Should we grant Amnesty to Illegal Aliens in the United States?

1. 75

   Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years ago

   My opinion is no, we should not.
   
   The problems of failed or "third world" countries have resulted in millions of people fleeing those countries to steal the better life the people of other non third world countries have. The United States is one of those countries. We have allowed these people to sneak in and secretly remain because we felt sorry for thier plight.
   
   However, they have become a devistating force on our nation and the United States now finds itself on the brink of possible collapse.
   
   Granting amnesty to all the Criminal Immigrants already here won't fix the problems of thier home nations. They would merely become a security blanket/power-base for the millions (thier family members) back in the old country to cling to when they become the new batch of illegals. Granting them amnesty will simply bring about the downfall of the United States in an expedited fashion.
   
   The only real cure to the problem is to help them help themselves by repairing thier own countries, or by allowing those countries to fail and collapse.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      michifusposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "to steal the better life the people". What is this? the Talented Mr Ripley?
      
      You have let them sneak into the country, that's fair, but "secretly remain because you feel sorry for them?" well its no secret they are there. Good tax paying Americans feel sorry for them, and give them a cash in hand job to help them out, out of pity?. It certainly isn't due to the fact that they can be easily exploited, paid terrible wages, given no rights is it? Nah. cant be. Definitly pity.
      
      Perhaps you think they are a drain on the economy? Maybe the shitty jobs they are given should be going to REAL Americans. Of course, no one can afford to pay proper wages to REAL Americans to do the jobs they are doing.
      
      America is on the brink of collapse not because of illegal immigrants, but because you have been going to foreign countries to "help them out" a bit too much recently. America is in trouble as it it has been mismanaged financially. America is in trouble because its industry cannot compete with the ultra cheap labor of the far east. You can try to pin all of your countries woes on illegals, but you are just kidding yourself.
      
      Why not have an amnesty? It is "A" solution. It has its problems, but doing nothing also is not the best way, and giving out even more money to foreign countries to improve them doesn't work. If the countries are corrupt, that money goes to the rich, not to the poor who need it.
      
      An amnesty would allow those in the country to earn a proper wage, which THEY would then send part of back home to support their families. It will then go to the right people. They could be the new cheap (but not exploited) labor you need to kick start the economy and improve your industry. They could help America to compete with the far east.
      
      If you have an Amnesty, you get the illegals earning taxes. THEN you tighten up your borders. OK, you will never stop people entering legitimately and remaining and outstaying their visas, but it could work!
      
      There is no easy solution unfortunately, but I wouldn't rule out an amnesty totally. These people are in your country and are going no where. Why not earn from them and get them working for the country. It should certainly be debated openly, the pros and cons weighed up. It may not work, but it may actually be the best solution to a difficult situation.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Where in the world do you get the idea that illegal aliens hold only bad jobs that Americans don't want?  I work in the construction trades and every year watch as more and more crews are comprised of people that speak no english at all and scatter if INS comes around while Americans that would jump at the job wait in the unemployment lines.  Every construction worker in the countries sees this - illegal aliens continue to make inroads in more and more skilled jobs while Americans wanting to work sit idle.
         
         Yes, the pay in those jobs would inevitably go up somewhat, although not a great deal, but it is far cheaper for the country to pay slightly higher wages than to not only support the American out of work as well as the illegal alien and their family while the employer gets rich by not paying local wages.
         
         It is a myth perpetuated by the amnesty crowd that illegals only work jobs that Americans won't, but anyone actually in the labor market knows all too well how false that is.  Sure, few Americans want to be a maid or butler or even pick crops for a few months a year.  Too bad; vacuum your own floor or pay a living wage for some to do it for you!  Or bring in people with a green card for temporary work like crops.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            michifusposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            fair point regarding construction work. This needs to be tackled with the building firms, as it is them, rather than the illegals who are the real problem. You cant totally rid the country of illegals even with an amnesty.
            
            I'm not pro amnesty, but I am for debating it and fully investigating the benefits as well as the disadvantages, rather than purely dismissing it. It may sound wrong and go against peoples beliefs, but there are benefits to it. As to whether it would work in the US, Im not sure.

            replyreport
         2. 84

            kerrygposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            "Or bring in people with a green card for temporary work like crops."
            
