Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Immigration and Amnesty (Page 4)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 14 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  12  13  14   
Author Topic: Immigration and Amnesty
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seneca:
If you've been following this, the Amendment has BECOME the bill through a trick of procedure and also a last minute attempt to flood it with lots of pages so people won't have time to read it before a vote on it is forced.

That's nonsensical. The respective amendments (you brought up two different ones) modified the bill with regards to it's specific provisions; that's how the amendment process works. They did not modify or replace things in the bill unrelated to their respective provisions, and each one operates in a separate context (The first regarding long term visa holders that were unable to secure a renewal, the second current active visa holders who commit minor infractions, and the third current undocumented residents in general. )

You made a complaint about one specific amendment, then shifted context to a different amendment, and then to an unrelated section of the main bill without acknowledging in the middle that the assertions each respective context had been shown to be inaccurate and that you were moving to a separate concern.

quote:
quote:
There's no talk of rewarding anyone, just about treating a minor civil violation like what it is instead wasting huge amounts of resources that could be better put to use looking for meaningful criminal activity.
It is absolutely a reward for people to be given preferential positioning for citizenship when they have broken our laws to getting here.
That's like saying that we shouldn't have repealed Jim Crow laws because it would be rewarding people who broke them while they were still in effect.

quote:
Since when is it the US's job to welcome the entire world's population in if all 7 billion wanted to be here? We are the most free country in the world with the largest economy. One can easily extrapolate your argument to say that we have a duty to let in all 7 billion humans if they wanted to come here, totally absurd.
That is totally absurd indeed, but only because it's entirely to absurd that the natural rate of migration would even be within two orders of magnitude of the worlds population. (Three and you might be about right)

Market forces and employment opportunities will do a much better job of regulating migration than arbitrary quotas set to satisfy whatever form of xenophobia is popular at the moment.

quote:
This part demonstrates one of the biggest divides in the immigration debate. People like yourself who equate illegals to speeders on a highway, that's not sound thinking.
That is the exact category of violation that not having proper documentation is, so the thinking is perfectly sound.


quote:
You probably do not live near the southern border nor do you have loved ones there.
I have had family living there; but trying to bring FUD into the mix isn't really sound.

quote:
There are organizations that track all the violent crimes these illegals do to American citizens, some of it may shock you.
Violent crim is violent crime regardless of who commits it. HAving a broken immigration system certainly does create pockets of population that are forced to harbor higher levels of it due to fear of engaging with law enforcement to help mitigate it, but there is nothing about being undocumented that, in ad of itself has a cuasal relationship with such crime. Help fix their status, and they'll be happy to help clear out the criminal actors that currently prey on them.

quote:
I also submit that citizens face tougher penalties for DUI than illegals because illegals are let go after a DUI when we can't even identify them or where they live, so then they skip bail and skip trial and we lose track of them.
So the problem comes directly on account of actions they're forced to take because we s systematically deny them the proper documentation, but you'd rather try hacking away at the symptom of the issue than address the fundamental injustice that the behavior is in response to.

quote:
The answer is not to legalize them and hope they come more cooperative, the answer is to kick them out and make room for more productive immigrants who will follow our laws and be productive members of our societies.
PEople who face DUI charges are unproductive? How do you make that logical leap? OR is it just immigrants that rack up a DUI that we can assert with certainty aren't doing any productive work?

quote:
Surely we can all agree we do not have unlimited space for unlimited immigrants, so if we have to be selective why can't we choose the law abiding ones?
How to arbitrary quotas and random lotteries equate to approving immigration requests from productive, law abiding applicants? Nice try to shift, but do you miss that what you're suggest there is exactly what I'm proposing? Get rid of the current arbitrary system and instead process applications expediently based on the merits of the individual instead of just tossing them in a pot and picking a lucky few on the basis that we can somehow set the broad limits better than the employment market can once we set some boundary guidelines to manage risk at the edges.

quote:
At least with citizens you can write down a license plate number as they flee, with an illegal, they often force their information or have none at all. If you live near the border you'd notice all the cars running around with plates or with stolen plates.
You think that citizens with expired registrations or licenses don't pull similar tricks? CAn you show, in any way how this is a behavior that does not stem directly from the need to avoid scrutiny due to their undocumented status?
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Won't these millions of illegals who get amnestized just move up a rung or more on the economic ladder and almost immediately take jobs that Americans are doing now especially when you factor in the incentive for companies if they don't have to give the newly amnestized Obamacare or pay the fine for them either?

