• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Immigration reform

What changes should be done to our immigration policy


  • Total voters
    42
Crime should not be rewarded. Other people wait in line to enter our country legally, so why should everyone else bend over backwards to cater to those who break into our nation?

Because they are already here, and most of them will not be leaving.

It's rather telling how wrong the progressives/liberals are in their thinking when you consider, iirc, that Mexico has stricter immigration laws.

Why should we base our immigration laws on Mexico's? I'm not sure if you've noticed but our economy is a little bit more vibrant and upscale than theirs. Perhaps they could learn a thing or two from our relatively liberal immigration policies.
 
Mexico is overrun with Central American illegals that displace workers here which displace American workers. I would suggest that we really have to help Mexico in a very targeted way build their economy to help ebb the flow as we undertake increasing their VISA allotments, creating perhaps new classes of admissions, and make it easier for unskilled workers to come and go legally. The easier it is to get back in, the easier it will be to get them to leave when their work is done/visit is over. It isn't as if there isn't a societal cost to Mexico in the current regime in which broken and used up bodies from slaving in the US litter their economy as well so we do have a mutual interest in a more sensible and respectful practical approach to the problems.
 
I thought restricting illegal immigration was about supporting jobs. :roll:

It is.These scumabgs who hire illegals are just trying to pressure law makers into getting rid their state's anti-illegal immigration law. They are trying to claim that since no one will work for **** wages then they should be allowed to hire illegals.
 
It is.These scumabgs who hire illegals are just trying to pressure law makers into getting rid their state's anti-illegal immigration law. They are trying to claim that since no one will work for **** wages then they should be allowed to hire illegals.

indeed, the days of the robber barons are gone, pay a living wage or you should NOT be able to operate a business in this country.
 
I picked restrict immigration to skills we need. After all, immigration is supposed to be to better our country, not to make someone else's life better. I also selected the second option, not for the "don't change them" part but for the "enforce them better" part. We need to enforce our immigration laws across the board and any city or state that refuses to do so should lose all federal funding until they man up and do their jobs.
 
This is one area where I strongly disagree with my party. I'm conservative. I was listening to Mark Levin on the radio, and normally I'm in agreement with his positions on other issues, but I was yelling at the radio today when he brought up the same points you are making about immigration.

I have lived in Latin America, and I have strong family ties to Brazil. Latinos are not the social welfare boogeymen the right makes them out to be. The only thing that would lead you to believe that is ignorance and xenophobia.

You don't think the Mexicans that are in this country work hard? Give me a break. Most of them work harder than any of us on this thread, and they get paid jack to do it. Yeah, they use a lot of social services. You want to guess why? Because they're POOR. They're first generation immigrants who literally walked here or floated over on a raft. So what?

I respect their dedication. I immigrated from Sweden legally, we flew first class. When I lived in Miami, I had friends from Cuba who literally floated over in a rubber raft, which is highly dangerous.

Latinos, as a group, are good, good people. They have strong families, conservative social and religious values, and they believe in working their butts off. They're the perfect constituency for the Republicans if we'd stop alienating them by acting like a bunch of scared bigots.

And finally, of course they will learn English. Like I said, they have strong families. If you meet these families, 99% of the time the parents are doing everything they can to make sure their kids go to English speaking schools and learn English. Why wouldn't they? They want their kids to succeed.

As for the parents learning English.... well, you try living abroad for a few years. I've done it. Learning another language is ****ing hard. It takes years to do.


IT is now well known that hispanic immigrants who came here legally or illegally and then gained citizenship were a major reason for Obama winning Florida, Virginia Colorado and perhaps some other states. Several discussions I heard today noted that the welfare promises of the DNC rather than amnesty were the main reason why more than 2/3s of these hispanic immigrants voted for Obama. 75% of them are not well educated or have a skilled trade.

Based on those assumptions, what should be done with our immigration policies
 
It is.These scumabgs who hire illegals are just trying to pressure law makers into getting rid their state's anti-illegal immigration law. They are trying to claim that since no one will work for **** wages then they should be allowed to hire illegals.

When you don't allow low-skill immigrants to come in and pick fruit, you drive up the price of fruit and you leave less available capital to support jobs elsewhere in the economy. This helps create more jobs. Most economist don't believe that illegals drive down wages, and even those that do believe that the effect is very small.
 
