Forums > Social Discussion > Immigration
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
So today I noticed that half the stores in my neighborhood (prominantly Latino) were closed.
Here's Why.
And I support the workers. They make our country run. Things would cost many times more without them...and their kids often do very well and go on to live the dream that the parents have.
I care for these people's children, I live with them, I speak their language, I patronize their businesses, and I remember that I, too, am a minority and a descendent of immigrants.
And I hope this country feels the sting of their absence.
So today I noticed that half the stores in my neighborhood (prominantly Latino) were closed.
Here's Why.
And I support the workers. They make our country run. Things would cost many times more without them...and their kids often do very well and go on to live the dream that the parents have.
I care for these people's children, I live with them, I speak their language, I patronize their businesses, and I remember that I, too, am a minority and a descendent of immigrants.
And I hope this country feels the sting of their absence.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
That's a cop-out. Passing the buck to whatever countries happens to be near-by trouble zones.
Britian, Germany and America are both rich countries which can easily accomadate immigrants and even benifit from them. I think we should be honoured that people are putting in extra effort to live here rather than a nearer country, and I don't see a single thing wrong with "economic migration".
That's a cop-out. Passing the buck to whatever countries happens to be near-by trouble zones.
Britian, Germany and America are both rich countries which can easily accomadate immigrants and even benifit from them. I think we should be honoured that people are putting in extra effort to live here rather than a nearer country, and I don't see a single thing wrong with "economic migration".
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
That's why I called it a convenient law.
But regarding the whole immigration thing, it depends on what it turns out at...
We've had people complaining that the food they got in their refuges was too "European".
My friend who works for the police regularly deals with "asylum seekers" who trade pictures and phone numbers of teenage girls.
Not to mention that at least in southern Germany the heroin trade is nearly completely in the hands of immigrant Africans.
I realise that these, and the number of people who come to rich countries and then live off social security, doesn't speak for everyone. But it's understandable that people who work and pay taxes, and then hear what some do with the chance they're given and use or hurt others and complain about it, aren't exactly happy.
That's why I called it a convenient law.
But regarding the whole immigration thing, it depends on what it turns out at...
We've had people complaining that the food they got in their refuges was too "European".
My friend who works for the police regularly deals with "asylum seekers" who trade pictures and phone numbers of teenage girls.
Not to mention that at least in southern Germany the heroin trade is nearly completely in the hands of immigrant Africans.
I realise that these, and the number of people who come to rich countries and then live off social security, doesn't speak for everyone. But it's understandable that people who work and pay taxes, and then hear what some do with the chance they're given and use or hurt others and complain about it, aren't exactly happy.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Patriarch: Everyone has a god-given right to be American? America should be brought to them? Excuse me if I don't happen to think that America is exactly the most shining example of a good country to live in. Extending America so that it covered the world would accelerate it's death by about 3 times.
Before people complain about immigrants taxes, I want to hear a valid explanation why 3 times as much is spent on the military in our country than on education. What about the taxpayers money that is funding our nuclear arsenal? Does anyone want to take round a survey to find out how many people think nukes are still needed in this day and age? I'm borderline wondering why I should pay taxes when the majority of them are used for things I'd rather they weren't used for.
Let's deport everyone with an IQ less than 105 to somewhere else! It makes about as much sense as saying "You can't come in" to people who are willing to work hard, pay taxes and be a good member of the community. It makes MORE sense than saying to stupid chavs who get drunk, vandalise things and milk benfits "Hello, fellow English-born person! You're someone I'd much prefer to live next door to! Stay here and drain the economy as long as you live!"
Patriarch: Everyone has a god-given right to be American? America should be brought to them? Excuse me if I don't happen to think that America is exactly the most shining example of a good country to live in. Extending America so that it covered the world would accelerate it's death by about 3 times.
Before people complain about immigrants taxes, I want to hear a valid explanation why 3 times as much is spent on the military in our country than on education. What about the taxpayers money that is funding our nuclear arsenal? Does anyone want to take round a survey to find out how many people think nukes are still needed in this day and age? I'm borderline wondering why I should pay taxes when the majority of them are used for things I'd rather they weren't used for.
Let's deport everyone with an IQ less than 105 to somewhere else! It makes about as much sense as saying "You can't come in" to people who are willing to work hard, pay taxes and be a good member of the community. It makes MORE sense than saying to stupid chavs who get drunk, vandalise things and milk benfits "Hello, fellow English-born person! You're someone I'd much prefer to live next door to! Stay here and drain the economy as long as you live!"
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
If they didn’t have a right to be an American, then America does nothing wrong when it keeps them out. Obviously, people have a right to be American. That's why we need to declare amnesty and open the borders.
Think of it like going to a concert. Some people wait in long lines and buy tickets. These are the people with enough time and money to spare. Others just sneak in, either because they can't afford the ticket price, or the wait is too much of a burden to them.
Should both people have an equal right to go to the concert? If the organizers of the concert find out that some people snuck in without going through the "proper" channels, do they have a right to make them leave? The people that sneak in are probably fans that are devoted to the band just as much as those who paid, but for some reason lack the money or the patience to wait in line to buy tickets.
Borders between countries are arbitrary and inconvenient, just like requiring tickets at concerts. Just as concerts, sporting events, movie theaters, and amusement parks should allow people to come and go unfettered, all countries should allow people to pass through their borders without the government getting involved.
Some might try to distinguish between legal immigration, and illegal immigration. The distinction is arbitrary and not useful. Someone who sneaks into a movie theater will enjoy it just as much as the person who pays for a ticket. Arguing that immigration laws should be changed to allow more legal immigration will still leave some people unable to immigrate. What we need is complete abolishment of laws restricting people and things from moving across international borders. That is the only fair solution.
If they didn’t have a right to be an American, then America does nothing wrong when it keeps them out. Obviously, people have a right to be American. That's why we need to declare amnesty and open the borders.
Think of it like going to a concert. Some people wait in long lines and buy tickets. These are the people with enough time and money to spare. Others just sneak in, either because they can't afford the ticket price, or the wait is too much of a burden to them.
Should both people have an equal right to go to the concert? If the organizers of the concert find out that some people snuck in without going through the "proper" channels, do they have a right to make them leave? The people that sneak in are probably fans that are devoted to the band just as much as those who paid, but for some reason lack the money or the patience to wait in line to buy tickets.
Borders between countries are arbitrary and inconvenient, just like requiring tickets at concerts. Just as concerts, sporting events, movie theaters, and amusement parks should allow people to come and go unfettered, all countries should allow people to pass through their borders without the government getting involved.
Some might try to distinguish between legal immigration, and illegal immigration. The distinction is arbitrary and not useful. Someone who sneaks into a movie theater will enjoy it just as much as the person who pays for a ticket. Arguing that immigration laws should be changed to allow more legal immigration will still leave some people unable to immigrate. What we need is complete abolishment of laws restricting people and things from moving across international borders. That is the only fair solution.
SILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
Posted:
thats all very well, but i fear with those people could move disease, feral animals and dangerous plant material.
i for one am glad that people are stopped, checked or warned before they enter Tasmania, i dont want some idiot bringing in a disease that will wipe out our crops that remain relitavely disease free or kill our native wildlife.
thats all very well, but i fear with those people could move disease, feral animals and dangerous plant material.
i for one am glad that people are stopped, checked or warned before they enter Tasmania, i dont want some idiot bringing in a disease that will wipe out our crops that remain relitavely disease free or kill our native wildlife.
