.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
The Expansionist
Thursday, May 12, 2011
 
For unexplained reasons, Google's Blogger service, which hosts this blog, was unavailable for updates for two full days, so I could not timely upload todays post, nor what had been yesterday's, about another online article.

Letting Illegals Stay, Despite the Law. I left the following 74 replies to comments (comprising about 4,000 words) at a Huffington Post story, "Chipotle, Undocumented Workers, And The Trouble With 'Enforcement-Only' Immigration", to clarify some issues in immigration.


WE didn't DO that to the people of Central America. In the 1840s, the United States was approached by people in some countries of Central America about having their countries join the U.S. as States. Had that been done then, almost 170 years ago, and Mexico annexed in 1850, after the Mexican War, that entire region would be prosperous Sunbelt states today. If we do it now, in 30 years the dire poverty of that entire region will disappear. In the interim, however, the United States must protect and serve its OWN people. If Salvadorans want the right to work in the District of Columbia, let them agitate to have their government petition for statehood.
*
I'd have NO PROBLEM deporting 12 million illegals. No hesitancy, either. You either HAVE the right to be here, because you followed the rules, or you do NOT. And if you do NOT, go home! (Besides, the number of illegals, tho impossible to establish with any certitude, since they hide from the Census, is probably much less due to the Great Recession.)
*
Pls do not blame multinational corporations for the monetization of subsistence-agriculture societies that are, today, much as they were in the 14th Century. People everywhere want to join the 21st Century, and they are entitled to -- in their own country. The Chipotle worker mentioned made $8 an HOUR, not a day. Certainly other employers, who exploit illegal immigrants by paying them less than the law requires for legal workers, need to be punished with extreme severity. Flogging would do nicely; it would hurt a lot more, and make more of an impression, than fines that might not remotely make up for the money they saved by exploiting helpless people. And a flogged fatcat is not going to want to be flogged again, tho he'd be perfectly happy to face fines again. Exile is a good punishment that the world has let pass. Perhaps if we exiled, to, say El Salvador, offending employers, they will learn their lesson for life, and perhaps use their entrepreneurial skills to create jobs in El Salvador so Salvadorans don't have to leave their own country, and family, to find work.
*
From the link you provided: "As discussed below, the Department of State [of Colorado] is nearly certain that 106 individuals are improperly registered to vote." Is it possible that as many as 11,805 noncitizens in Colorado are registered to vote? Sure. We may well need to titen the registration process. If an illegal alien votes, s/he should be deport[ ]ed. But to suggest that there is a serious problem of illegals voting is a huge exaggeration. There are, for instance, over 5 million people in Colorado, and fewer than 12,000 are said, in the report you cite, to be POSSIBLE illegal voters. All <12K should be deported, of course, but let's not think our system is being fundamentally subverted by such trivia.
*
All illegals caut here should be fingerprinted before deportation, and if caut back here later, illegally, should be punished severely, as by flogging or imprisonment for several months at hard labor, such as working in a chain gang on repairing roads, digging irrigation/drainage ditches, etc., and then tattooed prominently (as on the back of the hand) with a mark to indicate a two-time offender, so any third invasion can be punished even more severely, as by a large tattoo on the FACE before deportation. We cannot simply consent to repeat invasions.
*
I dout there are significant numbers of illegal European immigrants. LEGAL immigration from Europe dried up a couple of decades ago, and there are many unfilled quota spaces for Europeans. There are, however, indeed many illegal Asian immigrants, few of which are caut in debacles such as the Golden Venture ship grounding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Venture). I don't care where illegals come from. Deport them all. Some people from Communist China might well be entitled to refugee status, of course, but most are only economic migrants.
*
I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean RACIAL issue? If so, say so. Is it a RELIGIOUS issue, in that most illegals from Latin America are Catholic, and the ruling class of the United States (except for the Supreme Court, of course) is Protestant? If you mean to say something, why don't you just say it, and not leave us gessing?
