quote:Of course they should. Stop thinking with your wounded outrage, and your sense of what should be reserved for you as one of God's chosen ones, and think instead of the practicality. If you don't give them drivers' licenses, they will drive without insurance, and that will raise costs for all of us.
I completely agree with Icarus' point here, and my personal feelings are that they should be required to be licensed and insured just like any other driver. Is it possible maybe to issue a different license or a license with a notation that the carrier is not a citizen? Then, the license can't be used for ID to register as a voter or do anything else that is restricted to legal citizens only. I also like the idea of punishment for a crime by an illegal immigrant being immediate deportation.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Does the term "driving without a license" include just forgetting to bring your license with you?
Not as it is used in the articles I've read about what's going on in Maryland. They're specifically talking about unlicensed drivers.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
1)Few illegal immigrants want to be illegal. However the standard wait time for getting your visa approved is counted in decades, not weeks. This is due to the erroneous fear over the past 50 years that wider immigration would cost current American's their jobs, combined with lingering racial fears. (Even today one respected radio news anchor still mentions with fear, "The Browning of America".
There is also the costs involved. Hundreds of non-refundable dollars go into each attempt at getting a visa. It doesn't cost hundreds to get the visa, but to apply for it, which is usually denied.
2) Once in the US an illegal alien finds work easilly, and gets paid, usually in cash. However, finding a room to live out of the weather, or starting a bank account, or doing just about anything requires them to show some form of ID. The preferred form of ID is The Driver's Liscence.
If they have no legal id in order to rent a room they are forced to use extra-legal means, that usually result in them paying big bucks for shoddy places.
If they have no legal id to get a bank account, then of course they will wire most of there income to Mexico. Keeping it on their person, or in their mattrees, will only result in them being robbed.
3) Nobody says that getting a drivers liscence is a "right". It is a responsibility. Driving is the benefit you recieve from taking that responsibility. Many illegal immigrants want to be responsible, take the tests, get the insurance, drive by our laws. However, in the name of defining people as "Crimminals" we are stopping them from being responsible.
Guess what. If the needs of their families require them to drive to a distant factory to pluck chickens, they will do the benefit without taking the responsibility, not because they don't care, but because they are not allowed to.
4) Goody, if that idiot who hit your car would have had a driver's liscence, then there is a better chance the police would have gotten a good address and auto insurance on him.
My wife had a similar experience, being hit by an idiot with no insurance and no liscence. He was not an immigrant, just a guy who decided he'd rather spend his check on beer than on insurance and licencing.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
RRR - when the guy was ticketed (and when I was once ticketed for the same) it was because he couldn't provide legal proof at the scene of the accident. When I was nailed for DWL, I went to my court date with my license that clearly had been issued prior to the speeding ticket and that one got tossed out. Same for driving without insurance. if you can prove you had valid coverage prior to the incident, that ticket will be expunged.
To me, at least, bawsed on my prior experiences, "driving without a license" at least implies that you are in possession of valid authority and simply don't have proof on hand. "Unlicensed driver" would be someone who hasn't been granted the legal privelege of operating a motor vehicle (and yeah, I was there once too...)
But because this guy never showed up for any of his traffic court appearances, there's no real way of knowing if he had a valid license - and to be honest I have my doubts as to whether the identification he provided was even his own, largely because of his disappearance. In fact, the female passenger, who did immediately provide some form of ID without trying to avoid it as he did, also vanished.
(edit - when the heck did I pass 3K?)
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: Here are some facts to consider.
1)Few illegal immigrants want to be illegal. However the standard wait time for getting your visa approved is counted in decades, not weeks. This is due to the erroneous fear over the past 50 years that wider immigration would cost current American's their jobs, combined with lingering racial fears. (Even today one respected radio news anchor still mentions with fear, "The Browning of America".
There is also the costs involved. Hundreds of non-refundable dollars go into each attempt at getting a visa. It doesn't cost hundreds to get the visa, but to apply for it, which is usually denied.
Then why don't we fix THAT instead of just tossing the whole process to the dogs? The idea that ALL illegal aliens are here because they are perfect angels is, frankly, stupid. There are a lot of drug dealers, scam artists, and other various undesirables who also sneak across. I'm not saying end immigration. I'm not saying end work visas. I'm saying fix the root problem if getting here legally is that difficult. Getting and being here illegally needs to be much harder than getting here properly. If that's what is broke, that is what needs to get fixed. But at the same time, we cannot accept every single person who wants to move here all at once. And we certainly cannot allow ourselves to be invaded.
