Yesterday afternoon it was reported that the Los Angeles Police Department is “no longer heeding federal immigration requests to hold inmates who might be deportable past their jail terms, unless a judge has vetted the request, Mayor Eric Garcetti announced Monday alongside a cheering crowd of immigrant advocates,” the LA Times reported.
“The federal government is in charge of enforcing federal immigration laws — not us at the local level,” Mayor Garcetti said. “And that responsibility can’t be forced onto local law enforcement officials who already have stretched budgets.”
The Times reports, “Los Angeles joins scores of other cities and counties that have stopped the practice after a federal court ruling in April. That ruling found that an Oregon county was liable for damages after holding an inmate beyond her release date so that she could be transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
The Times continues, “Spurred by that ruling, Los Angeles officials decided to reexamine their approach to the federal requests earlier this year. LAPD Chief Charlie Beck declared that the new approach would foster the community’s trust in the police department, encouraging more people to report crimes.”
Chief Beck said that “crime had continued to fall over the last three years in Los Angeles as the police department ‘systematically reduced’ the number of detention requests that it honored. So far this year, the department received 773 such requests and had honored roughly 300, Beck told the crowd.”
“People ask — will this affect crime in Los Angeles? My answer is no,” Chief Beck said Monday at a news conference. He later added, “This is not something for people to be concerned about, about serious criminals being released, because they will not.”
Los Angeles is only the latest city to balk at cooperation with ICE.
In 2007, the Davis City Council, comprised of Mayor Sue Greenwald, Mayor Pro Tem Ruth Asmundson and Councilmembers Lamar Heystek, Don Saylor and Stephen Souza, unanimously passed Resolution 07-162 which reaffirmed the City of Davis as a City of Sanctuary. In 1986, the city had declared itself a City of Sanctuary, “specific to refugees fleeing persecution in El Salvador and Guatemala.”
The resolution reads, “WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Davis has also passed Resolution 07-123, which states that the City of Davis disapproves of and condemns the civil rights violations caused by conducting raids for the purpose of deportation of undocumented foreign nationals; and WHEREAS, much of the public discourse surrounding immigration has taken on a tone that ranges from irrational to racist, including the use of language such as ‘illegal’ and ‘alien’ to describe immigrants, which has a dehumanizing effect; and WHEREAS, the City of Davis supports a fair and just reform to the immigration process…”
It affirms “its declaration as a City of Sanctuary, broadening its scope to include undocumented workers and immigrants from all backgrounds.”
It notes that “the City of Davis supports a just and fair immigration reform that respects individuals and allows proper and affordable navigation channels for individuals to become documented workers in, permanent residents of and/or naturalized citizens of the United States and affirms the basic human rights and dignity of every human being.”
In May 2011, a national news conference was held by law enforcement officials, including Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto, in which they laid out their concerns about what was then a new federal program called Secure Communities.
The idea behind Secure Communities was for local law enforcement to have the ability to share the fingerprints of those arrested with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). It was touted as a way to help identify and deport illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes.
Instead, it is now coming under fire because it has been used to deport those arrested but not convicted of a crime, or convicted of minor crimes or even traffic violations.
According to the news conference, only 12,000 of the 38,828 people in California deported through the Secure Communities program between May 2009 and March 2011 were charged with or convicted of major violent offense. However, another 11,000 were classified as non-criminal deportees.
Sheriff Ed Prieto of Yolo County; Sheriff Patrick Perez of Kane County, Ill.; Arturo Venegas Jr., the retired police chief of Sacramento; and immigration rights activists held the news conference to express their opposition to the program.
Sheriff Prieto said he was unaware for a long time that the program was even in place. According to the LA Times article, he said yesterday that he is now looking for ways to get out of it.
According to another report, Sheriff Prieto “acknowledged that many people, including some in his own command staff, have no objections to deporting anyone who is discovered to be in the country illegally. But he is instructing his department to notify ICE only of prisoners in the country illegally who are known to have committed serious offenses.”
Different local entities are looking to deal with this in different ways. For instance, LA County Sheriff Lee Baca is a strong proponent of the federal program. He told the LA Times, “The program enables law enforcement agencies to identify criminals who are here illegally and allows the federal government to target those who have committed serious crimes for deportation so they no longer pose a threat to our communities.”
Sheriff Prieto did not return a message from the Vanguard on Monday asking for clarification on current Yolo County Sheriff policies.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Good to know, being a sanctuary city maybe we can bring in a bus load of new illegals being held at the border because we can so afford it.
don: why do you let this racism stay up here?
That post is not racist at all, it’s just stating the facts and relays what’s going on today that indeed bus and plane loads of illegals are being dropped on unsuspecting communities.
What’s typical is a lefty automatically going to the go to race card.
I am looking for anything close to an indication that a race was singled out here, but not seeing it.
I think those that are too loose with the term “racism”, given its implications and impacts, should be frog marched to the town square for some “hypersensitivity” branding ceremony.
Maybe not racism but certainly xenophobia. Racism is tougher to call out because it requires motive although in some cases its a good guess. Racism is like what Potter Steward said about obscenity, people know it when they see it.
Of course Tia is hilarious too. She’s all for helping people as long as we don’t build housing for them here upsetting her lifestyle choices.
As for me i say give them a physical exam and check for a criminal record and let in those who pass the test. That’s how most of the people in this country whose families came through Ellis or Angel islands got here.
The situation on the border is a humanitarian crisis not unlike what you would find in many places in the world. The United States should respond accordingly.
Of course the reason so many people are here without going through the system is because the system doesn’t work. I know this to be true because I’ve seen it take 12 years to go through the process. That is a broken system.
Toad wrote:
> Maybe not racism but certainly xenophobia
For most people it is not a fear of people of different races or a fear of people from different countries it is a fear of even higher taxes to educate and give health care to people without jobs when we don’t have enough money to educate or give health care to the people (of many different races from many different countries) already here (and we don’t have the money to fix the roads or build a 50m pool)…
The reason that so many people want to come here is that we are a wealthy 1st-world country with numerous benefits, freedoms, a nation of laws, infrastructure, school and hospital systems. It makes sense that hundreds of millions of people would like to come here. If I lived in Africa or Mexico, I’d want to come here.
They also are lured by jobs and an extensive social safety net and welfare system unheard of in 3rd world countries.
A rational immigration system might let more people come here from all over the world, not just a few counties lucky enough to be south of us.
Mr. Toad,
I have said repeatedly that I favor and would happily pay more to support low cost housing or a “housing first” program for those of our homeless who would accept this kind of support. What I have objected to on a number of occasions is more $400,000 – $ 600,000 dollar homes. I do not believe that we need more of these in the city. I do not believe that the people who can afford these homes need our help.