"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"
jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley
GOLD Member
Basu gasu bakuhatsu - because sometimes buses explode
1,584 posts
Location: Angels Landing, USA
Basu gasu bakuhatsu - because sometimes buses explode
1,584 posts
Location: Angels Landing, USA
Posted:
I'll just say a few things and scurry out of here.
I complain about America a lot. I complain about Bush a LOT. I am however glad to live in a country where our right to complain is secure.
There are people coming from countries were saying certain things will get you shot, or tortured. I fully welcome them to the US (even though saying certain things in the hood will get you shot here as well ).
There are Mexicans and Hmongs who I know have come over and didn't have basic clean water where they came from. Chinese who were persecuted for religion and jailed. Koreans who wanted to not live under the ridiculousness of a dictator who simply doesn't care about the common man and woman.
As the US truly goes global and wishes to stay a shining example of democracy and freedom, I believe in the democratization of immigration laws.
A the same time, we forget the poor who are already here, a city structure that is aging, social security that needs revamping, and a public education system that is greatly failing our poor.
This immigration debate I hope highlights and will show our politicians these very important issues that America's future is dependant on.
I believe this may be the first time I've ever been on the same page as Patriarch917
I'll just say a few things and scurry out of here.
I complain about America a lot. I complain about Bush a LOT. I am however glad to live in a country where our right to complain is secure.
There are people coming from countries were saying certain things will get you shot, or tortured. I fully welcome them to the US (even though saying certain things in the hood will get you shot here as well
).There are Mexicans and Hmongs who I know have come over and didn't have basic clean water where they came from. Chinese who were persecuted for religion and jailed. Koreans who wanted to not live under the ridiculousness of a dictator who simply doesn't care about the common man and woman.
As the US truly goes global and wishes to stay a shining example of democracy and freedom, I believe in the democratization of immigration laws.
A the same time, we forget the poor who are already here, a city structure that is aging, social security that needs revamping, and a public education system that is greatly failing our poor.
This immigration debate I hope highlights and will show our politicians these very important issues that America's future is dependant on.
I believe this may be the first time I've ever been on the same page as Patriarch917
To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
There's a reason there are a limited number of places... capacity. How would you like to be in a cinema when there are twice as many people as chairs? How would you like to be at a fottball match where people are being crushed to death against the railings because of people flowing in? How'd you like to be in an amusement park where everyride has a 3 hour queue?
I don't think you would. That's why people sell tickets, and there are set numbers allowed in.
Written by: Patriarch917
Just as concerts, sporting events, movie theaters, and amusement parks should allow people to come and go unfettered
There's a reason there are a limited number of places... capacity. How would you like to be in a cinema when there are twice as many people as chairs? How would you like to be at a fottball match where people are being crushed to death against the railings because of people flowing in? How'd you like to be in an amusement park where everyride has a 3 hour queue?
I don't think you would. That's why people sell tickets, and there are set numbers allowed in.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
SILVER Member
your new best enemy
246 posts
Location: over the river, through the woods, USA
your new best enemy
246 posts
Location: over the river, through the woods, USA
Posted:
alot of the immigrants, illegal and not, are trying to get their citizenship. so they can pay their taxes. so they can be americans. but really, whatis the difference between being an illegal immigrant and a legal one? did they kill a man coming in? or perhaps they robbed a bank... I understand overpopulation being a factor... but have you ever been to kansas? or is it that americans are still to racist to allow a brown man in without being approved yet? but in all honesty, I see more white guys sitting on the side of the road flying their signs than the illegal immigrants. they must have come here for a reason, as I'm sure that every one of our descendents did. I'm sure it's not easy to "illegally immigrate" into a country, so that must show at least a little bit of ambition. what ever happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave, give us your tired, hungry, and poor? i feel that by making it tougher for someone to earn american citizenship would be america going back on their innitial word. all of a sudden, people were immigrating from someplace other than europe? how the hell could this happen? we gotta do something about those brown guys. america has already banned an american having dual citizenship. so now, if you want to move to another country. you're either an american or you arent. you want to move to europe? ok, now you're an illegal immigrant. unless you give up your american citizenship. then, what if you want to come back? this whole thing is stupid. some people oughta grow hearts. others should remove their heads from their asses.
alot of the immigrants, illegal and not, are trying to get their citizenship. so they can pay their taxes. so they can be americans. but really, whatis the difference between being an illegal immigrant and a legal one? did they kill a man coming in? or perhaps they robbed a bank... I understand overpopulation being a factor... but have you ever been to kansas? or is it that americans are still to racist to allow a brown man in without being approved yet? but in all honesty, I see more white guys sitting on the side of the road flying their signs than the illegal immigrants. they must have come here for a reason, as I'm sure that every one of our descendents did. I'm sure it's not easy to "illegally immigrate" into a country, so that must show at least a little bit of ambition. what ever happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave, give us your tired, hungry, and poor? i feel that by making it tougher for someone to earn american citizenship would be america going back on their innitial word. all of a sudden, people were immigrating from someplace other than europe? how the hell could this happen? we gotta do something about those brown guys. america has already banned an american having dual citizenship. so now, if you want to move to another country. you're either an american or you arent. you want to move to europe? ok, now you're an illegal immigrant. unless you give up your american citizenship. then, what if you want to come back? this whole thing is stupid. some people oughta grow hearts. others should remove their heads from their asses.
I'll get there too late if I shorten my stride, I'll get there too soon if I find me a ride, I'll never move forward if I try to hide this path that I've troden one step at a time.
BRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
Posted:
Umm...
Once again, most of us are not against immigration.
Next, legally coming into American..not hard. I have known ALOT of people to do it..for visits, as students and as residents. In fact, one of my friends is going through the naturalization process right now. America is not nearly as hard as Canada I think.
Now, this has nothing to do with race. "Brown man" (can I say that is a *VERY* ignorant statement) is more than welcome, to come here legally.
Refugees are seeking escape from political tyranny, traditionally. Illegal immigrants are trying to get away from circumstances they find unsavory. Hell, there are times I was ready to bolt to Canada or hide out in NZ...but I didn't do it.
Next, let me expand a bit on the whole health issue.
When a person enters a country legally, they are essentially given the stamp of "clean" health (or at least non-major contageon).
Illegal immigrants, that is not so.
Recently (well, last autumn) a friend of mine has a daughter who works in a lawn and garden center in the south, which deals with alot of the illegals who are cheaply employed. Sometime later, there was an epidemic of Whooping Cough among the farm hands, one of those very rare here in the land of the vaccinated diseases. It is quite debilitating, very painful, highly contageous and sometimes deadly. Did you know the vaccines wear off? Most adults around here don't get boosters because we don't know that. Which means, my friends daughter caught the cough and passed it on to her entire family, who was taken out of commission for over a month. My friend still has the cough, months later. The entire thing, traced back to an illegal immigrant farm hand. Nice eh?
