist isn't an option, as our economy is intertwined with many other economies around the world, including Mexico (can you imagine if Mexico kicked out all the Ford manufacturing plants, in the name of sovereignty? I doubt many people would but a baseline Excursion for $45,000 and $100,000 for a Mustang).

We're better off working with them.

People who ignore our borders/immigration laws are undermining our sovereignty regardless of what they may do once they get here.

Yeah, but less italic-like. :)

Believing that we should have a border isn't isolationism. Anyway; I'd doubt that Ford would try to sell a basic Mustang or Mustang GT for $100,000 regardless of where it was built. Plenty of vehicles from various car companies are built in America, and I don't think many of them cost $100,000 or more.

So all they are doing wrong is breaking a law? There aren't any further problems? If that's the case, then what use is the law? The terrorists that attacked on 9/11, according to the official story, got here 100% legally, so it's not a safety issue. They don't need to cross the Rio Grande to attack us.
Ah, but Ford depends on how cheaply they can build their cars. Subaru has plants here, but their sales are excellent, and they are efficient at building. Ford can't compete with their sales vs. production and efficiency. If their level of efficiency were here in the US, it would cost a great deal more to produce their cars.

If you can call an abundance of cheap labor a crisis...

Crime is a problem: human smuggling, drug running, gang activity etc. These coyotes and snakeheads are real criminals preying upon would be immigrants.

Stress on infrastructure: emergency rooms etc. Gang activity (by illegals) and illegal immigrants put enormous pressure on our hospitals and resources.

New England actually experienced a mini crisis of illegal immigrants during the 70s and 80s - many Irish were coming to NE in droves and often involved in NRA activity (definitely criminal). Same with a lot of Chinese illegals running up crime in Boston (gang activity, human trafficking etc).

Nowadays, tons of illegal Chinese are crossing the Mexican border to enter our country illegally because it is so easy to violate the Mexican portion of our border (relatively speaking). The other method being overstaying their visas. With the propensity of Chinese students inthe Ivy Leagues, it is easy to see why New England has illegal immigrant activity.

The Chinese problem is particlaurly interesting. Deportation is costly and not very effective due to lack of Chinese cooperation.

Illegal immigrant Russian girls are proliferate in Boston, New York, Chicago as hookers as part if criminal gang activity. Ditto many east Euorpean illegals too.

In SoCal, lots of SE Asians brought in illegally as "slaves" for the rich, mainly in Beverly Hills.

As far as So Cal. Too many examples to cite.

A lot of hit and run by illegals. My buddy was in an accident. The other guy was an illegal and didn't have insurance so my buddy was SOL.

I used to work with a lot of illegals. Awful workers. They did not come on time if they showed up at all. Didn't follow instructions very well. They would bring their homeland conflicts with them. We had to separate the Hondurans from the Guatemalans, the Peruvians from the Ecuadorians, and everyone from the Mexicans. Apparently the Mexicans were the most arrogant and also refused to work with the blacks. I'm sure some of the illegals were good workers but more often than not, my experince has not been positive.

On the other side, as a customer, trying to deal with an illegal worker was just as frustrating. Since these people could not speak English, they could not provide me with good customer service. It was always some kind of Chinese, Spanish or whatever. I appreciate cultural diversity but come on now.

I think the Mexican thing gets more attention cause of all the politicians trying to pander to the ill-conceived notion of a Latino vote.

Just wanted to add:

I think much of the problem or crisis with illegal immigration is due to its illegal nature. A lot of the illegal activity involved is associated with the illegal nature of illegal immigration, fueling criminal activity. If anyone is interested in exploring this angle further, then we should open up another thread.

Hell....come to metro atlanta (especially the county I live in) you'll see more "immigrants" than you can shake a stick at. Cruise around the local shopping mall parking lots on saturday mornings and they are full of "immigrants" looking to be picked up for some day job.

our county...Gwinnett also has the highest concentration of Hispanic buying power in the metro area — about...Between 1990 and 2000, Gwinnett's Hispanic/Latino population soared from 8,470 to 64,137, according to the U.S. Census. By 2007, the county's Hispanic community is expected to reach 100,000.

and yes, with all the INS raids we have around here...most of them are illegal

what possible good do you see from social change because of massive illegal immigration?

Social change? How about a better understanding of the culture of one of our two neighbors. Think of how Europe is. They are stronger because they are the melting pot that the US used to be. The US would be stronger if we supported and didn't exploit our neighbors to the South. We need to learn to think of immigrants (and I name Mexicans most because they are the most represented) as people that are crashing until things get fixed at home. We should, as good friends and neighbors, do what we can to help them. I'm not saying they should stay here forever and just suck the teet, but letting them crash is the right thing to do. If you want to end illegal immigration, go to their country and teach them a trade that can help their economy.

One thing I think people forget about is how immigration is having a positive effect on wages, and supplying much needed labor that would mean that families that totally live in the US would make relatively less.

I do that everytime I take a vacation there. The mexican culture is great....as long as it stays in mexico. The American culture is great and shouldn't 'melt' into a conglomeration of many like the europeans. If you think the Euro Union is stronger for their 'melting pot', you should be paying more attention to the cultural strife they are currently dealing with.

There's no such thing as an American culture, so no worries there. Europe is already stronger than we are culturally, and it will only get better the more they integrate and the farther they develop from their past.

WHAT?!?!?! how did we get along after 200 some years without a culture of our own. damn.

I disagree, wholeheartedly.

By culture you mean patterns of intra-social behavior and organizations of norms and significant customs, right? Then I guess we have apathy, changing lanes without signaling, and consumerism. I'd hardly call that culture. The only thing close to culture we have in the US is religion.
Agree to disagree it is, then.

So by "immigrants" you mean "brown people", right? Because I'm pretty sure in just about any major city you will see a lot of immigrants. There's where first generation immigrants settle, due to easy access to public transportation, cheap housing, large populations of their ethnic group, unskilled labor, etc.

the hispanic population here is ridiculous...and I mean that seriously.

I run a wedding board...where several of our girls are trying to get their husbands to be from other countries...the legal way and it takes YEARS and a lot of money to do it. When I see all hispanics here that come for 9 months out of the year to make cash under the table...live 12 to an apartment (and no thats not an exaggeration ) it makes me sick

You wanna come here? fine...do it legally, dont make me have to sit outside some area I need to do business in..waiting.. while the INS is loading trucks up.

I don't partiuarly enjoy living in a place where the city councils actually had to pass an ordinance that business signs had to be in english as well because they were all being put up in spanish only.

In 2000 our county had 14% of the entire states hispanic people. Considering the population has jumped from 64k to over 100k in just 7 years I dread to see just how much worse its going to get.

The hispanic gang activity gets worse here every month. You have gang member wannabes standing on gas station corners shooting at random cars driving down the road.

I say send their asses back to mexico.....now..and when they can pay the money to "immigrate" the proper way, then fine.

ShaniFaye, you are coming across as fairly racist. You are implying that the presence of Hispanic people has a negative impact on your area.

well thats your opinion....as someone that has been in the county since 1976 I know exactly what kind of impact the ILLEGALS have had. Im not racist....Im just saying the ILLEGALS are causing more than their fair share of strife. I have yet to see an INS raid that involved koreans or the vietnamese that live here.

