Bush to order National Guard to border

[Texsox]

Now they are talking about a national database the employers would be required to check before hiring someone. In fact, I think Georgia is trying to implement this right now. So, in effect, that gives the gov't the ability to approve or disapprove of hirings. This is an offshoot of the illegal immigration problem, but easily expandable to include everyone.

 

Currently employers are required to look at various forms of identification to determine if an applicant can legally work in the US. Many people are proposing destroying any businesses that are caught with illegals. Huge fines, prison, etc. If we are going to make the penalties so severe that someone's life work would be destroyed if they hire someone who is found to be llegal, shouldn't there be a full proof way that employers would be protected? How else could we do it without changing our present ID systems?

[YASNY]

Currently employers are required to look at various forms of identification to determine if an applicant can legally work in the US. Many people are proposing destroying any businesses that are caught with illegals. Huge fines, prison, etc. If we are going to make the penalties so severe that someone's life work would be destroyed if they hire someone who is found to be llegal, shouldn't there be a full proof way that employers would be protected? How else could we do it without changing our present ID systems?

 

I don't have all the answers, my friend. I just don't like the way things are headed.

[Texsox]

I don't have all the answers, my friend. I just don't like the way things are headed.

 

I don't like the way things are and am glad we are having a national debate about it. One thing I have total faith in is America's ability to solve big problems. We have a system that allows for all voices to be heard, a single voice can change the world. So I am encouraged by the way things are headed. It is the things we aren't talking about that worry me more.

 

Now if I could just hear more people linking jobs to immigration, I'd be even happier.

[YASNY]

I'll say this much, though. This is the main reason I've been stumping for secure borders. That would curtail the need for Nat'l ID cards and databases. Once the border is effectively under control, then the weeding out process could take place through the natural course of events. In other words, pull someone over for speeding and if he's illegal alien, arrest and turn over to the proper department. No need for mass roundups.

 

I don't like the way things are and am glad we are having a national debate about it. One thing I have total faith in is America's ability to solve big problems. We have a system that allows for all voices to be heard, a single voice can change the world. So I am encouraged by the way things are headed. It is the things we aren't talking about that worry me more.

 

Now if I could just hear more people linking jobs to immigration, I'd be even happier.

 

What? You mean Natalie Holloway isn't an important issue?

 

Explain what you mean by linking jobs to immigration.

[Texsox]

I'll say this much, though. This is the main reason I've been stumping for secure borders. That would curtail the need for Nat'l ID cards and databases. Once the border is effectively under control, then the weeding out process could take place through the natural course of events. In other words, pull someone over for speeding and if he's illegal alien, arrest and turn over to the proper department. No need for mass roundups.

 

 

 

What? You mean Natalie Holloway isn't an important issue?

 

Explain what you mean by linking jobs to immigration.

 

Currently one proposal calls for 330,000 immigrants per year and another calls for less. Neither proposal links these immigrants actually having means of suppporting themsleves. Some link to where immigrants have to have jobs seems like a no brainer to me. I don't have an exact method in mind, but perhaps either a direct; Juan Carlos Espinosa's application as a guest worker is sponsored by Hormel who needs him in their chicken processing plant or a floating number based on unemployment numbers. But to say in 2008 we will allow X number of immigrants is just stupid.

[YASNY]

Currently one proposal calls for 330,000 immigrants per year and another calls for less. Neither proposal links these immigrants actually having means of suppporting themsleves. Some link to where immigrants have to have jobs seems like a no brainer to me. I don't have an exact method in mind, but perhaps either a direct; Juan Carlos Espinosa's application as a guest worker is sponsored by Hormel who needs him in their chicken processing plant or a floating number based on unemployment numbers. But to say in 2008 we will allow X number of immigrants is just stupid.

 

They can be let in, a controlled number, with the caveat they have to have employment within X number of days. Hell ... As I type this, I see all kinds of logistical problems with it. I don't know how to address this.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think there is a window of opportunity, and guys like McCain and Lieberman could lead the way. As the parties polarize themselves, they are leaving a lot of Americans in the middle.

I'd prefer Bayh or Richardson, for a centrist candidate. McCain is becoming senile, and Lieberman is a gamer disguised as a crusader.

[Texsox]

They can be let in, a controlled number, with the caveat they have to have employment within X number of days. Hell ... As I type this, I see all kinds of logistical problems with it. I don't know how to address this.

