I submit the thoughts of one the brightest minds in America today, Mr. Jacob Hornberger for reading enjoyment and the intellectual exercise for those who desire.
My only thought to share is this: the corrupt federal government typically screws everything else up, what makes anyone think they can make immigration work?
Dave, to the degree that I'm against the Senate plan is that it has quotas on immigration.
I'd favor no quotas, no barriers -- though I think for security reasons, there needs to be a process where everybody crossing the border is documented and there's due process for keeping potential bad actors out (be they terrorists or common criminals).
Other than that, I do think it will help with the current crisis.
And looking at the poll results, it seems a lot of people are planning on giving up food, or paying a lot more for it, or getting by on a diet of corn.
1) I do not believe that someone should be able to just walk or drive across the border and declare themselves an American citizen. Security issues like terrorist ties, criminal records should ALWAYS be a consideration.
2) Citizenship should require a demonstrated basic knowledge of our form of government, nothing lawyerly, just a basic knowledge of the three distinct branches of government, the relationship between states and the federal government and the inherent responsibilities of citizenship. (Some American born citizen should probably take a refresher course ;)
Anyone who wishes to become a citizen should be able to register and receive a temporary citizenship if they pass a security screening and pending a basic civics (The basic knowledge of our system orientation course) a say 5 year waiting period. I AM NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD TAKE A TEST, just take the course.
During the 5 year waiting program no welfare, public assistance or government disability should be allowed and Anchor babies should not be granted citizen ship until their parents meet the 5 year waiting period and orientation course.
3) Quotas are contrary to what we are, there should be none.
Before anyone launches on a diatribe about why should someone take a course or register, note THERE IS NOT ONE NATION IN THE WORLD that does not have immigration rules and requirements, Canada for example requires that you learn to speak either English or French and either have pre arranged employment or the capital to start your own business. France requires that you speak French etc. etc,
We still are the land of opportunity, and we should still live by 'Bring me your weak, your tired, your hungry" with the belief that anyone who is willing to sacrifice in this nation can succeed beyond the expectations of most.
Howard: You say you don't believe we should have quotas for immigrants. I totally disagree with you. Through the years, I've heard countless people state that, "These people are just trying to have a better life than they have in their countries of birth. They deserve to emmigrate to the U.S., so that they can: (a)Feed their families or themselves (b)Have freedoms that they don't have where they live, (c)Get away from the squalid conditions they face at home, (d)Escape the oppressive gov'ts they live under". Yes, in a perfect world, it would be great if we could help all those who needed it. That being said, I'm going to take the "devils advocate' side. Let's assume, and, yes, I know what Benny Hill said about the word assume, but, for this arguement, let's assume we were to let everyone emmigrate here for the purposes I mentioned. Let's assume there were ONLY 1-million North Koreans who'd like to live here, so that they could be FREE. How about China? Don't you think there might possibly be a couple milion Chinese that would rather live here (personally, I believe that the number would be over 10-million, but that's just my thought). What about India? Of the 1-billion-plus that live there, do you suppose there might be, let's say, 10-million Indians who are sick & tired of scrounging for morsels of food, and they would love to emmigrate here, for "a better life"? And that's only 3 countries so far. There's 100's of countries out there, and there's a LOT of people that would love to come here, for many different reasons. I believe there could possibly be (and, again, I'm assuming), but I believe that AT LEAST 1% of the people in other countries would LOVE to be able to come here. 1% of the 6.6 BILLION would be 66-MILLION!! Do we really have enough here to sustain 66-million more people? And that's only if 1% were the number. What if it were 5-percent? Could we honestly DOUBLE the U.S. population, as it stands today, without hurting? As I said, this is only assuming on my part. But, without quota's, we could be opening ourselves up to something unimaginable. That's my thoughts on why we need to limit immigration.
Ed, "The Means to Come Here' pretty much mitigates your examples. You are correct millions and millions of people might want to come here, perhaps a billion or so, but the means to reach our shores drastically limits their ability to do so.
And if a North Korean is willing to risk imprisonment or death for leaving their country and coming here, that might be the same kind of person that you want as your neighbor
Mark not interfering with whoever wants to come here and earn a living doesn't necessarily mean all will want to become citizens. I would want to see separate criteria for citizenship. I am totally with you against the "anchor baby" clause.
