Who are we deporting?

[JfizzleBlazer]

The thing that bothers me the most is that they come over illegally. There are all these people in Romania, Vietnam, Russia etc that want to come over too, but they have to go through a ton of tests and things to be able to come over. I don't think its fair, I also don't think it's fair now that they can't get car insurance (since they can't get a license), that some of them still feel it is ok to drive a car. If they were to get into a wreck and mess somebody up, that's a fucked up situation and I know I would be livid if they hit my car.

If they were to come over legally, and do all the documentation, then I have no problem with them coming here.

 

[barfo]

Illegal immigrants are the new generation of slaves. They are people without protection or rights. If you care about civil rights, you should be against illegal immigration.

There's a difference between being anti-slavery, and being anti-slaves.

barfo

 

[barfo]

One example I would bring up, is medical treatment. Many people say we should deny aliens medical treatment, because they can't or won't pay. Yet we have insurance companies here in the states, that pay for americans to go over to other countries and take advantage of their socialistic medical systems, or a "medical vacation" if you will. They go over to other countries, get free health care while they are there, and don't pay for anything but the trip over. All so the insurance company can save a few bucks. Who pays for it he medical treatment? The other country (like India) is stuck with the bill. Hypocritical practice. We don't all do it, but there are those who do. The same can be said of the aliens that come here. Some are bad folks. Many are not. So don't treat them all that way.

I think this is a misunderstanding. Nobody but the very poor would go to India to take advantage of socialized medicine. People go to India because private health care costs less there, due to (a) labor costs; (b) insurance costs; (c) regulatory costs.

barfo

 

[Minstrel]

I say yes.

No one is guaranteed food. No one is guaranteed shelter.

Why should they be guaranteed a new heart or cancer-removal surgery?

I think all of those things should be guaranteed.

 

[maxiep]

My wife was technically an illegal immigrant. Truth is that if she wanted to go the legal route, she would have had to remain in the UK for an extra year for the proper visa to arrive. We wanted to be together and get married, so why go through that hassle? She just overstayed her tourist visa, we got married, and 14 months later she was eligible to apply for a green card. During that time she couldn't leave the US, she couldn't work legally, and she had to make damned sure she didn't get pulled over by a cop.

When she finally received her green card, after two years from the time she first came to the US, she was free to work or visit England again.

The reason I described this is to show how moronic our immigration system is. It's confusing, badly organized and extremely inconsistent. It's hardly a shocker that so many just like my wife say "screw it" and do what's easy, rather than what's legal.

It's fun and all to just point fingers at the illegals, but a big part of the problem is that us lazy Americans haven't put a sensible immigration program in place.

Why does our immigration policy makes no sense? Because you and your wife-to-be would have been inconvenienced? She broke the law. Most of us have had long-distance relationships and you gut it out. I know I sound like a hardass, but it's tough to respect a flagrant violation like that because it would have been difficult for both of you.

 

[maxiep]

There's a difference between being anti-slavery, and being anti-slaves.

barfo

Ah, yes. The canard of being anti-illegal immigration means that I'm anti-illegal immigrant. I guess because I'm anti-Mafia, I must hate Italians.

Do you have any concept of the harm done in an underground economy? For someone who supposedly has a liberal viewpoint, you sure don't seem to give a shit about those being exploited.

 

[maxiep]

I think all of those things should be guaranteed.

Who pays for it? If you feel so strongly, give every cent you have to guaranteeing those items. Local, state and the federal goverment accepts checks and money orders. Right now, you're asking my kid to pay for it, which is awfully generous of you.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Why does our immigration policy makes no sense? Because you and your wife-to-be would have been inconvenienced? She broke the law. Most of us have had long-distance relationships and you gut it out. I know I sound like a hardass, but it's tough to respect a flagrant violation like that because it would have been difficult for both of you.

But I think mook's situation is a good example of how should we deal with these situations . . . jail and deport?

I say no way. Here in Oregon, you can steal a car and get no jail if it is your first offense. Keeping things in perspective, illegal immigration should be handled by jail?

 

[Minstrel]

Who pays for it?

Well, all of us.

Right now, you're asking my kid to pay for it, which is awfully generous of you.

Oh, you figured it out yourself.

I agree, it is very generous of me. Of course, I plan to pay it, too.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I say yes.

