GOP Backing Away From Tough Immigration

[Texsox]

Supply and demand. There is a demand for these jobs and the supply has to come from somewhere. There are 12,000,000 people holding down jobs in this country. If they all disappeared and were suddenly replaced by legal workers, what would change? Well we would have rising wages, because of a short supply of workers. These workers, being legal, would demand the government benefits that the current workers are afraid to apply for. The same taxes would be sent to Washington, yet more money would have to be returned.

 

The problem was we have a demand that has not be filed by legal workers. The solution being proposed is eliminate the workers. Who are these undocumented workers taking the jobs from?

 

It's funny that when we talk about cutting the taxes of the business owners, or raising minimum wage, people say that it will cause businesses to close, it would kill any incentive for business owners to expand, there would be less jobs. Now all of a sudden these same businesses can handle higher wages.

 

There are undocumented workers all around our country. We have senior citizens working off the books for cash so their pensions and social security are not cut.

 

I agree, if the worker provided no documentation, and the employer isn't paying taxes for the work, throw the book at them, it doesn't matter if the worker is a citizen or not. But lets not cripple our agriculture industry in the process of fixing an economic supply and demand problem. All this hand wringing about our dependence on foreign oil is silly when you stop and consider we currently cannot feed ourselves with our current food production. Eliminating more farms and ranches will only serve to make that worse.

 

The backbone of our economy are the workers at all levels. Reagan had the right idea and now Bush is also on the right track. Let's do what is right for the US instead of seeking retribution for people willing to do the dirty work in our society for low wages and even lower lifestyles. Put in place a guest worker program. Allow those individuals who have lived clean and quiet lives to remain here, deport and fine those that have not been good "guests". Make all businesses accountable when they fail to document their workers, no matter the country of origin. Paying grandpa cash is as wrong as paying an immigrant.

 

And who is being punished for these workers? All the stats I see about the benefits they receive are the same benefits any worker doing that job would receive. If we are punishing anyone, it is the workers who toil at these jobs in an underground industry and never given the opportinuty for the basic human dignity a worker deserves. We need you to pick our onions, scrape our plates, dig our ditches, but don't come around to the front door.

 

Yes Mike, the deficit will rise when workers are free to apply for the programs they are afforded by our government. Replacing undocumented workers, with documented workers will result in an increase to those entitlement programs. By ignoring the problem, those programs are not used as much. I'm not certain what point you are making. That would seem in favor of not doing anything. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I don't think we can put it back in. No matter who is working these jobs legally, the benefits are the same. Illegals actually collect less benefits. How would we have less taxes paid if these workers were legal?

 

Ending the incentive to being here illegally by ending the jobs. I like that idea. We need to begin training, or at least encouraging more Americans to work in farm fields, as busboys, lawn maintenace people, etc. How do you suggest we do that?

[Texsox]

What the years between Reagan's amnesty program and today have proven is our current system does not work. We had a huge demand for entry level, manual laborers, and similar jobs and our High Schools and Colleges could not supply workers to fill this demand and companies went looking outside the country. Perhaps we need to look at our education system and figure out what changes we need to make to start turning out students who can do this work. With less than 5% unemployment, this is one way to reach full employment.

[southsider2k5]

Supply and demand. There is a demand for these jobs and the supply has to come from somewhere. There are 12,000,000 people holding down jobs in this country. If they all disappeared and were suddenly replaced by legal workers, what would change? Well we would have rising wages, because of a short supply of workers. These workers, being legal, would demand the government benefits that the current workers are afraid to apply for. The same taxes would be sent to Washington, yet more money would have to be returned.

 

Net result is more outlays for the US government for more people, with a smaller tax base. Once again because of things like the earned income credit, the vast majority of these workers would be taking more out of the tax system than the paid in, thus reducing the tax base. Its not the same amout of taxes being paid in, it is substancially less... and that is before we start talking about the effect of 12 million new people on the social entitlement programs in the USA>

 

The problem was we have a demand that has not be filed by legal workers. The solution being proposed is eliminate the workers. Who are these undocumented workers taking the jobs from?