And then won't there be more millions of illegals coming in right behind the newly promoted ones to take their place doing the jobs that Americans won't do at those illegally low wages and in those OSHA non-compliant working conditions?

I fail to see how this will accomplish anything except to solidify the liberals' hold on power from here on out, but isn't that really the whole point anyway?

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If the bill was so lopsidedly favored by and favorable to liberals, why are so many GOP'ers voting for it? These days they don't even vote for things they themselves have proposed out of fear that Obama would derive some benefit from them.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Won't these millions of illegals who get amnestized just move up a rung or more on the economic ladder and almost immediately take jobs that Americans are doing now especially when you factor in the incentive for companies if they don't have to give the newly amnestized Obamacare or pay the fine for them either?

And then won't there be more millions of illegals coming in right behind the newly promoted ones to take their place doing the jobs that Americans won't do at those illegally low wages and in those OSHA non-compliant working conditions?

I fail to see how this will accomplish anything except to solidify the liberals' hold on power from here on out, but isn't that really the whole point anyway?

This is why the CBO report said that this bill will lower American wages over the next 12 years and why it will only stop 25% of the current illegal immigration. It's a joke.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
This is why the CBO report said that this bill will lower American wages over the next 12 years
No, it's not. Read the CBO report for their logic, which is unrelated to this rather unlikely expectation.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Won't these millions of illegals who get amnestized just move up a rung or more on the economic ladder and almost immediately take jobs that Americans are doing now especially when you factor in the incentive for companies if they don't have to give the newly amnestized Obamacare or pay the fine for them either?


If they become legal residence, then they will be eligible for health coverage and subsidies as needed.

Thenk for a moment what it means to move up a rung on the economic ladder- more purchases of needed goods and spending on minor luxuries, so far from taking jobs away from anyone, moving up the ladder will open more employment opportunities across the board, since it's just such purchases that create demand for sufficient employees to meet it in the first place.

quote:
And then won't there be more millions of illegals coming in right behind the newly promoted ones to take their place doing the jobs that Americans won't do at those illegally low wages and in those OSHA non-compliant working conditions?
Only because the bill fails to address the issues that force them to work under the table like that in the first place. Proper reform that would extend legal status on an ongoing basis to anyone willing and able to secure work would very directly serve to dry that market up, both eliminating and incentive to skirt the immigration system and the ability of employers to extort their employees into accepting such low wages and inhumane conditions.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Won't these millions of illegals who get amnestized just move up a rung or more on the economic ladder and almost immediately take jobs that Americans are doing now especially when you factor in the incentive for companies if they don't have to give the newly amnestized Obamacare or pay the fine for them either?


If they become legal residence, then they will be eligible for health coverage and subsidies as needed.

Thenk for a moment what it means to move up a rung on the economic ladder- more purchases of needed goods and spending on minor luxuries, so far from taking jobs away from anyone, moving up the ladder will open more employment opportunities across the board, since it's just such purchases that create demand for sufficient employees to meet it in the first place.

quote:
And then won't there be more millions of illegals coming in right behind the newly promoted ones to take their place doing the jobs that Americans won't do at those illegally low wages and in those OSHA non-compliant working conditions?
Only because the bill fails to address the issues that force them to work under the table like that in the first place. Proper reform that would extend legal status on an ongoing basis to anyone willing and able to secure work would very directly serve to dry that market up, both eliminating and incentive to skirt the immigration system and the ability of employers to extort their employees into accepting such low wages and inhumane conditions.

I'm glad you admit this is a bad bill that will load us up with tons of unfunded liabilities on the short end for sure and do nothing to stop illegal immigration ad the harm it inflicts.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What unfunded liabilities are you talking about?

