| Author |
Message |
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
 Tue May 02, 2006 4:19 pm |
|
Oh, well, trust me, I didn't mean you  I apologize for any misunderstanding, I meant some of the governmental officals. If we can see a soloution, how come they cann't? Truth is, they can, but don't want the "fair" one we all see
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 6:49 pm |
|
I'm going to ignore all the stuff that you argued against me, Founder, 'cause we're just going in circles there, but I will reply to the things we basically agree on, and TrekkieMaige's proposal.
First, the Canadian border. There is virtually no protection there--even less than on the southern border--and it's one of the longest borders on Earth. However, due to the fact that the amount of people that enter this country illegally through that border is a great deal smaller than that at our southern border, it is a security threat. A kid I know even accidentally entered Canada while hiking in Washington, so, yeah. Problem there, and we can't just leave that open. That's why the Minutemen are starting to operate up there as well (kind-of quells the racism argument, doesn't it?  .
Now, TrekkieMaige, I do have some disagreements with you and some things to point out and explain my opinions on, but overall I do think you did a great job with that post there. A lot better than many of the Republicans in Washington right now! 
Anyways, point-by-point:
| Quote: | | 1. Figure out (roughly) how many illegals are here, where they are, what jobs they have, and what they are earning, as well as trying to seperate out how long they've been here. Perhaps and anonymous collection of survey infornmation collected through physical polling places (without legal reprecusions for those illegals who do show up). |
There have been NUMBERS of studies done, and it's pretty definite that we actually have 24 million people here illegally, but I will submit to you that a survey similar to that which you suggested is definitely a good idea, so that we can figure out who is here and who isn't. But I honestly don't think that should be done before the border is secure. That is, we need to be in the middle of a massive effort to secure our borders when we do that.
This means that Congress should make a security-focussed bill, detailing how at this point in the border security progression such surveys will begin and the Congress will then look at dealing with the more domestic issues, as opposed to security, with regards to illegal immigration.
Can I get some agreement with that?
| Quote: | | 2. Criteria. What should the criteria be for citizenship? Should we declair some kind of special circumstance in order to make the process faster temporarily? |
I agree that we should do this, and here's the criteria I'm thinking now for citizenship.
You are here legally. Plain and simple. A guest worker program is what we should be focussing on domestically for illegals, not a reward of citizenship. If they want citizenship we should help them get started in the process while under the GWP, I will submit to you; however, in order to actually become a citizen they should be coming from their home country legally, like everyone else.
| Quote: | | 3. Borders. We need to secure our borders more carefully. This will (hopefully) prevent a flood illegal immigrants should we temporarily loosen citizenship requirements (big if). |
Already addressed. That, along with charging after employers, is the main thing we need to do to stop the immigration flow, but the key thing is, we have to secure our borders first. Otherwise nothing else matters.
| Quote: | | 4. Prioritize. Who should get citizenship first? Based on jobs? Families? Estimated time in the States? |
Already stated above. Those that apply legally should get priority, though we should help them start on that track while here.
| Quote: | | 5. Re-evaluate. Should we overhaul the citizenship requirements? What benefits should we offer-- English classes? Voter registration? Government classes? Employment services? |
Yes, we should. For instance, no more birthright citizenship. Nada.
Next, English and Government classes should be granted benefits for them, but I'm not so sure about the rest right now.
Otherwise, you are definitely right in that those are the things we need to be focussing on right now, and that is what Congress should be looking at. Comprehensive reform is necessary, but you have to do it with border security going first and everything else secondary; otherwise you're going to have another Bush failure on your hands, in terms of the 190% increase in illegal immigration between April 2003 and April 2004 after his foolish GW program.
Oh, and we also need to discuss green cards, Visas, and the like. Yep, there's a lot more to it than what we've even been discussing thus far.
Can we get agreement on that, or at least parts of that?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
voy416
Captain
Joined: 28 Oct 2001
Posts: 631
Location: Rock Bottom
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 pm |
|
I am for them all. They should protest, some of those people have been here for years, they have family's and lives here and they have a right to a free life, they are already HERE why send them back what is that going to prove oh that the USA is BIG and BAD and has the POWER big whoop. many of those illegal immigrants help this economy. It hurts them more because they are the ones who had to risk there lives just to come over here. all I say is let those people stay here. people need to stop worrying about illegal immigrants they are not the problem. worry about people coming over here and knocking down buildings, and worry about the corrupt government worry why 5 years later ground zero is still a hole in the ground. that is all i have to say this is my opinion.
