SPLIT--> Illegal Immigration

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
You can say those things would rise but if you eliminate all the people that are here illegally the burden on our resources would be eased. Less traffic...we clearly saw this effect on the "day without immigrants" last year. Electricity, Water, Gas, Public services, Education funds,...there is a positive effect on all of it. We could pay more for food and services if we are not getting hit in all the other areas. Supply and demand.
This MAY occur in a place like California, but it's not true throughout the country.


Back at ya...Truth? Yeah, 12 Million illegals brought over by businesses looking for cheap labor. No, more often it is one coming here, getting a job and shipping all their money back south of the border for the next family member to be smuggled across. It is a fact that an insane amount of money from immigrants in California ends up back in Mexico. So much for these hard working immigrants investing back in the local economy.

Yes this occurs, but only a small portion of illegal immigrants come here by paying thousands to a smuggler.

I live in an area with an extremely high number of immigrants from the Far East. There is a large Koren population in the area. These people don't seem to have any problem going through the process to come here legally. I also know that they make an immediate effort to learn English. How is it they can do it? I know Canadians who are here working in the LA area...they did it legally too.

Yes because I'm sure the economy and education system in Korea and Canada is comprable to Mexico... Oh dear.
 
I'm asked about amnesty, I say yes, and provide some reasonable rules and changes to our system. Do we have a rational debate about it..NO. Not even close! What I do get is attacked with what about a person trying to feed their kid? Way to go for the emotional, you cant be heartless enough to say a child should starve ploy! I though there could be a reasonable discussion about this but I was clearly wrong. I give up!

Now who's playing the "emotional" card?

You thought that was an 'attack'? Given some of the things you said when you started posting in here recently and what I asked was an attack? You've got to be kidding... You are right maybe you aren't capable of reasonable discussion.
 
In the interest of attempting to inject a little structure into the discussion...

What do you guys think about e-Verify, the new electronic verification program the Bush Administration is championing to make employers run SSN background checks on all prospective employees? Or the controversial 'no-match' proposals requiring employers to act on notices from Social Security informing them of mismatches in employees' SSN data?

ICE has recently dramatically stepped up large-scale raids at businesses with large numbers of unauthorized workers (as well as criminal prosecutions of employers and, more controversially, employees)--most notably at Agriprocessors Inc. in Postville, IA back in May, most recently at Howard Industries in Laurel, MS.
 
Last edited:
In the interest of attempting to inject a little structure into the discussion...

What do you guys think about e-Verify, the new electronic verification program the Bush Administration is championing to make employers run SSN background checks on all prospective employees?

So far everything I've seen on the system is that it's very flawed...
 
I hope you didn't take my comments as a personal attack. I'm definitely guilty of falling short in that respect as well. It's just that, well yes, I think if many who identify themselves as Christians truly were living up to the badge, then yes, opening up to those who can't feed their children and opening up our homes to those less fortunate might not be such a radical concept. Even those who may have done wrong/committed crimes.

But I don't want to turn this into a debate on Christianity. My apologies. :)

Thanks Diemen, apology accepted and appreciated: I'll tell you why there is a problem with you, or any of the others, trying to tie Christianity to this is issue. I'm confident if I were try tie Christianity to our governments role with regard to gay marriage, homosexuality, sex-before marriage, etc...... you would make the argument of the separating of church and state. I'd be eaten alive for trying to bring God into Washington.. That is why I though it was unfair here. I was discussing illegal immigration from a standpoint of what I feel the government has to do to fix things.

I think you might be mistaking my opinion on government policy with my personal conviction. It was Joe Biden this week who said he believes life begins at conception (personal view) but that his personal view would not dictate his decision for our nation. I even said I respected his opinion. Am I allowed that same consideration? As I said earlier, as an individual I support several charities. Some are based on my faith in God and some are deeply personal. I have supported HIV/AIDS research (because people I care about have lost family members to this awful disease) I support breast cancer research (I lost my sister to the bastard that is cancer) I support the LA Mission who feed , clothe, house and rehabilitate the homeless in downtown LA (a friends family was the ones who started this fantastic facility). Pres Bush wanted to have government support of "Faith Based" program. Liberals were saying no ...separation of church and state!!! These are the types of programs that help that "mother who has no money to feed her kids" that BVS brought up. They not only provide that kind of help her in the US and they take it to the world. I attend church at Saddleback...I'm sure it is a name that you know from the recent forum with McCain and Obama. You should check out their web site and see what is being done all around the world. These wonderful people are living their faith and taking real action, not just wearing ONE bracelets and sending a text message at a concerts. I'm not knocking ONE but I have seen many wearing a bracelet and they have no idea what the campaign is really about. The people of Saddleback are changing the world and bringing some of our hope and love to the far corners of the world.

This is why I dont think it is our governments responsibility to allow people to come here illegally. Our country has programs to take care of our own. We can help women like in your example because our government has a responsibility to the citizens of the US. If you individually are honestly concerned about these people in need and not just using them as an example to win an argument, then what are you doing to make a difference? If you really care, are you willing to support faith base funding or does your concerne for these downtrodden folks end if it requires you do something that is supporting of those awful Christian?
 
I'll tell you why there is a problem with you, or any of the others, trying to tie Christianity to this is issue. I'm confident if I were try tie Christianity to our governments role with regard to gay marriage, homosexuality, sex-before marriage, etc...... you would make the argument of the separating of church and state. I'd be eaten alive for trying to bring God into Washington.. That is why I though it was unfair here. I was discussing illegal immigration from a standpoint of what I feel the government has to do to fix things.

BUT your party is notorious for doing just this. Maybe not you personally, but a big portion of your party is hypocritical in this area. They use religion when it comes to gay marriage(for there is no secular argument), they want the 10 commandments in courthouses, prayer in school, etc yet use separation of church and state when it suits them.
 
BUT your party is notorious for doing just this. Maybe not you personally, but a big portion of your party is hypocritical in this area. They use religion when it comes to gay marriage(for there is no secular argument), they want the 10 commandments in courthouses, prayer in school, etc yet use separation of church and state when it suits them.

Sure, but we are not talking about my party or your party here. In this forum I was giving my personal view on the subject of Illegal Immigration and I had the question of Christianity thrown at me. I have not pushed my Christianity on you with any of the topics discussed in these forums, including the topics of sex-ed in schools and abortion, areas when it is often that case. I think I have been fair enough to not be lumped in with "your party is notorious for doing just this" Please try to give the benefit of the doubt and read what I, me, Chas, is saying. I'm not simply defined the as same as all Conservative Christian Republicans no more than you are with Liberal Democrats or whatever group you may associate with.

I'd would really like to get your answer to my question about funding for faith based programs. The type that help that mom with no money for food that you asked about.
 
Sure, but we are not talking about my party or your party here. In this forum I was giving my personal view on the subject of Illegal Immigration and I had the question of Christianity thrown at me. I have not pushed my Christianity on you with any of the topics discussed in these forums, including the topics of sex-ed in schools and abortion, areas when it is often that case. I think I have been fair enough to not be lumped in with "your party is notorious for doing just this" Please try to give the benefit of the doubt and read what I, me, Chas, is saying. I'm not simply defined the as same as all Conservative Christian Republicans no more than you are with Liberal Democrats or whatever group you may associate with.

Fair enough.

I didn't question you faith, I'm just stating why I think it may have come up.

I'd would really like to get your answer to my question about funding for faith based programs. The type that help that mom with no money for food that you asked about.

I'm torn about faith based programs and the government, I'm not strictly against them but I'm not sure how one discerns which ones can be funded and which ones can't with out subjectivity getting in the way.

That being said this is a much much bigger issue; charity isn't going to be the solution and neither is kicking them all out. I think there needs to be some kind of compromise in working on getting as many immigrants documented and legal.
 
Fair enough.

I didn't question you faith, I'm just stating why I think it may have come up.



I'm torn about faith based programs and the government, I'm not strictly against them but I'm not sure how one discerns which ones can be funded and which ones can't with out subjectivity getting in the way.

That being said this is a much much bigger issue; charity isn't going to be the solution and neither is kicking them all out. I think there needs to be some kind of compromise in working on getting as many immigrants documented and legal.

Thanks for the honest answer.

I agree with the compromise. I even said that the dam is already burst and deportation of everyone here is not possible for dozens of good reasons. That is why I said that the ones getting any amnesty should not be allowed to become citizens. The are getting to stay in the country but the consequence of initially coming in illegally, the compromise, is not having to opportunity to be a citizen, have voting rights and the other benefits afforded to our citizens. I think that is very small thing to give up on the immigrant side. I have no idea how many would even want to become citizens anything.
 
Thanks for the honest answer.

I agree with the compromise. I even said that the dam is already burst and deportation of everyone here is not possible for dozens of good reasons. That is why I said that the ones getting any amnesty should not be allowed to become citizens. The are getting to stay in the country but the consequence of initially coming in illegally, the compromise, is not having to opportunity to be a citizen, have voting rights and the other benefits afforded to our citizens. I think that is very small thing to give up on the immigrant side. I have no idea how many would even want to become citizens anything.