No one is guaranteed food. No one is guaranteed shelter.

Why should they be guaranteed a new heart or cancer-removal surgery?

Ed O.

Well the other alternative (on the extreme ) is to let someone die because they can't afford to pay for medical costs?

But I do get the idea there are no guarantees and why should health care be different . . . I think it should be, but I understand this is a highly controversial issue with points on both sides.

 

[maxiep]

But I think mook's situation is a good example of how should we deal with these situations . . . jail and deport?

I say deportation is fine. I don't want to pay for a jail cell. However, the penalty for being in the country illegally should be that there is a significant waiting period before you're allowed back in. It didn't seem as if there were any penalty in Mook's case.

I say no way. Here in Oregon, you can steal a car and get no jail if it is your first offense. Keeping things in perspective, illegal immigration should be handled by jail?

Wow, you seem to know a lot about jacking cars. Again, those are citizens breaking the law. Frankly, I'd like to see people like that in jail.

 

[maxiep]

Well, all of us.



Oh, you figured it out yourself.

I agree, it is very generous of me. Of course, I plan to pay it, too.

But you wouldn't pay for it, that's the part you don't seem to get. We're running a deficit that will not be paid in our lifetimes. So, you're asking the next generation and the generation after that to pay for programs to make you feel better. Like I said, feel free to send more of your money to the government; they'll be happy to take it. Or you can do what I (and others do) and give to a charity.

 

[barfo]

Ah, yes. The canard of being anti-illegal immigration means that I'm anti-illegal immigrant. I guess because I'm anti-Mafia, I must hate Italians.

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest anything about you. It was more a general comment towards the thread at large, and was expanding upon your comment.

Do you have any concept of the harm done in an underground economy? For someone who supposedly has a liberal viewpoint, you sure don't seem to give a shit about those being exploited.

Don't know how you got that from my one-line statement.

barfo

 

[Minstrel]

But you wouldn't pay for it, that's the part you don't seem to get. We're running a deficit that will not be paid in our lifetimes. So, you're asking the next generation and the generation after that to pay for programs to make you feel better.

Sure, just as I currently pay down (in part) a deficit left by others. Framing this as a sort of selfish process that I won't be a part of (in the paying sense) doesn't really wash, IMO. Conceptually, I believe society has an obligation to everyone. Whether I pay directly for the programs that exist today or whether I pay for previous social programs while future generations pay for the current ones doesn't change that principle a bit.

Or you can do what I (and others do) and give to a charity.

I do both. Pay taxes (that support both programs that I support and those that I don't) and I give directly to charity.

 

[bodyman5001]

Here is an intersting information:

Link

Now add to this number all the descendents from illegal immigrants and you have a huge number. It is virtually impossible to deport all this people.

People think all kinds of things are impossible. No harm in trying to prove them wrong.

My plan is this, put large buses in the back of every Goodwill store. Put a ramp from the loading area in the store to the bus....herd all the hispanics into the buses and let the ones that can prove that they are here legally go free. EASY.

 

[MARIS61]

My wife was technically an illegal immigrant. Truth is that if she wanted to go the legal route, she would have had to remain in the UK for an extra year for the proper visa to arrive. We wanted to be together and get married, so why go through that hassle? She just overstayed her tourist visa, we got married, and 14 months later she was eligible to apply for a green card. During that time she couldn't leave the US, she couldn't work legally, and she had to make damned sure she didn't get pulled over by a cop.

When she finally received her green card, after two years from the time she first came to the US, she was free to work or visit England again.

The reason I described this is to show how moronic our immigration system is. It's confusing, badly organized and extremely inconsistent. It's hardly a shocker that so many just like my wife say "screw it" and do what's easy, rather than what's legal.

It's fun and all to just point fingers at the illegals, but a big part of the problem is that us lazy Americans haven't put a sensible immigration program in place.

Seems like your wife is the lazy one, not us Americans?

 

[MARIS61]

Here is an intersting information:

Link

Now add to this number all the descendents from illegal immigrants and you have a huge number. It is virtually impossible to deport all this people.

Virtually Impossible?

They all got here on their own, without our assistance, many on foot.

With a proper incentive to go home provided (imprisonment, execution, whatever gets them motivated?) they'd be gone in a week.

 

[Denny Crane]

I say let 'em all in. Since when is America anything but a melting pot, and why should we pull up the ladder behind us after we've made it here?

