ok...i need to understand your point better. are you saying the situation here is different...or the cultures aren't comparable?? because when you said: "i find the comparisons of other cultures, that have migrated to america in the past, not to be particularly good." i assumed you were comparing cultures...not the situations here.
I think a key difference between 'then' and 'now' is that 'then' they were trying to populate the country....and I don't think that's the case today. I do see similarities between the irish and mexicans. Even beyond St Paddy's day and Cinco de Mayo -- though both are a good reason to get a buzz on. That said...I do favour amnesty, and increased immigration. Easy for me to say...as I'm not living on the mexican border, so I wouldn't see the impact. As an aside...it was much more difficult to immigrate to the US then to Canada at least in the 70's. My parents originally intended to stay in the US but were unable to do so...so they kept driving north.
i dont care what culture it is, i said cultures just meaning different people in general.. Its about people coming into a country properly and legally, not necessarily where they come from, although mexicos close proximity does have to be taken into consideration
What I don't understand is that you have people complaining that immigrants are coming to stay here and dilute our culture and use our benefits and then you have people complaining that they aren't coming and staying here. Make up your minds.
Then why did you bring up culture? Is your argument that illegal immigration is a culture of lawbreaking? Let me ask you do your ever speed or jaywalk? Have you considered that there already is a culture of lawbreaking when the laws are out of touch with reality?
again...and this keeps on coming up over and over...i think people are sick and tired of the people breaking the law to come to this country, not immigrants who do so properly.
In my post "they" meant the US. I don't buy the 'they don't want to stay here argument either.' I also don't buy the sentiment that they should be brought in to do all the crappy jobs. That's a caste system!
Oh, I'm very aware of the demographic changes in Europe, Russia, Japan, and other nations, most, but not all, developed countries. As I've said repeatedly, my problem is with the lack of fairness and equity that allows millions overseas who want to come to this country, and are using the legal system, being forced to wait for years, and pay what is for many a fortune to handle the legal work involved, while illegal immigrants with access to the border from this hemisphere getting into this country in their millions. Were they here on work visas and then returned to their own countries, using the legal system in place to attempt to become citizens, like those around the world, that would present no problem for me. If we are dependent on illegal immigration to maintain a growing population, well I'll pass. And what I was addressing with Sishir in that post, in particular, was this, which I could have done a better job highlighting... "How did the government and insurance companies pay for that great care before? They paid for it by having a growing youthful workforce that could support things pensions and health insurance." This was in response to my post about my father's ability to have the finest medical care under the insurance common at that time. I would argue that the change in insurance has little to do with a change in demographics, as it pertains to government employees, state employees in particular, and more to do with a combination of a very large reduction of state contributions towards insurance coverage for state employees, as well as the state, due to contributions by the insurance industry and their lobbyists, changing to cheaper and far less comprehensive insurance. And why did they do that? Because it makes more money for the insurance companies that provide coverage (those who are chosen to provide it by the Lege), and the cuts provide more available funds for tax cuts that help special interest contributors to the Lege and the Governor's reelection campaigns. It's not demographics, certainly not in Texas. It's politics of the worst kind. In my opinion, of course. D&D. Replicant Freeway.
Again do you speed? Do you jaywalk? What about being sick and tired of all those people speeding and jaywalking instead of the people who take their time to drive the speedlimit and obey crosswalks? I would buy this argument about the need to respect the law if moe people would follow all of the laws. I think we need a rule of law but at the same time you have to recognize that some laws are just out of touch with reality. Justifying maintaining laws on the sole basis that they are laws makes a mockery of the reason why we need a rule of law. You create a situation where the enforcement causes greater problems than the situation you were trying to address in the first place. See prohibition.
Again though this a problem not created by immigrants but by our laws. If we made it easier for immigrants to come here then it would be easier for immigrants from all parts of the world to come here. The problem you are citing is one created by the solution you are advocating. More enforcement means it is harder for immigrants from further away to come since the legal impediments exacerbate the geographic. Possibly not demographics in Texas because Texas already has a high population of both legal and illegal immigrants providing labor and creating capital. Its not the same in many places like the Dakotas where population is declining. While corruption and changes in laws have certainly added to the stituation in the end all that health care, pensions and other benefits have to be paid somehow. You can't just change the laws to tax businesses and compel insurance companies to provide more benefits and coverages and suddenly have them providing first class health care will still going about business as usuall. You need a labor pool, particularly one that is relatively healthy and won't tax the benefits, to generate the capital to pay for those things.
