jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (172 posts)

Who supports illegal immigration?

  1. Ericdierker profile image81
    Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago

    I cannot find a group that supports illegal immigration. Yet we cannot stop it. Now that is pathetic.
    So we must conclude that without saying it, some - many in America support it and do what they can to stop control of it. It would seem that this should be a target for midterm elections. Who does what they can to stop control of illegal immigration?

    Whoa Now!! My wife is a legal immigrant. My question goes only to what are rightfully called illegals. And I do not reference asylum seekers -- that is a different category and they are in the system. (got here illegally because of life or death)

    Is someone keeping a roll call from Congress to show who supports illegal immigration? If not why not? Let us out the treasonous dogs for what they are in fact.

    1. Perspycacious profile image74
      Perspycaciousposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I loved the comment on another site by an American Indian who basically said "that's what happened to us!"  Politicians anxious not to upset the portion of their base which is made up of formerly illegal aliens who have received amnesty in the past and are now voters, those politicians support amnesty programs.  That same group of former illegals want such programs to grant amnesty to their incoming illegals, on the basis I guess of "what was great for me is good for them."  And, those who pay under the table, taking nothing out for taxes and social security, think they have a good thing going and support the idea of "the more (illegals) the merrier", being as they are illegally, law-breaking citizens or illegal immigrants employing illegal workers.

      There is the story of a legal immigrant who couldn't get the job he wanted because he was a legal immigrant, so he had to send to relatives in the country he had come from for clothes that would allow him to impersonate an illegal alien and get the job he wanted.  Then he had to keep up his masquerade to keep the job!

      The illegals who won't have agricultural jobs in California this year and next, due to the sustained droughts there, will be looking for jobs in other parts of the country and other types of jobs to sustain themselves and their families.  Weakened American worker unions can still rival those workers when they start to feel the pinch, and you can bet they will.  Maybe then something will pinch the politicians into enforcing the laws they once swore to uphold.  Then again, maybe not.

      1. Ericdierker profile image81
        Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I think we need to accept that an immigrant -- any kind, from the 1970's is different from an immigrant today, any kind. Same for 1870's.

        1. gmwilliams profile image85
          gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 in agreement.

    2. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The bigger question should be what role have we played in creating such a situation? Sure it is easy to point a finger at these people and declare them law breakers but what conditions created this crisis? If you look back into history US corporations went to Central and South America to get fruit and other products for sale in the US. They bought massive amounts of land at pennies on the dollar (kind of reminds me of the early settlers who bought land from the Native Americans with only trinkets) and hired these people to farm what we wanted. Low and behold we placed dictators in place of their leaders which were not much better but now we had a friend or so we thought. Meanwhile the drug culture in the US exploded in the seventies and in the eighties and cocaine became a monster obsession for our youth. Heroin from the middle east was also a major import. Monsters like Manuel Noriega became drug lords and the major export to the US from Panama became cocaine facilitated by Columbia and other neighboring countries. The drug culture took over until you now have cartels exploiting the people with lawlessness and violence. The only jobs worth having are in the drug trade fueled by Americas insatiable demand for drugs. The US throws lots of money at these people in a so called drug war where the enforcers are many times the dealers. What are the local people to do when their country is over run with this culture of violence. Go north and hopefully get a little piece on the run from ICE and at least have a little safety that is not available in their own countries.

      What can we do to end the cycle and not contribute to it?

      1. Ericdierker profile image81
        Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Excellent piece of writing and historical basis. Thank you. And I have seen asylum cases succeed based exactly on what you are talking about, without the blame being placed back here. What goes around, comes around.
        And I think this justifies illegal entry to a large degree. But then they must file for asylum.
        (generally the difference between asylum and refugee status is that in asylum they have already reached our shores)

      2. 60
        retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I haven't played any role in illegals coming here, your President has.

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I was checking. Illegals do effect me negatively. And I do not do drugs. So I must be an innocent victim.

          1. 60
            retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Indeed.

        2. rhamson profile image76
          rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The island nation of Retief2000 has not played a role in all of this? Do you vote? Do you eat at restaurants that use illegal immigrant labor? How about the house you live in? Was it all legal labor that built it? Guess what, my President happens to be yours too!

          Have you done anything positive with regards to examining how your party (I assume you are a republican from past candor about the leftist democrats you hate so much) can put a candidate in place who appeals to all of America? What can you do to pull people together to vote for the good of the country rather than spew hatred and disgust over the current conditions?

          1. Ericdierker profile image81
            Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Nope that argument does not cut it at all. Yes we breathe air and use automobiles.

            1. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              A big? Huh?

          2. 60
            retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            1) I do not vote for any candidate who supports illegal immigration
            2) It is already illegal to hire illegal aliens. It is illegal to provide false documents when being hired. It is illegal to provide an illegal alien with false legal documents.
                   THERERFORE, if someone is working at a job that with holds taxes then the reasonable expectation is that they are doing so legally - - -
                    That is if the EXECUTIVE branch is discharging its responsibilities and enforcing immigration law.
            3) My home was built in 1963. That was when there were no jobs Americans would not do and no government reward for sloth.
            4) My President loves America, my pretend president is Barack Obama.

            As for the good of the country, what country. America is finished.

            1. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              ....1) I do not vote for any candidate who supports illegal immigration

              So you do vote. Guess what your guy lost. Can you think of anything that could be done to perhaps find a solution rather than picking a silver bullet scenario (a one move magical answer to fix the problem).

              ....2) It is already illegal to hire illegal aliens. It is illegal to provide false documents when being hired. It is illegal to provide an illegal alien with false legal documents.
                     THERERFORE, if someone is working at a job that with holds taxes then the reasonable expectation is that they are doing so legally - - -
                      That is if the EXECUTIVE branch is discharging its responsibilities and enforcing immigration law.

              Let me see? Is this a machination of the current administration or has it happened to other administrations? O yeah there was that "W" fellow who was about as forthright as a squid in a gill net. What are you talking about? Obama can't do a thing about it with this slimy congress anymore than the revered Bush.

              ....3) My home was built in 1963. That was when there were no jobs Americans would not do and no government reward for sloth.

              Good for you! I built my own home myself in 1984. A little hard work went a long way for me. Unfortunately with some, many are unable to buy homes due to the mortgage crisis and many are turning to apartments and condominiums. That is being handled by big construction where the hiring of illegal labor is notoriously rampant.

              ....4) My President loves America, my pretend president is Barack Obama.

              Pray tell who is the "real" president in your eyes?

              ....As for the good of the country, what country. America is finished.

              I think you are onto something here. I don't think America will ever be the same as long as we avoid the problems.

              1. 60
                retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                HERE IS THE PROBLEM!







