Immigration law

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

The vexing social problems are poverty and immigration. The overwhelming majority of undocumented workers who come here from Mexico do so because they are dirt poor and there is so little hope and opportunity in their home country to lift themselves out of poverty. That is why there is so huge a business in individual sending of money from the United States to Mexico: undocumented workers here are supporting their families back home. In many other cases, entire families come here -- for the same reason. This primary motivating factor for crossing our southern border is undeniable, and anyone who denies it -- whatever her or his political perspective -- cannot be taken seriously.

Ahh there's where I got confused. When I was talking about drug lords and gangs in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge you were talking about undocumented workers aka illegal immigrants. How silly of me, I should have known better. Yes, we all know that's why the every day run of the mill illegal immigrant are here. Not that that means we shouldn't try and keep illegal immigrants out. What does any of this have to do with closing down Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge to Americans?

Originally Posted by smc

I could write a long treatise on why Mexico is so poor, or -- more accurately -- why so many Mexicans are so poor (the nation itself is quite rich with natural resources). Suffice it to say here, in the interest of brevity, that the hand of the United States, over well more than a century of direct and indirect intervention, is all over today's Mexican reality.

Classic blame America rhetoric. With all of Mexico's abundant natural resources, the Mexican government had nothing to do with their poverty??

Originally Posted by smc

The question of "illegal immigration" poses a question of whether the United States wants to remain the beacon to the world it has always purported to be. The voices of reaction simplistically speak of militarizing the border, throwing people out, breaking up families, and so on. Many of these immigrants are hardworking people who contribute to the economy in a number of ways. Again, anyone who denies this fact cannot be taken seriously.

Yes, we have a system for bringing in LEGAL immigrants. And we would probably be able to bring in a lot more LEGAL immigrants if we weren't so overrun with illegal immigrants.

Originally Posted by smc

The reaction that is inherent in ridiculous statements such as Obama is "trying to change the demographics of the country".

I hope that is a ridiculous statement. The fact that Obama wanted to move the US Census under control of the White House and have it run by Acorn workers shouldn't lead one to think that. The fact that Obama canceled construction of a fence in Arizona despite the millions of illegals coming in there shouldn't lead one to think he's trying to change the demographics. The fact that he is asking the supreme court to over turn a state's ability to punish businesses who hire illegals shouldn't lead one to think that either.

That's why I'm bringing these things up here in this thread. Because looking at only his actions without hearing any of his reasoning, without giving him the benefit of the doubt, I think the only logical conclusion of his actions alone, is that he's trying to change the demographics of America. But I'm not hearing his reasons. And it's getting harder and harder to give him the benefit of the doubt when he consistently comes down on the side of letting illegals live and work here. So enlighten me. Have you or anyone else heard his reasons?

Originally Posted by smc

I mean, really, it is almost as ridiculous as the view that Obama wasn't born in the United States.

Uh, was that mentioned in this thread?

[Rachel]

Darn Tracy beat me to all the good comebacks! lol But lets call a Spade a Spade shall we SMC? They arent "undocumented workers" or any of the other politically correct niceties. They are Illegal Aliens. They are criminals.They didnt immigrate here. They entered the Country illegally. And they are a drain to our society not contributors. From all the free charity healthcare they get to local cities building shelters in muster zones. They dont pay taxes yet their children attend our schools.

[smc]

Originally Posted by Rachel

Darn Tracy beat me to all the good comebacks! lol But lets call a Spade a Spade shall we SMC? They arent "undocumented workers" or any of the other politically correct niceties. They are Illegal Aliens. They are criminals.They didnt immigrate here. They entered the Country illegally. And they are a drain to our society not contributors. From all the free charity healthcare they get to local cities building shelters in muster zones. They dont pay taxes yet their children attend our schools.

I am more afraid of living in an America where people who think as you write above -- reactionary, vitriolic, nativist, short-sighted, etc. -- are in charge than of living in a country overrun by the people you so easily belittle.

