dern illegal im'grants

Here are some of my things against illegal immigration:
1) They are a burden on the health care system. They go to the hospitals and leave without paying a bill.
2) The trash the boarder coming across by running though people's property, ruining fencing, and there is a sizable number of boarder homes that are robbed due to illeagals.
3) They have no car insurance. This drives up the bills that people have to pay to stay insured.
4) Too many of them have allegiance to Mexico. I hear from them at school that many of them prefer Mexico to the US but they don't mind using my country to get the good things in life.
5) It is illegal!!!
6) If any, they don't pay enough taxes.
7) They suppress wages even for themselves. If they were legal they'd get better benefits and/or pay.
8) Trying to cross a massive desert without any good supplies is lethal even in the winter.
9) Coyotes are notorious for stuffing 50+ people in 1 small house without any food, water, air conditioning, and other necessities. They leave with thousands of the illeagals money and never return. No one finds out about these illeagals until somebody almost dies.
10) They should fix their own beloved country.
11) They have great fears about getting hurt or needing emergency services. They think that they will be sent to Mexico if they go to a hospital or call the cops on someone who has wronged them. If they were legal migrants they wouldn't have to worry about hospitals or the cops.

So we really need to fix the illegal problem not only for ourselves but for them. The legal immigration process needs to be streamlined a bit and we need to beef up the security of the border. The guest worker program advocated by Bush and some of the Senate that will allow a path to citizenship. I think their pan is not the way to go. It will only show to illeagals that if you show up in big enough numbers that the US will do the same in another 20 years. Deportation, no matter how legally correct it may be, is not an efficient way to help solve the problem either. It would be near impossible to deport 15 million people back to Mexico. Most people who are deported now end up getting deported again in a few weeks because the US dumps them just barely over the border so they only place to try to get money is back in the US. The best way to get people back to Mexico would be to stop the attractiveness of hiring illeagals by business owners and homeowners. If you put fines and stricter penalties on those who let people break the law you'd end up with less people braking the law. It would be a simple supply and demand issue. If nobody want an undocumented worker than the undocumented workers would do what it takes to get documentation. If that means that they have to go back to Mexico to get the proper documents and wait for a certain amount of time while going through some bureaucratic hoops than that is a good thing.
To me that is the bast way to go.

I can't find an online source but back around 2002 I remember reading about the US government rejecting a loan request from Mexico. The loan was to be used to build roads to stimulate the economy, creating jobs and stopping illegal immigration. It was a LOAN, not foreign aid, and would have slowed immigration, but it was rejected. It was about 2-3 billion, I believe, not much by government standards. Think how much it could have helped.

Anyway read these columns, the first is really good:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/145...

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/142...

Realistically speaking the only way that we could fix Mexico would be to send in enormous amounts of US citizens (think engineers, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, and ect.) just to effectively train their people to do their jobs along with sending enormous amounts of US dollars to get the job done. Mexico is too corrupt to take foreign money to fix their country by themselves.
And you are you wrong about border security not working on a long term basis. If you look at the number of illeagals that come through Arizona you'd notice that those numbers increased greatly when border security was increased in New Mexico, California, and even Texas. Unlike what people think, walls do wonders when it come to restricting movement. If you also add in a part of George Bush's plan to increase the capabilities of each border patrol agent with new technologies you can clamp down on the number of people streaming across the border. If we really wanted to we absolutely stop all movement across that border. The next trick would be to have those who are already in the county leave the country. The only way to do that would be to remove all incentives of hiring an illegal worker and by changing the law to not allow children born of non-US parent to not automatically be a citizen.

USMA wrote:Realistically speaking the only way that we could fix Mexico would be to send in enormous amounts of US citizens (think engineers, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, and ect.) just to effectively train their people to do their jobs along with sending enormous amounts of US dollars to get the job done. Mexico is too corrupt to take foreign money to fix their country by themselves.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here as well. Sure the fact that there is a shortage of jobs in Mexico is a problem, but it's not because they lack training. Their problem is the same as ours, they have too many immigrants. The most effective solution to the problem as I see it is to improve the economies and education of almost all south and central American countries so that they wouldn't need to immigrate here to get decent jobs. And with better educational systems the population would most likely shrink, making immigration less of a problem.

And about the barrier thing, I'm going with erik on this one. There's always a way in. Look at Cuba, it's an island and yet immigrants still come in from there. What makes you think a little water's going to get in the way of them coming? Coyote's are just going to learn how to operate boats more efficiently. There's always gonna be a way in and people are always going to find the crack in the system.

And removing the incentive, you think that removing the ability of children born in the states is a good idea? What about refugees? Are their babies going to have to go through the years of citizenship applications? They won't even be able to take their citizenship tests for years. And this is a good thing? What are we going to do if there's a major war in Europe and we get flooded with refugees? What do you propose we do with all of the babies until they're citizens? Or are we just going to limit this rule to hispanics?

I'll first tackle the refugee question. Refugees/immigrants in almost every country besides the US do not such loose naturalization laws. In Germany, for example, if a family of refugees comes over from Yugoslavia to avoid Milosevic the German government won't recognize any children born in their county as a German citizen. But if they were to come to the US and have a child here the whole family would end up staying because of one child that has no ties to this country becomes a US citizen. The law that permits all children born in the US to become a citizen is the 14 Amendment to the Constitution. It was ratified in order to make all slaves in the US full fledged citizens. When this amendment was written it was not meant for people to enter into the US, birth a child, have that child claim citizenship (by the parent(s) of course), and then stay in the country illegally because that anchor baby will prevent the government from deporting the parents. This is bad because it encourages families to come to the US and have a child because they know that they will not be deported.
Now you give the hypothetical of a major war in Europe. I'd just like to point out that the chances of this are extremely low for many reasons. 1) There has never been a war between 2 working democracies. 2) The EU is tying Europe together economically so it would be very unwise to fight your neighbor when your economy is very dependant on him. 3) It would be very easy to not allow boats full of people into the US. With Mexico we have a massive border than need patrolling by car/foot. 4) If another outbreak were to happen it would be similar to the Balkans in 1990s were those European people would go closer to home in another European county. They more than likely spend time there before coming to America. Sorry to digress but now onto the question. pianogirl2422 wrote:What about refugees? Are their babies going to have to go through the years of citizenship applications? They won't even be able to take their citizenship tests for years. And this is a good thing?I see no problem with this. If they have grown up in America their whole life then their application process shall be easy once they turn 18. They would know perfect English, know US history, and would more than likely be loyal to the US. And if they are hardened criminals by the time they are 18 we could send them back to their origins. That is really the whole point of the immigration process. To take the good who want to come in a leave the bad at the door.

Now to fixing Mexico. Has anybody noticed that the most recent country that we've tried to fix isn't going too well by some standards. Some people say that Iraq is falling apart and is almost a lost cause. Why do you think that the American people would want to do the same basic thing to Mexico? We'd be there forever trying to clean up that country. Did you know that their cops are easily bought off and that illegal immigrants from South America are raped and beat up by Mexican border patrol agents? These aren't things that can change overnight. It would take at least a generation of people to pass in order to clear out that mess. And this isn't even mentioning our poor reputation in that area whether deserved or not. South and Central America remember the 1950-80s quite well and I don't foresee them opening up their economy to America any time soon. Heck, I can even push that date back to the 1800s with the Monroe doctrine and Manifest Destiny where some of them still don't like us.

I've also noticed that you don't think that a wall and other technological barriers wont work. That, to me, just seems a silly thing to think. Walls can serve 2 purposes 1) to keep people in and 2) to keep people out. A wall can do these simultaneously. But if walls aren't particularly useful why is there a massive one in China that can be seen from space? Or a more recent one at Berlin? That wall a very effective at keeping the East Germans in. And even more importantly to the Soviets it was a symbol. A symbol of their ideologies. A wall along Arizona, properly guarded, will send a message into Mexico. It would say we don't want you climbing over out walls but rather come through the gate legally.

I was also asked how to remove the incentives of hiring an illegal. One simple way would be to look at tax records. You notice that Company A has done X amount of work but the labor hours needed to do the work and the tax collected on the hours worked do not equal up all while the companies profits are comparably high. That would mean that they are underpaying people and not paying taxes. You can also pass laws for fines and jail penalties for people who hire illegally. You'd also need to set up a system so an employer can get information of a possible employee's legalities. So they won't have the excuse of saying that they didn't know.

Another issue that needs to be mentioned here is the time that it takes to get a green card/temporary living permit is too lengthy to stem illegal immigration. I'm sure that if you sped up the immigration process down to 1 year and required that all people seeking the permits to be in Mexico a year before they can receive such permits the numbers of illegal immigrants would sharply decrease because they want to be legal to. We'd be able to flush out America and soon enough allow them back in but this time have a way to track them, tax them, and provide them the services that a resident and taxpayer to the US deserves: Emergency services, proper schooling that they help fund, and a chance to become a citizen when all the current requirements are passed. Which are:
Immigration Laws wrote:
Applicants must be at least 18 years old. (Snip)

An applicant is eligible to file if, immediately preceding the filing of the application, he or she:

* has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence (see preceding section);
* has resided continuously as a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. for at least 5 years prior to filing with no single absence from the United States of more than one year;
* has been physically present in the United States for at least 30 months out of the previous five years (absences of more than six months but less than one year shall disrupt the applicant's continuity of residence unless the applicant can establish that he or she did not abandon his or her residence during such period)
* has resided within a state or district for at least three months
Generally, an applicant must show that he or she has been a person of good moral character for the statutory period (typically five years or three years if married to a U.S. citizen or one year for Armed Forces expedite) prior to filing for naturalization. (Snip)

