Well, unless they are creating chronic unemployment I don't see why not. I know that in Australia there is a big problem because most of the illegal immigrants have to pay up to $10,000 to get here. If they have that much money, why can't they come legally? Most people think that they come illegally because they have criminal records or something.
Unless you want a country without borders, you have to imply immigration laws that apply to social services, work, voting, et al. A country without borders breaks-up eventually, due to wide differences in culture. For us it's especially impossible, since like most economic leaders we'd be flooded if no immigration laws existed at all. I'm not for physically throwing anyone out unless they're criminal felonys (after they served their time). Actually I would like if these countries imprisoned people whom committed crimes here...if they were illegal....but I'm sure that's not going to happen. Without any real means of making money on steady terms, it's a lot more likely that people won't come nor will people stay.
if illegals dont get booted then why are they called illegals? obviously i think they shud get booted, and im not talking about US, im talking about illegals in any country even if its a illegal american in pakistan, then the illegal american shud get booted
YAY! MY choice is Winning! By the Way illegal immigrants do not respect the country they are in, if they are in it because they cant respect the laws Meaning Illegal= breaking the law
I didn't vote no or yes...but I lean-yes. I'm just don't think it work-out well to have that sort of stand-off.
I live in the United States in Arizona and there are alot of illegals here from Mexico. They risk there life to come over and are just looking for a better life. Vast majority of them seem like decent hard working people. I think they would make a nice addition to our melting pot if given the chance. I wish they would give them all amnesty but require that they register and go thru a program to gain citizenship.
I tend to flow along this line myself. I'll take an illegal alien who wants nothing more than to work hard and become a productive citizen over many a liberal I see with nothing but hatred and contempt for our country. Any day.
Even if 80% of new immigrants from latin america support democrats? They're not terrorists...and I would say the average person comes here for good reasons, but when does the law matter, and at what point of sacrifice do we revert to law....? It's not an easy thing either way. I believe bad things will come-out of either decision, and let me be clear...I don't like the situation we're in. I'd rather we'd enforce our laws in the first place and not be confronted with such a bigger issue.
That is tempting, but I can't say "no" because of someone's political leanings. At least not in this case. An immigrant's political views, no matter how much I despise where the democrap party has gone over the last ten years, shouldn't be part of the equation. The law matters very much. However, the problem has gotten so "out of hand" over the years, that I do not believe "laws" can effectively handle the problem in it's current state. I should take this opportunity to clarify my position here though. Personally, I'd rather stop not only illegal immigration, but legal immigration as well. I'm not particularly fond of either and could do without both. My comments above are a reflection of the broader problem we are facing with the illegal immigration from Mexico. I wrote about this once, a few months ago. It's a very complex issue. Basically my position was (and still is) that we have to address the issue first and stop the influx of illegals coming into our country. We have to address the issue of the millions already here. Simply rounding up millions of people and kicking them out won't work. Stop the problem first (at least reduce it, through fence building, through increased manpower on the border...whatever it takes, but it has to be addressed first. Here is the post I commented in: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=881026&postcount=12
Unsually strong integrity...good for you... I wouldn't use that as a main basis for it either. My view mostly based on the influx of uneducated individuals, and the effects that are rendered on culture, infrastructure, taxes, and simliar things of that nature. But I can't lie, that's at the back of my mind. I'm assuming you're saying the current laws can't. Generally I agree. Although I would say if the current Rico statues are interpeted in a way that allows lawyers to sue employees over hiring illegals, ...then that's more than enough to atleast stop newcomers. It's working it's way through the court as we speak. I believe it will pass as true. I don't like the method we take in legal immigration. I still believe we'll need it; just not as-is. It's overly bias to central america and sends far too many uneducated people here. Absolutely. I think we need to be more weary of whom we let in on visting, school, or work visa's. I believe half of the illegal immigrants come that way, and nearly all of the 9/11 assholes used our system to blend in. It truely is an extremely important issue on so many levels. I think the public fails to grasp this. I'm not for deportation, but I do believe workplace enforcement can work. I think it would be better if lawyers had reasonable right to sue those whom prove to be hiring illegals. I think if it doesn't pan-out in court, legislation making that firm law would be more than enough to stem new illegal immigration. Lawyers will have a field day... and are twice as effective than federal officials, which depend solely on the wind of the current admin. Thanks for your throrough response.