By the way, I use "undocumented worker" not as a PC nicety, but because I refuse to take the simplistic road of simply criminalizing behavior that has, at its root, the human yearning for a better life free of poverty and degradation.

It's so easy for we Americans to sit on our high horses, but I wonder what any of us would do were the tables turned. How about you, Rachel. I understand you have a gun. If your family was dirt poor, had no prospects for getting food, lived in rural Mexico and was subjected to all difficulties brought upon by gangs, murderers, and so on, might you pack them up and try to move somewhere safer and with more opportunity? Might you pick up that gun and use it (even "illegally)?

[Rachel]

Originally Posted by smc

I am more afraid of living in an America where people who think as you write above -- reactionary, vitriolic, nativist, short-sighted, etc. -- are in charge than of living in a country overrun by the people you so easily belittle.

By the way, I use "undocumented worker" not as a PC nicety, but because I refuse to take the simplistic road of simply criminalizing behavior that has, at its root, the human yearning for a better life free of poverty and degradation.

It's so easy for we Americans to sit on our high horses, but I wonder what any of us would do were the tables turned. How about you, Rachel. I understand you have a gun. If your family was dirt poor, had no prospects for getting food, lived in rural Mexico and was subjected to all difficulties brought upon by gangs, murderers, and so on, might you pack them up and try to move somewhere safer and with more opportunity? Might you pick up that gun and use it (even "illegally)?

Simplistic? I'm being real. Do we call car thieves autoless drivers? Let em do it the legal way as my grandparents did. And just WTF do my guns have to do with this conversation?

[smc]

Originally Posted by Rachel

Simplistic? I'm being real. Do we call car thieves autoless drivers? Let em do it the legal way as my grandparents did. And just WTF do my guns have to do with this conversation?

Rachel, I believe you are better than the answer "do we call car thieves autoless drivers?" I explained what I meant by "simplistic" in the full sentence, only a piece of which you respond to. It's about "criminalizing behavior" and the root of that behavior. At least reply to what I actually wrote. It's so easy to pull out a few words and pretend the rest are not there.

As for the "gun," I wrote quite specifically, using it as an analogy to the question of doing something "illegally." I refuse to believe you didn't see it, so I must assume that your question about what your "guns have to do with this conversation" is a rhetorical device. Unfortunately, it's the same as before: pull out a few words and pretend the rest are not there.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Rachel

Simplistic? I'm being real. Do we call car thieves autoless drivers? Let em do it the legal way as my grandparents did. And just WTF do my guns have to do with this conversation?

Hey, don't be hard on autoless drivers. They have vexing social problems to deal with.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by Rachel

Darn Tracy beat me to all the good comebacks! lol But lets call a Spade a Spade shall we SMC? They aren't "undocumented workers" or any of the other politically correct niceties. They are Illegal Aliens. They are criminals.They didn't immigrate here. They entered the Country illegally. And they are a drain to our society not contributors. From all the free charity health care they get to local cities building shelters in muster zones. They don't pay taxes yet their children attend our schools.

Tracy, you are absolutely right, they are illegal aliens. You are wrong about the taxes. They come up here to work to support their families. They obtain fake documentation and are hired as if they were legal. Income taxes and SS taxes are deducted from their paychecks. They do jobs that spoiled Americans are unwilling to do. They clean motel rooms, wash dishes, pick fruit, hoe weeds and raise our crops. These are essential services and alien workers do it cheaply and without complaining. The main problem is they bring their families up here. The wife and children put a strain on public services, health care, schools and housing.
My agricultural company could not have survived without these hardworking guys from Mexico and Guatemala willing to work nine hours a day six days a week for a modest wage.
We cannot stop them from coming up here. What needs to be done is once they have a job, give them a work permit that allows them to legally travel back and forth to Mexico so they can leave their families there where it is much cheaper for them to live.

Unfortunately, our political system is so fucked up, the situation will never be resolved.