 

If these jobs are that vital, why not establish a guest worker program for legal Mexican immigrants. If the offer of jobs here is that great that they are willing to work for the prevailing wages, and the supply is that great that the American workers still don't fill them, they will still be available for people to fill, except instead of entering the US illegally to get these jobs, have the guest worker program originate from people's country of origin, instead of after an illegal activity has already happened. Again all we are doing is rewarding an illegal activity AGAIN.

 

 

It's funny that when we talk about cutting the taxes of the business owners, or raising minimum wage, people say that it will cause businesses to close, it would kill any incentive for business owners to expand, there would be less jobs. Now all of a sudden these same businesses can handle higher wages.

 

Never did I say these businesses could handle higher wages. Don't start putting words into my posts. My point was actually to point out that there will be hirer wages if these folks are made legal, which isn't being pointed out in the mainstream anywhere. This will have a net loss job effect, and will put certian people out of business, whether we "send em all back to wheres they came from" or if we make them "guest workers". The only way that jobs, employment, and incomes will stay the same is through the status quo. The guest worker plan being bandied about as some sort of a saviour, will cost people, will shut down businesses/farms etc, and will result in wage based inflation. Those are economic facts, yet this plan isn't being put in the same terms, and I have no idea why.

 

There are undocumented workers all around our country. We have senior citizens working off the books for cash so their pensions and social security are not cut.

 

I agree, if the worker provided no documentation, and the employer isn't paying taxes for the work, throw the book at them, it doesn't matter if the worker is a citizen or not. But lets not cripple our agriculture industry in the process of fixing an economic supply and demand problem. All this hand wringing about our dependence on foreign oil is silly when you stop and consider we currently cannot feed ourselves with our current food production. Eliminating more farms and ranches will only serve to make that worse.

 

Then I guess you are against the guest worker program and legalization for illegal aliens who are currently here?

 

 

 

The backbone of our economy are the workers at all levels. Reagan had the right idea and now Bush is also on the right track. Let's do what is right for the US instead of seeking retribution for people willing to do the dirty work in our society for low wages and even lower lifestyles. Put in place a guest worker program. Allow those individuals who have lived clean and quiet lives to remain here, deport and fine those that have not been good "guests". Make all businesses accountable when they fail to document their workers, no matter the country of origin. Paying grandpa cash is as wrong as paying an immigrant.

 

I am all in favor of that too. $50,000 a pop will solve that problem, and it would almost have to be an accross the board thing to pass constitution muster, so as not be seen as aimed at one race, as it could be portrayed.

 

And who is being punished for these workers? All the stats I see about the benefits they receive are the same benefits any worker doing that job would receive. If we are punishing anyone, it is the workers who toil at these jobs in an underground industry and never given the opportinuty for the basic human dignity a worker deserves. We need you to pick our onions, scrape our plates, dig our ditches, but don't come around to the front door.

 

By all means, come to the front door. That is exactly what I want. Don't come through our desserts, our steams, in the back of trucks etc. Apply through your consolate just like the rest of the world does. Why should these people get it any easier than any other immigrant?

 

Yes Mike, the deficit will rise when workers are free to apply for the programs they are afforded by our government. Replacing undocumented workers, with documented workers will result in an increase to those entitlement programs. By ignoring the problem, those programs are not used as much. I'm not certain what point you are making. That would seem in favor of not doing anything. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I don't think we can put it back in. No matter who is working these jobs legally, the benefits are the same. Illegals actually collect less benefits. How would we have less taxes paid if these workers were legal?

 

Once again, negative marginal tax rate. Google the Earned Income Credit when you get a chance and realize that if you don't make a certian level of income you get back everything you pay in taxes. If you receive credits like this one, you can get those back on top of not paying any money at all in taxes, which means by adding that person to the tax base, they are actually taking away from total revenue of the United States, even before they start participating in entitlement programs. Again, I am stuck here making the negative points of something because the media hasn't seen fit to do so yet. The reality is that this is not a magical program that benefits everyone, in fact many of the drawbacks of sending them all back, are remarkably the same as making them all citizens, yet that never gets talked about. Why is that???

