• 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!

Inside the Brutal World of America's Kidnapping Capitol

Crunch said:
I think if you fine any business or person that has Illegal Alien employees $10,000 per head and give the owner 1 month in jail per head on a first offence, the problem would solve it's self..... or do you think people would risk those penalties to hire an Illegal?
Click to expand...

It depends on our consumerism. If we reward companies who hire illegals through our consumption of their goods; they'll continue to try to thwart the law. If there's money to be made, someone will try making it.

Crunch said:
If you think people would not hire Illegal Aliens with those penalties as law, do you think Illegal Aliens would still come to this country with no work available?
Click to expand...

If we completely stopped rewarding illegal labor, they would eventually stop coming over. It won't be a step potential mind you. But so long as they can get work, they'll continue to come over. And so long as we consume the products of their labor as voraciously as we do, there will be jobs for them here.
 
Ikari said:
It depends on our consumerism. If we reward companies who hire illegals through our consumption of their goods; they'll continue to try to thwart the law. If there's money to be made, someone will try making it.



If we completely stopped rewarding illegal labor, they would eventually stop coming over. It won't be a step potential mind you. But so long as they can get work, they'll continue to come over. And so long as we consume the products of their labor as voraciously as we do, there will be jobs for them here.
Click to expand...

I think you are wrong..... how many company owners would go to jail just to thwart the law? Think about it. Say for a second offence it was $20,000 per head and 2 months in jail per head. Next, $30,000 and 3. I think a smart business man/woman would take one look at the risk/reward equation and check their papers very carefully.
 
Crunch said:
I think you are wrong..... how many company owners would go to jail just to thwart the law? Think about it. Say for a second offence it was $20,000 per head and 2 months in jail per head. Next, $30,000 and 3. I think a smart business man/woman would take one look at the risk/reward equation and check their papers very carefully.
Click to expand...

I don't know, but the number would be non-zero. People try to thwart the law all the time in all sorts of circumstances even given the possible consequences if caught. I mean if people really universally thought of the consequences first and that acted as a deterrent, we wouldn't have crime.
 
Ikari said:
I don't know, but the number would be non-zero. People try to thwart the law all the time in all sorts of circumstances even given the possible consequences if caught. I mean if people really universally thought of the consequences first and that acted as a deterrent, we wouldn't have crime.
Click to expand...

Very true..... but if it cut down the jobs available to Illegal Aliens by 90%, they wouldn't come here at all, and I think if it was enforced big time there wouldn't be any jobs for them within a month.
 
Crunch said:
Very true..... but if it cut down the jobs available to Illegal Aliens by 90%, they wouldn't come here at all, and I think if it was enforced big time there wouldn't be any jobs for them within a month.
Click to expand...

So long as there is a chance, they'd come. There's a lot of advantages to illegally working in America if you can pull it off without getting caught.
 
How does a thread about kidnappings in Phoenix turn into a thread on hiring illegals.

The violence caused by the illegals seems to get a pass by pro illegals.
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
Whether you or anyone else wants them is irrelevant to them. They want to come, and they will.
Click to expand...

Which means that, if we are not to be overrun by unwanted peoples, we must exert greater efforts to remove them from our country and to keep them out. This is our country and if we allow others to impose themselves upon us, our country will be lost. This is not only our prerogative as a nation, it is our duty to do so as a matter of self-defense.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Which means that, if we are not to be overrun by unwanted peoples, we must exert greater efforts to remove them from our country and to keep them out. This is our country and if we allow others to impose themselves upon us, our country will be lost. This is not only our prerogative as a nation, it is our duty to do so as a matter of self-defense.
Click to expand...


A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation, or won't be long.

When too many people enter a country illegally, many times with no intention to assimilate or become a citizen, but rather abuse the existing social programs and thumb their nose at the law, the problems that arise are numerous and serious.

Not controlling our borders and immigration is an eventual path to losing our country to a foreign culture and people.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Which means that, if we are not to be overrun by unwanted peoples, we must exert greater efforts to remove them from our country and to keep them out. This is our country and if we allow others to impose themselves upon us, our country will be lost. This is not only our prerogative as a nation, it is our duty to do so as a matter of self-defense.
Click to expand...

I'm from Buenos Aires and I say kill them all!
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
I know that. Whether you or anyone else wants them is irrelevant to them. They want to come, and they will. By making it easier to come in legally, at least they have a chance of rising up instead of being a burden on taxpayers.
Click to expand...

False Logic, they will be burdens on society unless they integrate. Notice the lack of emphasis on such? They will be burdens because there are so many welfare and social programs aimed at "helping them".
 
Crunch said:
Top 10 reasons immigration visas are denied.
Click to expand...

Top 10 Reasons Why Immigrants Get Visas Denied « Guru Immigration Law Blog

http://reason.com/assets/db/07cf533ddb1d06350cf1ddb5942ef5ad.jpg

Crunch said:
Works for me..... let's just open up the border for everyone. No Visas, no rules, come one come all.

[/sarcasm]
Click to expand...