Dave, the birth right of citizenship for people born on our soil of non citizen parents was written to correct the wrong of slavery, Not to be a free ticket for circumventing immigration law
Say a migrant couple comes here and has a child while working say in Elba, then goes back to the Honduras or Panama and lives 20 years as a citizen there, Then all of a sudden, decides hey I want to move to the United States, why should they be treated any different than anyone else.
With what I am suggesting, the parents would earn, for lack of a better word, their citizenship after the five years, barring a change of heart or say conviction of a felony during the waiting period. If those parents change their mind and move back to their country of birth, or are deported to to commission of a felony, that child would be 5 years old or less, if they choose to return as an adult and go through the process themselves, fine I welcome them with open arms. But when they go back with their parents to country of origin, they are citizens of that country, assimilated into that culture and educated in that countries form of government, not ours.
It defeats the purpose of a five year wait
Read the Bill, not just the article, The Path to citizenship clause is what actually confuses the issue and the fact that many migrants have over stayed their work and have become actual immigrants.
Street Fight?!? I'm gonna start handing out the chains, and shivs and zip guns.... If we are gonna have a street fight with the politicians, might as well make it interesting. ( Cue west side story soundtrack someone )
I should clarify -- No quotas is overly broad. I'm not against restrictions, obviously -- no criminals, as I mentioned, for example. I also wouldn't object to some sort of criteria related to already holding a job.
The problem with a semantics comparison between migrants and immigrants is that you never know which migrants might eventually become immigrants.
I'm not against any person who can come to this country, work hard and improve the economy.
The good by far outweighs the bad for the United States when you allow people to come here and work and contribute, whether they keep their money here or send it home.
Conservatives get their panties in a wad over "illegal immigrants," forgetting that the only thing that has made them illegal was immoral immigration laws in the first place, so I don't object to a path to citizenship.
Being a free country is what made us a great country. The more we head down the socialist path of a managed economy (which includes managed immigration), the worse off we are.
People have a right to seek property to the best of their ability as each individual sees fit.
There are all kinds of barriers to immigration that have nothing to do with fences on borders -- family ties, jobs, lack of resources to make the trip, fear, etc. keep people from migrating. Our borders won't suddenly be flooded with migrants/immigrants just because we drop many of the anti-free market barriers that have plagued our immigration policy for so long, because not everybody wants to be a migrant.
What is a border, but a line drawn on a map? There were no borders before humans decided to be territorial jack wagons. This world is all of ours, period. You can own your property, but to deny good people access to our country...because of what?
Fear? Safety? Do you know how much freedom has been given away in the name of being safer? The Patriot Act, NDAA, Safe Act.....
If you don't like the thought of people collecting services? Fix the program.
If you don't like people taking jobs? Go get a farm job.
If you don't like that people don't speak our language? Teach them, oh and don't go to another country unless you speak theirs!
I lived in Europe for 3 1/2 years. I can't even count the amount of times that Americans would be so rude that their hosts didn't speak English. The sense of entitlement is nauseating.
My point is, I find the whole immigration discussion to be fear mongering nonsense. The process to come to our nation should be easy; to work, simple. For those who only find comfort in a Police State regime, collect their data, just like they have yours, but enough with this.
And to answer the question, could we handle 66 million more people? I sure hope so, because at our rate of growth we'll be there in a decade or so.
.
Asking only that one orients themselves as to our form of government and not be a murderer or convicted thief, are in my opinion a clear path to citizenship. I do not see that as managed immigration, I am not Teddy Roosevelt so I am not saying just bring the right kind of immigrant, just not someone who is running from a criminal past or coming here on some Jihad is all.
I think Howard that you and I are so very close in thought on this.
As far as semantics goes, merely pointing out if one comes here just to work with intent to return to their homeland, they are not an immigrant, they are a migrant worker, If they change their mind and choose to stay and become a citizen so be it, just follow the criteria that I suggest and what ever time they have already worked here count toward the waiting period that I mentioned.
The reason why I prefer an orientation and a waiting period is not just about social programs, it is about the most sacred responsibility of citizenship, the RIGHT TO VOTE, if you grant that right without regard to a basic knowledge of our constitution, our basic structure of government i.e. the separation of powers, and to someone who is more of a nomad than a citizen, you cheapen that vote. That is all I am saying.
In regard to Phil's statement that borders are nothing but a line on the map and the world is everyone's, that is certainly true in an Utopia, unfortunately, an Utopic world does not, can not and never will exist due to human nature itself.