 

Ending the incentive to being here illegally by ending the jobs. I like that idea. We need to begin training, or at least encouraging more Americans to work in farm fields, as busboys, lawn maintenace people, etc. How do you suggest we do that?

 

 

Ending many jobs is EXACTLY what you are advocating, whether you know it or not. But I guess no one else has been brave enough to actually point out the economic reality of this plan.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Do you want to end illegal immigration today?  One provision would do it.  Fine companies who hire illegal labor $50,000 per illegal hire, and give some one the resources to enforce the new law.  I guarentee you that the incentives to hire illegal workers under the table would quickly disappear with those kinds of finds looming overhead.  We don't need bigger walls, or amensty programs, or guest worker programs, we need to remove the incentives for being in the US illegally, the biggest of which is gainful employment.  If the US were to ACTUALLY address that one issue, the rest of the issues surrounding this, would quickly disappear.  but as usual, the big picture of this issue is totally being missed, and I have no doubt my kid child will be wonder WTF we were doing in 1986 and 2006 by repeatly missing the boat here.

 

Nowadays most working in factories and such jobs use fake, stolen, or borrowed documentation. Some of them are good. It's not even tough to do. Drive down 18th or 26th Street and you can find them on the streets. It'll be such an easy excuse for those who hire them. Imagine the legal battles and companies finding ways to say they didn't know the documentation wasn't good.

 

And I still would like to see information from a credible source (not a link from a site with an obvious anti-immigration agenda) that states that immigrants are such a burden on the economy.

 

A sound guest worker program is the best possible solution.

[Balta1701]

Ending many jobs is EXACTLY what you are advocating, whether you know it or not.  But I guess no one else has been brave enough to actually point out the economic reality of this plan.

Ugh...when the quote tags somehow don't work correctly, it's hard as all hell to Reply to a post.

 

I think I'm therefore just going to reply to this part...which as far as I can tell hits on the ol' "You raise the minimum wage and you eliminate jobs" argument. As you can probably imagine, I don't subscribe to that statement, and at current levels, given that the workers making the minimum wage spend nearly 100% (or even over 100%) of what they earn, a raise in the minimum wage can often wind up creating jobs, as there are more people capable of buying products and services.

 

I think the same sort of result could very well come from some sort of legalization/guest worker program which does bring these people out of limbo, for a couple reasons. First and foremost, you can get the same results as you do with increases in the minimum wage; people have more ability to purchase products, and if they do so in the U.S., then jobs can be generated in the U.S.

 

But there is an additional element here which I think is important to realize. When undocumented workers do sneak into this country, they often find jobs and then send the money back to Mexico where their families are, as has been pointed out many times. Here's my question; do we really think that, if given the option, these folks prefer to spend their time away from their families, only sending back a check? Or, if we did set up some sort of genuine legal procedure here, would they be more likely to bring their families with them, and thus cut down on the flow of cash going south? I think that actually bringing these people into some sort of legal status would probably do the latter, at least to some extent. Yeah, some money would still flow south, but some of the money flowing south would probably stay here as people bring their families with them.

[Balta1701]

And I still would like to see information from a credible source (not a link from a site with an obvious anti-immigration agenda) that states that immigrants are such a burden on the economy.

That may be difficult, since I think the evidence currently out there suggests that in almost every way you look at the issue, there is no clear cut answer. Take your pick. Wages, expenditures, jobs, taxes, etc., the evidence doesn't strongly back up either side. Yes, immigration may drive down wages, except in some cases it doesn't. Yes immigrants may take up jobs, but they may also generate some more. And so on.

[southsider2k5]

Nowadays most working in factories and such jobs use fake, stolen, or borrowed documentation.  Some of them are good.  It's not even tough to do.  Drive down 18th or 26th Street and you can find them on the streets.  It'll be such an easy excuse for those who hire them.  Imagine the legal battles and companies finding ways to say they didn't know the documentation wasn't good.