I have a simple way to help middle class families looking for such a home. Allow timber companies to cut down more of the trees killed by the wide infestation of beetles and fires. The Rim Fire alone killed over 250,000 acres of trees. It makes more sense to cut down dead trees than live trees, raise money to plant new trees, slow down the beetle infestation, allow the trees left to survive (more water per tree), and help lower the price of lumber. Win-win-win-win.
Good to know, being a sanctuary city maybe we can bring in a bus load of new illegals being held at the border because we can so afford it.
don: why do you let this racism stay up here?
That post is not racist at all, it’s just stating the facts and relays what’s going on today that indeed bus and plane loads of illegals are being dropped on unsuspecting communities.
What’s typical is a lefty automatically going to the go to race card.
I am looking for anything close to an indication that a race was singled out here, but not seeing it.
I think those that are too loose with the term “racism”, given its implications and impacts, should be frog marched to the town square for some “hypersensitivity” branding ceremony.
Maybe not racism but certainly xenophobia. Racism is tougher to call out because it requires motive although in some cases its a good guess. Racism is like what Potter Steward said about obscenity, people know it when they see it.
Of course Tia is hilarious too. She’s all for helping people as long as we don’t build housing for them here upsetting her lifestyle choices.
As for me i say give them a physical exam and check for a criminal record and let in those who pass the test. That’s how most of the people in this country whose families came through Ellis or Angel islands got here.
The situation on the border is a humanitarian crisis not unlike what you would find in many places in the world. The United States should respond accordingly.
Of course the reason so many people are here without going through the system is because the system doesn’t work. I know this to be true because I’ve seen it take 12 years to go through the process. That is a broken system.
Toad wrote:
> Maybe not racism but certainly xenophobia
For most people it is not a fear of people of different races or a fear of people from different countries it is a fear of even higher taxes to educate and give health care to people without jobs when we don’t have enough money to educate or give health care to the people (of many different races from many different countries) already here (and we don’t have the money to fix the roads or build a 50m pool)…
The reason that so many people want to come here is that we are a wealthy 1st-world country with numerous benefits, freedoms, a nation of laws, infrastructure, school and hospital systems. It makes sense that hundreds of millions of people would like to come here. If I lived in Africa or Mexico, I’d want to come here.
They also are lured by jobs and an extensive social safety net and welfare system unheard of in 3rd world countries.
A rational immigration system might let more people come here from all over the world, not just a few counties lucky enough to be south of us.
Mr. Toad,
I have said repeatedly that I favor and would happily pay more to support low cost housing or a “housing first” program for those of our homeless who would accept this kind of support. What I have objected to on a number of occasions is more $400,000 – $ 600,000 dollar homes. I do not believe that we need more of these in the city. I do not believe that the people who can afford these homes need our help.
I have a simple way to help middle class families looking for such a home. Allow timber companies to cut down more of the trees killed by the wide infestation of beetles and fires. The Rim Fire alone killed over 250,000 acres of trees. It makes more sense to cut down dead trees than live trees, raise money to plant new trees, slow down the beetle infestation, allow the trees left to survive (more water per tree), and help lower the price of lumber. Win-win-win-win.
Mira los desgraciados hablan.
More like:
ver el hablar veraz
You’re obviously not a Spanish speaker. I believe what you’re trying to say is “Digo la verdad”
¿Qué es una nación sin leyes?
close: lo que es una nación sin leyes
Mira los desgraciados hablan.
More like:
ver el hablar veraz
You’re obviously not a Spanish speaker. I believe what you’re trying to say is “Digo la verdad”
¿Qué es una nación sin leyes?
close: lo que es una nación sin leyes
“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-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
Tia:
How many homeless are living in your yard (or do you just want “others” to say “Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me”)?
I have taken in several homeless folks in the past when I was on my own. I don’t know how I would respond now if someone wanted a place to sleep, take a shower, or wash their clothes. I now have other responsibilities such as my own kids and a partner to consider. However, I would happily pay much more in taxes and I would certainly take in one of these children if that were agreeable to the remainder of my family.
Ergo, NIMBY?
Well blacks were only counted as 2/3 a person for political representation and women could not vote. So it seems you wax nostalgic when it suits your worldview.
The bottom line is that there are currently another 150 million people in the world, more poor and uneducated, that want to come to the US. Based on this poem, why not just bring them all in? That way the bleeding hearts of American liberals will certainly be filled.
The point lost on anyone repeating this plaque on the walls of all immigrant processing centers was that America needed people to populate the country. We stopped needing people after the baby boom. We cannot afford more poor and uneducated people, and we have allowed far too many and now we are overwhelmed and they are not assimilating into traditional American values, and so the country has changed and is changing away from traditional American values, and this pleases the American liberal who for some reason is stuck in some inferiority complex or anxiety about not fitting in… but only as a short term patch with long-term destructive consequences.
And lastly, crying that we need to allow all these people into the country from within a primarily white and affluent exclusive city really rings hollow for me. Move to a southern border state and then tell me you want open borders and then I will listen.
We need the labor that immigrants provide.
Yes they are, depending on what you consider to be American values. 2nd and 3rd generations from immigrant families assimilate. The pace varies. But it’s happening. They do like all previous ones did: they retain some things, and absorb others, and by so doing contribute to the eclectic pastiche that is America.
Please don’t continue to project your right-wing beliefs as “American values” on the rest of us. Your “American values” and mine overlap on some things, but not on others. But my family has been here as long as yours, I’d say, so you have no greater or prior right to define the term.
Not sure what you mean by this latest psychoanalysis (what did you say your degree was in?).
We have absorbed refugees before, and we’ll do it again. Be it Haiti, Cuba, Central America in the 1980’s, Hmong, Vietnam, and Central America today, we can process these folks and identify which ones have legitimate refugee issues, and which should and can be returned safely to their homes. It will cost some money, so increasing the border agency fundings and making some special funds and resources available is going to be necessary. That is what this president is doing, and it is what any president would do.
We need the labor that immigrants provide.
Absolutely false. There are more than enough unemployed Americans to do that work today.
Yes they are [assimilating]
No they are not.
A study by the Hudson Institute, found that immigrants — even those who earn U.S. citizenship — have far less attachment to their new home than native-born Americans. Among the findings are that native-born citizens are more likely to view the U.S. as “better” than other countries, more likely to see English as central to the American experience, and more likely to see the U.S. Constitution as a higher legal authority than international law.
When people live here still oriented to their home country, that does not bode well for the country. But they have friends in liberals because liberals also are generally not oriented to their country either. They don’t like it the way it is and want it transformed to something they can be more proud of. So we have that strange bedfellows relationship… immigrants that don’t really love America and just look at the US as a big ATM, and liberals that do the same.
Please don’t continue to project your right-wing beliefs as “American values” on the rest of us. Your “American values” and mine overlap on some things, but not on others. But my family has been here as long as yours, I’d say, so you have no greater or prior right to define the term.