Sorry, that was my fault for not being clearer in my response. I was addressing the thread in general and not you specifically. A caste system though is one where people are forced into their positions with no hope of advancement. I don't see a problem with immigration creating a caste systemn when people come here willingly and are given a chance to either advance or opt out of the lot they find themselves in by going back where they came. The current situation adds more to a caste system since illegal immigrants have few opportunities to advance since they are outside the law and due to the problems coming accross the border it is harder for them to go back.
Sishir, you don't get it. State government employees (including state university profs) had their benefits chipped away not because of a large labor pool that provides employees through legal and illegal immigration, but because of corruption. There was no shortage of employees. On the contrary, the number of state employees has been slashed the last several years, certainly relative to the increase in the state's population. D&D. Replicant Freeway.
come on sishir, you are smarter than that. You very well know that illegally intruding a country is much different than jaywalking or speeding. clever trick, but you know as well as i thats apples and oranges. as for the enforcement, why would enforcing it create a greater problem? also, thinking that there isnt a problem with letting millions of undocumented people into a country is being out of touch with reality.
Its not murder, assault and battery, embezzlement, or robbery either. I would place it closer to jaywalking than any of the above. There is no injured party who can claim direct injury. The self-created social costs of the un-winnable 'drug war' strikes me as a very apt comparison. We already have the second largest percentage of our population in prison (behind Rwanda) of any country in the world. Maybe we can double or triple that figure with people on the merry-go-round waiting to be deported before they cross the border again. If you try to fight a battle to the death with the ocean tides or the seasons or economic cycles you will not win. You succeed by understanding the nature of these forces and working your solution with them, judo-like, using existing points of leverage so that you get the best solution possible. Then document them. But of course the same people most concerned with documentation are against that as unfair. I agree that it is unfair. But the blame for this falls to the American people who have been trying to operate with a broken system.
I was talking about the workforce in general and not just state employees. I didn't notice in your previous posts that you were only talking about state employees if so I apologize. That said though state employees benefits are likely very indirectly affected by illegal immigration either way since those are somewhat shielded from the market.
Otto has already taken some of my responses but for my own response I would ask you how is breaking one law different from breaking another law? You are arguing about the rule of law yet are now essentially saying that some laws should be broken and that breaking one law is a different matter? If you don't feel that all laws are that important then your argument is inconsistent and is only about the laws that you feel are important. If that is the case then I would suggest you argue on another basis. As I've stated several times. When a law is out of touch with reality the enforcement of it creates greater problems. For instance during Prohibition by banning a substance that most of the public still demanded took the supplying of that product out of the hands of legitimate suppliers and instead created a vast criminal black market. Since the suppliers were unregulated there was no way for law enforcement to track it, government to tax it or regulators to regulate it. In a similar way there is a demand for cheap labor and immigrants willing to supply it but since most of that is pushed underground an unregulated and criminal black market is how the labor meets the demand but in a way that we can't keep track of. Again though if immigration laws were brought into line with the reality of what we have we wouldn't be letting a lot of people into the country undocumented. The market wouldn't be underground but would be open so we could track who is coming in and document them. I've said all of this several times already in the thread.
As I said near the beginning of the thread I'm not proposing an open border as I would certainly keep out people with highly infectious diseases or known members of Al Qaeda. I believe though our border could be open much much more. Practically this could be done through guest worker visas that could be obtained as easily as tourist visas with greater time limits. For illegals here now I would open up the possibility of citizenship for all of them that meet the criteria of naturalized citizenship. Anyone coming into and out of the country would have to register though so we can keep track of potential terrorists and other criminals. I don't know enough about other countries to know if any countries practice this.
Kinky suggested that we give every immigrant who wanted a "taxpayer ID card" if they passed a criminal background check. $50, a valid passport, and a clean record and anyone who wanted could be legal.
Dammit...don't you understand that we have to open up the borders and take all the world's people. Sheesh.
