Topic: George W. Bush pushes for more immigration

[Pandora]

Okay, naptime over.

Wow.....We do not need to shut down LEGAL immigration. We do not need to make it easier and we do not need to legalize those here. Those who strive to come here legally are not the issue, they are part of the solution.

I disagree.  We need to shut down legal immigration for a while except in selected cases, for the reason RickZ stated:  we need to assimilate those whom we've allowed in but were permitted to enclave instead.  We also get a lot of legal immigration through asylum, many of whom also do not assimilate, and we need to shut that off except in selected instances as well.

I believe if you'll consult John Florida about the rigamarole and run around with which those looking to legally emigrate have to deal, you may get a better perspective on the need to streamline and shorten the process.  If the emigres are desirable -- and I believe it does not take ten years to figure that out -- then they should be allowed to get on with it.

Chain migration has to be stopped.  Just because Pancho, Soong, Francois, Ramesh and Kim are desirables and a boon to us does not mean their parents, siblings, cousins, etc. are or will be as well; I don't give a rat's about "family reunification" as it is not for our benefit, it is for the immigrant's.

I'm not good at this...let me see if I can explain my point from the perspective of small business. I have many small business friends. We meet each month. Today, most use ( I'd state forced) some type of "foreign" labor, rarely used a decade ago, and you know what, they are hard workers and do a good job. There is a strong work ethic, but highly suseptable to the trappings of "free", frankly, just like everyone else. It's predictable they will vote democrat. The change I've witnessed over the last 20 years has not happened because my buddies are greedy bastages and want to make as much money as possible...... But because of an overabundance of taxation, regulation, gov't interference at every level.......so the unskilled "foreign" worker fills a need, not created for profits sake alone, but from the necessity to keep a business viable.  In a world where small business profits are squeezed to the brink and you have a family to care for, that unskilled worker has become essential.... Since the 1980's, The United States of America has been creating this need. As long as a landscaper must buy 200.00 worth of permits for a 1000.00 dollar job, there will be illegal, unskilled labor.

I'm doing some remodeling of my business. The skilled aspects( plumbing, electrical) of what I need does not come from the "unskilled" crowd. Until we create a business friendly enviroment, at every level of gov't, we will continue to be overrun with illegals. We can enforce the borders, fine people, it won't matter.

Of course, it aint happening. I'd venture a guess the unskilled have no real interest to become a citizen. They are looking for work. They will take what free chit dems will give them and still show up at 6am and work til darkthirty. They leave an area when: 1) the work dries up...that's it. Now, the work may dry up because everyone will go out of business, but it would be much more effective if the guy who hires over half the population didn't feel the need to cut costs by hiring illegals.

Maybe not, but once they download their anchor babies, they get all the bennies and the bonus of citizenship for their offspring and none of the responsibilities.

I get the need for low-cost unskilled labor, but importing that, regardless of how hard they're willing to work is not the right thing to do -- not for them and not for us -- and it is my belief this particular issue needs to be viewed through a bigger lens than just what is allowing your business, or that of anyone else's, to be able to stay afloat as the pertinent point. 

We have our own unskilled and skilled labor here and the laws need to change to allow these people to be hired and paid for the value they provide, no more and no less.

[LadyVirginia]

We have our own unskilled and skilled labor here and the laws need to change to allow these people to be hired and paid for the value they provide, no more and no less.

yes, but too many are being convinced they need to go to college

[charlesoakwood]

"Maybe not, but once they download their anchor babies, they get all the bennies and the bonus of citizenship for their offspring and none of the responsibilities."

Correct. This must be challenged and changed the freestuff and anchor babies this is the hook.  If these two things were eliminated the "problem" would disappear.

"We have our own unskilled and skilled labor here and the laws need to change to allow these people to be hired and paid for the value they provide, no more and no less."

They will not work.  They are privileged, either by birth, intellect, or government largesse and will. not. do. it.  I have tried and tried and tried, they will walk away
from the opportunity.  It's disgusting.