*
My first job was in McDonald's, right out of high school. I sure as heck would not want to have been unable to find that job because somebody who was not entitled to be here already had it. The issue is not "having" to fite over low-paid jobs but the RIGHT to accept a job. If we had a labor shortage, that's one thing. Instead, we have a catastrophic Great Recession. Even in times of labor shortage, we can fill undesirable jobs with LEGAL immigrants on short-term stays. thru a renewed Bracero program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracero).
*
What can people you cheat do? Hm. Let me think. Oh, I know. They can STAB you. There are more dangers to an underclass of illegals than you might think.
*
Pls cut the Cold War era, Communist crap. The United States has done far more good for Latin America in recent decades than all the harm it may have done in the past, and most of that past harm was in merely working with governments that we did not install and could not oust without being called "imperialists". 70 years ago, much of Latin America was controlled by dictators or corrupt oligarchies that might as well have been formal dictatorships. Now, thanks to constant pressure from the U.S. Government, and assistance from U.S. unions and NGOs, there are almost no dictatorships in the whole Continent.
*
Amnesty INVARIABLY produces more illegal immigration. NO amnesty. Mass deportation first, then we'll talk about what else needs to be done.
*
No one believes the NEXT amnesty will be the LAST amnesty. We were told that the LAST amnesty would be the last, but all thinking illegals assumed there would be future amnesties, so if only they could hide long enuf, they would, eventually, gain the right to be here. There IS a long-term solution -- two actually. (1) An EU-type arrangement of full integration of economies, with free flow of both capital and LABOR; (2) annexation to the United States, as States of the Union, of the sending countries, so we gain the right and power to change those countries so they work for their people, and for us as well. But we never do anything fully right in this country. We take half-measures, which invariably fail, rather than full-measures, which would invariably work. Thus "Obamacare" rather than single-payer. Single-payer would work, brilliantly. "Obamacare"? Not so much. If we want a permanent solution to the problem of illegal immigration from Latin America, we must transform the countries now sending miserable hordes across our border. And we can't do that with the arrangements now in place.
*
You don't punish the workers for the crimes of the bosses. Punish the individual responsible, not the entity at large. That would just victimize workers and worsen unemployment. Kindly THINK before you speak.
*
There are 6 billion people in the Third World, and many more are born each day. There is NO level of immigration to the United States that can satisfy the demand for admission from the Third World.
*
Nonsense. In Spanish, the terms are (honest) "ilegales" and (dishonest) "indocumentados". There is no basis in logic or grammar to object to the term "illegals". We really don't have to load down language with needless extra words, like "aliens" every time "illegal(s)" is mentioned.
*
We most definitely need to stop thinking every kid needs to go to college, and recognize that there are a host of honorable, well-compensated trades that we should be training kids for who don't have either the ability, or simply interest, to pursue.
*
Actually, PR is NOT part of the U.S. It is a semi-independent "Free Associated State" within the realm of SOME U.S. laws, but not all. For instance, Federal taxes levied there go to the "Commonwealth" government, not to Washington. And there is a serious question as to whether a resident of PR can run for President, because altho s/he is a "natural born citizen", s/he may not have resided in the "United States" for the requisite period before running. Puerto Rico's bizarre status -- first as a colony of a country that should never have had colonies, then as a "Commonwealth", in neither/nor limbo -- has kept it poor for generations. We need to bring it into the Union: http://www.expansionistparty.org/PR.html. And once we do, we can get rid of Spanish on ballots anywhere the people don't want it. Most Puerto Ricans can indeed speak English. They are taut it every day in school. Not so Mexicans, Guatemalans, etc.
*
Pls, everyone who links to a video, explain how it relates to the article we are talking about. And don't introduce irrelevancies.
*
So are MOST Democrats [hardworking family people of faith]. And polls and exit polling show plainly that by far most Hispanic voters ARE Democrats. The only exception is Cubans, drawn from the rich and middle class who left the island after the Communist takeover.
*
Kindly do not "correct" me by supplying WRONG information. The Spanish version of Puerto Rico's name is "Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_rico), the English version of which is, AS I SAID, "Free Associated State [of Puerto Rico]". In that the U.S. Constitution does not RECOGNIZE such a form of association, for purposes of U.S. laws, it is "territory" (property) of the United States, but ordinary "territories" do not have the powers of the "Commonwealth" of Puerto Rico. And please learn how to QUOTE. And reply AT the comment you are replying to, so you don't HAVE to quote. But above all, consult a reputable REFERENCE before "correcting" something that is already correct.
*
The job pays what it pays, to whoever applies. The presence or absence of illegal applicants does not change the pay rate.
*
You contradict yourself in telling people to "work on a legal path to citizenship" and accepting that the very first step on that path, being born in a place your mother had no right to be, is illegal but that doesn't matter. And if you shut down a business, you throw EVERYBODY out of work. That is not smart. Punish the guilty -- the employer who knowingly hires illegals -- not the innocent (other workers in that business).
*
Let's not forget that many illegals present very legal-looking documents.
*
The employer shouldn't keep money intended for illegal workers; the worker who defied the law shouldn't get it; it should go to the Government to offset part of the costs of enforcing the law and deporting illegals.
*
Stop the Communist crap. There are, aside from Cuba, essentially NO dictatorships left in Latin America: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/1022/Where-have-all-Latin-America-s-dictators-gone , so your first two points are pure b.s. Your third point is irresponsible lunacy, and paranoid to boot. The U.S. Government is "supporting drug cartels"? Perhaps you are on drugs yourself; if not, seek professional help.
*
If people born in the United States are not to be considered U.S. citizens, then NO ONE could be considered a U.S. citizen, because at some point, present or past, EVERYONE except naturalized citizens acquired citizenship by being born here.
*
Ah, another dishonest euphemism: "unauthorized immigrants". What next, a study to prove that the international drug trade actually makes money for us
*
Speak for yourself. 250 MILLION Americans, at least, would prefer to Buy American but aren't given that choice by greedy corporations -- not citizens.
*
What are you talking about, "indirect tariffs"? Tariffs made the United States a great manufacturing and economic power. The lowering or removal of tariffs has robbed us of much of our manufacturing AND economic power. That is what is "Not a great idea": free trade.
*
Mexico has a very short border with the rest of Latin America. We have a very LONG border with Mexico. Guess what? It is much easier to control a short border than long border. So Mexican Immigration's experience may be entirely irrelevant to our problems. Of course, if we annexed Mexico and Central America as Sunbelt States of the Union, our border with South America would be extremely short -- and in nearly impassable jungle.
*
There is no proof nor disproof for undated prophecies. Give us a date-certain for the collapse of the dollar, then we will be able to evaluate, AFTER that date, whether you were right or, more likely, wrong. But this discussion does not belong in a separate location, only at the original post.
*
Actually, the Great Wall of China worked fine. Some enemies managed to get AROUND it, but not OVER it. Some may have been invited THRU it by one Chinese faction eager to use their forces to defeat their Chinese rivals. But in general, the Great Wall worked great.
*
NO, do NOT fine the business; prosecute and fine -- or imprison, or flog -- the INDIVIDUAL responsible for violating the law. You could DESTROY the business, and thereby put legal workers out of work.
*
Amerinds were slautering each other for centuries -- Aztecs killed as many as 100,000 of their neighbors in some years, in human sacrifice -- before the arrival of Europeans. They were living at subsistence. There are BILLIONS of people around the world who would do almost ANYTHING to have the rights of American Indians. And in fact, if they weren't already here, they would be trying desperately to get into the United States -- not to their particular ancestral lands but to the United States as a society.
*
Actually, illegal immigration has more likely militated AGAINST outsourcing, by supplying downward pressu[r]e on domestic wage rates.
*
You are making that up. NAFTA has been of enormous aid to Mexico. Corporations do not have to steal land. They have the money to BUY land.
*
What standard of proof do we require? There are lots of illegals who produce very convincing documentation.
*
I have already pointed out that you MISREPRESENT what that report says, which is that only extremely trivial numbers of illegals are BELIEVED to have voted illegally. But let people follow that link and see for themselves that less than 200 are known to have voted and less than 12,000 are THOUGHT to have voted in Colorado, a state of 5 million people.
*
NO, birth in the United States determines U.S. citizenship. Parentage is a second type of qualification, and being born here of foreign parents generally entitles a child to a choice of citizenship at the age of majority. As for who paid for the medical care -- if any -- during those births, in this country, most illegals pay their own, and do without what they can't afford. If they have a job with medical coverage, they gain the right to such coverage by virtue of their employment.
*
Pls supply (a) URL to a reputable source for your assertion about 70% of births being paid for by Medicaid, and (b) provide proof as to what SHARE of Medicaid-assisted births are to illegal-alien parents.
*
It is indeed hard to understand why there are no borders against the rich.
*
On the contrary, when Obama took office, the U.S. was losing 655,000 jobs a MONTH. Now we are losing essentially NO jobs, which means that the Obama Administration (if any Administration can be credited with job creation) has created 655,000 jobs a month, for well over two years.
*
Pls explain how a lack of immunizations in OTHER people has anything to do with the health of Americans who DO get their immunizations.
*
Why are you and so many others eager to close down businesses and throw people out of work? If a manager or executive knowingly violates the law, the fault and legal liability is HIS, not the company's. HE should be punished INDIVIDUALLY.
*
You're talking nonsense. There are MILLIONS of people willing to work at unskilled jobs with no responsibilities beyond the actual time they put in. Recent high-school graduates, college students who need some supplemental income, as well as retirees who want a part-time job, and regular workers who don't have skills and don't have the money to acquire higher skills, etc.
*
You are accepting the "high series" population projection for the U.S., which is not likely to prove correct. Immigrants tend to emulate the wider society, and per-woman birthrates drop. Europe's population is declining, and Europeans would plainly much prefer to admit Christian Latin Americans who speak European languages than Moslems, Chinese, people from the Indian Subcontinent or other areas who do not share Europe's Western Civilization. But population control, a huge necessity, has very little to do with the issue of illegal immigration.
*
The bracero program worked fine, and could work perfectly, so pls do not assert that guest-worker programs have failed.
*
The problem of free trade is NOT with Mexico but with CHINA. So why are you blaming Mexicans?
*
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." THAT is what Christians favor. Plainly you have forgotten that. Enforcing laws is something everyone can sign onto. Killing Mexicans for trying to enter the United States is something NO Christian can sign onto, unless they were doing so as an invading army killing Americans. Oh, I guess I need to add, for some people, Mexicans are NOT doing any such thing.
*
No one is "supported by the government" long-term without working who CAN work. Stop falsifying the laws.
*
There is a wide misunderstanding -- sometimes willfully induced by people who know it is false -- that Latino immigrants do not assimilate. The reality is that a far higher percentage of present-day immigrants learn English than did immigrants in earlier eras, who had to have their children translate everything. That is because of TV in the home and the wide availability of teaching materials in audio and video form within the home. English-language teaching programs are one of, if not the single largest, advertiser/s on Spanish-language TV in the United States.
*
FALSE. Immigrant: "a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence": http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/immigrant. The fine legal niceties you try to impose upon the English language do not work. English does not listen to you, nor the USCIS. Legal or illegal, someone who moves from another country is an immigrant.
*
Believe it or not, there are a lot of places all around this planet where children can live very good lives. Indeed, some inner-city immigrant children here are in far worse danger in the U.S. than they would be in Mexico.
*
Your grandfather obeyed suchever laws as regulated immigration. The illegal alien, from whatever country, does not. Big difference. Another big difference, when your grandfather came to this country, the world had perhaps 2.5 billion people, and the U.S. had perhaps 125 million. Now the world has almost 7 billion, and the U.S. over 300 million. There is a limit to how many people we can accept.
*
The way to fix the world is to take in not individual immigrants but entire countries, with their people and resources, as States of the Union. Then we can improve life THERE so only the "best and britest" want to come HERE, and struggle with an unfamiliar culture.