Why no cries to build a fence across the Canadian border! It's racist.

Mexicans are NATIVE AMERICANS. They've been migrating throughout north america for centuries and long before white man came here. Let them continue to do so, I absolutely see no harm.

They're Mexican citizens, not US ones. They're only entitled to the rights that "Persons" (defined by law, the constitution) have, not that citizens have. That's the price for not going through "official" channels.

The immigration laws have always been there to racially profile people and deny them Liberty because of their race. It's a disgrace.

If we got rid of income tax and went to a sales tax of some sort, they'd pay their fair share of taxes to cover whatever societal cash costs anyone claims against them.

If we want them to not immigrate, we should be thinking of ways to make Mexico a better place for them to stay.

 

[number 10]

http://www.katu.com/news/34377814.html

BOO HOO! The guy's been here illegally for 10 years and probably didnt pay a dime in taxes. Boot his ass out of here! 10 years was plenty of time for him to become a legal citizen and contribute like the rest of us. Who's gonna support his family? Probably our tax $$$. Pisses me off!

I've always thought it was the opposite - illegal immigrants are stuck paying taxes without getting any of the benefits (ie social security)

regardless, I'm fairly shocked at how cold this thread is. It took three pages to get to this

If we want them to not immigrate, we should be thinking of ways to make Mexico a better place for them to stay.

Exactly. Some corporate responsibility would go a long way to improving the immigration situation.

 

[MARIS61]

There's a difference between being anti-slavery, and being anti-slaves.

barfo

Maybe you mean to say something else?

Is there a difference between being anti-murder and anti-murderer?

If you support them being here illegally, then you support them being enslaved, because without them applying for and receiving citizenship they will not be protected from it.

Maybe instead of deportation you would prefer they be rounded up and put in government labor camps for the benefit of our legal citizens, rather than merely benefitting greedy business owners?

 

[MARIS61]

If we want them to not immigrate, we should be thinking of ways to make Mexico a better place for them to stay.

WTF?

This is how incredibly LAZY the typical illegal immigrant from Mexico is.

They are born in a pretty nice country, one so comfy that millions of Americans choose to retire in and live out their golden years, and some Mexicans don't think it's perfect so rather than work to improve their home country like Americans do each and every day, they prefer to sneak into America and sponge off our legal citizens. They have no desire to become LEGAL Americans if it requires any effort on their part. They have no desire to be a constructive part of ANY society.

They are traitors to Mexico, and parasites riding the backs of decent Americans.

I have no sympathy for ILLEGAL immigrants at all, and despise their very presence here.

They are the exact opposite of LEGAL immigrants in every way, and further demonstrate WHY we have a process for immigration.

It weeds out the criminals, the users, the worst of the worst.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

I say yes.

No one is guaranteed food. No one is guaranteed shelter.

Why should they be guaranteed a new heart or cancer-removal surgery?

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

Maris, you seem to have two rather different views of illegal immigrants. How do you reconcile them?

They are born in a pretty nice country, one so comfy that millions of Americans choose to retire in and live out their golden years, and some Mexicans don't think it's perfect so rather than work to improve their home country like Americans do each and every day, they prefer to sneak into America and sponge off our legal citizens. They have no desire to become LEGAL Americans if it requires any effort on their part. They have no desire to be a constructive part of ANY society.

If you support them being here illegally, then you support them being enslaved, because without them applying for and receiving citizenship they will not be protected from it.

Are they slaves, or lazy welfare queens? Can't be both.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Maybe you mean to say something else?

Is there a difference between being anti-murder and anti-murderer?

The correct analogy is, is there a difference between being anti-murder and anti-murder victim?

If you support them being here illegally, then you support them being enslaved, because without them applying for and receiving citizenship they will not be protected from it.

Maybe instead of deportation you would prefer they be rounded up and put in government labor camps for the benefit of our legal citizens, rather than merely benefitting greedy business owners?

Maybe you aren't making any sense.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

Maris, you seem to have two rather different views of illegal immigrants. How do you reconcile them?





Are they slaves, or lazy welfare queens? Can't be both.

barfo

Both.

Absolutely.

As with all slaves, they simply follow the easiest path in life.