 

And I still would like to see information from a credible source (not a link from a site with an obvious anti-immigration agenda) that states that immigrants are such a burden on the economy.

 

A sound guest worker program is the best possible solution.

 

Immigrants aren't a burden on the economy, its illegal aliens that are a burden. One group did everything they were supposed to be here, the other violated the sovereinty of the US to be here. There is a big difference.

 

So just because it is easy to buy illegal social security cards, companies shouldn't be responsible for who they hire? A survey of about 80 sex offenders in Chicago turned up that about 75% didn't live where they said they did, should we stop tracking sex offenders? People with expensive printers make easy and believable counterfiet money at home now, should we quit charging people with counterfeiting? Just because it wouldn't be easy to enforce, doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do.

 

A guest worker program is exactly what is needed, except it needs to originate with people applying from outside of the US, and not after committing a crime to get into the US illegally.

[Balta1701]

A guest worker program is exactly what is needed, except it needs to originate with people applying from outside of the US, and not after committing a crime to get into the US illegally.

Aside from the "even though the law is stupid it's the law and they shouldn't violate it" angle, can you offer up any other reasons as to why exactly we shouldn't allow a guest worker program to apply to those who are already here?

 

My counterpoint to that sort of argument would be to say that since there seems to be a real demand for these workers, the problem is not that the people are coming over, the problem is that the government's immigration policy has been out of date for decades, and I find it difficult to justify punishments handed down because people violated an unjust or foolishly designed law.

[southsider2k5]

Ugh...when the quote tags somehow don't work correctly, it's hard as all hell to Reply to a post.

 

I think I'm therefore just going to reply to this part...which as far as I can tell hits on the ol' "You raise the minimum wage and you eliminate jobs" argument.  As you can probably imagine, I don't subscribe to that statement, and at current levels, given that the workers making the minimum wage spend nearly 100% (or even over 100%) of what they earn, a raise in the minimum wage can often wind up creating jobs, as there are more people capable of buying products and services.

 

I think the same sort of result could very well come from some sort of legalization/guest worker program which does bring these people out of limbo, for a couple reasons.  First and foremost, you can get the same results as you do with increases in the minimum wage; people have more ability to purchase products, and if they do so in the U.S., then jobs can be generated in the U.S.

 

 

Is that a hint of supply side economics I detect in your voice?

 

That answer you quoted, is pretty well taken out of context actually. Tex was referring speficially to farmers and food stuffs industries who are limited by the prices they can receive for their product, which is what I was responding to. If you take one specific industry and effectively say double their wage rate you will get firings/layoffs/increased prices in someway shape or form, or the industry/business will collapse, as profitability is removed as an incentive and the capital investment flees.

 

In a macro view, if people are working they can create more jobs, but the net effect depends on how many other people lose their jobs, lose income from increased prices etc. Especially in an industry that is really sensative to price increases like food stuffs, that industry specifically would suffer in a micro sense. It all depends how those two things would balance out.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Immigrants aren't a burden on the economy, its illegal aliens that are a burden.  One group did everything they were supposed to be here, the other violated the sovereinty of the US to be here.  There is a big difference.

 

 

We may have to call on the Predators to take care of them...

 

So just because it is easy to buy illegal social security cards, companies shouldn't be responsible for who they hire?  A survey of about 80 sex offenders in Chicago turned up that about 75% didn't live where they said they did, should we stop tracking sex offenders?  People with expensive printers make easy and believable counterfiet money at home now, should we quit charging people with counterfeiting?  Just because it wouldn't be easy to enforce, doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do.

 

Yeah, they should be responsible. I was just providing an easy excuse that came to mind.

 

A guest worker program is exactly what is needed, except it needs to originate with people applying from outside of the US, and not after committing a crime to get into the US illegally.

 

Are you one of those who thinks we should kick out the 12 million already here too?

[Balta1701]

Is that a hint of supply side economics I detect in your voice?

 

That answer you quoted, is pretty well taken out of context actually. Tex was referring speficially to farmers and food stuffs industries who are limited by the prices they can receive for their product, which is what I was responding to.  If you take one specific industry and effectively say double their wage rate you will get firings/layoffs/increased prices in someway shape or form, or the industry/business will collapse, as profitability is removed as an incentive and the capital investment flees.