                You are completely and absolutely wrong and you will never acknowledge it.
                Barack Obama is TH President of the United States
                THE chief executive
                THE chief enforcer and executor of the law
                THE entire branch of government -THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
                THE entire mechanism of federal law enforcement is at his command

                He is the Executive who Commands the following.
                United States Department of State (DOS)
                Bureau of Diplomatic Security
                Diplomatic Security Service (DSS)
                United States Department of the Treasury[edit]
                Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigations Division (IRS-CID)
                Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)
                United States Mint Police (USMP)
                United States Treasury Police – merged into the US Secret Service Uniformed Division in 1986.
                United States Department of Defense (DOD)[edit]
                Defense Criminal Investigative Service(DCIS)
                Pentagon Force Protection Agency
                Department of the Army

                United States Army Criminal Investigation Division (Army CID)
                United States Army Military Police Corps
                Department of the Air Force

                Air Force Office of Special Investigations (Airforce OSI)
                Air Force Security Forces
                Department of the Air Force Police
                Department of the Navy

                Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)
                Office of Naval Intelligence Police (ONI Police)
                Marine Corps Provost Marshal's Office
                United States Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division (USMC CID)
                National Security Agency

                National Security Agency Police (NSA Police)
                United States Department of Justice (DOJ)[edit]
                Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF)
                Drug Enforcement Administration (since 1973)
                Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (1968–73)
                Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1930–68)
                Bureau of Prohibition (1927–33)
                Bureau of Drug Abuse Control (1966–68)
                Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
                Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
                United States Marshals Service (USMS)
                United States Department of the Interior (USDI)[edit]
                Bureau of Indian Affairs Police
                Bureau of Land Management Office of Law Enforcement & Security
                National Park Service
                National Park Rangers
                United States Park Police
                U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement
                United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)[edit]
                U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement and Investigations
                Office of Inspector General
                United States Department of Commerce (DOC)[edit]
                National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Office for Law Enforcement
                United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)[edit]
                Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
                Office of Criminal Investigations
                United States Department of Education (ED)[edit]
                Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
                United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)[edit]
                United States Department of Veterans Affairs Police
                United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS)[edit]
                Federal Protective Service (FPS)
                U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
                Coast Guard Police (CGPD)
                Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS)
                U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
                U.S. Secret Service (USSS)
                Other Major Federal Law Enforcement Agencies[edit]
                Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
                Security Protective Service (SPS)
                Federal Reserve Police
                Library of Congress Police
                Smithsonian National Zoological Park Police
                United States Capitol Police (USCP)
                United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS)
                United States Probation Service (USPO)
                United States Supreme Court Police


                CONGRESS CAN DO NOTHING TO STOP HIM FOR ENFORCING THE EXISTING LAWS OF THE COUNTRY - NOTHING. HE HAS RESPONSIBILITIES HE REFUSES TO DISCHARGE. YOU WILL NEVER SEE IT!!!!!!!!!

              2. 60
                retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                HERE IS THE PROBLEM!


                -
                -
                You are completely and absolutely wrong and you will never acknowledge it.
                Barack Obama is THE President of the United States
                THE chief executive
                THEchief enforcer and executor of the law
                THEentire branch of government -THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
                THE entire mechanism of federal law enforcement is at his command

                He is THE Executive who COMMANDS the following Executive Departments and the accompanying LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES:
                United States Department of State (DOS)
                Bureau of Diplomatic Security
                Diplomatic Security Service (DSS)
                United States Department of the Treasury[edit]
                Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigations Division (IRS-CID)
                Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)
                United States Mint Police (USMP)

                United States Department of Defense (DOD)
                Defense Criminal Investigative Service(DCIS)
                Pentagon Force Protection Agency

                Department of the Army
                United States Army Criminal Investigation Division (Army CID)
                United States Army Military Police Corps

                Department of the Air Force
                Air Force Office of Special Investigations (Airforce OSI)
                Air Force Security Forces
                Department of the Air Force Police

                Department of the Navy
                Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)
                Office of Naval Intelligence Police (ONI Police)
                Marine Corps Provost Marshal's Office
                United States Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division (USMC CID)

                National Security Agency
                National Security Agency Police (NSA Police)

                United States Department of Justice (DOJ)
                Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF)
                Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
                Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
                Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
                United States Marshals Service (USMS)

                United States Department of the Interior (USDI)
                Bureau of Indian Affairs Police
                Bureau of Land Management Office of Law Enforcement & Security
                National Park Service
                National Park Rangers
                United States Park Police
                U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement

                United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
                U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement and Investigations
                Office of Inspector General

                United States Department of Commerce (DOC)
                National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Office for Law Enforcement
                United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
                Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
                Office of Criminal Investigations

                United States Department of Education (ED)
                Office of the Inspector General (OIG)

                United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
                United States Department of Veterans Affairs Police

                United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
                Federal Protective Service (FPS)
                U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
                Coast Guard Police (CGPD)
                Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS)
                U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
                U.S. Secret Service (USSS)

                Other Major Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
                Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
                Security Protective Service (SPS)
                Federal Reserve Police
                Library of Congress Police
                Smithsonian National Zoological Park Police
                United States Capitol Police (USCP)
                United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS)
                United States Probation Service (USPO)
                United States Supreme Court Police


                CONGRESS CAN DO NOTHING TO KEEP HIM FROM ENFORCING THE EXISTING LAWS OF THE COUNTRY - NOTHING. HE HAS RESPONSIBILITIES HE REFUSES TO DISCHARGE. YOU WILL NEVER SEE IT!!!!!!!!!

                Lefties don't live in reality. Obama is not impotent, nor impeded. He is committed.

                1. rhamson profile image76
                  rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Maybe even bigger letters the next time will make your points true. If I did not know better I would swear you believe I am a liberal. I wonder if "W" thought that when he got my vote twice during his presidency.

                  Don't be a tool. smile

                  1. 60
                    retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Yet you still think the problem is Congress when Obama refuses to enforce the law OR makes it all up on the fly.

                2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Howdy Retief. Nice to exchange views with you once more.

                  Let me see now. “CONGRESS CAN DO NOTHING…Lefties don’t live in reality.”

                  Wrong on both points. According to your posts, you are among the few who still deny what is actually happening in this country.

                  Nearly 80% of Americans, including Republicans by the way, believe their representatives in Congress are NOT the best persons for the job. Wow, in March that number was 78% and it continues to climb. In November 2009, only 67% of Americans felt that way.

                  No wonder you feel you have to shout in uppercase to get people to believe you. Your posts are disconnected from the realities on the American political landscape and from the real sentiments of the American public.

                  About 75% of voters believe their representatives do NOT deserve to be reelected or they are otherwise wavering and undecided. Wow! That ratio was 71% in March and it too is a new high. In November 2009, 58% felt this way.

                  So, tell us again in upper-upper-uppercase this time why the Congress is not part of the problem. Or, did you not vote for your congressional delegation either?

                  “In fact, only 14% of voters think most members of Congress care what their constituents think, and only slightly more (21%) believe their congressional representative cares what they think. These numbers, too, have been trending down over the last four-and-a-half years and are now at new lows.” {1}

                  When rhamson wrote:
                  “Obama can't do a thing about it with this slimy congress anymore than the revered Bush.”

                  Your smug reply was:
                  “You are completely and absolutely wrong and you will never acknowledge it.”

                  Well, it seems three-fourths of the US electorate agrees with rhamson while your posts, obviously, are not only out of touch with reality but they deny reality even exists.

                  I thank you again, Retief, for your many contributions. All, except for the uppercase rants, are appreciated.
                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
                  {1} http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ … erformance

                  1. 60
                    retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Is the President of the United States responsible for the execution of existing laws? If the answer is yes, then what can Congress do to prevent him from enforcing those laws? Apparently entering into the conversation in the middle can create a great deal of confusion for you. Perhaps going to the beginning and then commenting may help. little transpires at the border of the United States that is outside the legal, Constitutionally charged responsibilities of the President. This President is openly ignoring those responsibilities.

                    Rhansom contradicted without understanding, thus the chastisement. Excuses are constantly made for Obama's ineffectiveness in fulfilling the responsibilities that are his alone. Responsibilities over which Congress has little control once a law has been passed. This is ably demonstrated by Obama himself and his refusal to take the current border crisis in hand. It is also demonstrated by his use of Executive Orders to do as he chooses, without Congress. Blaming Congress is merely excuse making.

                    Do we now define that which is real by polling results?