            It needs to be much, much easier to get a green card if you want to do that. They're currently virtually impossible to get if you don't have a million dollars,  a job offer for a position requiring a bachelor's degree or higher, or an immediate relative (parent, child, or spouse) already in the US. They cost thousands of dollars in fees even if you do meet one of those requirements. Very few farm workers would stand a chance.

            replyreport
         3. 71

            rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Excellent points!

            replyreport
      2. 75

         Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Agreed many business people have taken advantage of them in this fashion. But that is only recently, 30 or 40 or 50 years ago when this problem started they were allowed in because of pity. Then they started taking advantage of that pity until they had a powerbase big and strong enough to take better jobs from legal citizens. The jobs they have taken and forced me personally out of (in the construction field alone) are anything but "sh*tty" jobs. The factory 100k a year position they have stolen from me personally is again not some pitiful crap job nobody wants.
         
         
         
         Yes I do, in the long run they are dragging the entire nation down.
         
         
         
         Because amnesty would not stop new illegals from continuing to come, in fact it would inspire others to come illegally in the hopes of thier own amnesty. It would also create a great powerbase and support system for these new criminal immigrants. The end result being the take over of the United States by criminal immigrants' home countries from inside the infrastructure of the United States' workforce.
         
         
         
         No, it isn't.
         
         
         
         Again, No it won't. It will be used to finance the new criminal immigrants invasion at a much increased pace. And/or be taken by the corrupt governments of the home nation.
         
         
         
         No, with them gone employers could afford to pay a decent wage because all of thier competition would also have that pay scale as part of thier overhead. As things are now, to stay in business, construction companies have to hire illegals or they will be forced out of business by thier competition.
         
         
         
         
         The bottom line for me is the only people that benefit from an amnesty are the criminal immigrants. The good law abiding citizens lives will only get better after the criminal immigrants are gone.

         replyreport
   2. 61

      artcivacompposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Boarders, Language, Culture. Without them we don't have a country, How can we help the world if we collapse as a nation. Do you think we can send hospital ships to Haiti, or Sumatra if we are busy praying to Allha.

      replyreport
   3. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      The answer is a resounding no.  America has MORE than enough internal problems to repair without the illegal immigrants. America has to finally grow up and realize that she is not the world's savior.   Each should take care of its own.  America should only let immigrants in who can possess a high level of education and relevant skills.   Any immigrant who cannot demonstrate relevant skills and/or have the prerequisite education SHOULDN'T be let in.  Illegal immigrants(hate the word alien) usually have little to no skills nor education; they have nothing to contribute to the American economy.   In fact, based upon their predictament, they are the ones who will drain our social resources and networks, resulting in more of a socioeconomic malaise.    However, unfortunately, this inane administration under Obumler decided "for humanitarian purposes" to grant amnesty to the illegals, knowing full well that the country can ill support them!

      replyreport
   4. 75

      Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The southwest was owned by the Mexican and like the other native American, the US  took the land from the them. Then name them illlegal Aliens. Nothing new, Columbus was a pirate too.

      replyreport
   5. 61

      days leaperposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, see
      http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/132687#post2763283
      
      neither should Europe!

      replyreport
2. 95

   wildernessposted 12 years ago

   I see a problem for young people that have been here nearly their whole lives - we are at least partially to blame for this fiasco.  There is also a legal problem for the "anchor babies" and we are wholly to blame for this.  No problem for their parents (deport) but for the children there is some question.
   
   Other than that, deport the bunch.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think it is unfair to the children or anchor babies as well.  We don't imprison family members for the crimes or their families and a just way to deal with them must be found as loopholes to our immigration blunders of the past.
      
      Perhaps a type of dual citizenship arrangement can be made to allow them to re-enter the country when they are 21.  They would of course need to meet the same requirements as all other immigrants but have some responsible plan to become employed or educated and not become a burden to the US when they come back.
      