The bill falls short of fixing the immigration system, it mostly just sweeps up the damage it's done so far. It does waste money (in the sense that we're putting resources to a completely impossible and manifestly unproductive use) on even more overspending on border security than the current administration already does, but that money is fully allocated by the bill so far as I know and not passed on to the states to come up with on their own. (It also ignores the fact that there are an extra approximately 2/3 or more of the border that it doesn't even pretend to try to secure.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Won't these millions of illegals who get amnestized just move up a rung or more on the economic ladder and almost immediately take jobs that Americans are doing now especially when you factor in the incentive for companies if they don't have to give the newly amnestized Obamacare or pay the fine for them either?

Exactly, from a ObamaCare perspective, you can get a full time employee that won't count torward the ObamaCare penalties. Add in that you can pay quite a bit less, there's a pretty significant incentive to get rid of American workers.
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:

And then won't there be more millions of illegals coming in right behind the newly promoted ones to take their place doing the jobs that Americans won't do at those illegally low wages and in those OSHA non-compliant working conditions?

Yes, nothing in the bill prevents it. Just like the amnesty deal done in the 1980's.
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:

I fail to see how this will accomplish anything except to solidify the liberals' hold on power from here on out, but isn't that really the whole point anyway?

I think it's time for your audit citizen.
Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's been the problem with immigration for hundreds of years. Once you let the Irish, Chinese or the Jews in or ended slavery they started taking jobs that would have gone to Americans. Every job one of them gets is one that we didn't.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
What unfunded liabilities are you talking about?

The bill falls short of fixing the immigration system, it mostly just sweeps up the damage it's done so far. It does waste money (in the sense that we're putting resources to a completely impossible and manifestly unproductive use) on even more overspending on border security than the current administration already does, but that money is fully allocated by the bill so far as I know and not passed on to the states to come up with on their own. (It also ignores the fact that there are an extra approximately 2/3 or more of the border that it doesn't even pretend to try to secure.

Immediate drains on welfare, food stamps, medicaid, obamacare exchanges and credits, and pretty much every other social service.

Does anyone really think these people will be a net gain on the economy or our tax revenue? The CBO report even admitted they had no way of quantifying the effect on state and local government services so they didn't even try.

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Does your last sentence contradict your first?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Does anyone really think these people will be a net gain on the economy or our tax revenue.
I believe the consensus among economists is that, yes, "these people" are in fact a net gain for our economy.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seneca:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
What unfunded liabilities are you talking about?

Immediate drains on welfare, food stamps, medicaid, obamacare exchanges and credits, and pretty much every other social service.

Those are all funded by Congressional appropriations, in as much as they'll be affected, so even if there is some extra draw on them, it will just represent more employment opportunities and overall revenue for the state in question, which will directly translate to significantly more tax revenue for that state as it circulates than any nominal matching costs that it might be responsible for (in terms of Medicaid, specifically).

quote:
Does anyone really think these people will be a net gain on the economy or our tax revenue?
Absolutely on both counts, in as much as the people who attain legal residency will no longer be subject to an additional avenue of extortion that keeps their wages down (never mind many cases where they'll now be getting paid above the able instead of under it) as well as a significant drop in enforcement costs, freeing more legal resources up to concentrate on real crime rather htan chasing technical violations.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Those are all funded by Congressional appropriations, in as much as they'll be affected, so even if there is some extra draw on them, it will just represent more employment opportunities and overall revenue for the state in question, which will directly translate to significantly more tax revenue for that state as it circulates than any nominal matching costs that it might be responsible for (in terms of Medicaid, specifically).
I find this argument absurd. Because the federal government is handing out more welfare it means more jobs? Not true. You may not even need to hire more people to hand out more benefits, much of it is automated, or for the parts that aren't once people are signed up it's automated after that. Besides, these people won't have any incentive to work once they are on the dole. How is this fair to the American citizen taxpayer?
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Because the federal government is handing out more welfare it means more jobs?
One of the most direct ways to create jobs is to hand out welfare, actually. People who receive welfare spend money with almost perfect efficiency, and the dirty secret monetarists don't want you to know is that we're a demand-driven economy.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/27/senate-approves-immigration-overhaul/

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00168

Looks like the libs and RINOs passed this bill, despite their own report showing it will drop American wages over the next 12 years and that at best it will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%. Every single one of those traitors can now depend on a real conservative challenging them in their next primary. Marco Rubio has sunk not only his 2016 Presidential bid but he'll lose his Senate seat over this as well.