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: 4) Goody, if that idiot who hit your car would have had a driver's liscence, then there is a better chance the police would have gotten a good address and auto insurance on him.
My wife had a similar experience, being hit by an idiot with no insurance and no liscence. He was not an immigrant, just a guy who decided he'd rather spend his check on beer than on insurance and licencing.
Hold on, I thought the whole point was that giving them licences was going to make sure that they would have insurance, but now you are saying that even having the license is no guarrantee. So what's the point? Oh, yeah, I forgot. Surrendering without even token resistance or realistically looking at a logical solution to the larger problem.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also got hit by a truckful of what I can only assume were illegals. They politely suggested that we leave the police out of it, and after a quick count of them (4), me (1 16 year old boy), the number of beer cans in their truck bed (18+), and the number of baseball bats in their truck bed (1) I decided that was the thing to do.
I got their license plate, but to no avail. The whole shebang went on my parents' insurance and they were never heard from again.
Just thought I'd throw that in. I don't have any problem with immigrants, legal or otherwise. In fact, I think that most of the illegal ones would prefer to be legal but either don't know how or aren't able to make it happen. But that's as much our fault, for having an unnavigable system, as is it theirs for giving up too easily.
But by all means, license them and require insurance. No one, and I mean no one should be allowed behind the wheel of a car in this country without a driver's license and car insurance.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: 4) Goody, if that idiot who hit your car would have had a driver's liscence, then there is a better chance the police would have gotten a good address and auto insurance on him.
My wife had a similar experience, being hit by an idiot with no insurance and no liscence. He was not an immigrant, just a guy who decided he'd rather spend his check on beer than on insurance and licencing.
Hold on, I thought the whole point was that giving them licences was going to make sure that they would have insurance, but now you are saying that even having the license is no guarrantee. So what's the point? Oh, yeah, I forgot. Surrendering without even token resistance or realistically looking at a logical solution to the larger problem.
No, the point is twofold: 1) All these bad things that people are saying illegal immigrants do are just as frequently done by people here legally. So the people who argue that we should do nothing at all that helps illegal aliens, and give, as a reason, all the crappy things that they've ever seen somebody they thought perhaps might be an illegal alien do, are demonstrating faulty reasoning. and 2) People with the ability to get licenses and insurance and other elements of the trappings of civil life in this country are likelier to buy into that life. Illegal aliens are good and bad people in pretty much exactly the same proportions as people born in the US, and so, just like most US Citizens will get insurance, obey laws, and fix what they break, most illegals would do it too, but some people advocate not giving them that possibility because, hey! They're illegal!
My point is simply that you punish American citizens more by not allowing illegal aliens to earn the privilege of driving legally in this country than you do illegal aliens.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: My point is simply that you punish American citizens more by not allowing illegal aliens to earn the privilege of driving legally in this country than you do illegal aliens
I think the point most others are making is to make it easier for illegal aliens to become either legal citizens or legally documented workers first, then DL and so on second.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My point is simply that you punish American citizens more by not allowing illegal aliens to earn the privilege of driving legally in this country than you do illegal aliens
I;m not sure if I'm parsing this right... it sounds to me like you're saying that prohibiting undocumented immigrants (the term "illegal aliens" sonds so Men In Black to me now LOL, thanks Alcon) from having a legal authority to drive is punishing Americans more than that same action is punishing those who are being prevened from driving. And I don't understand that logic. Clarfication would be appreciated.
In the context of the original post, the proposed law is intended to crack down on people driving without a valid license (as opposed to people driving without proof on their person when they get caught). And a particular group is claiming that they're beign unfairly targeted by this law. My question about that claim is how do they figure they're being unfairly targeted? Can they prove somehow that Hispanics (or any other ethnic group, for that matter, so as not to assume that the undocumented involved are automatically mexican or cuban or whatever) are being pulled over under the guise of a moving violation with the intent of sussing out invalid drivers? Is there some other way of proving their claim of being targeted by this law?
The issue of getting these people documented is, at least to me, completely separate and apart from the unlicensed driver issue. They were only tied together by this one group's claim of persecution.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:it sounds to me like you're saying that prohibiting undocumented immigrants (the term "illegal aliens" sonds so Men In Black to me now LOL, thanks Alcon) from having a legal authority to drive is punishing Americans more than that same action is punishing those who are being prevened from driving.
That is precisely what I'm saying. I believe the majority of people, whether immigrant or homegrown, are basically law-abiding--except when they feel that their survival affords them no other choice. Therefore, if they can get drivers' licenses and insurance, they will, for the same reasons that most American citizens do. But if they can't many will drive anyway. Public transportation is not a terribly realistic option for people who work in rural areas. So if "undocumented immigrants" cannot get licenses, you will simply have more uninsured motorists, and we will all pay the price for this in the form of higher insurance rates for the rest of us, and higher public health costs.