I dont see the asian culture (that also has a very big presence here now) causing near the problems. The majority of people here arrested for "gang" activity are not black or asian...they are hispanic.

If you want to define me as "racist" because the facts support that its the illegal hispanics causing the problems then be my guest...but you'd be wrong.

There are social effects of immigration that are, in my opinion, best dealt with as social phenomena. Crime, stress on the health care infrastructure, etc. Those things are a function of population density and economic distribution, not of the racial makeup of a society. Washington DC didn't need immigration to become the murder capital, for instance--other forces were at work that caused that. Saying that Mexicans or Chinese are inherently more criminal or gang-inclined is flat-out racist.

Immigrants don't come to American in order to "undermine our sovereignty", whatever the hell that means. That explanation requires taking the immigration situation personally, as an affront to you and your precious notion of America. That reaction has very little to do with reality. That IS the reaction that's largely being pumped by conservative talking-heads.

To understand immigration, you have to understand the immigrant. Why do they come to America? Because their situation at home is economically unworkable, and they see the hope of a new future in the US. For many of them, coming to the US, working their asses off, and sending as much money home as they can is the only way to keep their families alive.

Joining a gang doesn't help with that. All they really want is to work and be left alone. You might think, well a crime where they steal a bunch of money would be attractive to them--but they know if they're caught, they're gone, and they're smart enough not to risk that. Notice how we're not all "oh, those damn immigrants... always robbing banks!" Mostly they want to live quietly, and under the radar.

My suspicion (and I say this the way I say it very deliberately) is that the reason Most White Americans have a problem with immigration is the same reason they would have a problem with cockroaches living under their sink. It's the same reason Most White Americans aren't completely horrified at the Iraqi casualty count. I assert that in the eyes of Most White Americans, brown people's lives simply aren't worth as much as pink people's lives. It's institutionalized racism that goes unchallenged and unquestioned. I accuse us all (including myself) of that.

Now: I'm not in favor of blanket amnesties. But I think it would serve everyone to have our immigration policy looked at from the view of what works best for the most people, and a REALISTIC view of the benefit that the current level of illegal immigration does for our economy (which is HUGE).

My question for the immigration foes of the world (and of TFP, for that matter): if immigration in general was open, free, and legal (like it probably was when your ancestors came over, by the way), would you have a problem with the current level of immigration?

Firstly, I want to say that this debate has been a lot more civil than originally thought. Most other sites, this debate would have come to flame wars very quickly....Thumbs up to all TFPer's.

And now, more thought fodder...Illegals ARE a problem. Some of us justify it by saying how they contribute to the greater good with the GNP and doing work that none of us would do and such. Let's put a different light on that.

Like ShaniFaye said, in our areas, it is not uncommon to see a large group of illegals amassed outside stores like Lowe's and Home Depot waiting for some contractor to pick them up for work. One Home Depot in particular is located across the street from a Staples. The illegals are so bad in that area, that Home Depot finally had to force them from entering the lot. So then the illegals gather across the street at Staples. Unfortunately for Staples, there is enough right of way on the side of the street that they can't force them off their lot. They just have to put up with it. Numbers go down, and the store eventually closes.

An old neighbor hood was fairly well kept, then the low mortgage rates in the early/mid 90's takes hold, housing becomes a lot more affordable. A Mexican family moves in. Then others move in to the same house. Before long, relations of this family have purchased a few other houses in close proximity. There are junker cars, loud music, pot smoking, numerous police visits, and even an INS visit. Now, the home value in the immediate area has gone down dramatically, and other older home owners are losing money in a market that should have been pretty stable.

Now, I have actually witnessed, heard, and smelled both events. I doubt there's a news report, but they did happen.

Now let's replace "Mexican" and "illegal" with "white" or "colored" and "poor" and "legal". What's the difference? Difference is if the market and economy of an area is going to be dragged down by "legal" persons, than that is a function of society. If that's what it's like to be part of society, then I can accept that. But these people aren't a part of our society. They haven't come here legally, most don't want to assimilate, and they are not part of our society. Part of Mexico's society have decided to come here and still be Mexico's society. They don't integrate with ours, they only leech off of it.

The short of it is this. If they would come here and really want to be part of our society like so many others before them, then I could see how this would be a "non-problem". But that isn't happening, and I think that a lot of Americans are getting frustrated by that.

Now, a potential solution.....Most coyotes are charging into the thousands of dollars to smuggle a person into our country. I say that America set up a policy to where anyone who wants to become a citizen can pay $2000 dollars to do so provided they pass a very basic english skills test and of course, a background check. This would allow for "legal" immigration AND reduce the crime rate along the border dramatically.

Just a thought.....

I whole heartedly agree with push-pull. One of my main problems is...there is no attempt at assimilation. If I wanted to live in a hispanic, asian etc culture I'D MOVE TO THAT COUNTRY and would expect my self to speak the language etc. I expect the people that move to America to to do the same. The ones in our county make no effort at all to even learn english. How can you successfully cohabitate a community where you cant communicate with each other.

If I moved to France or Spain or Germany etc, I would learn the language and wouldnt get pissed off because not everyone knew english.

Property values are down because of the exact example given above. The illegals move several families in one house/apartment/duplex and then dont take care of anything. They let it get run down so badly its pathetic.

I know Ratbastid sometimes stays in the Jimmy Carter Blvd are of Norcross (which is the city I moved from a year ago to try to get away from the worst part of it). Im sure he has noticed how bad things are on that road.

As to his question...If they were here legally AND not trying to "take over" then no I wouldnt have a problem with it.

anyone who sees this
http://images.hostileadmin.com/image...atriotic_4.bmp
and still denies the 'reconquista' crap or that the illegals aren't out to undermine our soveriegnty, that it's just a vast right wing nut conspiracy to pump the masses full of fear, doesn't have the intellect necessary to deal with the issue squarely and honestly.

Sorry rat, but you hold zero credibility on the illegal immigration issue.

All murderers, car thieves, tax evaders and jaywalkers are doing wrong is breaking a law. The law that illegal immigrants are breaking happens to be an important one. It's a law that's designed to protect America's sovereignty. The most basic requirement for a sovereign nation - and hell, when push comes to shove, the ONLY requirement for a sovereign nation - is recognized borders. With that in mind, I don't take it lightly when people choose to ignore our immigration laws.

It wasn't all that long ago that American cars were built in America by American citizens. Oddly enough, these cars were sold by dealerships for much less than $100,000. If getting kicked out of Mexico means that Ford has to sell a $20,000 - $30,000 car for $100,000 in order to remain profitible, it tells me that there are serious problems within the company that have nothing to do with foreign labor.

Shall we take that on faith, or can you back up your opinion?

Want to give some context for that picture? Because I could set up a picture like that in my backyard and then wave it around to try and make some point. Or would you rather just insult the people who disagree with you?

Without the story behind that picture, I declare it baseless propaganda.

...Because I disagree with you and are therefore stupid. :rolleyes:

Perilously close to a personal attack, there, dk. Certainly an ad hominem response to any opinion that disagrees with yours.