 

In a macro view, if people are working they can create more jobs, but the net effect depends on how many other people lose their jobs, lose income from increased prices etc.  Especially in an industry that is really sensative to price increases like food stuffs, that industry specifically would suffer in a micro sense.  It all depends how those two things would balance out.

Well, for that I apologize, I did the best I could given that the quote tags didn't work right & I could barely tell who wrote which part. Maybe I shoulda just kept my mouth shut.

 

And that is a hint of supply side economics, with a strong bit of demand-side economics as well

[southsider2k5]

Aside from the "even though the law is stupid it's the law and they shouldn't violate it" angle, can you offer up any other reasons as to why exactly we shouldn't allow a guest worker program to apply to those who are already here?

 

My counterpoint to that sort of argument would be to say that since there seems to be a real demand for these workers, the problem is not that the people are coming over, the problem is that the government's immigration policy has been out of date for decades, and I find it difficult to justify punishments handed down because people violated an unjust or foolishly designed law.

 

Because I don't see rewarding illegal activity and penalizing legal citizens and immigrants as being more productive than stupid politicians who are afraid of growing a backbone to cut off the problems at its roots, instead of just pruning the weeds every 20 years.

 

The US tried this once already, it failed miserably. NOTHING in the new bills address the root of the problem, and that is the US provides incentive for people to break its own laws. Heck I could even stomach the guest worker program being talked about if it included real economic incentives for not hiring illegal labor, but it doesn't. In 20 years, we will be looking at this problem again, and wondering how we can fix it, without pissing off the largest minority in the US.

 

If there is a real demand for these jobs, and the numbers of 500,000 (from just Mexico)people a year still trying to get into the US are true, all of the doom and gloom about needing workers will take care of itself because there is still a major supply of labor trying to get into the US. Plus I also believe that if these jobs are do desireable we shouldn't be committing an act of overt racism by setting up this program by and large to appease one country, which just so happens to be the quickest growing minority in the US. Why should Mexico and Central/South America by and large be favored for jobs in the US just because of the geographic luck of a shared porus border. Open the guest worker program to every country in the world, and let the potential immigrants compete with each other so that this is truely an equitable program. Why should potential Africian immigrants be penalized because they didn't have the ability to hire a Coyote to smuggle them through the dessert and hideout until the next amnesty was granted? Answer is they shouldn't. Its racist in its roots. If we opened this up to the world, we would have no problems replacing the illegal labor, and it would all be done legally.

[southsider2k5]

Well, for that I apologize, I did the best I could given that the quote tags didn't work right & I could barely tell who wrote which part.  Maybe I shoulda just kept my mouth shut. 

 

And that is a hint of supply side economics, with a strong bit of demand-side economics as well 

 

yeah I have no idea why the tags didn't work. I tried fixing them, but it bombed. hopefully it is understandible enough.

[southsider2k5]

Are you one of those who thinks we should kick out the 12 million already here too?

 

I have a hard time rationalizing the reward of illegal behavior, basically on the basis of geographic luck. Immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Europe have to go through a rigorous immigration process to become citizens of the US. People from our hemisphere know that they can sneak through our borders and wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way.

 

The big picture for me is that we are not solving any long-term problems here. Like I said to Balta I could even understand amnesty if it meant we got a new policy that severely penalized people for hiring illegal labor. At least then the root of the problem is being identified. Today that root cause is being ignored again. Reagan and company did the samething in 1986, and it got us no where good.

 

If we want to solve illegal immigration, we HAVE to remove every possible incentive for someone to come here illegally.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Why should Mexico and Central/South America by and large be favored for jobs in the US just because of the geographic luck of a shared porus border. 

 

You kinda answered it within the "question," no?

 

It's sorta like asking why it's cheaper to go to Wisconsin Dells than to fly to Paris or Rome.