                    Apparently one of the great transformations in America is that the "Buck" no longer "Stops" in the Oval Office.

                3. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Good evening, Retief.

                  I will review a few documented facts with you that may have escaped from your reality.

                  In an uppercase rant, you shouted the following: “HE HAS RESPONSIBILITIES HE REFUSES TO DISCHARGE. YOU WILL NEVER SEE IT!!!!!!!!!”

                  The president of the National Council of La Raza, Janet Murguía, criticized President Obama’s immigration policies by calling him the "deporter in chief." While you may have missed reading her quotes, be sure not to miss the facts behind them as well.

                  President Obama, the man you claim has not been doing his job, has deported 2 million undocumented immigrants since taking office in 2009. Based on his monthly average, he has deported undocumented foreigners in much greater numbers than did his predecessor George W. {1}

                  This unsupported false claim is typical of the many found in this thread: “Is the President of the United States responsible for the execution of existing laws…
                  This President is openly ignoring those responsibilities…”


                  Since last October, 52,000 children and teens have been apprehended by Border Patrol agents. About 11,000 were from Mexico and they were immediately returned to their home country as prescribed by law. The minors from countries other than Mexico are being held in Border Patrol stations in Texas and Arizona, or in other emergency facilities set up by the Department of Health and Human Services. This, too, is in compliance with the law signed by President Bush in January 2009 that grants all immigrant children the right to be screened by an immigration judge before being deported. {2}

                  Therefore, Retief, examining the facts confirms how the President is indeed fulfilling his responsibilities and is respecting the law. What the President needs to expedite the processing is emergency funding from a GOP controlled House suffering from rigor mortis. In stark contrast, your solution is to deploy our war weary military after the President has been working for six years to get them to stand down from two useless wars.

                  “It is a primary responsibility of the President to employ the military to secure the borders. All have been reluctant to do so, Obama especially so. He has demonstrated time and again that he has little interest in the law…”

                  More opinion driven rhetoric unsupported by ANY facts. President Obama’s interest in the law is made evident by his continuing efforts to expand the number of US Border Control Agents particularly in the Southwest sector. Recent data from the US Border Patrol indicates agent staffing during the Obama administration increased 22.2% to a force of 21,391 since the last year President Bush held office. The current staffing places 86% of all agents in the country along the Southern border. {3}

                  Now you put yourself in charge of writing the President’s job description. “Little transpires at the border of the United States that is outside the legal, Constitutionally charged responsibilities of the President. This President is openly ignoring those responsibilities.

                  Surely, you must be aware that you are not an authority on interpreting “the legal, Constitutionally charged responsibilities of the President.” Those of us living in the real world know we are neither an authority nor an expert when it comes to gauging the duties or the powers of the President. Even the US Congress is limited under the doctrine of separation of powers found in the first three article of the Constitution. You may wish to read about them here: {4}

                  Finally, the President is not “openly ignoring those responsibilities” simply because one passionately vocal citizen is unable to tolerate a fundamental principle of our republic, namely, the person who gets elected as the President gets to steer the ship of state for the next four years.” Under our two party traditions this means sharing governance with different ideologies.

                  Furthermore, among the variety of principles legally embedded in the President’s responsibilities are the principles of Prosecutorial and Enforcement Discretion. Like it or not, this means agencies of the government are permitted to interpret how much latitude of discretion is available beyond the clear, expressed, and specific guidelines prescribed within a law.

                  A Congressional Research Service report prepared for members and committees of Congress advises members, “even agencies that do not prosecute or engage in law enforcement have been recognized as having discretion (sometimes referred to as enforcement discretion) in determining whether to enforce particular violations.” {5}


                  Therefore, rather than being an evasion of responsibilities, enforcement discretion is a legally valid exercise of the President’s responsibilities when performing the duties of his office.

                  I hope, Retief, you are enjoying your summer. Personally, I am trying to determine if the summer is half over or just half started. Hmm. smile
                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
                  {1} http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 … portations
                  {2} http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/pro … t#overview
                  {3}
                  http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/ … 2-2013.pdf
                  {4} http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_sepp.html
                  {5} http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42924.pdf

                  1. 60
                    retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this
                  2. GA Anderson profile image86
                    GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Greetings Quill,

                    What a typical "Quilligrapher" response. I would like to make one basic point...

                    Well done!

                    I would carry the "Obama and the border" conversation in a different direction, (we could have an enjoyable tussle),  but as applied to the topic - another excellent example of reason.

                    Always glad to see your contributions.

                    GA

    3. Don W profile image83
      Don Wposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      "Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
      Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

      (Words engraved inside the Statue of Liberty)

    4. Yousif Mohammed profile image61
      Yousif Mohammedposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      take a look in the mirror, drive to your local native american friend, and say the same words to him/her and see what he/she thinks

    5. Josak profile image61
      Josakposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I support anyone who seeks a better life for themselves or their children who comes to the US with the intent to work and prosper. So me.

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        However, that is NOT the intention of many of the illegal immigrants.  They come to this country because they want the free social services which America offers.  They do not have contributable skills nor education to make a significant contribution in this postmodern society.   I can see highly skilled and educated immigrants coming to this country as it is their intent to take advantage of the immense opportunities which this wondrous country offer to them and their children.   

        Such immigrants have contributable skills which will make their and their children's lives better in addition to making America better.  For example, the  Russian, Vietnamese, Korean, Lebanese, or Sengalese businessperson who starts a fruit store which subsequently become a fruit cooperative.  This person is making a significant contribution to the economy.  He/she isn't draining the economy.  However, illegals without skills nor education will drain our social system as they have no measurable job skills. 

        Since they have no significant job skills, they will be detrimental to the American economy. These illegals, even generations later, are in poverty as their children.  One can see that they are mired in poverty and have adopted the culture of poverty mentality.  We have enough people on welfare already without increase the number of welfare recipients.   No illegals SHOULD EVER be allowed in this country unless it is extenuating/life threatening circumstances; even then, there should be stringent standards applied.  Only the highest calibre of people should be allowed to immigrate to America.

        1. Josak profile image61
          Josakposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Factually wrong on all counts.

          The actual stats show:

          Most "illegals" come here seeking work and get work.

          About a third of them pay taxes voluntarily even though they don't get most of the benefits.

          Very few of them receive social benefits.

          "For example, the  Russian, Vietnamese, Korean, Lebanese, or Sengalese businessperson who starts a fruit store which subsequently become a fruit cooperative.  This person is making a significant contribution to the economy"

          (notice none of these people actually have any skills, running a fruit store is not a skill btw)

          That is just racism against Hispanics, you hit every major racial group (White, Oriental, Black and Middle Eastern) except the one which makes up the majority of immigrants to America... because you are a racist.

          Also I have no idea where you live but all the fruit stores and stands y the side of the road around where I live are run by Mexican and Nicaraguan immigrants and I know for a fact many are "illegals" and I suspect most of them are. Which makes sense because as I said "illegals" come to America to find work.

          The proof of that is the rate of entry dropped by almost two thirds and many left when the economic crisis hit, because there were no jobs, welfare didn't stop and yet they left and didn't come, because they aren't here for welfare but for work.

          Prediction for reply, respondent will ignore all facts or data above, make emotive statements and claim personal experience as relevant on a national scale.

          1. 60
            retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            The largest Hispanic group in the US is La Raza - "The Race"
            Their goal is complete open borders for Hispanic immigrants.
            They are not an immigration advocacy group, but an illegal Hispanic immigration advocacy group.

