Legal Vs Illegal

MrWonka said:

As with most things Conservatives do they invent stupid laws which they know full well hurt a class of people they don't like so that they can use the excuse of being tough on crime to justify what is actually just blatant racism.

Click to expand...

Care to put any examples of these stupid laws and how they are blatantly racist? Trying to imply evil motives to people that disagree with you is one reason this country is in the partisan hysteria it is currently in. The average person from both sides want the same thing but have opposite view points on how to get there.

MrWonka said:

Imagine you're at a grocery store, and there's only one checkout line open.... (the) check out is really long... you finally get to the front of the line... Do you have a right to demand they not open those new checkout lanes? No... You can be frustrated it wasn't solved sooner, and that you had to deal with it, but that's not a justification for not allowing the problem to be solved.

Click to expand...

I don't think you appreciate his full point - its not (only) about his personal frustration, its about basic fairness. Every system based on taking turns, queuing, is expected to be fair to those that are legally in line. Whether or not there should be more "lines", the que jumpers and systems that support their que jumping are detested everywhere (e.g. as found in the privileged "que jumping" of medical treatment in medical systems).

Today there are millions who are in a que as legal applicants, still residing overseas waiting their turn. Then there are the adult illegals, who decided to ignore the rules and jumped the que and their supporters who demand their amnesty.

Any reform that puts illegals who self-migrated as adult at the front of line in legal residency, before the ques are cleared, is morally unacceptable.

Our immigration policy in this country is ****ing idiotic. ... 98% of people coming into this country whether they're undocumented or documented are perfectly good people... There's no good reason to be denying them that....we have a demand for their labor, and we don't have enough people in this country willing to work these ****ty jobs to fill them all without immigrants.

Click to expand...

It is idiotic, but perhaps not for the reasons that you suppose. While the premise is unclear (other than your personal "feeling" of right and wrong), there are those that do have a principled basis for objection to current policy.

1) "A people" have a right to self-determination within jurisdictional boundaries (i.e. nation-states).

2) The American people have a social compact, to ensure a system that provides them, and their posterity, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A system that provides for more perfect union and their general welfare.

3) The American people, individually or collectively, have no moral duty to "save" foreign citizens or their people or states, either in war or charity. (Nor to those peoples have a moral duty to the US).

4) As a part of the right of self-determination, the American people have an absolute right to decide who moves into its jurisdiction and who joins its social compact. it may do so on any basis that helps secure its liberty, security, and general well-being.

5) Immigration law, in a government of the people, that should reflect and protect the goals of the social compact FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

What part, if any, eludes you? What right of the people do you reject? Till a person develop's a principled basis for their thoughtless "feelings", then they shouldn't take themselves seriously.

Put it this way... The law doesn't tell us what is right and wrong, what is right and wrong should tell us what the law should be. If the law doesn't match what is right and wrong, then you should change the law before you demand people follow it.

Click to expand...

You have to know what is right or wrong beyond personal ranting of one's gut feelings - your subjective emotions are not a basis of principled law.

There are over 10 million undocumented immigrants in this country, and they're not going anywhere. Even if we could realistically round them all up we wouldn't want to. The best thing we can do is treat these people as much like citizens as possible and give them simple methods to earn their citizenship. If their going to be driving on our roads we might as well make sure they are properly licensed and insured. If they're going to be working we might as well make sure they're paying taxes and not getting paid cash under the table. If they witness a crime, we want them to feel like they can report it to authorities without getting in trouble themselves. If they see an accident we want them to stop and help instead of fearing what might happen when the police finally get there. If our criminal justice system can handle white citizen criminals, there's no good reason to treat a brown non-white citizen any differently.

Click to expand...

They are not going anywhere because political forces in Washington (supported by folks like you) DON'T WANT them to go anywhere. When there is a will (as in Eisenhower's operation Wetback) or a serious threat (as in Trump's first six months of immigration sabre rattling) they do go. When measures are taken to deny them employment (e.g. e-verify), to punish employers, to create serious criminal consequences for violating one's visa term or crossing the border illegally - people will go somewhere, i.e.; jail or self-deportation.

Exactice said:

I hate to beat a dead horse.... but I was just watching something today about the Sanctuary cities....and it made me question,


When people TALK immigration, The Right Seems to harp specifically on "Illegal" immigration.

The Left never brings up Illegal Just Immigration period. Its like they disregard Illegal, Immigration is all the same?

Sorry hate throw it out there like that but thats what it seems like....

What I mean is, My wife came through immigration through a K1 visa, we have been happily married for 5 years now and 2 beautiful children. Things are going great and will continue so for many many many years to come.

But during the Visa process it was LONG, tenuous, cost a lot and we where separated for at least a year. We WENT THROUGH THE IMMIGRATION process...Paid thousands, did interviews and waited separated.


So why should 800,000+ Illegal immigrants, just DACA not including the 14million Illegals already here "Get" a pass?


I just dont get it. I am an American Citizen born and raised, I followed all laws, yet these people that KNOWINGLY committed a crime get a pass. More so the Chain Migration attached to it.... HOW and why does this work?

PLEASE justify this for me?

Click to expand...

I am completely against "Sanctuary cities" of any kind.


That said, do you believe in "Jury nullification" where a jury can look past a law if they feel it is unjust?

Thoreau72 said:

If you are so good at recognizing partisanship, where do you put me? For which party am I a partisan?

