Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 63

Thread: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

  1. #31
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Actually, the trade liberalization angle will reveal the fact that governments that negotiated trade agreements that provided financial benefits that accrued overwhelmingly in the interests of the American (and to a lesser extent, the Mexican) financial class bear responsibility for the exacerbation of inequitable international wage differentials and destabilization amongst the Mexican working classes that created a need for immigration.
    That is a reason that people come to America illegally. It does not excuse doing so.

    Of course there is. Civil disobedience, for example, was and is based on the violation of laws in accordance with presumed higher ethical standards. In this case, an interest in sustenance seems a fairly appropriate cause for lawbreaking.
    Again, a reason to do something is not an excuse to do something. If you engage in civil disobedience, you become a criminal, and should be punished as the law calls for. Saying "oh, it's civil disobedience" does not magically make it allright.

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    That is a reason that people come to America illegally. It does not excuse doing so.
    No logical analysis could abandon consideration of ethics in favor of mere blind adherence to legal standards. Such consideration is also a critical facet in the development of more rational legal standards through modification of existing ones.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Again, a reason to do something is not an excuse to do something. If you engage in civil disobedience, you become a criminal, and should be punished as the law calls for. Saying "oh, it's civil disobedience" does not magically make it allright.
    Then you either don't seem to be referring to ethics, or have simply incorrectly conflated legal and ethical standards.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    WASHINGTON (AP) — The lead Democrat steering an immigration overhaul through the Senate said Wednesday he expects to have a bill ready by Labor Day that is more generous to highly skilled immigrant workers than those who are lower skilled and is tough on future waves of illegal immigration.
    Howsabout he proves his sincerity and demonstrates some toughness, even a wet tortilla, on the current illegal tsunami-surfers, then?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    In an interview with The Associated Press, Sen. Chuck Schumer said an immigration bill can be done by the end of the year or early next year that works out disagreements between labor and business interests on the flow of legal foreign workers.
    Gee...big surprise, no mention of the needs of Americans who need jobs....oh, and by the way, the Messiah's jobless figures are pushing double digits.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Schumer said the way to get the bill done is to be very tough on future waves of illegal immigration. He declared himself pro-immigration and said the U.S. should encourage legal immigration and find some kind of path for people now here to find a way to legal citizenship.
    The path already exists.

    The Invader goes back to the country he started from, fills out the application, and WAITS. THERE.

    When we need him, we'll call.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    "I think one of the ways to bridge it is to
    forget what he things, he's trash.

    The way to "bridge" it is to arrest employers of invaders and fine the living crap out of them, to arrest invaders found or reported and holding them in custody until they can be expelled. If they don't want to take their anchor baby brats back to their ****hole countries, they become wards of the state, where they get to learn english and english only.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Ana Avendano, AFL-CIO's director of immigration policy, said Schumer's "one size doesn't fit all" view is shared by labor. "We want employers to have workers they need, but the key is determining when there is a real need, not one employers make up when they import temporary workers."
    This isn't hard to do.

    Once the employes who don't like jail fire their Invader workforce, they'll be hiring domestic unskilled "workers". So they'll need protection from completely ridiculous racial and sexual harassment lawsuits, and similar bull**** our indigenous indigents have become accustomed to abusing to manipulate the system.

    So, tort reform is required, which is piss off the lawyers supporting the Democrats. How sad.

    And, because we want a competitive workforce, we'll have to end our totally insane habit of subsidizing our indigenous indigents, and we'll have to turn off welfare, so the lazy bums will have increased desire to pick strawberries.

    Sounds perfectly fair.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Earlier Wednesday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said beginning Sept. 8, businesses wanting federal contracts would have to use E-Verify, a Web-based system, to check whether their employees are legally working in the U.S. The Bush and Obama administrations had delayed implementing the rule.
    I've been telling ya Bush is a liberal.

    Any more questions?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    The department also said it is abandoning a Bush administration plan to force employers to fire workers who can't resolve a mismatch between their Social Security numbers don't match their names. The administration said it would come up with a new rule.
    That's fine. The new rule should be: if you have Invaders on the staff, go to jail.

