quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

If they get arrested for being here, illegally, doesn't that give them a criminal record?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
The OP added that stipulation after my post.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/politics/immigration-reform/index.html
Seems a deal may be near. Do you think making a way for illegal immigrants to stay, and work towards citizenship is a good idea, or do you think they've broken the law, and should be deported?
The poll is speaking about those that haven't been in other legal trouble other than being here illegaly.

I think that the government is also looking at it from the viewpoint of our relations with Mexico, as well as elements in the business community which have benefited from hiring illegal immigrants. The public seems to be divided on the issue.
They've broken the law, but they've certainly had a lot of help from our side of the border, including the government which has done very little about the issue. This bit of irony isn't lost on our neighbors to the south, so they would see a mass deportation as unfairly blaming their citizens just trying to earn a buck, while letting the real criminals on our side of the border get off scot-free. Questions like that have to be handled delicately.
There's also the problem with border security, so even if they are deported, they'll still try to come back, especially with those who have relatives in the U.S.
Then there's Mexico itself, with which we should probably try to work some sort of more coherent relationship. It's supposed to be a "friendly" relationship, but there's always this bit of history which is still remembered. We need to have closer and more equal ties with each other. That may be a way to survive the global economic turbulence. If some other world power becomes unstable or starts saber-rattling, it might be better to have Mexico on our side than a potential enemy (or client state of an even bigger enemy).
That's where the immigration reform question becomes complicated. I think that in the debate over immigration, Mexico might be taken for granted, and there's also some degree of disregard and even outright hostility towards Mexico that I've sensed lately. Mexico does have a lot of problems, and things are kind of messed up down there, especially with these ongoing cartel wars. No kind of immigration reform can really work unless that question is also examined.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
~FR~
I favor a path to citizenship. Mainly for economic reasons. We are an aging population. The birth rate among native born citizens is too low to support our domestic economy and too low to support in the long run our social support systems ~ social security & medicare. Illegals have a low crime rate and have not been a drain on welfare funds.
They have taken jobs from the native born, however. Especially in construction, hospitality, and meat packing industries. In that respect they are a part of the globalization issue that has stagnated wages for low middle class labor. Big business seeks out cheap labor one way or another. On the other hand illegals have been very entrepruneurial, starting many small businesses, and revitalizing areas where the young natural born have migrated out.
Net/net I have read they are a plus for the economy. It is interesting to see that the resistance to illegals comes mainly from those who profess allegience to free markets. Labor is subject to the forces of supply and demand. Labor is part of the free market. In 2008/2009 when the economy and financing went into the tank there was a reversal of migration across our southern border. In a sense restrictive immigration acts on labor in a similar fashion that high tariffs act upon imported goods. So, what is the objection from free market advocates?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Lets be honest here. A large number, probably the majority, of illegals are undereducated. If we give them amnesty, which will attract another HUGE number of undereducated people to sneak in. (check what happend when regan tried that) Tell me again how this oversupply of labor will increase wages and working conditions for the non-college educated? Even the college educated with non-scientific degrees are already picking shit with the chickens. Oh, thats right! we are going to secure the border! LOL, Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

quote:

Keep in mind that immigration laws are regulatory, not criminal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Keep in mind that immigration laws are regulatory, not criminal.
Aliens' living here without status because they over-stayed a visa or crossed the border are generally seeking opportunities and are willing to work hard to support their families. They broke immigration laws not with a malicious intent, but because they are risk-takers willing to take a chance on a better life.
Anyone who is pro-economic growth should be all for giving long-time workers and residents of the USA a legal status. This way they can settle down and begin to invest and built a life in the USA while injecting entrepreneurial energy into the economy.
The alternative would be ripping families apart and billions of dollars spent on forced deportations while depleting the USA of its most vibrant workforce.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Not speaking for any free market advocate other than myself, but it's the whole "not following the rules" thing. Don't equate being against illegal immigration as being against immigration. Two very separate things, there. I'm all for legal immigration, and improving it to get more people through the door, and faster.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Considering the lack of funding to maintain the infrastructure of this country, we are having enough problems with taking care of the people born here, can we afford to add to that number with legal or illegal immigrants?

quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion

Lets be honest here. A large number, probably the majority, of illegals are undereducated. If we give them amnesty, which will attract another HUGE number of undereducated people to sneak in. (check what happend when regan tried that) Tell me again how this oversupply of labor will increase wages and working conditions for the non-college educated? Even the college educated with non-scientific degrees are already picking shit with the chickens. Oh, thats right! we are going to secure the border! LOL, Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

quote:

I suggested that while the US military is prohibited from conducting military operations domistically, they are legally allowed to patrol the border, put all the troops we are no longer using in Iraq and Afghanistan patrolling the border with Mexico, build a better fence, and use the same sensors used by the military to detect movement in a given area and tunneling operations on the border.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/politics/immigration-reform/index.html
Seems a deal may be near. Do you think making a way for illegal immigrants to stay, and work towards citizenship is a good idea, or do you think they've broken the law, and should be deported?
The poll is speaking about those that haven't been in other legal trouble other than being here illegaly.

I think that the government is also looking at it from the viewpoint of our relations with Mexico, as well as elements in the business community which have benefited from hiring illegal immigrants. The public seems to be divided on the issue.
They've broken the law, but they've certainly had a lot of help from our side of the border, including the government which has done very little about the issue. This bit of irony isn't lost on our neighbors to the south, so they would see a mass deportation as unfairly blaming their citizens just trying to earn a buck, while letting the real criminals on our side of the border get off scot-free. Questions like that have to be handled delicately.
There's also the problem with border security, so even if they are deported, they'll still try to come back, especially with those who have relatives in the U.S.
Then there's Mexico itself, with which we should probably try to work some sort of more coherent relationship. It's supposed to be a "friendly" relationship, but there's always this bit of history which is still remembered. We need to have closer and more equal ties with each other. That may be a way to survive the global economic turbulence. If some other world power becomes unstable or starts saber-rattling, it might be better to have Mexico on our side than a potential enemy (or client state of an even bigger enemy).
That's where the immigration reform question becomes complicated. I think that in the debate over immigration, Mexico might be taken for granted, and there's also some degree of disregard and even outright hostility towards Mexico that I've sensed lately. Mexico does have a lot of problems, and things are kind of messed up down there, especially with these ongoing cartel wars. No kind of immigration reform can really work unless that question is also examined.

Actually, the bill being debated provides a "path to citizenship" for all the illegals whose only criminal record is being here illegally. But, that part doesn't take effect until the borders are secured. So, until the borders are secured, illegals can stream in to get here before the borders are "closed." If that doesn't provide incentives for mass migration, nothing will. And, what do you think the odds are that the borders are going to actually be secured?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I suggested that while the US military is prohibited from conducting military operations domistically, they are legally allowed to patrol the border....

quote:


Keep in mind that immigration laws are regulatory, not criminal.

quote:


Then make the damn things criminal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/28/politics/immigration-reform/index.html
Seems a deal may be near. Do you think making a way for illegal immigrants to stay, and work towards citizenship is a good idea, or do you think they've broken the law, and should be deported?
The poll is speaking about those that haven't been in other legal trouble other than being here illegaly.

I think that the government is also looking at it from the viewpoint of our relations with Mexico, as well as elements in the business community which have benefited from hiring illegal immigrants. The public seems to be divided on the issue.
They've broken the law, but they've certainly had a lot of help from our side of the border, including the government which has done very little about the issue. This bit of irony isn't lost on our neighbors to the south, so they would see a mass deportation as unfairly blaming their citizens just trying to earn a buck, while letting the real criminals on our side of the border get off scot-free. Questions like that have to be handled delicately.
There's also the problem with border security, so even if they are deported, they'll still try to come back, especially with those who have relatives in the U.S.
Then there's Mexico itself, with which we should probably try to work some sort of more coherent relationship. It's supposed to be a "friendly" relationship, but there's always this bit of history which is still remembered. We need to have closer and more equal ties with each other. That may be a way to survive the global economic turbulence. If some other world power becomes unstable or starts saber-rattling, it might be better to have Mexico on our side than a potential enemy (or client state of an even bigger enemy).
That's where the immigration reform question becomes complicated. I think that in the debate over immigration, Mexico might be taken for granted, and there's also some degree of disregard and even outright hostility towards Mexico that I've sensed lately. Mexico does have a lot of problems, and things are kind of messed up down there, especially with these ongoing cartel wars. No kind of immigration reform can really work unless that question is also examined.

Actually, the bill being debated provides a "path to citizenship" for all the illegals whose only criminal record is being here illegally. But, that part doesn't take effect until the borders are secured. So, until the borders are secured, illegals can stream in to get here before the borders are "closed." If that doesn't provide incentives for mass migration, nothing will. And, what do you think the odds are that the borders are going to actually be secured?

Probably pretty slim, although they're still working on it. It's a long border. Plus they keep finding tunnels, some of them have been quite elaborate and professionally built. They're still going to keep trying to find new ways. I've even heard of Mexicans going up to Canada in order to cross into the United States, since our border with Canada is hardly secured at all. I've also heard that some use boats to sneak up the coast and disembark on the U.S. side.
I suppose the only other option would be to work with Mexico to improve conditions in that country so that more people will have an incentive to stay, rather than risk making the perilous journey over mountains and hot deserts (many deaths every year). Isn't that one of the big promises they made when NAFTA was passed? They said that Mexico's economy would greatly improve so that illegal immigration would be reduced. I guess that didn't pan out as expected.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)