Immigration question/frustration

[Mo.Raider]

Let me start by saying this is not an anti-immigration thread by any means. I live in an area that is seeing large amounts of Mexican immigration and at this point I have seen nothing but polite, respectful, hardworking people wanting a better life. This thread is not about them, but the weird way my government is looking the other way in some cases and beingvery picky in others.

My example is my wife and I's second international adoption. We cross every t, dot every i and jump through an incredible amount of bureaucratic hoops to ensure our government we are on the up and up. They even have my original marriage license tucked away in the government warehouses. I don't have any problem with this because becoming a U.S. citizen should require a fair amount of work (you got to want it bad enough). My question is why after receiving what feels like a bureaucratic wedgy do we always get a letter saying you must provide further proof, or here is another "extra" hoop. As an American citizen trying to accomplish what has become a fairly common task(international adoption), why am I scrutinized sooo heavily, while illegal immigration has become almost accepted or considered unenforceable? I love immigration because it is what this country was founded upon, but it would be nice for everyone to be forced to play by the rules. I guess my frustration stems from my government not being able to realize when someone is doing cartwheels to satisfy them when someone else walks by them and thumbs their nose and it is ok. There has to be a middle ground somewhere.

Sorry,

just a rant/vent

[gstelmack]

It's because you don't have a powerful lobby that makes a ton of money off you fighting to cut all your red tape...

[Ajaxab]

Originally Posted by Mo.Raider

Let me start by saying this is not an anti-immigration thread by any means. I live in an area that is seeing large amounts of Mexican immigration and at this point I have seen nothing but polite, respectful, hardworking people wanting a better life. This thread is not about them, but the weird way my government is looking the other way in some cases and beingvery picky in others.

My example is my wife and I's second international adoption. We cross every t, dot every i and jump through an incredible amount of bureaucratic hoops to ensure our government we are on the up and up. They even have my original marriage license tucked away in the government warehouses. I don't have any problem with this because becoming a U.S. citizen should require a fair amount of work (you got to want it bad enough). My question is why after receiving what feels like a bureaucratic wedgy do we always get a letter saying you must provide further proof, or here is another "extra" hoop. As an American citizen trying to accomplish what has become a fairly common task(international adoption), why am I scrutinized sooo heavily, while illegal immigration has become almost accepted or considered unenforceable? I love immigration because it is what this country was founded upon, but it would be nice for everyone to be forced to play by the rules. I guess my frustration stems from my government not being able to realize when someone is doing cartwheels to satisfy them when someone else walks by them and thumbs their nose and it is ok. There has to be a middle ground somewhere.

Sorry,

just a rant/vent

I feel your pain. Your experience makes me wonder whether it's worth the trouble to try to gain citizenship here. After having it take more than four years to gain permanent residency, I'm not sure I want to submit myself to having to do cartwheels to satisfy the US government again.

Like you, I struggle with these illegals seemingly aiming to sidestep the processes (and fees and time and emotional duress and frustration) you and I had to endure in order to legitimate our (or your child's) respective statuses.

[WVUFAN]

That's my whole problem with it. You have so many people who are here legally, who have worked and went through all the requirements to be here legally, and now the government is going to basically give amnesty to those who thumbed their noses at the law. Add to that some people actually DEFEND these lawbreakers under the guise they do jobs no one else wants to do. It's a horrible argument, and it's not fair to those who follow the law.

[MrBigglesworth]

I would say that in your case the government of the United States has a right to do what is in the best interest of the child, and since the child has no decision making ability of its own, the government must step in and scrutinize the situation as much as possible to make sure that it is a positive environment for the child.

[Mo.Raider]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I would say that in your case the government of the United States has a right to do what is in the best interest of the child, and since the child has no decision making ability of its own, the government must step in and scrutinize the situation as much as possible to make sure that it is a positive environment for the child.