            There are tens of thousands of immigrants not from Latin America who want to emigrate to the US.
            They are pursuing their personal goal legally.

            Why should those who wantonly violate the law be permitted to jump ahead of those who have obeyed existing immigration laws merely because they are Hispanic and managed to creep into the country undeterred by annoyances like legality?

            If there is any racism in the debate it is the racism of consistently putting the illegal Hispanic immigrant ahead of all others of every other national origin, language or race who are pursuing legally acquired citizenship.

            The thousands we celebrate each year when they raise their hands and swear a citizenship oath come from everywhere, are every color, speak every language and practice every religion or none. They even come from Latin America, speak Spanish and are Catholic.

            How then is it racist to oppose illegal immigration in favor of legal immigration? One can easily make a prima facie case for the racism of advocating illegal Hispanic immigration. 

            It is far to easy for some to level the hateful accusation of racism, the most disgusting and scurrilous retreat of the scoundrel, but what is one to expect in these enlightened days.

            1. gmwilliams profile image85
              gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              A thousand applauses to you, retief!

          2. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            About a third of them pay taxes voluntarily even though they don't get most of the benefits."

            What is the procedure used to pay federal income taxes without a SS#?  Or FICA taxes?  Or state income taxes?  About all an illegal can do is pay sales tax, and that's ONLY if the state they're squatting in has a sales tax.

            1. Quilligrapher profile image90
              Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Hi Wilderness. How are things going in your neck of the woods?

              I think it is fair to say that not all knowledge comes to us through our own limited life experiences. Most comes by our going out of our comfort zones and searching for truth.

              “ What is the procedure used to pay federal income taxes without a SS#? Or FICA taxes? Or state income taxes?”

              Most illegal immigrants are “documented!”

              The Center of Immigration Studies answers these questions in a report written by Ronald W. Mortensen, PhD.

              “ Illegal immigrants are not “undocumented.” They have fraudulent documents such as counterfeit Social Security cards, forged drivers licenses, fake “green cards,” and phony birth certificates. Experts suggest that approximately 75 percent of working-age illegal aliens use fraudulent Social Security cards to obtain employment…Most (98 percent) Social Security number (SSN) thieves use their own names with stolen numbers.”{1}

              Now that we know how they do it, let us look at the results. The 11.2 million undocumented immigrants living in the US pay nearly $11 billion in federal, state or local taxes each year. In 2010, the State of Idaho reaped about $27M from the earnings of undocumented workers. I wish I had a dollar for every time I posted these facts in this forum.

              “Undocumented immigrants currently contribute significantly to state and local taxes, collectively paying an estimated $10.6 billion in 2010 with contributions ranging from less than $2 million in Montana to more than $2.2 billion in California. This means these families are likely paying about 6.4 percent on average of their income in state and local taxes.”  Passage of a comprehensible Congressional Immigration Reform Bill would add 5 million legal workers and would increase this revenue by at least $2B a year. {2}

              Foreign workers not residing in the USA lawfully pay Social Security taxes even thought they cannot qualify for retirement, disability or survivor benefits. {3}

              So, Wilderness, who benefits from this? The federal government reports illegal workers have “contributed up to $300 billion, or nearly 10 percent, of the $2.7 trillion Social Security Trust Fund” against which very few claims will ever be filed. {4}

              I have covered Social Security numbers, Federal, State, and Local Taxes, and FICA. When combined, this comes to more than $25B/year. It is hard to imagine that some in this forum still think undocumented workers do not contribute to America. roll

              Then you said, “About all an illegal can do is pay sales tax,” which you just learned is completely untrue and then you add insult on top with, “and that's ONLY if the state they're squatting in has a sales tax.”

              Well, Wilderness, illegal immigrants generally do not squat. Furthermore, they usually go to great lengths not to attract “official” attention to themselves. Which makes this whole sentence from you worth diddly-squat. smile Nearly all non-agricultural workers rent houses and apartments or they own homes. Either way, directly or indirectly, they are paying real estate or renters taxes in every state in which they reside. 

              Finally, Grace had this contribution to add: “+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000!”

              Although I hate to bring this to your attention, I believe Grace gave three more zeros to GA then she gave to you. <j/k> big_smile

              Stay well, Wilderness, and enjoy your summer. Here in New York we are in August and still waiting for prolonged warm weather. Maybe there is some truth to those global cooling claims. cool
              http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
              {1} http://cis.org/IdentityTheft
              {2} http://www.itep.org/immigration/
              {3} http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbof … s/s744.pdf p.30
              {4}  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magaz … l&_r=0

              1. rhamson profile image76
                rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                .....Maybe there is some truth to those global cooling claims.

                Don't get him started Quill. I always enjoy your posts and the accuracy you place with them. smile

              2. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I understand that many use forged ID - does that make it right?  I also understand that some actually pay income taxes, at a rate far below what the rest of us do - does that mean they are supporting themselves when they use the same ID to get welfare checks, food stamps, section 8, etc?

                There isn't a chance in the world that an illegal family of 5 or 6, using the welfare system while paying minuscule taxes off of near minimum wage, is actually a net value to the country.

                1. psycheskinner profile image81
                  psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  It depends on whether you think getting manual labor like crop picking accomplished is of intrinsic value.  I would argue that it is.

                  1. 60
                    retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Do illegals account for 100% of crop harvesters? Is it a task that could be automated rather than jobbed out to NO skill labor. (by no skill I mean no reading, writing, arithmetic required) Is the abundance of hands delaying progress? Mechanization is a product of great amounts of work and few workers. One need not invent the wheel when there are 100000 Hebrew slaves available.

                  2. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Of course it is.  It's worth minimum wage, which will not support a large (or even small) family in this country; so the illegals survive on welfare benefits.

                    Net value to the country is negative, and net value to us as consumers of those products is also negative as we then pay higher taxes to support the workers.  And the Americans put out of work as well...

                2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Hi Wilderness!

                  I certainly hope you are not suggesting that I, or anyone else, said using a forged ID is right. In addition, if you already knew most illegal residents used false ID than why did you ask, “What is the procedure used to pay federal income taxes without a SS#? Or FICA taxes? Or state income taxes?”

                  There is no reason to believe this portion of your post is true: “I also understand that some actually pay income taxes, at a rate far below what the rest of us do.” You understand? Are you stating a fact or an assumption? If it is a fact, please show us a source that supports it. If it is an assumption, it is useless speculation not worth consideration.

                  The wages earned by illegal workers using a false Social Security number are subject to the same tax rates as the rest of us. There is no special rate for illegal workers. While claiming a large number of dependants may reduce the income tax withheld by a little, everyone contributes to Social Security at the same rate. 

                  “- does that mean they are supporting themselves when they use the same ID to get welfare checks, food stamps, section 8, etc?”

                  Is this a fact or another assumption? It is always so difficult to tell because immigrant bashers NEVER offer any data to support their outrageous claims. In my last post, I supplied data showing how illegal workers 1) contribute about $25B a year from their wages to the Social Security trust funds and federal, state, or local governments; 2) pay the same sales taxes as US citizens; and 3) pay renter’s and/or property taxes. In response, you continue to drone the false mantra, “they invade the US to get welfare checks, food stamps, section 8, etc.” Nor have I ever seen a study that found that they do. Do you know of one?

                  Your gut feeling misleads you into thinking, “there isn't a chance in the world that an illegal family of 5 or 6, using the welfare system while paying minuscule taxes off of near minimum wage, is actually a net value to the country.”