Just a question/thought; if your idea was applied, and these immigrants who came in illegally were allowed to stay but not given citizenship, wouldn't that mean that technically they wouldn't be protected by the constitution - i.e. they wouldn't have the rights and protections guaranteed by the bill of rights - freedom of speech, right against self-incrimination/double jeopardy, protection from unreasonable search and seizure, right to trial by jury, etc.? If so, that seems like it would take away many of the reasons these people would've wanted to live here in the first place.
 
Just a question/thought; if your idea was applied, and these immigrants who came in illegally were allowed to stay but not given citizenship, wouldn't that mean that technically they wouldn't be protected by the constitution - i.e. they wouldn't have the rights and protections guaranteed by the bill of rights - freedom of speech, right against self-incrimination/double jeopardy, protection from unreasonable search and seizure, right to trial by jury, etc.? If so, that seems like it would take away many of the reasons these people would've wanted to live here in the first place.

First, what protections are there for people that come here legally and obtain a greencard? They are not citizens. There have been immigration rallies here in LA where illegals have gathered. The police did not round them up and bus them out. They kept the peace and allowed them the right to meet and protest. We are a pretty civil country. I think you are reaching if you think that giving amnesty but not citizenship is going to result in the losses you spoke of. BTW, how many illegals have committed crimes and received a trial by jury? If we do that for an person illegally here I think it is safe to say that we'd do it for one granted amnesty. Question, would you agree with revoking amnesty if they were convicted of a felony?

The overwhelming argument I hear is that people are coming here to work. If you talk about illegal immigration, what gets thrown at you instantly? Just look back the the responses to what I posted. Its, "Who is going to pick your food, do the dishes, clean the hotel rooms?" The argument is who is going to do the jobs that the immigrants are doing? I doubt there are many who are coming here to be protected from double jeopardy or for a trial by jury. They are looking for a way to provide for their family and live in a place that is safe.
 
Question, would you agree with revoking amnesty if they were convicted of a felony?

I agree that if, pre-amnesty, they have committed a crime other than entering the country illegally, then no amnesty. If they commit a crime like that after being granted amnesty...they'd probably go to jail anyway...does it make a difference if they're in an American jail or in a jail in their home country?
 
If they commit a crime like that after being granted amnesty...they'd probably go to jail anyway...does it make a difference if they're in an American jail or in a jail in their home country?

Yes, it does make a difference. Let the Mexicans or whomever pay for their incarceration. Not the taxpayers of Arizona, California, Texas, etc.
 
Just an FYI to consider...

Money sent home by Mexicans in US drops 12 percent

Even though the numbers are down, nearly 2 Billion dollars a month (15.5 Billion for 8 months) are being pulled out of the US economy and going straight to Mexico!

Note that 2 Billion per month is just Mexico, how much more is going to other countries? Also, I wonder how much of that is from my state, California, which is dealing with financial issues? I'm sure that what ever the amount, it would help our state if it were growing our local economy and not that of Mexico.
 
This seems to me to be more of an argument against immigrants in general than necessarily illegal immigration. I doubt we'd ever be able to parse what percentage of that money is getting sent by illegal immigrants, but even fully legal immigrants send money to their families in their home countries. I know quite a few myself who do so. Should we discourage them from doing so?
 
Yeah, this will sound harsh but it is not my problem if you're from another country and cannot feed your kid. My country has programs to help people in situations like that. My tax dollars go to programs to help my fellow Americans that need a helping hand.

Also, many of these people who come here illegally are paying "coyotes," illegal immigrant smugglers 100's and 1000's of dollars to sneak them across the border. Where is that money coming from??

If people want open borders, it's okay but without social programs. As soon as you have social programs there is a tragedy of the commons that occurs forcing you to have limits on immigration and borders. Free rides can't last forever.

The liberal argument is usually "hey they are here already so lets allow them to stay." Also they like to shame people for the idea of deportation. Can you imagine the news coverage if most of the illegal immigrants were deported over a year. The sob stories would accumulate and the guilt would make the majority agree to more amnesty. Millions of illegals are a lot to deport.

All limits on immigration will be half measures for the forseeable future. The only viable reform will apply to people who are wanting to come illegally and haven't done so yet, but not those who already arrived.

Hopefully one day Mexico will have better governments and more jobs so people don't actually want to leave.

In Canada legal immigrants have a tough time because a lot of their education is applicable but professional associations often require them to start all over again. The wealthy want immigrant workers and the poor look at them as competition.
 