 

[MARIS61]

Illegal immigrants are slaves VOLUNTARILY, as they have many legal opportunities available to them but lazily choose to take the path of least resistance.

They can work to make their already pretty good country better, or they can go through a simple administrative process and become legal citizens here and contribute to making this country better.

They refuse to do either, because it requires a modicum of personal effort and responsibility, and prefer to desert their countrymen and families and sponge off our society at our expense.

 

[barfo]

Voluntary slaves? Isn't that completely self-contradictory?

barfo

 

[maxiep]

Sure, just as I currently pay down (in part) a deficit left by others. Framing this as a sort of selfish process that I won't be a part of (in the paying sense) doesn't really wash, IMO. Conceptually, I believe society has an obligation to everyone. Whether I pay directly for the programs that exist today or whether I pay for previous social programs while future generations pay for the current ones doesn't change that principle a bit.

As long as we continue to run a deficit, you don't pay for anything in the present. All you're doing is putting it on future generations. For everyone who is comfortable with that concept, if you have kids, look them in the eye and explain why they should pay for your comfort.

And I just don't buy the argument that because something was put on us, that we can then justify making it worse. You leave something better than when you found it.

I'm a believer in buying only what you can afford. Our government needs to do less, not more. Local organizations do a marvelous job at feeding the poor. In fact, I'd like someone to point to me the widespread starvation problem in this country. If anything, poor people suffer from the effects of excess calories (heart disease, obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, etc), not a calorie deficiency.

I do both. Pay taxes (that support both programs that I support and those that I don't) and I give directly to charity.

If you're still not satisfied, give more.

 

[Minstrel]

As long as we continue to run a deficit, you don't pay for anything in the present. All you're doing is putting it on future generations. For everyone who is comfortable with that concept, if you have kids, look them in the eye and explain why they should pay for your comfort.

Simple. We each pay for the social programs of the previous generation, due to the way things work. As I said, the essential concept is unchanged: we're paying for the social good, because society should not let anyone end up starving in the gutter. Whether the "strangers" one is helping are people today or people from yesterday isn't terribly germane to the point.

And I just don't buy the argument that because something was put on us, that we can then justify making it worse.

Right, but I don't see it as "put upon us" and "making it worse." It's an essential difference between us. I understand why I have a bill come due from the past, and I'm not willing to forsake social programs because of it.

Of course, we could spend half of what we do on military and still lead the world in military spending by a LARGE amount. Perhaps we could "make the deficit better for future generations" by cutting into that a bit?

In fact, I'd like someone to point to me the widespread starvation problem in this country.

That's a strange challenge. There is no starvation problem because we have social welfare programs.

If you're still not satisfied, give more.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll take it under advisement. I try to do my part, but society as a whole can do far more than I can individually, so I'll continue to support social programs in addition to donating money and time.

 

[maxiep]

Simple. We each pay for the social programs of the previous generation, due to the way things work.

I refuse to accept this new idea. We have historically run small deficits, but those were to pay for the articles outlined in the Constitution. Social Security is supposed to be paid for by your dollars; it's to be held in trust. Reagan raided the SSTF, and we've never refilled it.

As I said, the essential concept is unchanged: we're paying for the social good, because society should not let anyone end up starving in the gutter. Whether the "strangers" one is helping are people today or people from yesterday isn't terribly germane to the point.

Wrong country. Here's what we believe:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Right, but I don't see it as "put upon us" and "making it worse." It's an essential difference between us. I understand why I have a bill come due from the past, and I'm not willing to forsake social programs because of it.

Like I said, all governments accept personal checks, money orders and credit cards. Pay as much as you want.

Of course, we could spend half of what we do on military and still lead the world in military spending by a LARGE amount. Perhaps we could "make the deficit better for future generations" by cutting into that a bit?

Besides the fact that the military serves as the most effective social program in the United States, I'll refer you back to the preamble of the Constitution. We provide for the common defense.

That's a strange challenge. There is no starvation problem because we have social welfare programs.

Then why create a new program or a new right for a problem that doesn't exist?

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll take it under advisement. I try to do my part, but society as a whole can do far more than I can individually, so I'll continue to support social programs in addition to donating money and time.

Think Globally, Act Locally. If not enough is being done, give more. There are those who believe too much is done. If you don't want to live your values and give more, run for office and try to allocate money that isn't yours. The Left is very good at that particular skill.