Thank You Very Much.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:05 pm |
|
Well, doesn't an open-border policy leave more room for those kinds of people flowing in here to pose a threat than anything else? I mean, if our border's so open, and it's so easy to get here illegally, including with truck fulls of materials, how can you begin to think that it is so difficult for a terrorist to sneak in (which they HAVE) or for them to even sneak in nuclear or weapons-grade materials? It's not difficult. There's your answer.
It's a serious issue, our southern border. So is not knowing anything about as many as 24 million people who are in our country.
So, yes, there is a threat posed by open borders and illegal immigrants, respectively (though, for the millionth time on this site, I will concede to you that most of the illegals entering this country are following Migration Selectivity, the Human Geographic concept that most long-distance migrants move for economic reasons, which is what the majority of these people are doing).
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:11 pm |
|
This is not about open borders. AGAIN, people who support THESE illegals in the country do not support open borders. Even most of the illegals agree with doing something about the border. Only the radical and stupid illegals want an open border. With the terrorist threat, this is unnacceptable. This topic isn't about open borders as much as you all want to say it is. Its about the immigrants, here and now, who are protesting....
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:14 pm |
|
Well, when you say
| Quote: | | I am for them all. They should protest, some of those people have been here for years, they have family's and lives here and they have a right to a free life, they are already HERE why send them back what is that going to prove oh that the USA is BIG and BAD and has the POWER big whoop. many of those illegal immigrants help this economy. It hurts them more because they are the ones who had to risk there lives just to come over here. all I say is let those people stay here. people need to stop worrying about illegal immigrants they are not the problem. worry about people coming over here and knocking down buildings, and worry about the corrupt government worry why 5 years later ground zero is still a hole in the ground. that is all i have to say this is my opinion. |
that's the impression I get, and that is actually the belief that a majority (not most, but a majority) of illegal immigration proponents have. Otherwise they wouldn't be against even the border security initiatives only.
But I digress. Fine, back to the protestors...
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:36 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | I'm going to ignore all the stuff that you argued against me, Founder, 'cause we're just going in circles there, but I will reply to the things we basically agree on, and TrekkieMaige's proposal.
First, the Canadian border. There is virtually no protection there--even less than on the southern border--and it's one of the longest borders on Earth. However, due to the fact that the amount of people that enter this country illegally through that border is a great deal smaller than that at our southern border, it is a security threat. A kid I know even accidentally entered Canada while hiking in Washington, so, yeah. Problem there, and we can't just leave that open. That's why the Minutemen are starting to operate up there as well (kind-of quells the racism argument, doesn't it? . |
My question is, how many people actually (or at least a guess) come accross the Canadian border? We have to prioritize somewhere, and in my opinion the Mexican border is a higher priority.
| Quote: |
Now, TrekkieMaige, I do have some disagreements with you and some things to point out and explain my opinions on, but overall I do think you did a great job with that post there. A lot better than many of the Republicans in Washington right now! |
I'm not sure if I should take that as a complement or not...
| Quote: |
Anyways, point-by-point:
| Quote: | | 1. Figure out (roughly) how many illegals are here, where they are, what jobs they have, and what they are earning, as well as trying to seperate out how long they've been here. Perhaps and anonymous collection of survey infornmation collected through physical polling places (without legal reprecusions for those illegals who do show up). |
There have been NUMBERS of studies done, and it's pretty definite that we actually have 24 million people here illegally, but I will submit to you that a survey similar to that which you suggested is definitely a good idea, so that we can figure out who is here and who isn't. But I honestly don't think that should be done before the border is secure. That is, we need to be in the middle of a massive effort to secure our borders when we do that.
This means that Congress should make a security-focussed bill, detailing how at this point in the border security progression such surveys will begin and the Congress will then look at dealing with the more domestic issues, as opposed to security, with regards to illegal immigration.
Can I get some agreement with that? |
I know there are numbers, but I still think that a new study should be done, more direct, and with a promise that they will suffer absolutely no legal reprecussions if they admit to being illegal. It can be anonymous, and they can have a number in order to identify themselves if they so choose.
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | 2. Criteria. What should the criteria be for citizenship? Should we declair some kind of special circumstance in order to make the process faster temporarily? |
I agree that we should do this, and here's the criteria I'm thinking now for citizenship.
You are here legally. Plain and simple. A guest worker program is what we should be focussing on domestically for illegals, not a reward of citizenship. If they want citizenship we should help them get started in the process while under the GWP, I will submit to you; however, in order to actually become a citizen they should be coming from their home country legally, like everyone else. |
But what do we do with the people who are already here? We can't just ship them back. There must be a way to create a one-time-only special case. Maybe a block of a year or two where illegals can get citizenship under a special program, after the borders are secure. Through this program we can weed through and seperate who should gain citizenship and who should gain a special pass. What those criteria should be is debatable. I think family statis, estimated time in the U.S. and what kind of employment they have should play a role, but that's just me.
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | 3. Borders. We need to secure our borders more carefully. This will (hopefully) prevent a flood illegal immigrants should we temporarily loosen citizenship requirements (big if). |
Already addressed. That, along with charging after employers, is the main thing we need to do to stop the immigration flow, but the key thing is, we have to secure our borders first. Otherwise nothing else matters.
|
Not much more to say on that one, but I agree. We just need to control the situation more. What I mean is who gets in to begin with. But basically I agree and I'm rambling
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | 4. Prioritize. Who should get citizenship first? Based on jobs? Families? Estimated time in the States? |
Already stated above. Those that apply legally should get priority, though we should help them start on that track while here. |
Bingo.
| Quote: |
| Quote: | | 5. Re-evaluate. Should we overhaul the citizenship requirements? What benefits should we offer-- English classes? Voter registration? Government classes? Employment services? |
Yes, we should. For instance, no more birthright citizenship. Nada.
Next, English and Government classes should be granted benefits for them, but I'm not so sure about the rest right now. |
Why no more birthright citizenship? Isn't that part of what being in America is? Or am I mistaken? As for the services, perhaps the voter registration can come at the completion of the government/civics class. That seems appropriate. Not to mention that the process is confusing to Americans who's families have live here for generations. Employment services, perhaps a small version at the completion of the English classes.
| Quote: |
Otherwise, you are definitely right in that those are the things we need to be focussing on right now, and that is what Congress should be looking at. Comprehensive reform is necessary, but you have to do it with border security going first and everything else secondary; otherwise you're going to have another Bush failure on your hands, in terms of the 190% increase in illegal immigration between April 2003 and April 2004 after his foolish GW program.
Oh, and we also need to discuss green cards, Visas, and the like. Yep, there's a lot more to it than what we've even been discussing thus far.
Can we get agreement on that, or at least parts of that? |
For the most part, I think we agree. Then again we're discussing fairly broad ideas. Once we get into the details we begin to differ
And wait, you admit to Bush failures?
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:42 pm |
|
| TrekkieMage wrote: |
And wait, you admit to Bush failures? |
I do I seriouly do. He's our president yes, but especialy in this issue.. BAH
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 7:59 pm |
|
| TrekkieMage wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | I'm going to ignore all the stuff that you argued against me, Founder, 'cause we're just going in circles there, but I will reply to the things we basically agree on, and TrekkieMaige's proposal.
First, the Canadian border. There is virtually no protection there--even less than on the southern border--and it's one of the longest borders on Earth. However, due to the fact that the amount of people that enter this country illegally through that border is a great deal smaller than that at our southern border, it is a security threat. A kid I know even accidentally entered Canada while hiking in Washington, so, yeah. Problem there, and we can't just leave that open. That's why the Minutemen are starting to operate up there as well (kind-of quells the racism argument, doesn't it? . |
My question is, how many people actually (or at least a guess) come accross the Canadian border? We have to prioritize somewhere, and in my opinion the Mexican border is a higher priority.