*
If illegal aliens are using the Social Security numbers of children, then they are paying into those children's Social Security account's tally for purposes of figuring retirement benefits. The illegal worker himself gets no benefit from those earnings taken as SS taxes. As long as the identity theft of children does not produce other problems, and the illegal stays out of legal trouble, then, the child actually BENEFITS from the misuse of his or her SS#.
*
A candidate's religion DOES matter to most Conservatives. Why do you think we have had only ONE Catholic President?
*
Why can't Republicans understand that there are TWO HALVES to the deficit equation, income and outgo? You DON'T have to cut spending if you increase revenues. It IS possible to raise taxes on the rich. There's no provision in the Constitution against it.
*
Mexico's resources are not used for wide public benefit because they have always been conrolled by the rich, who wanted only THEMSELVES to benefit. That is where WE are headed, as more and more of the Nation's wealth falls into fewer and fewer hands.
*
Illegal aliens are NOT eligible for welfare. Stop falsifying the state of the law.
*
The Constitution does not even say that immigration law must be blind to race, religion, sexual orientation, color of hair, or anything else. People are entitled to equal treatment once they are allowed in, not before. Until then, they are just foreigners, with no right of entry.
*
We did NOT "entice" illegal aliens to come to the United States. That is an inexcusable bit of nonsense.
*
There is no such thing as an "anchor baby" because having a child in the United States grants the PARENTS no special rights under U.S. immigration law: http://www.scottimmigration.net/AnchorBaby.pdf.
*
Yes, Mexicans have been stopped by the vicious ruling class and the officials they own, for centuries. The best thing that could have happened is if the U.S. had taken all of Mexico after the Mexican War, not just the northern half. Then all of Mexico would be prosperous Sunbelt states, and Mexicans would live as well as we do -- without having to leave home.
*
If I were President, I would CRUSH "sanctuary cities". One of the causes of the Civil War was asserted "nullification" by states. What states cannot nullify, neither can cities.
*
NO, no one should have automatic entry to the United States, and most foreign students' skills are needed far more in their own country than ours. They should go home and help their own country.
*
Nonsense. "Undocumented" is a LIE. The reason they don't have documents is that they are not ENTITLED to documents because they are ILLEGALS.
*
For that, we would have to have a relationship with all the world such as the European Union has among European countries. You can't have free movement of people between rich countries and poor without enormous disruption.
*
And we've had laws against murder for millennia, but there are still murders. Your solution, I suppose, is just to legalize murder, or give it a different name.
*
So we could have 500 million people pour into the United States from the Third World, and that would be fine with you, eh?
*
I'm the 13th generation in this area, and I have to show proof of citizenship to get a job.
*
Some considerable free movement between the U.S. and Mexico would actually be much in both countries' interest -- even if we do not annex Mexico as several states. For one thing, Americans could live well on Social Security in most of Mexico, if the U.S. negotiated a treaty to allow Medicare to operate in Mexico. For another, younger workers could contribute to Social Security in the U.S.
*
Drivel. Mexico was a mess when it was New Spain, and Mexicans blamed Spain. Then it was a mess as an independent country, and they blamed the United States. Then they gave up on trying to ignore the giant nextdoor, and negotiated NAFTA, which helped a lot, but hurt some sectors of the economy. Latin America is very good at blaming others for their problems, and very bad at assuming responsibility for their own misbehavior, then making the kinds of fundamental cultural change necessary to giving the people a good life.
*
"Tens of millions" [of illegals]? Kindly don't make up "facts". You really think Liberals want the United States to be destroyed culturally and economically? Are you out of your mind? We LOVE this country, and believe every word of our national credo, all that "liberty and justice for all" stuff. (The U.S., by the way, is not "her", but "it". Or "we".) Liberals want everyone on Earth to live the life they deserve, good or bad dependent upon their own nature, not artificial limits. We do NOT want open borders unless we gain some power to improve things in countries on the other side of those borders, as we would get if we ANNEXED Mexico and Central America as states.
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is 4,452 — for Israel.)



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

Powered by Blogger