Next, the illegals aren't trying to be citizens. They are simply demanding that they have rights as citizens. Sorry, not buying it. I grew up surrounded by them. Not one attempted to go through naturalization. Not one attempted to learn American (they let their kids do it for them). I worked in a grocery store and cashed in their food stamps and WIC checks which made me sick when I had friends who really needed the help being denied.
I also saw the very sub-standard of living they had...
Illegal Immigration encourages poor, and downright illegal and immoral, business practices. And businesses *will* take advantage of it because they can. The businesses need to be cracked down upon..hardcore. The illegal immigrants need to go, and legalizing them won't help. It will simply encourage more to people attempt to come illegally than legally. Giving in to this is not a solution.
And I like Kansas the way it is. I am against urbanization of most areas. I like the plains and the woods and I don't think we need more people to fill it up. Sorry. Still no excuse. Just because I have an empty space in my home doesn't mean I need to fill it up...same way with this country.
Umm...
Once again, most of us are not against immigration.
Next, legally coming into American..not hard. I have known ALOT of people to do it..for visits, as students and as residents. In fact, one of my friends is going through the naturalization process right now. America is not nearly as hard as Canada I think.
Now, this has nothing to do with race. "Brown man" (can I say that is a *VERY* ignorant statement) is more than welcome, to come here legally.
Refugees are seeking escape from political tyranny, traditionally. Illegal immigrants are trying to get away from circumstances they find unsavory. Hell, there are times I was ready to bolt to Canada or hide out in NZ...but I didn't do it.
Next, let me expand a bit on the whole health issue.
When a person enters a country legally, they are essentially given the stamp of "clean" health (or at least non-major contageon).
Illegal immigrants, that is not so.
Recently (well, last autumn) a friend of mine has a daughter who works in a lawn and garden center in the south, which deals with alot of the illegals who are cheaply employed. Sometime later, there was an epidemic of Whooping Cough among the farm hands, one of those very rare here in the land of the vaccinated diseases. It is quite debilitating, very painful, highly contageous and sometimes deadly. Did you know the vaccines wear off? Most adults around here don't get boosters because we don't know that. Which means, my friends daughter caught the cough and passed it on to her entire family, who was taken out of commission for over a month. My friend still has the cough, months later. The entire thing, traced back to an illegal immigrant farm hand. Nice eh?
Next, the illegals aren't trying to be citizens. They are simply demanding that they have rights as citizens. Sorry, not buying it. I grew up surrounded by them. Not one attempted to go through naturalization. Not one attempted to learn American (they let their kids do it for them). I worked in a grocery store and cashed in their food stamps and WIC checks which made me sick when I had friends who really needed the help being denied.
I also saw the very sub-standard of living they had...
Illegal Immigration encourages poor, and downright illegal and immoral, business practices. And businesses *will* take advantage of it because they can. The businesses need to be cracked down upon..hardcore. The illegal immigrants need to go, and legalizing them won't help. It will simply encourage more to people attempt to come illegally than legally. Giving in to this is not a solution.
And I like Kansas the way it is. I am against urbanization of most areas. I like the plains and the woods and I don't think we need more people to fill it up. Sorry. Still no excuse. Just because I have an empty space in my home doesn't mean I need to fill it up...same way with this country.
Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
Right, but if there are empty seats in a theater or a concert then it is ok to sneak in. And people who sneak in should get seats first, they should not be kicked out in favor of the people that had been waiting in line with their tickets.
Countries are special, in that they don't really have any constraints on how many people can come in, which is why all borders should be opened.
Written by: SethisWritten by: Patriarch917
Just as concerts, sporting events, movie theaters, and amusement parks should allow people to come and go unfettered
There's a reason there are a limited number of places... capacity. How would you like to be in a cinema when there are twice as many people as chairs? How would you like to be at a fottball match where people are being crushed to death against the railings because of people flowing in? How'd you like to be in an amusement park where everyride has a 3 hour queue?
I don't think you would. That's why people sell tickets, and there are set numbers allowed in.
Right, but if there are empty seats in a theater or a concert then it is ok to sneak in. And people who sneak in should get seats first, they should not be kicked out in favor of the people that had been waiting in line with their tickets.
Countries are special, in that they don't really have any constraints on how many people can come in, which is why all borders should be opened.
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Pele, I find a lot of your points are certainly interesting, though I dont necessarily agree. We have had very different experiences, so not surprisingly end up with different opinions.
For each example you site, I can easily think of similar situations of trouble that arose from legal citizens foolish choices , and have seen many making themselves a burden to society in some way or another. It seems to me that irresponsible behaviour has little to do with immigration legal or otherwise.
But mostly, I am not sure why you would consider the reference to the treatment of a " brown" immigrant as an ignorant statement? There are many well documented cases of racism shown in immigration issues, both currently and historically, as well as through-out both our countries in general.The history is undeniable. It strikes me as naive to assert that being brown/ yellow/ red would not be a factor in ones ability to gain access to the privelege of legal immigration. The experience of whites and non-whites within the legal/immigration system is radically different, as is the experience of the poor vs the rich...
Or we just not supposed to mention it? Or perhaps is it the terminology that offends, describing someone as brown? What made that an ignorant statement?
Pele, I find a lot of your points are certainly interesting, though I dont necessarily agree. We have had very different experiences, so not surprisingly end up with different opinions.
For each example you site, I can easily think of similar situations of trouble that arose from legal citizens foolish choices , and have seen many making themselves a burden to society in some way or another. It seems to me that irresponsible behaviour has little to do with immigration legal or otherwise.
But mostly, I am not sure why you would consider the reference to the treatment of a " brown" immigrant as an ignorant statement? There are many well documented cases of racism shown in immigration issues, both currently and historically, as well as through-out both our countries in general.The history is undeniable. It strikes me as naive to assert that being brown/ yellow/ red would not be a factor in ones ability to gain access to the privelege of legal immigration. The experience of whites and non-whites within the legal/immigration system is radically different, as is the experience of the poor vs the rich...
Or we just not supposed to mention it? Or perhaps is it the terminology that offends, describing someone as brown? What made that an ignorant statement?
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh
Posted:
I'm not convinced that's it's "easy" to immigrate easily to the US if you live in Mexico of SE Asia. If it were why do thousands of people risk their lives to make the crossing instead of taking the "easy" route?
In any case Maddox makes a very valid point on the subject of immigrant rights...
Clue train 1
Clue train 2
Conclusion of the Clue train 3
The completly unneccasery Clue train 4
I'm not convinced that's it's "easy" to immigrate easily to the US if you live in Mexico of SE Asia. If it were why do thousands of people risk their lives to make the crossing instead of taking the "easy" route?
In any case Maddox makes a very valid point on the subject of immigrant rights...
Clue train 1
Clue train 2
Conclusion of the Clue train 3
The completly unneccasery Clue train 4
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
I don't agree it's easy either... even for Europeans, it's easy enough as a tourist or student, but not if you want to work and possibly stay.
Pele, do illegal immigrants really get food stamps and all that? I would've thought they were trying and avoid the official places as much as possible?
I don't agree it's easy either... even for Europeans, it's easy enough as a tourist or student, but not if you want to work and possibly stay.
Pele, do illegal immigrants really get food stamps and all that? I would've thought they were trying and avoid the official places as much as possible?