I understand that your preference is to "fix" the immigration system--if we could only figure out how. Make it more straightforward a process to become a citizen, make it impossible to hire illegals, make it impossible to sneak in, and make it so that we always catch all the illegals within our borders. But I, for one, can't think of a way to accomplish all that. In the meantime, I am a pragmatist.
I think a lot of our reactions to illegal immigration are knee-jerk. This is one example, but there are others.
I've heard it argued that illegal immigrant children should not receive free public education. They're here illegally! Why should we pay to educate them! Um, hello, you think it would somehow be better to perpetuate the underclass by keeping these children uneducated?
I heard of a recent proposal to "punish" countries from whom the most illegal immigrants come by reducing their quotas of legal immigrants. Hah! That'll show them! Um, wait. Because you're getting too many maids and farmhands, you're going to limit the number of economically "desireable" immigrants, like doctors and teachers and professors and programmers and scientists?
I think I grasp the sentiment behind each of these ideas, but in each case, the actual move is ill-conceived, and likely to hurt us here.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Illegal aliens are good and bad people in pretty much exactly the same proportions as people born in the US
Last year the Salt Lake paper published a list of violent crimes for the year with photos and names of their perpetrators. More than 50% of the violent crimes were committed by people having hispanic names and faces. 20% were Pacific islanders. 10% black. The rest white. The list didn't say whether any of these people were illegal immigrants.
My cop friend says that more than 90% of the crime in Salt Lake is drug and alcohol related and that the majority of crimes are committed by ethnic minorities, with most of the hispanic offenders being illegal immigrants. Would you accuse my friend of being racially biased if you knew that his best friend is a black cop in the same department?
Perhaps the US is a magnet for criminals. Yes, I'd say that's true. Better to be a criminal where there's money and where you don't run the risk of getting shot while in the act. I don't think those criminals bother to apply for a visa.
So I still say take everybody's name, photo, and address.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I think I grasp the sentiment behind each of these ideas, but in each case, the actual move is ill-conceived, and likely to hurt us here.
And so we should do nothing, except accept an invasion? Sure that may be 'pragmatic.' It was certainly 'pragmatic' for the French to capitulate to the Germans a few decades back. And it was certainly 'pragmatic' for them to comply with the Germans' various ethnic programs, too.
I disagree that 'pragmatism' is always appropriate. I just happen to think that we have something that is actually worth defending from those who would invade us.
Fixing the immigration laws is easy. Defending the border is a bit tougher, but with landmines and other forms of passive lethal defence that's not as difficult as you make it out to be, either. As for catching illegals who are here, it happens all the time. And they are let out on bail and then disappear. We should stop doing that. Also, there are few penalties for companies that knowingly hire illegals. Instead, those penalties should be draconian.
Also, I would make it clear to Mexico that they WILL stop actively supporting illegal immigration (as they currently do), as it is universally accepted as an act of war for one nation to send its citizens over an internationally recognized border into a neighboring country contrary to the laws of that country.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:but with landmines and other forms of passive lethal defence
Could you please let me know if you ever run for office?
I want to make sure not to accidently vote for anyone considering the use of landmines to stop desperate people from trying to find a better life.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
WntrMute--Define "Fixing the immigration laws". Would you make it easier for law abiding hard working people of Mexico to come into the US legally in order to find work, or would you make it harder for waves of Mexicans to come here and steal American jobs?
Just curious.
Many people are saying make immigration easier for the Mexican workers. However Unions and other workers groups are opposed to this, trying to defend the rights of their workers. After all, the Mexican who is getting $3/hr to do your gardening would love a non-union job at Chrysler for minimum wage. I can see the Anti-Nafta crowd already complaining about this capitulation of giving American Jobs to foreigners without having the companies go to the expense of moving the equipment.
Just a warning Wntr, your comparing latin-American workers with an invading army sounds a bit, um, racially motivated.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:It was certainly 'pragmatic' for the French to capitulate to the Germans a few decades back. And it was certainly 'pragmatic' for them to comply with the Germans' various ethnic programs, too.
Don't be asinine. First of all, your analogies are absurd. Second, I specifically said we should work to improve immigration law. What I have been arguing, however, is that we not foolishly take steps that hurt American citizens more than they hurt illegal immigrants.
quote:Defending the border is a bit tougher, but with landmines and other forms of passive lethal defence that's not as difficult as you make it out to be, either.