                  By all available measurements, immigrants are NOT freeloading moochers. You believe illegal immigrants give nothing and just take from society and you ignore reams of studies that prove you are mistaken. One study estimates that deporting all illegal foreign workers in Arizona would reduce the state’s gross product by $13.3 billion! According to your wisdom, eliminating immigrants should improve the state’s economy.

                  Arizona's Cronkite News points out that Arizona "could be throwing away millions in potential tax revenues by trying to drive illegal immigrants out." In a feature article, they note that "a new report challenges the argument that illegal immigrants are a drain on Arizona's economy."

                  The paper is referring to a study titled "The Consequences of Legalization Versus Mass Deportation in Arizona," which envisions dire fiscal consequences for Arizona without its undocumented workers. {1}

                  The study explores in depth just what would happen to Arizona’s economy if all of its 211,000 undocumented workers were deported vs. the results from their ultimate legal status. It compares the significant gains if reform legalization occurs to the major economic losses if total deportation became a reality.

                  Among the study’s findings, mass deportation will result in an annual $6.25 billion reduction in AZ wages leading to $2.4 billion in lost tax revenue on top of a $13.3 billion cut in the state’s gross product output. In contrast, just legalization of the undocumented, not citizenship, mind you, will increase wages in the state by $1.8 billion and will produce $540 million in additional tax revenues from nearly 39,000 newly created jobs.

                  Rather than doing the necessary research, Wilderness, people cling to their false notions that immigrants do not contribute to our economy, the majority does not work and earn wages, and most just come to the US to leech from the Gringos. Wrong! So wrong!

                  I find a common characteristic in a lot of immigration discussions like this thread. Emotional political postures or fear-driven rhetoric always exceeds intellectual inquiry by a large margin.
                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
                  {1} http://www.scribd.com/doc/104334578/Dep … in-Arizona

  2. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    To the extent that our agricultural economy depends on it, I guess you could say I give it some conditional support.  I think if it could be completely stopped overnight we would have another recession. If you think that makes me a treasonous dog, well, I disagree.  I think we need a transitional approach to normalizing immigration, so that the people the US needs can actually get in legally.

    1. Ericdierker profile image81
      Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      You do not think we have enough workers already?

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Eric, we Americans have MORE than enough workers.  The unemployment rate in America is high.  There are Americans without jobs to sustain themselves and their families.  The amnesty program is only going to disrepair the American ecomony.  The illegals are draining our social services and we the American taxpayers are the ones going to fill the bill.   Regarding jobs, illegals are going to create fierce competition with the lower socioconomic strata Americans for jobs.   One can say that many lower socioeconomic strata Americans are going to be displaced by illegals for jobs as they will do the same job at a cheaper rate than the American.   This is going to create racial/ethnic discord among Caucasian and Black Americans.

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          In California now the farm worker or house worker or gardener gets more of a wage than a fast food worker or security worker. White Americans cannot get the jobs reserved for illegal immigrants even though the pay is the same as for jobs requiring proper documentation because those jobs are secured through a "good old boy" network.

      2. psycheskinner profile image81
        psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Who will do season agricultural labor for minimum wage? Demonstrably not.  Georgia discovered that last year when they cut off the illegals and the fruit rotted on the trees.

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          One horrible example does not make good generalizations. They cut it off before advertising for American workers, just plain stupid. A fruit pickers wage is not minimum wage, closer to twice that.

      3. crazyhorsesghost profile image85
        crazyhorsesghostposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Americans are not going to pick our countries vegetables. Anyone who believes so is living in a dream world.

        Agriculture work is extremely hard. I raise huge crops of vegetables every year and if it were not for Mexicans they would not get picked. Americans will not do the stoop labor that is needed to pick the vegetables.

        1. rhamson profile image76
          rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I absolutely agree that Americans will not do these jobs. But do the ones that do have to sneak into the country to do these jobs? Isn't there a better way of enforcing the migrant workers so that they are allowed in the country and back out when their work is finished for a season? The objective is to not have these people break the law and the employers superseding the law to gain profits that they are not entitled to through illegal means and exploiting those who have no voice..

    2. Ericdierker profile image81
      Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Did you know that a security guard in general makes less than a field worker and that field work is hired by bosses that will not hire a white guy? They give the jobs to illegals over Americans because of family and favors. Just go try and get one of those jobs with a name like Dierker and you are discriminated against. They make nearly twenty bucks an hour. But big white guys cannot get those jobs because they are not part of the group that gets them.

      That is first hand knowledge.

      Try as a white man to get a gardening job in the line ups. NO CAN DO, again first hand experience.

      1. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Hello again, Eric.

        Do you know that your numbers are bogus?

        May I please have your sources for security guard and field worker wages? I am interested in knowing the origin of your information because it smacks of bias and distortions.

        For starters, the median hourly wage for a security guard is $11.57/hr ($24,070/yr). The top 10% tier in the profession earns $20.75/hr ($43,150/yr) or more! {1}

        Secondly, you claim farm workers earn more. Wrong!

        The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports Farmworkers and Laborers (Crop, Nursery and Greenhouse) have extremely low individual earnings. The median hourly wage is $9.00/hour ($18,710/year). Three-fourths earned less than $21,000 annually ($9.91/hour) and only one field worker out of ten earns over $26,000/year (12.52/hour). {2}

        Eric, your inference is wrong again when you say, “But big white guys cannot get those jobs because they are not part of the group that gets them.”

        I think it is obvious to most people that the bosses you speak of have learned that the big white “guys” do less work during a typical 12 hour day than the little lean tan guys!

        Eric, your numbers and your claims appear to be all wrong. The security guard has the potential to earn $20.00/hour and the field hand’s best hope is $12.52. Your claims include figures that appear to be intentionally distorted by someone to create the wrong impression. We can review your false claims again when you reveal your sources.

        Until then, Eric, I hope you will be well.
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
        {1} http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes339032.htm
        {2} http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes452092.htm

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Simple to answer your question. I worked at both jobs.

          1. Quilligrapher profile image90
            Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thank you, Eric, for providing your data source. It is easy now to see why your claims are so distorted. They are based upon a survey sample of only one person which actually makes the numbers useless.

            I appreciate you reply, Eric. Thank you again.
            http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

            1. Ericdierker profile image81
              Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Life is funny that way. Census's never have been best sellers and their truth is as questionable as the willingness of the people to tell the truth to a revenuer.
              Your data stinks and is not accurate. Get a life away from gov. stats or continue to be a moronic machine of the gov.

              1. Quilligrapher profile image90
                Quilligrapherposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I thank you for your advice, Mr. Dierker.

                However, if you do not mind, I think I will continue searching for verifiable data and not rely on people who fabricate their own facts as they go along.

                I hope you stay well.
                http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

                1. Ericdierker profile image81
                  Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Are you calling me a liar?

              2. GA Anderson profile image86
                GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Eric, I hope you don't mind if I jump in. Get a grip and relax. Take a breath.

                I understand your perspective, you have first-hand experience and for you that is validation of your point. Except that sometimes it isn't.

                I wouldn't presume to answer for Quill. he is more than capable of answering for himself. But I would say this...

                Quill's points probably come from national medians - which may or may not apply to regional/state experiences.

                I would somewhat agree with your experiences. I don't have first-hand knowledge of "security guard's pay" but, in my region an "ordinary" security guard, (malls, warehouses, building entrances, etc.), might make a couple bucks, (or three), above minimum wage. And "illegal immigrant-type jobs, (landscaping, poultry processing, farm labor), are probably about the same, ($8-$10 bucks p/hr.). But, productivity-based pay - number of crops harvested, can be much more for good hard-working experienced immigrant labor. Probably close to $12 - $15 p/hr. equivalents.