[Glock32]

Challenging the anchor baby provision is raycisss. Actually, the term "anchor baby" is also raycisss.

[Pandora]

"Maybe not, but once they download their anchor babies, they get all the bennies and the bonus of citizenship for their offspring and none of the responsibilities."

Correct. This must be challenged and changed the freestuff and anchor babies this is the hook.  If these two things were eliminated the "problem" would disappear.

"We have our own unskilled and skilled labor here and the laws need to change to allow these people to be hired and paid for the value they provide, no more and no less."

They will not work.  They are privileged, either by birth, intellect, or government largesse and will. not. do. it.  I have tried and tried and tried, they will walk away
from the opportunity.  It's disgusting.

I understand and agree; it's a problem everywhere.  Americans were once willing to work as hard as they needed to, if not to prosper, then at least to eat.  The handouts need to stop and then so will their attitude, and that includes the student loans for productively-useless college indoctrination.

Everywhere one looks, there are tangles of laws and regulations and government, government, government.  Trying to untangle a single mess involves untangling multiples of others.  This is the main reason why I throw up my hands and look for it to all burn down.  Maybe -- MAYBE -- we can try it again and get it right-er next time.

[Pandora]

Challenging the anchor baby provision is raycisss. Actually, the term "anchor baby" is also raycisss.

Yeah, I know.  'At's me, just a raycisss all over.

[Glock32]

I understand and agree; it's a problem everywhere.  Americans were once willing to work as hard as they needed to, if not to prosper, then at least to eat.  The handouts need to stop and then so will their attitude, and that includes the student loans for productively-useless college indoctrination.

Everywhere one looks, there are tangles of laws and regulations and government, government, government.  Trying to untangle a single mess involves untangling multiples of others.  This is the main reason why I throw up my hands and look for it to all burn down.  Maybe -- MAYBE -- we can try it again and get it right-er next time.

This is how pervasive it is. When I went to college, immediately after graduating high school, I applied for and received a student loan. It absolutely never occurred to me that it should be any other way. I did not at all think of it as any sort of government excess. It was simply what you did, what you were supposed to do. College was basically the 13th grade of school. My entire school experience to that point had repeatedly driven home that college was a virtual necessity. I thought nothing of applying for student aid. And I have never been a liberal, either. That's what we are up against. It is surely much worse for all the other young skulls full of mush entering the once-real world. They are almost literally incapable of understanding what could possibly be wrong with government programs for everything under the sun. It's honest to God going to be such an uphill battle that I don't think we can win it rhetorically. I think our only "victory" will be when it collapses under its own weight and we can hopefully whip the shell-shocked survivors into submission before someone else does.

I am still paying that loan, btw.

[LadyVirginia]

You know, I am Irish. People said the same things about the Irish when they came here.

  Ah, no they didn't.  That whole use of  "Irish need not apply" signs that I've seen in movie scenes or read references to did not happen. 

Challenging the anchor baby provision is raycisss. Actually, the term "anchor baby" is also raycisss.

Yeah, I know.  'At's me, just a raycisss all over.

You crack me up, Pan.

[Predator Don]

Okay, naptime over.

Wow.....We do not need to shut down LEGAL immigration. We do not need to make it easier and we do not need to legalize those here. Those who strive to come here legally are not the issue, they are part of the solution.

I disagree.  We need to shut down legal immigration for a while except in selected cases, for the reason RickZ stated:  we need to assimilate those whom we've allowed in but were permitted to enclave instead.  We also get a lot of legal immigration through asylum, many of whom also do not assimilate, and we need to shut that off except in selected instances as well.

I believe if you'll consult John Florida about the rigamarole and run around with which those looking to legally emigrate have to deal, you may get a better perspective on the need to streamline and shorten the process.  If the emigres are desirable -- and I believe it does not take ten years to figure that out -- then they should be allowed to get on with it.

Chain migration has to be stopped.  Just because Pancho, Soong, Francois, Ramesh and Kim are desirables and a boon to us does not mean their parents, siblings, cousins, etc. are or will be as well; I don't give a rat's about "family reunification" as it is not for our benefit, it is for the immigrant's.

