Quote from: TboneAgain on August 25, 2014, 12:34:22 PM
Some (e.g. Alaska Slim) think we're under some sort of moral imperative to let anyone and everyone in. They believe we have no right as a nation to say who comes and stays. So much for nationhood.

Others claim we have plenty of space and resources to share with anyone and everyone -- we'd be mean ol' hogs not to share. Look at all that open space in New Mexico! Why, there's hardly anybody there! Of course, if you've been to New Mexico, it ain't hard to figure out why there's hardly anybody there. Most of the place is fit for lizards and rattlesnakes and not much else.

I've also seen claims that we have no right to restrict our borders because it's not explicitly in the Constitution. Of course, I don't recall anything in the Constitution about speed limits on interstate highways either, or testing standards for new pharmaceuticals, or the redistribution of levied taxes in the form of food stamps, or bringing suit against landowners who build unpermitted ponds.

Those who believe in open borders simply don't see the reality of the situation, and they don't understand how drastically things have changed in 200 years. In 1814, people were coming here to find freedom from oppression, to build a new life in a new country, to start over on a 40-acre plot. In those days, the government offered them almost nothing -- just the 40 acres on a raw frontier. Today, our strange government offers them literally everything from free food to free health care to free housing. Free to them, that is; the rest of us have the privilege of paying for it. A hundred years ago, we picked and chose from prospective immigrants, making sure we got those who were healthy and productive. Today we take them, sick, poor, addled, old, little kids, known criminals, drug dealers, terrorists, and we do it wholesale, without regard for the laws we have on the books. Our motivation in doing this, I am utterly ashamed to say, is to attract dirt-cheap labor and to expand the Democrat voter base.

I don't see how anyone can say a country (any country) doesn't have the RIGHT to determine who does and does not get to stay.  YOU have a right in your own home to that much. 

That's the very LEAST a country is entitled to.  The Constitution argument is plain dumb.

DaisyJane   

Quote from: Alaska Slim on August 25, 2014, 01:06:07 PM
Says the system, you've already acknowledge this is the case.

No, sweetie.  I only want skilled, capable immigrants to come here legally.  I want us to have the best of the best.

Quote
The system doesn't people in, because it is cynical, and violates Natural Law.

We're the best, so we have to keep the rest of the world out.  Otherwise, they will come here and flood us and turn us into a 3rd world nation.  Why is that hard for you to understand?

Quote
Had them in the 19th century too, somehow, letting people in didn't erase them.

The American 19th Century. Best growth period we ever had. Disproves every single objection to immigration.

I warned you about intentionally conflating legal vs. illegal.  You get a 24 hour timeout.

I actually agree with this blithering idiot, Oh I don't support amnesty part but the illegals who are now invading our country WIIL turn into terrorists or criminals with amnesty or not. Every single one of these people who cross the border do so ONLY with the blessing of whatever criminal cartel gang controls human smuggling in their respective section. Likely they are indepted tot he cartels moneywise and must work off their debt by doing their bidding...that means prostitution, drugs, various criminal activety such as identity theft and if necessary murder and kidnapping, something that has turned several cities in Arizona into high crime areas with over 100% rise in REPORTED crimes over the last ten years....URBAN TERRORISM INDEED

This moron thinks he is doing them a favor by promoting this crap but he is actually doing them a disservice and scaring the crap out of ordinary citizens, hopefully it will work against him (them) and amnesty will be shot down again.

Quote from: taxed on August 25, 2014, 02:47:31 PM
No, sweetie.  I only want skilled, capable immigrants to come here legally.  I want us to have the best of the best.
We're the best, so we have to keep the rest of the world out.  Otherwise, they will come here and flood us and turn us into a 3rd world nation.  Why is that hard for you to understand?
I warned you about intentionally conflating legal vs. illegal.  You get a 24 hour timeout.

A misunderstanding, and I was at fault for it. I apologize.

Quote from: DaisyJane on August 25, 2014, 02:05:09 PM
I don't see how anyone can say a country (any country) doesn't have the RIGHT to determine who does and does not get to stay.

The Constitution gives us the right to determine naturalization, or the process for becoming a citizen. The Naturalization act of 1798 and earlier such laws deal with just thus matter.

Who simply gets to come here, to work, to shop, to visit or otherwise, is an economic matter, and one the Founders saw fit to leave in the Economy's hands.

There are conditions for which we can block entry, but that's not an open warrant to pass any immigration policy we wish.

Any immigration policy we have, must first acknowledge why the Founders left us with open borders, and structure itself with their principles in mind. This does not mean we should have open borders once again, but it does mean that our emphasis on liberty should be the same now, as it was then.

QuoteYOU have a right in your own home to that much. 

What of businesses who hire immigrants, and are both part to blame and encourage illegal immigration to occur?

In this analogy, it's saying that the intruder was invited to your home by someone else (the business) who lives there, and the moment the intruder showed up, this other person hired them on the spot to go mow the lawn.

This comparison, doesn't quite track with average home experience does it? But it is the average experience for illegal immigration.

Quote from: Alaska Slim on August 26, 2014, 08:54:05 PM
A misunderstanding, and I was at fault for it. I apologize.

Thanks.

I'm more concerned about an immigrant's ATTITUDE about America than his skill level. Some of the best "educated" carry the dumbest ideas (like Communism).

I want people who WANT TO BE AMERICAN. Who understand what that means and not simply here to see how many goodies they can steal from the Taxpayer -- or people who bring their lesser culture here along with the problems that culture creates (like beheading anyone who disagrees with you.

Quote from: carlb on August 27, 2014, 06:21:01 PM
I'm more concerned about an immigrant's ATTITUDE about America than his skill level. Some of the best "educated" carry the dumbest ideas (like Communism).

I want people who WANT TO BE AMERICAN. Who understand what that means and not simply here to see how many goodies they can steal from the Taxpayer -- or people who bring their lesser culture here along with the problems that culture creates (like beheading anyone who disagrees with you.

Measuring attitude is a subjective business, far beyond the capabilities of the average INS or ICE worker. The idea behind using things like level of education, degrees, professional certifications, and so on, is close to what you're wanting, but less susceptible to the inevitable errors of a scenario in which a US/union worker bee spends 30 seconds passing judgement on a total stranger who doesn't even speak English.

Quote from: TboneAgain on August 27, 2014, 07:18:22 PM
The idea behind using things like level of education, degrees, professional certifications, and so on, is close to what you're wanting,

But this forgets we need low skill labor as well, and indeed bracero was specifically designed to bring in 1000s of the laborers thought needed by our farms. Skilled labor wasn't the target.

Raising the bar to skills, and only specific skills the government thinks the economy needs, is a messy and counterproductive mandate. The economy needs both, that businesses seek to hire them is proof in of itself of that.

Quote from: Alaska Slim on August 27, 2014, 10:01:40 PM
But this forgets we need low skill labor as well, and indeed bracero was specifically designed to bring in 1000s of the laborers thought needed by our farms. Skilled labor wasn't the target.

Raising the bar to skills, and only specific skills the government thinks the economy needs, is a messy and counterproductive mandate. The economy needs both, that businesses seek to hire them is proof in of itself of that.

Yes, low skilled labor as in entry level jobs for American citizens, like prior to WWII, and after the war, jobs Americans should have been allowed to return to, Instead, they had been replaced by cheaper labor.

I speak from experience, in 1969 I tried to get a job at a sugar beat processing plant in Clarksburg Ca, the foreman asked if I spoke Spanish, I said no, he said how are you going to communicate then, all my workers are Mexicans, sorry, can't higher you.

A well paying entry level job, and I couldn't have it because I spoke English in America?
This is what you're proposing for all young Americans entering the work force, competition by people that shouldn't even be here.

I speak from experience, you speak from an emotional level regarding Liberty, all the while ignoring the Rights of American citizens, while giving corporations free reign to trample our Constitution.
This is not a free Mkt issue, no matter how many ways you spin it.

Quote from: Solar on August 28, 2014, 07:31:11 AM
Yes, low skilled labor as in entry level jobs for American citizens, like prior to WWII, and after the war, jobs Americans should have been allowed to return to, Instead, they had been replaced by cheaper labor.

I speak from experience, in 1969 I tried to get a job at a sugar beat processing plant in Clarksburg Ca, the foreman asked if I spoke Spanish, I said no, he said how are you going to communicate then, all my workers are Mexicans, sorry, can't higher you.

A well paying entry level job, and I couldn't have it because I spoke English in America?
This is what you're proposing for all young Americans entering the work force, competition by people that shouldn't even be here.

I speak from experience, you speak from an emotional level regarding Liberty, all the while ignoring the Rights of American citizens, while giving corporations free reign to trample our Constitution.
This is not a free Mkt issue, no matter how many ways you spin it.