 

Exactly and the control has to be linked to jobs. I wouldn't let them in until there is a job or someone willing to support them. There is no other criteria as important to both parties (immigrant and US) Perhaps let the employers apply for a guest worker permit and then they fill it. There has to be some way to link jobs to immigration. Anything can happen once they are here, companies may close, etc. and we would have to account for that. But from both sides this makes sense.

 

From the people I know who have immigrated, legally and illegally, the desire to build a better life for their kids and sometimes themselves is the #1 reason for crossing the river. That better life isn't from being on public aid, it comes from working and having your children be educated. From the taxpayer side, we would rather send aid to Mexico than deal with Spanish speaking Mexicans on our shores who are accepting aid. So linking jobs to immigration works.

[Balta1701]

Now they are talking about a national database the employers would be required to check before hiring someone. In fact, I think Georgia is trying to implement this right now. So, in effect, that gives the gov't the ability to approve or disapprove of hirings. This is an offshoot of the illegal immigration problem, but easily expandable to include everyone.

Such a program already exists at the national level. But thus far, it has only been voluntary, and as enforcement of immigration searches against companies have declined to almost zero in the past few years, there's little reason for companies to participate.

 

Exactly and the control has to be linked to jobs. I wouldn't let them in until there is a job or someone willing to support them. There is no other criteria as important to both parties (immigrant and US) Perhaps let the employers apply for a guest worker permit and then they fill it. There has to be some way to link jobs to immigration. Anything can happen once they are here, companies may close, etc. and we would have to account for that. But from both sides this makes sense.

But see, here's the one problem with something like that. If I want to unionize or try to work towards a better salary, or if I want to file a workplace complaint, or something silly like that, I have that right, and if things get really bad I can always just quit and go look for another job. But if a guest worker has a problem with a company, or the company decides it's given out too many raises to guest workers and lets them go in favor of new blood, then those people are stuck without jobs, and if you're only allowed in this country with a job, basically you wind up having to choose between tolerating whatever situation you're in or deportation.

[Texsox]

But see, here's the one problem with something like that. If I want to unionize or try to work towards a better salary, or if I want to file a workplace complaint, or something silly like that, I have that right, and if things get really bad I can always just quit and go look for another job. But if a guest worker has a problem with a company, or the company decides it's given out too many raises to guest workers and lets them go in favor of new blood, then those people are stuck without jobs, and if you're only allowed in this country with a job, basically you wind up having to choose between tolerating whatever situation you're in or deportation.

 

Unsafe working conditions are covered by OSHA, and basic US protections are in place, so I am not concerned about most abuses. But then, let's tie it to the unemployment rate. If unemployement in the skill area the immigrant is applying for is increasing, then decrease the number of immigrants allowed and vice versa. It helps no one when workers are out of work. And I will not bankrupt the US by allowing more workers in than can be supported. Emphasis on worker in a Guest Worker program. Another way to help this is the company would have a limited number of "do overs", after that, they would not be allowed to continue to hire guest workers.

 

The same objection I have to people that make statements that illegal is illegal and we should deal with it without looking at anything else, I have to statements that allow immigration for immigration sake. There has to be a need and benefit to the US.

 

I will admit, when someone like Southsider is so opposed and believes that jobs aren't part of the equation, I start to doubt my position. He is far ahead of me with economics, but it seems too obvious.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

But they have Galavision....

 

and really, Gala? Think about it.

 

But have you seen the women on that channel??

 

[southsider2k5]

Unsafe working conditions are covered by OSHA, and basic US protections are in place, so I am not concerned about most abuses. But then, let's tie it to the unemployment rate. If unemployement in the skill area the immigrant is applying for is increasing, then decrease the number of immigrants allowed and vice versa. It helps no one when workers are out of work. And I will not bankrupt the US by allowing more workers in than can be supported. Emphasis on worker in a Guest Worker program. Another way to help this is the company would have a limited number of "do overs", after that, they would not be allowed to continue to hire guest workers.

 

The same objection I have to people that make statements that illegal is illegal and we should deal with it without looking at anything else, I have to statements that allow immigration for immigration sake. There has to be a need and benefit to the US.

 

I will admit, when someone like Southsider is so opposed and believes that jobs aren't part of the equation, I start to doubt my position. He is far ahead of me with economics, but it seems too obvious.