So none of those crimes have victims? Sorry, that statement doesn't stand up.
This was before the US corporations realized that they could produce cars outside the US for a lot less money. The system, as it is now, is dependent on that saving of money. You can see as well as I can that even with the cars being built so cheaply they need to lay off workers. Imagine that savings was suddenly removed. Mercury would die, and other companies would be sure to follow. That's the reality.
I'm defending, not prosecuting, but I'll humor you.

Health Care: The actual reason behind the rise in costs are shortages in staff (nurses, doctors), consumer-targeted adds by pharmaceutical corporations, mismanagement, abuse, lack of attention to prevention, the number of uninsured Americans continues to grow, malpractice lawsuits, insurance companies, and people think that illegal immigrants are playing some huge role in the rising cost of health care? Give me a big fat break. We have screwed up our own system without any help needed from immigrants.

Crime: There was just a thread about this recently, when talking about that immigrant with the DUI. I had a link to an article on MSNBC, but it was removed. The story was covered by other outlets, fortunately:
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/84831
http://iblnews.com/story_en.php?id=23489
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister...le_1591720.php
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/11128949/detail.html
Illegal immigrants are less likely to commit a crime than a natural citizen. It's pretty cut and dry.

Do you have any sources to contend with this information? Or is you're assumption that I'm wrong just opinion?

RB it was a student protest against immigration reform, done March 2006 in a high school in california, you can read about it on snopes

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/mexicoflag.asp

I strongly request that you either list your qualifications and prove that rat has none, or take this statement back.

I would really enjoy some honesty here. People who say "illegal immigrants" mean Hispanic illegal immigrants. No one is crying about European or Asian or African (screw you, Australia!) immigrants. And some people obviously don't draw a distinction between legal and illegal Hispanic immigrants because they all look the same and no one would bother to check to see if they are legal. So they assume that all brown people are illegal immigrants. And they also assume they are here to take over America.

What exactly are they going to take over? Other countries (including this one) have experienced waves of immigrants without losing national sovereignty or identity. The way immigrant populations become acclimatized to the US is as follows: The first generation usually speaks little or no English. Their children (2nd generation) speak both their native tongue (English!) and their parents' native tongue. And the 3rd generation speaks only English and is generally indistinguishable from a person whose forebears have been in America for many generations. The Mexicans are not going to take over or ruin America, and to say otherwise is ignorant fear mongering and bigoted.

If someone breaks into your home but doesn't steal, damage, destroy or even touch anything, should it still be a crime? Why is trespassing, in and of itself, a crime? These are issues of property rights, and national borders determine where one country's property rights end and another's begin.

It sounds to me like these US corporations made their own beds and, at some point, may be forced to lie in them. And do we have any credible evidence that Mexico would kick Ford out if America ever got the balls secure its borders? It would be silly for an impoverished nation to intentionally eliminate a source of decent jobs just out of spite.

so since you're on the racist tangent again, let me make sure I have this clear....because some of us would prefer the hispanics take the time trouble and money to enter illegally we are bigoted? You are seriously sitting their saying that wanting someone to obey the immigration laws...we are bigoted? Because the majority of illegals in my county that are rounded up and shipped back home are hispanic, I'm bigoted?

I cant speak for other nationalities in other areas because I dont live there....I can only speak for where I have called home for 31 one years, and YES its "brown people" "mexicans" "hispanics" "latinos" or whatever other name you want to call them. I don't care what nationality, if they are here without going thru the proper channels ITS WRONG, that is NOT "bigoted"

I think the issue is more complex than we give it credit for. You are assuming that we are assuming that all "brown" people (whatever that means) are illegal immigrant or Hispanic (which is quite wrong).

First, Hispanic is a language group that is hightly diverse within itself. It is NOT a race nor is it an ethnicity.

Rat, I don't think anyone said that Mexican or Chinese illegal immigrants were inherently criminal. I think the circumstances have created a criminal context. That is, the very illegal nature of their status has fostered a criminal activity environment. Note that I do not blame the illegals themselves per se (that's another thread). So often, their very arrival has criminal beginnings such as comeing here through human smuggling and then beholden to a debt often repaid through criminal activity. Like mentioned before, there are other groups like Russians etc too. Lets not all obssess over "Mexicans".

In answer to the other question, I have no problem with the numbers of people (immigrants etc). We have plenty of room and our nation thrives on its diversity and immigrant tenacity. I have a huge problem with the illegal status and manner in which these people would flagrantly flout our laws.

I have attended many citizenship ceremonies of my friends, the legal immigrants who patiently waited and followed the law and I am always honored and humbled by their commitment and loyalty.

The other issue raised, Reconquista and othe groups like La Raza, I think should be another thread. La Raza is mostly college kids who don't really know what they are talking about and don't quite see the irony in he fact that they are funded by the school and state to tout their racist and violent views. They are also mostly Americans as far as I can tell. I doubt some poor illegals dude would really want to run around with a group like that.

The Mexican side of the equation is an important one that needs discussion I think. They simply cannot get their act together. I know the US is not perfect but damn, their government makes ours look like saints. That is the biggest problem I think. Fixing their corruption so that their economy and society can function. If you can stabilize that country, then maybe relax the borders a bit, I think things will even out. Many of the illegals don't want to come and live in the US. They do not plan on living here. They just want to work and return to their families as soon as they can. So I don't anticipate some sort of Exodus or mass migration to El Norte. Maybe at first in a scramble for jobs or what have you. I think it would ultimately balance out (over time). And maybe you would even see a whole bunch of Gringos moving south, buying up houses in retirement communities (which has already happened but the Mexican government has crazy strict laws on foreigners and immigration, go figure).

I thought I thought that anyone who enters this country illegally should be deported, regardless of what race they are or what country they come from. Imagine my surprise when I read your post and discovered that I actually thought that immigration laws should only apply to hispanics. :surprised:

Maybe you should refrain from putting words in other people's mouths or trying to read their minds?

ShaniFaye, let me explain my read on what you say, and you can point out where I am misreading you.
I know you add after the fact that you only object to illegal Hispanic immigrants. But I don't see anything based on fact in your stance that it's just the illegal ones having this negative impact on your area. I know you think it's only the illegals who "move a ton of guys into a house and ruin it because they just don't care." I just don't see any actual basis for that.

To you and others who use the "I only object to illegal immigrants" defense, I ask you to answer honestly: Do you know who's illegal and who's not? It seems to me it's an easy way to deflect accusations of bigotry. You object to all people who are here illegally! It's just a coincidence you only talk about Hispanic immigrants. Talking about illegal immigration is code for attacking Hispanics. I think some people are honestly afraid a brown wave is going to drown white America. I think other people are racist. I think yet others are just easily manipulated, and yet more are just people who look for someone to blame.

Here near Philadelphia, there's a very clear dividing line where Philadelphia county ends, at Cheltenham Avenue. One one side is a slum, on another is a rapidly improving area. It has a great deal to do with the fact that the counties spend different amounts of money and make different efforts to improve, but it's also not a coincidence that there is a very large Korean immigrant population in the nicer neighborhood. They moved in and worked hard to improve the area. They don't embrace US culture: the signs are in Korean and it's an insular community. But they aren't trying to take over America; they're just trying to get their piece of the American dream.