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
Posted:
I know several people who are legal immegrants, including members of my family. It is not a cake walk, but it is not as difficult as people make it out to be either.
I would also like to say that Patriarch has the most confusing statements to me. I can't tell if they are sarcasm or not, or simply meant to inflame. Not throwing people who sneak into a movie theater out? Surely you must understand the dynamics of business. If you feel this way, is your home..where you eat and sleep and pay for everyting...then open to perfect strangers day and night without rule or govern? Same concept as what you are talking about.
I found the entire "brown" people in Kansas to be a bit ignorant in the scope of this conversation. That takes this down to a racial thing, which it is not. It is a legal thing that applies to more than Mexicans, or "brown" people. This is much greater than Mexicans, as I said before, so such a blantantly racial generization is completely ignorant to the base of this issue. Illegal entrance into this country should not qualify you for legal rights. That is what all of this is about.
And giving into bullying tactics (which we still haven't felt a blip of here, btw) will cause more issues, no solve the current problem. A band-aid doesn't help a broken limb.
This entire system and situation is broken and slapping a "legalize them or they'll protest" band-aid does nothing to help it.
They do. The process of getting it is quite skewed and it is one of the largest problems with the US "welfare" is that it is a horrible system, to tell you the truth. I don't know how much the requirements changed in the past many years but I know they used to. I know some of the farm owners who employ the immigrants (most illegally) and would pay them off the books, cook the books in other ways so the money was accounted for and then help them get food stamps.
It was sickening. The farmers would pay their fines if they were caught and keep on going. THAT is one of the biggest issues about it to me. Laws need to be harsher on the employers as well I think.
I know several people who are legal immegrants, including members of my family. It is not a cake walk, but it is not as difficult as people make it out to be either.
I would also like to say that Patriarch has the most confusing statements to me. I can't tell if they are sarcasm or not, or simply meant to inflame. Not throwing people who sneak into a movie theater out? Surely you must understand the dynamics of business. If you feel this way, is your home..where you eat and sleep and pay for everyting...then open to perfect strangers day and night without rule or govern? Same concept as what you are talking about.
I found the entire "brown" people in Kansas to be a bit ignorant in the scope of this conversation. That takes this down to a racial thing, which it is not. It is a legal thing that applies to more than Mexicans, or "brown" people. This is much greater than Mexicans, as I said before, so such a blantantly racial generization is completely ignorant to the base of this issue. Illegal entrance into this country should not qualify you for legal rights. That is what all of this is about.
And giving into bullying tactics (which we still haven't felt a blip of here, btw) will cause more issues, no solve the current problem. A band-aid doesn't help a broken limb.
This entire system and situation is broken and slapping a "legalize them or they'll protest" band-aid does nothing to help it.
Written by: Birgit
I don't agree it's easy either... even for Europeans, it's easy enough as a tourist or student, but not if you want to work and possibly stay.
Pele, do illegal immigrants really get food stamps and all that? I would've thought they were trying and avoid the official places as much as possible?
They do. The process of getting it is quite skewed and it is one of the largest problems with the US "welfare" is that it is a horrible system, to tell you the truth. I don't know how much the requirements changed in the past many years but I know they used to. I know some of the farm owners who employ the immigrants (most illegally) and would pay them off the books, cook the books in other ways so the money was accounted for and then help them get food stamps.
It was sickening. The farmers would pay their fines if they were caught and keep on going. THAT is one of the biggest issues about it to me. Laws need to be harsher on the employers as well I think.
Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK
SILVER Member
member
39 posts
Location: Huntington, New York, USA
member
39 posts
Location: Huntington, New York, USA
Posted:
America was founded by immigrants. Now who are we to judge who will stay and who's not good enough? 60 years ago German and Japanese immigrants were being treated the way we treat Hispanic immigrants now.
America was founded by immigrants. Now who are we to judge who will stay and who's not good enough? 60 years ago German and Japanese immigrants were being treated the way we treat Hispanic immigrants now.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
If people did not have a right to be an America, then there would be no moral problem with taking that right away. America could declare that only 3 people get to immigrate per year, or that you have to be able to recite the alphabet backwards, or that you have to have higher education, or that no immigration is allowed at all.
This would be perfectly acceptable if being an American were a privilege. A privilege can be withdraw, or made difficult to receive, because no one deserves it in the first place.
One argument used to try to excuse violating U.S. immigration laws is that the laws make it difficult to immigrate legally. The reasoning is straightforward. If it is wrong to have difficult or restrictive immigration laws, the reason it is wrong must be because people have a right to easy and open immigration.
Pele asked me a question:
My home is America, where I eat and sleep and pay for everything. Perfect strangers are coming to America, eating, sleeping, and using things that I have paid for (such as roads, schools, hospitals, national defense, etc.). America ostensibly has rules that are supposed to govern immigrants, but they have been ignored.
Now I am asked what to do with the people that have snuck in. Some say that they have no right to be here, but may only come with my invitation and permission. Others say that my home is nice and has plenty of room, and that I should give everyone permission to come. Others say that since my home is so nice and so large, other people have a right to live in it and use the stuff that I have paid for whether I give permission or not.
Some may say that Americans have a moral duty to be charitable. I would agree. What if they are not? Does a stingy man deserve mere condemnation, or do we actually have a right to take his stuff by force?
If a man builds a house with spare rooms, do his neighbors have a right to sneak into it as long as there is excess capacity? Does it matter whether he had planned to use those rooms for his future children? Does you answer change if it can be shown that the man benefits in some way, such as if the “squatters” mow his yard for him?
The real question is whether humans, in general, have an intrinsic right to immigrate to America. If they do, then we can demand that they be let in, and that those who are here should get amnesty.
If people do not have such a right, then it is no excuse that immigration laws may be difficult, or that the immigrants aren’t doing anything bad, or that the country is benefiting from it. No one deserves a privilege, and one is not allowed to take it by force.
If the argument is that poor people deserve to come to America because America owes them a charitable duty, then that principle cannot stop with immigration. If America has a duty to save the world’s poor, then it can’t just save those who have the means to immigrate. American must reach out and try to change the world, so that the countries people are fleeing from will become enough like America so that people will be content to live there.
Should America withdraw within its own borders, mind its own business, and keep everyone out? Should it allow those people with the means to come to America to come in, but ignore the people who can’t simply cross a river? Should it take an active part in bringing America to the desperate parts of the world, so that immigration will no longer be necessary?
I see compelling arguments for and against each position.
If people did not have a right to be an America, then there would be no moral problem with taking that right away. America could declare that only 3 people get to immigrate per year, or that you have to be able to recite the alphabet backwards, or that you have to have higher education, or that no immigration is allowed at all.
This would be perfectly acceptable if being an American were a privilege. A privilege can be withdraw, or made difficult to receive, because no one deserves it in the first place.
One argument used to try to excuse violating U.S. immigration laws is that the laws make it difficult to immigrate legally. The reasoning is straightforward. If it is wrong to have difficult or restrictive immigration laws, the reason it is wrong must be because people have a right to easy and open immigration.
Pele asked me a question:
Written by: Pele
…is your home..where you eat and sleep and pay for everyting...then open to perfect strangers day and night without rule or govern?
My home is America, where I eat and sleep and pay for everything. Perfect strangers are coming to America, eating, sleeping, and using things that I have paid for (such as roads, schools, hospitals, national defense, etc.). America ostensibly has rules that are supposed to govern immigrants, but they have been ignored.
Now I am asked what to do with the people that have snuck in. Some say that they have no right to be here, but may only come with my invitation and permission. Others say that my home is nice and has plenty of room, and that I should give everyone permission to come. Others say that since my home is so nice and so large, other people have a right to live in it and use the stuff that I have paid for whether I give permission or not.
Some may say that Americans have a moral duty to be charitable. I would agree. What if they are not? Does a stingy man deserve mere condemnation, or do we actually have a right to take his stuff by force?
If a man builds a house with spare rooms, do his neighbors have a right to sneak into it as long as there is excess capacity? Does it matter whether he had planned to use those rooms for his future children? Does you answer change if it can be shown that the man benefits in some way, such as if the “squatters” mow his yard for him?
The real question is whether humans, in general, have an intrinsic right to immigrate to America. If they do, then we can demand that they be let in, and that those who are here should get amnesty.
If people do not have such a right, then it is no excuse that immigration laws may be difficult, or that the immigrants aren’t doing anything bad, or that the country is benefiting from it. No one deserves a privilege, and one is not allowed to take it by force.
If the argument is that poor people deserve to come to America because America owes them a charitable duty, then that principle cannot stop with immigration. If America has a duty to save the world’s poor, then it can’t just save those who have the means to immigrate. American must reach out and try to change the world, so that the countries people are fleeing from will become enough like America so that people will be content to live there.
Should America withdraw within its own borders, mind its own business, and keep everyone out? Should it allow those people with the means to come to America to come in, but ignore the people who can’t simply cross a river? Should it take an active part in bringing America to the desperate parts of the world, so that immigration will no longer be necessary?
I see compelling arguments for and against each position.
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
"One argument used to try to excuse violating U.S. immigration laws is that the laws make it difficult to immigrate legally. The reasoning is straightforward. If it is wrong to have difficult or restrictive immigration laws, the reason it is wrong must be because people have a right to easy and open immigration."
That is not a logical conclusion, or at least is not the only logical conclusion...
There are lots of other possibilities that dont break things down into over simplified versions of right and wrong. Our decisions about who we invite to be part of our country, and how we do so, are much more complex. We can reasonably expect our laws, such as they are, to be effective and applied without predjuidice. That is not necessarily the same thing as an open border, and extending rights to every last person-- though I am not necessarily against that either. We can also choose to change our laws so they are more encompassing of diversity, without removing them entirely.
"If a man builds a house with spare rooms, do his neighbors have a right to sneak into it as long as there is excess capacity? Does it matter whether he had planned to use those rooms for his future children? Does you answer change if it can be shown that the man benefits in some way, such as if the “squatters” mow his yard for him?"
You know, I actually do feel that if one person has excess, and another is suffering from lack, then it is not unreasonable for the person lacking to access the excess of the other... And I would see that as happenning in the moment, -- despite the future plans. If I was freezing, you better believe I would take what shelter was available, and the legalities would not be the biggest factor in determining how I went about it.
Fortunately, we do have societies where many people are sharing what they have in a variety of ways, so this sort of extreme is not usually necessary. But when and where it is, I see it as completely reasonable.
I know how this is done would be a big issue. I would prefer we did not do it in an aggressive way. But I am a bit of a rebel that way to be sure. I am all for the people who held up a huge grocery store chain and took food to distribute to the hungry. Yes, it was a crime by our laws. Yet, I think it is a worse crime for some people to have food rotting in their fridges while others are hungry. Their neighbors, never mind the whole global village aspect...
As for how this applies to immigration, it is simply that I do not beleive we should greedily hoarde the opportunities we have here for safe productive lives. I believe that it is entirely possible to develop a system of immigration that allows others from elsewhere to partake in our abundance, and contribute to it. I think that we do this to some degree already, and could benefit hugely from doing it even better than we are presently.
"One argument used to try to excuse violating U.S. immigration laws is that the laws make it difficult to immigrate legally. The reasoning is straightforward. If it is wrong to have difficult or restrictive immigration laws, the reason it is wrong must be because people have a right to easy and open immigration."
That is not a logical conclusion, or at least is not the only logical conclusion...
There are lots of other possibilities that dont break things down into over simplified versions of right and wrong. Our decisions about who we invite to be part of our country, and how we do so, are much more complex. We can reasonably expect our laws, such as they are, to be effective and applied without predjuidice. That is not necessarily the same thing as an open border, and extending rights to every last person-- though I am not necessarily against that either. We can also choose to change our laws so they are more encompassing of diversity, without removing them entirely.
"If a man builds a house with spare rooms, do his neighbors have a right to sneak into it as long as there is excess capacity? Does it matter whether he had planned to use those rooms for his future children? Does you answer change if it can be shown that the man benefits in some way, such as if the “squatters” mow his yard for him?"
You know, I actually do feel that if one person has excess, and another is suffering from lack, then it is not unreasonable for the person lacking to access the excess of the other... And I would see that as happenning in the moment, -- despite the future plans. If I was freezing, you better believe I would take what shelter was available, and the legalities would not be the biggest factor in determining how I went about it.
Fortunately, we do have societies where many people are sharing what they have in a variety of ways, so this sort of extreme is not usually necessary. But when and where it is, I see it as completely reasonable.
I know how this is done would be a big issue. I would prefer we did not do it in an aggressive way. But I am a bit of a rebel that way to be sure. I am all for the people who held up a huge grocery store chain and took food to distribute to the hungry. Yes, it was a crime by our laws. Yet, I think it is a worse crime for some people to have food rotting in their fridges while others are hungry. Their neighbors, never mind the whole global village aspect...
As for how this applies to immigration, it is simply that I do not beleive we should greedily hoarde the opportunities we have here for safe productive lives. I believe that it is entirely possible to develop a system of immigration that allows others from elsewhere to partake in our abundance, and contribute to it. I think that we do this to some degree already, and could benefit hugely from doing it even better than we are presently.
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
SILVER Member
your new best enemy
246 posts
Location: over the river, through the woods, USA
your new best enemy
246 posts
Location: over the river, through the woods, USA
Posted:
if I were to go someplace else in this world and work for really cheap. I'd hope that the farmer I busted my ass for would help me pay my fines and help me eat. they come from a different place. not only locationally (?) but if it's believed that in my saying "the brown man" is an ignorant statement, you should have turned your tv on and looked at who was protesting if you couldn't be there to stand with them. if I was denied things such as health care, you'd better believe that I'd be standing on the front line of that demonstration myself.
if I were to go someplace else in this world and work for really cheap. I'd hope that the farmer I busted my ass for would help me pay my fines and help me eat. they come from a different place. not only locationally (?) but if it's believed that in my saying "the brown man" is an ignorant statement, you should have turned your tv on and looked at who was protesting if you couldn't be there to stand with them. if I was denied things such as health care, you'd better believe that I'd be standing on the front line of that demonstration myself.
I'll get there too late if I shorten my stride, I'll get there too soon if I find me a ride, I'll never move forward if I try to hide this path that I've troden one step at a time.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
Every town is a border town...