As much as I hate too, I agree, because in Europe it functions like this

Slovenians, Estonians, Croatians etc go to Poland to work as carpenters and concrete workers, Polish workers go to Norway, and Norwegians go to the welfare office because they can't compete with $5/hour wages the polish get and there is nowhere else to go.

There is rampant unemployment in both Western Europe and United States, the current unemployment figures is not representative at all as the important variables are either removed (like people who are unemployed but not searching for work) or tweaked to lower the bar (people on welfare working 1 day out 30 is considered full employment in the unemployment statistics) or the definitions are Orwellian changed to give better impression.

The politicians get reelected since they can say "we created 100,000 jobs" (by having 100,000 stop searching for work) and the bureaucrats get their raises and salaries.

A liberty based market can't compete with a slave based market without sacrificing social mobility, an essential pillar in a liberty based society with huge wealth differences. What this free movement of labor is creating is a permanent welfare social class which is detrimental to liberty.

Quote from: Mountainshield on August 28, 2014, 08:33:44 AM
As much as I hate too, I agree, because in Europe it functions like this

Slovenians, Estonians, Croatians etc go to Poland to work as carpenters and concrete workers, Polish workers go to Norway, and Norwegians go to the welfare office because they can't compete with $5/hour wages the polish get and there is nowhere else to go.

There is rampant unemployment in both Western Europe and United States, the current unemployment figures is not representative at all as the important variables are either removed (like people who are unemployed but not searching for work) or tweaked to lower the bar (people on welfare working 1 day out 30 is considered full employment in the unemployment statistics) or the definitions are Orwellian changed to give better impression.

The politicians get reelected since they can say "we created 100,000 jobs" (by having 100,000 stop searching for work) and the bureaucrats get their raises and salaries.

A liberty based market can't compete with a slave based market without sacrificing social mobility, an essential pillar in a liberty based society with huge wealth differences. What this free movement of labor is creating is a permanent welfare social class which is detrimental to liberty.

I don't think good people stop looking for work when there off Unemployment Benefits in the U.S.   It's just a way for the government system to look good and say unemployment is down. 

Quote from: Mountainshield on August 28, 2014, 08:33:44 AM
As much as I hate too, I agree, because in Europe it functions like this

Slovenians, Estonians, Croatians etc go to Poland to work as carpenters and concrete workers, Polish workers go to Norway, and Norwegians go to the welfare office because they can't compete with $5/hour wages the polish get and there is nowhere else to go.

There is rampant unemployment in both Western Europe and United States, the current unemployment figures is not representative at all as the important variables are either removed (like people who are unemployed but not searching for work) or tweaked to lower the bar (people on welfare working 1 day out 30 is considered full employment in the unemployment statistics) or the definitions are Orwellian changed to give better impression.

The politicians get reelected since they can say "we created 100,000 jobs" (by having 100,000 stop searching for work) and the bureaucrats get their raises and salaries.

A liberty based market can't compete with a slave based market without sacrificing social mobility, an essential pillar in a liberty based society with huge wealth differences. What this free movement of labor is creating is a permanent welfare social class which is detrimental to liberty.

Exactly correct! It is slave labor, and the pols take credit for feeding the coffers of crony capitalists.
This is not Capitalism, this is crony socialism.

Quote from: Solar on August 28, 2014, 09:15:41 AM
Exactly correct! It is slave labor, and the pols take credit for feeding the coffers of crony capitalists.
This is not Capitalism, this is crony socialism.

Indeed, and people are not willing to accept huge wealth differences in a crony socialist society and will demand higher taxes on all businesses and employees because there is no social mobility (except for the politicians and bureaucrats ofc, they can live like the aristocrats they are).

Niall Ferguson was talking about this in one of his documentaries, people in America accept huge wealth differences because they believe there exist social mobility, but take that away and the US becomes just another European nondescript socialist nation.

Quote from: Mountainshield on August 28, 2014, 09:54:10 AM
Indeed, and people are not willing to accept huge wealth differences in a crony socialist society and will demand higher taxes on all businesses and employees because there is no social mobility (except for the politicians and bureaucrats ofc, they can live like the aristocrats they are).

Niall Ferguson was talking about this in one of his documentaries, people in America accept huge wealth differences because they believe there exist social mobility, but take that away and the US becomes just another European nondescript socialist nation.

Ya know, that gives me an idea. Lets make it legal to hire illegals, but if someone does, they pay a premium tax to offset a job stolen, an illegal alien migrant tax.
Enforce the shit out of it, and watch the wave of illegals come to a screeching halt.