A modest proposal for illegal immigration

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by achilleus

Does this mean we'll have to pay more for fruit and meals as businesses pay more for employees? If so, that sucks.

One way or another you're going to pay. If not for food then:

a) higher health care costs to cover those who can't afford to pay
b) taxes to cover programs for those who are out of work
c) higher insurance premiums to cover accidents caused by those who can't afford insurance
d) more money for a house in a safer neighborhood
e) a burglar alarm for your house
f) a private security patrol to respond to the alarm
g) taxes to build more prisons to keep the guys the security patrol catch

[AndrewH]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pfleschbach

NO ONE CARED A RAT'S #$%! Why? Because we were white, spoke English and no one viewed us as a threat to their way of life.

Actually, they didn't care because:

Originally Posted by Dr. Pfleschbach

Neither my grandfather, nor I worked for less pay than legal residents. We paid our debts and our taxes. With the exception of our immigration status we obeyed the laws and adopted the customs of our adopted homes.

My argument here is that problems arise when illegal immigrants DO work for less pay, DON'T pay debts and taxes and DON'T obey the laws of the US.

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

My argument here is that problems arise when illegal immigrants DO work for less pay, DON'T pay debts and taxes and DON'T obey the laws of the US.

I agree with you. But you can't blame them for going after the only carrot being dangled in front of them. It's not like they would refuse more money if it were being offered. Who sets the pay rate? The employer. Who provides the mechanism by which most of us pay our taxes? The employer. And, assuming that the main debt illegals incur is a bill from the emergency room at the county hospital, what is the source of medical insurance for most people? The employer. So if we want to solve these problems we have to deal with the employers because thay are responsible for creating them. It seems pretty clear to me that, if you do that, the illegal alien problem will go away since the jobs they're coming here for won't be available because they'll be taken by Americans.

[AndrewH]

What can we possibly do to employers to make them comply? Nothing, hiring illegals is already against the law. Illegal immigration will happen, no matter what. My original post was outlining a plan to reform immigration laws in order to gain the maximum benefit from this inevitable situation.

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

What can we possibly do to employers to make them comply? Nothing, hiring illegals is already against the law. Illegal immigration will happen, no matter what. My original post was outlining a plan to reform immigration laws in order to gain the maximum benefit from this inevitable situation.

We could enforce the laws on the books, pass a living wage law, & either mandate employer supplied health insurance or adopt some sort of government administrated single payer plan similar to Canada's. We might need some sort of biometric national ID card as well. Sure, it'll cost us a bundle, but it'll also save us a bundle for all the reasons I listed in my previous post.

This will never happen under a GOP dominated government because it's going to alienate their constituencies, some of whom are the ones screaming the loudest about illegal immigration. I say some because the businesses hiring illegals aren't interested in solving the problem, I don't think they even believe there is a problem.

It probably won't happen if the DEMs are running things either because they are gutless and lack a charismatic spokesperson who can advocate policies in a courageous, consistent and coherent manner. Also, their working class constituants whose jobs have been taken by illegals don't contribute enough money to the campaign coffers to get the party's attention. Maybe if an illegal took George Soros's job?

Maybe the problem just isn't bad enough for anyone to do what it's going to take to solve it.

[rcmatthews]

Yeah, thats what we want a socialist government. HOORAY. Great lives for everyone. Ask France how that works out.

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by rcmatthews

Yeah, thats what we want a socialist government. HOORAY. Great lives for everyone. Ask France how that works out.

You use the term socialist extremely loosely. Every modern democratic state includes elements of socialism to one degree or another, including the United States. After all, we are a self-proclaimed government "Of the people, by the people, for the people". It sounds like your definition of socialism is a government made up of "Us" instead of "Them". I don't accept your statement as being the result of thoughtful consideration.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

If we get rid of illegal immigrants, produce prices will rise dramatically. We need a wall, like the great wall of china, and we need a balancing systems. Illegals have a place in our system, and that is in the fields, making things cheaper for us.

[AndrewH]

Did anyone actually read my proposal?

[ReverseLunge]

When you import the third world, your standards adjust to accommodate it. It would be cheaper to send back these useless people who take far more than they are capable of contributing.





Illegal immigration allows us to experience the problems created by people totally irrelevant to us.


The thing that is f'ing us up is not whether they are legal or not. The thing that is f'ing us up is their low class, trashy culture and their beggar value system. If the majority of the illegals were Indo European or North Oriental then no one would have an issue since these kind of people aren't a burden.

America was not founded as a "melting pot" for the world's needy garbage looking for a free ride, but instead as a place for people with dignity and high values capable of creating civilization.

[rcmatthews]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

Did anyone actually read my proposal?

Yes. The problem that I have with the illegal immigrant protest movements is that it seems like they feel they are entitled to jobs and health care in the US. They most certainly are not. What they are entitled to is a jail cell and a nice ride back to wherever they came from.

That picture of the mexican and american flags pisses me off

[Dr. Pfleschbach]

Originally Posted by AndrewH

Did anyone actually read my proposal?

Yeah, I read it. But in one of your posts responding to a comment I made you said:

"What can we possibly do to employers to make them comply? Nothing, hiring illegals is already against the law. Illegal immigration will happen, no matter what. My original post was outlining a plan to reform immigration laws in order to gain the maximum benefit from this inevitable situation."

So my question to you is: If illegal immigration is inevitable and you aren't willing to enforce the laws prohibiting the employers from hiring them, why should the employers bother with these guys running around with newly minted work permits? The employers rely on exploiting people with no options and then sticking us with the consequences. If you give the people options they no longer qualify for the job.

[AndrewH]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pfleschbach

So my question to you is: If illegal immigration is inevitable and you aren't willing to enforce the laws prohibiting the employers from hiring them, why should the employers bother with these guys running around with newly minted work permits? The employers rely on exploiting people with no options and then sticking us with the consequences. If you give the people options they no longer qualify for the job.

I didn't say I wasn't willing to enforce the laws. What I said was, under our current system where it's much much easier to cross the border illegaly than apply for residency, there won't be any way to effectively enforce our laws against employing illegals. However, under my proposal, it would become much more attractive to go through the legitimate system and much more DIFFICULT to go through the illegal system. There would be harsher penalties implemented and greater border security as a deterrent. Illegals caught without a permit would be automatically deported and/or punished, no questions asked. Therefore, nearly every immigrant worker WOULD be legitimate and the employers would have no choice but to hire them.

[ReverseLunge]

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2006-04-10hm.html

What Would Mexico Do with Protesting Illegals?
Deport them on the spot.
10 April 2006 EMAIL
RESPOND
PRINT



The Mexican government constantly hectors the American people about how we should treat its illegal migrants. President Vicente Fox, Foreign Secretary Ernesto Derbez, and Mexican consuls in the United States insist that Americans should be grateful for the hundreds of thousands of surplus Mexicans who break across our border each year. Without them, these leaders explain, the American economy would grind to a halt (never mind that Mexico’s management of its own affairs would seem to undercut the officials’ economic expertise). Therefore, as a token of appreciation for keeping us afloat, say the Mexican apologists, we must grant amnesty to the law-breakers and reward them for illegal entry with a host of rights.

Fine. If Mexico wants to dictate our immigration policy to us, let’s follow their example to the letter. That example is particularly relevant on this further day of protests demanding amnesty for illegals. Among the demonstrators in at least 60 cities nationwide will undoubtedly be thousands of border lawbreakers. What would Mexico do? The answer is easy: deport them on the spot. In 2002, a dozen American college students, in Mexico legally, participated peacefully in an environmental protest against a planned airport outside of Mexico City. They swiftly found themselves deported as law-breakers for interfering in Mexico’s internal affairs.

If Mexico was willing to strip these students of their duly-obtained travel visas, imagine what it would have done had the students broken into the country surreptitiously—not just summary deportation but undoubtedly howls of complaint to the U.S. government for winking at this double violation of Mexican sovereignty. Open borders propagandists in the U.S. constantly present deportation as a patent act of cruelty that no right-thinking person would tolerate. Yet Mexico has no qualms about deporting not just illegals but legal immigrants as well whom it deems fractious.