If someone broke into my house and cleaned it up and charged less than my cleaning lady, I don't see myself pressing charges. But that's a really good argument (seriously). I had to think about that one for a minute. I understand what you're saying, but I put a great deal of interest in how we can live like friends in our global neighborhood. I want us to be a good neighbor, and we can't do that (right now) by shutting down our borders and kicking them out. A better way to do this would be to retool CAFTA and other trade agreements
in order to benefit everyone, not just the few. When Clinton loaned Mexico $50b in the 1994 devaluation of the peso, it was a fantastic start, but the real process of healing the Mexican economy is going to take decades of hands on work. I know, Mexicans aren't the only immigrants, but I know a ton of Mexicans, and I'm pretty sure that Mexicans represent the largest illegal population in the US. We should be helping them because it's the right thing to do. Imagine if we took 100m of the hundreds of billions of dollars sent to Iraq and helped to build a school infrastructure in Mexico.
I suppose there's very little evidence of anything of this nature because the US had never done this (that I'm aware of).

Great. So in dksuddethland, high school activists speak for all immigrants and the entire immigration reform lobby. THAT'S what I call credibility on immigration! :lol:

I imagine that the rich in Mexico would only get richer.

I agree about helping them, but throwing money at the problem isn't the answer. I mean, aren't we trying to help already by opening various manufacturing plants there that employ Mexicans? Isn't there plenty of high-dollar tourist spots that employ Mexicans? Yes, you could argue that these very examples are "throwing money at the problem", but it's not a hand-out, it is capitalism. And I'm sure that Ford and other major companies are contributing something at the local level at their Mexico plants. At any rate, I feel this is a better approach than simply giving them money.

Touche. If someone can figure out a way to make the rich actually want to allow for the growth of the middle class, besides liberal guilt, I'm all ears.

I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request.

far be it from me to level personal attacks.....ok, just kidding on that one, but seriously. This was a NATIONAL protest that occurred in several big cities and in california alone there were 500,000 people protesting this. I pick one incident as representative of the whole thing and all you have to say is it's just a bunch of high school activists? My previous statement about intellectual honesty still stands. So does my evaluation of your credibility.

as I have said, more than once...Im not sure how else to say it to get it across to you. WHERE I LIVE, the illegals I see are HISPANIC....I have stated more than once I dont know about other places, I can only attest to what I HAVE SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES.

How do I know they are illegal? well I guess it would be the scattering like ants when the cops show up at a store parking lot where they are looking for day work, or the fact that the ones they are loading up in the roundups certainly dont look asian to me.

I cant help that where I live....its the "brown" people as you put it, that are rounded up, I cant help that its the mexican billard halls, and mexican restuarants that are raided day in and day out. I cant help that when its written about in the county paper they are being shipped back to *gasp* MEXICO. Hell even the legal Mexicans are getting sick of it, there are some places you find signs on their doors specifically stating they only employ LEGAL aliens.

My answer to the thread title: No, there is not a problem. At least, no more of a problem with immigration than has ever existed in the history of the United States. Do I have to put up my cartoon about the Native American chief standing on the shore of America, watching the English ships come in, thinking aloud, "Not more illegal immigrants!"

That said, I don't want to get into a huge point-by-point discussion about immigration again. Didn't we just go 'round this topic a few months back? But I will quote from one of the best current sources of grounded, factually-based research on immigration in the US: A book called Immigrant America, by the very respected sociologists Alejandro Portes and Ruben Rumbaut. They, along with Douglas Massey, are the triumvirate of scientific immigration research in this country, and while they are still academics (and I never trust any academic completely), their results stand up to as much criticism as you can hurl at them. This includes Samuel Huntington's nativist treatise, Who are we? (he basically freaks out about America losing its so-called identity) and perhaps even George Borjas' indictment of immigration on economic grounds. There is a lot that could be said (which I already said in the earlier thread on immigration, and don't feel like typing again), but I'll stick with this simple idea from Portes & Rumbaut: And, if you're not too bored yet, some more quotes included by the authors in their conclusion... And to answer that...

I really fail to understand how someone can say ILLEGAL immigration here isn't a problem.

What can I say, Shani... alright, here is my previous post on the topic, from the thread http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=112318 earlier this year... maybe it helps to explain where I'm coming from.

in all due respect...no that doesnt help me understand how someone can say there is no "illegal immigration problem" when we have people blatantly crossing borders without regard to our immigration laws. I dont care they want to come here....I care that they obey the laws and go thru the proper channels.

Sorry, dksuddeth, you have zero credibility on the illegal immigration issue.

Ah, but what about the employers who are blatantly hiring these people without regard to our immigration laws? What about the employers who do not go through the proper channels? You cannot have illegal immigrants without people who are willing to hire them. The labor system of the US is as much to blame for its "illegalism" as you might want to blame the immigrants for being "illegal," when in reality they are responding to a demand. They are the supply for the labor demand that is very clear in the US.

If I was going to say that there is a "problem" related to this topic in the US, I would say the problem is with the entire immigration system, not just with illegals. The whole damn thing is broken. So I could surely say that there is perhaps a system-wide crisis related to immigration policy and its enforcement in the US, as well as a nativist backlash that only makes things worse... but I cannot say that there is an "illegal" problem. That is only one piece of a very large and complicated puzzle.

I think there is a speeding problem in this country. People blatantly exceed the speed limit with no regard to our driving laws. There are more than 40,000 people killed in the US every year in automobile accidents. I don't care that people drive -- I care that they do it legally.

All this is by way of saying that illegal immigration is a less significant issue than politicians are making it out to be. It's another version of gay marriage, used to divert public attention from more significant issues, and from issues that don't have easy answers (such as the war, the economy, the education gap between the US and other nations, the healthcare industry, etc) . Don't buy into it.

i'm picking out shani's posts above to work off from below--i could have picked out dk's or tellurides or any number of other folk--but i thought that shani's responses, based on her relation to her community was most interesting, and probably is the most difficult to get at from the outside. since this topic has come up repeatedly and like many others in politics, debate about it shows no signs of progression, i figure going after the most difficult version of it at least makes this sad topic marginally interesting to go through again again again....

there is no illegal immigration "problem"--there are undocumented workers. these people come to the states because firms will hire them.
to call these flows of people in (AND OUT) of the us "illegal immigrants" is to fundamentally distort the question that the term is used to address.
but "illegal immigration" does get the nativists riled up: it sets up yet another Them which threatens US somehow--perhaps via their brown-ness, perhaps by way of their spanish-speaking-ness.

once you buy into this category--that it refers somehow to something--then it is easy to organize your perceptions of your community around it--the term functions primarily to structure your projections and so voila--in this thread post after post based on nothing but projection and that whcih is projected through it, anxiety.

what are you looking for as "data" when you do this?
that folk speak spanish?
the assumptions seems to be that if folk spoke english fluently, then they'd be "legal immigrants" but since they dont...they are--well what? what exactly can you determine from language competences? how hard have you tried to make any determinations based on something that goes beyond projection? any? it is not enough to just gather a bunch of aggregated infotainment off of far right anti-immigrant website and map it wholesale onto the spanish-speaking people that you now imagine are "invading your community" with the intent of "taking it over."...

it is absurd.