                So to your wage difference points - I can see where you are coming from. But to your, "Big white man can't get it" perspective - I totally disagree - I think your perspective must be a truly localized situation.

                My only basis for saying this is my extrapolation of my region's circumstances of not being able to get enough "big white men" to fill the needed jobs.

                My closest resort town has to import foreign workers just to fill their open positions, (this I do have first hand knowledge of as I was one of those looking for employes).

                As a local/regional statement, I can say that there are a lot of instances where American workers would rather be unemployed than take certain jobs.

                Bottom line is, I think your perspective about a job bias is wrong. I do think immigrant workers do have a better reputation of being hard workers in the areas you mention than "big white guy" American workers. Unfortunately I think that reputation is deserved.

                Yelling at Quill is like shooting the messenger because you don't like the message.

                Just sayin'

                GA

                1. Ericdierker profile image81
                  Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Well said. You cut through the ranker like a sharp knife through butter.

                  Correct me if I am wrong but aren't there "allowances" that make the laborer legal in the scenario of a dire industry need.    ????

                  Probably location location location within this huge country does make a big difference. Here is border town USA (largest international border crossing in the world) Our problems are probably quite different than Georgia's.

                  Yes I was talking about incentives built into the laborers position. That is the real money and maids and security folk do not get those. Hey talk to a salesman about commissions.

                  Thanks

  3. maxoxam41 profile image79
    maxoxam41posted 2 years ago

    I support them. After we are all immigrants.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Speak for yourself; I was born here.

      But even if true, what could that possibly have to do with hordes of people entering your home uninvited and illegally?

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        +1,000,000,000,000,000!

    2. Ericdierker profile image81
      Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Where does this come from? I am not an immigrant.

    3. 60
      retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      But not all illegal immigrants.

  4. peeples profile image89
    peeplesposted 2 years ago

    I support it to a certain extent. My father came here as a child. Him and his parents were LEGAL immigrants. So much so that they almost completely stopped speaking Spanish because they wanted to be like the Americans. When they came here Mexico and Honduras were safer than they are now.  Now far more children are being forced to join cartels. This practice isn't new, but it certainly is much more out of hand than it was in the past. With America steady legalizing more and more marijuana it will put even more pressure on these cartels who will be focusing more and more on the hard drugs that aren't legal here. Children there are in a life or death situation.If there lives were not in jeopardy does anyone really believe they would risk dying to get here. Do any people who believe their lives are NOT at risk realize how many die trying to get here? I have a friend who is illegal. She's here and trying to get legal. The father of her three children died after refusing to be part of the cartel. She says this is common and many times nothing is done because the police ignore it out of fear. Who can say this isn't life or death? These people down there are miserable, constantly looking over their shoulders, fearing when their boys get old enough to be forced into crime. I agree that in an ideal world they would all be legal, but my moral compass says we should do whatever we need to do in order to help fellow humans. Yes we should all share the burden in my opinion. If we can dump out 48 BILLION in Foreign aid, why can't we cut that in half and give the other half to help these people, or to help the American people who claim to be so hurt by the illegals?

    1. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The other plight of these people is when they come here and the employers who hire them do so as an exploitation of them. They pay them minimum wages, refuse them full time status to get around the laws and dump them when ICE gets wise to their actions.

      As I stated in my earlier post the problem did not just crop up but we Americans are so short sighted and just want the problem fixed with the least amount of effort and expense. It is kind of like smoking for 40 years and then "BAM" I just got cancer? What were you thinking all those years of enjoying your habit? And now that you have cancer what can you do? Cut it away? It keeps coming back in other places.

      It is a maddening cycle. What can be done to end the need for these illegal immigrants to seek safety and security not available in their own country due to Americas exploitation of their illegal drug trade?

    2. Ericdierker profile image81
      Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Great points. I am hoping people are getting the difference between someone who sneaks into the country and just tries to avoid detection and someone who illegally entered or tried and is seeking asylum. Those seeking asylum are legally here pending and after appropriate determination. If a scenario of life and death presents itself asylum can be and is granted more often than not. Even a Mexican could conceivably obtain asylum from drug cartel activity.
      So when we speak of illegals we are not speaking of asylum seekers, that is a totally different class.

      Someone who enters solely to obtain financial gain and does not apply through appropriate channels is illegally here.
      (Poverty and refugees are again a different issue)

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Close but no cigar.  Sneaking over the border and hiding from the cops for years, then suddenly deciding you are a refugee and seeking asylum does not make the act, or the stay, legal.  Asylum seekers cross into the country and immediately ask for help in setting up a new life.

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          What you describe is not what I described -- close but no cigar. Legitimate asylum seekers clearly go immediately to authorities, refugees are only refugees when they are out of the country.
          I suppose you could stay here illegally and then go back and then try asylum. But if you had been here for years illegally there would be no eminent threat to your life -- you would have to go back and establish it again? It has to be proximate in time.

          1. peeples profile image89
            peeplesposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            But do USA citizens understand that they are afraid to seek asylum, because what happens if they are denied? They will be forced to go back. Many feel they are in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I wonder sometimes is USA citizens even attempt to think of it from the illegal immigrants side or if it's just "get out of MY land" mentality.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Of course they will be forced back.  "Asylum" has specific legal meanings, not just "I'm poor and want a better life". 

              The problem may be that if they try and fail (at asylum) there is every intention to remain illegally.

              1. peeples profile image89
                peeplesposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Are you even willing to consider that our government may turn down people even if they are in a life or death situation? Millions of Mexicans are in a life or death situation. If they all applied at the same time for asylum they would likely be turned down. Legally how does someone prove that the police are abusing them because they are part of the cartel? Legally how do they prove that their government is part of what is getting so many killed? I understand that there is a legal requirement for asylum, however my morality tells me that sometimes we need to apply common sense. It's common knowledge what happens down there. I would think most American's have heard of the cartel. Everyone knows how dangerous they are. Does anyone believe that any person living in the cities where they are prevalent isn't in a life or death situation?

                1. Ericdierker profile image81
                  Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I worked on an asylum case from Mexico. No just living in a country with violence is not enough, but in this particular case there was evidence, she had been kidnapped in fact. Just living in Tijuana is not good enough.
                  (if we had that everyone in Detroit would seek asylum in Israel ;-)

            2. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The simple answer is yes! That is precisely many Americans feel. I too wish that there was not a need for these illegal immigrants to come here but what to do. The US arms and trains the drug enforcement agencies down there but nothing changes. Why? Because they are corrupted as well. America fuels the fire with its addiction and its failed policies to combat or rectify it.

              Many come to the US for jobs and are exploited which also eliminates the opportunity for an American to fill that job. This infuriates many and be angered by the blatant use of the illegal labor pool to pad their wallets.

              You see it is not a simple problem and America does not handle difficult problems well as too many oppose the other for political ideology. Its a shame but no one seems to wish to take responsibility and thereby a solution to it.

              1. peeples profile image89
                peeplesposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I agree. It is not a simple problem, and there is no simple fix. My concern is that many Americans will be so stuck in the "get off my land" mentality that they will lose their moral obligation to help others.

              2. Ericdierker profile image81
                Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                rhamson there is a problem with this logic. Asylum seekers are fleeing their own predicament instead of taking responsibility for their own country and demanding, courageously, a right to live in peace. Until they do that their countries will not be responsible to them or anyone.
                You see how you put all the responsibility on us and took it away from citizens of their own countries? If they do not see staying and making their country better as an option, it never will get better.