 

Actually you couldn't be more backwards on what I have said. A guest worker program is an excellent ideal to strive for. I just don't believe it should be a reward for illegal activities. The guest worker programs should originate at American consulates in every country where we screen and check applicants from all over the world to get the canditates we need, instead of simply being given to people who are lucky enough to get into the country illegally. If we need skilled labor we can give appropriate tests for it. If we need unskilled labor I believe we should bring in the people who need the USA most. We should consider victims of genocide, famine, and war first, then look at poor families who need jobs the most.

[mr_genius]

We need more whiite babies. If you're not ready and willing to procreate, John Gibson is.

 

 

haha, did he really say that?

 

Hispanic eye for the white guy?

 

 

lol

 

you're on a roll

 

But have you seen the women on that channel??

 

 

 

^^^^

 

sleepy, you bring up an excellent point that is often ignored during the illegal immigration discussion

 

there are sooo many hot mexican girls

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Actually you couldn't be more backwards on what I have said. A guest worker program is an excellent ideal to strive for. I just don't believe it should be a reward for illegal activities. The guest worker programs should originate at American consulates in every country where we screen and check applicants from all over the world to get the canditates we need, instead of simply being given to people who are lucky enough to get into the country illegally. If we need skilled labor we can give appropriate tests for it. If we need unskilled labor I believe we should bring in the people who need the USA most. We should consider victims of genocide, famine, and war first, then look at poor families who need jobs the most.

 

Yep, flying out all over the world and testing the poorest of the poor to see who is most deserving yet qualified while deporting a worforce that is already here is the most logical, feasible, and affordable solution. :rolly

[Heads22]

haha, did he really say that?

 

 

Yeah, it was something to the effect of the majority of the babies in the US are hispanic.....so "we" need to start having children or whites will be a minority in 20 years.

[Cknolls]

I've got another idea. Hire the extra border patrol and customs agents. Have half of them go after the businesses hiring illegals. Fine the s*** out of the guilty businesses to fund the department.

 

You can call them the "Border Revenue Patrol".

 

I'm only joking about the name - serious about the rest.

 

 

I like it.

 

No, not at all. Just don't look the other way and pretend that the problem can be fixed for free. The fact that we've spent 20 years sitting around ignoring the problem is the reason why it'll cost so much to fix it now.

 

 

Ah 20 years since the last amnesty program. that worked well.

 

 

We don't collect taxes to pay for anything, we collect, or don't collect taxes to stimulate the economy. Let's cut taxes 25%, borrow a couple hundred billion from China, and get after this problem. We cut taxes to fight the war in Iraq, let's cut taxes to fix the border.

 

 

make sure you tip your waitresses on the way out.

[Balta1701]

Yeah, it was something to the effect of the majority of the babies in the US are hispanic.....so "we" need to start having children or whites will be a minority in 20 years.

All you need to know?

 

 

John Gibson is ready and waiting!

 

(Hat tip: Stephen)

 

Ah 20 years since the last amnesty program. that worked well.

Now that's just silly. The reason the last amnesty program didn't work is that we never actually went to the heart of the problem. Reagan's amnesty was supposed to be linked to strong enforcement against employers who hire illegal workers. Unfortunately, that little key part has been ignored more with each passing administration.

[Texsox]

Actually you couldn't be more backwards on what I have said. A guest worker program is an excellent ideal to strive for.

 

You're right, what was I thinking. We should just annex Mexico and get it over with, right? I mean they obviously need our tax money more than we do, not to mention we need busboys and fruitpickers as you have pointed out, and no American should have to do that when we have Mexicans who will...

 

Stuff like the above and pointing out that at higher wages, American's would be willing to work these jobs, led me to believe that you didn't think we needed the workers. So we both agree immigrant labor is necessary. You would prefer to open up a worldwide lottery for those workers, placing a humanitarian premium on who gets in. I like the theory, but believe it is in America's best interest to have allys with strong economies and would prefer to see Canada and Mexico with an edge. Yes, it's geographical luck, but isn't the famines in Africa and the civil unrest also geographical luck? Help ourselves and our neighbors first. With NAFTA and other intragovernment programs, it only makes sense.

[southsider2k5]

Yep, flying out all over the world and testing the poorest of the poor to see who is most deserving yet qualified while deporting a worforce that is already here is the most logical, feasible, and affordable solution. :rolly

 

Logical would be taking care of our own poor and disadvantaged before we take on another countries. Logic doesn't dictate breaking a countries laws, and insisting on being rewarded for it. The feasibility is just a direct result of where Mexico lies on this planet. If Mexico were in Africa, no one would care about them, just like no one seems to care about Sudan, Chad, and their likes. The only reason it is an affordable solution is because the illegals are vitrual slave labor, who work in dangerous conditions for illegal wages, and are denied all of the United States social programs. When they become legal, all of those preconditions will end and so will the "affordable"ness. That is unless you are advocating leaving the illegals status as a status quo so coroporate America can continue to exploit them, at the expense of paying a few more dollars an hour to pay our own poor.

[Texsox]

^^^^^^

 

Quick summary. I am in favor of allowing those immigrants who have jobs or can show financial support to immigrate. No financial support, no immigration. I do not believe that there are that many illegals getting paid less than minimum wage. I believe more were working with false papers and receiving minimum wage. It's also safer for the employer. I am also in favor of tying immigration numbers to some job number, not some arbitrary guess that we have to live with in 5 years that may under or over fill the workforce.

 

I don't believe you are in favor of rounding up and deporting them, and you don't want to have them benefit from their crime, so what is your solution with the existing illegals? I favor a program for those illegals who have demonstrated good behavior to earn citizenship. They must not have committed a crime, have a good work history, etc.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Logical would be taking care of our own poor and disadvantaged before we take on another countries.

 

You're right. I say no more helping other countries in any way at all until we fix our own problems. I want my tax dollars fixing problems within the country first and foremost, including the illegal immigration issue, not what's going on halfway around the world.

 

The feasibility is just a direct result of where Mexico lies on this planet.

 

Duh.

 

 

 

I don't believe you are in favor of rounding up and deporting them, and you don't want to have them benefit from their crime, so what is your solution with the existing illegals?

 

He's stated that he's in favor of deportation in the past, if I'm not mistaken.

[Texsox]

He's stated that he's in favor of deportation in the past, if I'm not mistaken.

 

I thought he backed off because of the cost and logistics.

[southsider2k5]

^^^^^^

 

Quick summary. I am in favor of allowing those immigrants who have jobs or can show financial support to immigrate. No financial support, no immigration. I do not believe that there are that many illegals getting paid less than minimum wage. I believe more were working with false papers and receiving minimum wage. It's also safer for the employer. I am also in favor of tying immigration numbers to some job number, not some arbitrary guess that we have to live with in 5 years that may under or over fill the workforce.

 

I don't believe you are in favor of rounding up and deporting them, and you don't want to have them benefit from their crime, so what is your solution with the existing illegals? I favor a program for those illegals who have demonstrated good behavior to earn citizenship. They must not have committed a crime, have a good work history, etc.

 

Um their very presence in the USA is a crime...

[Texsox]

Um their very presence in the USA is a crime...

 

So it is your opinion that it is in Americas best interest to track down and deport every last one?

[southsider2k5]

I thought he backed off because of the cost and logistics.

 

I said I could compromise if we had something that indicated it would solve this problem for the long term. No bill I have seen takes away the main problem, and that is an incentive to be in the US illegally. If we could adress that, I could live with admitting the illegals, despite the massive border rush it will cause, which has also been convieniently ignored by the pols and media.

 

I also want to state that cost and logistics shouldn't stop us for doing what is right. We keep hearing that it is too expensive to send all of the law breakers back, but as soon as I suggested bringing in the truely desparate people from around the world, well that was too expensive too, and therein you have the root cause of this whole issue. American's always take the cheap and easy way out of everything. We had a chance to solve this problem 20 years ago, but completely blew it. We have a chance to solve this problem again today, and are well on the way to completely blowing it again. I thought we were the richest and most generous nation in the world, right? Then why is cost such an issue for doing what is right? Then again if this were truely about helping people, corporations would have just paid the people who are already here what it took to hire someone for a job. Instead all of the sudden everyone seems to be OK with enriching corporate American through the exploitation of Central America and Mexico's poor.

 

 

So it is your opinion that it is in Americas best interest to track down and deport every last one?

 

Is it yours that we can pick and choose which laws we want to obey?