you want to complain about something, then complain about how capitalist labor markets are presently operating. it is now somehow rational for a firm to locate facilities or to tie themselves to subconractors/suppliers who locate their facilities in place with the lowest possible wages and the most repressive anti-union regulations. it is now somehow rational and acceptable for firms to exploit transnational labor flows within the united states in order to "maintain a competitive advantage" by paying below minimum wage, using forced overtime, shitty working conditions, totally deskilled work, etc etc etc,..people like to imagine that the economic systems within which they operate is organized on the same lines as those which they prefer to think obtain in the world--well, it doesn't. it hasn't for 40 years (if it ever did). for example: at the public corporation level, stock has traded internationally since the early 1970s--firms that trade publically are not in any meaningful way owned by amuricans.
another fine feature of the capitalism that has somehow dropped out of the debate about this non-issue of "illegal immigration" is old -school:
capitalism treats territories as interchangeable, as abstract, and working people as numbers, as extensions of the machines, as abstractions: that a community within the states would find its population being reorganized along the lines that shani (to take one example) is freaking out about has to do with the changing character of capitalist relations of production and nothing--AT ALL--to do with any imaginary invasion of the land of White People by some new brown Plague. this is a labor pool dynamic that you are seeing. nothing more, nothing less. and if it bothers you--for whatever reason--the problem is not american border "security"--but rather the patterns of hiring that the firms which operate in your community have chosen to adopt.

so this is a LABOR ISSUE, and NOT an immigration issue.

typing the word ILLEGALS in caps, according to the collective preference of those who are bugged out by this sorry non-question changes nothing at all.
(where did this tick come from anyway?)

let's play a little game of perceptual organization:
you can organize what you see in any number of ways...that you "see" a phenomenon does not mean that it exists in any meaningful way--you can describe a common feature in your visual field in any number of directions--what would let you evaluate one over another would be the extent to which each description aligns with EXPECTATIONS ABOUT your experience--so it is entirely possible that you could have a number of ways of framing the same experience each of whcih would be internally as compelling as the other--so the question of how one reacts based on the category "illegal immigrant" vs. "undocumented worker."

i could look around the room i am sitting in now and isolate all the black lines that run through or around features in the images that hang on the wall: i could extend them in my imagination and decide that this room is filling with barbed wire. if i posted something about my anxiety over being forced out of my space by an influx of barbed wire and someone were to respond "uh--what are you talking about?" i could make the same claim as shani does above, which amounts to "this is MY space, i have lived in it for years and there IS an influx of barbed wire you dont know what you are talking about"

the material that i would be using exists in my space: there are many images on the wall and lots of black lines running around them. the extension of that material into an invasion of barbed wire would be a function of (a) the category that i was using implicitly to organize that information (the black lines) and (b) the anxiety that enabled this category to have some effective hold on how i thought. from an outside viewpoint, what would link the material (the black lines) to their results (barbed wire spilling into my space) would be a breakdown in edge recognition. if a situation were to exist where i could go online and find a bunch of websites devoted to fighting the scourge of barbed wire, i would probably feel that my connecting-together of surface features of my experience was now legitimated. and the invasion of barbed wire DOES lean on an aspect of my experience (the black lines in the images on my wall) and i know those images in the same way that i suspect shani (and others above--i really am singling shani out because her posts are difficult to get to and for no other reason) knows this population she talks about--i look at them from a distance..

the point is that the fact that you SEE what amounts to social data does not mean that you KNOW anything about the elements that you group together to make that data. teh category that you use does that work for you.
the response "i know what i see, asshole.." or a variant doesnt actually address the problem.

the problem is that this category "illegal immigrant" organizes a certain amount of visual data--and in the main it IS visual data. you have a spectator relation to it. you know this information in the way that i know the black lines in the images on my wall: except less intimately.

it doesnt really matter then that you try to push the debate back onto your community. all it really points to is the effect a category like "illegal immigrant" can have in ordering what is experentially close to you. you SHOW why this category is dangerous. you DEMONSTRATE its danger.

rather than think about the labor market in your area, it is enough to imagine that your area is being invaded and to blame the people who are drawn to your area by its labor market for the labor market itself. it seems a screwy way to think.

Feel free to have whatever opinion of me and my honesty and my credibility that you want to have; what you've said in this paragraph is a lie. If you actually read the Snopes article that surrounds that picture, you'll see that it was 800 to 1000 high school students from a mostly hispanic high school who were protesting for immigration reform. They were responding to other students' walkout over proposed immigration reform legislation. They came to the campus of this other high school--which went on lockdown--and did this to their flagpole. The student (note the singular) who did it was disciplined, and the incident blew over, except for this picture, which became conservativefodder.

But hey, by all means, do what Bill O'Reilly does and spin that picture as evidence of some massive culture-war conspiracy. It isn't honest OR credible, but as long as you keep that finger firmly pointed at others, nobody'll probably notice. :thumbsup:

I give up on this discussion. As far as typing illegals in caps, it was my impression that this thread was about illegals....not legal immigrants and responses to things I've said have called me racist and bigoted against immigrants and MY beef is the thousands of illegals that have invaded our county in the last 15 years. Having worked for a payroll company for over 10 years I am WELL aware of the companies that hire illegals to work for x amount of months for them to make money only to go back across the border when the "season" is over. On a daily basis I had to check and report bad SS#'s used by "employees" of landscape/construction etc companies. And then deal with the backlash from the company because I reported "Jose Lopez" was using such and such a number and they were raided by the INS

I dont care who's fault it is....they are still here

If you want to avoid being branded as racist then you should be more precise in your wording.

Either you are saying that the problem is the hispanics, or that the problem is the illegals. Which is it? If you are saying hispanic people are the problem, then that is in fact racist. You can make all the excuses and justifications you want, but if you brand one specific race as the cause of problems, you are being racist.

If, however, you mean the ILLEGAL immigrants are the problem, no matter where they come from, then you should avoid calling them hispanics. There are plenty of hispanics here who are here legally. Lumping them in with the illegals is not only asinine, but also racist.

Perhaps instead of getting angry, you should clarify your position.

how many friggin times to I need to clarify? I used "immigrants" AND hispanics in my very first post

then was told I was coming across racist and bigoted

y'all really need to make up your minds and quit knitpicking

ok to clarify one more time. In Gwinnett county where I live, it illegal problems are the mexicans, they are ones reported constantly and the ones rounded up by the INS. I cannot say another culture is the problem in Gwinnett County because I do not see/read about it.

Is that clear enough?

my basic point, shani, is that if you referred to these same people as undocumented workers, your reaction would be totally different. and that category is more accurate than your preferred "illegal immigrant" of ILLEGAL or whatever.

since the category "illegal immigrant" or ILLEGAL is less accurate than "undocumented worker" in capturing what is actually happening, it follows that the reasons for preferring ILLEGAL to undocumented and IMMIGRANT to worker is that "illegal immigrant" must be more fun, in a strange kinda twisted way. it gives you something to be afraid of. and this is amurica, where being afraid of something is as important as buying things as expressions of what passes for freedom here.

so by all means, indulge it if you find it fun: imagine you are beseiged by ILLEGALS. but maybe it also makes sense to wonder about why that category is so much fun to have around--and it must be fun otherwise you wouldnt defend it--given that it is less accurate than undocumented workers as a blanket description of a complex situation.