My apologies for not making it clear. By "first" I don't mean that that's our first priority. I meant that that was the first thing I was going to be talking about. I concur with you that the Mexican border is the far more important border to concentrate on right now, with as many as 8.1 million people entering this country illegally each year at this point.
| Quote: | | Now, TrekkieMaige, I do have some disagreements with you and some things to point out and explain my opinions on, but overall I do think you did a great job with that post there. A lot better than many of the Republicans in Washington right now! |
I'm not sure if I should take that as a complement or not...
| Quote: | Anyways, pointby-point:
| Quote: | | 1. Figure out (roughly) how many illegals are here, where they are, what jobs they have, and what they are earning, as well as trying to seperate out how long they've been here. Perhaps and anonymous collection of survey infornmation collected through physical polling places (without legal reprecusions for those illegals who do show up). |
There have been NUMBERS of studies done, and it's pretty definite that we actually have 24 million people here illegally, but I will submit to you that a survey similar to that which you suggested is definitely a good idea, so that we can figure out who is here and who isn't. But I honestly don't think that should be done before the border is secure. That is, we need to be in the middle of a massive effort to secure our borders when we do that.
This means that Congress should make a security-focussed bill, detailing how at this point in the border security progression such surveys will begin and the Congress will then look at dealing with the more domestic issues, as opposed to security, with regards to illegal immigration.
Can I get some agreement with that? |
I know there are numbers, but I still think that a new study should be done, more direct, and with a promise that they will suffer absolutely no legal reprecussions if they admit to being illegal. It can be anonymous, and they can have a number in order to identify themselves if they so choose.
As I said, I agree.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | 2. Criteria. What should the criteria be for citizenship? Should we declair some kind of special circumstance in order to make the process faster temporarily? |
I agree that we should do this, and here's the criteria I'm thinking now for citizenship.
You are here legally. Plain and simple. A guest worker program is what we should be focussing on domestically for illegals, not a reward of citizenship. If they want citizenship we should help them get started in the process while under the GWP, I will submit to you; however, in order to actually become a citizen they should be coming from their home country legally, like everyone else. |
But what do we do with the people who are already here? We can't just ship them back. There must be a way to create a one-time-only special case. Maybe a block of a year or two where illegals can get citizenship under a special program, after the borders are secure. Through this program we can weed through and seperate who should gain citizenship and who should gain a special pass. What those criteria should be is debatable. I think family statis, estimated time in the U.S. and what kind of employment they have should play a role, but that's just me.
I agree. Deportation of them isn't good, nor is it probable. But that's why we set them on the track here saying that if they return to their home country after their guest worker permittance has expired they will get into the line at the right position with the rest of them. It's not deportation--it's an agreement with them so that they can obtain citizenship in a way that truly is fair to those that wait as much as 20 years to come here legally. We have to think about them, do we not?
| Quote: | | Quote: | | 3. Borders. We need to secure our borders more carefully. This will (hopefully) prevent a flood illegal immigrants should we temporarily loosen citizenship requirements (big if). |
Already addressed. That, along with charging after employers, is the main thing we need to do to stop the immigration flow, but the key thing is, we have to secure our borders first. Otherwise nothing else matters.
|
Not much more to say on that one, but I agree. We just need to control the situation more. What I mean is who gets in to begin with. But basically I agree and I'm rambling
lol, good (to the agreement, not the rambling )
| Quote: | | Quote: | | 4. Prioritize. Who should get citizenship first? Based on jobs? Families? Estimated time in the States? |
Already stated above. Those that apply legally should get priority, though we should help them start on that track while here. |
Bingo.
But notice that I said start. I don't think they should necessarily get citizenship while here, but we should make it so that they can start down that track while here.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | 5. Re-evaluate. Should we overhaul the citizenship requirements? What benefits should we offer-- English classes? Voter registration? Government classes? Employment services? |
Yes, we should. For instance, no more birthright citizenship. Nada.
Next, English and Government classes should be granted benefits for them, but I'm not so sure about the rest right now. |
Why no more birthright citizenship? Isn't that part of what being in America is? Or am I mistaken? As for the services, perhaps the voter registration can come at the completion of the government/civics class. That seems appropriate. Not to mention that the process is confusing to Americans who's families have live here for generations. Employment services, perhaps a small version at the completion of the English classes.
| Quote: |
Otherwise, you are definitely right in that those are the things we need to be focussing on right now, and that is what Congress should be looking at. Comprehensive reform is necessary, but you have to do it with border security going first and everything else secondary; otherwise you're going to have another Bush failure on your hands, in terms of the 190% increase in illegal immigration between April 2003 and April 2004 after his foolish GW program.
Oh, and we also need to discuss green cards, Visas, and the like. Yep, there's a lot more to it than what we've even been discussing thus far.
Can we get agreement on that, or at least parts of that? |
For the most part, I think we agree. Then again we're discussing fairly broad ideas. Once we get into the details we begin to differ
That is true, and I agree.
And wait, you admit to Bush failures? |
Well, tell me, my friend. Where have you been over the last year, particularly in recent days?
For one, I'm critical of the President and Republicans when I need to be. They're not perfect. No one is.
Secondly, I have been very critical of the President and everyone in the government on two critical issues: Illegall immigration and spending. I give most people involved in that regard Fs on those two issues including the President.
And finally, were you not here, what was it, two weeks, three weeks, ago when I was doing that whole "anti-Republican fit," to use someone's words? My sig bashed Bush on this, calling him a failure and an incompotent on the issue, granting me praise from Bush dislikers like La Forge, who took it a bit out of context, but nonetheless.
The point is, I will criticize Republicans and the President when they are wrong. And on this they are wrong.
I have clearly stated in the past that on these two issues Bush is a total failure and incompotent, and my opinion hasn't changed one bit.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:11 pm |
|
| Quote: | | I agree. Deportation of them isn't good, nor is it probable. But that's why we set them on the track here saying that if they return to their home country after their guest worker permittance has expired they will get into the line at the right position with the rest of them. It's not deportation--it's an agreement with them so that they can obtain citizenship in a way that truly is fair to those that wait as much as 20 years to come here legally. We have to think about them, do we not? |
Are you kidding me? That is deportation, but with a happy sticker placed over it. It isn't fooling anyone. Sending them back is WHAT THEY DONT WANT. So ANY solution of that nature, will not be accepted.
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:13 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Quote: | | I agree. Deportation of them isn't good, nor is it probable. But that's why we set them on the track here saying that if they return to their home country after their guest worker permittance has expired they will get into the line at the right position with the rest of them. It's not deportation--it's an agreement with them so that they can obtain citizenship in a way that truly is fair to those that wait as much as 20 years to come here legally. We have to think about them, do we not? |
Are you kidding me? That is deportation, but with a happy sticker placed over it. It isn't fooling anyone. Sending them back is WHAT THEY DONT WANT. So ANY solution of that nature, will not be accepted. |
Agreed, the solution has to not involve the ones already here going back, its the only way the illegals are going to be peacful about this.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm |
|
No, it's not deportation, because deportation is, according to Webster's, "the removal from a country of an alien whose presence is unlawful or prejudicial."
We're not saying, "Leave and never come back." By that we're saying, "You get to work here for X amount of time, and during that time we start the legalization process for you. You return home for the duration of the process and then we'll let you back, citizenship and all. That way it's fair to those that spend the time to wait rather than skipping the process to come in more quickly.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:18 pm |
|
If the government gives the jobs of the illegal immigrants to the "poor people" of society we can eliminate most of the poverty in America. and by deporting those illegals afterwards cities will have lower crime rates, more jobs for the poor and they no longer have to deal with paying for the services of these illegal immigrants.
Give the jobs of the illegal immigrants to the poor legal citizens of the United States and deport all illegals back to their respective countries.
That is not hard to understand.
Btw if you didn't read the facts, only 5% of the economy is from Illegal Immigrants contributing, the rest of the 95% is from legal immigrants and Native born.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:22 pm |
|
| borgslayer wrote: | If the government gives the jobs of the illegal immigrants to the "poor people" of society we can eliminate most of the poverty in America. and by deporting those illegals afterwards cities will have lower crime rates, more jobs for the poor and they no longer have to deal with paying for the services of these illegal immigrants.
Give the jobs of the illegal immigrants to the poor legal citizens of the United States and deport all illegals back to their respective countries.
That is not hard to understand.
Btw if you didn't read the facts, only 5% of the economy is from Illegal Immigrants contributing, the rest of the 95% is from legal immigrants and Native born. |
Speaking of "facts", the news clearly showed what would happen if we deported them all. I'll give you a hint, it isn't good.
| Republican_Man wrote: | No, it's not deportation, because deportation is, according to Webster's, "the removal from a country of an alien whose presence is unlawful or prejudicial."