                1. rhamson profile image76
                  rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Just as I surmised. Americans never want to take responsibility for their own messes. It is a problem we created by first overthrowing their governments and or supporting and installing dictators.

                  http://wais.stanford.edu/USA/us_support … s8303.html

                  But just as the importation of slaves from Africa has now been conveniently solved? And their plight met, we can just move on? Is that what you are telling me? It is not our fault?

                  These facilitated dictator monsters by the US created a mobster climate and overthrew any political reparation that could possibly help these countries back on track. Instead the US government supported and still supports criminals in a so called drug war.

                  Sure these illegal immigrants should fight but at what odds. The government is just as bad as the drug cartels.

                  Don't get me wrong I am not for amnesty and the current condition is not an excuse to enter the US illegally but it is a very good reason. Left with a situation like this would you stay and subject your family to sure death going up against these hoodlums? I didn't think so. It is so easy to point a finger at others plight but try and live it is a different story. We have meddled in so many countries for our own goals and profit we should be ashamed of ourselves.

                  1. Ericdierker profile image81
                    Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The problem with haranguing against the US on this is that we do take in the immigrants. So blaming us is useless because we already make recompense and allow 100's of thousands in each year. REmittances from the US sometimes is the top money maker for some of these countries -- I know it has been for Mexico and Vietnam in the past (do not know today)
                    " In 24 countries, remittances were equal to more than 10 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2011; in nine countries they were equal to more than 20 percent of GDP." http://migrationpolicy.org/programs/dat … nces-guide

                    So we are already doing the pay back legally --- illegals do not help that scenario one bit.

                2. psycheskinner profile image81
                  psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Like the asylum seeking who helped the US military in the Middle East and are now going to be killed for it?  What would the prove by staying and being killed for the US now the US forces are long gone.

                  IMHO, staying and dying proves nothing.  And only those at real risk of death have a chance of getting approved.

                  I am a legal migrant for the simple reason that I can afford to be.  I find it hard to judge those who cannot.  Those who lack the resources to get lawyers, the degrees to apply for work visas, etc.  They want a good life and they try to get it.  I can't blame them for that.  I think it is a form of taking responsibility for their life, as best they can.

                  1. Ericdierker profile image81
                    Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    My wife is a legal immigrant because we are law abiding citizens and we pay taxes and act like citizens. Believe me those kids seeking asylum do not have money -- the system still handles them. The cost to be law abiding is minimal and if that is a reason not to do something, I think I will go steal my dinner tonight.

                  2. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Would you feel the same about a burglar, a thief that broke into your home and stole everything?  Someone that stole your car and broke it down for parts?  Or your dog, to sell it to a cosmetic company (happened to us, once).  They're all just trying to improve their lot in life, after all...

            3. Ericdierker profile image81
              Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              At some point you have to take responsibility for your own life. The system is not perfect but generally if they will get killed if they are returned they will not me returned.

          2. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I think we're in complete agreement here.  Terminology may vary a bit, and small misunderstandings, but we agree once more.  Few people have a problem with real refugees (still a refugee even after arriving - they are running from something beyond poverty smile ) and I'm not one of them.  When there are 10 million "asylum seekers" in the country, I might change my mind, but for the nonce refugees, seeking actual asylum, are welcome.

            1. Ericdierker profile image81
              Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              We have reached accord, thank you for ironing out some of our wrinkles -- it is worth the effort.

      2. rhamson profile image76
        rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah it is not a one size fit all scenario. There are those in Mexico as well as those who are here legally that will game the system. One point is some of these people fleeing here do not have the luxury of time on their side.

        The problem still persists here with the demand for illegal drugs and the failed efforts of the government from years past and present to address it. The United States leads the world in illegal drug use, yet we turn the other way when it is us who are creating the problem in our southern neighbors countries.

        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-leads-th … -drug-use/

        The hard line is what a lot take when they blame them for their lack of enforcement when we arm and train their less than stellar drug enforcement forces.

  5. crankalicious profile image88
    crankaliciousposted 2 years ago
  6. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago

    +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000!

  7. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago

    These illegal immigrants are unskilled and uneducated, many are illiterate. That means that they are going to use our welfare systems.  If and when they are sick, they are going to use our hospitals for FREE.  Well, not FREE for Americans as we are going to absorb the costs.

    We Americans DON'T need people who will not add nor benefit the American economy.   These illegals aren't the best and the brightest, they are at the bottom.  America in this postmodern era need immigrants with a commensurate level of skills and education that will enhance, benefit, and improve the American socioeeconomic fabric, not worsen it.

    People are concerned about the illegals coming to this country and rightfully so.   These illegals are draining the system and are receiving better services than many Americans.  This is going to cause animosity towards Latinos(hate to say it). Because of the illegals, there are going to be Americans who will view Latinos in a more negative light.   

    Since illegals are taking jobs away from Americans who need such jobs, there is going to be heightened racial/ethnic conflict between illegals and other Americans.  It is time to close the borders and deport the illegals who are in America.   If this influx continue, there is going to be exacerbation of racial/ethnic conflict in this country of horrific proportions.

    1. GA Anderson profile image86
      GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      After seeing many of your past topic responses, - passionate emotionally charged, but usually facts deficient opinions - I didn't think you could surprise me...

      But you did with is one; "We Americans DON'T need people who will not add nor benefit the American economy."

      Does this mean you feel the same way about non-productive Americans too? Uneducated and illiterate Americans too? Would you clear the welfare rolls by deporting any American receiving government assistance?

      Normally, passion is a good thing, at least until it crosses the line to zealotry. Which is hardly ever a good thing.

      ps. As I am also an American, I hope you will exclude me from future such generalizations by at least qualifying your tirades as the views of "this American."  I am capable of speaking for myself, and I certainly don't want to be lumped in with your "We Americans."

      GA

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I am discussing the current crop of illegals.  Of course, there are Americans who are also non-productive.  Send the illegals back as they are contributing nothing to the economy.  Non-productive, able bodied Americans should be MADE to work or starve.  Wish non-productive Americans can be deported though but NO country wants non-productive people, some have MORE than ENOUGH non-productive folks.

        1. GA Anderson profile image86
          GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          GM, it appears we are both against illegal immigration, and the way this crisis, (for us) is being handled.

          It also appears we have great differences in our opinions of the illegal immigrants. I am more than willing to condemn illegal immigration, but I am not willing to condemn the illegal immigrants with such harsh derogatory generalizations as you apparently feel comfortable with.

          I completely agree that Americans, (and their leaders), have a responsibility to protect our way of life and economy, but I don't agree with your all-encompassing generalizations of their danger to us.

          I believe there are just and compassionate solutions, (yet to be found), and I think securing our southern border first and now is a critical component to any workable solution.

          In thinking about my obvious objections to your strident responses, and considering that at the root of the discussion we both seem to agree on multiple points, I think it is because your responses strike me as the tone of someone with the attitude, "This is mine. I was here first. You can't have any. Get the hell out of here!"

          But as is frequently demonstrated - it is possible to have rational discussions after the dust of the emotional responses settles.

          GA

        2. Sychophantastic profile image83
          Sychophantasticposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          You are clearly not a Christian.

    2. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I think that was as impassioned as I have ever heard you express yourself. The premise to just round them up and deport them is about as dumb as a bag of hammers. It will have the same effect that the war on drugs has had. Typically American is to treat the symptoms and ignore the cure. Hence my bag of hammers comment.

      What is the motivation for the illegals to continue flooding in? Jobs not welfare. I have never seen a race of people such as the Latin Americans work so hard for so little. The little part is what keeps them from buying healthcare and food so they apply for food stamps and welfare. If the jobs went away so would they as we have seen many exit in this economic downturn. 