Given the clear record of human migration on this planet since the beginning (I'm thinking of the knowledge imparted by Jared Diamond's fine book "Guns, Germs and Steel"), all this anxiety, weeping and gnashing of teeth over immigration is rather demonstrative of the small minds of humans and the prevalence of xenophobia.

Click to expand...

I was not speaking of parties, partisanship is a "prejudice in favor of a particular cause; bias". The roots of your partisanship, whether is stems from an unreflective adherence to libertarianism or a personal attachment to "the cause" of immigration is irrelevant. Clearly, however, you are too bright to have not detected your "common sense" flaws in reasoning IF you had not already formed deep attachments (bias) on the issue.

For example "the clear record" of human migration linked to systemic and unrelenting, human conflict, oppression, and violence. It's nice to have a romantic and progressive view of human progress, a sort of "it all worked out in the end after 10,000 years of blood-letting" but it is also pollyannaish history. The Germanic and Slavic "migrations" destroyed the Roman Empire and initiated the dark ages, the Huns eviscerated the late empire replacing or killing many of the prior peoples of Central-East Europe, the Aryans overturned the ancient empires of Northern India, the Indo-Europeans of the Steppes displaced populations across Europe and Asia, the Arab Muslims buried the non-Muslim peoples and cultures, the Zula's pushed out the Bantu, and the America's (and Australian) aborigines suffered massive depopulation from diseases and conflict.

Aside from our own national experience, more recent human migration in history has created long lasting conflicts; northern Ireland, Rhodesia -Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Israel.

The only "small minded" are those that are dismissive of the prevalence of xenophobia as an aberration; the historically literate should know better.

sangha said:

you are lying again

The right does not oppose K1 because they are being abused. Dreamers are not illegal immigrants who have been caught - they cant be caught because they broke no laws. And everyone with a Temporary Protected Status Visa is legitimate.

Be honest. Just admit the right is against both legal and illegal immigration.

Click to expand...

Be honest?

AFTER you.

Your final sentence is a broad brush lie.

maxparrish said:

I was not speaking of parties, partisanship is a "prejudice in favor of a particular cause; bias". The roots of your partisanship, whether is stems from an unreflective adherence to libertarianism or a personal attachment to "the cause" of immigration is irrelevant. Clearly, however, you are too bright to have not detected your "common sense" flaws in reasoning IF you had not already formed deep attachments (bias) on the issue.

For example "the clear record" of human migration linked to systemic and unrelenting, human conflict, oppression, and violence. It's nice to have a romantic and progressive view of human progress, a sort of "it all worked out in the end after 10,000 years of blood-letting" but it is also pollyannaish history. The Germanic and Slavic "migrations" destroyed the Roman Empire and initiated the dark ages, the Huns eviscerated the late empire replacing or killing many of the prior peoples of Central-East Europe, the Aryans overturned the ancient empires of Northern India, the Indo-Europeans of the Steppes displaced populations across Europe and Asia, the Arab Muslims buried the non-Muslim peoples and cultures, the Zula's pushed out the Bantu, and the America's (and Australian) aborigines suffered massive depopulation from diseases and conflict.

Aside from our own national experience, more recent human migration in history has created long lasting conflicts; northern Ireland, Rhodesia -Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Israel.

The only "small minded" are those that are dismissive of the prevalence of xenophobia as an aberration; the historically literate should know better.

Click to expand...

I agree with what you say. What's your take on our present "immigration crisis"?

I agree that xenophobia may not afflict the entire population, but I have a hard time assigning a value to what part of the population is so afflicted. I guess it's just that it SEEMS so much more apparent today than before. What think you?

Visbek said:

DACA is for children who were brought to the US as minors. They didn't have a choice, and they grew up in the US. It is a bit cruel to treat them as criminals when they did not make that choice.

Further, the program said to those children than in exchange for identifying themselves, they would not be deported. Now they are at risk, because they tried to follow a process that was offered to them.

Click to expand...

the process is worthless. that is the problem by ruling through feit as obama did.
whatever he did can be undone.

it wasn't set in stone. their agreement was with obama and no one else. it is congresses job to try and fix it but
that is going to be a very difficult road.

lefty louie said:

I am completely against "Sanctuary cities" of any kind.
That said, do you believe in "Jury nullification" where a jury can look past a law if they feel it is unjust?

Click to expand...

i would say that jury nullification is more of a free speech issue.

Sanctuary cities is a local government purposely flaunting federal law that is a bit different.
they are bound to follow federal law.

a jury not so much.

Exactice said:

I hate to beat a dead horse.... but I was just watching something today about the Sanctuary cities....and it made me question,


When people TALK immigration, The Right Seems to harp specifically on "Illegal" immigration.

The Left never brings up Illegal Just Immigration period. Its like they disregard Illegal, Immigration is all the same?

Sorry hate throw it out there like that but thats what it seems like....

What I mean is, My wife came through immigration through a K1 visa, we have been happily married for 5 years now and 2 beautiful children. Things are going great and will continue so for many many many years to come.

But during the Visa process it was LONG, tenuous, cost a lot and we where separated for at least a year. We WENT THROUGH THE IMMIGRATION process...Paid thousands, did interviews and waited separated.


So why should 800,000+ Illegal immigrants, just DACA not including the 14million Illegals already here "Get" a pass?


I just dont get it. I am an American Citizen born and raised, I followed all laws, yet these people that KNOWINGLY committed a crime get a pass. More so the Chain Migration attached to it.... HOW and why does this work?

PLEASE justify this for me?

Click to expand...