Our language, government and judicial system should not just be taught but, we should allow just those who have the skills and ability to support themselve. Or we can just keep going down the path of self-destruction where we keep taking the sick, lame and lazy while businesses and their owners leave our shores. After all who does not enjoy wasting money on those who are not willing to contribute to society and just take?
Your right, Mark it won't, but that doesn't mean I want my money being squandered on the stupidity that is INS, and billions on ridiculous fences. The fact that people with access to the money are truly asinine enough to think that these are viable options, just makes me sad.
John, people who have the means, the where with all and the drive to make their way here for the most part have at least basic skills, otherwise they could not afford to get here. The sacrifices that those with little financial means go through to get here says mountains about contribution.
People hide in the shadows when they come here for two basic reasons, 1 they have criminal intent or history, or more often 2, they fear deportation because of an over bearing work visa/ immigration policy.
If we don't believe in 'Bring me your weak, your tired, your hungry, your oppressed ' what do we believe in. I for believe that a large part of make us a great nation is not just our basic liberty, but our charity and our opportunity. Sometimes I think that many people who I may agree with on a wide range of issues seem to forget that.
Document, and give an opportunity ...... after all your ancestors were given just that.
The INS is a result of current law Phil, I am not suggesting strengthening that, in fact I believe it can be diminished with common sense legislation.
I actually agree with you on that to a large extent. Elimination in totality however, is a bit of a stretch, there has to be a means to ensure that some semblance of security exist.
I see the answer as a way less cumbersome, stream lined method of applying for work visa and/or citizenship applications. Protecting our borders is the most basic responsibility of our federal government.
Mark yes there are criminals and those who fear deportation. You forget there are those who come here to for our social services. More than we probably know. Mothers illegally cross our borders every day for many reasons in which some are for their child to be an automatic citizen who gets them citizenship. Who is going to banish and deport a mother from her child? Now this mother files to collect social services and benefits to help raise her child and she will never be expected to work. If she does work it will be low wages and/or under the table. I know there are criminals that are entering this country. Funny thing is, they are all criminals once they cross illegally. We talk about allowing amnesty for those illegals who are already here and those who will come in the future. These laws are politically motivated and will not benefit our country. It will become worst and terrorists and drug cartels will use this to their benefit only.
We keep allowing our government to misguide and misinform us and we all fall for it. We got those who believe we should open our borders completely (Which is idiotic) and those who think we should close are borders completely (Which is paranoia). We need to take control and focus on securing our borders and stop letting agencies like the ACLU mislead us in believing we are violating the rights of illegal immigrants. We are our own worst enemy and we don’t see it.
My ancestors also, came here and never collect a government dime. My ancestors also started their own business from their own savings (I know OMG, right?) and contributed to the US society.
My ancestors also were not criminals and came here legally. So Mark, to compare my ancestors with illegal immigration is very clueless on your end.
When talking about immigration, 99% of the time we mean Hispanics. I have a friend who lives in Germany. She is a college graduate with many skills besides the field of her degree. She has a brilliant mind, speaks better English than most Americans, has remarkable problem solving skills, not to mention amazing people skills. She would give anything to be able to move to America, but her chances are practically zero. She would have to have a job here and not just any job like at Burger King. She would need to have a job that only her special set of skills would fulfill. A system that will grant amnesty to illegals yet keep someone like my friend out of the US who would be nothing but an asset to this country is totally insane.
The reason why we have shadow immigrants or illegal immigrants is because our immigration laws have become so cumbersome, so arbitrary and so quota oriented that many if not most times it is easier for those seeking employment or citizenship to ignore them and try to chase the American Dream through a back door.
I am not idiotic as I do not believe anyone should just be able prance in, nor am I paranoid thinking we should seal the borders tighter than a barometric chamber. With regard to people coming here for social service benefit alone, well that is not as common as many of our more paranoid believe, in fact, that is more likely to be abused by many citizens than immigrants who largely come here for work and/or opportunity.
When my grandfather came here in 1913 to avoid being impressed into the Kaiser's Army and my grandmother a year later after working in Canada for 5 years to bank enough money to get a start in the US, they too sought no help from government, neither spoke more than maybe 50 words of English beyond the pledge of allegiance which was required to become a citizen back then until the day they died, yet my Grandmother built a catering business which she ran for 60 years, my grandfather learned to weld and even became a Civil Defense Block captain in WWII, so I didn't make that comparison lightly.
You are in Law Enforcement, you should know that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are not border jumpers but people who over stayed work and education visas, the migrant workers who enter illegally do so not for our benefits, but because getting a work visa is so cumbersome and laden with bureaucratic BS that boggles the mind.
We need to stream line the work visa process and make outright immigration a reasonable process or we will never solve the problem, that is all that I have been saying. No Quotas, no ridiculous lengthy bureaucratic process.
If we truly are a free country, we need to welcome those who want to come here, not look down on them as though they are inferior. As far as the social services rip offs, I addressed that in my very first post on this issue, I suggest that you go back and read it carefully.
That is exactly what I am talking about Janice, we should welcome your friend or anyone that truly wants to come here, not burden them with bureaucratic BS. She should be able to come here, register, and even if she had to find a crummy job for a few months be allowed to seek employment in her field from here, not 3,000 miles away.
No Mark. The point is the Immigration policies are bs and will do nothing. Second is that there is a high number of immigrants in this country who soak our social services because, they either bring no skills to the table or prefer not to work. I am not saying all but, let's face it. As long as we have a government willing to spend money we do not have to support the lazyness of society and all those who use fraud to gain such. Numbers will grow and we become even bigger losers.
We do need to take control of our borders and asap.
I submit the thoughts of one
I submit the thoughts of one the brightest minds in America today, Mr. Jacob Hornberger for reading enjoyment and the intellectual exercise for those who desire.
My only thought to share is this: the corrupt federal government typically screws everything else up, what makes anyone think they can make immigration work?
http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/immigration-socialism-freedom-fr…
Dave, to the degree that I'm
Dave, to the degree that I'm against the Senate plan is that it has quotas on immigration.
I'd favor no quotas, no barriers -- though I think for security reasons, there needs to be a process where everybody crossing the border is documented and there's due process for keeping potential bad actors out (be they terrorists or common criminals).
Other than that, I do think it will help with the current crisis.
And looking at the poll results, it seems a lot of people are planning on giving up food, or paying a lot more for it, or getting by on a diet of corn.
(No subject)
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzJNDxmAuFE]
(No subject)
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2eO65BqxBE]
This is always a touchy
This is always a touchy subject for many reasons.
1) I do not believe that someone should be able to just walk or drive across the border and declare themselves an American citizen. Security issues like terrorist ties, criminal records should ALWAYS be a consideration.
2) Citizenship should require a demonstrated basic knowledge of our form of government, nothing lawyerly, just a basic knowledge of the three distinct branches of government, the relationship between states and the federal government and the inherent responsibilities of citizenship. (Some American born citizen should probably take a refresher course ;)
Anyone who wishes to become a citizen should be able to register and receive a temporary citizenship if they pass a security screening and pending a basic civics (The basic knowledge of our system orientation course) a say 5 year waiting period. I AM NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD TAKE A TEST, just take the course.
During the 5 year waiting program no welfare, public assistance or government disability should be allowed and Anchor babies should not be granted citizen ship until their parents meet the 5 year waiting period and orientation course.
3) Quotas are contrary to what we are, there should be none.
Before anyone launches on a diatribe about why should someone take a course or register, note THERE IS NOT ONE NATION IN THE WORLD that does not have immigration rules and requirements, Canada for example requires that you learn to speak either English or French and either have pre arranged employment or the capital to start your own business. France requires that you speak French etc. etc,
We still are the land of opportunity, and we should still live by 'Bring me your weak, your tired, your hungry" with the belief that anyone who is willing to sacrifice in this nation can succeed beyond the expectations of most.