My relative Daniel Lee would disagree with you here. My values are traditional American values. They are the same that are at the root cause for why this nation has succeeded when so many have failed. They are the same that created the very country that so many want to immigrate to. You tend to support more of the values that historically prevailed for failed states and empires. But we do overlap on many things. Unfortunately it is those that we don’t agree on that are destroying the country.
We have absorbed refugees before, and we’ll do it again.
So here we understand the liberal response… these are refugees and we need to “absorb” them.
This President is a giant cluster f___. He was a hazard to this country from day one, and he has proven it beyond any shadow of a doubt. Everyone knows it except for those liberals that are so far up his rear that they cannot see the light.
These are not refugees, they are a consequence of the Obama Administrations’ words and actions related to immigration policy. I read today that the Administration is going to ask Congress for $5 billion to hire an army of immigration judges and attorney to handle this new, one of hundreds, giant mistake by the President and his “smart” minions.
We tried that experiment in Georgia and Alabama. Because of the immediate shortage of agricultural labor, they stopped enforcing the laws and the immigrants returned. There may be, numerically, enough unemployed Americans to do that work. But they wouldn’t do it there, and they won’t do it here in sufficient numbers to support our diverse agricultural economy.
By the second and third generations, immigrants assimilate along familiar patterns.
My values are traditional American values, too. Please don’t assert that what you value is superior to what I value. I have no idea what your ‘failed states and empires’ comment refers to.
Many of them are clearly fleeing violence in their home countries. They need to be interviewed, processed as we’ve done many times before, and assessed individually on the merits of their cases.
Yes. We need more money and resources to deal with this. And we need to get the word out in those three countries that are providing most of these immigrants that there is not guaranteed sanctuary here. They’ll be treated humanely, and processed safely, but there is no guarantee they can stay. Some can, perhaps; others can’t.
“These are not refugees”, so true, they are future Democrat votes and that’s all Obama and the left care about no matter how much it costs the nation.
By any definition of ‘refugee’ it is clear that many of them are. Since they are here illegally, and have no path to citizenship, it is obvious that they wouldn’t be “future Democrat[ic] voters.”
Don, are you for Open Borders?
I don’t think you’re being honest with me as you know the next step will be Amnesty, and then 75-80% of Latino’s will vote Democrat for 3 generations, and Progressives will do to America what they have done to California.
No, I’m for a humanitarian response to a flood of refugees and economic immigrants who are coming here for a mix of reasons.
I don’t think there’s even going to be a vote on an immigration bill in 2014, 2015, or even 2016. So it’s kind of moot. We need to partner with Mexico and the three countries of origin where most of these folks are coming from, and come up with a humane solution. That has really nothing to do with “open borders.”
So this is really the driving force behind the anti-immigration push? Ironically, if that’s true, it is self-created. In 1994, Hispanics voted about 50-50 Democrat to Republican. It was only things like Prop 187 that changed the landscape. The anti-Immigration push has turned Asian voters from Republican leaning to 70% Democratic leaning.
From my perspective, the anti-immigration policies have caused the partisan shift, rather than the other way around.
But Don, we have defacto Open Borders right now, whether we’ll admit to 25, 30, or 40 million illegal immigrants.
And why should those who suffer economic hardship in Mexico jump ahead of the line in front of those from Africa, Russia, or the Ukraine?
Obama has had a large role in this travesty, from stopping the construction of the 700-mile border fence in 2010, to his Amnesty for “dreamers”. On top of that, I have spoke to numerous illegal immigrants who uniformly say “Obama promised me papers. Obama no good, Obama (Spanish curse word).”
Don wrote:
> By the second and third generations, immigrants assimilate
> along familiar patterns.
My kids were born more than 100 years after their (immigrant) grandparents.
I think that Frankly’s point was that it didn’t usually take 50-100 YEARS (two or three generations for people to assimilate in the past.
http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/perspectivesmar07citrin_etal.pdf
Testing Huntington: Is Hispanic Immigration a Threat to American Identity?
authors: Jack Citrin, Amy Lerman, Michael Murakami, and Kathryn Pearson
Many other interesting characteristics of second-generation Americans here: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/02/07/second-generation-americans/2/#chapter-2-demographic-portrait-of-adult-children-of-immigrants
Last I checked there is still a substantial education gap between native born children and both legal and illegal Hispanic immigrants. I spoke with a friend who is a grade school teacher, and asked her if language were the biggest issue. She commented that the second issue is that many don’t know formal Spanish, so that makes it twice as hard if they don’t know their mother tongue.
Don, some studies show Mexican immigrants assimilating at a much slower rate than other ethnic groups. This includes teen pregnancy and crime. The Manhattan Institute had this: “Mexican adolescents are imprisoned at rates approximately 80 percent greater than immigrant adolescents generally.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm
Unfortunately, we have never had this level of illegal, unchecked immigration into our country at one time. 40-45 million illegal immigrants are near impossible to assimilate, and thus we have barrios and ghettos like East Los Angeles. The Irish, Italians, Jews, Ethiopians, and Russians all assimilated. This does not appear to be the case now.
And what do you think about the explosion of gangs we’ve imported, as well as drugs? Is that fine with you? This makes the mafia look like child play. Sleepy Fresno is now the car theft capital of the United States!
40 to 50 million seems like a very high number.
The current federal government estimate of 12 Million was used at least as far back as 2005, but it appears they haven’t updated the number.
In 2005 two researchers at Bear Stearns put the number as high as 20 Million. “Their figures are based on an analysis of the large discrepancy between official census estimates and growth in indicators such as remittances to the countries of origin, school enrollment and building permits.”
In 1986 Ronald Reagan signed Amnesty for the government estimate of 1 Million illegal immigrants. Right? 3.6 Million signed up.
Take that error rate times the current federal government estimate. 3.6 x 12 Million = 43.2 Million.
3/5 not 2/3
Frankly: We stopped needing people after the baby boom.
Baby boomers will probably appreciate the cheap immigrant labor to serve apple sauce in their golden years.
… and the graffiti and gangs.
TBD: … and the graffiti and gangs.
And is that what you genuinely think of immigrants?
Read very carefully what you just responded to, and maybe you’ll see why you might get called out as racist, bigot, and worse.
Frankly,
“Move to a southern border state and then tell me you want open borders and then I will listen.”
OK, better listen up then because I felt exactly the same way when I lived within an hours drive of the southern border outside of Tucson for two years.
I felt the same way when I lived across the border from the strawberry fields of Anaheim which would clear of workers when the shout “La Migra” would go out.
I felt the same way when I was working the ER in Fresno where many of these workers would turn up with illnesses and injuries sustained while trying to make it north from the border.
I feel that human beings have a moral obligation to help other human beings who are less fortunate and I always have. I have never felt that religion or nationality or race mattered at all. Being a human is my only criteria.