Oh it doesn't have anything to do with the environment or the child. Those things are proven long before the Government gets involved. This is nothing more than the visa clearance to travel to the U.S. Like I said, I understand that a certain amount of red tape is necessary, but it is usually something like "we need to fingerprint you again", or " we need a fourth copy of such and such... The big one is proving over and over again that you make enough to support the child, even though they have your last three tax returns in front of them. You misunderstood my point. I will jump through any hoop they can throw at me for my child, because in the end they are just inconveniences, but it is frustrating to see mass demonstrations of people who say "I am here illegally, and there is nothing you can do about it". While I work my butt off trying to bring my little baby home.

Like I said, it was just a vent. I am really honestly in favor of legal immigration because it is good for the country, and the people looking for a better life. I believe it is good for the economy when done legally because I believe it will probably help offset the baby boomers by adding an infusion of working young. I probably should just delete the thread.

[Daimyo]

I'm a US citizen, but my wife isn't (one more year to go!) so I know what you're talking about... dealing with US immigration was easily the worst experience of my life so far. People who are lucky enough to never have to deal with INS don't realize how fortunate they are. Its like the worst DMV/BMV you can imagine multiplied by a thousand. I feel especially sorry for all the people who have to deal with it without the support of a native English speaker or legal assistance.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

That's my whole problem with it. You have so many people who are here legally, who have worked and went through all the requirements to be here legally, and now the government is going to basically give amnesty to those who thumbed their noses at the law. Add to that some people actually DEFEND these lawbreakers under the guise they do jobs no one else wants to do. It's a horrible argument, and it's not fair to those who follow the law.

It might be a horrible argument, yet it reflects reality better than immigration opponents would admit.

The only amnesty I'd honestly be completely happy with would go hand in hand with a guest worker program. If we create a program where, say farm laborers, can register as guest workers, and stay here for as long as the program allows. If you want to call that amnesty, then so-be-it. In my opinion, if you are going to let them come here as non-citizens and work legally, it really shouldn't matter that they are already here working.

[Mo.Raider]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

I'm a US citizen, but my wife isn't (one more year to go!) so I know what you're talking about... dealing with US immigration was easily the worst experience of my life so far. People who are lucky enough to never have to deal with INS don't realize how fortunate they are. Its like the worst DMV/BMV you can imagine multiplied by a thousand. I feel especially sorry for all the people who have to deal with it without the support of a native English speaker or legal assistance.

Wow, I have made that same comment to my wife as we sit and wait to meet with a rep. Good luck to you both, it sounds like you are almost there.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

It might be a horrible argument, yet it reflects reality better than immigration opponents would admit.

The only amnesty I'd honestly be completely happy with would go hand in hand with a guest worker program. If we create a program where, say farm laborers, can register as guest workers, and stay here for as long as the program allows. If you want to call that amnesty, then so-be-it. In my opinion, if you are going to let them come here as non-citizens and work legally, it really shouldn't matter that they are already here working.

I'm not happy with ANY amnesty or guest worker program. You're rewarding illegal behavior. What should be done is fourfold:

1) Remove the incentive to bring illegals over -- go after the companies that hire them. Make it a FELONY to hire an illegal worker. Put some of the execs of these companies in prision, and they'll stop hiring these people. Enforce these laws with renewed vigor.

2) Substantially more money in enforcement of border patrols.

3) Build a wall between us and the country of Mexico.

4) Remove ALL public assistant program access for people not able to prove citizenship or the right to legally live in this country. This means NO school for illegal alien children, NO public assistance, NO driver's licences -- they get NO HELP WHATSOEVER from this country. Then bolster efforts to find and remove these people to get them out.

[Mo.Raider]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

It might be a horrible argument, yet it reflects reality better than immigration opponents would admit.

The only amnesty I'd honestly be completely happy with would go hand in hand with a guest worker program. If we create a program where, say farm laborers, can register as guest workers, and stay here for as long as the program allows. If you want to call that amnesty, then so-be-it. In my opinion, if you are going to let them come here as non-citizens and work legally, it really shouldn't matter that they are already here working.