Almost everybody in the world recognizes the use of landmines as barbaric, in that long after the disputes that give rise to them are over, they kill innocent men, women, and children for no good reason.
Almost everybody except you, apparently.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
skillery, as far as I can tell, you are not addressing my major points. The only point that you address in your last post is my contention that illegal immigrants are normal people, and not morally deficient as a group. Okay, you disagree. You think they are. I have anecdotal evidence on my side, and you have anecdotal evidence on your side. (The plural of anecdote, I'm sure you know, is not data.) *shrug* I see no way for either of us to conclusively prove the point, so um, whatever.
EDIT to remove angry words.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: WntrMute--Define "Fixing the immigration laws". Would you make it easier for law abiding hard working people of Mexico to come into the US legally in order to find work, or would you make it harder for waves of Mexicans to come here and steal American jobs?
If you had paid attention you would have noticed that I have said about three times that legal immigration and visa/work programs need to be made easier, and that I have no problem with increasing quotas. So that would pretty much mean the first answer, wouldn't it? Of course, it is so much more easy just to toss out a completely unfounded accusation of racism, since that takes far less effort than basic reading comprehension would.
Just a friendly answer to your helpful warning.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It was certainly 'pragmatic' for the French to capitulate to the Germans a few decades back. And it was certainly 'pragmatic' for them to comply with the Germans' various ethnic programs, too.
Don't be asinine. First of all, your analogies are absurd. Second, I specifically said we should work to improve immigration law. What I have been arguing, however, is that we not foolishly take steps that hurt American citizens more than they hurt illegal immigrants.
quote:Defending the border is a bit tougher, but with landmines and other forms of passive lethal defence that's not as difficult as you make it out to be, either.
Almost everybody in the world recognizes the use of landmines as barbaric, in that long after the disputes that give rise to them are over, they kill innocent men, women, and children for no good reason.
Almost everybody except you, apparently.
I'm sorry if I don't consider someone who is actively violating border laws as being 'innocent.' The concept of the 'innocent' criminal is one with which I am, admittedly, quite unfamiliar. I also do not think that our borders should be changing any time soon, so pretty much the only people that would be affected would be those that SHOULD be affected. You also do not understand modern munitions.
As for absurdity, I don't understand how you can even use that word without wincing at the sheer audacity of it. Oh, illegals are here: let's not deport them, instead let's give them stuff. Hey, guess what, people do drugs. Let's give them drugs! People drive drunk, let's have whiskey fountains along every highway!
HOW, and explain this to me slowly, since I'm obviously much stupider than you, and I ought to be thanking God for just the most sneeringly contemptuous insult from you, HOW does not only not punishing a crime, but officially sanctioning that crime PREVENT that crime?
But, you know what? I have absolutely no problem with letting anyone who can get here live here however they want. So long as it is in your neighborhood, and completely at your expense. Not mine, I'm tapped out.
Otherwise, the illegals have got to go and those companies and people who were exploiting them for profit need to be fined into the poor house and jailed. Ultimately, I think that Perdue, ADM, and Walmart can afford to hire citizens or documented workers.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lavalamp: Should states give drivers licenses to illegal aliens?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: ...it SHOULD be easier.
No, it should not be easier.
I think there should be a dual 10 meter concreate wall the entire length of the border with Mexico, with landmines and automataed machineguns between them... and lots of razor wire.
Citeznes in Mexico need to seriously do something about vicente fox... he activly promotes, advertises and aids illegals coming into the USA (he makes millions on the $$$ that gets sent back and on drug dough). His military not only help the illegals but drug trafficers as well. The border must be shut down, IMHO.
Posts: 11 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I see no way for either of us to conclusively prove the point
Perhaps we can agree that without having our guests present credentials and fill out extensive paperwork there is no way of knowing exactly what sort of people are crossing the border, be they law-abiding or otherwise.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Planting landmines is one of the crimes Saddam Hussein is on trial for.
You know, after googling just the word LANDMINES, I could not find a single link in six pages that did not condemn their use or, in the case of news sites, address the ethical controversy they pose. They are an un-aimed weapon, ready to maim someone, with no regard for who it is. They don't kill their victims, they maim them and leave them alive. They also stick around for a very long time. Imagine a time when the present economic realities are different, and our border with Mexico more closely resembles our border with Canada; the landmines you want to plant would still be there.
And the penalty for illegal immigration is . . . death or dismemberment? Kind of a bit out of proportion, don't you think? We don't kill people who knock over liquor stores. Why are the illegal immigrants who keep this country running with their slave labor so much worse?
-o-
quote:Oh, illegals are here: let's not deport them, instead let's give them stuff.
I have not advocated giving illegals anything at all, except the gift of being easier to track, the gift of being able to pay for any harm they might do. The gift of a responsibility to obey the rest of the law, even when they are here illegally. You, on the other hand, wish to give them the gifts of anonymity and the ability to damage property without paying for it. Your comparison of enabling them to be responsible for their actions with collaborating with the Nazis is asinine, yes. The shoe fits; wear it.
Ever heard of Godwin's Law?
-o-
quote:. . . just the most sneeringly contemptuous insult from you, . . .
The most sneeringly contemptuous insult here is yours comparing me to the French capitulating to the Nazis. It is a morally repugnant comparison to make (in addition to being a thoroughly broken analogy) because of the atrocity that was the Nazi regime. Comparing illegal immigrants, most of whom are simply starving and looking for work, to the Nazis, borders on immoral. Your use of the French, specifically, is very telling, because they are the favorite whipping boy of knee-jerk reactionaries everywhere.
Will you next suggest I am gay?
Insulting? Pot, meet the kettle.
-o-
quote:HOW does not only not punishing a crime, but officially sanctioning that crime . . .
I have in no way sanctioned illegal immigration in this thread. The measures I argue for are not an official sanction. They are an expectation of responsibility. As long as illegal immigrants exist, I want them to be bound by our laws. You seem so desperate for them not to exist that you would pretend that they don't, and in effect let them live within our borders but outside of our laws.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Perhaps we can agree that without having our guests present credentials and fill out extensive paperwork there is no way of knowing exactly what sort of people are crossing the border, be they law-abiding or otherwise.
Okay. Are you going to ask them, or shall I?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
The government should ask the questions(with a little help from inter-agency computer file sharing):
"May I have your name and country of origin sir?"
"I'm sorry sir, but the name you provided does not appear in the database for your country of origin."
or
"I'm sorry sir, but there is a warrant for your arrest in your country of origin."
or
"I'm sorry sir, but your criminal record shows three prior arrests. Our local three-strikes law requires your immediate arrest and deportation."
or
"Your name and date of birth matches the database record. Now please provide me with a permanent address in the U.S. where you can be contacted...I'm sorry that address does not exist, I'm sorry but the hotel receptionist says you are not a registered guest, I'm sorry but the residents at that address have no knowledge of any person by your name..."
That's the same kind of check they do on me when I try to leave this country and enter another.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you proposing these questions be asked at the border, or at the DMV?
In any case, I mostly don't have a problem with any of that. Where it starts to unravel for me is in the interagency file sharing, but that's a much larger can of worms than I feel like jumping into right now.
(Are you actually proposing that we have a database somewhere that contains information of every person living in every other country? Because your first example sure seems like it.)
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
More likely, the idea would be to have every country have a database of their own people, which they would then open up to us so we could corroborate the claims of immigrants as to their country of origin, and get a basic history on them, and to check their criminal record.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:So long as it is in your neighborhood, and completely at your expense. Not mine, I'm tapped out.
Please provide a source that illegal aliens use more in public resources than they contribute via sales and other taxes.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not to mention the way each of us profits from the low produce (and other) prices made possible only by their illegal, underpaid labor.
-o-
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: More likely, the idea would be to have every country have a database of their own people, which they would then open up to us so we could corroborate the claims of immigrants as to their country of origin, and get a basic history on them, and to check their criminal record.
Are you saying this is something you think other countries would go along with?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dictating Immigration policy to us, we must have too much money here, next it will be let us in or we are coming whether you like it or not. Then we get to prove our resolve by killing families, probably on TV. It would be nice if we did not have to do this all the time...
I will never understand why the rest of the America's cannot get their act together, they had a couple of centuries head start and still can't climb out of the third world. Free and Common Sockage!
quote:I will never understand why the rest of the America's cannot get their act together, they had a couple of centuries head start and still can't climb out of the third world.
Well, on the one hand, they were not so much colonized as exploited. Spain never really set out to colonize South American. They were there for the gold, all of which they took back to Europe with them. England always saw North America as a place to bleed off population pressure. The English came with an infrastructure; they had a system of government, and a tradition of rule of law. It is North America who has the (enormous) head start: a couple of thosand years or so of Western Civilization. South America does not have this to fall back on, nor do they have the even older aboriginal civilizations, since these were destroyed by the Spaniards. Compare South American politics to European politics 1800 years or so ago, and I'm not certain that South America is behind at all.