Uh...how is 'undocumented' not comparable to 'illegal' in immigration discussion?
There are procedures and laws...if you are not a documented worker/immigrant, you're illegally here working or whatever.
Using the driving analogy from earlier, if I never got a license or tags and got into the car and drove around, I would not be an 'undocumented' driver, I'd be driving illegally.
Same thing.

ok, 99% of the undocumented workers in my county that I've had to report for stealing social security numbers or using fake ones have been mexicans


is that better?

ng: the terms are not really interchangeable.
in the term "illegal immigrant" the charge that seems to freak people out is in the second term, which presupposes that the folk who are here to work intend to stay here.
that is false simply because "reverse immigration" rates are not factored into the debate. even amongst documented workers, the rate of return is very high.
amongst the undocumented, the rates are probably higher still.
so there is no reason to think of these folk as an immigrant population: they are parts of a migrant labor pool.
so the analogy is false.

so say that if you are driving without a license makes you an illegal driver is much more limited: it simply states that at the time you were presumably busted, you were driving. calling an undocumented worker an illegal immigrant makes a whole sequence of other assumptions that the term "illegal driver" does not make.

seriously: without the category of "immigrant" the entire fantasy of being-invaded by Them falls apart. you could still get riled up on legal grounds, if you like: but the way that would work logically (and politically) would be totally different. it would be much harder to move from "these people do not obey the rules" to "these people are trying to take over the heimat"....

Agreed. Lay off ShaniFaye. Illegal and undocumented are two different ways of saying the same thing depending on your POV.

again, equating "illegal immigrant" to "illegal driver" is wrong.
the analogy is false.
it is not a matter of one's "POV"--it is a false analogy.

there is logic. there is a requirement that terms used to describe a social phenomenon minimally correspond to that phenomenon. the term "illegal immigrant" does not meet that requirement.

to the extent that there is an "issue" being discussed here, it has been framed in a fundamentally disengenous way. most of the more noxious aspects of this thread have followed directly from a simple mapping onto the social world of the consequences of this disengenuous framing.

Marginally. Your trouble is that in earlier posts you told us that the hispanics were the problem. The hispanics as a whole are not the problem. The *illegal immigrant* hispanics are the problem. There is a difference. I'm sure that right there in your town, there are hispanics who are here legally. To lump them in with the illegals is unjust. You should consistantly refer to the troublemakers as *illegal immigrants,* not hispanics.

After all, to rip another story from the headlines, you'd probably be annoyed if I looked at Paris Hilton and her little Nicole friend and proclaimed "Women are the troublemakers and are a great example of everything that's wrong with this country." But by your reasoning, saying that would be fine, because those two are women.



That said, getting mad because Shani didn't call them undocumented is stupid. They are here illegally. They are illegal immigrants. Let's call them what they are instead of wrapping the issue in feel good politically correct bullshit.

Be thankful we don't call them foreign invaders, because that's what they are as well. The idea that illegal immigrants are law abiding productive members of our society is inherently flawed. If you broke the law to be here, you cannot be considered a law abiding individual.

for fucks sake, there is no reason to assume that these people are moving here to stay.
so there is no reason to categorize them as immigrants.
there is no reason to think about them as an immigrant population.
this has nothing to do with "politically correct"---whatever that means.
it is a simple question of logic--you know, the idea that there should be some minimal correspondence between a term used and what it purports to describe.

the terminology matters because people use it to organize their experience---they do not KNOW what they are organizing--they appeal to political categories that enable them to order certain aspects of what they see and from there they generally simply run out the effects of the CATEGORY.
so without this fatuous, empty category of the "illegal immigrant" organizing this information, we wouldn't be having this debate.

if you think that categories are not fundamental to how people organize their experience, then you haven't actually thought much about it.

this is growing tedious really fast.

I'm reading a new book about the press and it's interactions with the Civil Rights movement and segregation and you're "trying to take over" bit is pretty much an exact quote of what some of the most virulent racist sgeragationists and i might add, law enforcement officials in georgia said back in the early 1960's. 'Course back then they were referring to and I quote, "[I]them goddamn niggers[I]."

I'm curious, what proof do you have that illegals are trying to "take over?

How exactly would they do this?

You need proper documentation to get a drivers license etc and most illegals don't have the kind of resources to get even legal documentation. let alone "bootleg" shit.

Illegal aliens can't run for public office and they certainly aren't organized enough to start a mass revolution in the US.

So how exactly are they "taking over?"

Wow.

I've been in this discussion on another thread and it's one that gets my goat, so to speak, so I'll just say here that I'm throwing the weight of my sentiment behind abaya and roachboy. Fight the power, people.

I've been through this fight too many times as well.

My two cents - I thought the compromise bill, while far from perfect, was the right way to go to address the problems of border security and illegal immigration.

It provided stricter border enforcement (focus on hi tech not chain fences) than currently in place and with the funds to support it), stricter penalities for employers acting ILLEGALLY in hiring undocumented workers, a gues worker program for jobs not otherwise likely to be filled, and a comprehensive penalities and requirements towards citizenship (fines, back taxes, proof of employment, etc IS NOT AMNESTY) for those undocumented workers who commited a misdomeanor by entering the country illegally or overstaying their visa.

The mulit-level approach in the bill is a step in the right direction and in the best interest of our national security, our economy, and the country as a whole.

It seems to me that if employers were fined heavily and/or given jail time for hiring undocumented workers then many of those in our country illegally would have less work here and many would leave and fewer would come. No need to round up and deport many of them.

To those who are in favor of the amnesty bill: Do you think there are any restrictions on immigration (legal and otherwise) that we should enforce?

I think undocumented workers who become criminals (other than being here illegally) should be deported and banned from entry. If undocumented workers enter our country and sell cocaine, or rob old ladies, then they aren't welcome in my eyes. Other than that, I don't see their helping our economy and adding to our culture as bad things. I think this is like the prohibition on marijuana and other bullshit laws and regulations that have no purpose. Kicking out undocumented workers does not serve the public good.

so... I don't honestly care if mexicans wanna come in and join the workforce legitimately, I just hate the gang bangers and drug dealers and gun runners that work out of mexico too.

Like it or not, there is definately an unfavorable element that comes in under that carpet. Unfortunately, it would be 2 faced of me to not recognize that there are legal residents here that also support that unfavorable image of "thug life" regardless of nationality.


I think what I'm really trying to say is, I don't care if they're mexican, I just hate the media's adoption of hip hop culture as something favorable, where the artist do nothing but bitch about how crappy and hard thier lil thuggin lives were and how people died and all that noise, yet people try to downgrade thier quality of life and adopt it as a cultural influence straight out of thier middle class suburb into the ghetto. I honestly hope those people are the ones who wind up getting shot for voluntary retardation.

infamatory? maybe, off topic? it may be a tangent, but honestly, Its more of a problem now than it was 30 years ago because of the gang element, dont kid yourself. The only reason the gang element continues to rise is because of the media portrayal in hip hop culture/music videos. "bling blinging straight thuggin etc etc"

I live in north idaho and there seriously whiter than white kids who act like this. I'd beat the eyeballs out of my children if I had any if they started acting like that.