I think a guest worker program would probably work, but they would still have to be registered in some form to keep the big corporations from failing to pay the prevailing wage. A guest worker program is also a long way from citizenship and its entitlements. I think most people would go for a program that makes those here illegally to at least register as a guest worker and begin the long process to become legal as many have done before them. The one thing that must be enforced with this program would be anyone involved in criminal activity, or fail to register, are grounds for immediate deportation.

[MrBigglesworth]

I think it is against the spirit of America to create second class citizens through some type of guest worker program.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I think it is against the spirit of America to create second class citizens through some type of guest worker program.

They can't be "second class citizens" when they aren't citizens to begin with. They have absolutely no right to be in this country, and should not be entitled to any privilages given to citizens or legal residents.

[JPhillips]

Mo: Are you adopting from China? I think some of the documents, especially the income proof, are for the home country of the child. I know my wife and I had to do all that for the Chinese. The US paperwork was more about criminal checks and home inspections. Some of the US side of things was also specific to the state we live in as well.

Not to say I don't understand your frustration. It took us two years to get our beautiful baby girl. Our agency also had some problems, so that just added to the frustration. All I can say is that its really true that it all goes away when they hand you your baby.

Good luck and feel free to PM me if you need anymore moral support. The people that helped us were a blessing and I'd love to pass that help along.

[JPhillips]

WVU: I too think a guest worker program is a bad idea. Just look at the riots in France last year. They were essentially due to having a large number of workers with no access to citizenship. Any guest worker program needs to have a road to citizenship IMO.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

They can't be "second class citizens" when they aren't citizens to begin with. They have absolutely no right to be in this country, and should not be entitled to any privilages given to citizens or legal residents.

A legalization program would make them citizens, giving them a right to be here, and allaying your fears.

I don't understand why 'guest worker' is acceptable but 'citizen' is not. In each case they are in the country. In each case they are contributing to the economy. But the former has no long term benefit to the country, while the latter does.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I think it is against the spirit of America to create second class citizens through some type of guest worker program.

I didn't say anything about making them citizens. Besides, they are already second class citizens...they don't have all the rights that citizens do. Plus they are essentially continually at risk for deportation. I'm suggesting removing that risk.

These people are here, and they aren't going away.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

A legalization program would make them citizens, giving them a right to be here, and allaying your fears.

I don't understand why 'guest worker' is acceptable but 'citizen' is not. In each case they are in the country. In each case they are contributing to the economy. But the former has no long term benefit to the country, while the latter does.

A guest worker ISN"T acceptable, and neither is citizenship in the case of people already here illegally. As I said before, anything outside of deportation for people here illegally is justifying their unlawful action. It doesn't matter the reason why they "jumped the fence". The fact that they did ensures they should NEVER have an opportunity to be here legally in any format.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I would say that in your case the government of the United States has a right to do what is in the best interest of the child, and since the child has no decision making ability of its own, the government must step in and scrutinize the situation as much as possible to make sure that it is a positive environment for the child.

What is ludicrous about this statement is that Mo is a legal citizen trying to adopt a child that is not a citizen and he has to jump through numerous hoops while an illegal immigrant can just bring their kid into the United States without any scrutiny whatsoever. If the United States government is trying to do what is in the best interest of the child, then they should take away the children of illegal immigrants if they can't prove they can meet the same standards (which I highly doubt).

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

These people are here, and they aren't going away.

Then why not just make them citizens, or put them on a track to citizenship, instead of creating a guest worker program? Just to prove a point? Why the hostility to making them citizens?

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

What is ludicrous about this statement is that Mo is a legal citizen trying to adopt a child that is not a citizen and he has to jump through numerous hoops while an illegal immigrant can just bring their kid into the United States without any scrutiny whatsoever. If the United States government is trying to do what is in the best interest of the child, then they should take away the children of illegal immigrants if they can't prove they can meet the same standards (which I highly doubt).

The obivous problem with your logic is that the illegal immigrant is bringing in his/her own child. As a society we have decided that parents know what is best for their children. For a child that is being adopted, the parent is the government. They do the due diligence, and they decide for the child what is best for them.

While I can see some frustration, they are just not analogous circumstances. My one friend though married a German woman when he was living in Germany, and he is having a hell of a time getting her into this country.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Then why not just make them citizens, or put them on a track to citizenship, instead of creating a guest worker program? Just to prove a point? Why the hostility to making them citizens?

So, do you reward people who violate our laws? Do you think it's ok to pat on the back someone who, say, is convicted of tax evasion, or someone who is convicted of embezzlement? No, they're punished because they broke the law. What you're suggesting is exactly the same -- you're rewarding illegal behaviour.

So, how do you think people who immigrated here legally would feel, went through all the hell it takes to get here as a legal resident, if you did that?

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

So, do you reward people who violate our laws? Do you think it's ok to pat on the back someone who, say, is convicted of tax evasion, or someone who is convicted of embezzlement? No, they're punished because they broke the law. What you're suggesting is exactly the same -- you're rewarding illegal behaviour.

How do you feel about guns-for-goods programs? The 76ers recently collected hundreds of guns by offering a pair of tickets to anyone who brought a gun in, no questions asked. Now, that is rewarding people who violate our laws, but the practical result is that it takes hundreds of guns off of the street. It's not optimum, I'd rather the guns not be there to begin with, but the program has a net positive effect.

Your idea of deporting them is a pipe dream, we have neither the manpower nor the funds to get rid of millions of illegals that will just find a way back anyway. So we have to find a way to live with them.

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

So, how do you think people who immigrated here legally would feel, went through all the hell it takes to get here as a legal resident, if you did that?

I'm sure they'll be pissed, but they have to get over it. We don't create policy based on whose feelings we are going to hurt, we do it for what is best for the country.

[Mo.Raider]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

How do you feel about guns-for-goods programs? The 76ers recently collected hundreds of guns by offering a pair of tickets to anyone who brought a gun in, no questions asked. Now, that is rewarding people who violate our laws, but the practical result is that it takes hundreds of guns off of the street. It's not optimum, I'd rather the guns not be there to begin with, but the program has a net positive effect.

Your idea of deporting them is a pipe dream, we have neither the manpower nor the funds to get rid of millions of illegals that will just find a way back anyway. So we have to find a way to live with them.


I'm sure they'll be pissed, but they have to get over it. We don't create policy based on whose feelings we are going to hurt, we do it for what is best for the country.

I don't want to steer away from my original intent in this thread, but owning a gun is not violating the law. I have always thought that these publicity stunts were useless in terms of having any real affect on gun crime. I am being serious not sarcastic, but has there ever been any conclusive evidence that this type of event actually deters crime? It just seems like it would be the equivalent of scooping a handful of water from the ocean and saying it is a whole lot drier now. The people that bring in that gun probably came about it pretty cheap, and is laughing about their "free" tickets. If they felt they needed a gun before the game, they probably picked one up about 30 minutes after the game.

On a side note: The 76er's really were helping out the poor season ticket holders that night. "I know you plopped down some serious change for an overpriced season ticket, but at least you get the added value of the show within a show when we invited the no questions asked crowd to sit next to you and your family for the night."

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Mo.Raider

I don't want to steer away from my original intent in this thread, but owning a gun is not violating the law.

You missed his point. He said "No questions asked", so the cops don't check your background to see if you bought the gun legally. You can turn in a gun you bought illegally, on the street, without a background check and recieve the benefit.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

How do you feel about guns-for-goods programs? The 76ers recently collected hundreds of guns by offering a pair of tickets to anyone who brought a gun in, no questions asked. Now, that is rewarding people who violate our laws, but the practical result is that it takes hundreds of guns off of the street. It's not optimum, I'd rather the guns not be there to begin with, but the program has a net positive effect.

Your idea of deporting them is a pipe dream, we have neither the manpower nor the funds to get rid of millions of illegals that will just find a way back anyway. So we have to find a way to live with them.


I'm sure they'll be pissed, but they have to get over it. We don't create policy based on whose feelings we are going to hurt, we do it for what is best for the country.

Yes, an illegals for goods program would be great. An Illegal turns themself in and gets a free ticket to a 76ers game, after which they are sent back to Mexico. That would give the 76ers someone to actually watch their game and get illegals off the streets.

That is a great idea Biggles!

Now, that is rewarding people who violate our laws, but the practical result is that it takes thousands of illegals off the street. It's not optimum and of course, I'd rather the illegals not be there to begin with, but the program would definately have a net positive effect.

[Mo.Raider]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You missed his point. He said "No questions asked", so the cops don't check your background to see if you bought the gun legally. You can turn in a gun you bought illegally, on the street, without a background check and recieve the benefit.

I didn't miss his point. I was just nitpicking the statement. I think a lot of people do have the mindset that anyone who owns a firearm is involved in some form of criminal activity. I can just see me turning in my .22 caliber for a pair of tickets and suddenly they break their promise and questions are asked. "How did you acquire this peace of weaponry?" In a stuttering voice I answer.....uhh, my dad gave it to me when I was 12 for my birthday....I might have shot a rock with it before, maybe even aimed it at a squirrel....and I definitely have killed an aluminum can with it.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Yes, an illegals for goods program would be great. An Illegal turns themself in and gets a free ticket to a 76ers game, after which they are sent back to Mexico. That would give the 76ers someone to actually watch their game and get illegals off the streets.

That is a great idea Biggles!

Now, that is rewarding people who violate our laws, but the practical result is that it takes thousands of illegals off the street. It's not optimum and of course, I'd rather the illegals not be there to begin with, but the program would definately have a net positive effect.

Excellent point. Only in the illegals for goods program, we KNOW they're breaking the law. Possession of a gun isn't necessarily an illegal action. So, an illegal for goods program actually makes more sense.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Your idea of deporting them is a pipe dream, we have neither the manpower nor the funds to get rid of millions of illegals that will just find a way back anyway. So we have to find a way to live with them.

No, you do not have to "live with them". That's a defeatest attitude. Why not "figure out" how to live with drug dealers, or other lawbreakers in this country. Do we forgive them too?

I'm sure they'll be pissed, but they have to get over it. We don't create policy based on whose feelings we are going to hurt, we do it for what is best for the country.

What's best for the country is not to forgive 10 million lawbreakers at the expense of EVERYONE ELSE. What's best for this country is to devote the manpower and the resources to find and remove, and then remove the reason they come over to begin with -- remove their "right" to public programs, remove their "right" to anything in this country, and remove those companies that hires these lawbreakers to begin with.

[IwasHere]

I'll say this again for this thread... No Jobs, No illegal aliens!

You must go after the dealers to make an impact. Companies that employ these people need to be punished and punshed hard. If we start siezing property and putting Business owners in jail, the imigration problem will go away.

It is all about Risk and Reward. Right now the reward($) far out weighs the risk.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Then why not just make them citizens, or put them on a track to citizenship, instead of creating a guest worker program? Just to prove a point? Why the hostility to making them citizens?

Hey there is a track for citizenship for these people. There are ways to become a citizen of the United States. Who suggested that participants in a guest worker program wouldn't have access to those programs? Besides we really don't NEED them to become citizens. The guest worker program is only a means to allow them to come here legally, and work in our fields. They currently provide a benefit to our nation and our economy, the guest worker type programs just legitimize it.

Of interest: a report on NPR yesterday mentioned that more than 90% of new farm labor workers are immigrants.

[IwasHere]

1986 when the US did their last Amnesty for immigration and set up the Guest Worker Program this is how 2 of the 9/11 hijackers managed to stay in the country right?

Why would you want to give amnesty to terrorist?
http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/kephart.html

Among the findings:

*

Of the 94 foreign-born terrorists who operated in the United States, the study found that about two-thirds (59) committed immigration fraud prior to or in conjunction with taking part in terrorist activity.

*

Of the 59 terrorists who violated the law, many committed multiple immigration violations -- 79 instances in all.

*

In 47 instances, immigration benefits sought or acquired prior to 9/11 enabled the terrorists to stay in the United States after 9/11 and continue their terrorist activities. In at least two instances, terrorists were still able to acquire immigration benefits after 9/11.

*

Temporary visas were a common means of entering; 18 terrorists had student visas and another four had applications approved to study in the United States. At least 17 terrorists used a visitor visa -- either tourist (B2) or business (B1).

*

There were 11 instances of passport fraud and 10 instances of visa fraud; in total 34 individuals were charged with making false statements to an immigration official.

*

In at least 13 instances, terrorists overstayed their temporary visas.
*

In 17 instances, terrorists claimed to lack proper travel documents and applied for asylum, often at a port of entry.

*

Fraud was used not only to gain entry into the United States, but also to remain, or "embed," in the country.

*

Seven terrorists were indicted for acquiring or using various forms of fake identification, including driver's licenses, birth certificates, Social Security cards, and immigration arrival records.

*

Once in the United States, 16 of 23 terrorists became legal permanent residents, often by marrying an American. There were at least nine sham marriages.

*

In total, 20 of 21 foreign terrorists became naturalized U.S. citizens.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

No, you do not have to "live with them". That's a defeatest attitude. Why not "figure out" how to live with drug dealers, or other lawbreakers in this country. Do we forgive them too?



What's best for the country is not to forgive 10 million lawbreakers at the expense of EVERYONE ELSE. What's best for this country is to devote the manpower and the resources to find and remove, and then remove the reason they come over to begin with -- remove their "right" to public programs, remove their "right" to anything in this country, and remove those companies that hires these lawbreakers to begin with.

Yes, and when we do not allow illegals to have entitlements that legal citizens pay for and we move forward with deporting them and start barring them from illegally entering the U.S., I'm sure they'll (the illegals) be pissed, but they have to get over it. As you said, we don't create policy based on whose feelings we are going to hurt, we do it for what is best for the country.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by IwasHere

I'll say this again for this thread... No Jobs, No illegal aliens!

You must go after the dealers to make an impact. Companies that employ these people need to be punished and punshed hard. If we start siezing property and putting Business owners in jail, the imigration problem will go away.

It is all about Risk and Reward. Right now the reward($) far out weighs the risk.

I agree, but that by itself doesn't solve the problem of us needing immigrant workers.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

No, you do not have to "live with them". That's a defeatest attitude. Why not "figure out" how to live with drug dealers, or other lawbreakers in this country. Do we forgive them too?

What's best for the country is not to forgive 10 million lawbreakers at the expense of EVERYONE ELSE. What's best for this country is to devote the manpower and the resources to find and remove, and then remove the reason they come over to begin with -- remove their "right" to public programs, remove their "right" to anything in this country, and remove those companies that hires these lawbreakers to begin with.

It may be a defeatist attitude, but it is the correct one, like shortly before prohibition when everyone realized that it wouldn't work and changed the law. Same situation here.

Can we please drop the pretense that this is some grand respect for the law thing? It's obviously not that. You couldn't care less when Bush breaks the law when he says it is for the good of the country, and here, with immigration, we have a genuine benefit to the country by having these immigrants come in.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

It may be a defeatist attitude, but it is the correct one, like shortly before prohibition when everyone realized that it wouldn't work and changed the law. Same situation here.

Can we please drop the pretense that this is some grand respect for the law thing? It's obviously not that. You couldn't care less when Bush breaks the law when he says it is for the good of the country, and here, with immigration, we have a genuine benefit to the country by having these immigrants come in.

Can you at least admit to a grey area? Are there NO illegal immigrants that should be deported? I think of all the things that get talked about here, this is one area where there is a lot of room for compromise.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Can you at least admit to a grey area? Are there NO illegal immigrants that should be deported?

Definitely, I don't think that every single immigrant is a gift from the gods.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

Definitely, I don't think that every single immigrant is a gift from the gods.

Do you know the difference between an illegal and a legal immigrant? It seems as if your posts don't differentiate between the two.

[st.cronin]

It seems as though Mr. B thinks that every illegal immigrant is a sign that we need more legal immigration.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

It seems as though Mr. B thinks that every illegal immigrant is a sign that we need more legal immigration.

I think that, in general, that's true, because (generally speaking) the illegal immigrants are coming over here for jobs. So we have a demand for jobs, and supply is meeting that demand. I would rather make them legal than get rid of the supply.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

I think that, in general, that's true, because (generally speaking) the illegal immigrants are coming over here for jobs. So we have a demand for jobs, and supply is meeting that demand. I would rather make them legal than get rid of the supply.

Get rid of the demand (go after businesses who hire them), the supply will dwindle.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Get rid of the demand (go after businesses who hire them), the supply will dwindle.

But then the price of my vegetables go up. I don't want that.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

But then the price of my vegetables go up. I don't want that.

I'm willing pay a few cents more for my vegetables to secure our borders.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

I'm willing pay a few cents more for my vegetables to secure our borders.

That's not going to secure our borders. It will just stop the people from coming over that want jobs, it won't stop the people from coming over that wish us harm.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

That's not going to secure our borders. It will just stop the people from coming over that want jobs, it won't stop the people from coming over that wish us harm.

I can just draw a big red line through that sentence, since it makes no sense and has nothing to do with reality.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I can just draw a big red line through that sentence, since it makes no sense and has nothing to do with reality.

WTF are you talking about? We want to secure the borders to keep Al-Q types out, right? Getting rid of the jobs will not do that.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

WTF are you talking about? We want to secure the borders to keep Al-Q types out, right? Getting rid of the jobs will not do that.

We want to secure our borders to prevent people, in general, from entering our country illegally.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

WTF are you talking about? We want to secure the borders to keep Al-Q types out, right? Getting rid of the jobs will not do that.

What difference does it make why we want to secure the borders? More secure borders are more secure borders. It's not like anybody is saying "make the borders more secure for mexicans, but let's not worry about the turks," or vice versa. People are concerned about the safety of our borders, for a variety of reasons - illegal immigration is, in that respect, an indicator, as well as a distraction. Finding ways to reduce illegal immigration is a step in the right direction.

Look, I agree with your philosophy - immigration has been, and should continue to be, a source of this country's strength. But illegal immigration is not at all the same thing.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

We want to secure our borders to prevent people, in general, from entering our country illegally.

Originally Posted by st.cronin

What difference does it make why we want to secure the borders? More secure borders are more secure borders. It's not like anybody is saying "make the borders more secure for mexicans, but let's not worry about the turks," or vice versa. People are concerned about the safety of our borders, for a variety of reasons - illegal immigration is, in that respect, an indicator, as well as a distraction. Finding ways to reduce illegal immigration is a step in the right direction.

Look, I agree with your philosophy - immigration has been, and should continue to be, a source of this country's strength. But illegal immigration is not at all the same thing.

WHAT DOES DRYING UP THE JOBS DO TO SECURE A BORDER?!?!

It just makes less people come here for jobs. The borders are just as porous as ever. It doesn't do anything to keep people from coming here that want to come here, especially those evildoers that I hear so much about. It just makes less people that want to work come here.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

WHAT DOES DRYING UP THE JOBS DO TO SECURE A BORDER?!?!

It just makes less people come here for jobs. The borders are just as porous as ever. It doesn't do anything to keep people from coming here that want to come here, especially those evildoers that I hear so much about. It just makes less people that want to work come here.

a) 1 million illegal immigrants, 5 terrorists
b) 1 thousand illegal immigrants, 5 terrorists

you choose line a, i prefer line b