On the other hand, North Americans also had a whole continents worth of resources to exploit, once virtually all of the natives were killed. Those pesky South American natives are still there, getting in the way all the time. You can't torch a colmado without hitting two or three.
And then there's the fact that, once they got their own empty continent settled, with the aid of the infrastructure that England set up for them, North America went about deliberately undermining democracy in South America, using their military and economic might to defend governments that would do what the U.S. wanted, rather than what was best for their people, or, at least, what their people wanted.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wntr--I did not toss out unfounded accusations of racism in regards to your changes to the emigration situation. I tossed them out for you comparing illegal immigrants to Nazi armies. Even then it was a warning, not an accusation.
The true question seems to be how bad is illegal immigration.
To some here, the answer is that breaking this law is tantamount to a life of crime and depravity. I hear that "Breaking one law makes them crimminals." I can only assume that this comes from people who have never gone over the speed limit, never fudged their taxes, never took home so much as a pen from thier place of employment.
To others it seems that this is a noble practice, fighting "the Man" to feed your family. It appears that these Mexicans have a choice of slow horrible death of starvation or breaking the law and coming to America.
Pragmatism was discussed earlier. What is more pragmatic, killing thousands of desparate workers via Mines and Guns, spending millions if not billions in increased border patrols and enforcement, or allowing these people to work in the US in jobs that no American is willing to do?
"They use up our medicine and our schools and our government facilities, that I pay for in taxes." Could we agree that a non-biased examination of the subject needs to be done to see what will use up more of your hard earned tax money--allowing them to use these neccesities as they pay for them with sales taxes etc, or the cost of deporting, catching, and stopping them all?
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
They are not facing a slow painful death of Starvation, that is utter nonsense. In fact most are on a cycle of work in the states for two or three years then go home and do nothing and live off the money for two or three years. If they were working back home to make it nice place instead of living in a cycle of subsistence and outlawry their country would be a better place.
There is no work that someone will not do, as a highschool kid I cleaned hoghouses, mowed, detassled and on and on. It is not a question of not finding workers it is an issue of price.
An influx of low end labor keeps labor prices down and helps lower cost for those hiring. However the cost of labor is rarely as much as 20% of the cost of bringing a product to market, and if the savings is only 25% of that then it is clearly a case where the majority of people would benefit more from higher wages then they would lose through higer costs.
The cost would be dispreportionately borne by the owners of concerns that hire Illegals, in other words the wealthy. Hence the difficulty in getting effective legislation, just another place where Democracy is squaring off against Capitalism and losing.
I would expect the Democrates to be behind this for labor reasons and the Republicans for security, but the Dems don't want to offend the Hispanics and the Reps don't want to anger their buddies, I think this is an issue the people are going to have to push from the grass roots or it will be ignored in the hopes it will go away.
quote:They are not facing a slow painful death of Starvation, that is utter nonsense.
Dan was offering this, not as his own argument, but as an extreme argument, with the suggestion that the truth is probably somewhere in between both extremes. (In other words, you are rebutting a position nobody has espoused.)
-o-
quote:In fact most are on a cycle of work in the states for two or three years then go home and do nothing and live off the money for two or three years.
In my experience, this is not remotely true. Can you document or retract it?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why should your experience matter, it is mine that concerns me. I will do neither but you are welcome to seek enlightement on your own time instead of expecting me to provide it.
posted
If you say so or it could come from about a hundred different Mexicans I have worked with as a waiter, contractor and soldier, and you could just be a well of ignorance I choose not to try to fill, not my job, I will offer the benefit of my experience not the substance of it, that would make you lazy and dependant, removing an opportunity for you to grow in Power.
quote:Originally posted by Bean Counter: I will offer the benefit of my experience not the substance of it, that would make you lazy and dependant, removing an opportunity for you to grow in Power.
BC
I'm sorry, I don't buy into Timecube.
-o-
I'm willing to bet a substantial sum that I have far, far more experience with illegal aliens than you do.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
A turn of phrase that higly offends certain others on the board. Or a certain other.
Illegal immigration has large consequences for this country. It is a problem that needs to be solved. BC is correct in that neither party is willing or able to do the right thing with regards to it.
I fully understand that there are some people who are quite desperate to leave Mexico. That is a very dysfunctional society at this point, but there is nothing we can do to fix it. However, we cannot and should not be expected to bear the burden of their corruption, mismanagement, and ineffective governance. The answer is not to buckle under and just accept this. The answer is to put grass roots pressure on both parties to do the right things. I also do not see any benefit to providing licenses to illegals. As has been noted, a license is not the same as having insurance, leaving many costs uncovered. Denying a license, as happens to serial drunk drivers or old people who are no longer able to safely drive a car, is no guarrantee that the person won't drive anyhow -- this is quite frequent. A family was severly injured just the other day in Florida when an unlicensed old person hit the accelerator instead of the brake. This is fairly common. Should we provide licenses to those who fail the driving test? How many illegals, a substantial percentage of which are illiterate, would be able to pass the tests in the first place? The biggest problem I have with this is that a driver's license or state ID is, pretty much, our de-facto national identity system. Granting these ID's to illegals is in that respect, in every effective measurement, a complete revocation of our current federal immigration standards. Either change the standards, or uphold them -- that is my challenge to both of the parties that run the government. Doing neither is the hight of stupidity.
Also, with regards to the modern kinds of mines we have available, they are designed to degrade and become inert and there are several which can be armed and disarmed en masse.
With respect to the cost of illegal immigration versus the influx of tax revenue, the whole point of hiring illegals, for a complany, is that there are no taxes withheld. They don't pay social security or income taxes, in most cases. There is therefor an immediate loss in tax revenue when compared to the income that could have instead been generated by a documented worker who did pay withholding and social security taxes. Whatever sales taxes they may end up paying are going to be less than the lost revenue from unreported wages -- especially at the federal level where sales taxes don't count. The other main cost is to our native unskilled labor pool that cannot compete with the low wages that illegal immigration causes for positions that rely on unskilled laborer. It isn't just picking vegatables. Construction, food processing, landscaping, and more. Some of these jobs are fairly well paying -- if the job market wasn't saturated with people who can work for half the price or less.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Construction, food processing, landscaping, and more. Some of these jobs are fairly well paying -- if the job market wasn't saturated with people who can work for half the price or less.
As a former business owner in the construction industry I can verify that this is correct. For the licensed trades - plumbing and electrician - it's not that big of an impact because not just anyone can call themselves a plumber, they must have a certain number of years as a apprentice and then pass a test before they're allowed to carry a journeyman's card and the penalties for doing it without a license can be severe - not only fines but criminal charges. Public health is at stake after all.
Other trades, like say painting, brick-laying, frame carpentry, drywall, etc. are jobs that did used to be decent wages and have now bottomed out because of the large influx of illegal laborers who are willing to lay brick for less than minimum wage. And the contractor doesn't cut taxes, doesn't report the income, as WntrMute said. Because the wages have bottomed out, fewer young men go into those trades, and when you're looking to hire quality subs who don't skirt the tax laws and who are licensed and bonded, you have a hard time finding them and they are very expensive. Illegal labor has had a huge impact in the construction industry and I don't think it's a positive impact, at all. I think it's driven down the costs to the point that skilled craftspeople have left the trades and it encourages sub-contractors to hire unskilled labor and do shoddy work. Which is not a slam on anyone, I'm sure there are illegals who are darn fine bricklayers. I'm saying that when you have a sub who's willing to break the law by hiring people who don't have legal visas, then how likely is it he does everything else he's supposed to do like carry the proper insurance or workman's comp or make sure the work is up to code?
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I'm sorry, I don't buy into Timecube.
How can you not!?
quote:Scientists know Time Cube, but any scientist supporting the 4 simultaneous days in a single rotation of Earth, will be fired and banned for life from academic institutions. Scientists are evil cowards and should be castrated for obscurantism of the 4 simultaneous days within a single rotation of Earth. Average people understand 4 Day Creation when I tell them about it, but scientist can't accept it, for the evil bastards think singularity. Singularity can't procreate, a feat requiring opposites.
In the words of the immortal Guinness guys: BRILIANT!
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by WntrMute: It's a 'colonic extraction.'
A turn of phrase that higly offends certain others on the board. Or a certain other.
To be fair, I politely asked him to document his reply, and he rudely refused, before I labeled it thus. I did not simply call it that right off the bat.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
So where is are these "Grassroots" we need to water, I have limited access to search engines here and would welcome an opportunity to toss my support to this cause, as would most every soldier I know.
quote:Originally posted by WntrMute: It's a 'colonic extraction.'
A turn of phrase that higly offends certain others on the board. Or a certain other.
To be fair, I politely asked him to document his reply, and he rudely refused, before I labeled it thus. I did not simply call it that right off the bat.
I'm not calling you on it. I'm being a prat, as our gentler cousins across the pond would say.