Who here is suggesting that?

Korimyr the Rat said:
Which means that, if we are not to be overrun by unwanted peoples, we must exert greater efforts to remove them from our country and to keep them out. This is our country and if we allow others to impose themselves upon us, our country will be lost. This is not only our prerogative as a nation, it is our duty to do so as a matter of self-defense.
Click to expand...

The only reason why they're a problem now is that they are a criminal underclass mostly incapable of getting good employment or education. The previous wave of huddled masses did pretty well.

MrVicchio said:
False Logic, they will be burdens on society unless they integrate. Notice the lack of emphasis on such? They will be burdens because there are so many welfare and social programs aimed at "helping them".
Click to expand...

And the biggest barrier to integration is keeping them poor by making it too difficult to immigrate. Of course we should have some screening before we let them in, but the current system is a complete mess.
 
Mason66 said:
How does a thread about kidnappings in Phoenix turn into a thread on hiring illegals.

The violence caused by the illegals seems to get a pass by pro illegals.
Click to expand...

Nobody's denying that these scumbags should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The argument is over the main causes.
 
Human trafficking, and especially the trafficking of women and children, is an international problem, not just in the U.S. I think focusing on the illegal immigration situation in just the U.S. is only downplaying the seriousness of the global human trade. People are often lured with false promises to come overseas, and once they arrive they're trapped. Slavery and indentured servitude are still alive and kicking, even in the U.S. and Canada, it's just not something people want to know or talk about. The fact that it's sex slavery and not industrial-strength slavery like the old day should not really ease our minds about this.

People forget that the western nations are wealthy, which means the sickos with a lot of money and time on their hands can pay any sum to have people moved from country to country. You'd be surprised what levels of society are involved. It's not just the low life pimps of the streets. There's also an upper crust at work, especially when it comes to child trafficking.

Even if the border has a wall, it's not going to stop the root of the trafficking practice. These low lives have centuries worth of experience in moving humans from one place to another under the radar. They are always adapting and their greatest weapon is our systemic ignorance of the problem.
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
The only reason why they're a problem now is that they are a criminal underclass mostly incapable of getting good employment or education.
Click to expand...

They cannot acquire these things because they are somewhere they do not belong and somewhere that they have no right to be. These things are privileges that belong to the rightful inhabitants of this country.

DrunkenAsparagus said:
The previous wave of huddled masses did pretty well.
Click to expand...

The previous wave of huddled masses expected their children to join mainstream American society. The children of immigrants who follow this pattern are fully capable of receiving good educations and good employment opportunities and are statistically more successful than the children of natural born citizens. I have no complaint against immigrants who come to this country understanding that success in America depends upon adaptation to American cultural values.
 
DrunkenAsparagus said:
I know that. Whether you or anyone else wants them is irrelevant to them. They want to come, and they will. By making it easier to come in legally, at least they have a chance of rising up instead of being a burden on taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Actually, we need to remove the economic incentive for illegal immigrants to come by cracking down harder on the businesses and individuals who hire them.
 
texmaster said:
How exactly are you for the Arizona law but hate Arpaio and claim the governor who helped bring the law into the light is a racist without supporting information?
Click to expand...

Because Arpaio's tactics go far beyond the law. The law itself is a state stepping forward to enforce federal law and protect its economy, since the federal government will not. There is NOTHING illegal about the law. But Arpaio is a chronic rights violator who is being investigated by the federal and state authorities, and SHOULD BE.

Jan Brewer has made the allegation that the only people coming here are drug dealers. That's a racist comment. I've worked with illegal mexican nationals, most only want to work very hard here to provide for their families better than they can in Mexico. However, that's a criminal act, and I don't support them doing it. I can understand that it's wrong to label all illegal nationals as drug dealers while still believing that illegal immigration is bad.

Enforcing our existing laws = fine. Undermining constitutional rights = not fine. Racially labeling people as drug dealers = not fine.

I am very wedded to our constitution and bill of rights. We have a right to enforce our borders. We are a nation of laws. One can be a constitutionalist and believe simultaneously that racism is wrong and that violating people's civil liberties is wrong. In fact, the seriousness with which I believe in our constitution and civil liberties makes the idea of Arpaio's conduct, as a legally appointed enforcer of laws, all the more appalling to me.

See, I worked for a police agency. Enforcing the law and protecting civil liberties goes hand in hand. This is what cops do, daily.

Why is this so hard for you?
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, we need to remove the economic incentive for illegal immigrants to come by cracking down harder on the businesses and individuals who hire them.
Click to expand...

I'm siding with Milton Friedman on this issue.

Milton Friedman said:
"If you have free immigration, in the way we had it before 1914, everybody benefited. The people who were here benefited. The people who came benefited. Because nobody would come unless he, or his family, thought he would do better here than he would elsewhere. And, the new immigrants provided additional resources, provided additional possibilities for the people already here. So everybody can mutually benefit."

