< 1 2 >
Posted: by cheeselog1234:
I'd like to know what people think about this new immigration bill in congress. I have my opinions on immigration, but I'm not too familiar with the bill. I know some of you out there keep up with stuff like this, so please, give us your take on this subject...
Score: [-] 36 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by nicky666:
Could you add a little more detail?
"Bill" in my language sounds like "ass cheek" (no, I'm not kidding), but something tells me you're not consulting anyone about those...on the other hand my, that could get interesting...
hmmm, think I'm drifting away from the subject a bit, anyway..
I'd like to get some more details...tell me, what is this bill, and what are your opinions? (in other words, should I pack my bag and fly over, or stay in europe :P )
Score: [-] 28 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by subobisis:
and thats all I have to say about that.
Score: [-] 96 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by cheeselog1234:
« subobisis :
and thats all I have to say about that. Couldn't see the pic sorry...
Here are some links in Google news
Immigration Hullabaloo from the White House
The details of the immigration bill, to me, are sketchy, all i really know is what i've heard on talk radio. What it basically comes down to is granting amnesty to people already illegally in the U.S. by requiring them to pay fees and jump through a few hoops to obtain a permanent visa of some kind - the Z Visa. So the people who are in the US illegally will be given the chance to become citizens...in effect we are rewarding their illegal behavior by asking them to abide by the law...but if they didn't obey the law in the first place there would be no need for such legislation, so what makes legislators believe they will abide by the law this time around?
Score: [-] 28 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by makri:
The more left wing, socialist western democracy a country is, the more strict they are about border control and suppression of illegal immigrants. The more right wing the country is, the less they seem to care who comes and goes and borders are drawn mainly for humorous effect.
On one end of this spectrum is a socialist democratic country like Finland, which invests lot of money and energy in border control and keeping track of who comes in and who goes out. On the opposite end there's USA that has no interest to protect it's borders or practise any kind of serious control on it's population.
While most Americans probably wouldn't like the level of knowledge the leftist governments have of their citizens, being on the other end doesn't make much sense either.
Most countries have laws and protocols that control legal immigration process. They're there for a reason, and it's appalling that some people seem to believe that they're above the law. Seem to believe that they somehow have the right to invade whatever country they please, whatever way they choose. To have the country then silently approve this practise is a spit in the face of those who followed the rules and followed the laws and immigrated legally. It's even more appalling that these criminals then believe they have some sort of rights in their new country of residence.
It's obvious that US should change the current policies. Is a countrywide amnesty a good idea? I don't know. It certainly means rewarding people for breaking the laws. I think the most important thing that should be done now is to 10-fold the border control (fence, soldiers, whatever it takes) to make sure not a single person will jump the border again.
The next step would be to have every human being within the border listed and added to the databases. Any non-citizen that breaks any law would be immediately deported. Those of the existing illegal immigrant population that stay clean would be eligible to apply for legal residence status.
Score: [-] 71 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by cheeselog1234:
« makri :
The next step would be to have every human being within the border listed and added to the databases. Any non-citizen that breaks any law would be immediately deported. Those of the existing illegal immigrant population that stay clean would be eligible to apply for legal residence status. Even though no one will come out and say it...i think that this is the Bush reasoning behind the current bill: I think the current bill will attempt to get a master list of those illegally in the country (a good thing for reasons of terrorism)...but then, these people on the list will be scored and rated on how they will benefit american society based on factors like education, family, how long they've been in the country, etc.
thanks makri for the thoughts...
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 3 years ago by VooDooPeacock:
« cheeselog1234 but then, these people on the list will be scored and rated on how they will benefit american society based on factors like education, family, how long they've been in the country, etc. I think scoring and rating immigrants is a good idea myself. If we supposedly need an influx of new people for whatever reason, why not make sure they're the best?
Score: [-] 26 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by gammerus:
I am against it, why on earth would we give people amnesty for break federal laws?
Score: [-] 17 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
« cheeselog1234 : Even though no one will come out and say it...i think that this is the Bush reasoning behind the current bill: I think the current bill will attempt to get a master list of those illegally in the country (a good thing for reasons of terrorism)...but then, these people on the list will be scored and rated on how they will benefit american society based on factors like education, family, how long they've been in the country, etc.
thanks makri for the thoughts... No, sadly Bush's reasoning behind the attempt to give amnesty to 12 million lawbreakers is Big Business wants the cheap labor despite the problems so many criminals will cause to our national security, economy, health care, etc. If they can save a few dollars on payroll it's worth it. (of course Bush, nor the republicans are alone in this, many politicians on all sides bow to the BigBusinessDollar)
Also, they want to try to get those millions of votes to keep them in office so they can get even more money
Score: [-] 37 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by jago:
« VooDooPeacock : I think scoring and rating immigrants is a good idea myself. If we supposedly need an influx of new people for whatever reason, why not make sure they're the best? This sounds suspiciously resonant of 'Affirmative Action' movements, quotas, and also, indirectly, eugenics.
That's a very slippery slope, that is.
Score: [-] 19 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by cheeselog1234:
« 2manyusernames : No, sadly Bush's reasoning behind the attempt to give amnesty to 12 million lawbreakers is Big Business wants the cheap labor despite the problems so many criminals will cause to our national security, economy, health care, etc. If they can save a few dollars on payroll it's worth it. (of course Bush, nor the republicans are alone in this, many politicians on all sides bow to the BigBusinessDollar)
Also, they want to try to get those millions of votes to keep them in office so they can get even more money cheap labor means cheap products and low costs for americans. unfortunately, these laborers are a "necessary evil" in american society - and also in many other societies/cultures before us...
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
« cheeselog1234 : cheap labor means cheap products and low costs for americans. unfortunately, these laborers are a "necessary evil" in american society - and also in many other societies/cultures before us... They are not necessary.
I would be willing to pay higher prices and have fewer criminals and the rest of the problems illegal immigration brings.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by cheeselog1234:
« 2manyusernames : They are not necessary.
I would be willing to pay higher prices and have fewer criminals and the rest of the problems illegal immigration brings. you are in the minority.
like i said, some of the greatest civilizations in the world's history were built on the backs of cheap labor (or slave labor) - romans - greeks - babylonians - americans
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by yoornotme:
« jago : This sounds suspiciously resonant of 'Affirmative Action' movements, quotas, and also, indirectly, eugenics.
That's a very slippery slope, that is. I disagree. If we get 100 new illegal immigrants today, and 30 of them break another law outside of being an illegal immigrant, then those 30 should get deported. Why should we have to cater to people who come here illegally?
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by coldbladed:
The problem is that a lot of illegal workers have work because they are willing to work for less than minimum wage and take their pay under the table, two very attractive bonuses for businesses.
As soon as you make them legal you have to pay them a fair wage. At that point it is preferable (and easier) to get English speaking workers with more skills.
What does that mean? A lot of illegal immigrants won't sign up for Amnesty because they know they'll lose their jobs. The ones that do probably already have good jobs and families and may be able to anchor their lives for the first time.
If I'm right it is a win win situation. Since this is reality though it'll probably be a lot more helter skelter than anyone can anticipate.
The other question to ask is this; How is such a resolution fair to immigrants who have been patiently waiting for a long time to enter our country legally? What are the advantages/disadvantages to screwing them over by giving illegals amnesty?
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 2 years ago by steelshooter:
« cheeselog1234 : cheap labor means cheap products and low costs for americans. unfortunately, these laborers are a "necessary evil" in american society - and also in many other societies/cultures before us... Gee, and I thought SLAVERY was bad...
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 6 months ago by GreenCard:
From a humanitarian perspective, our fellow human beings, who migrate to support their families, continue to suffer at the hands of immigration policies that separate them from family members and drive them into remote parts of the American desert, sometimes to their deaths. This suffering should not continue.
Now is the time to address this pressing humanitarian issue which affects so many lives and undermines basic human dignity. Our society should no longer tolerate a status quo that perpetuates a permanent underclass of persons and benefits from their labor without offering them legal protections.
Score: [-] 1 [+].
Posted: 6 months ago by ruthstark:
"Everything in life is good in small quantities.
Extreme of anything is bad" - Hamlet.
We need and want a resonable level of immigration.
Too much and it causes problems.
The idea is not to be pro or against - it is to set a reasonable limit for immigration to be benificial without causeing problems.
Score: [-] 27 [+].
Posted: 6 months ago by steelshooter:
« GreenCard:From a humanitarian perspective, our fellow human beings, who migrate to support their families, continue to suffer at the hands of immigration policies that separate them from family members and drive them into remote parts of the American desert, sometimes to their deaths. This suffering should not continue.
Now is the time to address this pressing humanitarian issue which affects so many lives and undermines basic human dignity. Our society should no longer tolerate a status quo that perpetuates a permanent underclass of persons and benefits from their labor without offering them legal protections. First, your choice of user name gives away that you joined specifically to chime in on a particular topic. Please be sure to read the FAQ and actually join the community. If you join to be a troll and dig up old threads just to spark arguments, well, your choice but we treat spammers and trolls as they deserve.
To the topic, they are breaking the law by "migrating" (Thus the term "Illegal" immigrants.)
If this separates them from their family, I have a good idea. DON'T BREAK OUR LAWS! Stay home.
This solves so many of the issues you list:- We can't "oppress", they aren't here to be oppressed.
- They cannot suffer from immigration policies that separate them from their families, they are still with their families
- They cannot be driven to remote American deserts and their deaths (yeah, right), because they aren't in America
- We cannot undermine their basic human dignity by making them an underclass, they aren't here to be an underclass
- We cannot benefit "from their labor without offering them legal protections", unless they are exporting something, because they aren't here to be affected by our apparently lawless nature.
Gee, seems NOT VIOLATING AMERICAN LAW by entering the country illegally fixes ALL of those issues.
Funny how you seem to make it OUR FAULT, when they break our laws. You seem to think it is OUR FAULT things are bad back where they come from.
Pack the bleeding heart with gauze and learn the facts. This country was founded by folks who decided that things "at home" were intolerable, but they used that to stand up and CHANGE THINGS.
Imagine what would have happened if they decided to move south and live under Spanish rule when English rule was too much. Think Mexico would have started speaking English and drinking tea so they would fit in? Or is it more likely the new "immigrants" would have to speak Spanish and drink mescal like everybody else.
Score: [-] 28 [+].
Posted: 6 months ago by steelshooter:
« ruthstark : "Everything in life is good in small quantities.
Extreme of anything is bad" - Hamlet.
We need and want a resonable level of immigration.
Too much and it causes problems.
The idea is not to be pro or against - it is to set a reasonable limit for immigration to be benificial without causeing problems. We DID set limits. I am not against immigration, Grandpa was an immigrant.
I am against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. This is not simply a case of "oh he forgot to sign a form", it is deliberate and planned violation of our laws in the hope of personal gain.
Score: [-] 30 [+].
Posted: 6 months ago by ruthstark:
« steelshooter : We DID set limits. I am not against immigration, Grandpa was an immigrant.
I am against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. This is not simply a case of "oh he forgot to sign a form", it is deliberate and planned violation of our laws in the hope of personal gain. Sorry, I didn't make it clear.
Like everyone, I am against illegal immigration.
I'm all for immigration laws.
The reason I am supporting the law is because unregulated immigration harms immigrants in the long run. Take a look at Europe. Most of the countries have immigration laws and that doesnt turn them into bad guys.
The bottom line - set limitations with resonable levels of entry and work permits. It will be the best for all of us.
Ruth
Score: [-] 27 [+].
< 1 2 >