[GRH]

Originally Posted by randolph

Tracy, you are absolutely right, they are illegal aliens. You are wrong about the taxes. They come up here to work to support their families. They obtain fake documentation and are hired as if they were legal. Income taxes and SS taxes are deducted from their paychecks. They do jobs that spoiled Americans are unwilling to do. They clean motel rooms, wash dishes, pick fruit, hoe weeds and raise our crops.

I'm unemployed right now and I would GLADLY perform any of these duties without complaint, to support MY LEGAL family. My only stipulation would be to make the federal/state minimum wage...Which in MY experience, most immigrant workers demanded more than that (typically $10/hour). And I'd pay the taxes and SS too, without attributing it to a false set of papers. Why should some damn illegal get work that I'm willling to do first?

These are essential services and alien workers do it cheaply and without complaining. The main problem is they bring their families up here. The wife and children put a strain on public services, health care, schools and housing.

And my spouse and family pay our taxes, we have health insurance, etc., etc. We are not the drain on the system that the illegal family is. So once again, why should an illegal get my job?

My agricultural company could not have survived without these hardworking guys from Mexico and Guatemala willing to work nine hours a day six days a week for a modest wage.

Personally, I'd LOVE to make it utterly impossible for you to survive with them. If it were my call, we'd regularly screen companies for illegal workers (and we'd make it easier for employers to screen their workforce). If you were caught with just one illegal on your payroll, you'd be fined $10,000 and a subsequent fine of $10,000 for every other illegal caught on your audited payroll. Too many strikes, and just like a person, your corporate personhood would be sent away for life for breaking the law too many times. In short, your corporation would be dissolved and liquidated and sold to the highest bidder.

We cannot stop them from coming up here. What needs to be done is once they have a job, give them a work permit that allows them to legally travel back and forth to Mexico so they can leave their families there where it is much cheaper for them to live.

Wrong, we should make work IMPOSSIBLE for them to obtain, so they crawl their way back across the border and make due with what opportunities they can get from where they came from.

Unfortunately, our political system is so fucked up, the situation will never be resolved.

THIS, I completely agree with. I don't look for your solutions, mine, or ANYONE who has sensible solutions to ever have them actually implemented.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by GRH

I'm unemployed right now and I would GLADLY perform any of these duties without complaint, to support MY LEGAL family. My only stipulation would be to make the federal/state minimum wage...Which in MY experience, most immigrant workers demanded more than that (typically $10/hour). And I'd pay the taxes and SS too, without attributing it to a false set of papers. Why should some damn illegal get work that I'm willling to do first?




And my spouse and family pay our taxes, we have health insurance, etc., etc. We are not the drain on the system that the illegal family is. So once again, why should an illegal get my job?



Personally, I'd LOVE to make it utterly impossible for you to survive with them. If it were my call, we'd regularly screen companies for illegal workers (and we'd make it easier for employers to screen their workforce). If you were caught with just one illegal on your payroll, you'd be fined $10,000 and a subsequent fine of $10,000 for every other illegal caught on your audited payroll. Too many strikes, and just like a person, your corporate personhood would be sent away for life for breaking the law too many times. In short, your corporation would be dissolved and liquidated and sold to the highest bidder.



Wrong, we should make work IMPOSSIBLE for them to obtain, so they crawl their way back across the border and make due with what opportunities they can get from where they came from.



THIS, I completely agree with. I don't look for your solutions, mine, or ANYONE who has sensible solutions to ever have them actually implemented.

Believe me, I would have been delighted to hire someone like you. I tried the employment department, job retrainmnent agencies and even private employment agencies. Some would come to work for a week or two and then leave. I am very sorry for your predicament, so many are in it.

In California, unemployment could be mostly eliminated by a simple law, do what Oregon does, require a gas station attendant to fill the tank. This could tide many over until they found a better job.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by GRH

Personally, I'd LOVE to make it utterly impossible for you to survive with them. If it were my call, we'd regularly screen companies for illegal workers (and we'd make it easier for employers to screen their workforce). If you were caught with just one illegal on your payroll, you'd be fined $10,000 and a subsequent fine of $10,000 for every other illegal caught on your audited payroll. Too many strikes, and just like a person, your corporate personhood would be sent away for life for breaking the law too many times. In short, your corporation would be dissolved and liquidated and sold to the highest bidder.