As usuall, the ACLU can't distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground. The constitution gives the power to make immigration law to the U.S. Congress, but all other powers (such as issuing business permits, regulating landlords, or deciding what language to use) are reserved to the states and to the people. The town of Hazleton could not tell people what they must do to immigrate to the U.S., but they can certainly tell people who want a business permit from Hazleton what they must do to get one.
If I were them, I would consider letting the businesses hire illegal immigrants, but make the business pay an "undocumented worker tax" that would raise the cost of hiring the illegal immigrant to the same cost as hiring a legal immigrant or citizen (with minimum wage, social security, taxes, safety regulations, etc.). If you want to make the federal government take notice, let them see taxes and social security that a legal worker would have paid to the federal government suddenly being paid directly to Hazleton.
Every town is a border town...
Written by:
Town Sued Over Immigration Law
By Jon Hurdle
PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Civil rights campaigners sued the Pennsylvania town of Hazleton on Tuesday, seeking to block one of America's toughest local laws against illegal immigrants.
The suit says Hazelton's City Council violated the U.S. constitution when it passed a law denying business permits to companies that hire illegal aliens and fining landlords who rent homes to them.
The measure, which also establishes English as the town's official language, has made Hazleton a focus of the national debate on immigration. The plaintiffs say their suit is the first in the country to challenge a local immigration ordinance.
The suit was filed in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania by groups including the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union. They accuse Hazleton of overstepping its authority on the federal matter of immigration and say the law discriminates against immigrants.
"This mean-spirited law is wrong for many reasons but the most obvious is that the city does not have the power to make its own immigration laws," Omar Jadwat, an attorney for the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, said in a statement.
Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta, a proponent of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance, says illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America has increased crime, overburdened schools and hospitals, and eroded the quality of life in the town of some 31,000 people.
Barletta predicted the law would survive a court challenge and said he would take it to the Supreme Court if necessary. "We're not going to be bullied," he said in a statement.
About a third of the Hazelton's residents are Hispanic, up from around 5 percent in 2000, officials say.
At the federal level, the House and Senate are trying to reconcile starkly different immigration bills that call for tougher border controls and provide routes to citizenship for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the country.
As usuall, the ACLU can't distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground. The constitution gives the power to make immigration law to the U.S. Congress, but all other powers (such as issuing business permits, regulating landlords, or deciding what language to use) are reserved to the states and to the people. The town of Hazleton could not tell people what they must do to immigrate to the U.S., but they can certainly tell people who want a business permit from Hazleton what they must do to get one.
If I were them, I would consider letting the businesses hire illegal immigrants, but make the business pay an "undocumented worker tax" that would raise the cost of hiring the illegal immigrant to the same cost as hiring a legal immigrant or citizen (with minimum wage, social security, taxes, safety regulations, etc.). If you want to make the federal government take notice, let them see taxes and social security that a legal worker would have paid to the federal government suddenly being paid directly to Hazleton.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I'm not sure I necessarily agree that the ACLU can't usually distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground, but in this case, I am afraid you are correct. I see no constitutional or leagal reason why a town cannot do this. The only thing that might be not OK is the establishment of English as the official language since there is no US official language. Although I see no reason why a town might not do so legally.
The law is mean-spirited, I have to say that. I also think that this town is going to realize very suddenly that it has painted itself into a rather tight corner when everyone suddenly has to pay $8 for a plate of pancakes at the local diner because the help is being paid minimum wage and taxes are being taken out. I also think that they are going to see that their Latino population will continue to grow and Mr. Barletta will soon find find his political coffers quite empty. Latino citizens who vote will also have some sway.
If you think this is not a racially-motivated law, you are stupid, naive, and probably not telling the truth, anyway. However, I have to agree that it is legal.
I, for one, wouldn't challenge it. I think that illegal immigrants make a much larger contribution to our nation's economy than we realize and Hazleton is very soon going to realize it.
Written by: Patriarch917
As usuall, the ACLU can't distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground. The constitution gives the power to make immigration law to the U.S. Congress, but all other powers (such as issuing business permits, regulating landlords, or deciding what language to use) are reserved to the states and to the people. The town of Hazleton could not tell people what they must do to immigrate to the U.S., but they can certainly tell people who want a business permit from Hazleton what they must do to get one.
I'm not sure I necessarily agree that the ACLU can't usually distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground, but in this case, I am afraid you are correct. I see no constitutional or leagal reason why a town cannot do this. The only thing that might be not OK is the establishment of English as the official language since there is no US official language. Although I see no reason why a town might not do so legally.
The law is mean-spirited, I have to say that. I also think that this town is going to realize very suddenly that it has painted itself into a rather tight corner when everyone suddenly has to pay $8 for a plate of pancakes at the local diner because the help is being paid minimum wage and taxes are being taken out. I also think that they are going to see that their Latino population will continue to grow and Mr. Barletta will soon find find his political coffers quite empty. Latino citizens who vote will also have some sway.
If you think this is not a racially-motivated law, you are stupid, naive, and probably not telling the truth, anyway. However, I have to agree that it is legal.
I, for one, wouldn't challenge it. I think that illegal immigrants make a much larger contribution to our nation's economy than we realize and Hazleton is very soon going to realize it.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
You are correct in thinking that there is no legal problem with Hazleton choosing which language to use for it’s official business. While it is true that there is no “U.S. Official language” established by congress, there is nothing that prevents towns from choosing one.
In fact, congress likely lacks the power to prevent this town from choosing a language, even if congress wanted to. Thus, Congress could declare English to be the official U.S. language, but the town could probably pick any language it wants to use for it’s own official business.
I agree that the minimum wage and income taxes are both bad ideas. However, it would be mean spirited for the town to allow only one class of people to ignore these laws, while forcing other people to obey them. We are entitled to equal protection under the law. If you want to let businesses hire people without having to pay minimum wage or taxes, you should let them hire legal immigrants and other citizens in this fashion as well.
The most significant beneficiaries of this law are legal immigrants. Pretending, for a moment, that illegal immigrants take jobs that native Americans don’t particularly want, it follows that illegal immigrants are mostly competing for jobs with legal immigrants.
Right now, we encourage businesses to hire illegal, rather than legal immigrants. If a business hires a legal immigrant, they will have to pay them the same wage as a citizen, give them social security, medicare, unemployment insurance, ensure a safe workplace, pay them overtime, and generally treat the worker in a fair manner.
If a business hires an illegal immigrant, they do not have to pay them as much, they don’t have to pay taxes, give them social security, ensure a safe workplace, or any of that. Furthermore, the business can discriminate, sexually harass, require them to work overtime without extra pay, and fire them for any reason without having to pay their unemployment benefits. If a worker is injured on the job, they can simply kick them out the door and hire another in their place, without fear of things like lawsuits or reports to OSHA.
This is very mean spirited. We create an underclass that is not protected by our laws so that we can use and abuse them to give us cheaper pancakes. This system encourages illegal immigration over legal immigration, since a legal immigrant will be at an unfair disadvantage in applying for a job.
You will find that those who have bothered to respect the laws of the U.S. and gone through the effort to immigrate legally are the ones most upset that we allow illegal immigrants to flagrantly violate the law. Their resentment is understandable. It is in their interest to be treated fairly, and laws such as Hazleton have passed do exactly that. I expect that these voting citizens will use their sway to support such laws.
Since the law treats all races equally, and is designed particularly to help minorities, there is nothing about it that would support a charge of racism. Unless you have some inside knowledge about this town, your accusation of racism is both unfounded and deplorable.
Imagine, for a moment, someone who wants to import a “Latino” population. He wants them to come here illegally so that they will not have the protection of our laws, since they know that to go to the authorities they would risk deportation. The reason he wants to have such an underclass is so that he can avoid U.S. laws designed to protect workers. Thus, he can deny them minimum wages, social security, unemployment, medicare, a safe environment, protection against racial and sexual discrimination, overtime pay, and all the other protections that a legal immigrant or native would have had. He justifies this behavior because he is able to charge less for pancakes than the competition (who give their legal workers all of these benefits).
When this scheme is threatened, he tries to instill fear in his neighbors by telling them that, if they do not allow him to operate illegally, they will have higher prices. By violating the law, he is able to procure cheaper labor. Cheaper labor means higher profits. Higher profits make the economy grow.
It is the same argument used in the past to justify slavery. Perhaps the employer feels less guilty because the people he is oppressing are of a different race and language. Thus, they feel “less human” to him.
Such a person, it appears to me, has done far more to warrant accusations of racism than this town.
Maybe they do, but like Hazleton I am willing to vote based on principles rather than profits. If we want to encourage economic growth by abolishing the minimum wage, lowering taxes, getting rid of social security, and all of the other things that increase the cost of a “legal” worker, I am quite willing to consider that idea. However, it should be applied equally to all people, and be done legally. It should not be accomplished by looking the other way while business break the law.
Written by: Doc Lightning
I'm not sure I necessarily agree that the ACLU can't usually distinguish constitutional law from a hole in the ground, but in this case, I am afraid you are correct. I see no constitutional or leagal reason why a town cannot do this. The only thing that might be not OK is the establishment of English as the official language since there is no US official language. Although I see no reason why a town might not do so legally.
You are correct in thinking that there is no legal problem with Hazleton choosing which language to use for it’s official business. While it is true that there is no “U.S. Official language” established by congress, there is nothing that prevents towns from choosing one.
In fact, congress likely lacks the power to prevent this town from choosing a language, even if congress wanted to. Thus, Congress could declare English to be the official U.S. language, but the town could probably pick any language it wants to use for it’s own official business.
Written by: Doc Lightning
I also think that this town is going to realize very suddenly that it has painted itself into a rather tight corner when everyone suddenly has to pay $8 for a plate of pancakes at the local diner because the help is being paid minimum wage and taxes are being taken out.
I agree that the minimum wage and income taxes are both bad ideas. However, it would be mean spirited for the town to allow only one class of people to ignore these laws, while forcing other people to obey them. We are entitled to equal protection under the law. If you want to let businesses hire people without having to pay minimum wage or taxes, you should let them hire legal immigrants and other citizens in this fashion as well.
Written by: Doc Lightning
I also think that they are going to see that their Latino population will continue to grow and Mr. Barletta will soon find find his political coffers quite empty. Latino citizens who vote will also have some sway.
The most significant beneficiaries of this law are legal immigrants. Pretending, for a moment, that illegal immigrants take jobs that native Americans don’t particularly want, it follows that illegal immigrants are mostly competing for jobs with legal immigrants.
Right now, we encourage businesses to hire illegal, rather than legal immigrants. If a business hires a legal immigrant, they will have to pay them the same wage as a citizen, give them social security, medicare, unemployment insurance, ensure a safe workplace, pay them overtime, and generally treat the worker in a fair manner.
If a business hires an illegal immigrant, they do not have to pay them as much, they don’t have to pay taxes, give them social security, ensure a safe workplace, or any of that. Furthermore, the business can discriminate, sexually harass, require them to work overtime without extra pay, and fire them for any reason without having to pay their unemployment benefits. If a worker is injured on the job, they can simply kick them out the door and hire another in their place, without fear of things like lawsuits or reports to OSHA.
This is very mean spirited. We create an underclass that is not protected by our laws so that we can use and abuse them to give us cheaper pancakes. This system encourages illegal immigration over legal immigration, since a legal immigrant will be at an unfair disadvantage in applying for a job.
You will find that those who have bothered to respect the laws of the U.S. and gone through the effort to immigrate legally are the ones most upset that we allow illegal immigrants to flagrantly violate the law. Their resentment is understandable. It is in their interest to be treated fairly, and laws such as Hazleton have passed do exactly that. I expect that these voting citizens will use their sway to support such laws.
Written by: Doc Lightning
If you think this is not a racially-motivated law, you are stupid, naive, and probably not telling the truth, anyway. However, I have to agree that it is legal.
Since the law treats all races equally, and is designed particularly to help minorities, there is nothing about it that would support a charge of racism. Unless you have some inside knowledge about this town, your accusation of racism is both unfounded and deplorable.
Imagine, for a moment, someone who wants to import a “Latino” population. He wants them to come here illegally so that they will not have the protection of our laws, since they know that to go to the authorities they would risk deportation. The reason he wants to have such an underclass is so that he can avoid U.S. laws designed to protect workers. Thus, he can deny them minimum wages, social security, unemployment, medicare, a safe environment, protection against racial and sexual discrimination, overtime pay, and all the other protections that a legal immigrant or native would have had. He justifies this behavior because he is able to charge less for pancakes than the competition (who give their legal workers all of these benefits).
When this scheme is threatened, he tries to instill fear in his neighbors by telling them that, if they do not allow him to operate illegally, they will have higher prices. By violating the law, he is able to procure cheaper labor. Cheaper labor means higher profits. Higher profits make the economy grow.
It is the same argument used in the past to justify slavery. Perhaps the employer feels less guilty because the people he is oppressing are of a different race and language. Thus, they feel “less human” to him.
Such a person, it appears to me, has done far more to warrant accusations of racism than this town.
Written by: Doc Lightning
I think that illegal immigrants make a much larger contribution to our nation's economy than we realize and Hazleton is very soon going to realize it.
Maybe they do, but like Hazleton I am willing to vote based on principles rather than profits. If we want to encourage economic growth by abolishing the minimum wage, lowering taxes, getting rid of social security, and all of the other things that increase the cost of a “legal” worker, I am quite willing to consider that idea. However, it should be applied equally to all people, and be done legally. It should not be accomplished by looking the other way while business break the law.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Since you are neither stupid nor naive, I accuse you of feigning both.
As it happens I *DO* have some knowledge of this town. It happens that a good portion of latinos, particularly Mexicans from New York City, have been moving to this town in Pennsylvania. Many of them are (well, were my patients). Many of them are legal immigrants who speak poor or no English. Now, while I believe that one should make an honest effort to learn the language, official or not, of ones' home country, a law that establishes English as an official language in a situation like this can only be targeted at the 30% of the population who are (mostly) Mexican.
I didn't say the law treated one race differently than another. I said it was racially MOTIVATED. And although those who support this law will deny it, as you have, there is no question in my mind that it is. In fact, I'm 100% certain that it is. And I almost never claim 100% certainty about anything. 99% yes, but 100% almost never.