If participation in an environmental protest constitutes unlawful interference in Mexico’s internal affairs, how much more intrusive would it deem mass demonstrations to legalize immigration law-breakers? No issue is more central to a country’s sovereignty than immigration policy. Yet we won’t be seeing any statements by Mexican diplomats today urging its citizens in the U.S. to refrain from efforts to influence American laws.

It is particularly delicious to imagine what would happen if American students in Mexico ran the American flag up a flag pole over an upside down Mexican flag, as students in a Southern California high school did last month. An international crisis! Each participant would be promptly ejected and possibly the American ambassador as well. When President Ernesto Zedillo tried to revise Mexican textbooks in the 1990s to be more favorable toward U.S. foreign policy, Mexico’s pundits denounced him as a traitor. Yet Mexican consuls in the U.S. work mightily to disseminate Mexican textbooks in U.S. schools and they have raised not a peep of remonstrance against Mexican protesters carrying signs such as THIS IS STOLEN LAND and WE DIDN’T CROSS THE BORDER, THE BORDER CROSSED US during the mass demonstrations last month.

Efforts to portray the student protesters in particular as modern day civil rights crusaders are laughable. Far from representing a sacrifice, cutting school is something of a tradition among Hispanics in the U.S., who have a high school dropout rate of just under 50 percent. Taxpayers must pay for the schooling of illegal aliens and their children, yet local schools get stiffed on their per-pupil payments from their state governments because truancy rates are so high. Immigration protests just drive the base truancy rate up higher. In December 2003, the school district in Santa Ana, California, the most Spanish-speaking large city in the country, promised to raffle off a color TV set to students who came to school on the day of a statewide protest against the repeal of a California law granting drivers licenses to illegal aliens. The streets won out over the free TV, and the district lost thousands of dollars in state funds.

Then there’s the question of whom we should favor in our immigration policy. Accept only the economic cream of other countries. Mexico’s immigration law grants preferences to scientists and other professionals likely to contribute to “national progress.” Peasants with third-grade educations aren’t high on their wish list; in fact they do everything they can to keep them out. Local observers have often alleged Mexico’s brutal treatment of impoverished Central Americans crossing its borders. Yet according to Mexican officials, millions of uneducated, unskilled campesinos are just what the American economy needs.

You have to admire the Mexican elites. They have a clear-sighted understanding of their country’s national interest—which lies above all in getting as many Mexican citizens as possible into the U.S. for their billions of dollars in remittances—and they’re unapologetic about pursuing it. Mass demonstrations that include illegal residents demanding that Mexico override its laws to accommodate them wouldn’t cow those elites for an instant. Too bad American officials can’t summon the same commitment to the wishes of the American people, who overwhelmingly oppose the rewarding of law breaking. The U.S. government isn’t about to deport the thousands of illegals who will be exploiting the American right to protest today, but it should at least not be swayed by their mass show of force.

[Inquartata]

Even many immigrants are against illegal immigration:

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...tance0410.html

[TrainingDummy]

RL's post is interesting, but I trust the ethics of Mexico's government even less than those of my own. From my perspective, elites rarely act in favor of that kind of dempgraphic, no matter the nation. You're right, raising the Mexican flag above an upside-down American flag in support of people who fled from the former is kind of lame. But saying that they speak for all illegals and their supporters is like saying Fred Phelps is the spokesperson for Christianity.

[lochinvar]

Originally Posted by TrainingDummy

But saying that they speak for all illegals and their supporters is like saying Fred Phelps is the spokesperson for Christianity.

Wait--you mean he isn't the spokesperson for Christianity?

[rcmatthews]

i would think that most legal immigrants are against illegal immigration. Since they took the time to get here legally, why should illegal ones get to come across at will.

[achilleus]

Originally Posted by rcmatthews

i would think that most legal immigrants are against illegal immigration. Since they took the time to get here legally, why should illegal ones get to come across at will.

And you would be wrong.

Some think this way. Some don't. Many immigrants help undocumented people from their country with jobs so they can get ahead, and eventually become legal residents.