This seems to me to be more of an argument against immigrants in general than necessarily illegal immigration. I doubt we'd ever be able to parse what percentage of that money is getting sent by illegal immigrants, but even fully legal immigrants send money to their families in their home countries. I know quite a few myself who do so. Should we discourage them from doing so?

I know that one cannot account what amount is from illegal immigrants verses legal. Regardless of the status, 2 Billion per month going away from the US economy is staggering. These funds are the 2nd largest source of foreign income for Mexico. 2nd Largest! That is insane. There is no service provided. No goods that come in to our country. This money is lost to our economy.

I'm not saying that immigrants living legally in the US should not send money to family in Mexico. However, you need to be realistic with the numbers. 2 BILLION. $2,000,000,000 per month. If many of theses people, legal or not, are "working the low wage jobs that American won't do?" How much do they really make? How much can they afford to send and pay their bills, buy food, etc? It just makes that 2 Billion look bigger and bigger.
 
However, you need to be realistic with the numbers. 2 BILLION. $2,000,000,000 per month. If many of theses people, legal or not, are "working the low wage jobs that American won't do?" How much do they really make? How much can they afford to send and pay their bills, buy food, etc? It just makes that 2 Billion look bigger and bigger.

This number doesn't make sense to me. Do we have another source? Grab a calculator and find out how many folks need to be sending per month... It just doesn't add up.
 
This number doesn't make sense to me. Do we have another source? Grab a calculator and find out how many folks need to be sending per month... It just doesn't add up.

It may not make sense to you, but it is what it is. This is info from the Bank of Mexico and it a stat that has been tracked for 12 years! It cannot be passed it off as jaded info from some right-wing group with an agenda.

The problem is that is does add up.
 
I'm not saying that immigrants living legally in the US should not send money to family in Mexico. However, you need to be realistic with the numbers. 2 BILLION. $2,000,000,000 per month. If many of theses people, legal or not, are "working the low wage jobs that American won't do?" How much do they really make? How much can they afford to send and pay their bills, buy food, etc? It just makes that 2 Billion look bigger and bigger.

You should be more concerned about corporations who ship jobs to other countries than how much money is being sent to help the families of immigrants - illegal or not.
My grandmother sends her family money every time she can save enough to do so. It's none of your business, his business, my business, their business, the government's business, anybody's freaking business what she does with her money in the first place. Isn't that what the Republicans are about? Whenever I scoff at these idiots slamming their gas pedals in a big Hummer my dad rants at me not to get mad because if they can afford it, then who gives a shit?
If an immigrant can afford to send money to his family back home, then so be it. He still has to contribute to the economy just by living here, illegal or not.
 
At the same time, it has nothing to do with racism. Personally I think it only serves to diminish real cases of racism when people throw the race card around so recklessly.

Did you read the article? It's nothing but racial paranoia. Then you put it in the context of this thread and it just sounds like, look here is another reason to stop the Mexicans from coming in for they'll destroy higher education.
 
You should be more concerned about corporations who ship jobs to other countries than how much money is being sent to help the families of immigrants - illegal or not.
My grandmother sends her family money every time she can save enough to do so. It's none of your business, his business, my business, their business, the government's business, anybody's freaking business what she does with her money in the first place. Isn't that what the Republicans are about? Whenever I scoff at these idiots slamming their gas pedals in a big Hummer my dad rants at me not to get mad because if they can afford it, then who gives a shit?
If an immigrant can afford to send money to his family back home, then so be it. He still has to contribute to the economy just by living here, illegal or not.

Sure, I wish more companies were able to stay in the US, but who's fault is that? It's seems most on the left see companies as the bad guys. "No, dont give them a tax break or incentives!" That's Obama's plan and the result is companies pack up and move and jobs are lost.

Lets look at companies that are shipping job out. We, Americans, are seeking products but we dont want to pay a premium. Go to a Wal-Mart or Target on any given weekend and you'll find the place packed. We want things inexpensive. The company I work for had to move production from near Boston, MA to China. If we did not, we could not price our product competitively and we'd ALL be out of jobs. Are you willing to pay more for what you buy for it to be made in the US? When you are bitching about that Hummer, are you and your family driving American cars and supporting domestic workers? Do you let your actions match your words?


The work is may be done elsewhere but the US is provided with goods at a reasonable cost. We get something for that contributes to our economy. Money shipped to Mexico give us NOTHING.

No, it is not my business what you Grandma does. I couldn't care less what she does. But when pro-immigration people make the argument that immigrants are contributing to the US economy yet 2 Billion a month is going back to Mexico, that argument is pure BS.
 
Back
Top Bottom