    We don't have to force them to fire the Invaders, just make it expensive.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    Seems like it would make more sense to change the system in a way that would reduce the length of the line and remove the temptation for not using the system.

    But I guess that's unpatriotic of me to even suggest ...
    Agreed.

    First step: Eliminate welfare and insist employers verify the legal residency of employees, with penalties for hiring them, and also penalties for not reporting illegal invader applicants they do not hire.

    That'll pretty must shorten the demand for outside unskilled labor (our public schools are mass producing ignorant unskilled adults at an unprecedented rate) and remove temptation for breaking the law, too.

    And if illegals are caught, fingerprint'em, DNA'em, and heave 'em over the fence.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    Why should we divert police resources away from finding rapists and murderers to catch those productive members of the workforce who are guilty of nothing more than an administrative offense?
    Because if we arrested all the invaders, we'd also catch a bunch of murderers and rapists and drug dealers and petty criminals and invaders, too.

    What part of illegal are you not picking up on?

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Nor will it result in 20 million illegal immigrants ever being effectively deported, since they will attempt to return if domestic conditions if their homelands have not changed.
    The use of well dispersed anti-personnel mines at the most popular border crossings will discourage recidivism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Domestic conditions need to change here too.
    Absolutely. It should be against the law for an illegal invader to be able to file any kind of lawsuit against any legal American resident for actions that resident took to defend himself, his home, his family, his property, and his favorite cactus from the depredations of the Invader.

    Buckshot is a good deterent to Invasion, I hear.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    Firstly, we need to eliminate excessive demand for low-skilled labor,
    Easy.

    Eliminate welfare.
    Eliminate minumum wage.

    Our own unskilled starvlings will work, finally, for the first time in their useless lives.

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Illegal immigration is not the fault of any government, but the fault of the people who chose to break laws to improve their situation. There is no excuse for being a criminal.
    Oh, bull****.

    The Mexican government published a pamphlet for it's citizens describing how to invade the US and how to evade the border patrol and other LEOs.

    That makes it an INVASION, not simply a cultural phenomenon.

    Mexico profits hugely from the cash taken out of the US economy that these INVADERS send home.

    Naturally, the US suffers from the lost cash. If it ain't circulating north of the border, it ain't doing us any good.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    Where are you getting this money?
    Easy.

    There's tons more information in the government's computers than is needed to find out which employers are hiring invaders.

    Arrest those employers and fine them to finance further hide and seek games.

    Also, identify the funds those employers have donated to political parties and fine the political parties (and I know it's both GOP and Dem, here) for their treason.

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnapostate View Post
    No logical analysis could abandon consideration of ethics in favor of mere blind adherence to legal standards.
    No logical analysis can make it ethical for our elected government to violate the very first principle of governance: the protection of the nation from invasion.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Between Hollywood and Compton.
    Last Seen
    11-25-09 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,497

    Re: Schumer: Immigration bill to be ready by Labor Day

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    The use of well dispersed anti-personnel mines at the most popular border crossings will discourage recidivism.
    Sorry, but my libertarian sentiments prevent me from supporting that sort of authoritarian police state policy, not that it would work anyway. That said, your candidness is refreshing; it's typically the case that you disingenuously cloak your ideology with euphemisms and newspeak (such as referring to capitalism as "libertarian" ), so this is certainly a welcome change.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Absolutely. It should be against the law for an illegal invader to be able to file any kind of lawsuit against any legal American resident for actions that resident took to defend himself, his home, his family, his property, and his favorite cactus from the depredations of the Invader.
    "Invader"? As long as you're dealing with nativist and nationalist sentiments, the descendants of the European population who live in the U.S. are descendants of the true invaders, the invaders who deliberately expelled and antagonized the indigenous population from which mestizo immigrants are partially descended from. But as it were, you have the American financial class to blame for destabilizing conditions in Mexico and profiting from the exacerbated of inequitable international wage differentials. Perhaps you should shoot them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Buckshot is a good deterent to Invasion, I hear.
    That won't be tolerated. As noted by immigration rights advocate Armando Navarro, "obviously some of us have experience in the military, so there will be maybe some elements of surprises in terms of activities, and that is a warning to the militias."