 

Why should potential Africian immigrants be penalized because they didn't have the ability to hire a Coyote to smuggle them through the dessert and hideout until the next amnesty was granted?  Answer is they shouldn't.  Its racist in its roots.  If we opened this up to the world, we would have no problems replacing the illegal labor, and it would all be done legally.

 

[Balta1701]

I have a hard time rationalizing the reward of illegal behavior, basically on the basis of geographic luck.  Immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Europe have to go through a rigorous immigration process to become citizens of the US.  People from our hemisphere know that they can sneak through our borders and wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way.

I think at this point your argument is starting to verge on what I would call "Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good." Yes, it is unfair that people from Africa can't just take a quick walk here and find themselves having a path to citizenship after a decade or so, while maybe someone from Mexico can.

 

However, the fact is that they're already here, in large part because of the fact that the government has refused to figure out any legitimate way to solve the problem, whether it's increasing the legal immigration quotas to fill the employee void we all discuss or penalizing employers who do hire illegals.

 

So, yes, it would be nice if we could just start over at zero cost, send every one of the illegal immigrants back to whatever their country of origin actually was, and then allow a worldwide admission process to fill the spaces we do have open. But at this point, that's just so far from impractical as to be laughable, and in fact, even keeping something like that as an option, no matter how remote, is only delaying actually coming up with a real solution.

 

If we want to do this correctly, in the sense of opening up avenues to the entire world that are actually fair, we're going to have to decide to start doing that right now. There's just no way we're going to be able to conduct a forced mass migration of immigrants out of the U.S. and then allow a return flow of equal or slightly greater size from the entire world. The idea of punishing those who are already here just can't stay on the table if we want to actually come up with good policy.

 

Here would be what I would outline as the tenets of how I would build this sort of policy:

 

1. Guest worker status for the immigrants who are already here, but with a very long path towards citizenship.

2. A flexible guest worker program for those who are not currently in the country, tied to the demand for those levels of employment. The path to citizenship through this method should be significantly shorter than the path for those who are already here, so as to discourage people from sneaking across and then applying as a guest worker, and to provide some encouragement for people to return home.

3. Strong future punishments for illegal border crossings. This only works, though, if the guest worker program is done correctly, such that the supply is allowed to keep up with demand and not shut off because we get some racist in Congress or the DHS who decides they don't like a certain type of folk.

4. Stronger punishments for businesses who hire illegal immigrants. Fines strong enough to touch the bottom line, i.e. in the hundreds of thousands per worker. Actual enforcement mechanisms, which cannot be negotiated downwards in exchange for campaign contributions (i.e. Walmart).

[SleepyWhiteSox]

I have a hard time rationalizing the reward of illegal behavior, basically on the basis of geographic luck.  Immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Europe have to go through a rigorous immigration process to become citizens of the US.  People from our hemisphere know that they can sneak through our borders and wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way.

 

 

Not sure where you're going with your new "racism" angle, but there are also illegal immigrants from Europe. But of course geography plays a role. It has always been easier, less costly, and more convenient to move people short distances as opposed to much farther ones.

 

Also, I highly doubt anyone comes here with the plan to "wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way".

 

And the language in whatever laws are made will not read "only for Mexicans and South Americans." It's for all immigrants.

[southsider2k5]

You kinda answered it within the "question," no?

 

It's sorta like asking why it's cheaper to go to Wisconsin Dells than to fly to Paris or Rome.

 

And that's my point. It shouldn't be that way. If we are going to open up the US job market to foreign labor, why shouldn't the entire world be on equal footing, and not just one race who happend to hit the geography lotto? I honestly believe it is racist to open the US labor market to primarily one race. Then again our entire immigration system is racist as it considers certian countries immigrants by their country of orgin, instead of simply by something like their plight, or their skills.

[Rex Kickass]

Isn't that point academic though? How many Africans are going to fly over here to be a dishwasher or a migrant farm worker? I understand that they would be earning several times what they would earn in their home country - but it would take months just to pay off the flight.

 

The truth is that we have an illegal immigrant problem because our immigration policy is broken. Although these people did break a law by entering into our country there are other ways to enforce the law other than deportation. Making them legal and fining them might be one way to do it.