Hi Tia,
According to Wikipedia, that poem became famous because it was engraved in 1903 on a plaque at the foot of the Statue of Liberty: “John T. Cunningham wrote that ‘The Statue of Liberty was not conceived and sculpted as a symbol of immigration, but it quickly became so as immigrant ships passed under the statue. However, it was Lazarus’s poem that permanently stamped on Miss Liberty the role of unofficial greeter of incoming immigrants’.”
In other words, those immigrants were coming into our country legally, not illegally. If any present immigrants want to do the same, I’m all for that. However, this article is about illegal immigration, and you equate it with the legal kind.
For instruction to all readers, consider the Heinz dilemma, which I reprint from my Vanguard post of June 22:
“A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, ‘No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.’ So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.
Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?”
This dilemma is quoted in Wikipedia under “Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development.” If readers answer the dilemma for themselves (i.e., do they personally think that Heinz should have stolen the drug; if so, why; if not, why not) and then go to the Wikipedia text just after this dilemma, they will find sample answers to the dilemma, one of which will probably match up to theirs. Then they will know which stage of moral development they are in (according to Kohlberg), which will give them a better appreciation for how they see the world.
I know you answered the Heinz dilemma, Tia, and I thank you for that. However, your answer to the moral dilemma of illegal immigration leads me to believe that you have not reached the most complete answer for the Heinz dilemma, which I understand as follows:
Human life is more important than human laws, but in general these laws should be broken only for reasons of certain or near-certain death, and the consequences of breaking them should be paid, if necessary. In the Heinz dilemma, the man’s wife was dying, and he did everything he could to work within the law to save her. When that was not enough (due to the intransigence of the pharmacist), he broke the law and (to my mind) probably would have turned himself in if necessary, since the goal of saving (or trying to save) his wife’s life was accomplished, and he was in general a law-abiding man.
However, is the illegal immigration situation analogous? Are these immigrants fleeing certain or near-certain death? Are they trying to immigrate legally first? Are they willing to abide by laws (such as registering with I.C.E.) after they come in illegally? (I heard last night on TV that only 20% of them turn up to register.) I submit to you that the answer in most cases is no. Just like legal immigrants, they want a better life for themselves, but unlike legal immigrants they are breaking the law to get it. If they are true refugees, they can establish that status with the federal government, as other refugees do.
Why does this matter? I can’t continue writing everything out, especially if you and other readers are not interested. If any of you are interested, let me know.
I believe this didn’t imply free housing, food, medical care, and hospital care.
These were legal immigrants who didn’t come here for a free ride, they didn’t bring in thousands of illegal gangs, and they didn’t import tens of billions of dollars of extremely harmful drugs to poison our youth with.
We have usually displayed compassion, but we also have our own elderly to take care of, our own poor.
Dorte,
I do not believe that all human laws have equal moral authority. If a law is designed which betrays a higher moral mandate, such as the life or well being of humans, then I do not think that it should be followed. For an example that is not immigration related, I think it is a moral act for a pacifist to refuse conscription into an army when his/her belief is that war is immoral.
I do not subscribe to the belief that laws should be broken only when death is certain or near certain. I believe that inability to feed one’s children, or to prevent them from being sold into prostitution,or forced into gangs, or threatened with beatings for not paying “insurance” are enough reasons to flee one’s country. This is asylum seeking and in my opinion trumps our immigration law. Would anyone really let their children go hungry in order to obey the law of another country ? I would not.
Hi Tia,
Thanks for your response. I guess that your main argument is that the illegal immigrants are refugees seeking asylum. The definition of “refugee” in the American Heritage Dictionary is “one who flees in search of refuge, as from war or political oppression”. I’m not up on current events in the countries from which these immigrants come, but is there actual war there or wide-scale political oppression? If so, these immigrants should register as required after they come to this country, since their request for asylum should be granted.
However, only a small minority of them will register, so I conclude that those who do not do so are seeking a better life by breaking our laws. Yes, they are in need. Yes, they want to improve their well-being, as you put it. Yes, these are reasons to leave their country. However, these may not be adequate reasons for our country to let them stay. You see, people can ask for things, but we don’t have to give them. You think that in this case we should; I think that we shouldn’t.
What I want to do is to help the needy here first. Therefore, I am investigating the plight of the homeless in Davis and looking into improving adoption opportunities for foster children nation-wide.
If you think that these immigrants deserve help, maybe you could organize public agencies and private individuals to help the government. Dealing with this influx will cost a bundle, and every donation, in time or money, will make a difference.
Hi Dorte
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
First, I doubt that many of the unaccompanied children who arrive have any idea of what our laws are and how to comply with them. I believe from having met a number of teens barely older than these from my time in the southwestern part of the US that their understanding of what their parents have asked them to do is to get as far from the border as they can relatively quickly and find work. Their instruction is to work hard and save money some of which they send home, some of which they are to use for living expenses and if any is left over, to save for the trip home.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment about helping the needy here. What I do not agree with is your feeling that this should be done
“first”. I believe that they should be done concurrently. I do not pretend that I can work here in my clinic, volunteer my time on public health issues here and organize for these refugees. What I can do is volunteer my time locally, advocate more broadly for the the refugees, and offer and vote to have relatively more taxpayer money ( yes, including my own ) spent on this humanitarian endeavor and less on war expenditures which I consider to be immoral.
Hi Tia,
You consider these immigrants to be refugees and therefore want to let them stay. I do not consider all of them to be refugees and therefore do not want to let all of them stay.
The central question is whether all of them are refugees. Refugees leave countries in which living conditions are intolerable. How can living conditions be intolerable if those who come here want to earn money and return? How can living conditions be intolerable if parents or family members are still there?
I submit to you that in most cases living conditions are bad (maybe very bad) but not intolerable. If we admit everyone who lives in bad conditions, we will admit a great part of the world’s population, and we will cease to exist as a nation. Then we will not be able to help anyone at all, not even ourselves.
“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-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
Tia:
How many homeless are living in your yard (or do you just want “others” to say “Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me”)?
I have taken in several homeless folks in the past when I was on my own. I don’t know how I would respond now if someone wanted a place to sleep, take a shower, or wash their clothes. I now have other responsibilities such as my own kids and a partner to consider. However, I would happily pay much more in taxes and I would certainly take in one of these children if that were agreeable to the remainder of my family.
Ergo, NIMBY?
Well blacks were only counted as 2/3 a person for political representation and women could not vote. So it seems you wax nostalgic when it suits your worldview.
The bottom line is that there are currently another 150 million people in the world, more poor and uneducated, that want to come to the US. Based on this poem, why not just bring them all in? That way the bleeding hearts of American liberals will certainly be filled.