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Easy.

    Eliminate welfare.
    That's a rather poor suggestion for an advocate of capitalism to make. Welfare programs are a necessary element of maintaining the stability and efficiency in the capitalist economy, and sustain the physical efficiency of the working class without negatively impacting on other forms of efficiency, and also providing assorted other benefits in terms of reductions in inequality. For example, we could refer to Headey et al.'s Is There a Trade-Off Between Economic Efficiency and a Generous Welfare State? A Comparison of Best Cases of `The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’ As noted by the abstract:

    A crucial debate in policy-making as well as academic circles is whether there is a trade-off between economic efficiency and the size/generosity of the welfare state. One way to contribute to this debate is to compare the performance of best cases of different types of state. Arguably, in the decade 1985-94, the US, West Germany and the Netherlands were best cases - best economic performers - in what G. Esping-Andersen calls the three worlds of welfare capitalism. The US is a liberal welfare-capitalist state, West Germany a corporatist state, and the Netherlands is social democratic in its tax-transfer system, although not its labor market policies. These three countries had rates of economic growth per capita as high or higher than other rich countries of their type, and the lowest rates of unemployment. At a normative or ideological level the three types of state have the same goals but prioritise them differently. The liberal state prioritises economic growth and efficiency, avoids work disincentives, and targets welfare benefits only to those in greatest need. The corporatist state aims to give priority to social stability, especially household income stability, and social integration. The social democratic welfare state claims high priority for minimising poverty, inequality and unemployment. Using ten years of panel data for each country, we assess indicators of their short (one year), medium (five year) and longer term (ten year) performance in achieving economic and welfare goals. Overall, in this time period, the Netherlands achieved the best performance on the welfare goals to which it gave priority, and equalled the other two states on most of the goals to which they gave priority. This result supports the view that there is no necessary trade-off between economic efficiency and a generous welfare state.
    When we keep in mind the fact that unemployment is a form of static inefficiency, the benefits of preventing unemployment are clearly more expansive than mere "moral" purposes; there's a legitimate interest in preventing inefficiency involved with prevention of unemployment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Eliminate minumum wage.
    Why? It seems that this suggestion is only based your inaccurate and naive conception of labor markets being perfectly competitive or something near it, which you erroneously use to maintain these beliefs about the minimum wage's alleged adverse effects on unemployment. However, this perspective fails to incorporate the existence of monopsony and oligopsony, "[n]ot monopsony in the sense of there being a single buyer of labor, but monopsony in the sense of the supply of labor to an individual firm not being infinitely elastic." As put by Alan Manning:

    [M]inimum wages...are seen as raising wages above the market-clearing level, reducing employment in the affected sectors. But, in oligopsonistic labor markets, minimum wages and trade unions are unlikely to have the same effect. If labor markets have substantial wage dispersion (and both theory and evidence suggest that they do), then minimum wages are likely to "push" the wage distribution from below as, by definition, they directly affect the lowest wages in the market...
    The reality that firms are confronted with upward sloping labor supply curves thus yields an analysis that must incorporate that fact, which is why the empirical literature does not support the assertion that the minimum wage has an adverse effect on employment. For instance, we could turn to Machin et al.'s (in which Manning is included), The Effects of Minimum Wages on Employment: Theory and Evidence from Britain. Consider the abstract:

    Recent work on the economic effects of minimum wages has stressed that the standard economic model, where increases in minimum wages depress employment, is not supported by empirical work in some labor markets. We present a general theoretical model whereby employers have some degree of monopsony power, which allows minimum wages to have the conventional negative impact on employment but which also allows for a neutral or positive impact. Studying the industry‐based British Wages Councils between 1975 and 1992, we find that minimum wages significantly compress the distribution of earnings but do not have a negative impact on employment.
    Of course, I can understand how your antipathy toward empirical research would cause you to ignore this reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Our own unskilled starvlings will work, finally, for the first time in their useless lives.
    I doubt that. As long as capitalism endures, there will be a financial class permitted to be lazy sluggards through the hoarding and selective distribution of capital, the very epitome of authoritarian economic arrangements.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •