None of them allow for unrestricted immigration. So I fail to see how those who don't fall under the umbrella of the new program will simply decide to stay home. Hundreds of thousands cross the border every year, these bills don't cover all of them.
Further, what is the point of charging them huge fines for being here illegally? A lot of them are poor, they can't afford to pay a fine, and what are we going to do, lock millions of them away? Seems like more of a paper tiger to me.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
fugu- I see what you're saying about the economy. Without agreeing or disagreeing about whether massive immigration is good for the economy, I think that when people use the term economy it includes many other factors: taxes, social services, etc.
It seems simple to me. If you greatly increase the amount of people who do not pay any taxes in a nation (since if they are unrestricted they are undocumented and therefore not paying taxes) yet you massively increase the amount that social services (funded by taxes) must put out, there will be some point where the above social services will not be able to continue to function.
quote:First- address the putative concerns of the nationalists. They say that immigrants pay no taxes and put a burden on the social services the country provides. Fine- allow illegal immigrants access to free health clinics etc. but provide no welfare checks to anyone without a valid social security card. That should be simple enough.
Sure, there's no sense of entitlement. This fellow just wants to give every illegal immigrant that comes into this country free healthcare- something American citizens do not even enjoy, and at the expense of American taxpayers. That sounds suspiciously like entitlement to me.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where do you get that unrestricted equals undocumented and not paying taxes? Not that anybody is actually arguing for unrestricted immigration, but even that extreme isn't how you're casting it.
Btw. if you think free health clinics constitute free healthcare, I suggest you spend some time with the homeless .
I'm for significantly reducing illegal immigration, I just think this is best done by making legal immigration much easier.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
We benefit when an adult worker crosses into our country. We have a social security crisis from not having borne and raised enough workers. I mean, yeah it's not fair to the law abiding to live with these law breakers, but the law abiding have not created a sustainable social security system. Should there be any limits on who we let in? How many people here are not descendants of immigrants in one form or other?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Large scale imigration is very analogous to large scale oil importation. Could we do without it. Yes, but not without a substantial impact to our present way of life. I ride a bike to work every day. How many of you are willing to sign up for that? I enjoy being able to buy fresh produce in my local market. I guess I could go back to imported sardines and crackers. But, I'm not willing to do that. There is not an EEUU person on this forum that does not benifit from the avalability of that workforce.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:First- address the putative concerns of the nationalists. They say that immigrants pay no taxes and put a burden on the social services the country provides. Fine- allow illegal immigrants access to free health clinics etc. but provide no welfare checks to anyone without a valid social security card. That should be simple enough.
Sure, there's no sense of entitlement. This fellow just wants to give every illegal immigrant that comes into this country free healthcare- something American citizens do not even enjoy, and at the expense of American taxpayers. That sounds suspiciously like entitlement to me.
erm, fugu is, as far as I know, American. how can he possibly be evidence of an immigrant's sense of entitlement?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think fugu said the quotation in question . . . though he is American. However, that one person wants to give people something, even were that singular person an immigrant, would not be evidence for immigrants having a sense of entitlement.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:First- address the putative concerns of the nationalists. They say that immigrants pay no taxes and put a burden on the social services the country provides. Fine- allow illegal immigrants access to free health clinics etc. but provide no welfare checks to anyone without a valid social security card. That should be simple enough.
Sure, there's no sense of entitlement. This fellow just wants to give every illegal immigrant that comes into this country free healthcare- something American citizens do not even enjoy, and at the expense of American taxpayers. That sounds suspiciously like entitlement to me.
erm, fugu is, as far as I know, American. how can he possibly be evidence of an immigrant's sense of entitlement?
And there IS a certain degree of free health care for American citizens. He was referring to FREE CLINICS, which do exist for American citizens. I know in this city, there was (thanks, Katrina) a free hospital, as well as a free mental health clinic which would provide generic medication and counseling for free. I don't know what the requirements were to qualify, but such things DO exist.
And why should we want immigrants running around unable to care for their own health, anyway?
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Where do you get that unrestricted equals undocumented and not paying taxes? Not that anybody is actually arguing for unrestricted immigration, but even that extreme isn't how you're casting it.
Btw. if you think free health clinics constitute free healthcare, I suggest you spend some time with the homeless .
I'm for significantly reducing illegal immigration, I just think this is best done by making legal immigration much easier.
If a person is required to do some sort of documentation in order to work, then that is a restriction. No restriction could mean no documentation. If there is no documentation, then there would be no records for paying taxes, no contributions to social security by employer or employee.
I have heard people arguing for unrestricted immigration, Bok for one, and you implied that it wouldn't be a problem but a benefit.
If I've cast the arguments wrong, I apologize, however the same has happened to me. People are implying I'm against immigration. I'm IN FAVOR of greatly increasing LEGAL immigration and in cutting the red tape involved. However, it really seems as if the only way to do that is to greatly reduce illegal immigration.
This hurts Americans, as well as legal and illegal immigrants. For example, if we increase legal immigration dramatically, illegal immigration would directly hurt those legally immigrating. The unskilled workers that come in the legal way would be in direct competition for jobs with illegal immigrants, who work for cheaper than the minimum wage requirements for permanent residents and citizens.
It really bothers me that just because I'm for solving the illegal immigration problem, people's responses have implied that I am against immigration. They are two seperate things people. It really is possible to be strongly pro-immigration and anti-illegal immigration. To me, they go hand in hand.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It really bothers me that just because I'm for solving the illegal immigration problem, people's responses have implied that I am against immigration. They are two seperate things people. It really is possible to be strongly pro-immigration and anti-illegal immigration. To me, they go hand in hand.
Yes it is possible. Unfortunatly the politics and posturing of our elected officials as they play with the biases and fears of the electorate will probably prevent it happening any time soon.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I think that when people use the term economy it includes many other factors: taxes, social services, etc.
I don't have access to the numbers any more, although I did at one time. But, generally undocumented workers and workers using eroneous documents do pay taxes. They may use some general services. But, they do not use individual services to the extent that citizens do, as they are reluctant to identify themselves to "the government". Most do not ultimately qualify for Social Security retirement benefits. But, they do pay Social Security taxes. On the balance they are not a net cost to the Nationwide system of social services.
Today, I saw an article in our local press that said that many more families are immigrating as a unit. If that is the case, the children may use the public education system. However, we need to remember; that system was set up to benefit society and not to benefit individuals. If the child remains in this country, society will enjoy the benefit no matter the immigrant status of the parent.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: If the child remains in this country, society will enjoy the benefit no matter the immigrant status of the parent.
And the disbenefits of a bunch of kids who AREN'T educated are enough to convince me that, no matter what the cost, we should provide the best education we can afford regardless of legal status.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
BaoQingTian, I don't think I'm misconstruiing your p.o.v., just disputing whether the statement you quoted is evidence of a sense of entitlement.
(Also, when people say "unrestricted immigration," I take it to mean with documentation, etc. So yeah, it is "restricted," but only in the most minimal way. I don't know that anybody is for allowing people to be legally undocumented. Then again, perhaps I am misinterpreting this.)
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry to double post, so to speak, but I was having technical issues.
Lou Dobbs brings up some good points.
What is the plan to secure the borders? Is it the high tech, surveillance plan? or is it the increased manpower plan? or some mix of the two?
And how are illegal workers supposed to verify how long they have been here? their tax records? their good citizenship? Any of the things that Congress is using as a benchmark to determine who stays, who goes, and what rank they are put in?
There's still too many unanswered questions for people who are sitting around patting themselves on the back.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