The point lost on anyone repeating this plaque on the walls of all immigrant processing centers was that America needed people to populate the country. We stopped needing people after the baby boom. We cannot afford more poor and uneducated people, and we have allowed far too many and now we are overwhelmed and they are not assimilating into traditional American values, and so the country has changed and is changing away from traditional American values, and this pleases the American liberal who for some reason is stuck in some inferiority complex or anxiety about not fitting in… but only as a short term patch with long-term destructive consequences.
And lastly, crying that we need to allow all these people into the country from within a primarily white and affluent exclusive city really rings hollow for me. Move to a southern border state and then tell me you want open borders and then I will listen.
We need the labor that immigrants provide.
Yes they are, depending on what you consider to be American values. 2nd and 3rd generations from immigrant families assimilate. The pace varies. But it’s happening. They do like all previous ones did: they retain some things, and absorb others, and by so doing contribute to the eclectic pastiche that is America.
Please don’t continue to project your right-wing beliefs as “American values” on the rest of us. Your “American values” and mine overlap on some things, but not on others. But my family has been here as long as yours, I’d say, so you have no greater or prior right to define the term.
Not sure what you mean by this latest psychoanalysis (what did you say your degree was in?).
We have absorbed refugees before, and we’ll do it again. Be it Haiti, Cuba, Central America in the 1980’s, Hmong, Vietnam, and Central America today, we can process these folks and identify which ones have legitimate refugee issues, and which should and can be returned safely to their homes. It will cost some money, so increasing the border agency fundings and making some special funds and resources available is going to be necessary. That is what this president is doing, and it is what any president would do.
We need the labor that immigrants provide.
Absolutely false. There are more than enough unemployed Americans to do that work today.
Yes they are [assimilating]
No they are not.
A study by the Hudson Institute, found that immigrants — even those who earn U.S. citizenship — have far less attachment to their new home than native-born Americans. Among the findings are that native-born citizens are more likely to view the U.S. as “better” than other countries, more likely to see English as central to the American experience, and more likely to see the U.S. Constitution as a higher legal authority than international law.
When people live here still oriented to their home country, that does not bode well for the country. But they have friends in liberals because liberals also are generally not oriented to their country either. They don’t like it the way it is and want it transformed to something they can be more proud of. So we have that strange bedfellows relationship… immigrants that don’t really love America and just look at the US as a big ATM, and liberals that do the same.
Please don’t continue to project your right-wing beliefs as “American values” on the rest of us. Your “American values” and mine overlap on some things, but not on others. But my family has been here as long as yours, I’d say, so you have no greater or prior right to define the term.
My relative Daniel Lee would disagree with you here. My values are traditional American values. They are the same that are at the root cause for why this nation has succeeded when so many have failed. They are the same that created the very country that so many want to immigrate to. You tend to support more of the values that historically prevailed for failed states and empires. But we do overlap on many things. Unfortunately it is those that we don’t agree on that are destroying the country.
We have absorbed refugees before, and we’ll do it again.
So here we understand the liberal response… these are refugees and we need to “absorb” them.
This President is a giant cluster f___. He was a hazard to this country from day one, and he has proven it beyond any shadow of a doubt. Everyone knows it except for those liberals that are so far up his rear that they cannot see the light.
These are not refugees, they are a consequence of the Obama Administrations’ words and actions related to immigration policy. I read today that the Administration is going to ask Congress for $5 billion to hire an army of immigration judges and attorney to handle this new, one of hundreds, giant mistake by the President and his “smart” minions.
We tried that experiment in Georgia and Alabama. Because of the immediate shortage of agricultural labor, they stopped enforcing the laws and the immigrants returned. There may be, numerically, enough unemployed Americans to do that work. But they wouldn’t do it there, and they won’t do it here in sufficient numbers to support our diverse agricultural economy.
By the second and third generations, immigrants assimilate along familiar patterns.
My values are traditional American values, too. Please don’t assert that what you value is superior to what I value. I have no idea what your ‘failed states and empires’ comment refers to.
Many of them are clearly fleeing violence in their home countries. They need to be interviewed, processed as we’ve done many times before, and assessed individually on the merits of their cases.
Yes. We need more money and resources to deal with this. And we need to get the word out in those three countries that are providing most of these immigrants that there is not guaranteed sanctuary here. They’ll be treated humanely, and processed safely, but there is no guarantee they can stay. Some can, perhaps; others can’t.
“These are not refugees”, so true, they are future Democrat votes and that’s all Obama and the left care about no matter how much it costs the nation.
By any definition of ‘refugee’ it is clear that many of them are. Since they are here illegally, and have no path to citizenship, it is obvious that they wouldn’t be “future Democrat[ic] voters.”
Don, are you for Open Borders?
I don’t think you’re being honest with me as you know the next step will be Amnesty, and then 75-80% of Latino’s will vote Democrat for 3 generations, and Progressives will do to America what they have done to California.
No, I’m for a humanitarian response to a flood of refugees and economic immigrants who are coming here for a mix of reasons.
I don’t think there’s even going to be a vote on an immigration bill in 2014, 2015, or even 2016. So it’s kind of moot. We need to partner with Mexico and the three countries of origin where most of these folks are coming from, and come up with a humane solution. That has really nothing to do with “open borders.”
So this is really the driving force behind the anti-immigration push? Ironically, if that’s true, it is self-created. In 1994, Hispanics voted about 50-50 Democrat to Republican. It was only things like Prop 187 that changed the landscape. The anti-Immigration push has turned Asian voters from Republican leaning to 70% Democratic leaning.
From my perspective, the anti-immigration policies have caused the partisan shift, rather than the other way around.
But Don, we have defacto Open Borders right now, whether we’ll admit to 25, 30, or 40 million illegal immigrants.
And why should those who suffer economic hardship in Mexico jump ahead of the line in front of those from Africa, Russia, or the Ukraine?
Obama has had a large role in this travesty, from stopping the construction of the 700-mile border fence in 2010, to his Amnesty for “dreamers”. On top of that, I have spoke to numerous illegal immigrants who uniformly say “Obama promised me papers. Obama no good, Obama (Spanish curse word).”
Don wrote:
> By the second and third generations, immigrants assimilate
> along familiar patterns.
My kids were born more than 100 years after their (immigrant) grandparents.
I think that Frankly’s point was that it didn’t usually take 50-100 YEARS (two or three generations for people to assimilate in the past.
http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/perspectivesmar07citrin_etal.pdf
Testing Huntington: Is Hispanic Immigration a Threat to American Identity?
authors: Jack Citrin, Amy Lerman, Michael Murakami, and Kathryn Pearson
Many other interesting characteristics of second-generation Americans here: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/02/07/second-generation-americans/2/#chapter-2-demographic-portrait-of-adult-children-of-immigrants
Last I checked there is still a substantial education gap between native born children and both legal and illegal Hispanic immigrants. I spoke with a friend who is a grade school teacher, and asked her if language were the biggest issue. She commented that the second issue is that many don’t know formal Spanish, so that makes it twice as hard if they don’t know their mother tongue.
