Just ask them: "which part of 'illegal' do you not understand?"

Just had an illegal alien where I live kill a 4 year old girl in a car accident after running a red light.

He had been drinking, and was driving without a license due to 3 previous DUI"s.

He was able to get around the system as the 3-DUI's were in different states.

None the less, every arrest had to tell law enforcement he was illegal and he should have been shipped back.

Let's face it, law enforcement is told to look the other way when it comes to illegal immigration.

I don't understand why we provide people here illegally any benefits at all. If I were to go up to Canada and ask for medical treatment, they would merely say 'bite me' and ship me back over to our side of the border.

We also need to force the sharing of information between governmental agencies. Social Security can tell when an employer is paying to an invalid SSN, however, they never share this information with border patrol.

The simple solution is to start going after employers. If the manager of the McD's was facing jail time by hiring illegals, he/she wouldn't risk it. Fewer jobs mean fewer opportunities and many of the illegals would go back home. It has already started:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/10/immigrants.economy/index.html

dejavu all over again... the last amnesty in the 90's did nothing to change or stop them coming here. Until you have a boarder you can actually close, it's just a line on a map. The laws are there, we just can't make them work when they come right back. That is the dirty little secret of these nasty deportation things... they stay out a week or a month, and then come right back. When the economy turns around, everyone who left will return. This is simple economics, there risk/reward to coming here is just too good to pass up, when there are no jobs at all in Mexico. Want to stump an illegal advocate? Just ask them if it is our problem that Mexico's econ. is so much in the tank that there are no local jobs.

I think we should just cut to the chase and annex them... or build a real boarder, and put staff in for real patrols. 2 guys to do a hundred miles of boarder just doesn't work.

Yeah, but their vote counts the same as yours. You say they're not eligible to vote. I just laugh.

It was a nice country, once.

"Just ask them: "which part of 'illegal' do you not understand?"

It's a misdemeanor. We talk about how angry we are about all this, but we don't pass laws with any teeth.

The policies we do have just make the problem worse. Take the work site roundups as one example. It sounds like a good idea, just round them up and then they're gone, right? Wrong. They just come back and this is why. Round ups inntimidate the illegals. Whatever good that does, the bad it does is it means that the employers can threaten these workers more effectually and drive their wages down. That makes them all the more profitable. That opnes up more jobs for them, so more of them come. So what you have is the federal governmentacting as the employers' enforcers to help them break the law.

We could have hasd soem kind of reform long ago, somo kind of guest worker visa - come work, get paid, go home, come back, etc - but the only ones who really pay attention, the people making money off things the way they are, are the employers, and they can see what legal workers would mena for their bottom line. Things are just they way they want them now. It makes absolutley no difference what party a legislator belongs to either; they all know who to listen to.

It doesn't help at all that the rest of us fall for all ths sentimentality about immigrants. First thing: there's a big difference between a migrant and an immigrant. We have lots of migrants in the world today, most of them in the US. A huge number of Mexicans at least would be perfectly happy to be migrants (coming and going) rather than immigrants, if it wasn't such a big deal to get into the country in the first place.

Jim -

Either you're advocating a "guest worker" program where guest workers are not protected by safety and minimum wage laws (treating them like second-class humans), or you're advocating one where they are (and therefore are no cheaper than domestic help).

Either way, you've got problems. Personally, I think the whole "Sure, you can come here and we'll treat you like shit" thing is morally repugnant.

Better to keep them out in the first place.

Here in the Dallas metropolitan area, we frequently get news stories about the families "ripped apart" by deportations. Funny, we never get stories about the families "ripped apart" by the crime committed by illegals.

I think four things would be of tremendous help:
1. Crack down on employers hiring illegal workers.
2. No benefits (schools, medical care, etc.) for non-citzerns other than emergency trauma care, unless cash payment is made at time of service, ESPECIALLY at public hospitals.
3. No automatic citizenship when someone is born here unless at least one parent is a citizen or permanent legal resident.
4. No welfare for able-bodied Americans. There wouldn't be as big of a problem finding reasonably priced labor if we didn't let our own live off of welfare rolls... We don't need immigrants to fill construction, farming, and ranch work, domestic help and food/beverage work. Most of the people who are doing those jobs get paid more than minimum wage, even when they're of questionable legal status.

What good would it do to deport jailed criminals? They'll just come right back over the open border, and then we'll have the murderers and rapists running loose. Can the Mexicans be trusted to jail them?

kishke,

While a majority of those coming over are coming from mexico, I would guess that about 50% aren't mexican. They are central and south american. My wife and her family are mexican, and this issue really pisses them off. My father in law was seperated from my MIL and their newborn son for a year while he was here working and working to get them here legally.

Ahw, can't agree more.

Karen, keep in mind This story. That was the main theme...we can't seperate her from her son who was born here and is a citizen. Only one problem with that....she had previously been deported, came back again illegally, and was now using someone elses SSN to work (So that other person kept getting hit with a larger tax bill each year - but hey, that's ok, right?). She knew she was doing something wrong and chose to do it anyway. Too damn bad if you are now getting kicked out. You don't want to be separated from your son? Take him with you. Your choice, your responsibility.

She knew she was doing something wrong and chose to do it anyway. Too damn bad if you are now getting kicked out. You don't want to be separated from your son? Take him with you.

If she took him with her then he wouldn't be her 'planter kid'. Having the kid in the US is supposed to keep the government from shipping the two of you off. Now she can 'protest' the cruel nature of the country that she is so desperate to live in. Funny, huh?

-Julie

This is all old news to the writers at VDare.com

If you want to know more about the problems of overwhelming illegal and legal immigration, you should check them out - mostly good writers, especially Steve Sailor, who has his own blog isteve.blogspot.com

Disclaimer: I don't have any part of those 2 websites; I just like to read blogs as I am unemployed awaiting my bailout (it's gonna be huge!)

Funny? Not quite the word I would use. :)

I live in the Chicago area, and it was amazing the number of people who said she shouldn't be punished. The people who were the most pissed? Those who have come here legally, like my in-laws.

I would ask, why not? She broke the law... twice, and to cap that, she purchased a SSN of someone else so she could get a job at O'Hare Airport. What of the person who's SSN she was fraudulently using, that took the hit on taxes because of her? If the government doesn't deport her, they should go after her for Social Security fraud.

There are plans by the elite to merge the USA, Mexico and Canada into one country called the "North American Union".

That is the reason why there hasn't been any noticeable border enforcement (except for propoganda/deceit purposes) since the mid-1990's.

I vote for ahw's plan.

Funny? Not quite the word I would use. :)

Yup, I was thinking funny in a sad, we sure are fucked sort of way. I understand a person's desire to move to this country, but considering how one can get into this country through legitimate means (come in under a student visa, get a degree, get sponsored for a job, get a green card, apply for citizenship. I work with three people in my own department that have gone through this method. One from China, one from India, and one from Pakistan.) I don't completely understand why one would want to deal with the coyotes to work for pennies while cleaning up pampered people's shit.

-Julie

4. No welfare for able-bodied Americans.

I am on board, but what do you consider welfare? I keep thinking of octo-mom who insisted that she wasn't on welfare, but got food stamps...

-J

I like items 2, 3 and 4 of ahw's plan. I favor open legal immigration, which would make item 1 moot. Additionally, I wouldn't mind requiring everyone who comes into the country to buy deportation and emergency care insurance so we don't get stuck with paying those costs.

As for the jail vs. deportation question, it seems to me that there should be some concrete cost/risk comparison between the two that would give the best answer. I mean I could easily see it turning out that it's cheaper to keep Mexican criminals in jail than deport them and build a border wall, but on the other hand I could see it being cheaper to deport Chinese criminals.

Milton Friedman noted that you can't have open borders in a welfare state.
It's so hard for me to pick which one of those I'd like to get rid of. /sarcasm

From Rector's article: But in practice, pursuit of these dual libertarian goals of opening borders and ending the redistributionist welfare state often leads to contradictions.
That is pure, Grade A bullshit. Also, I don't know what he means by "in practice." Either there are contradictions or there aren't...and there aren't.
More from Rector: On average, low-skill immigrant families receive $30,160 per year in government benefits and services while paying $10,573 in taxes...
I like the fact that he's quantitative here, but I didn't see a citation for those numbers. If they're true, the $19,587 difference is exactly what needs to be eliminated.

Julie,

She had to be getting more than food stamps. In-vitro is not cheap, and I can't think there are many doctors who would accept food stamps in payment.

Since we all seem to be in agreement with ahw's idea, one question:

ahw - what state are you in, and are you planning to run for congress? I'd vote on that platform. :)

Jesus. I get punished just for being a few days late getting my car registration updated! Do I bitch? Er, no, because no matter how inconvenient the fine, it WAS in fact my own damn fault.

I'm guessing no one is yet FLINGING people over the border against their will?

Texas, E.S.B... and I must attribute idea #4 to Mr. Banned From the UK, Micheal Savage. I don't follow him, or necessarily subscribe to his general way of thinkging (he's an entertainer, after all), but I read a chapter or two from one of his books a few years ago, and that stood out as really making sense.