Originally Posted by Rachel

I called for the idea of the .50 cal fence one every half mile will cover the border. We are supposed to be at war arent we?

When I become president I have positions for both of you. (Double entendre intentional)

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

When I become president I have positions for both of you. (Double entendre intentional)

You probably need to be governor of Arizona first. Lots of support there.
Mexican babies born here? Just through them across the border. Who cares, they would make good coyote bait.

[Rachel]

20 years ago there was a fish market/restaurant in town. the best ever. Was a family owned place that was there when my dad was a kid. All of a sudden he's closed up. Boarded up. He had 10 illegals working for him and they shut him down. My how times have changed. Now the problem is ignored and towns are bending over backward to appease this group of criminals. Wasting taxpayers money building shelters in muster zones. Hmm they built it 4 miles away in the industrial park where no one goes at a cost of 144 thousand. What a waste of the citizens money.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Ahh there's where I got confused. When I was talking about drug lords and gangs in the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge you were talking about undocumented workers aka illegal immigrants. How silly of me, I should have known better. Yes, we all know that's why the every day run of the mill illegal immigrant are here. Not that that means we shouldn't try and keep illegal immigrants out. What does any of this have to do with closing down Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge to Americans?

Classic blame America rhetoric. With all of Mexico's abundant natural resources, the Mexican government had nothing to do with their poverty??

Yes, we have a system for bringing in LEGAL immigrants. And we would probably be able to bring in a lot more LEGAL immigrants if we weren't so overrun with illegal immigrants.

I hope that is a ridiculous statement. The fact that Obama wanted to move the US Census under control of the White House and have it run by Acorn workers shouldn't lead one to think that. The fact that Obama canceled construction of a fence in Arizona despite the millions of illegals coming in there shouldn't lead one to think he's trying to change the demographics. The fact that he is asking the supreme court to over turn a state's ability to punish businesses who hire illegals shouldn't lead one to think that either.

That's why I'm bringing these things up here in this thread. Because looking at only his actions without hearing any of his reasoning, without giving him the benefit of the doubt, I think the only logical conclusion of his actions alone, is that he's trying to change the demographics of America. But I'm not hearing his reasons. And it's getting harder and harder to give him the benefit of the doubt when he consistently comes down on the side of letting illegals live and work here. So enlighten me. Have you or anyone else heard his reasons?

Uh, was that mentioned in this thread?

Many posts ago, Tracy, I suggested that you might be a "master sophist" and encouraged you to look up the word. I don't suspect you did.

In ancient Greece, there was a class of teachers who dealt with philosophy, rhetoric, and politics, and who mastered the "art" of using fallacious but plausible reasoning.

I grow exhausted by your sophistry. You either pretend not to understand how argument works or really do not, but in either case you keep ascribing either explicit or implicit statements or intents to your opponent. Any mention of anything in the argument by your opponent is subjected to the scrutiny of whether it was mentioned previously (this is only relevant if someone actually says you said something and then takes it on; otherwise, in argument one certainly has the right to raise analogous statements, references, etc., so long as it is done fairly). You change the goalposts of the discussion, and you bring in early referents as if they were the most recent subjects of the rhetoric.

I am so exhausted by having to spend time discussing how you argue, rather than only the substance of your points. Were you a student in my university rhetoric class, I would put you on "probation" and get you some tutoring, and that would be irrespective of your positions on any subject. It would be about how to argue.

You can read what I wrote just above and declare victory if you wish, but remember that there are many kinds of victories. If you simply exhaust your opponent with sophistry, as the early Sophists learned, yours may indeed be a Pyrrhic victory for your position in the end.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

Many posts ago, Tracy, I suggested that you might be a "master sophist" and encouraged you to look up the word. I don't suspect you did.