Don, some studies show Mexican immigrants assimilating at a much slower rate than other ethnic groups. This includes teen pregnancy and crime. The Manhattan Institute had this: “Mexican adolescents are imprisoned at rates approximately 80 percent greater than immigrant adolescents generally.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm
Unfortunately, we have never had this level of illegal, unchecked immigration into our country at one time. 40-45 million illegal immigrants are near impossible to assimilate, and thus we have barrios and ghettos like East Los Angeles. The Irish, Italians, Jews, Ethiopians, and Russians all assimilated. This does not appear to be the case now.
And what do you think about the explosion of gangs we’ve imported, as well as drugs? Is that fine with you? This makes the mafia look like child play. Sleepy Fresno is now the car theft capital of the United States!
40 to 50 million seems like a very high number.
The current federal government estimate of 12 Million was used at least as far back as 2005, but it appears they haven’t updated the number.
In 2005 two researchers at Bear Stearns put the number as high as 20 Million. “Their figures are based on an analysis of the large discrepancy between official census estimates and growth in indicators such as remittances to the countries of origin, school enrollment and building permits.”
In 1986 Ronald Reagan signed Amnesty for the government estimate of 1 Million illegal immigrants. Right? 3.6 Million signed up.
Take that error rate times the current federal government estimate. 3.6 x 12 Million = 43.2 Million.
3/5 not 2/3
Frankly: We stopped needing people after the baby boom.
Baby boomers will probably appreciate the cheap immigrant labor to serve apple sauce in their golden years.
… and the graffiti and gangs.
TBD: … and the graffiti and gangs.
And is that what you genuinely think of immigrants?
Read very carefully what you just responded to, and maybe you’ll see why you might get called out as racist, bigot, and worse.
Frankly,
“Move to a southern border state and then tell me you want open borders and then I will listen.”
OK, better listen up then because I felt exactly the same way when I lived within an hours drive of the southern border outside of Tucson for two years.
I felt the same way when I lived across the border from the strawberry fields of Anaheim which would clear of workers when the shout “La Migra” would go out.
I felt the same way when I was working the ER in Fresno where many of these workers would turn up with illnesses and injuries sustained while trying to make it north from the border.
I feel that human beings have a moral obligation to help other human beings who are less fortunate and I always have. I have never felt that religion or nationality or race mattered at all. Being a human is my only criteria.
Hi Tia,
According to Wikipedia, that poem became famous because it was engraved in 1903 on a plaque at the foot of the Statue of Liberty: “John T. Cunningham wrote that ‘The Statue of Liberty was not conceived and sculpted as a symbol of immigration, but it quickly became so as immigrant ships passed under the statue. However, it was Lazarus’s poem that permanently stamped on Miss Liberty the role of unofficial greeter of incoming immigrants’.”
In other words, those immigrants were coming into our country legally, not illegally. If any present immigrants want to do the same, I’m all for that. However, this article is about illegal immigration, and you equate it with the legal kind.
For instruction to all readers, consider the Heinz dilemma, which I reprint from my Vanguard post of June 22:
“A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, ‘No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.’ So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.
Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?”
This dilemma is quoted in Wikipedia under “Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development.” If readers answer the dilemma for themselves (i.e., do they personally think that Heinz should have stolen the drug; if so, why; if not, why not) and then go to the Wikipedia text just after this dilemma, they will find sample answers to the dilemma, one of which will probably match up to theirs. Then they will know which stage of moral development they are in (according to Kohlberg), which will give them a better appreciation for how they see the world.
I know you answered the Heinz dilemma, Tia, and I thank you for that. However, your answer to the moral dilemma of illegal immigration leads me to believe that you have not reached the most complete answer for the Heinz dilemma, which I understand as follows:
Human life is more important than human laws, but in general these laws should be broken only for reasons of certain or near-certain death, and the consequences of breaking them should be paid, if necessary. In the Heinz dilemma, the man’s wife was dying, and he did everything he could to work within the law to save her. When that was not enough (due to the intransigence of the pharmacist), he broke the law and (to my mind) probably would have turned himself in if necessary, since the goal of saving (or trying to save) his wife’s life was accomplished, and he was in general a law-abiding man.
However, is the illegal immigration situation analogous? Are these immigrants fleeing certain or near-certain death? Are they trying to immigrate legally first? Are they willing to abide by laws (such as registering with I.C.E.) after they come in illegally? (I heard last night on TV that only 20% of them turn up to register.) I submit to you that the answer in most cases is no. Just like legal immigrants, they want a better life for themselves, but unlike legal immigrants they are breaking the law to get it. If they are true refugees, they can establish that status with the federal government, as other refugees do.
Why does this matter? I can’t continue writing everything out, especially if you and other readers are not interested. If any of you are interested, let me know.
I believe this didn’t imply free housing, food, medical care, and hospital care.
These were legal immigrants who didn’t come here for a free ride, they didn’t bring in thousands of illegal gangs, and they didn’t import tens of billions of dollars of extremely harmful drugs to poison our youth with.
We have usually displayed compassion, but we also have our own elderly to take care of, our own poor.
Dorte,
I do not believe that all human laws have equal moral authority. If a law is designed which betrays a higher moral mandate, such as the life or well being of humans, then I do not think that it should be followed. For an example that is not immigration related, I think it is a moral act for a pacifist to refuse conscription into an army when his/her belief is that war is immoral.
I do not subscribe to the belief that laws should be broken only when death is certain or near certain. I believe that inability to feed one’s children, or to prevent them from being sold into prostitution,or forced into gangs, or threatened with beatings for not paying “insurance” are enough reasons to flee one’s country. This is asylum seeking and in my opinion trumps our immigration law. Would anyone really let their children go hungry in order to obey the law of another country ? I would not.
Hi Tia,
Thanks for your response. I guess that your main argument is that the illegal immigrants are refugees seeking asylum. The definition of “refugee” in the American Heritage Dictionary is “one who flees in search of refuge, as from war or political oppression”. I’m not up on current events in the countries from which these immigrants come, but is there actual war there or wide-scale political oppression? If so, these immigrants should register as required after they come to this country, since their request for asylum should be granted.
However, only a small minority of them will register, so I conclude that those who do not do so are seeking a better life by breaking our laws. Yes, they are in need. Yes, they want to improve their well-being, as you put it. Yes, these are reasons to leave their country. However, these may not be adequate reasons for our country to let them stay. You see, people can ask for things, but we don’t have to give them. You think that in this case we should; I think that we shouldn’t.
What I want to do is to help the needy here first. Therefore, I am investigating the plight of the homeless in Davis and looking into improving adoption opportunities for foster children nation-wide.