I'd think that if someone commits a crime here, they should serve their jail sentence, THEN be deported.

She had to be getting more than food stamps. In-vitro is not cheap, and I can't think there are many doctors who would accept food stamps in payment.

I agree. My only point was that many people define 'welfare' differently. I define it as any program where the government provides you with goods and services exclusively for your own welfare. Housing, food, money payments, etc. Schooling I personally believe is for the benefit of all, as an educated populace is required for a republic such as ours. However, we need to decide what 'welfare' means if we are going to keep illegal aliens from getting it.

-Julie

Julie,

We are on the same page. I only have one problem with the education issue. Should the taxpayers be forced to educate the children of illegals, when the children are illegal as well (children born here of illegals is a whole nother thread)?

With all the problems we have with our education system, I would think that money could be better spent ensuring the education of kids born and raised here.

Amy, and anyone else in California are probably aware of this, but here in Chicago, they have to have classes taught in both english and spanish so those kids can understand. How much is being lost to those who are sitting there waiting, that don't speak spanish?

"Either you're advocating a "guest worker" program where guest workers are not protected by safety and minimum wage laws (treating them like second-class humans), or you're advocating one where they are (and therefore are no cheaper than domestic help).

Either way, you've got problems. "

Brian, I agree the first interpretation is bad, but what's wrong with the second? Why shouldn't people who do the same work get the same pay? Why should they be any cheaper than other workers? Is it because they are foreign? Well, California has been through that one before, during the Dust Bowl - and please, the Okies were as foreign and as despised as as any Mexican, I know because I heard it around the dinner table for years - so I don't buy it.

"I'd think that if someone commits a crime here, they should serve their jail sentence, THEN be deported."

Ahw, why punish ouselves that way? Incarceration costs money. If they commit felonies here they should be lamed somehow so they can't come back, and then deported.

Brian, I agree the first interpretation is bad, but what's wrong with the second? Why shouldn't people who do the same work get the same pay? Why should they be any cheaper than other workers? Is it because they are foreign?

Your lack of ability to understand basic economics astounds. Either that, or you completely missed the point.

If you have two labor pools of equal capability, and of equal expense, why pick the one you have to learn a new language to work with?

In other words, absent any waivers from minimum wage and occupational safety laws, migrant workers offer no advantage to the employer.

Or, simpler still, my second scenario is unrealistic because it will never happen

If you cannot understand this, then you have bought the "jobs Americans won't do" fallacy.

The Swift meat-packing plant serves as a perfect example of why this is a fallacy. After they got busted and all the illegals got sent home, they started offering jobs at reasonable (i.e. not sub-legal or sub-market) wages, and they had applicants lined up around the block.

Unchecked illegal immigration or a migrant worker program that does not protect the rights of those migrants offers employers a shot at low-cost labor they cannot otherwise get.

The American people will demand mass deportation and border control at some point once unemployment breaks the 10% barrier.

I only have one problem with the education issue. Should the taxpayers be forced to educate the children of illegals, when the children are illegal as well (children born here of illegals is a whole nother thread)?

Sorry that i wasn't clear. :-) I wasn't attempting to imply that we should educate the world's illegal immigrants just because they jump a fence (or overstay their visas) and implant themselves with their offspring. If we eliminate free education and free medical care and easy jobs, then fewer people will want to come.

In addition, the purpose of educating the populace is to ensure that they are (reasonably) knowledgeable for voting and reasonably capable of earning a living. If a person can neither vote or legally get a job here, what is the point of giving them a free education?

This is my long winded way of saying that I agree with you.

"In addition, the purpose of educating the populace is to ensure that they are (reasonably) knowledgeable for voting and reasonably capable of earning a living."

Too bad it isn't working. :) (semi kidding)

You bring up an interesting thought.

When groups like ACORN are out registering people who aren't eligible to vote, I wonder what they promise them:

Hey, come over and vote for this person, and they will work to continue to give you all this free stuff.

What we need to do, is make the politicians pay attention to our own citizens first, then we can worry about the rest of the world. We have too many problems here in this country that we need to take care of. Wouldn't that be a nice change? (kinda rhetorical)

One of the problem with the many mmigration system in Western countries is that it is not selective enough and more often than not allowed those various tribal groups who are cowardly fleeing from a fight(in their countries such as asia, africa, middleeast). If they are brave enough to fight(for democracy or for whatever reason), they should be also be brave enough to defend themselves in their own countries rather than fleeing as socalled refugees at the first opportunity.