Illegal immigration IS a problem. However, I think that there are two ways of dealing with the problem.
The first thing is that people come here, don't pay taxes, but reap social services. I'm not in support of that. We may be a nation of immigrants, but we are not a social services center for the world. So we need to do something about it, but we need to be realistic. We AREN'T going to stop them from coming, so we need to get them to pay taxes. And the way to do that is to 1) deny any social services to anyone over the age or 18 who is here without papers and 2) make it easier to get said papers and then insist that those people pay taxes.
This law is too heavy-handed and while I agree with the motivation behind it insofar as illegal immigration is concerned, I don't agree with the spirit that it clearly embodies.
We have a lot of Albanian immigrants here and, in spite of the fact that they don't speak English, they usually have a MUCH easier time of things than the Mexicans and other minority races. If you don't think that racism is alive and well then you have your head deeply shoved...somewhere.
Written by: Patriarch917Written by: Doc Lightning
If you think this is not a racially-motivated law, you are stupid, naive, and probably not telling the truth, anyway. However, I have to agree that it is legal.
Since the law treats all races equally, and is designed particularly to help minorities, there is nothing about it that would support a charge of racism. Unless you have some inside knowledge about this town, your accusation of racism is both unfounded and deplorable.
Since you are neither stupid nor naive, I accuse you of feigning both.
As it happens I *DO* have some knowledge of this town. It happens that a good portion of latinos, particularly Mexicans from New York City, have been moving to this town in Pennsylvania. Many of them are (well, were my patients). Many of them are legal immigrants who speak poor or no English. Now, while I believe that one should make an honest effort to learn the language, official or not, of ones' home country, a law that establishes English as an official language in a situation like this can only be targeted at the 30% of the population who are (mostly) Mexican.
I didn't say the law treated one race differently than another. I said it was racially MOTIVATED. And although those who support this law will deny it, as you have, there is no question in my mind that it is. In fact, I'm 100% certain that it is. And I almost never claim 100% certainty about anything. 99% yes, but 100% almost never.
Illegal immigration IS a problem. However, I think that there are two ways of dealing with the problem.
The first thing is that people come here, don't pay taxes, but reap social services. I'm not in support of that. We may be a nation of immigrants, but we are not a social services center for the world. So we need to do something about it, but we need to be realistic. We AREN'T going to stop them from coming, so we need to get them to pay taxes. And the way to do that is to 1) deny any social services to anyone over the age or 18 who is here without papers and 2) make it easier to get said papers and then insist that those people pay taxes.
This law is too heavy-handed and while I agree with the motivation behind it insofar as illegal immigration is concerned, I don't agree with the spirit that it clearly embodies.
We have a lot of Albanian immigrants here and, in spite of the fact that they don't speak English, they usually have a MUCH easier time of things than the Mexicans and other minority races. If you don't think that racism is alive and well then you have your head deeply shoved...somewhere.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
So this town, Hazleton, with a population of ( now I've seen a range of pop. estimates from 19 000 to 31 000 ) let's go with the 31 000, who's percentage of "immigrants" has risen from 5% to 30% in the past five years has apparently seen what could be construed as a population explosion.
Maybe they're not able to handle it. The figures seem to indicate an influx of what looks to me like 10 000 people over the past five years, and just where are those people living? Maybe Hazleton planned for, and constructed housing in expectation of a boom, or more likely, it's like the situation I had next door to me in an apartment building in downtown Vancouver. 15 Mexican illegals living in a one bedroom apartment.
This could be a clash of cultures issue as well as a financial issue. My Mexican neighbours deemed it acceptable to dispose of their garbage in the apt. complex hallway, Hey, maybe they do that in Mexico, but I sure wasn't used to it. Maybe I should open my mind to other cultures and just accept that my culture is going to be changed, problem is, I don't want to.
I liked my nice clean hallways, and the fact that all my other neighbours were living 1 or 2 people per apartment and didn't have late night screaming fights in Spanish ( or screaming fights at all )
Maybe my cultual conditioning is what caused me to have issues with the fact that these guys weren't paying their utility bills and cooking over,,,what ? I know they were cooking, I could smell it, and I saw the garbage. Maybe I should get over my fear of fires and just accept the Mexican way of doing things. I still don't want to.
Maybe the people of Hazleton don't want to compromise their lifestyle either, and i don't balme them for it. As an experiment it would be interesting to take 10 000 impoverished French Canadians ( just to ensure a language barrier ) and relocate them to a town on 20 000 in Mexico, illegally, just to see the reaction of those towns people.
Do you think they'd be happy with the situation? I don't.
So this town, Hazleton, with a population of ( now I've seen a range of pop. estimates from 19 000 to 31 000 ) let's go with the 31 000, who's percentage of "immigrants" has risen from 5% to 30% in the past five years has apparently seen what could be construed as a population explosion.
Maybe they're not able to handle it. The figures seem to indicate an influx of what looks to me like 10 000 people over the past five years, and just where are those people living? Maybe Hazleton planned for, and constructed housing in expectation of a boom, or more likely, it's like the situation I had next door to me in an apartment building in downtown Vancouver. 15 Mexican illegals living in a one bedroom apartment.
This could be a clash of cultures issue as well as a financial issue. My Mexican neighbours deemed it acceptable to dispose of their garbage in the apt. complex hallway, Hey, maybe they do that in Mexico, but I sure wasn't used to it. Maybe I should open my mind to other cultures and just accept that my culture is going to be changed, problem is, I don't want to.
I liked my nice clean hallways, and the fact that all my other neighbours were living 1 or 2 people per apartment and didn't have late night screaming fights in Spanish ( or screaming fights at all )
Maybe my cultual conditioning is what caused me to have issues with the fact that these guys weren't paying their utility bills and cooking over,,,what ? I know they were cooking, I could smell it, and I saw the garbage. Maybe I should get over my fear of fires and just accept the Mexican way of doing things. I still don't want to.
Maybe the people of Hazleton don't want to compromise their lifestyle either, and i don't balme them for it. As an experiment it would be interesting to take 10 000 impoverished French Canadians ( just to ensure a language barrier ) and relocate them to a town on 20 000 in Mexico, illegally, just to see the reaction of those towns people.
Do you think they'd be happy with the situation? I don't.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
It's a felony to illegally immigrate to Mexico. At least Hazleton isn't as racist as the Mexicans obviously are.
It's a felony to illegally immigrate to Mexico. At least Hazleton isn't as racist as the Mexicans obviously are.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Not only that, it's also illegal to do any type of work in Mexico, including renovations to any properties you might buy down there. My friends ( gringos) that bought a house to convert and run as a bed and breakfast found that out the hard way.
Not only that, it's also illegal to do any type of work in Mexico, including renovations to any properties you might buy down there. My friends ( gringos) that bought a house to convert and run as a bed and breakfast found that out the hard way.
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [immigration] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > moving to UK [2 replies]
- Forums > Saleable Skills? [10 replies]
- Forums > un-country-ish [24 replies]
- Forums > Immigration [55 replies]
- Forums > Immigration is the new Gay Marriage (US Politics) [69 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com