In ancient Greece, there was a class of teachers who dealt with philosophy, rhetoric, and politics, and who mastered the "art" of using fallacious but plausible reasoning.

I grow exhausted by your sophistry. You either pretend not to understand how argument works or really do not, but in either case you keep ascribing either explicit or implicit statements or intents to your opponent. Any mention of anything in the argument by your opponent is subjected to the scrutiny of whether it was mentioned previously (this is only relevant if someone actually says you said something and then takes it on; otherwise, in argument one certainly has the right to raise analogous statements, references, etc., so long as it is done fairly). You change the goalposts of the discussion, and you bring in early referents as if they were the most recent subjects of the rhetoric.

I am so exhausted by having to spend time discussing how you argue, rather than only the substance of your points. Were you a student in my university rhetoric class, I would put you on "probation" and get you some tutoring, and that would be irrespective of your positions on any subject. It would be about how to argue.

You can read what I wrote just above and declare victory if you wish, but remember that there are many kinds of victories. If you simply exhaust your opponent with sophistry, as the early Sophists learned, yours may indeed be a Pyrrhic victory for your position in the end.

LOL keep your red herrings to yourself. I believe the technical term for your type of response is a DODGE. You didn't answer any of my questions.

What does

Originally Posted by smc

The vexing social problems are poverty and immigration. The overwhelming majority of undocumented workers who come here from Mexico do so because they are dirt poor and there is so little hope and opportunity in their home country to lift themselves out of poverty. That is why there is so huge a business in individual sending of money from the United States to Mexico: undocumented workers here are supporting their families back home. In many other cases, entire families come here -- for the same reason. This primary motivating factor for crossing our southern border is undeniable

have to do with closing down Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge to Americans?

Did the actions and policies of the Mexican government have nothing to do with the country's poverty??

And did anyone in this thread accuse Obama of not being born in the US?

I only ask because if you wouldn't want someone to

Originally Posted by smc

bring in early referents as if they were the most recent subjects of the rhetoric.

you probably wouldn't want someone to refer to something that wasn't even said.

Originally Posted by randolph

Tracy, you are absolutely right, they are illegal aliens. You are wrong about the taxes.

Thanks, but Rachel wrote that Although I doubt income tax and SS is deducted from their pay checks. They don't have SS numbers and companies usually don't report their illegal workers.

Originally Posted by randolph

My agricultural company could not have survived without these hardworking guys from Mexico and Guatemala willing to work nine hours a day six days a week for a modest wage.
We cannot stop them from coming up here. What needs to be done is once they have a job, give them a work permit that allows them to legally travel back and forth to Mexico so they can leave their families there where it is much cheaper for them to live.

I think the work permit is a slippery slop to amnesty or will lead to problems with 3rd class citizens.

Mexicans are hard workers. But if there weren't illegals here the hard work would still get done. It would have to or else we wouldn't be too good to do the work. Our society would fall apart. We would be poor, and then willing to do the hard work. I don't want this to come back and bite us in the butt like slavery did. People used the same arguments about slaves. "They do the work no one else will do".

Well it's time we all do the hard work.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

LOL keep your red herrings to yourself. I believe the technical term for your type of response is a DODGE. You didn't answer any of my questions.

What does

have to do with closing down Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge to Americans?

Did the actions and policies of the Mexican government have nothing to do with the country's poverty??

And did anyone in this thread accuse Obama of not being born in the US?

I only ask because if you wouldn't want someone to you probably wouldn't want someone to refer to something that wasn't even said.

How convenient for you to have come up with the idea of the dodge. It allows you to avoid the issues of your fallacious way or arguing that I've raised. So, anyone who reads from the beginning might not realize that you are, in fact, the dodger.

Be that as it may, your questions:

Buenos Aires -- what does this have to do with anything? You raised it in a post recently with no connection to anything. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that it was a rhetorical device, inexplicable as it may be. Instead, should I point out that you are now guilty of bringing things up no one ever spoke of before in the thread (something you seem to feel is universally invalid)?