"But on the other hand, if you come under circumstances where each person is entitled to a pro-rata share of the pot, to take an extreme example, or even to a low level of the pie, than the effect of that situation is that free immigration, would mean a reduction of everybody to the same, uniform level. Of course, I’m exaggerating, it wouldn’t go quite that far, but it would go in that direction. And it is that perception, that leads people to adopt what at first seems like inconsistent values."

"Look, for example, at the obvious, immediate, practical example of illegal Mexican immigration. Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It’s a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It’s a good thing for the United States. It’s a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it’s only good so long as its illegal."
Click to expand...

Classically Liberal: What Milton Friedman really said about immigration.

The only thing that gives me pause about them, is that they tend to vote for stupid political ideologies.
 
The sad thing is that there is no real answer to this question. Arizona's Law, while it may be effective at helping round-up illegals and send them back, will still not end the mass exodus people are undergoing to the US. I think Arizona and all states should have the right to determine their immigration laws if the federal government is failing to act, which it is, but in the end we still face the problem of deterring illegals from pouring in. If people will endure the treatment described in the article to get into this country, then there is little laws like Arizona's will even do to stop them.
 
tlmorg02 said:
The sad thing is that there is no real answer to this question. Arizona's Law, while it may be effective at helping round-up illegals and send them back, will still not end the mass exodus people are undergoing to the US. I think Arizona and all states should have the right to determine their immigration laws if the federal government is failing to act, which it is, but in the end we still face the problem of deterring illegals from pouring in. If people will endure the treatment described in the article to get into this country, then there is little laws like Arizona's will even do to stop them.
Click to expand...

Restricting state benefits to new, poor immigrants may help make them more useful and wanted.
I think that is a better start than straight up prohibition.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Because Arpaio's tactics go far beyond the law. The law itself is a state stepping forward to enforce federal law and protect its economy, since the federal government will not. There is NOTHING illegal about the law. But Arpaio is a chronic rights violator who is being investigated by the federal and state authorities, and SHOULD BE.

Jan Brewer has made the allegation that the only people coming here are drug dealers. That's a racist comment.
Enforcing our existing laws = fine. Undermining constitutional rights = not fine. Racially labeling people as drug dealers = not fine.
Click to expand...

I can understand your opinion about Sheriff Joe. I cannot understand how the Gov's statment is racist. Ill advised, yes. Racist no.
It is pretty well known AZ is a cooridor for drugs coming in from Mexico. I agree not all illegals are drug smugglers. IMO, the race card is played way to much on the issue of illegals in the US or Arizona. Many illegals are hard workers as stated. IMO, many of the illegals in the US today do not have the same motivation as those who came in legally in the 30's and 40's.
 
mike2810 said:
I can understand your opinion about Sheriff Joe. I cannot understand how the Gov's statment is racist. Ill advised, yes. Racist no.
It is pretty well known AZ is a cooridor for drugs coming in from Mexico. I agree not all illegals are drug smugglers. IMO, the race card is played way to much on the issue of illegals in the US or Arizona. Many illegals are hard workers as stated. IMO, many of the illegals in the US today do not have the same motivation as those who came in legally in the 30's and 40's.
Click to expand...

I worked with a police agency in the southwest. I'm very familiar with narcotrafficantes, most of the major drug distribution in our area was handled by the Sinaloan Cowboys, beginning back in the mid 1990s--and it continues today. Even now, I have a statue of Jesus Malverde in my office, and a necklace with his picture on it in my desk, both confiscated from Sinaloan narcotrafficantes.

These folks did a ton of criminal activity in our area, and it certainly wasn't limited to street level drug sales. I saw them involved in crimes ranging from home invasion robbery to sex slavery. I personally worked with a 16 year old client who was one of their victims, her mother sold her to them for heroin when she was 14.

Even knowing the extent of illegal mexican national involvement in drug trafficking in my city/state, I still was able to understand that the majority of undocumented workers in our area were there for WORK, not to sell drugs.

Is the race card played too much on these issues? Absolutely. I saw our Chicano police chief and local Chicano judge come under major fire from local Hispanics for enforcing the laws on illegal immigration in partnership with what was then called INS.

However, the fact that the race card is played from one side doesn't make racist allegations appropriate, particularly for a person holding a higher office, like governor.

Re: Jan Brewer's comments, negatively generalizing across an entire group of people on the basis of race/ethnicity IS racism.

p.s. I don't need you to "school" me on this stuff, Mike. I'm probably better informed on what the narcotrafficantes are up to than you are.
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
Restricting state benefits to new, poor immigrants may help make them more useful and wanted.
I think that is a better start than straight up prohibition.
Click to expand...

So, you think that by providing illegal immigrants with benefits we will make them more desireable?
 
tlmorg02 said:
So, you think that by providing illegal immigrants with benefits we will make them more desireable?
Click to expand...

I think that he's saying that they would then be a greater net positive and less negative drain on the system. I'm just not sure how we'd, for instance, refuse to treat them at hospital emergency rooms. Or, refuse to enroll their kids in school. I can't see that happening, which means that working harder to cut off the incentive to come here is the only real option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom