should we stop illegal immigration and even send those illegals already here back home?
Look at the crime,poverty,toll on precious natural resources.These people can get welfare,drivers' licences and other government services while not having paid taxes to them. I believe both parties,Demos and Repubs or pro immigration because they can get cheap labor or because they potentially represent future votersw of the democratic party.Wait a minute,what's the real difference between the two 'parties' anyhow,They don't represent the average americans anymore,if they ever really did in the first place.
- YakuzaLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
I agree that neither major party speaks for the American people. And I agree that the uncontrolled influx of illegal aliens must be stopped. The borders must be secured before anything else can be done. That's first and foremost on my agenda. secure our borders,then begin the deportations.
Legal immigrants are welcome but not illegal aliens.
Business interests are short-term. Easy immediate access to labor will always be preferred to the costs of training and capital investment for the longer term. In the nature of economic cycles, yesterday’s essential labor can often become, as the defunct factories and mills of Europe have shown, today’s unemployed. Employers who demanded cheap illegal alien labor are not held to account for this or required to contribute to subsequent costs of their unemployed former workers. Few things are more permanent that temporary worker from a poor country. If business were made responsible for the lifetime costs of their illegal alien labor in the same way as they must now deal with the lifetime environmental costs of their products, perhaps enthusiasm for cheap illegal alien labor might be moderated and make way for longer-term investment in capital-intensive restructuring.
- 1 decade ago
Okay, here is something for everyone to ponder on.
How Long Do We Have?
about the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote thenselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith
2. From spiritual faith to great courage
3. From courage to liberty
4. From liberty to abundance
5. From abundance to complacency
6. From complacency to apathy
7. From apathy to dependence
8. From dependence back into bondage
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St.Paul Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:
Number of States won by Gore:19; Bush:29
Square miles of land won by Gore:580,000; Bush:2,427,000
Population of counties won by Gore:127 million; Bush: 143 million.
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by Gore:13.2; Bush:2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase, with some 40% of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to 20 million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than 5 years. Apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
- RELv 71 decade ago
Here's a good editorial on the subject:
'Temporary is temporary' won't work for all immigrants
We need workers. Some will want to stay. We'll need to find a way to evaluate them for citizenship.
By Tamar Jacoby, TAMAR JACOBY, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, is launching a new nonprofit, Our Pledge, devoted to helping immigrants become Americans.
May 10, 2007
THE DEBATE about immigration reform is shifting dramatically, and with it the high-stakes negotiations between Democrats and Republicans that have been taking place for several weeks now in a backroom on Capitol Hill.
The good news: The fight over legalization, or "amnesty," is all but over. Even conservative Republicans intensely skeptical about a foreign influx are coming to understand that we as a nation can't solve the problem of illegal immigration without doing something about the 12 million illegal immigrants already here, and together they and Democrats are crafting a measure that would allow many of those workers to earn citizenship over time.
The not-so-good news: There is very little agreement among lawmakers about the much larger, more important issue of how to structure the immigration system going forward.
The system we have obviously does not work. Every year for years now, U.S. economic needs have drawn roughly 1.5 million foreigners — workers and their families — into the country. But we issue only about 1 million visas. It's as if we were making cars and had to import the steel, but our steel quotas provided only two-thirds of what we needed, and the other third had to be smuggled in for the economy to function at full capacity.
Illegal immigrants are merely a symptom. The real problem is the law that ignores the truth about our economic needs. And the critical question is whether Congress can own up to the reality of those needs and the real behavior of the foreign workers who come to meet them.
The last time legislators rewrote the immigration code, in 1986, they couldn't bring themselves to face the facts. They legalized that era's illegal population; they stipulated the need for a better, more realistic system and more effective enforcement. But they just couldn't bite the political bullet — explaining to voters why we needed to raise our quotas by 400,000 to 500,000 new visas a year.
This time around, Congress appears a little more intrepid, and many lawmakers — Democratic and Republican — recognize the need for additional visas. But under pressure from organized labor, some Democrats are resisting, determined to limit the increase to 200,000 new permits. And an equally unrealistic faction of Republicans, though willing to admit an extra 400,000 workers a year, is insisting that they stay only temporarily — that no matter how well they do in this country or what kind of roots they put down here, every single one of them must go home at the end of a three-year work stint.
These Republicans' mantra is "temporary is temporary," and the reasoning behind it isn't entirely wrong. Many unskilled Mexicans and Central Americans don't want to stay permanently. They work to build a nest egg and, after a few years, return home. That's good for the countries they go back to, and it safeguards us against the possibility of an economic downturn when we no longer need so many foreign workers.
But what about the foreigners who do so well here — rising up the economic ladder, putting down roots and falling in love with the United States — that they want to settle permanently and, like generations of immigrants before them, become citizens? We need a system that can accommodate them too.
One possible compromise: Allow foreign workers to enter on temporary visas, then use a point system to determine who can stay.
In fact, the Republicans in the backroom in Washington are considering a point system, but they want to apply it primarily to people waiting abroad for permanent visas. The problem with that idea? What can we determine about people waiting abroad beyond their skill and education level? Of course we need more doctors and computer scientists. But we also need farmhands and drywallers. And there's no real way to judge from afar how well either group will do here.
Far better to admit an array of temporary workers, skilled and unskilled, and then after a few years use a point system to screen them for permanent visas: a system that rewards not just skill and education but hard work, job advancement, abiding by the law, learning English, putting down roots and investing in your community — the things we want to see in U.S. citizens.
"Temporary is temporary" makes a good sound bite, but as a one-size-fits-all policy, it's not a workable answer. A system like that would deprive us of our most able, enterprising newcomers. Even worse, many of them probably would not go home when their work stints were done, but instead would burrow underground, creating another generation of illegal immigrants.
At some point, Congress is going to have to face the facts. Wouldn't it be better to do it now than wait another 10 or 20 years?Source(s): LA Times
- Anonymous4 years ago
not sufficient, in my view. we ought to have extra enforcement. We additionally ought to take a extra impregnable stand against employers that knowingly hire unlawful aliens. in case you want to do something very exciting on your debate, you ought to concentration on the states and cities around the U.S. that are making their own stricter regulations and regulations. the federal government isn't present day interior the day by day international of a few of those communities, and so community leaders are stepping it as much as make issues extra advantageous. i'm particular i'm forgetting lots of the examples, yet Hazleton PA, Oklahoma, and Oregon have all made steps in the direction of clarifying regulations and making issues extra stringent. possibly the particularly some different posters can record the particularly some others they could think of of.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
Yes we have to on both accounts. If parents are sent back and their kids are not then they should have thought about having children as illegal citizens before having them here in the US. If I commit a felony and go to prison no one is going to say "She's a mom so she is above the law." Mexico has the same opportunities as the US, heck they have the worlds second richest man and the worlds largest city, so they need to fix their own economy and quit forcing them out.
- skip742Lv 61 decade ago
Cut out the welfare, the freebies, the automatic citizenship, and offer jobs to immigrants who want to work and nothing else. The ones who still want to come sound like the type of people I want to invite. Then, I'm ok with it.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. America love it or leave it. Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. Leave it Now. Zero tolerance for immigration-law violators! No amnesty, no "stealth-amnesty." No "change of status," marriage fraud, "exceptional leave to remain," no "Temporary Protected Status." If you break the law, depart or be deported. Illegal aliens kill more US citizens each year than the war in Iraq has killed in four years. Apologists for illegal immigration like to paint it as a victimless crime. But in fact, illegal immigration causes substantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population--the poor, minorities, and children. Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees. Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America--crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland. Taxpayers are being forced to pay for the free health care, education, and other welfare programs being given to illegal aliens; Those tax dollars could be given back to U.S. taxpayers or used to keep our borders secure; They may be here illegally, but they sure know how to "work the system" to collect "free" medical care, "free" education, "free" food, Section 8 housing vouchers and other housing assistance, and hundreds of other social services. It costs citizens additional hundreds of billions of tax dollars at every level: local, state, and federal. It gobbles up billions of our charitable contributions. And much of that money ends up siphoned out of our economy and into offshore accounts. Illegal aliens, over half of whom work "under the table" with neither job nor income reported (nor taxed), are not counted as employed or unemployed. But some of those day-labor and off-the-books "job-lets" would be "real" jobs - available to American citizen job-seekers - if employment regulations were enforced. Illegal aliens can get away with tax evasion, et al., which citizens cannot. In short, we have too many workforce entrants and too few jobs created. The ratio works out to roughly 7-10 workforce entrants per job created. If all illegal aliens depart or are deported, all legal immigration halted, and all temporary employment visas abolished, we still have a problem with more US-born workforce entrants than new jobs created. Illegal immigration damages our country and our citizens every day at every level. And not even the attacks of 2/26 and 9/11 have awakened many Americans to the vast dangers illegal immigration poses to our selves, our families, our communities, our society, our values, our principles, our civilization. Zero Tolerance for Immigration-Law Violators! We must remember the lessons of 2/26, 9/11, and the costs we bear every single day. God Bless the U S A !
- 1 decade ago
I am so 100% with you about the parties not representing the "average joe" anymore. Most of them don't care about global warming because most of them get their money from owning gas. George bush doesn't care that gas has gone up by almost 40 cents and than 5 years ago you could fill up your tank with a 20 dollar bill. And its mostly his fault. Iran and Iraq have great sources of gasoline and now they refuze to trade with us. But i am not sure about the immigration part. Some imigrants work here and their boss does take money for tax. and some of them own homes, by getting their relitives social security, and they do pay taxes. And some of them have car insurance, But this is only 1 out of 100 imigrants. So I dont know what to say to that one because their is some very hard working immigrants in this counrty, but some are slackers that just wanna live off of our country.Source(s): My head.
- 1 decade ago
This is how we solve the problem. I think this whole foiled terrorist plot is going to light a fire under Bush's *** as far as doing something about stopping the flow of people across the border. I'm kinda glad that whole situation went down how it went down. I mean that is kinda scary knowing that if mexicans can sneak across the border, whose to say that can't be a pipeline for terrorists. This has opened alot of people's eyes.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
oops that was two
Have a great day and go home and watch The Sopranos