We're not saying, "Leave and never come back." By that we're saying, "You get to work here for X amount of time, and during that time we start the legalization process for you. You return home for the duration of the process and then we'll let you back, citizenship and all. That way it's fair to those that spend the time to wait rather than skipping the process to come in more quickly. |
Sorry, but that is only acceptable in an ideal world. The illegals would worry, and rightfully so, that they would simply be sent back and forgotten. Which is probably the case here. You keep saying that many others are waiting to enter legally and we should focus on them. Guess what? There is a reason they are STILL waiting. Because the immigration process is terrible in this country. They locked it down with the terrorist scare. Its fine to be more careful, but this is ridiculous. Now its near impossible to get in. You're asking these people to put their trust in immigration to save them later on. They obviously don't trust immigration. It won't work and no one would agree to this.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 8:25 pm |
|
I believe their contribution is a bit higher, but in actuality, it's not the removal of all the illegals that will help the economy by giving more Americans jobs and incentives to take those jobs, but it will help if we have laws for employers that both protect illegals and make all people receive minimum wage, decreasing the significant amount of competetition posed by illegals and all that stuff. That would help the economy, not shipping them all away.
And Founder, come to think of it, I can't say that I'd be entirely opposed to citizenship here--AFTER being in a NEW guest worker program (we have several already, in actuality) for a certain amount of time--so long as our borders are secured first and we have strict penalties for them over the years. That I could go for.
But we can't have another Reagan Amnesty of 1987 in 2006, with no actual enforcement of our laws afterwards and all that. Hence why things really need to be reformed significantly.
EDIT: However, to argue against your point, though, we would have reform of our legal immigration process as well, as part of the comprehensive reform, improving it all greatly and ensuring their chance of citizenship. Yet nonetheless, see above.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:02 pm |
|
In response to the Canadian border being very easy to cross, I want to comment on that. Have you tried recently? We used to go back and forth all of the time, barely had to show ID. Now we've got to have passports. (That's not legally in effect yet, but if you get an ass agent, he can turn you back).
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:03 pm |
|
Some of the facts are manipulated in the news to make you think the economy will collapse without these illegals around. As I stated if the government give the jobs of the illegals to the poor before deporting them then poverty can be reduced in America.
If these illegals work so hard on their jobs then they should go back to their respective countries, so they can work hard in those to make those countries better.
I would like see Mexico as a country improve economically so these people wouldn't have to cross to get a "better life"
People down there who are in poverty think that crossing the border is the only way to get a better life and that is not neccessarily true. The people of Mexico can stand up and demand for a better life against the Mexican Government. When the U.S. gets control of the border and when the Mexican Government figure out the problem in its economy then all sides will be content.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:08 pm |
|
Problem is, it's no so easy for them to up and do it. More and more the cities are becoming overrun by the drug cartels. Them and corruption of the government is really hurting them. The Mexican government isn't going to do anything unless there's the incentive because they're so happy with all the money illegals bring back to their country from the US.
That's why all these things are important, so there will be the incentive for Mexico to help their people to improve their lives, which there is no incentive for now. I mean, the Mexican people are impoverished. Know about all the squatter settlements there? It's horrifying.
That's why we need comprehensive reform that is secure and beneficial to America while at the same time fair and assisting to all, from the US to Mexico to the illegals.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:08 pm |
|
Until we get this situation fixed so that all receive justice, I will have to go with what has been engraved on the statue of liberty:
| Quote: | "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" |
-"The New Colossus"
Emma Lazarus
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:14 pm |
|
| borgslayer wrote: | Some of the facts are manipulated in the news to make you think the economy will collapse without these illegals around. As I stated if the government give the jobs of the illegals to the poor before deporting them then poverty can be reduced in America.
If these illegals work so hard on their jobs then they should go back to their respective countries, so they can work hard in those to make those countries better.
I would like see Mexico as a country improve economically so these people wouldn't have to cross to get a "better life"
People down there who are in poverty think that crossing the border is the only way to get a better life and that is not neccessarily true. The people of Mexico can stand up and demand for a better life against the Mexican Government. When the U.S. gets control of the border and when the Mexican Government figure out the problem in its economy then all sides will be content. |
Oh I see, so the news is distorting facts. Sorry. That is a cheap cop out. The news did not distorat anything. There was a negative affect on the economy.
Not to mention your "solution" of giving it to poor people doesn't work either. You're acting on the assumption that they can literally replace the man power and dedication to the work these illegals do. Some might, but not all. It won't be enough.