If you think that these immigrants deserve help, maybe you could organize public agencies and private individuals to help the government. Dealing with this influx will cost a bundle, and every donation, in time or money, will make a difference.
Hi Dorte
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
First, I doubt that many of the unaccompanied children who arrive have any idea of what our laws are and how to comply with them. I believe from having met a number of teens barely older than these from my time in the southwestern part of the US that their understanding of what their parents have asked them to do is to get as far from the border as they can relatively quickly and find work. Their instruction is to work hard and save money some of which they send home, some of which they are to use for living expenses and if any is left over, to save for the trip home.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment about helping the needy here. What I do not agree with is your feeling that this should be done
“first”. I believe that they should be done concurrently. I do not pretend that I can work here in my clinic, volunteer my time on public health issues here and organize for these refugees. What I can do is volunteer my time locally, advocate more broadly for the the refugees, and offer and vote to have relatively more taxpayer money ( yes, including my own ) spent on this humanitarian endeavor and less on war expenditures which I consider to be immoral.
Hi Tia,
You consider these immigrants to be refugees and therefore want to let them stay. I do not consider all of them to be refugees and therefore do not want to let all of them stay.
The central question is whether all of them are refugees. Refugees leave countries in which living conditions are intolerable. How can living conditions be intolerable if those who come here want to earn money and return? How can living conditions be intolerable if parents or family members are still there?
I submit to you that in most cases living conditions are bad (maybe very bad) but not intolerable. If we admit everyone who lives in bad conditions, we will admit a great part of the world’s population, and we will cease to exist as a nation. Then we will not be able to help anyone at all, not even ourselves.
Another example of our council (past and present) wasting time taking on fringe issues when they should be concentrating on running the city.
You understand of course that ICE holds add huge non-reimbursed costs to local law enforcement, right? So it’s actually as moot an issue as you suggest.
Another example of our council (past and present) wasting time taking on fringe issues when they should be concentrating on running the city.
You understand of course that ICE holds add huge non-reimbursed costs to local law enforcement, right? So it’s actually as moot an issue as you suggest.
BP
Another issue where we differ on what is “fringe” and what is vital. I consider human rights on an equal par with financial well being. Both are essential to good governance.
But this is not such a clear-cut situation.
I heard one report that fifty percent of the girls that travel to our border are sexually abused. Then take the cost of leaving one’s family, the increase in gang activity on both sides of the border as fathers leave their families for more money and status. What happens when “Sancho” (“the other man”) starts playing footsies with the wife, while her husband leaves his family for 3, 4, 5 years?
Might it not be better for these Mexican nationals to stay in their own country, and improve it?
I have empathy for someone truly leaving a war-torn country where their life is at risk, but not for an opportunist, not for members of M13 or the Nortenos or the Sorenos or the Bulldogs. Not for drug smugglers or coyotes who rape 12-year-old girls.
We’re not mostly talking about Mexican nationals.
Yes, so they need to be processed individually to assess their situations. Which is why the administrative end needs more resources and money.
LOL, all that will happen is the illegals will get hooked up with immigration attorneys that will tell them exactly what they have to say to stay.
Please tell me what you think we should do with these kids.
Pay to send them back to where they came from. Most came in with their mothers and any that didn’t we should hook them up with a liason to help them get back to their home country.
Sadly, Barack Palin, I agree with you. We already have reports of illegal immigrants claiming family here, that don’t exist.
Don, the answer is multi-pronged. Unfortunately, Barack Obama did the exact opposite.
1- A competent President would warn illegal immigrants of the dangers in the long journey.
2. A POTUS who values and loves our country would not halt the 700-mile double-walled fence which was under construction. (If fences don’t work, take down the fence around the White House.) Obama did this in 2010.
3- A competent President would not send the message to Latin America that they all know: “Obama promised us papers”.
4- A competent President would not have signed Amnesty for the so-called “Dreamers”, sending the clear message that if you get here, you stay.
Obama helped to create this massive problem, and it is about one of six massive problems he has failed to fix – and thus his poll numbers are in the toilet. Hence the recent Quinnipiac Poll which rated Barack Obama the worst president since WWII.
BP: Most came in with their mothers…
citation?
The immigration attorneys are just trying to make a buck.
I bet they would change their tune if we allowed in a few million lawyers from abroad who would compete for their jobs.
BP
Another issue where we differ on what is “fringe” and what is vital. I consider human rights on an equal par with financial well being. Both are essential to good governance.
But this is not such a clear-cut situation.
I heard one report that fifty percent of the girls that travel to our border are sexually abused. Then take the cost of leaving one’s family, the increase in gang activity on both sides of the border as fathers leave their families for more money and status. What happens when “Sancho” (“the other man”) starts playing footsies with the wife, while her husband leaves his family for 3, 4, 5 years?
Might it not be better for these Mexican nationals to stay in their own country, and improve it?
I have empathy for someone truly leaving a war-torn country where their life is at risk, but not for an opportunist, not for members of M13 or the Nortenos or the Sorenos or the Bulldogs. Not for drug smugglers or coyotes who rape 12-year-old girls.
We’re not mostly talking about Mexican nationals.
Yes, so they need to be processed individually to assess their situations. Which is why the administrative end needs more resources and money.
LOL, all that will happen is the illegals will get hooked up with immigration attorneys that will tell them exactly what they have to say to stay.
Please tell me what you think we should do with these kids.
Pay to send them back to where they came from. Most came in with their mothers and any that didn’t we should hook them up with a liason to help them get back to their home country.
Sadly, Barack Palin, I agree with you. We already have reports of illegal immigrants claiming family here, that don’t exist.
Don, the answer is multi-pronged. Unfortunately, Barack Obama did the exact opposite.
1- A competent President would warn illegal immigrants of the dangers in the long journey.
2. A POTUS who values and loves our country would not halt the 700-mile double-walled fence which was under construction. (If fences don’t work, take down the fence around the White House.) Obama did this in 2010.
3- A competent President would not send the message to Latin America that they all know: “Obama promised us papers”.
4- A competent President would not have signed Amnesty for the so-called “Dreamers”, sending the clear message that if you get here, you stay.
Obama helped to create this massive problem, and it is about one of six massive problems he has failed to fix – and thus his poll numbers are in the toilet. Hence the recent Quinnipiac Poll which rated Barack Obama the worst president since WWII.
BP: Most came in with their mothers…
citation?
The immigration attorneys are just trying to make a buck.
I bet they would change their tune if we allowed in a few million lawyers from abroad who would compete for their jobs.
David: Sanctuary VS Secure….two very different thoughts. As one went right into the other, it was a little confusing!