Give it up and just open up the borders. To not discriminate, open them to EVERYONE ONE, not just Latinos. Let 500,000,000 people flood in. They might be smarter about government, democracy and capitalism than Americans are now anyway. Most people of the world WANT the old American ways, while most Americans curse those values and even our country now.

Open to door to 100,000,000 people from India and this country would swing dramatically towards capitalism and self reliance. So open up the doors. Particularly to Asians and Asian-Indians. Let them all in.

Grant statehood to Mexico too. Give them all an SS card.
 
Give it up and just open up the borders. To not discriminate, open them to EVERYONE ONE, not just Latinos. Let 500,000,000 people flood in. They might be smarter about government, democracy and capitalism than Americans are now anyway. Most people of the world WANT the old American ways, while most Americans curse those values and even our country now.

Open to door to 100,000,000 people from India and this country would swing dramatically towards capitalism and self reliance. So open up the doors. Particularly to Asians and Asian-Indians. Let them all in.

Grant statehood to Mexico too. Give them all an SS card.

while you post that in jest, except for the give them a ss card statement, i concur with your proposal
we should open our door to all comers
come to the USA and spend your money
but do not expect to get a job. do not expect to get a drivers license. do not expect your children to attend public school. do not expect your family to receive publicly funded medical attention or welfare in any form
in short, come and spend your money in our economy but do not plan to extract any portion

and before you ask, how do we do that, allow me to add that we enforce our laws. and we commit to pay any fine to the American citizen who identified to the homeland security (former INS folks) those undocumented immigrants who are illegally working, driving, sending kids to public school, or receiving any other form of public assistance
it will become the new cottage industry
and that woooosh sound you hear will be the caravan of cars travelling south

this was one thing romney got right. they will self deport - but we first must make it apparent we are going to enforce our existing immigration laws
 
There is no efficient way for an employer to know if a person is legal or not if they have fake documents. There is no citizenship verification process not subject to fraud and the IRS tends not to share its information with INS when they identify such folks. Punish employers who were victims of fraudulent documents they could never verify and people with brown skin will have great difficulty getting a corporate job even if they are 100% legit.
 
Reform it. Make it easier to become citizen. Make it easier to get a work visa. Make the path to citizenship a lot more simpler and easier.

Why? The answer is, don't allow the unskilled to immigrate. Work visas are already available and easier to get than many other nations.
 
It's simple. We do not need people who are a burden. But what we are doing is rather stupid.

We should be asking anyone who can support themselves to come here. Since unemployment is high, I agree with limiting that. But when it improves the doors should be wide open based on means testing,
 
When you don't allow low-skill immigrants to come in and pick fruit, you drive up the price of fruit and you leave less available capital to support jobs elsewhere in the economy. This helps create more jobs. Most economist don't believe that illegals drive down wages, and even those that do believe that the effect is very small.
These farmers don't want so called low skilled immigrants, if they did they would file for more H2A Visas. What these farmers want are low skilled illegals so that they can pay them **** wages.By the way labor has little to do with the overall cost of food.This tomatoes will cost five dollars a pound if farmers have to hire illegals is nothing more than pro-illegal scum fear mongering.


Local News | Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices | Seattle Times Newspaper
More than 7 million illegal immigrants work in the United States. They build houses, pick crops, slaughter cattle, stitch clothes, mow lawns, clean hotel rooms, cook restaurant meals and wash the dishes that come back.

You might assume that the plentiful supply of low-wage illegal workers would translate into significantly lower prices for the goods and services they produce. In fact, their impact on consumer prices — call it the "illegal-worker discount" — is surprisingly small.

The bag of Washington state apples you bought last weekend? Probably a few cents cheaper than it otherwise would have been, economists estimate. That steak dinner at a downtown restaurant? Maybe a buck off. Your new house in Subdivision Estates? Hard to say, but perhaps a few thousand dollars less expensive.

The underlying reason, economists say, is that for most goods the labor — whether legal or illegal, native- or foreign-born — represents only a sliver of the retail price.

Consider those apples — Washington's signature contribution to the American food basket.

At a local QFC, Red Delicious apples go for about 99 cents a pound. Of that, only about 7 cents represents the cost of labor, said Tom Schotzko, a recently retired extension economist at Washington State University. The rest represents the grower's other expenses, warehousing and shipping fees, and the retailer's markup.