      If you want them to leave stop the employers from hiring them.

  8. Sychophantastic profile image83
    Sychophantasticposted 2 years ago

    Once again, simple solution. Close down companies who hire illegals. Oh, except such businesses spend a whole lot of money on politicians to keep from doing just that.

    1. 60
      retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Even though there is ample evidence that illegals use false identification to secure employment? Even though employers are already required to obtain three forms of identification from prospective employees before hiring? It is certain that some employers intentionally ignore the law, but ALL illegals ignore the law to work in America. They steal identities, falsify credentials and place employers at risk of breaking EXISTING law.

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Retief, you and I know what illegals do.  It is time to send ALL illegals back and to start penalizing companies and corporations who hire such people.  Americans, time to REALLY CLEAN house and get rid of these illegals.  The illegals are flooding the gates and ruining this country, pure and simple.   No one in their right mind supports illegal immigration.   No one in his/her thinking mind wants illegal immigrants with no skills and no education to come to this country, draining and bankrupting our social, medical, and educational systems.   I CARE about this country; that is why I am vehemently against illegal immigration.  These illegals are not the highest calibre.

        I support immigration when immigrants are of high calibre, having skills and education to enhance this country and its quality of life.   I support the engineers, teachers, and other educated people immigrating to this country.  I do not support these illegals who FLOOD this country and turning this country into a 3rd world country.  I do not support these illegals using our social services when we as Americans can ill afford to support our people, let alone these illegals.   It is TIME to stop this type of immigration and to only let those of high calibre and possess the skills and education to immigrate to America.  Sadly, now we are letting ANYONE immigrate to America.  OH NO.

      2. Sychophantastic profile image83
        Sychophantasticposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Obviously, companies that have followed the law would not be subject to being shut down. However, what if we deported CEO's who knowingly hired illegals?

      3. rhamson profile image76
        rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        And yet with the risk of false identity and the ramifications of being caught the employers are willing to take the risk anyway. Why do you think that is?

        The immigration people need to get a ironclad way of identifying illegals from truly legal citizens. Agency paperwork is far to easy to obtain and the ID process is so over run with enforcement that a solution would be a national card that would go from state to state.

        1. 60
          retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          That would require a national government willing to enforce that ID. In Arizona v. United States, the federal government refused to enforce the law; Arizona passed a state law mirroring the federal and the Supreme Court ruled individual states could not enforce federal laws in which states are excluded from enforcement. When the NATIONAL government refuses to act what good is a national ID?

          1. rhamson profile image76
            rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            I agree and this has been a controversial issue for many years. It has to be a priority of both the executive and legislative branches of the government. But as you know with the political wrangling for votes the democrats don't want to lose the votes of the Hispanic caucus' and the GOP doesn't want to offend them anymore than they have.

            1. 60
              retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Those with legal residence status are required to have their "green card" always on their person no matter where they are in the country. To require CITIZENS to carry a national identity card is a disgusting affront to our liberty. We are not property of the government. The government does not control us. To require a CITIZEN to carry a government dog license is revolting. Why not just tattoo a serial number on our forearms.

              This is the problem, Americans have forgotten that they do not exist for government, government exists for and because of them. Government should tremble at the idea of a national ID rather than fully embrace the notion. We already have a national ID, a Social Security number. We pretend that it is only for the purposes of the Social Security System but it long ago broke through those limits.

              We are no longer CITIZENS holding a franchise, we are subjects bound to the State.

        2. GA Anderson profile image86
          GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Have you looked into the potential ramifications of a national ID? I know it dumps me into the "Nazis" dumpster - but, can you say "Papers Please!!"

          I am not ready to be a bar-coded citizen yet.

          GA

          1. 60
            retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

            This is the 21st Century, the age of the IR Chip.

            1. GA Anderson profile image86
              GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Oh right, so now I gotta think of myself like a "rescue dog" - ID chip implantation mandatory.

              Geez Relief, you coulda let me linger in my yesteryears haze ya know.

              GA

              1. 60
                retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                If you aren't chipped you won't be permitted to travel, unless you are an elected official, government employee, member of a favored group or in the Stasi.

          2. rhamson profile image76
            rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            It could be as simple as a chip inserted into a credit card or a necklace or a wrist band. You would need to have it on your person and there would need to be ways of enforcement. It could have a blue tooth capacity that the law enforcement agent (do you like the Nazi sound of agent?) would only need to be in close proximity of the possible offender to discover. Sure these chips might have some sort of vulnerability to counterfeiting but it could be made so that a lot fewer would get through than with the current paper ID.

            1. 60
              retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The best way to make a law work is to enforce it. The political fodder created by not enforcing laws is far more valuable to the NOBILITY than the civil social order improved by enforcing those same laws. The NOBILITY has little interest in enforcing all immigration laws. That would require expelling millions of dependents that liberals are trying very hard to turn into Democrat voters. One need only look at sanctuary cities - a clearly criminal endeavor, legal state issued IDs for ILLEGAL immigrants and the massive transfers of taxpayer money to realize that our RULING CLASS wants illegals to come and stay. Merely enforcing existing law would put pressure on the entire system of illegal immigration. If governments were to merely discharge their responsibilities under the law many illegals would self-deport, some would await deportation hearings and some would be turned back at the border never to return.

              The biggest problem with illegal immigration is not illegals it is, as per usual, government.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                So the nobility and ruling classes are all liberals!

                1. 60
                  retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Nobility and Ruling Class have no real ideology beyond protecting that class distinction. They make liberal or conservative noises, but they, themselves are their only constituency. There is an awakening  among conservatives in America that threatens to sweep away those rulers, again. That is why there are vast sums of money and media power aimed at protecting members of that class.

                  American liberals willingly accept a ruling class. Republicans used to accept that ruling class but there is a fragmenting of the Republican Party between Constitutional conservatives and Party loyalists. It is not the first time. The Republican Party tends to be the most contentious one, despite the silly notion that it is monolithic and ossified. Several times the conservative/Federalist party has broken apart and reconstituted itself. Most recently in the 1970's with the candidacy and subsequent Presidency of Ronald Reagan. He was opposed by the Ruling Class. The current Ruling Class likes to remind conservatives that the "Era of Reagan is over."

                  I would imagine British politics is interesting and complex, in its own right. I can only imagine the forces necessary to bring the Liberal Party and Conservative Party together to defeat the Labour Party, much to the regret, no doubt, of that same Liberal Party.

                  1. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    So keep left fighting the right and the right fighting the left leaving the nobility and the ruling class to carry on unmolested and unobserved.

            2. GA Anderson profile image86
              GA Andersonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              It is those very same technical capabilities that concern me. along with the abuse potential of a national database with the amount of information an ID card system would contain.

              GA

              1. rhamson profile image76
                rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                With the latest revelations about the CIA and NSA spying on Congress and American citizens I think nothing is lost as it was compromised with 911. Individuality has its price and identity security is a cleverly veiled ruse. I have to wonder who is eavesdropping on us as we communicate even now. You know thinkers are a pain in the a$$ to bureaucrats.

                1. 60
                  retief2000posted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  An official national identity card that you must carry with you at all times is very different than the NSA gathering billions of mostly useless texts and quintillions of bytes of metadata. The signal is lost in the noise.

                  1. rhamson profile image76
                    rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I guess one that is taken from you without your permission is more acceptable to you?

                  2. Josak profile image61
                    Josakposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Both utterly unacceptable. Though only one has the added "benefit" of blatant racism.

 
working