Generally, an applicant must show that he or she has been a person of good moral character for the statutory period (typically five years or three years if married to a U.S. citizen or one year for Armed Forces expedite) prior to filing for naturalization. (Snip)

A person also cannot be found to be a person of good moral character if during the last five years he or she:

* has committed and been convicted of one or more crimes involving moral turpitude
* has committed and been convicted of 2 or more offenses for which the total sentence imposed was 5 years or more
* has committed and been convicted of any controlled substance law, except for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana
* has been confined to a penal institution during the statutory period, as a result of a conviction, for an aggregate period of 180 days or more
* has committed and been convicted of two or more gambling offenses
* is or has earned his or her principal income from illegal gambling
* is or has been involved in prostitution or commercialized vice
* is or has been involved in smuggling illegal aliens into the United States (This one would need to be overlooked when considering some Arizona law.)
* is or has been a habitual drunkard
* is practicing or has practiced polygamy
* has willfully failed or refused to support dependents
* has given false testimony, under oath, in order to receive a benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
An applicant must disclose all relevant facts to the Service, including his or her entire criminal history, regardless of whether the criminal history disqualifies the applicant under the enumerated provisions. (Snip)

Applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language. (Snip)

An applicant for naturalization must demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history and of the principles and form of government of the United States. (Snip)

To become a citizen, one must take the oath of allegiance. By doing so, an applicant swears to:

* support the Constitution and obey the laws of the U.S.;
* renounce any foreign allegiance and/or foreign title; and
* bear arms for the Armed Forces of the U.S. or perform services for the government of the U.S. when required. (Snip)

[URL=http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/services/natz/general.htm]Immigration Laws[/URL]

USMA wrote:Now to fixing Mexico. Has anybody noticed that the most recent country that we've tried to fix isn't going too well by some standards. Some people say that Iraq is falling apart and is almost a lost cause. Why do you think that the American people would want to do the same basic thing to Mexico? We'd be there forever trying to clean up that country. Did you know that their cops are easily bought off and that illegal immigrants from South America are raped and beat up by Mexican border patrol agents? These aren't things that can change overnight. It would take at least a generation of people to pass in order to clear out that mess. And this isn't even mentioning our poor reputation in that area whether deserved or not. South and Central America remember the 1950-80s quite well and I don't foresee them opening up their economy to America any time soon. Heck, I can even push that date back to the 1800s with the Monroe doctrine and Manifest Destiny where some of them still don't like us.

Okay, I really don't have the energy to address all of your reply at the moment, but I'm gonna have to talk about this. If you had read any of my posts in the Iraq threads you would know that I don't think that you can compare anything with Iraq except maybe Vietnam. I'm not proposing that we go into the country, overthrow their leader under false information, take command of the country, and start a major war. You really think anyone wants that kind of situation again? I'm proposing ECONOMIC AND EDUCATIONAL HELP. Erik is proposing some major political reconstruction, but I'm willing to bet that he's not for a forceful one. True, they do need some major political reconstruction, but knowledge is power my friend and if we take steps to educate the people, not even necessarily about politics, then the countries will come to realize that their system of government may not be the best.

And yeah, they don't like us. Why? Because we've interfered with their politics way too often. They finally get to electing someone and we disapprove and place one of our pawns in his place, or something similar. I never said it would be easy. Nor did I say it would be instantaneous. Change takes time and you cannot force a change upon the people that they are not ready for. That's why we have such a problem in Iraq. The permanent solution to the problem, whatever it may be, will take time. I admit, precautions may be needed to help in the short run, but they won't work for long. Or at least, they probably won't work well for long. And I prefer not to have a huge wall when we find a political solution...

I'm really sorry. I haven't seen your proposal yet. I've seen a vague general idea but no real proposal.
When delivering your proposal I'd like to know how you plan on doing this while keeping all of Central and South America feeling like we aren't Imperialistic bastards. Please also remember that the socialist movement of S. America (by people like Hugo Chávez) and that they are nationalizing businesses. Why would they want US involvement in their government's business?
My plan is simple:
1) Stop the inflow of illegal immigrants with walls, boots, and other technologies.
2) Create conditions within the US that encourages illeagals to move back to their country. This can be done with immigration incentives that require residency in their native country and enforce harsher laws to stop businesses from hiring an illegal.
3) Open up and speed up the legal immigration to keep our economy moving.
These 3 points are absolutely within our control to do without any need of permission from any foreign government.
And one more thing, Mexico won't be fixed until they have the people and the government wanting to fix it. As long as they can suckle off of America's money why would they want to change anything?

And another great reason to close the free-flow on the border is this: [URL=http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-05-30-border-shooting_x.htm?csp... related violence and the drugs themselves.[/URL]
I should also add in its companion article: [URL=http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-17-nuevo-laredo-cover_x.htm]h...