And that's for one of the most labor-intensive crops in the state: It takes 150 to 190 hours of labor to grow and harvest an acre of apples, Schotzko said, compared to four hours for an acre of potatoes and 1 ½ hours for an acre of wheat.

The labor-intensive nature of many crops is a key reason agriculture continues to rely on illegal workers. A report by Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center who has long studied immigration trends, estimates that 247,000 illegal immigrants were employed as "miscellaneous agricultural workers" last year — only 3.4 percent of the nation's 7.2 million illegal workers, according to Pew statistics, but 29 percent of all workers in that job category.

Eliminating illegal farmworkers, by shrinking the pool of available labor, likely would raise wages for those who remain. Philip Martin, a professor of agricultural economics at the University of California, Davis, noted that two years after the old bracero program ended in 1964, the United Farm Workers union won a 40 percent increase for grape harvesters.

A decade ago, two Iowa State University agricultural economists estimated that removing all illegal farmworkers would raise wages for seasonal farmworkers by 30 percent in the first couple of years, and 15 percent in the medium term.

But supermarket prices of summer-fall fruits and vegetables, they concluded, would rise by just 6 percent in the short run — dropping to 3 percent over time, as imports took up some of the slack and some farmers mechanized their operations or shifted out of labor-intensive crops. (Winter-spring produce would be even less affected, they found, because so much already is imported.)
 
IT is now well known that hispanic immigrants who came here legally or illegally and then gained citizenship were a major reason for Obama winning Florida, Virginia Colorado and perhaps some other states. Several discussions I heard today noted that the welfare promises of the DNC rather than amnesty were the main reason why more than 2/3s of these hispanic immigrants voted for Obama. 75% of them are not well educated or have a skilled trade.

Based on those assumptions, what should be done with our immigration policies

We should realize that we live in a globalized world, so I voted OTHER. Although such thing doesn't exist, but countries could trade immigration quotas between each other, with people's labor potential as the underlying commodity. Sooner or later, but rather sooner, every American will learn (the hard way?) that emigrating out of the USA in search of a job/livelyhood will be just as viable or more, than immigrating to the USA for the same.

The real migration borders of this world are the demarkations between market manipulators, such as currency suppressors like China and account administrators such as the USA. So immigration legislation/control for individual country borders will always be an impossible concept.
 
We should realize that we live in a globalized world, so I voted OTHER. Although such thing doesn't exist, but countries could trade immigration quotas between each other, with people's labor potential as the underlying commodity. Sooner or later, but rather sooner, every American will learn (the hard way?) that emigrating out of the USA in search of a job/livelyhood will be just as viable or more, than immigrating to the USA for the same.

That untrue. The reality is America has the most lax border control and immigration law of most of the world's countries. Try to break into Mexico and see how they deal with you. Or New Zealand, or the UK.
 
That untrue. The reality is America has the most lax border control and immigration law of most of the world's countries. Try to break into Mexico and see how they deal with you. Or New Zealand, or the UK.

We HAVE to make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. I thought this thread was about LEGAL immigration.
 
We HAVE to make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. I thought this thread was about LEGAL immigration.

No, the thread was about immigration reform, which includes a discussion of how that will deal with illegals. I agree the distinction should be preserved, but the amnesty forces have been busy destroying that language.

But speaking stictly about legal immigration, the same comment applies. Our policies and laws are no more restrictive than the majority of the world's countries. In many cases less so. Try to immigrate to New Zealand or Australia.
 
No, the thread was about immigration reform, which includes a discussion of how that will deal with illegals. I agree the distinction should be preserved, but the amnesty forces have been busy destroying that language.

But speaking stictly about legal immigration, the same comment applies. Our policies and laws are no more restrictive than the majority of the world's countries. In many cases less so. Try to immigrate to New Zealand or Australia.

Immigration to Australia is easier than immigration to the USA. Plus, Australia runs on a commodity trade based economy that is one of the very few left in the "developed" world that can still generate jobs. And they don't even need to be that highly skilled. I don't know much about New Zealand, but I heard that New Zealand was the country that gave a new home to all those white farmers who were chased out of Zimbabwe, in very large numbers.

So your assumptions are not likely to be real.
 
IT is now well known that hispanic immigrants who came here legally or illegally and then gained citizenship were a major reason for Obama winning Florida, Virginia Colorado and perhaps some other states. Several discussions I heard today noted that the welfare promises of the DNC rather than amnesty were the main reason why more than 2/3s of these hispanic immigrants voted for Obama. 75% of them are not well educated or have a skilled trade.