Lets hope that the House rejects this nonsense, if Boner holds true to the Hastert rule then this will have some good come after all, we'll have seen who the RINOs are without having to suffer their insanity, and come their next primary we'll oust them before they can do real harm on immigration.

Why does this government refuse to fully fence the whole southern border? It's not like it's impossible. We waste hundreds of millions sending the Obamas on vacations to Africa but we can't afford to secure our border from criminals and terrorists...

[ June 27, 2013, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Seneca ]

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seneca:
I find this argument absurd. Because the federal government is handing out more welfare it means more jobs? Not true. You may not even need to hire more people to hand out more benefits, much of it is automated, or for the parts that aren't once people are signed up it's automated after that. Besides, these people won't have any incentive to work once they are on the dole. How is this fair to the American citizen taxpayer?

Why won't they have an incentive to work? There's no basis for that assertion at all. Just the opposite, they'll be better able to afford to work and more productive when they do. A minimal income supplement isn't going to somehow make them less interested in achieving a higher level of overall comfort.

Even if the funds are 100% automated and created no bureaucratic jobs, healthcare funds will create jobs for medical professionals to provide the care that those funds buy. Food funds will create jobs for store employees, people in the shipping industry, farm workers, etc... to provide the food that those funds buy. Other forms of support will similarly produce jobs in whatever area those funds are used to purchase goods and services from as producers work to capture that potential revenue. Housing funds will not only turn into more jobs in construction and maintenance areas, but into more local tax revenue, which in turn will help employ more teachers and other local municipal workers.

How is it fair to existing US citizens? More income at the low end translated directly consumer demand means more employment demand and more revenue, thus better wages and job opportunities.

[ June 27, 2013, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's particularly bizarre to suggest that people who have taken on a huge level of personal risk and legal sanction to try to find better employment would suddenly turn around and say that they're content scraping along at the bottom with the bare minimum. They could have had that without the risk just by staying home in the first place. The perception of sunk costs alone, for the most part, actively works to prevent the kind of behavior you describe.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Why does this government refuse to fully fence the whole southern border?
Why don't we build a ladder to the moon while we're at it? It's not impossible either, and at least would have marginally more actual utility than such a completely pointless fence would.

Don't forget that it would have to cover all of our ocean borders as well, and the Canadian border too, since whatever marginal local effect it would have would be completely eliminated by people just going around it otherwise.

[ June 27, 2013, 05:47 PM: Message edited by: Pyrtolin ]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
It's particularly bizarre to suggest that people who have taken on a huge level of personal risk and legal sanction to try to find better employment would suddenly turn around and say that they're content scraping along at the bottom with the bare minimum. They could have had that without the risk just by staying home in the first place. The perception of sunk costs alone, for the most part, actively works to prevent the kind of behavior you describe.

If you believe that then you know nothing about Mexico. The standard of living and wages are so low there that with welfare and EBT in the US you can live like a King in comparison and not have to do any work for it.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Why does this government refuse to fully fence the whole southern border?
Why don't we build a ladder to the moon while we're at it? It's not impossible either, and at least would have marginally more actual utility than such a completely pointless fence would.

Don't forget that it would have to cover all of our ocean borders as well, and the Canadian border too, since whatever marginal local effect it would have would be completely eliminated by people just going around it otherwise.