Howard: You say you don't
Howard: You say you don't believe we should have quotas for immigrants. I totally disagree with you. Through the years, I've heard countless people state that, "These people are just trying to have a better life than they have in their countries of birth. They deserve to emmigrate to the U.S., so that they can: (a)Feed their families or themselves (b)Have freedoms that they don't have where they live, (c)Get away from the squalid conditions they face at home, (d)Escape the oppressive gov'ts they live under". Yes, in a perfect world, it would be great if we could help all those who needed it. That being said, I'm going to take the "devils advocate' side. Let's assume, and, yes, I know what Benny Hill said about the word assume, but, for this arguement, let's assume we were to let everyone emmigrate here for the purposes I mentioned. Let's assume there were ONLY 1-million North Koreans who'd like to live here, so that they could be FREE. How about China? Don't you think there might possibly be a couple milion Chinese that would rather live here (personally, I believe that the number would be over 10-million, but that's just my thought). What about India? Of the 1-billion-plus that live there, do you suppose there might be, let's say, 10-million Indians who are sick & tired of scrounging for morsels of food, and they would love to emmigrate here, for "a better life"? And that's only 3 countries so far. There's 100's of countries out there, and there's a LOT of people that would love to come here, for many different reasons. I believe there could possibly be (and, again, I'm assuming), but I believe that AT LEAST 1% of the people in other countries would LOVE to be able to come here. 1% of the 6.6 BILLION would be 66-MILLION!! Do we really have enough here to sustain 66-million more people? And that's only if 1% were the number. What if it were 5-percent? Could we honestly DOUBLE the U.S. population, as it stands today, without hurting? As I said, this is only assuming on my part. But, without quota's, we could be opening ourselves up to something unimaginable. That's my thoughts on why we need to limit immigration.
Ed, "The Means to Come Here'
Ed, "The Means to Come Here' pretty much mitigates your examples. You are correct millions and millions of people might want to come here, perhaps a billion or so, but the means to reach our shores drastically limits their ability to do so.
And if a North Korean is willing to risk imprisonment or death for leaving their country and coming here, that might be the same kind of person that you want as your neighbor
Mark not interfering with
Mark not interfering with whoever wants to come here and earn a living doesn't necessarily mean all will want to become citizens. I would want to see separate criteria for citizenship. I am totally with you against the "anchor baby" clause.
those are 2 different subjects
I totally agree Dave, and
I totally agree Dave, and that is exactly why our immigration laws at present, and to some degree the proposed Senate law are so befuddling.
Politics has so muddled both issues together that finding a reasonable solution is pretty much a street fight
Why doi we call migrant workers immigrants in the first place? That has always puzzled me.
Dave, the birth right of
Dave, the birth right of citizenship for people born on our soil of non citizen parents was written to correct the wrong of slavery, Not to be a free ticket for circumventing immigration law
Say a migrant couple comes here and has a child while working say in Elba, then goes back to the Honduras or Panama and lives 20 years as a citizen there, Then all of a sudden, decides hey I want to move to the United States, why should they be treated any different than anyone else.
With what I am suggesting, the parents would earn, for lack of a better word, their citizenship after the five years, barring a change of heart or say conviction of a felony during the waiting period. If those parents change their mind and move back to their country of birth, or are deported to to commission of a felony, that child would be 5 years old or less, if they choose to return as an adult and go through the process themselves, fine I welcome them with open arms. But when they go back with their parents to country of origin, they are citizens of that country, assimilated into that culture and educated in that countries form of government, not ours.
It defeats the purpose of a five year wait
Read the Bill, not just the article, The Path to citizenship clause is what actually confuses the issue and the fact that many migrants have over stayed their work and have become actual immigrants.
"Why doi we call migrant
"Why doi we call migrant workers immigrants in the first place? That has always puzzled me."
I just call them people.
The only solution to socialist problems like this is to abandon socialism
Street Fight?!? I'm gonna
Street Fight?!? I'm gonna start handing out the chains, and shivs and zip guns.... If we are gonna have a street fight with the politicians, might as well make it interesting. ( Cue west side story soundtrack someone )
I should clarify -- No quotas
I should clarify -- No quotas is overly broad. I'm not against restrictions, obviously -- no criminals, as I mentioned, for example. I also wouldn't object to some sort of criteria related to already holding a job.
The problem with a semantics comparison between migrants and immigrants is that you never know which migrants might eventually become immigrants.
I'm not against any person who can come to this country, work hard and improve the economy.
The good by far outweighs the bad for the United States when you allow people to come here and work and contribute, whether they keep their money here or send it home.
Conservatives get their panties in a wad over "illegal immigrants," forgetting that the only thing that has made them illegal was immoral immigration laws in the first place, so I don't object to a path to citizenship.
Being a free country is what made us a great country. The more we head down the socialist path of a managed economy (which includes managed immigration), the worse off we are.
People have a right to seek property to the best of their ability as each individual sees fit.
There are all kinds of barriers to immigration that have nothing to do with fences on borders -- family ties, jobs, lack of resources to make the trip, fear, etc. keep people from migrating. Our borders won't suddenly be flooded with migrants/immigrants just because we drop many of the anti-free market barriers that have plagued our immigration policy for so long, because not everybody wants to be a migrant.
Immigration is one of the
Immigration is one of the biggest jokes there is.
What is a border, but a line drawn on a map? There were no borders before humans decided to be territorial jack wagons. This world is all of ours, period. You can own your property, but to deny good people access to our country...because of what?
Fear? Safety? Do you know how much freedom has been given away in the name of being safer? The Patriot Act, NDAA, Safe Act.....
If you don't like the thought of people collecting services? Fix the program.
If you don't like people taking jobs? Go get a farm job.
If you don't like that people don't speak our language? Teach them, oh and don't go to another country unless you speak theirs!
I lived in Europe for 3 1/2 years. I can't even count the amount of times that Americans would be so rude that their hosts didn't speak English. The sense of entitlement is nauseating.
My point is, I find the whole immigration discussion to be fear mongering nonsense. The process to come to our nation should be easy; to work, simple. For those who only find comfort in a Police State regime, collect their data, just like they have yours, but enough with this.
And to answer the question, could we handle 66 million more people? I sure hope so, because at our rate of growth we'll be there in a decade or so.
.
Asking only that one orients
Asking only that one orients themselves as to our form of government and not be a murderer or convicted thief, are in my opinion a clear path to citizenship. I do not see that as managed immigration, I am not Teddy Roosevelt so I am not saying just bring the right kind of immigrant, just not someone who is running from a criminal past or coming here on some Jihad is all.
I think Howard that you and I are so very close in thought on this.
As far as semantics goes, merely pointing out if one comes here just to work with intent to return to their homeland, they are not an immigrant, they are a migrant worker, If they change their mind and choose to stay and become a citizen so be it, just follow the criteria that I suggest and what ever time they have already worked here count toward the waiting period that I mentioned.
The reason why I prefer an orientation and a waiting period is not just about social programs, it is about the most sacred responsibility of citizenship, the RIGHT TO VOTE, if you grant that right without regard to a basic knowledge of our constitution, our basic structure of government i.e. the separation of powers, and to someone who is more of a nomad than a citizen, you cheapen that vote. That is all I am saying.
In regard to Phil's statement that borders are nothing but a line on the map and the world is everyone's, that is certainly true in an Utopia, unfortunately, an Utopic world does not, can not and never will exist due to human nature itself.
Our language, government and
Our language, government and judicial system should not just be taught but, we should allow just those who have the skills and ability to support themselve. Or we can just keep going down the path of self-destruction where we keep taking the sick, lame and lazy while businesses and their owners leave our shores. After all who does not enjoy wasting money on those who are not willing to contribute to society and just take?
Your right, Mark it won't,
Your right, Mark it won't, but that doesn't mean I want my money being squandered on the stupidity that is INS, and billions on ridiculous fences. The fact that people with access to the money are truly asinine enough to think that these are viable options, just makes me sad.
John, people who have the
John, people who have the means, the where with all and the drive to make their way here for the most part have at least basic skills, otherwise they could not afford to get here. The sacrifices that those with little financial means go through to get here says mountains about contribution.
People hide in the shadows when they come here for two basic reasons, 1 they have criminal intent or history, or more often 2, they fear deportation because of an over bearing work visa/ immigration policy.
If we don't believe in 'Bring me your weak, your tired, your hungry, your oppressed ' what do we believe in. I for believe that a large part of make us a great nation is not just our basic liberty, but our charity and our opportunity. Sometimes I think that many people who I may agree with on a wide range of issues seem to forget that.
Document, and give an opportunity ...... after all your ancestors were given just that.
The INS is a result of
The INS is a result of current law Phil, I am not suggesting strengthening that, in fact I believe it can be diminished with common sense legislation.
I actually agree with you on that to a large extent. Elimination in totality however, is a bit of a stretch, there has to be a means to ensure that some semblance of security exist.
I see the answer as a way less cumbersome, stream lined method of applying for work visa and/or citizenship applications. Protecting our borders is the most basic responsibility of our federal government.
Mark yes there are criminals
Mark yes there are criminals and those who fear deportation. You forget there are those who come here to for our social services. More than we probably know. Mothers illegally cross our borders every day for many reasons in which some are for their child to be an automatic citizen who gets them citizenship. Who is going to banish and deport a mother from her child? Now this mother files to collect social services and benefits to help raise her child and she will never be expected to work. If she does work it will be low wages and/or under the table. I know there are criminals that are entering this country. Funny thing is, they are all criminals once they cross illegally. We talk about allowing amnesty for those illegals who are already here and those who will come in the future. These laws are politically motivated and will not benefit our country. It will become worst and terrorists and drug cartels will use this to their benefit only.
We keep allowing our government to misguide and misinform us and we all fall for it. We got those who believe we should open our borders completely (Which is idiotic) and those who think we should close are borders completely (Which is paranoia). We need to take control and focus on securing our borders and stop letting agencies like the ACLU mislead us in believing we are violating the rights of illegal immigrants. We are our own worst enemy and we don’t see it.
My ancestors also, came here and never collect a government dime. My ancestors also started their own business from their own savings (I know OMG, right?) and contributed to the US society.
My ancestors also were not criminals and came here legally. So Mark, to compare my ancestors with illegal immigration is very clueless on your end.
When talking about
When talking about immigration, 99% of the time we mean Hispanics. I have a friend who lives in Germany. She is a college graduate with many skills besides the field of her degree. She has a brilliant mind, speaks better English than most Americans, has remarkable problem solving skills, not to mention amazing people skills. She would give anything to be able to move to America, but her chances are practically zero. She would have to have a job here and not just any job like at Burger King. She would need to have a job that only her special set of skills would fulfill. A system that will grant amnesty to illegals yet keep someone like my friend out of the US who would be nothing but an asset to this country is totally insane.
John you are totally missing
John you are totally missing my point.
The reason why we have shadow immigrants or illegal immigrants is because our immigration laws have become so cumbersome, so arbitrary and so quota oriented that many if not most times it is easier for those seeking employment or citizenship to ignore them and try to chase the American Dream through a back door.
I am not idiotic as I do not believe anyone should just be able prance in, nor am I paranoid thinking we should seal the borders tighter than a barometric chamber. With regard to people coming here for social service benefit alone, well that is not as common as many of our more paranoid believe, in fact, that is more likely to be abused by many citizens than immigrants who largely come here for work and/or opportunity.
When my grandfather came here in 1913 to avoid being impressed into the Kaiser's Army and my grandmother a year later after working in Canada for 5 years to bank enough money to get a start in the US, they too sought no help from government, neither spoke more than maybe 50 words of English beyond the pledge of allegiance which was required to become a citizen back then until the day they died, yet my Grandmother built a catering business which she ran for 60 years, my grandfather learned to weld and even became a Civil Defense Block captain in WWII, so I didn't make that comparison lightly.
You are in Law Enforcement, you should know that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are not border jumpers but people who over stayed work and education visas, the migrant workers who enter illegally do so not for our benefits, but because getting a work visa is so cumbersome and laden with bureaucratic BS that boggles the mind.
We need to stream line the work visa process and make outright immigration a reasonable process or we will never solve the problem, that is all that I have been saying. No Quotas, no ridiculous lengthy bureaucratic process.
If we truly are a free country, we need to welcome those who want to come here, not look down on them as though they are inferior. As far as the social services rip offs, I addressed that in my very first post on this issue, I suggest that you go back and read it carefully.
That is exactly what I am
That is exactly what I am talking about Janice, we should welcome your friend or anyone that truly wants to come here, not burden them with bureaucratic BS. She should be able to come here, register, and even if she had to find a crummy job for a few months be allowed to seek employment in her field from here, not 3,000 miles away.
No Mark. The point is the
No Mark. The point is the Immigration policies are bs and will do nothing. Second is that there is a high number of immigrants in this country who soak our social services because, they either bring no skills to the table or prefer not to work. I am not saying all but, let's face it. As long as we have a government willing to spend money we do not have to support the lazyness of society and all those who use fraud to gain such. Numbers will grow and we become even bigger losers.
We do need to take control of our borders and asap.
John you are simply not
John you are simply not reading what I am writing. And it seems that you are saying is that we are screwed any way you look at it
The current immigration
The current immigration system costs American taxpayers $30 billion a year.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/04/04/study-finds-high-economic-cost…
Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens
http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/poor-imm…
A CATO study found that the proposed immigration reforms will ad $1.5 trillion to the GDP over 10 years
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/immigrations-clear-benefits
The idea that immigration. through use of social services, is a net drain on taxpayers is utter rubbish.
Can't go along with you until
Can't go along with you until I see you dance. Can't dance, no dice.
Along that line, I can't go along with you precisely because I cannot dance. Got any other ideas?