If they cant speaka the english, that sucks! i know people who cant get jobs inside of houston anymore because they cant speaka da tex mex.
I can only speak from my experience, in the restaurant industry. I have never outright asked somebody "are you here legally?" but I know many aren't. All the workers I have known (to a man) bust their tail day in and day out - pulling 2 or 3 jobs, working like dogs, all to better feed their families and provide for a better future. They do so without whining, which is more than I can say for many native-born confreres. In other words, they exemplify our putative American ideal. In my mind, I owe them nothing but my abiding respect.
This administration has done more to hurt this country than all the previous administrations combined. I'm sure there are bull queers in prison who think they're acting out of love as well. But the consequence of their "love" is the same either way, in the end(pun intended).
Its pretty amusing that that is actually a consideration in your head, also illegals can't vote, so are you against legal immigration too? Its pretty obvious that most Republicans , which recieve support from business owners who in turn want cheap labor. Maybe that is why nothing has been done about illegal immigration in the 6 years they have been in charge, and its pretty certain that nothing will done about it. Notice no moves have been made against employers, its probably the cheapest and effective way to stem illegals , to fine the hell out of employers, but yet it doesn't see to be happening. You know thats really admirable and all, but why should I have to pay in taxes, their social services etc. Whats in it for me?, that great you got a someone to wash dishes all day or whatever. But why should non-business owners have to foot the bill of the added expenses the illegals add?
The problem I see with prosecuting employers is: How does the employer find out if the ID and SS# are real, stolen, or faked? When we had guys give us all the information we asked for, then a year down the road SS would send a letter saying the SS# did not match the name we would ask for the person SS# and (knowing he had to be illegal) he would come up with a new card or say that SS was sending him a new one, etc.. and that is what we had to report to SS. Now do we fire the guy? Then the aclu would send lawyers to defend the guy and sue the crud out of the business and then what? It seems like the only way to enforce a law with employers is give them the ability to verify or to allow the fed's to verify and if found fraudulent come in and deport the guy and not sue the company. Now those companies that do not even get the ID and SS are probably not reporting wages and other things anyways, so sue them all you want.
I'll answer in second... I know illegals can't vote. Remember the whole unsaid reasoning behind 65's immigration legislation was votes (all liberal immigration has been about votes), and... still is with the desire to give them citizenship...plus expanded programs. Lincoln and the former republicans knew that if the south expanded slavery in to the western states the north would lose political clout...well, because slaves add representive to the state. It's no different today, as illegals add representives to states now-a-days. The democrats of yesterday and today are still after the same thing...cheap votes. I take it in consideration, because I don't want huge swings in the countries political perspective (over bullshit)....that just stinks of civil war. I like legal immigration, but I believe it must be different. 1)NO more family chain immigration ie if your not immediate family you have to wait in line 2)Set-up standards based on economic needs that are truely unfullfilled...focus on educated industries 3)Get rid of the lottery, and give honest consideration of all countries and people without preference to race 'Most' is not a good word for this situation. Close if your talking about the Senate Republicans, but absolutely false if you're talking about house republicans. 21 senate republicans betrayed their base by voting for the debacle of an idea led by McLame and Kennedy. In the house which is so much bigger, house republican were fairly one-sided on their beliefs to enforce the border first...then consider the rest later-on. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-4437 (92% of Republicans supporting, 82% of Democrats opposing.) Because of dumb entrenched senators. But the house did take their position on this.... HR4437 would have made it mandatory to 'verify workers' legal status through electronic means', and this would be reviewed by Congress one to two years after implementing. Right now that's an optional thing for employees...some do it, and others obviously don't. So I believe your generally wrong, because the above would likely be effective. The best thing for workplace enforcement is the combination of mandatory verfication and allowing employees or competitors the right to sue if they can prove a company is hiring illegals. A Rico statue concerning this is moving through the courts as we speak [refer to mohawk]. If the courts recognize the arguement made to support the Rico statues, then it would be extremely effective. Lawyers would have field day. I thought you didn't mind illegal immigration, ferret?...Am I incorrect in remembering it that way?