Absolutely right.

disneydude said:

As long as there is no true access for people who cannot pay for their place in line...there is going to be illegal immigration. If you want to fix the problem, you first have to address the problems with our system.

Click to expand...

1.3 million immigrants came in to the US. That's a lot of rich people if we go by your claims. Do you have any sources to back up your assertions?

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/art...tics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

Thoreau72 said:

I agree with what you say. What's your take on our present "immigration crisis"?

I agree that xenophobia may not afflict the entire population, but I have a hard time assigning a value to what part of the population is so afflicted. I guess it's just that it SEEMS so much more apparent today than before. What think you?

Click to expand...

Hopefully I conveyed my point: xenophobia is not unnatural given the history of human conflict over territory and dominance. Arguably, those who are not at least somewhat xenophobic are an aberration from the norm.

My view of the current immigration controversy is both principled and pragmatic. Several posts ago (50ty something) I provided five principles (to another poster). In short, that it is the duty of our government to secure the liberty, security, and well-being of the American people, without any duty to assist others outside the social compact. There is no reason to allow anyone to join our people if they do not secure those ends.

Therefore, in principle, most illegals should be deported, the strong majority of immigration since 1965 should not have been allowed, and most (but not all) future immigration should be curtailed.

Low skilled and unskilled immigrants are costly; they contribute little to the well being of our citizenry, cost the citizens dearly in economic and institutional resources, lower wages for the working class, are below the American average in ability, destroy our social capital, harm the environment, and contribute to great social dislocation (migration) of domestic populations seeking to distance themselves from alien cultures. I believe the immigration of the last half century to have been a current and future disaster for "my posterity" and my state (California).

Not all immigration is undesirable; highly skilled individuals usually contribute more in economic gain (and less social cost) than the more typical immigrant. However, most illegals are self-selected and most legals are a result of chain migration.

Hence, I support any measure that vastly reduce the amount of immigration, and that will change it to a system of merit and need for the American people.

maxparrish said:

Any reform that puts illegals who self-migrated as adult at the front of line in legal residency, before the ques are cleared, is morally unacceptable.

Click to expand...

Nobody is suggesting they be put in front, simply that the line should be eliminated or minimized so there's no reason for someone to bother trying to circumvent it unless they truly are a bad guy we shouldn't let through.

Republicans are creating this problem, then trying to use the existence of the problem they created as an excuse not to solve it. The truth is Republicans hate minorities and don't want people coming to this country unless their nice white European christians. This illegal immigration problem is just an excuse they've made up to try and pretend they're not racists.

maxparrish said:

3) The American people, individually or collectively, have no moral duty to "save" foreign citizens or their people or states, either in war or charity.

Click to expand...

We may not have a duty, but when you claim that "all men are created equal, and endowed with certain rights" it is beyond hypocritical to not do the least we can to help people obtain those rights.

When you are a nation that was founded entirely by immigrant refugees trying to escape religious and class-based persecution in search of better opportunities, it is nonsensically stupid, hypocritical, and selfish to deny those same opportunities to the next generation just because you've already got them, and don't give a **** about anyone else. You're hear because the founding fathers of this country gave you that opportunity, and to not pay it forward is the height of selfishness, and flies in the face of the core concept of America.

maxparrish said:

4) As a part of the right of self-determination, the American people have an absolute right to decide who moves into its jurisdiction and who joins its social compact. it may do so on any basis that helps secure its liberty, security, and general well-being.

Click to expand...

In a free country you don't need a reason to give someone freedom you need a reason to take it away. It is not the immigrant's job to jump through ridiculous hoops to try and prove they would be a good citizen it is our job prove otherwise. This is nothing but blatant racism and xenophobia disguised as vetting. It's the same garbage tactics that conservatives used to try and keep minorities from voting. You're the one trying to restrict the freedom of someone else, therefore the owness is on you to prove it's deserved. If someone can pass a basic medical exame to determine they are not carrying dangrous diseases, and a background check to insure they have no known criminal history, and are not suspected of ties to terrorism they should be allowed to go on their way. In this age of technology performing these simple tests should not take 5-10 years.

maxparrish said:

5) Immigration law, in a government of the people, that should reflect and protect the goals of the social compact FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Click to expand...

Which just highlights the nonsensical ideas conservatives have about immigration. Immigration is good for the country. It's what made America strong in the first place. Particularly given the radical reduction in birth rates among native citizens we actually need more immigrants to grow our economy. The resent slow down in economic growth in this country, the housing bubble...the reduction in population growth is a huge part of the cause of that problem.

Conservatives can try and hide their racism all they want to the rest of the world sees right through it. Conservatives believe that white people are supperior. They believe that as the percentage of the country that is white decreases it will automatically translate into the decline of the United States of America. In reality white christian Americans are so ****ing ignorant and entitled, that we increasingly need more well educated, and hard working people from other countries to keep us from declining.

maxparrish said:

You have to know what is right or wrong beyond personal ranting of one's gut feelings - your subjective emotions are not a basis of principled law.

Click to expand...

As I've already explained to you the fundamental principles that drove the founding of this country are the beliefs that all men are created equal, and that people should be considered innocent until proven guilty. These beliefs are essential to the existence of a free society. You'll find these principles repeated allthroughout our laws. Conservative claim they fear big government infringing upon their rights, yet they hipocritically have no problemm using that big government to do everything in their power to block the will of anybody that wasn't lucky enough to be born on the rigt side of an ocean or imaginary line.

maxparrish said:

They are not going anywhere because political forces in Washington (supported by folks like you) DON'T WANT them to go anywhere. When there is a will (as in Eisenhower's operation Wetback) or a serious threat (as in Trump's first six months of immigration sabre rattling) they do go.

Click to expand...

Actually, Obama deported more mexican immigrants in 2016 than Trump did in 2017, but regardless. These people aren't going anywhere because you cannot simply force 10 million people to do anything. Particularly when you have to violate your own privacy laws to try and figure out who should and shouldn't be here.

maxparrish said:

When measures are taken to deny them employment (e.g. e-verify), to punish employers,

Click to expand...

The unemployment rate in the United States of America is 4.1%. Almost any Economist will tell you that anything below 5% is generally considered full employment due to the fact that there is always a certain percentage of people transitioning between jobs. That means that virtually every single solitary citizen in this country who wants a job can find one, and yet some how we still have enough jobs left over for almost 10 million immigrants from other countries to have no trouble finding them.

Employers would happily hire American citizens before resorting to immigrants, but as Donald Trump's own hotels and resorts demonstrate they can often be incredibly difficult to find. That's why his Mara-lago resort has applied to hire 70 foreign workers. Trump wins visas to hire 70 foreign workers at Mar-a-Lago | TheHill

All these rural white **** heads that voted for Donald Trump claim they want jobs, but don't seem to think working in a kitchen, busing tables, or cleaning hotel rooms count as jobs. In California farmers have been forced to leave entire fields full of crops unharvested this year because they can't find anybody to help them pick the crops.

I'm sorry buddy, but you are very ignorant of reality. Thanks to the good work of President Obama and Congressional Democrats back in 2009 and 2010, the U.S. Economy is humming a long so well that we have more jobs available than we know what to do with. As of this time last year before Trump took office we had more job openings available in the United States than at any other time in all of recorded American history. That number as only continued to grow. America has record-high 6.2 million job openings - Aug. 8, 2017

The problem is simply that most native workers are either unqualified for those jobs, or not interested in them. It makes absolutely no sense to punish immigrant workers, or the employers who hire them because whether you like it or not they're doing us all a big favor.

MrWonka said:

Actually, Obama deported more mexican immigrants in 2016 than Trump did in 2017, but regardless. These people aren't going anywhere because you cannot simply force 10 million people to do anything. Particularly when you have to violate your own privacy laws to try and figure out who should and shouldn't be here.



The unemployment rate in the United States of America is 4.1%. Almost any Economist will tell you that anything below 5% is generally considered full employment due to the fact that there is always a certain percentage of people transitioning between jobs. That means that virtually every single solitary citizen in this country who wants a job can find one, and yet some how we still have enough jobs left over for almost 10 million immigrants from other countries to have no trouble finding them.

Employers would happily hire American citizens before resorting to immigrants, but as Donald Trump's own hotels and resorts demonstrate they can often be incredibly difficult to find. That's why his Mara-lago resort has applied to hire 70 foreign workers. Trump wins visas to hire 70 foreign workers at Mar-a-Lago | TheHill

All these rural white **** heads that voted for Donald Trump claim they want jobs, but don't seem to think working in a kitchen, busing tables, or cleaning hotel rooms count as jobs. In California farmers have been forced to leave entire fields full of crops unharvested this year because they can't find anybody to help them pick the crops.

I'm sorry buddy, but you are very ignorant of reality. Thanks to the good work of President Obama and Congressional Democrats back in 2009 and 2010, the U.S. Economy is humming a long so well that we have more jobs available than we know what to do with. As of this time last year before Trump took office we had more job openings available in the United States than at any other time in all of recorded American history. That number as only continued to grow. America has record-high 6.2 million job openings - Aug. 8, 2017

The problem is simply that most native workers are either unqualified for those jobs, or not interested in them. It makes absolutely no sense to punish immigrant workers, or the employers who hire them because whether you like it or not they're doing us all a big favor.

Click to expand...

the problem isn't just about getting a job... its about wages.. and the facts are that illegal immigrants are willing and able to take much lower wages.. and their existence in the workforce lowers wage pressure on employers.

I would be sure.. that if trump increased salaries and benefits at his hotels.. he would see an increase in his ability to hire and retain workers. Instead.. its cheaper for him to get a visa to hire workers.... and the reason its cheaper is because he won't have to pay the wages.

Illegal immigrants are not "doing us a big favor"/... unless you mean doing the wealthy in this country.. like Trump.. a big favor increasing their profits and furthering the inequality in this country.

maxparrish said:

Hopefully I conveyed my point: xenophobia is not unnatural given the history of human conflict over territory and dominance. Arguably, those who are not at least somewhat xenophobic are an aberration from the norm.

My view of the current immigration controversy is both principled and pragmatic. Several posts ago (50ty something) I provided five principles (to another poster). In short, that it is the duty of our government to secure the liberty, security, and well-being of the American people, without any duty to assist others outside the social compact. There is no reason to allow anyone to join our people if they do not secure those ends.

Therefore, in principle, most illegals should be deported, the strong majority of immigration since 1965 should not have been allowed, and most (but not all) future immigration should be curtailed.

Low skilled and unskilled immigrants are costly; they contribute little to the well being of our citizenry, cost the citizens dearly in economic and institutional resources, lower wages for the working class, are below the American average in ability, destroy our social capital, harm the environment, and contribute to great social dislocation (migration) of domestic populations seeking to distance themselves from alien cultures. I believe the immigration of the last half century to have been a current and future disaster for "my posterity" and my state (California).

Not all immigration is undesirable; highly skilled individuals usually contribute more in economic gain (and less social cost) than the more typical immigrant. However, most illegals are self-selected and most legals are a result of chain migration.

Hence, I support any measure that vastly reduce the amount of immigration, and that will change it to a system of merit and need for the American people.

Click to expand...

OK, got it. Xenophobia is normal. Though I am not xenophobic, I do agree with you that many today are. But I know that many are not. I'm curious as to what percentage of the population is xenophobic, but that would be some sort of digression.

Any measure to vastly reduce the amount of immigration sounds very much like favoring any measure that vastly reduces the amount of drugs entering the country illegally. A little bad news implying a bad prognosis for your dream--the government has been wasting billions of tax dollars, and having much fun and bureaucratic prosperity while doing it, trying to vastly reduce the amount of drugs entering the country, and we've reached the point many years ago where about 95% of U.S. currency has traces of cocaine on it, kids are selling drugs on street corners, and illegal drugs are available in many prisons.

Good luck amigo. :lol:

Thoreau72 said:

OK, got it. Xenophobia is normal. Though I am not xenophobic, I do agree with you that many today are. But I know that many are not. I'm curious as to what percentage of the population is xenophobic, but that would be some sort of digression.

Any measure to vastly reduce the amount of immigration sounds very much like favoring any measure that vastly reduces the amount of drugs entering the country illegally. A little bad news implying a bad prognosis for your dream--the government has been wasting billions of tax dollars, and having much fun and bureaucratic prosperity while doing it, trying to vastly reduce the amount of drugs entering the country, and we've reached the point many years ago where about 95% of U.S. currency has traces of cocaine on it, kids are selling drugs on street corners, and illegal drugs are available in many prisons.

Good luck amigo. :lol:

Click to expand...

I wonder if its what we think it really is?

When We Say Racist or Xenophobic, sexist etc are we really being that... Or are we just being overly sensitive or trying to be politically correct.

What I mean is. I grew up in a place where I was surrounded by all walks of life. Meaning I had exposure to many different races, religions and beliefs. We all equally co inhabited just fine.

BUT at this is a HUGE BUT

Between the Races there was conflicts of belief as WELL as conflicts of MORALS.... That being said some races did treat others differently, with that certain races did ACT differently. To be called out on that NOW, it to be xenophobic or racist, which is BULL......

If a certain race does not act accordingly, to the rest of the nation...... is it really Xenophobic or Racist or is it just calling them out and NOT being politically correct.


It bothers me when people demand something different. Just because..... we all really do have equal opportunities. its the Choice we make where we are..... to allow us to flourish or lay down and go with the flow......

disneydude said:

There is so much corruption in the immigration system. It amounts to as you yourself put it....those who can pay to go through the process get in...those without the means to buy a spot don't.

Click to expand...

Then end the corruption and move to a bonded immigrant program. Low demand job skills = high bond. High demand job skills = low bond. Having an American citizen as a spouse gives you a discount on your bond (which you would lose upon divorce). Streamline the process by using the bonding process as the standard for who gets in and who doesn't. Lots more to this plan if you want to see it....

Exactice said:

I wonder if its what we think it really is?

When We Say Racist or Xenophobic, sexist etc are we really being that... Or are we just being overly sensitive or trying to be politically correct.

What I mean is. I grew up in a place where I was surrounded by all walks of life. Meaning I had exposure to many different races, religions and beliefs. We all equally co inhabited just fine.

BUT at this is a HUGE BUT

Between the Races there was conflicts of belief as WELL as conflicts of MORALS.... That being said some races did treat others differently, with that certain races did ACT differently. To be called out on that NOW, it to be xenophobic or racist, which is BULL......

If a certain race does not act accordingly, to the rest of the nation...... is it really Xenophobic or Racist or is it just calling them out and NOT being politically correct.


It bothers me when people demand something different. Just because..... we all really do have equal opportunities. its the Choice we make where we are..... to allow us to flourish or lay down and go with the flow......

Click to expand...

Thanks for the most reasonable post.

Racism is generally defined as feeling that one's own race is superior to others, or the converse, that other races are somehow inferior to one's own.

Being racially aware, as we all are, is not the same as practicing racism.

Xenophobia is generally defined as fear of other races, fear of foreigners.

In real life, we all really DO NOT have equal opportunities, despite the best intentions of many and all the rhetoric. For example, a person born into even moderate wealth has far more opportunities than a person born in poverty.

A person born in good health has far more opportunities than a person born with serious congenital conditions.

MrWonka said:

...simply that the line should be eliminated or minimized so there's no reason for someone to bother trying to circumvent it unless they truly are a bad guy we shouldn't let through.

Republicans are creating this problem... The truth is Republicans hate minorities and don't want people coming to this country unless their nice white European christians. This illegal immigration problem is just an excuse they've made up to try and pretend they're not racists.

Click to expand...

A lesson: it is true that if you leave your door open, there would be less illegal breaking and entering of your home. However, only a nitwit would suggest that unlocking your doors are the solution to criminal trespass. Correct?

Lines are a form of rationing, necessary because the rules of immigration that are far too permissive. When those those rules are changed to be far more restrictive, the lines of qualified in line will shrink. In other words, it would be most idiotic to solve the problem of lines by removing the administrative dikes.

But I do understand why you think Republicans are the problem; after all, anyone who fights against your view of open ended immigration and who wants to make illegals ACTUALLY illegal are "problems" to you. Anyone who wishes to maintain a heritage cultural continuity and make the liberty, security and well being of the native born come first are (in your view) wretches. And anyone who disagrees with you are racists (including, one supposes, some on the left who are also against generous immigration (e.g. Mickey Kaus or Peter Beinart)).

...when you claim that "all men are created equal, and endowed with certain rights",...When you are a nation that was founded entirely by immigrant refugees trying to escape religious and class-based persecution in search of better opportunities, it is nonsensically stupid, hypocritical, and selfish to deny those same opportunities to the next generation just because you've already got them,... and to not pay it forward is the height of selfishness, and flies in the face of the core concept of America.

Click to expand...

Spewing thought-deadening cliches and superficial moral pronouncements is not an argument, unless one adheres to the medieval view of related collective blood debt or guilt. It's a historical fact that the current population are not immigrants, but are largely the descendants of diaspora's of mixed peoples (free, indentured, or enslaved) of the mostly dead. It is also true that the well-being of the non-immigrants of prior generations was sometimes improved, and other times harmed, by such population waves. None the less, there is nothing "hypocritical" for a native born or legal immigrant to make his people, the American people, come first.

By the way, as far as "paying if forward", if you had bothered to read the founding documents it would know what that idea means:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Click to expand...

The people of the United States formed a government to secure union, justice, tranquility, defense, liberty and promote the general welfare for "ourselves" and our posterity - not to provide those things and opportunities for "the next generations" of foreign peoples.

In a free country...it is not the immigrant's job to jump through ridiculous hoops to try and prove they would be a good citizen it is our job prove otherwise. This is...blatant racism and xenophobia, ... garbage tactics that conservatives used to try and keep minorities from voting. You're the one trying to restrict the freedom of someone else, therefore the owness is on you to prove it's deserved. ...

Click to expand...

Your not a country, free or otherwise, unless you have membership in a sovereign people who have a sovereign, jurisdictional, territory. In a free country the people have a right to self-determination, including who it permits to move into its sovereign territory and to join its social compact. There is no inherent right for you to move to Japan or Mexico or Nepal or New Zealand and become a resident member of their society. If they don't want you, get over your arrogance and respect their choice.

Continued...

Continued...

Which just highlights the nonsensical ideas conservatives have about immigration. Immigration is good for the country. ...

Click to expand...

Clearly you are profoundly ignorant of the economics of immigration. Immigration is only "good" for the general welfare under certain circumstances. Economic growth is good ONLY if it increase per capita wealth, something that most current immigration fails to do. It is only good if it does not cause externalities of economic and social costs that exceed benefits (i.e. crime, pollution, education costs, that exceed benefits). And, only a mook would ignore the fact that we have an affordability crisis in housing due to population pressures on a limited supply, NOT a problem in surplus housing.

The remainder of your post was a series of opaque rants over equality, christians, whites, conservatives, imaginary lines, etc. Because you degenerate into unsupported subjective characterizations of persons (not actual argument), we shall let that composting pile be left undisturbed.

MrWonka said:

Actually, Obama deported more mexican immigrants in 2016 than Trump did in 2017, but regardless. These people aren't going anywhere because you cannot simply force 10 million people to do anything. Particularly when you have to violate your own privacy laws to try and figure out who should and shouldn't be here.

Click to expand...

Actually, you've got a bad case of hyper partisan confirming bias. The Obama-Trump comparison is another truthie passed around by your fellow gullible true believers as "wanna-believe" fic-facts (fictional facts). Or are you unaware that even the far left periodical, "The Nation", has derailed this "truthie" as as misleading hooey?

https://www.thenation.com/article/why-numbers-alone-obscure-the-real-deportation-story/

There are, broadly speaking, two kinds of deportation: those which kick people out of the country quickly for getting caught crossing the US-Mexican border, and those which round up people who are already living in the United States—the “interior.” One big reason for the decrease in deportations is that fewer people are crossing into the country from Mexico. ...

If one looks only at what are called “interior removals,” Trump has deported more people than Obama did in his final two years. In fact, in his first eight months in office, Trump deported 61,094 people from the interior, 37 percent more than Obama did in the same period in 2016.

ICE arrests are also up under Trump. Between his inauguration and September 30, ICE arrested 42 percent more people for immigration violations than it did over the same period in the previous year. Immigration-court backlogs are key to understanding why Trump’s deportation numbers aren’t even higher: If a person has lived in the country for more than two years and has not been previously subject to a deportation order, they’re entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge. Processing those cases takes time

Click to expand...

As I said, deportation is a matter of political will and "those people" may not be going anywhere (in part) only because side lacks the political will (in case you have forgotten). At least be honest about it.

The unemployment rate in the United States of America is 4.1%. ...That means that virtually every single solitary citizen in this country who wants a job can find one, and yet some how we still have enough jobs left over for almost 10 million immigrants from other countries to have no trouble finding them.

Click to expand...

No, it does not. Your partisan "self-education" needs a curriculum improvement.your

First, the unemployment is computed for those are employed INCLUDING those illegally employed by employers. This means that "every single solitary citizen" who wants a job, but can't find one, if millions that are illegally employed were fired.

Second, it has been clear to economists since 2009 (nine years ago) that the unemployment rate does not reflect the fact that fewer adults are working than in any prior modern period (excepting the 1970s when many women did not work outside the home), only half of which are due to baby boomer retirement.

In other words, you "home brew" analysis is either cherry picked or oblivious to the broader employment picture.

Employers would happily hire American citizens before resorting to immigrants... All these rural white **** heads that voted for Donald Trump claim they want jobs, but don't seem to think working in a kitchen, busing tables, or cleaning hotel rooms count as jobs. In California farmers have been forced to leave entire fields full of crops unharvested this year because they can't find anybody to help them pick the crops.

Click to expand...

And you "know" this how, other than by mind reading?

I assume its mind reading, given that your "knowledge" does not derive from the basic laws of economics, let alone common sense. If it did, you would know that firms seek the lowest cost labor and don't desire to hire anyone at a higher rate than necessary, including Americans. And there is no reason to suppose American citizens could not fill any semi or unskilled position, if the wages were sufficiently high - which is highly unlikely to happen when Republicans and Democrats push for a much larger pool of competing foreign labor so as to drive down labor costs.

And when you are passing along another "truthie" from you fellow partisans, perhaps you ought to have the good sense to check it out. The "California Field Rotting" trope is another mangled story, pushed by leftscope.com (and then pulled from its site), who got it from an alternative newspaper. As it turned out, it had nothing to do with rotting food left in feilds, it was reputedly based on an unvetted survey (2015) by a growers association of some farmers on how much MORE they think they might have made with more field hands - all of which is conjectural and amounts to a hill of beans.

maxparrish said:

"The Nation", has derailed this "truthie" as as misleading hooey?

Click to expand...

Your own article admits the truth of this statement in the very first paragraph, it just goes on to make a bunch of excuses for why it's happening.

maxparrish said:

As I said, deportation is a matter of political will

Click to expand...

Sure thing cheif. Just eliminating drugs is a matter of political will. Never mind that we've spent over 40 years, and trillions of dollars to not put a dent in the problem.

And elminating guns? Yeah, if we really wanted to do that we could. It wouldn't just be the good guys who turned them in, the bad guys would too if we just had the will to do it.

maxparrish said:

This means that "every single solitary citizen" who wants a job, but can't find one, if millions that are illegally employed were fired.

Click to expand...

Nope. 4.1% means that everyone who wants a job CAN find one, and there are still millions left over that we can't fill. You're radically misinformed as are most right wingers. Now it's possible that in your ****ty conservative state the employment rate might be a bit higher, but not because of immigration. Because you have ****ty conservative economic policies, and your population is very poorly educated.

maxparrish said:

Second, it has been clear to economists since 2009 (nine years ago) that the unemployment rate does not reflect the fact that fewer adults are working

Click to expand...

Irrelevant. There are plenty of valid reasons why people choose not to work. More people are going to school. More people are retiring. More parents are deciding they can stay at home with the kids because their spouse makes enough money to support them both. Even if there are some people who don't look because they don't think their are jobs available that's their own dumb problem. There is actually a **** load of jobs available, and at this point it's only Republican lies that keep some people from believing otherwise. Don't have a job? Go get one. I could find one in about 15 seconds if I really wanted. In fact I technically even found a second job that pays $25/hour, and it's easy as ****. What's your excuse?

maxparrish said:

only half of which are due to baby boomer retirement.

Click to expand...

And the other half is explained by college students, and people choosing not to work for other valid reasons.

maxparrish said:

In other words, you "home brew" analysis is either cherry picked or oblivious to the broader employment picture.

Click to expand...

I'm using the official statistic that has been agreed upon for decades. You're picking alternative statistics because the truth looks too good, and you can't admit a Black President fixed your boy Bush's mess.

maxparrish said:

And you "know" this how other than by mind reading?

Click to expand...

Pretty simple logic really. Why would someone commit a crime to benefit a foreigner when they can legally hire one of their fellow countrymen that wants the same job at the same price?

maxparrish said:

I assume its mind reading, given that your "knowledge" does not derive from the basic laws of economics, let alone common sense.

Click to expand...

Really that's weird because virtually every respected econmist on earth agrees with me, and not you.

maxparrish said:

If it did, you would know that firms seek the lowest cost labor and don't desire to hire anyone at a higher rate than necessary, including Americans.

Click to expand...

So why don't you just legalize all these immigrants so they can earn a legitimate living and be subject to all the same wage laws that citizens are? I think you'll be surprised to find that most of these day laborers are actually getting paid quite well. Most of them are actually making more than minimum wage. The real problem has more to do with the fact that so many of these jobs are seasonal. Actual citizens who generally don't want to migrate with the seasons simply don't want them.

maxparrish said:

\f the wages were sufficiently high

Click to expand...

Oh, I see so we're all supposed to pay astronomical prices for our fruit because a bunch of dumb white guys didn't feel like getting good enough grades to get a real job? Why is it that the same people who seem to think we don't need a minimum wage are always complaining about competition from brown people driving down their salary?

maxparrish said:

competing foreign labor so as to drive down labor costs.

Click to expand...

Which according to Republican Supply siders would drive down the cost of goods, and make it possible for people to afford more goods on lower wages thereby creating jobs. Who's side are you on anyway?

maxparrish said:

growers association of some farmers on how much MORE they think they might have made with more field hands - all of which is conjectural and amounts to a hill of beans.

Click to expand...

Yeah, what would farmers know about farming anyway.</sarcasm> These farmers have the experience to make good educated guesses on this topic. You don't. You're right about one thing though there are entire hills of beans that didn't get harvested this year because Trump supporters are morons.

Dont want to quote all the above....

This goes back to Perpetuation...... we have rooted our own problem.

1) Americans and American Society, finds low skilled low wage positions beneath them. This is reality, by unemployment, Calls for $15 minimum wage from etc.... its ridiculous. We enabled undocumented workers to pick up the slack. because Americans that dont want to work for $7.25. (Truth) And when undocumented people that were getting paid $1 a day are offered a couple of dollars an HOUR, they Are MORE than happy to do that. Why? Because they dont feel entitled , they dont feel the work is beneath them and they are just happy to get something.

2) The American Business is Hurting, due to this bottom line, The lack of low skilled applicants as "teens" and low skilled works still demand higher pay that does not QUANTIFY the positions. Or College Students coming out EXPECTING $50,000 a year + benefits. There are 3 positions to any business. Entry level, Class Workers and Management. Everyone one wants to START at class or Management and many think just because they have a Degree they DESERVE the Management. You CANT manage something without entry level workers.....

3) Because there is no American Willing to take entry level work. THIS WORK STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE. Look no further than those either desperate (illegal immigrants) without Government support (Welfare, Section 8, Unemployment etc) WILL to do what they gotta do.



WE created this MONSTER. Until we are ready to address the UNDERLYING reason..... Then this emotional need to separate Immigrants from Illegal Immigrants will always be here.


Again my Feeling is LETS address JUST the ILLEGAL's NOT the Legal Migrants that are going through the process.


If you are Illegal why did you NOT take steps to register. DACA (first word DEFERRED action for Childhood Arrivals) meaning temporary. TPS El Salvador (TEMPORARY STATUS) These were all temporary NOT permanent, So why do any of these people think it not fair that they are at risk. They KNEW they were are risk once they accepted DACA/TPS status????

MrWonka said:

Your own article admits the truth of this statement in the very first paragraph, it just goes on to make a bunch of excuses for why it's happening. ...Sure thing cheif. Just eliminating drugs is a matter of political will. Never mind that we've spent over 40 years, and trillions of dollars to not put a dent in the problem

And eliminating guns? Yeah, if we really wanted to do that we could. It wouldn't just be the good guys who turned them in, the bad guys would too if we just had the will to do it.

Click to expand...

You are spider-holed in denial, simply repeating previously unsupported assertions and uninformed comparisons (when not peppering it with unskilled sarcasm). As you can't seem to focus on the topic boundaries, I will just sum them up and move on.

1) No one, other than you, are speaking of guns or drugs. And, if we were, illegal drugs and guns are materially different; in quantity, volume, subsistence needs, employment exposure, etc. (Nor are they though, by the way, immune to political will).
2) No one is speaking of "eliminating" anything, we are speaking of substantially reducing illegal immigration and residency.
3) Since the advent of the nation state, most states have regulated the flow of goods (customs) and people across their borders.
4) Strict and effective restrictions to illegals exist (past and present) in (for example) Israel, Russia, China, Australia, New Zealand, Iran, Mexico, and are growing in Eastern Europe. Of course, the communist countries demonstrated how effective border walls and militarized borders were (very effective!).

So yes, it is obviously a matter of those who have the will, and those who don't.

Nope. 4.1% means that everyone who wants a job CAN find one, and there are still millions left over that we can't fill. You're radically misinformed as are most right wingers. Now it's possible that in your ****ty conservative state the employment rate might be a bit higher, but not because of immigration. Because you have ****ty conservative economic policies, and your population is very poorly educated.

Irrelevant. There are plenty of valid reasons why people choose not to work.

Click to expand...

First, the "validity" of reasons are what is irrelevant. That people are unable and/or unwilling to find work that they previously had (before 2008) is due to specific developments, in part due to the political choices made in the past.

Second, the 4.1 rate is not a judgemental "normative" value, it is only your unsupported conjecture that "anyone who wants a job can find one". The rate is defined as "a measure of the prevalence of unemployment and it is calculated as a percentage by dividing the number of unemployed individuals by all individuals currently in the labor force." It says nothing about why the labor participation market has declined. It is just a rate used by economists to characterize the labor economy as a whole, regardless of the actual economic sector, or specific demographic group or personal experiences of potential workers.

Third, there are (at least) a half dozen other BLS measures refining the employment/unemployment/underemployment and labor drop out picture - all of which suggests that some who want a job of the same kind (full-time employment, same wage and benefits) as before the 2008 recession won't find one. And, as one might expect because of unemployment, or structural underemployment, some have returned to school a go in debt, some given up looking, many have chosen record SSI disability, some are forced to accept part-time lower paying jobs, and some are now "employed" as unbenefited temporaries.

Anyway, the 4.1 percent rate says nothing about the so-called need for more illegals to harvest crops that, it turned out, were never left to rot. It is obvious that the termination of several million illegals working for American companies would mostly be replaced, with a little higher wages, by those groups of unskilled who are in underemployed or unemployed. As Hormel was forced to discover after major ICE raids, yes, there are Americans willing to work at those jobs previously held by illegals.

You're radically misinformed as are most right wingers. Now it's possible that in your ****ty conservative state the employment rate might be a bit higher, but not because of immigration. Because you have ****ty conservative economic policies, and your population is very poorly educated.

Click to expand...

I guess you believe that your repeated ranting of forum bleeped obsenties directed at my "conservative" state and my state's "conservative" economic policies makes you sound convincing? As I live in "conservative" California, one of the most Democratic and liberal states in the union, I see that your rants have regressed from boring to whack-a-doodle delusional. (But you are correct about one thing, we do have the highest poverty rate in the nation and the 7th highest inequality).

Continued.