[southsider2k5]

Not sure where you're going with your new "racism" angle, but there are also illegal immigrants from Europe.  But of course geography plays a role.  It has always been easier, less costly, and more convenient to move people short distances as opposed to much farther ones.

 

Also, I highly doubt anyone comes here with the plan to "wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way". 

 

And the language in whatever laws are made will not read "only for Mexicans and South Americans."  It's for all immigrants.

 

And by and large who are the 12 million illegal aliens in the US? Its kind of like the law in Maryland that specified a company of a certian size had to provide its employees with health insurance, of which it just happened to be one company that met all of the criteria. Even though it doesn't speficy who it is for, it is pretty obvious who the laws are trying to pacify, I mean I have yet to see a large contingent of Asians out protesting the new proposals yet, right? There are people here illegally from all over, but don't play games and act like this isn't almost exclusively one country we are talking about.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

but don't play games and act like this isn't almost exclusively one country we are talking about.

 

You're right. We're only talking about the USA.

 

How it affects our country should be the only issue, not where they're coming from.

[southsider2k5]

I think at this point your argument is starting to verge on what I would call "Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good."  Yes, it is unfair that people from Africa can't just take a quick walk here and find themselves having a path to citizenship after a decade or so, while maybe someone from Mexico can.

 

However, the fact is that they're already here, in large part because of the fact that the government has refused to figure out any legitimate way to solve the problem, whether it's increasing the legal immigration quotas to fill the employee void we all discuss or penalizing employers who do hire illegals.

 

So, yes, it would be nice if we could just start over at zero cost, send every one of the illegal immigrants back to whatever their country of origin actually was, and then allow a worldwide admission process to fill the spaces we do have open.  But at this point, that's just so far from impractical as to be laughable, and in fact, even keeping something like that as an option, no matter how remote, is only delaying actually coming up with a real solution.

 

If we want to do this correctly, in the sense of opening up avenues to the entire world that are actually fair, we're going to have to decide to start doing that right now.  There's just no way we're going to be able to conduct a forced mass migration of immigrants out of the U.S. and then allow a return flow of equal or slightly greater size from the entire world.  The idea of punishing those who are already here just can't stay on the table if we want to actually come up with good policy.

 

Here would be what I would outline as the tenets of how I would build this sort of policy:

 

1.  Guest worker status for the immigrants who are already here, but with a very long path towards citizenship.

2.  A flexible guest worker program for those who are not currently in the country, tied to the demand for those levels of employment.  The path to citizenship through this method should be significantly shorter than the path for those who are already here, so as to discourage people from sneaking across and then applying as a guest worker, and to provide some encouragement for people to return home.

3.  Strong future punishments for illegal border crossings.  This only works, though, if the guest worker program is done correctly, such that the supply is allowed to keep up with demand and not shut off because we get some racist in Congress or the DHS who decides they don't like a certain type of folk.

4.  Stronger punishments for businesses who hire illegal immigrants.  Fines strong enough to touch the bottom line, i.e. in the hundreds of thousands per worker.  Actual enforcement mechanisms, which cannot be negotiated downwards in exchange for campaign contributions (i.e. Walmart).

 

And if an equitable program provides more benefits to one group, that is fine with me. I don't care if it is icky, its what is right. All we are doing is swinging the pendulum to favor another group over someone else instead.

 

Right now we are being fed a complete line of bulls*** by our politicians and our media that somehow this a guest worker program/amnesty is going to fix something. Again and again I have said that the root of the problem is being ignored, instead to have people focus on the sidepoints.

 

Again-This program will provide economic harm to this country as a whole, and many, many individuals here as well. It is not being portrayed that way at all. People who want to see our laws followed, and the problems solved are instantly waved off as racist, even though the very system they are endorsing is just as racist, except for who it favors. No one seems to want to tell the otherside of the coin on this, and it is a joke.

 

I agree actually with the vast majority of what you are saying Balta, and as I said, I could even agree with wiping the slate clean for the people who are here, provided the big problem is solved. I think there is way too much time being wasted with irrelevant details in this debate, and none on the causation of the problem.

[southsider2k5]

You're right.  We're only talking about the USA.

 

How it affects our country should be the only issue, not where they're coming from.

 

Please. This policy is by and large made to appease Mexico, and Mexican immigrants, as they are the vast majority of the people who are in the USA illegally. They also are the quickest growing minority in the USA, and so politicians are trying to curry favor with them for votes with a half-assed policy that does nothing to solve the main problem, and will cause many of the same economic issues that they say they are trying to prevent us from happening.

 

Like I said personally I believe these jobs should be open to anyone based on skill level mostly, but I could also understand a policy that allowed workers to compete for these jobs based on the conditions in their home country.

[Texsox]

I've been driving around a bit today and had the opportunity to think about this a little bit. It seems to me that this breaks down into a couple areas. Economic, immigration, politics, and ethics to name a few. I'm not schooled in economics, there are far better minds regarding this around here, but would like to see which conclusions I have here would be considered wrong.

 

Our society needs people to scrape our dished, mow our lawns, wash our cars, pick our fruit, and dig ditches and other forms of manual labor.

 

These jobs are not held in high esteem, are not particularly well paid, and do not provide much of a lifestyle. Definately not the American dream that we have for our children when we send them off to school and tell them not to forget the golden rule.

 

Our education system needs to prepare our children to earn a living. Further, because it is taxpayer financed, the greater good of society should be furthered.

 

As our society has moved from a manufacturing and agriculture based economy to higher tech, we have increased our wealth in a world wide economy, decreased the desire for manual labor jobs, while increasing demand for these jobs. After all a computer programmer earning a six figure income doesn't want to come home and mow his lawn.

 

If our education system was producing an end product (Graduates) who were suited for scrapping dishes and picking fruit, we would believe the system failed, the teachers were inadequate, and we would demand improvements. Anyone who has spent 12 years in our education system must certainly be capable of something else besides toiling in a farm field.

 

So we have advanced past manual labor for our citizens, we demand more for our children, yet these jobs need to be filled.

 

So for the past several decades, perhaps all of the past century, we have silently watched as individuals without documentation, sneak into this country via the backs of semi trailers, in boxcars, and walking hundreds of miles, dodging checkpoints, and risking death.

 

Now, we want to change the way these jobs are filled.

 

Some would claim that we have able bodied Americans that can do these jobs. That despite 12 years of education, toiling in fields and restaurants is all they can do. Hopefully there backs will outlast their years.

 

It seems plain to me that the reforms that Reagan started did not keep pace with the reality of our society, our education system, and the demands of our businesses. The system did not allow for the legal immigration of much needed workers.

 

So now we have reached a point when this is on the front burner and we need to fundementaly change our immigration laws.

 

We could say to the 12,000,000, thank you and goodbye. You broke our laws, and need to go home. We could further destroy those businesses that employed those workers. I believe we are punishing ourselves as much as we are punishing the law breakers. In the wake of that policy would be failed agriculture, which is not in our nation's security.

 

We could once again offer amnesty, like Reagan, and not change any of our current programs, and wait 30 years and again have millions and millions of undocumented workers again. Not a good answer.

 

Or we could work to bring those existing workers into the system. Punish those that paid their workers cash, that paid them less than minimum wage, that didn't make payroll tax payments. Keep out those that cheated, robbed, and didn't act like guests. We could develop a program that allows workers to legally immigrant and earn their citizenship. In short to look at what benefits out security, that doesn't destroy our agriculture programs, that yes, and I see no way around it, does make legal, those that broke our laws by coming here to pick onions, to butcher chickens, to mow lawns.

[Soxfest]

What part of Illegal alien am I missing, try going all around Mexico and stay after 60 days you will be deported, try as an illegal in Mexico to hold a rally you can't as stated in there constitution and even If you gain citizenship you can be deported anytime no questions asked as stated in there constitution, on Mexico southern border they use the military so illegals do not get in. Mexico wants US to give all things to illegals but in Mexico they want it the other way.