As for the rest of what you said, it makes no sense. RM perfectly pointed out that some kind of revolution will not be easy. The government is too corrupt and the drug cartels are everywhere. Besides, these people simply want to work. Not fight in a revolution. They want their kids to have an education. Not die in a revolution.
If you meant no revolution but simply work. That is meaningless too. In Mexico the government simply preys on the people. Also, THERE ARE NO JOBS. Why do you think they come here?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue May 02, 2006 9:19 pm |
|
Well, there are plenty of jobs. They're coming here for a number of reasons, all of which I discussed, whether it deal with human geography or the simple fact that they want a better life.
But Founder is right, you know. If we deported them all this economy would fall into a recession, which is why we can't do that. Besides, if we secure our borders and then eventually legalize the people here (again, providing that our laws are enforced) it will cause businesses to look towards the American worker more than the Mexicans, as everyone would be getting fair wages. That could drive up prices, yes, but that would help the economy overall, and it's a price increase I'm willing to pay if most of our workforce consists of legal citizens and they're no longer being beat out by those that will accept less than minimum wage.
Again, it's the best of both worlds. Founder was right earlier in saying that we can't take such hard-lined stances either way. I haven't had such a hard-lined stance, though I do lean against our presidents and illegals, but I am willing to find a more middle ground to compromise, something that is necessary for change and still doesn't compromise my principals (unlike Bill Frist, a Republican I thought I liked but not so much anymore; he's political, and that's it).
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Fri May 12, 2006 12:41 am |
|
| Quote: | Senators Agree to Revive Immigration Bill By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
56 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Senate leaders reached a deal Thursday on reviving a broad immigration bill that could provide millions of illegal immigrants a chance to become American citizens and said they'll try to pass it before Memorial Day.
The agreement brokered by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., breaks a political stalemate that has lingered for weeks while immigrants and their supporters held rallies, boycotts and protests to push for action.
"We congratulate the Senate on reaching agreement and we look forward to passage of a bill prior to Memorial Day," said Dana Perino, deputy White House press secretary.
Key to the agreement is who will be negotiating a compromise with the House, which last December passed an enforcement-only bill that would subject the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States to felony charges as well as deportation.
Frist said the Senate will send 14 Republicans and 12 Democrats to negotiate with the House, with seven of the Republicans and five Democrats coming from the Judiciary Committee. The remaining seven Republicans will be chosen by Frist and remaining seven Democrats chosen by Reid.
At least one oppoenent of the compromise measure, Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, will be among the remaining seven Republicans appointed to the committee, spokesman Don Stewart said.
Frist said a "considerable" number of amendments would be debated when the Senate begins debating the bill early next week.
It would be the most comprehensive rewrite of immigration laws since the so-called Simpson-Mazzoli bill some 20 years ago.
Reid acknowledged on the Senate floor Thursday morning that he "didn't get everything that I wanted" in the agreement, but said Frist didn't either. Reaching the agreement is "not easy with the political atmosphere," Reid said.
Reid had been taking some criticism for refusing to move forward on the bill after complaining that Republicans were trying to undermine it with amendments and insisting that Democrats be allowed to have a say in who serves on the conference committee.
Republicans, too, have had opposition from conservatives to the compromise proposal. These critics consider its path to citizenship provision for illegal immigrants and hundreds of thousands of future guest workers to be tantamount to "amnesty."
They've also had to contend with fallout from opposition to the House bill that triggered nationwide protests that drew hundreds of thousands in Los Angeles, Chicago and Dallas and hundreds more in other cities and small communities.
Presidential and midyear politics have been a subtext to the immigration debate. Frist and Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), one of the architects of the legalization proposal, are prominent in speculation for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination.
The compromise bill the Senate will consider builds on legislation approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee 12-6, with four Republicans voting with Democrats to approve the measure.
That measure absorbed a bill drafted by McCain and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., that called for allowing illegal immigrants to work toward becoming legal permanent residents.
President Bush had helped accelerate progress on the bill after meeting with a bipartisan group of senators last month and stating clearer support for allowing illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.
"Business and labor, Democrats and Republicans, religious leaders and the American people strongly support our plan to strengthen borders, provide a path to earned citizenship for those undocumented workers who are here and put in place a realistic guest worker program for the future," Kennedy said. |
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060512/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/immigration
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