Mexican government -- if you had read my previous posts fully (complete reading does not seem to be part of your M.O. in this discussion), you would see that I already ascribed to the Mexican government blame. I also pinned the blame on the U.S. government for propping up a bad Mexican government.

Obama's birth -- here's where you illustrate that you don't fully read. I wrote: "I mean, really, it is almost as ridiculous as the view that Obama wasn't born in the United States." In other words, I used it to illustrate another point. I didn't ascribe the view to you. I didn't put words in your mouth. I didn't say anyone had said this. I used it to illustrate my point.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

How convenient for you to have come up with the idea of the dodge. It allows you to avoid the issues of your fallacious way or arguing that I've raised. So, anyone who reads from the beginning might not realize that you are, in fact, the dodger.

I'm dodging because I didn't respond to your dodge? Just stay on the subject.

Originally Posted by smc

Buenos Aires -- what does this have to do with anything? You raised it in a post recently with no connection to anything. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that it was a rhetorical device, inexplicable as it may be.

"if you had read my previous posts fully (complete reading does not seem to be part of your M.O. in this discussion)" I brought it up because it was news that broke that day relevant to illegal immigrants in Arizona. I posted a link to the news story as well.

Originally Posted by smc

Mexican government -- if you had read my previous posts fully (complete reading does not seem to be part of your M.O. in this discussion), you would see that I already ascribed to the Mexican government blame. I also pinned the blame on the U.S. government for propping up a bad Mexican government.

I'm glad to see you give the Mexican govt the blame. I still don't see it above though.

And back to the other subject that you dodged with the fallacy of appeal to ridicule:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

That's why I'm bringing these things up here in this thread. Because looking at only his actions without hearing any of his reasoning, without giving him the benefit of the doubt, I think the only logical conclusion of his actions alone, is that he's trying to change the demographics of America. But I'm not hearing his reasons. And it's getting harder and harder to give him the benefit of the doubt when he consistently comes down on the side of letting illegals live and work here. So enlighten me. Have you or anyone else heard his reasons?

[randolph]

Tracy- "Thanks, but Rachel wrote that Although I doubt income tax and SS is deducted from their pay checks. They don't have SS numbers and companies usually don't report their illegal workers."

Sorry Tracy, you are wrong there. Most "illegals" have documents (possibly fake) that appear genuine. The employer has no available means to determine authenticity and is not required to investigate. The forms that are filled out when they are hired require several forms of ID. SS and IRS are deducted from their paychecks. I know because I signed the checks. The one case where SS Admin. questioned one of our employees SS, it turns out he was legal and some one had stolen his SS.
Since the funds, SS and IRS, deducted from "illegal" workers checks, end up not being "claimed" by the worker, the money is gravy for the government. Neither the SS Admin or the IRS ever checked the legality of our workers.

[ila]

This thread has deteriorated into a ?he said, she said, they said, we said? discussion. It?s time to get it back on track.

Since the humans first appeared on Earth there has been a constant movement from one place to another. That is how the complete globe has become populated. And no, Randolph, there is no proof that Cro-Magnon man pushed the Neanderthals out of Europe or were even responsible for the extinction of Neanderthals.

The US is not the only country that has experienced a lot of immigration recently. All of the Americas were settled by migration, albeit a process that started during the last ice age. As well Oceania, Europe, and parts of Africa have experienced a lot of immigration.

Documentation of immigrants has only been required for within the last couple of hundred years. If one cares to go back in history the first European immigrants to the Americas did not require any kind of documentation. Nor were there any laws restricting immigration, no prerequisites, and no quotas. Illegal immigration is merely a bureaucratic invention designed to control what humans have been doing for a couple of hundred thousand years.

Now, take the discussion from this point and keep it civil.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Sorry Tracy, you are wrong there. Most "illegals" have documents (possibly fake) that appear genuine.

Well that's lovely