      The other thing would be to place heavy fines and penalties on hiring illegal immigrants to curb the problem from now on.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Deport 12 million people? Neither practical nor moral. Nor in the interest of the United States.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         "Deport 12 million people? Neither practical nor moral. Nor in the interest of the United States."
         
         No need to deport all of these people here illegally. Just enforce severe penalties on those who hire them. They will eventually leave of their own accord. We are the problem not them. Greed allows the the company who hires them to pocket the difference between hiring them, and a legal US citizen. Unfortunately with no responsibility to them or the country they can abuse them by either not paying them when they are through with them ( I have personally seen this on many occasions ) or deny them compensation when they are hurt at work ( I have seen this as well ) and other things they cannot get away with a legal US citizen when the illegal is in their employment. These illegals go on welfare and government assistance when they fail. The system is set up for them to fail as they have no rights or expectation of the US governments desire to fix this. Their problems are now ours. Hooray for globalization!

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            I'll second that for globlization!!!

            replyreport
            1. 71

               rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

               That was sarcasm for globalization I hope you know.

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  Castlepalomaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  Was thinking global public opinion is the other super power, other than USA Military/Corporatism complex.
                  
                  Since most people perfer to be kept.
                  
                  Carry on false alarml

                  replyreport
   3. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Here, here, in TOTAL AGREEMENT!

      replyreport
3. 75

   Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years ago

   If I were an anchor baby and my entire family was being deported. I think I'd opt to go with them... It wouldn't be like being taken from the only people you have ever known and being sent somewhere you didn't know any one. The anchor babies have family in thier parents home countries. But I will agree they are the only group within this issue I would have a qualm about deporting.
   
   Deporting them isn't sending them to a strange foreign country...it is sending them home.

   replyreport
4. 61

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   Yes we should.
   
   This is one of the few areas that I disagree with Ron Paul with.
   
   ANYone who wants to be American should be able to be.
   
   Make it easy to become a citizen (Ron Paul agrees with this), AND grant citizenship to all living here who desire it (Ron Paul disagrees with this).
   
   However, Paul agrees that the road to citizenship shouldn't be NEARLY as difficult as it is today.
   
   The real problem is that we tax our citizens and then give welfare to non-citizens. End the welfare and much of this problem will go away.

   replyreport
5. 61

   Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years ago

   I am Hispanic and my particular family settled in what is now New Mexico in 1609. We acquired a Spanish Land Grant to inhabit the northernmost territory of what was then called Nuevo Espana (New Spain).
   
   Over the centuries the borders have changed and I have been made to feel like an immigrant many times in my life. In reality us Spanish were the first Europeans here, yet I do not feel we should provide amnesty to illegal aliens. They are precisely the ones who make many American idiots think I (and millions of other Latinos) do not belong here.
   
   I am so sick of Anglo Americans assuming that this was their idea. Us Spanish are overlooked as the purveyors of this land! Remember who Cristobal Colon is? He is who you seem to have Anglicized by calling him Christopher Columbus. Yeah, I'm so sure any Spaniard or Italian from the 1400's was named Christopher Columbus.
   
   Also, I am sick of people thinking that Hispanic is a race. Hispanic is an ethnicity and you can be of any race and be considered Hispanic. The majority of American Hispanics are racially Caucasian. I know the truth, and so should you, especially if you consider yourself an intellectual or a writer or a reporter or an American.
   
   Amnesty for illegal aliens should not be allowed from any country, as there are ways to become a legal citizen or visitor. Have you been to El Paso lately? The first Americans were Hispanic!!!!!

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Actually the first Americans were my ancestors, the Native American Indians, the Cherokee in my case.
      
      But race has nothing do to with this thread, Criminal and legal are the concepts in question. That the criminal immigrants are using race and "I was here first" so it should be mine anyway as a ploy to avoid deportation is also a secondary consideration (and not a very good one as far as I'm concerned considering my ancestory). Who the land use to belong to isn't in question, it is now the United States and belongs to the citizens of the United States.
      
      Criminal Invaders have no right to own it no claims to it and no right to be in what isn't thier country.
      
      Only Legal resident aliens and United States Citizens have any claim to the United States.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I said the Spanish were the first EUROPEANS to inhabit the area!!! Additionally, I did not mention that I am half Mescalero Apache - I currently write for the Navajo Times, Native Peoples Magazine and Indian Life magazine!!! Anak Cheena Tee A Miila toona Kondiaronk Abo Ma Zine!!!!

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            No actually you didn't... your exact words were "The first Americans were Hispanic!!!!!"
            
            Anak Cheena Tee A Miila toona Kondiaronk Abo Ma Zine!!!! Means?

            replyreport
      2. 61

         Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         P.S. You do not look AT ALL Cherokee - So...your'e one of those eh??
         That is another of my pet peeves - What percentage of Cherokee are you? 1/16th or less?

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            my grandmother is a half blood... (I think)

            replyreport
            1. 61

               John Holdenposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               So one eighth!

               replyreport
      3. 61

         Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         ACTUALLY - see my picture? I am half Spanish and half Apache - this is what we look like! Never ever doubt me - yet I doubt you!!!

         replyreport
      4. 61

         John Holdenposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Erm, forgive me if I'm wrong but aren't you describing the founding fathers there?

         replyreport
         1. 75

            Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Military conquest isn't a criminal act, it may not be a moral act but it is what most countries have been formed on. The illegals can't fight a direct military conflict and win, so they are attempting to take over through theft of a nation using the laws of that nation to thier advantage when they can, and breaking them when the laws won't help them. You are correct though this truly is a war for a nation.
            
            The British lost because the founding fathers adopted new tactics of warfare. The criminal immigrants have adopted a cowardly hide behind your cute little girl, use Jesus, and the turn the other cheek clause of Christianity and then stab them in the back tactic. We must see past thier I'm just a poor desperate soul looking for help con and make them fix what they broke in thier own countries. Before they ruin ours.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               John Holdenposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               The founding fathers didn't "win" America from the British, it wasn't theirs to win or lose.
               
               The founding fathers were nothing more than illegal immigrants.

               replyreport
               1. 75

                  Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually the founding fathers weren't the same people that first arrived, so technically.... <grinning>
                  
                  (and look at what happened to the native people that were here that granted those people amnesty)...food for thought...

                  replyreport
         2. 61

            Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            OK YOU ARE FORGIVEN

            replyreport
6. 95

   wildernessposted 12 years ago

   Although I am generally for deportation, I might consider amnesty under the following conditions:
   
   Issue any current illegal a green card, good for 2 years.  In that time must learn English (both written and spoken) and normal requirements for citizenship.  A quick path to citizenship must be formed and if not a citizen in those two years, deport.
   
   Any legal violations outside of very very minor convictions (jaywalking, perhaps, or speeding) to result in immediate deportation.  Panhandling where not allowed or failure to pay a hospital bill - deport.  DUI, driving with a license or insurance, reckless driving, assault or battery (any conviction for violence), illegal drug possession - deport.  We're tired of supporting you, even in jail.  Stop the BS cries about racism when checking legal status.
   
   No govt. handouts of any kind, forever.  SS the same as everyone else; based on contributions.  Again, we're tired of supporting you.  The forever part to help make up for what they have already cost the country.  Normal practice for any govt. entity to check citizenship status including welfare offices and schools.
   
   A serious and severe plan to stop hiring of illegals.  Strong enough to make any company think twice about it, coupled with a quick and easy method of checking legal status for every employee.  Maybe 1/2 of last years receipts for a 2nd or 3rd conviction - that would put any small outfit out of business and severely hurt large companies with many locations and hiring offices.
   
   Tough?  Sure - what else can a criminal expect?  Unfair to legal immigrants?  Of course, but it is a problem that MUST be solved and is not even being addressed.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      michifusposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Properly managed, an amnesty can be a good thing. Its not a perfect solution by a long long way, but the current situation is clearly not working either, so something needs to be done. Whether an amnesty is the answer is still open to debate, but not to look at all of the options will only end up making the situation worse.
      
      I don't agree with Mikel, although I fully appreciate his anger. As I understand it immigration was welcomed back then, and it helped to create a great nation. True there were some "casualties" but overall, immigration was/ and is a good thing. Illegal immigration however is not, unfortunately the solution to that is far from simple.
      