I'm not good at this...let me see if I can explain my point from the perspective of small business. I have many small business friends. We meet each month. Today, most use ( I'd state forced) some type of "foreign" labor, rarely used a decade ago, and you know what, they are hard workers and do a good job. There is a strong work ethic, but highly suseptable to the trappings of "free", frankly, just like everyone else. It's predictable they will vote democrat. The change I've witnessed over the last 20 years has not happened because my buddies are greedy bastages and want to make as much money as possible...... But because of an overabundance of taxation, regulation, gov't interference at every level.......so the unskilled "foreign" worker fills a need, not created for profits sake alone, but from the necessity to keep a business viable.  In a world where small business profits are squeezed to the brink and you have a family to care for, that unskilled worker has become essential.... Since the 1980's, The United States of America has been creating this need. As long as a landscaper must buy 200.00 worth of permits for a 1000.00 dollar job, there will be illegal, unskilled labor.

I'm doing some remodeling of my business. The skilled aspects( plumbing, electrical) of what I need does not come from the "unskilled" crowd. Until we create a business friendly enviroment, at every level of gov't, we will continue to be overrun with illegals. We can enforce the borders, fine people, it won't matter.

Of course, it aint happening. I'd venture a guess the unskilled have no real interest to become a citizen. They are looking for work. They will take what free chit dems will give them and still show up at 6am and work til darkthirty. They leave an area when: 1) the work dries up...that's it. Now, the work may dry up because everyone will go out of business, but it would be much more effective if the guy who hires over half the population didn't feel the need to cut costs by hiring illegals.

Maybe not, but once they download their anchor babies, they get all the bennies and the bonus of citizenship for their offspring and none of the responsibilities.

I get the need for low-cost unskilled labor, but importing that, regardless of how hard they're willing to work is not the right thing to do -- not for them and not for us -- and it is my belief this particular issue needs to be viewed through a bigger lens than just what is allowing your business, or that of anyone else's, to be able to stay afloat as the pertinent point. 

We have our own unskilled and skilled labor here and the laws need to change to allow these people to be hired and paid for the value they provide, no more and no less.

Ok.....those who came here legally are already assimilated for the simple fact it takes so dang long to become a citizen.    Dropping your baby on our soil should not be recognized as citizens.......and chain migration can't be allowed to continue.

And I'm not in favor of importing unskilled labor...our tax and entitlement systems enhanced it. Before it became so difficult to do business as a small business, there were few Mexicans taking American jobs. Our unskilled American labor was working. They were also not on food stamps, at least not in the numbers of the last few years. Today, when a family of 4 can receive up to 60 k of assistance, the urgency of work isn't there.

If the tax situation became more palatable, it would be our citizens getting paid in cash instead of others. If entitlements were reduced or eliminated, our unskilled labor force would have the jobs.......and crossing the border wouldn't be so prevelant. The only ones left would be the Mexicans who vote for us.

Of course, it ain't gonna appen.

[Libertas]

Wonder if poor misguided CC and others agree with this -

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illegal-immigrant-kidney-transplant-20121209,0,3537821.story

"Health care should be a human right, not a privilege." - Illegal immigrant donor recipient.

Yeah, human rights trump laws and constitutions dontchyaknow?!

       

[IronDioPriest]

If health care is a human right, then those who provide it are slaves.

[Glock32]

If health care is a human right, then those who provide it are slaves.

It's the only conclusion you can draw. If it is said you have a right to a material good or service, then that means you are demanding a sovereign claim to the talent, time, and resources of those who produce those goods and services.  Trying to deflect that conclusion by saying it merely means the government is obligated to compensate those providers on your behalf is to do nothing more than run off into the weeds. Because then the immediate question is, who gets to decide what that compensation will be? It ain't the producer of the service, that's for sure.

We really have an intellectually and philosophically shallow population. First order thinkers, as Thomas Sowell describes them. Not a one of them seems to have given any thought to what, really, is the nature of a "right". How can you have a right to something that can only be fulfilled by abrogating another person's own rights? Any serious thinker who is honest with themselves would recognize that rights are intangible things. They are statements about what cannot be taken from an individual, not what must be given to them.

We've really got an uphill battle on our hands here.

[John Florida]

Challenging the anchor baby provision is raycisss. Actually, the term "anchor baby" is also raycisss.

Yeah, I know.  'At's me, just a raycisss all over.

 Count me in.

[John Florida]

Then the refrain should be ENFORCEMENT.

Then let the dems explain why we can't do that instead of the republicans always letting the dems lead the discussion.

 Both want the same votes.

[Pandora]

If health care is a human right, then those who provide it are slaves.

It's the only conclusion you can draw. If it is said you have a right to a material good or service, then that means you are demanding a sovereign claim to the talent, time, and resources of those who produce those goods and services.  Trying to deflect that conclusion by saying it merely means the government is obligated to compensate those providers on your behalf is to do nothing more than run off into the weeds. Because then the immediate question is, who gets to decide what that compensation will be? It ain't the producer of the service, that's for sure.

We really have an intellectually and philosophically shallow population. First order thinkers, as Thomas Sowell describes them. Not a one of them seems to have given any thought to what, really, is the nature of a "right". How can you have a right to something that can only be fulfilled by abrogating another person's own rights? Any serious thinker who is honest with themselves would recognize that rights are intangible things. They are statements about what cannot be taken from an individual, not what must be given to them.

We've really got an uphill battle on our hands here.

It's not just a matter of how much compensation; more to the first point is who is to pay it because the government has no money but that which it mulcts from others.

[warpmine]

If health care is a human right, then those who provide it are slaves.

It's the only conclusion you can draw. If it is said you have a right to a material good or service, then that means you are demanding a sovereign claim to the talent, time, and resources of those who produce those goods and services.  Trying to deflect that conclusion by saying it merely means the government is obligated to compensate those providers on your behalf is to do nothing more than run off into the weeds. Because then the immediate question is, who gets to decide what that compensation will be? It ain't the producer of the service, that's for sure.

We really have an intellectually and philosophically shallow population. First order thinkers, as Thomas Sowell describes them. Not a one of them seems to have given any thought to what, really, is the nature of a "right". How can you have a right to something that can only be fulfilled by abrogating another person's own rights? Any serious thinker who is honest with themselves would recognize that rights are intangible things. They are statements about what cannot be taken from an individual, not what must be given to them.

We've really got an uphill battle on our hands here.

Simply put, the weight of the problem will collapse as soon as we take away our hands from propping it up. I have encountered all of these problems. I went to the unskilled labor in this country first and found nothing but drug addled, largely uneducated idiots that never appreciated the opportunity that work provides. Quality of work suffered immensely so the cost of call backs and corrections were simply to great. Since all were getting govt services in one form or another, they didn't care to work for the wage to skill set experience and I couldn't afford to pay them more for steadily getting worse skills. Finally, I subbed to immigrants legal or otherwise just to be able to get the work done. I ended up paying more for the labor but the quality came up proportionately so I stuck with it. I've discovered that most of them do have papers and some have obeyed the law and returned to their native countries. These folks have more desire to work than anyone that I've encountered in the indigenous population.

The skill sets in the native population absolutely suck worst than a milkshake through a paper straw and we all know where to lay the blame for that............... state run education. The fact that the localities continue to push through more expensive permits and overseeing operations because of the complaints from people that won't do their investigation before hiring a contractor for a particular service. The added weight of the bureaucracy still can't stop bad work from being done by shady contractors so all it did was to make it more expensive for the service.

One of the chief principles for the separation from Britain was to make it easier to conduct business and it worked for a century until politicians began to seek power by allowing citizens to feed from the public trough.

Sadly, the only way the system collapses is by tax revolt meaning stop paying the beast. The states will need to suffer this as well because like the Fed, they are bloated and anti-business in the same way. Better to fold up and place more weight upon the system so that it's down fall is hastened.