You are making an idealistic assumption that anyone that comes to the US illegally is here to make a few bucks and go home. There's really no statistics to back that up. And it wouldn't matter any way as those that are here illegally are, well...illegally here, be it any amount of time.
I'm the granddaughter of immigrants-my grandfather's name is on the Immigrant's Wall on Ellis Island. I have no beef at all with documented (read-legal)workers, whether here for a month or a century. As Shani pointed out, their SS numbers, their papers et al, are legit, they're productive and not a drain on social services as they pay taxes to support those services.
My beef is with those who, regardless of origin of country, cross into the US, encourage employers to pay substandard wages, thereby depriving legal citizens of jobs, who drain and steal from social services, create dangerous situations for themselves and others(the NY Daily News did a series on illegals and the construction industry and their high injury/death rate and substandard work/conditions there). Cases in point: The 'winner' of a first baby contest turned out to be an illegal-who paid for the hospital expenses when the baby was born? An illegal family from Mexico makes public appeals to save their daughter via a multiple organ transplant. Only after the transplant was done was it discovered they'd entered the country illegally. Costs that weren't covered by public donations were borne by the medical community. These were widely publicized stories, but they reflect a larger problem in the shadows. We have an economy that's stagnant at best, American families are struggling just to get by and corporate heads are just getting greedier by the minute. Add to those problems we currently face the lure of someone coming in freely to earn less than minimum wage because some company owner can save a few bucks on his payroll and the $2 an hour is more than double what could be gotten back home. It's exploitation, it's bucking the law and it's dangerous, just like driving illegally.
Those that are of the thinking of 'taking over', I would call racist to some extent at least. But I don't necessarily think the fears of being pushed aside economically via jobs is a totally unrealistic fear as it happens every day. Why would Mr. Smith pay me $7 an hour when he can get someone for $2, no questions asked? And you think they'll just take that $2 for a few weeks and go home? Is that the right thing to do at any rate?

The way I see it everyone, save the Native Americans, are illegal immigrants.

But the real question is not whether you or I would choose to press charges. It's whether or not the action would be illegal in the first place.

I'm certainly not against trying to be friendly neighbors with other nations, but an important part of that is respect for your neighbor's rights. If I had a neighbor who was constantly entering my property illegally (regardless of his or her reasons for doing so), I would say that he or she is a very bad neighbor. Not necessarily a bad person, but definitely a bad neighbor.

Just to clarify; I don't want American companies to go out of business or even suffer financially. But I don't think the American government should allow the decisions of corporations to hamstring us when trying to assert sovereignty over our own country.

But, as I was saying before, laws are in place for a reason. A law with no purpose is not much of a law. Obviously undocumented workers are undocumented. I'm not suggesting that they aren't breaking the law. I'm saying the law is unfair and should be fixed, and deporting people or persecuting them would be a step in the wrong direction.
...but is it our place to punish, especially when we have the power to help? The Mexican government couldn't slow immigration if they wanted to.
I completely agree corporations should be involved in matters of state.

Absolutely the employers of illegal immigrants or illegal aliens should be fined and prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and in some cases, they have. I am just as furious, actualy, no more furious with the emplyers and enablers of the illegal crisis. The problem is holistic, not just confined to one variable of illegals (though they are not off the hook).

The system being broken is another good point. We need wholesale reform and a new immigration policy that fits the needs of our nation in the 21st century.

Add to that, (and this is bordering a thread jack), we need to look at our foreign policy as well. Our current Grand Strategy is too narrow and overly focused on onle terrorism. We need to revist NAFTA, CAFTA etc and figure out how we want to interact with our immediate neighbors. Ideally, a free trade or open border movement should work in all directions. Obviously the first few years would be a bit hairy but I am willing to bet it would even out. Again, here, the key is partnership and cooperation. Canada and Mexico need to do their part as well.

The only place where I would disagree with your very fine post Abaya, is that I am inclined to agree with the many others that there is yes indeed, an illegal immigrant, illegal alien problem.

Also, people, please understand the difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration. In defense of Shani, she is not against legal immigrants, but the illegal ones as are many, many people.

ng: i agree with most of your post--except the first sentence. fact is that there are reverse migration stats and that if you juxtapose them with immigration stats it turns out that the inflow and outflows are not terribly far apart--i knew a guy once who was doing research on this topic==i dont remember the population he was tracking exactly--maybe germans==but i do remember that it was a long-term project (it covered about 150 years up to either the 1995 or 2000 census)--his basic claim was that reverse migration account in the aggregate for about 75-80% of the inflow for the population he was studying. that's bloody high....but thing is that this data would cover only "legals"...but from that, you can assume (i think) that the numbers for the undocumented would be much closer to the same (in other words, i would expect that the net gain of population would be close to zero in the aggregate.) so there is data out there, numbers in the census--all that is required is juxtaposing categories that normally aren't juxtaposed for some reason.

so it is not only a speculative issue, this. and it is not idealism to assume that many--if not most--people who come into the states leave again, in the aggregate at any rate. it does seem a bit idealistic to assume that the united states is some kind of nirvana such that everyone on earth wants to live here. that seems more than idealism--it seems like narcissism. but that i dont particularly impute to you--it's more an amurican kultcha thing.

Will, that's a tough place. I think you would need to separate the issues. I too am sympathetic to the illegals in their motivation. But I don't think breaking the law is the right solution. Changing the law is. I would agree we need to change and fix etc.

The "power to punish vs power" to help is a bit more blurred. I think you can punish the law violators and reform the law while implementing a more sensible foreign policy.

I disagree with you that corporations should be involved in matters of state. That's dangerously close to okaying Halliburton's actions.

We may have to agree to disagree. I think that exercising strict control over our borders serves a very valid purpose. (By "strict control" I don't necessarily mean that nobody should ever be let in the country, but rather that nobody should be let in without permission from the government.)

Absolutely. I can understand why many people from other countries may want to move here, but I don't think that gives them a right to ignore any law that hinders their attempt to relocate. It's sort of like the breaking and entering example I brought up before. I can understand why a homeless person would want to get out of the cold and rain on a winter day, but that doesn't give him or her the right to break into someone's home in search of shelter.

I'd even consider some sort of temporary worker program if it was determined that it was truly necessary. But no person who is here illegally now or who had been caught here illegally in the past should be eligible, in my opinion.

I'm not too big a fan of corporations being involved in the affairs of the state. I don't like the idea of the state meddling in the affairs of corporations, either.

I see a difference between monitoring borders and kicking out or mistreating undocumented workers. I don't think people understand just how mush of the US economy is dependent on their high work to low cost worth. If we were suddenly to lose all of the workers in the US that are undocumented, I strongly suspect that we could be looking at an economic crisis the likes of which we've not seen in over a half a century. Not only that, but it seems ungrateful, in my view, that we should want to kick people out who are doing more work for less wages and who are so far from home to send money home to their families (which is often the case). I respect many of them a great deal.
The aren't just breaking and entering, though. In order to make the comparison apt, they would pay rent and work. It's more like having someone live in your rented home without the owner's permission....though even that comparison isn't perfect. They aren't sitting and mooching. They're working, and contributing to the GNP. They are an active part of our workforce, and a gift from god to industries like agriculture, landscaping, cleaning, and babysitting.
What, in your mind, would be a reasonable determination as to the necessity that would merit a temporary worker program?

Also, keep in mind that the people who are here now are more likely to have a trade skill and speak English.
It's a tough area because neither is really all that trustworthy....the idea would be to isolate their interests so as to avoid conglomeration and mutual greed. But that's for another thread.