      Deportation is fine, but it is just not workable considering the numbers involved. Its fighting a losing battle. The cost of accepting those who are in the country compared to the money and resources to kick them all out just doesn't compare. Besides kicking them all out is an impossibility.
      
      where I agree with mikel is
      
      "Criminal Invaders have no right to own it no claims to it and no right to be in what isn't thier country.
      
      Only Legal resident aliens and United States Citizens have any claim to the United States."
      
      Amnesty is not giving in or being a soft touch, it is taking affirmative action to deal with a problem. The only way that it can work though, as Wilderness points out, is if it is structured properly, but also that following an amnesty that there is a zero tolerance policy.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I disagree that deportation is impossible; one good system to prevent employing illegals and they would deport themselves.
         
         Problem, of course, is that the powerful in the country don't want that.  Illegals produce too much money for them and their political buddies.

         replyreport
      2. 75

         Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I disagree, allowing the amnesty gives the next wave of criminal invaders a place to set up shop. Since the next wave will be the relatives of those that received the first amnesty they will be hopeful of a second amnesty and protected by the new legally established ex-criminals that have no respect for the laws of the United States.
         
         They will also be a shining example to all that "CRIME PAYS".
         
         Crime should not pay, criminals should.

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            With strong restrictions and enforcement on hiring illegals I can't see a next wave.  Nor do I see a great number of illegals becoming citizens as most don't want to any way.  Especially without the "helping hand" of deep American pockets.
            
            I agree in principle that illegals should simply be deported (with the caveat that children are a problem) but it isn't going to happen.  This seems like a good way to compromise.

            replyreport
            1. 75

               Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               denying amnesty and deportation is the compromise, killing them in the streets like any other invading army is what "by the book" policy is.

               replyreport
               1. 95

                  wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  While I might like to see them all deported it isn't going to happen. Realistically, some compromise must be made - the country is far too split on opinion to be otherwise.
                  
                  On one hand are those that would simply open the doors to anyone and everyone especially including those that are already here while others would simply deport everyone.  Somewhere in the middle is where it will end up - I believe it behooves us all to find that middle ground.

                  replyreport
                  1. 75

                     Mikel G Robertsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     and again I say denying amnesty and deportation is the middle ground.
                     
                     By the book is kill them all, the other extreme is blanket amnesty.
                     
                     If we are to remain a nation that is based on law and order we must respect and follow the law. If the law is meaningless then citizens will stop following it and revolution will follow. Mark my words.

                     replyreport
               2. 61

                  Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  i FINALLY AGREE WITH YOU

                  replyreport
   2. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You're on the right track, Wilderness.

      replyreport
   3. 84

      kerrygposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "A serious and severe plan to stop hiring of illegals.  Strong enough to make any company think twice about it, coupled with a quick and easy method of checking legal status for every employee."
      
      I think this would do much more to stop illegal immigration than any amount of border patrolling or deporting. Most of them come here because they can make more money here than they can at home. Make it impossible for them to make any money here and the number of illegals will slow to a trickle within days!

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It would not only stop illegal aliens from coming in it would force voluntary "deportation" of those that are here.  The only real border patrol necessary would be for drug runners and other smugglers.
         
         That will cause many people to cry "unfair" as those illegals that have lived here for years or decades are forced out.  The suggestion I offer is a compromise that allows those that want to stay to do so, but ONLY at a cost that most won't be willing to pay.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Isaiah23Montoyaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Are we in Palestine or the USA?

            replyreport
      2. 83

         gmwilliamsposted 9 years agoin reply to this

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

         replyreport
7. 87

   Zelkiiroposted 9 years ago

   Considering we Europeans entered the U.S. illegally and with intent to rape the land and displace the natives, we have absolutely no right to deny others entry into a country we ourselves stole from its natives.
   
   American deportation is hypocrisy of mind-boggling proportions.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Oh?  And which owners had laws prohibiting such entrance?  If it was "illegal" as you claim whose law was it that said no one could enter the continent?

      replyreport