It is my intention to test the limits of the new law denying Americans their God-given right to be annoying on the internet.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a sore subject with me when we start talking about the construction trade. There are more problems than just illegal workers, of course. But, had we been willing to not cut taxes for our employees, not pay unemployment tax, not carry liability insurance, not pay workman's comp - we'd still be in business. The single reason we closed down was because we weren't making enough profit to cover the rising costs of insurance for the construction trades. And the people who don't care, who are only after a profit, are driving out legitimate business owners who tried to do things right.
We personally know of five people who shut down construction business in the last two years. And I'm not talking about one person, little handyman operations. Of the five ours was the smallest, and our business wasn't small. Our main supply house told us our supply and fixture orders made us their fith highest customer the last year we were in business.
All of them say the same thing we do - we couldn't keep paying the overhead, it's too high. So who fills the void when folks like us give up? Companies that don't care, that will hire anyone and will lower their standards to just make a profit. For the prices their charging, I KNOW they aren't paying the isurance overheads we were, it would be impossible. We know because in that last year, we were trying to compete with them and were consistently outbid. For the prices some of these companies are charging, we would have been doing the job at a loss.
Personally I predict a grim outcome for the housing industry. Better enjoy the home you have now, or when you move, buy one that was built before the late nineties. The level of craftmanship has gone way, way down in the last decade and it's not going to get better.
Sorry for my tangential rant.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Belle: Sorry for my tangential rant.
It is hardly tangential at all, since the costs of the influx of illegal workers is one of the most significant aspects of the problem. Your input has been very pertinent.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My cop friend says that more than 90% of the crime in Salt Lake is drug and alcohol related and that the majority of crimes are committed by ethnic minorities, with most of the hispanic offenders being illegal immigrants. Would you accuse my friend of being racially biased if you knew that his best friend is a black cop in the same department?
I wouldn't accuse your friend of anything, since I've never met or spoken to him before. But your phrasing and general rhetoric in this thread does invite the question, "Are you racially biased?"
Personally, I don't know. I really don't. I wonder sometimes, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt on a question like this. I'll just say this, though: the opinions you've put forward in this thread have a lot in common with the opinions of out-and-out racists, skillery.
It is quite possible that there are reasons for the statistics the newspaper published past, "These races are inherently more violent in the USA than is the majority race." Just a thought.
--------
quote:Also, I would make it clear to Mexico that they WILL stop actively supporting illegal immigration (as they currently do), as it is universally accepted as an act of war for one nation to send its citizens over an internationally recognized border into a neighboring country contrary to the laws of that country.
Well while we're pursuing this whimsical war-mongering fantasy, I'm curious: what happens if Mexico refuses? Do we "counter"-invade? Really, your use of the word invasion is utterly inappropriate, considering the utility America obtains by such newcomers. Yes, yes, impoverished, desperate, uneducated, (immigrants) with no legal marketable skills pose a threat...but they're also awfully good at working in Wal-Mart and picking citrus.
I'm deliberately using inflammatory language here in the hopes that you'll understand that this "invasion" you speak of is benefitting us as well as hurting us. It's a strange invasion that pours money into the pockets of the invaded, don't you think?
But back to my question...suppose Mexico balks? We invade. Naturally enough we quickly win (after massive military problems involving moving lots of troops and recruiting lots of troops, as well as thinning our operations elsewhere). Umm...and then what? The United States of America is now the ruler by right of conquest of the nation formerly known as Mexico.
I'll just bet the Mexicans will of course sleep against a sun-drenced wall with their sombreros over their faces while this happens, and during the following occupation, too.
--------
Icarus, I think possibly he was referring to mines that can be deployed with triggers that can be activated and deactivated remotely. I have heard of such things recently, but I don't know much about land mines other than not to step on one.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will never understand why the rest of the America's cannot get their act together, they had a couple of centuries head start and still can't climb out of the third world. Free and Common Sockage!
Let's just take this line of idiocy to its logical conclusion. The USA has a headstart of-just to be conservative-roughly five-thousand years ahead of Africa. Therefore, the people of the USA are (using as a standard of humanity's lifetime six-thousand years) hundreds and thousands of times better, smarter, faster, stronger, and nobler than those poor Africans.
If we're going to use standards as stupid as when a nation got started, that is.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
You're probably right about me being a racist. Wish it wasn't so. Wish I could get over it. Wish I had seen some white people at the state prison when our youth group toured it. Wish I hadn't been beaten up by that black-power gang in high school back in the 70's. Wish my Japanese boss didn't keep mentioning "stupid, lazy Americans." Wish that hispanic guy hadn't stolen my GTO. You say white people do bad things all the time. Well, maybe I'm just lucky.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