I think part of the problem is a total inability to relate to the situation and environment that would lead a person to "break the law" and "work illegally" in the US. We expect that those two phrases have a universal meaning. When in truth that is an illusion.

I agree with mixedmedia on this one. On an earlier thread about immigration, which I can't seem to find, we tried to illustrate how the situation can't be seen as "all illegals are bad". This isn't the case at all. I don't know what good it's going to do to the thread, but put yourself in the shoes of an illegal immigrant. Why did you come here? Did you have another option? What about your family? Now that you're here, what's your priority? I shared in the previous thread the story of my family and friends. If you find it hard the imagine and rationalize what these illegal immigrants feel and experience as they are making the decision to break into the US, simply ask, and I'll write the story again.

It's easy to sit here in our comfortable environments, moderate economy, and great standard of living and feel contempt for these foreign peoples who are seemingly leaching off of America (which, I might add, isn't the case), if you don't know what it's like to be in their shoe, and you've never experienced what they have.

The blame lies in so many places, it's impossible to just say "to hell with illegal immigrants" (not putting words in anyone's mouth). The blame can be shared with foreign governments which don't care for their people enough to actually give them opportunities to work for a living to sustain their families. how can you blame the citizens for wanting to live? The blame lies partially with the US for previously (and contemporaneously) hurting the economic and political foundations of some foreign countries, to the point where they're so destabilized that citizens don't usually have a choice - It's either immigrate (illegally) into another country, or die, and let your family die too. There's neither the time nor the money to go about the process legally. If you have the time and the money, then you can't say you've been through what illegal immigrants have been through. Again...Live or die...It's a simple choice, especially when you have a wife and kids, and don't tell me for a second that you wouldn't make the exact same choice in a comparable situation.

Yes, yes, and yes again... you've hit the nail on the head with each point here. Every single last one of us would be illegal, if we weren't already so damn privileged. I know I would do it, if I had to.

Btw, did you post previously in the thread I cited in my long post earlier in this thread? (There's a link there, if you want to check.) That was the last immigration thread I remember, but I could be wrong.

But how much would house prices go down if we kicked out 10-20 million people in the southwest?

Then again, you would just have a flood of snowbirds moving down there and 'investors' buying up real estate after they left.

No, it was in a different one. I couldn't find it before since it didn't show up on the Tilted Politics page, but I found it by searching my post history. Here it is. This thread wasn't specifically about immigration; it was about Newt Gingrich's idea that the US should only accommodate one language. It did, however, inevitably lead to a heated discussion about immigration.

I'm afraid I don't follow. By 'people' do you mean citizens, legal immigrants, or undocumented workers?

I think he means Illegal aliens. you know, people here in violation of the immigration laws of this country.

I named citizens, legal immigrants, or undocumented workers. I can't think of any other group here in the US, certainly not these 'illegal aliens' you speak of.

Are you taking about one these?
http://content.answers.com/main/cont...f/Spock001.jpg

I'm pretty sure he has permission to be here.

illegal immigrants then, or do you prefer the orwellian speak of 'undocumented workers'? maybe I can start using that speak for illegal carrying of a weapon, just call it an undocumented concealed handgun carrier.

It fascinates me that me being against more government power makes me 'Orwellian'. I've read 1984 dozens of times. I think you missed something. Also, as I stated before, you're more likely to have a citizen commit a crime than an undocumented worker. They are less dangerous than we are. Guns, however, are slightly more dangerous than Mexicans or Guatemalans. That's the last I'll speak of guns in this thread.

It isn't me that missed something.....

because us americans are so violent and full of hatred. right?

how about undocumented social security receivers, or undocumented drivers? why don't we start replacing the word illegal with undocumented for everything? after all, the less government power, the better, right?

What's the first sentence of the third chapter.
I'm not sure why, but it may have something to do with being spoiled considering people who are more poor and are in danger of deportation are more law abiding. It could be a lot of things.

my point exactly.

if they didn't follow the laws to get in here, they aren't very law abiding, are they?

You don't have the book.
If guns were outlawed tomorrow, you'd keep your guns. Explain how that's any different.

not on me at work, but you're still missing the point.

"Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void."
Marbury v. Madison 1803

I agree, but I happen to think immigration laws should be strictly enforced. I don't think illegal immigrants should be beheaded, flogged or forced to watch music videos from rap and emo artists. That would be cruel and counter-productive. But I wouldn't consider it mistreatment to send an illegal back to wherever he or she came from.

I'm willing to risk it. And I'm not convinced that Americans being forced to mow their own lawns and clean their own homes will result in a crisis. It wasn't that long ago that people actually did stuff like this for themselves. And even if there are some issues, I kinda see it as a form of "tough love". I think the only real potential for problems may be with agriculture. Perhaps prison labor would alleviate that?

They are "breaking and entering", though. Breaking into someone's house is illegal, regardless of what happens once the person gets inside. Immigration laws should be enforced the same way and for the same reason: property rights (which would be known as "sovereignty" on the national level).

A complete collapse of our economy from which we could never, ever recover.

Plenty of lawbreakers have trade skills and speak English. I see your point, but it doesn't change my mind. I don't believe that one's appeal to employers should be used to excuse violations of important laws.

Agreed.

I've really enjoyed this discussion but we may have to just agree to disagree on the whole issue. I definitely understand your concerns and I think you understand mine, but I honestly don't see either of us budging much. :no:

I understand what you're saying. My first thought would go to how. I doubt we can send them all packing, considering pure numbers. It wouldn't be reasonable to spend the money and manpower that would be necessary to send even half of them home. My second thought would be why, BESIDES THE LAW. Aren't most of them doing hard work? Aren't they functioning members of our society? When you eat a raisin, you're probably eating something that was picked by an undocumented worker in the area of agricultural land around Fresno. If grapes were picked by people who made minimum wage, you'd have to seriously consider removing raisins from your budget. I love tomatoes. I would have to grow them myself or stop eating them. I don't have a back yard big enough to fit the all the fruit and veggies me and my family need. I happen to grow veggies in my back yard, and I know that even using my whole back yard, we'd need to supplement the amount of food with a large secondary source. I'm estimating that I could only supply 1/3 of our veggies. And I'd never eat a banana again, as they don't grow as well in a Mediterranean climate like I have here.

These are logistical concerns outside of the philosophical argument, which may not be resolved.
When the US was much more agrarian and had a much smaller population, it was reasonable. We'd have to see a lot of deaths in order to be able to pay fair wages for lower work.
I'm still not sure as to why you think it should be illegal. You started talking about sovereignty, and I was starting to follow, but saying something is wrong because it's illegal doesn't make sense. That's like saying it's wrong because it's wrong.
I won't say that'll definitely happen, but if we were to somehow expel all undocumented workers, we'd be looking at a MASSIVE crisis.
I understand what you're saying. Sovereignty is important to you. I can respect that.
I'm willing to respectfully disagree. I've done it a few times on TFP.

Kudo's to my county.....finally

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met...immigrant.html

I have mixed feelings on this issue, but one thing is clear - the rhetoric coming from "conservative media" is way over the top. As they turn up the volume it is becoming more and more shrill. At some point poeple truly interested in addressing the issue will have to tune these folks out.