Based on those assumptions, what should be done with our immigration policies
Devastating consequences for businesses which use illegal immigrant labor.

The rest will take care of itself.
 
Immigration to Australia is easier than immigration to the USA. Plus, Australia runs on a commodity trade based economy that is one of the very few left in the "developed" world that can still generate jobs. And they don't even need to be that highly skilled. I don't know much about New Zealand, but I heard that New Zealand was the country that gave a new home to all those white farmers who were chased out of Zimbabwe, in very large numbers.

So your assumptions are not likely to be real.

Their (Australia) site is very short on details. I named those two countries because I have seen the difficulties folks have in immigrating there. For Australia my experience goes back to the 70s when my best friend's father was being "invited" to be a citizen by his wartime friends (he had been a POW held by the Germans). Their state department even sent over a couple folks with films about it and to help with all the forms. I got to sit in on the briefs.

Eventually he declined the offer because they were not allowing black folks to immigrate at that time and his family and mine were heavy into our own country's civil rights struggle. Since then I have had several friends over the years try to immigrate there. Not a single one of them was accepted. They've all described the process as byzantine and "insane".

As for New Zealand, one of my favorite programs is Border Wars. It's a NZ weekly program serializing immigration and customs control. Not once has anyone on this reality show described immigration as easy, or anything other than life consuming. In fact, several episodes folks have compared entry to the US specifically, saying as much as the US puts you through, NZ is ten times worse.

Anecdotal I admit, but that's why I chose those two examples.

Now, show me specifics. What is it about US immigration law you find so anomalous with the rest of the world?
 
Their (Australia) site is very short on details. I named those two countries because I have seen the difficulties folks have in immigrating there. For Australia my experience goes back to the 70s when my best friend's father was being "invited" to be a citizen by his wartime friends (he had been a POW held by the Germans). Their state department even sent over a couple folks with films about it and to help with all the forms. I got to sit in on the briefs.

Eventually he declined the offer because they were not allowing black folks to immigrate at that time and his family and mine were heavy into our own country's civil rights struggle. Since then I have had several friends over the years try to immigrate there. Not a single one of them was accepted. They've all described the process as byzantine and "insane".

As for New Zealand, one of my favorite programs is Border Wars. It's a NZ weekly program serializing immigration and customs control. Not once has anyone on this reality show described immigration as easy, or anything other than life consuming. In fact, several episodes folks have compared entry to the US specifically, saying as much as the US puts you through, NZ is ten times worse.

Anecdotal I admit, but that's why I chose those two examples.

Now, show me specifics. What is it about US immigration law you find so anomalous with the rest of the world?

Maybe I am a bitch, but what distinguishes the US immigration services from all others in the industrial word, is that the US immigration services ride the tails of American marketing. If they want to reduce the number of immigrants, then they should either stop marketing what they stand for or better still they should counter-market it. The US immigration services have good sides too, such as they are warm hearted(?), which is another thing unlike other countries, but the US immigration services are squeezed between a phony marketing and an extremely technical and highly inhumane process directive/legislation ... between a rock and a hard place. (I know them because I read a ton of their materials when they denied the application of my GF's family a while back, and she and I became quick lawyers, but no success.)
 
indeed, the days of the robber barons are gone, pay a living wage or you should NOT be able to operate a business in this country.

you should pay a wage sufficient to obtain the quantity and quality of labor you need. what is a living wage? some artificial bit of crap that the left howls for that puts american companies at a competitive disadvantage
 
you should pay a wage sufficient to obtain the quantity and quality of labor you need. what is a living wage? some artificial bit of crap that the left howls for that puts american companies at a competitive disadvantage

our lack of effective tariffs on china are what put us at a competitive disadvantage. we can't compete with slave labor, even if we cut the minimum wage in half.
 
Creat a panel of 1000 men and women.
Rate each illegal on attractiveness on a scale of 0 to 100. Anyone that rates above 70% can stay in America and become a citizen.
 
Creat a panel of 1000 men and women.
Rate each illegal on attractiveness on a scale of 0 to 100. Anyone that rates above 70% can stay in America and become a citizen.

i'd prefer we test their intelligence/work ethic in some way too =/.
 
Back
Top Bottom