Crazy hyperbole. We're talking about fencing the southern land border. The coast guard monitors for boats on the water and that's not where the bulk of illegals are coming in. It wouldn't actually be that hard to fully fence the southern land border and secure it. Once it's closed off you'd see illegal immigration drop by a LOT.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Has anyone ever seen the Mexican constitution? Do you know how they treat foreigners who even try to legally immigrate? Do you know what they do to illegal immigrants?
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
we can't afford to secure our border from criminals and terrorists...
And dishwashers and soybean farmers, of course.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OpsanusTau
Member
Member # 2350

 - posted      Profile for OpsanusTau   Email OpsanusTau   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don't forget the animal agriculture workers. Some days I think people who really want to deport illegal immigrants should probably go vegan - because a huge amount of the care of the animals producing milk, eggs, and meat is done by immigrants (some legal, but not nearly enough to meet the demand). It's just Work Americans Won't Do.
Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by OpsanusTau:
Don't forget the animal agriculture workers. Some days I think people who really want to deport illegal immigrants should probably go vegan - because a huge amount of the care of the animals producing milk, eggs, and meat is done by immigrants (some legal, but not nearly enough to meet the demand). It's just Work Americans Won't Do.

This is a myth that has largely been debunked, I'll post some info. when I have time. I have yet to see anyone make a good argument why we shouldn't expect reciprocity in our immigration policies with Mexico and their laws and enforcement.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why should we? You want to move to Mexico?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We're not Mexico. We can, in some ways, be better then Mexico, and this is one of them.

The economy is based upon people working and producing things. If these people come here, and they work, then they are contributing. Both in producing for their employers, and in spending what they earn on what others have produced.

Fencing the southern border IS a joke, Seneca. I brought this up before, but you ignored it. The border is two thousand miles long, and large portions of it are in uninhabited desert. How many men will it take to man that fence? How much will it cost to pay support them when they're stationed dozens or hundreds of miles from the nearest bases and towns? You are aware that these fences will be built on dirt, yes? And that it will be possible to dig through that dirt and underneath the fence? Take a look at some of the sections of the border that have a fence already, and you'll find plenty of reports of tunnels dug to smuggle people and drugs. They find a few every year, and the best of them look like they were dug by professional construction crews.

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Illegal immigration from Mexico is way down over the past several years. IMO a fence will help to keep the ones who are already here in, unless they choose to self-deport. I jaywalked the other week, and briefly considered self-reporting myself, but decided it wouldn't be in my interests to do so.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I imagine that Seneca dreams of a fence hundreds of feet high, perhaps made of solid, magical ice and patrolled by all the criminals who'd otherwise be sentenced to die. Or, if that's not his preferred genre of fortress fiction, a laser grid guarded by robot drones and hardened men who speak in acronyms.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I got the first reference, what's the second?
Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by djquag1:
We're not Mexico. We can, in some ways, be better then Mexico, and this is one of them.

The economy is based upon people working and producing things. If these people come here, and they work, then they are contributing. Both in producing for their employers, and in spending what they earn on what others have produced.

Fencing the southern border IS a joke, Seneca. I brought this up before, but you ignored it. The border is two thousand miles long, and large portions of it are in uninhabited desert. How many men will it take to man that fence? How much will it cost to pay support them when they're stationed dozens or hundreds of miles from the nearest bases and towns? You are aware that these fences will be built on dirt, yes? And that it will be possible to dig through that dirt and underneath the fence? Take a look at some of the sections of the border that have a fence already, and you'll find plenty of reports of tunnels dug to smuggle people and drugs. They find a few every year, and the best of them look like they were dug by professional construction crews.

The arguments I've heard against hard-line border security all stem from the fact that because we share a border with Mexico that we cannot cut them off, we must closely interact and cooperate with them, etc. etc. Given that this legislation will largely benefit citizens of Mexico it seems only natural that we should expect some kind of dove-tailing reciprocity to make sure our efforts actually work and aren't being opposed. Lets not fool ourselves about where the money will be sent from these immigrant's paychecks.

As far as fencing the southern border, it is absolutely doable and practical. For sections that are geographically unfeasible, the Obama admin. can simple use the drones they love to use to kill enemies attempting to invade the US.

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You believe we should indiscriminately kill people crossing our border? You were just sneering at Mexico for how they treat their immigrants, correct?

Also, how does that work exactly, when they come through tunnels? Just get them as soon as they pop their heads up on our side? Are the inevitable American casualties worth it?

[ June 28, 2013, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: djquag1 ]

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G3
Member
Member # 6723

 - posted      Profile for G3   Email G3       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think he was being sarcastic but since that's obviously a terrorist threat you could just notify the authorities and have him locked away. That's not a joke . If you see something, say something.

[ June 28, 2013, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: G3 ]

Posts: 2234 | Registered: May 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not advocating harming anyone and I would never harm anyone myself, I think the government should use the same zeal they have shown overseas to hunt people trying to harm America. All I'm advocating is the government using it's own legal authority to carry out its responsibility to protect the homeland from terrorists. We've already seen that terrorists have come across our southern borders in attempts to attack America. I think we should assume anyone trying to illegally cross the border without going through a checkpoint could be a dangerous terrorist and our government should respond accordingly.

Our border is a security weakness. If people are trying to invade the US that is an act of war. Obama clearly has no problems using drones on people for less than that, right?

Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not saying you're wrong, but could you clue me in on the terrorists that illegally crossed our southern border and committed terrorist acts? I hadn't heard of that.
Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://remember1986.com/muslim-terrorists-caught-crossing-us-border/

quote:
It is usually assumed that most illegals caught crossing the US/Mexican border are South Americans.

You may be surprised to learn, however, that thousands of the illegals caught crossing the borders are classified as “OTMs” (Other Than Mexicans). A substantial number of these OTMs are Muslim terrorists.

Records from a detention center near Phoenix, AZ, show illegals from Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Sudan, and Yemen in custody.

Former Arizona Congressman JD Hayworth said in an interview, “There are definitely people out there who mean to do us harm who have crossed that border.”

An Arizona rancher, who lives right near the border, found a Muslim prayer rug on his property. He said, “This is a good indicator that there’s a whole lot of people other than just Mexicans coming into the United States.”

“The American public has been kept in the dark about this whole issue,” said Dave Stoddard, a former border patrol agent with 20 years of experience.

A Congressional report shows how most Muslims are illegally entering the country. They travel from Europe to the tri-border region of South America. While there, many of them learn to speak Spanish, and then blend in with Mexicans attempting to enter the US.

One of America’s most wanted terrorists was actually found in Atlanta. It is suspected that he entered the US by crossing the Mexican border.

“If we learned anything from 911, it should have been that borders are important,” said Hayworth.

I'm sure the source will be derided as partisan however it should be easy to corroborate whether "OTMs" have been found crossing that border and what country they are from.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Do we really believe that every immigrant from Yemen or Pakistan has come to this country to do us harm? I ask this because one of my best friends came here from Pakistan about five years ago, and I'm reasonably sure that he didn't come over just for the purposes of blowing something up eventually.

In other words: the method described -- flying into South America, then moving across our effectively indefensible southern border -- is the easiest way for any illegal immigrant who doesn't already live in this hemisphere to get into the country. This is as true for someone immigrating from Denmark as for someone immigrating from Iraq. The assumption that anyone illegally immigrating from an Arabic country is actually a terrorist is the obvious logical error.

[ June 28, 2013, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
djquag1
Member
Member # 6553

 - posted      Profile for djquag1   Email djquag1       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, I have to agree, assuming that because a person is Muslim that they're a terrorist is a little weak.

On a sidenote, JD Hayworth represented my district, and was he ever a useless, pompous blowhard.

Posts: 769 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
One of America’s most wanted terrorists was actually found in Atlanta. It is suspected that he entered the US by crossing the Mexican border.
This is actually the only thing that substantiates your argument. The rest just shows that it's not just Latin Americans crossing the border and that some of those people are Muslim.

I don't suppose you know which of "America's most wanted terrorists" was caught in Atlanta?

I'm skeptical of any unsupported claims the article makes since the title "Muslim Terrorists Caught Crossing US Border" isn't substantiated by the content.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 14 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  ...  12  13  14   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1