David: Sanctuary VS Secure….two very different thoughts. As one went right into the other, it was a little confusing!
this is a serious problem that local agencies have – having to incarcerate individuals past the dispensation of their cases. for serious crimes, it makes sense to put a hold on them and deport when their sentence expires, but for minor crimes, it clogs the system and ends up being rather discriminatory.
DP wrote:
> it clogs the system and ends up being rather discriminatory
Holding ANYONE who breaks the law also “clogs the system” and is “rather discriminatory” (to lawbreakers). If we just let EVERYONE do what they want the “system” would not be “clogged” and we would not have to worry about “discrimination”…
I saw an old couple get a seatbelt ticket downtown the other day and the old man tried to plead with the cop to just give him a warning. The cop still gave the old guy the ticket. They were driving an old beat up truck and I’m sure that fine will hurt them financially.
So we’re going to ding our own for little nuisance tickets like a seatbelt while we’re supposed to look the other way while illegal aliens break our laws?
you obviously missed my point so i’ll state it again. it’s one thing to put people into custody who committed serious offenses. that’s not cloging the system. what clogs the system are people who are in custody for minor offenses. so when you get an ICE hold for example, someone is less likely to attempt to plea, can’t be released either on OR or bail, so they sit in custody until trial. that’s a huge expense to the local system that is not reimbursed. do you understand my point now?
So what is your solution?
Reports are that less than 5% show up for their legal hearing.
Meanwhile, how many will drop a so-called “anchor baby” as we continue to mis-apply the 14th Amendment? What other nation allows someone to pop out a child, and gain citizenship?
Yhey don’t even need to pop a child anymore, they can just walk in with the ones they already have thanks to Obama’s Dream Act.
You don’t even need your own kid as long as “any” kid calls you Dad…
this is a serious problem that local agencies have – having to incarcerate individuals past the dispensation of their cases. for serious crimes, it makes sense to put a hold on them and deport when their sentence expires, but for minor crimes, it clogs the system and ends up being rather discriminatory.
DP wrote:
> it clogs the system and ends up being rather discriminatory
Holding ANYONE who breaks the law also “clogs the system” and is “rather discriminatory” (to lawbreakers). If we just let EVERYONE do what they want the “system” would not be “clogged” and we would not have to worry about “discrimination”…
I saw an old couple get a seatbelt ticket downtown the other day and the old man tried to plead with the cop to just give him a warning. The cop still gave the old guy the ticket. They were driving an old beat up truck and I’m sure that fine will hurt them financially.
So we’re going to ding our own for little nuisance tickets like a seatbelt while we’re supposed to look the other way while illegal aliens break our laws?
you obviously missed my point so i’ll state it again. it’s one thing to put people into custody who committed serious offenses. that’s not cloging the system. what clogs the system are people who are in custody for minor offenses. so when you get an ICE hold for example, someone is less likely to attempt to plea, can’t be released either on OR or bail, so they sit in custody until trial. that’s a huge expense to the local system that is not reimbursed. do you understand my point now?
So what is your solution?
Reports are that less than 5% show up for their legal hearing.
Meanwhile, how many will drop a so-called “anchor baby” as we continue to mis-apply the 14th Amendment? What other nation allows someone to pop out a child, and gain citizenship?
Yhey don’t even need to pop a child anymore, they can just walk in with the ones they already have thanks to Obama’s Dream Act.
You don’t even need your own kid as long as “any” kid calls you Dad…
So the Davis City Council passed a speech code to forbid the use of the word “illegal”. How high minded.
What is a country? A country has a border, it has a language, and it has a culture. Obliterating that causes all kinds of problems, and where does “diversity” occur if we import 100 Million people with Latino roots?
You are one for three. A country has a border.
So you are saying that they speak Mandarin in France?
And America doesn’t celebrate the 4th of July, Super Bowl, and Thanksgiving?
I’m sure there are people who speak Cantonese in France. It is the world’s most common language. Some do celebrate these things others not so much. The great thing about this country is we are free to speak, worship and hang out as we please. Your culture, while it may or may not be dominant, is not a requirement. As far as assimilation goes its really a mixed bag and a long debate going all the way back to the genocide against native americans, We are actually richer as a country with some assimilation and some retention of cultural tradition. The Anish and Mennonites come to mind.
“What is a country? A country has a border, it has a language, and it has a culture. Obliterating that causes all kinds of problems”
I personally think that obliterating that would solve a lot of problems. If there were no separate countries there certainly would be no wars based on national identity. There would be lots of other issues to fight over, but not nationalism.
So the Davis City Council passed a speech code to forbid the use of the word “illegal”. How high minded.
What is a country? A country has a border, it has a language, and it has a culture. Obliterating that causes all kinds of problems, and where does “diversity” occur if we import 100 Million people with Latino roots?
You are one for three. A country has a border.
So you are saying that they speak Mandarin in France?
And America doesn’t celebrate the 4th of July, Super Bowl, and Thanksgiving?
I’m sure there are people who speak Cantonese in France. It is the world’s most common language. Some do celebrate these things others not so much. The great thing about this country is we are free to speak, worship and hang out as we please. Your culture, while it may or may not be dominant, is not a requirement. As far as assimilation goes its really a mixed bag and a long debate going all the way back to the genocide against native americans, We are actually richer as a country with some assimilation and some retention of cultural tradition. The Anish and Mennonites come to mind.
“What is a country? A country has a border, it has a language, and it has a culture. Obliterating that causes all kinds of problems”
I personally think that obliterating that would solve a lot of problems. If there were no separate countries there certainly would be no wars based on national identity. There would be lots of other issues to fight over, but not nationalism.
$2 billion going to the border to try and deal with this mess while in the meantime people in Detroit are having their water cut off, roads are crumbling in cities all across America, bridges need updating, etc……..
It is not just Detroit, the roads are crumbling in Davis and much of our infrastructure (like water) needs updating but they are asking for (close to $4 Billion if the recent radio report is correct) more money…
$3.7 Billion.
$2 billion going to the border to try and deal with this mess while in the meantime people in Detroit are having their water cut off, roads are crumbling in cities all across America, bridges need updating, etc……..
It is not just Detroit, the roads are crumbling in Davis and much of our infrastructure (like water) needs updating but they are asking for (close to $4 Billion if the recent radio report is correct) more money…
$3.7 Billion.
A billion here and there and it starts adding up but compared to George W Bush’s repeated $100 billion appropriations for Iraq or his $1 trillion for profligate banks that left Uncle Sam holding the bag its not that big an amount. California is the world’s 8th largest economy with an equivalent GDP of over $2 trillion. There is a humanitarian crisis on the border. We have a moral responsibility to help these people. At least that is my understanding of american culture.
Obama has racked up what, $7.5 Trillion in hot checks? And there have been more super-super wealthy created under Obama than Bush with his “quantitative easing”, which has shelled out billions upon billions to Wall Street.
I think Goldman Sachs is in Obama’s pocket, the media doesn’t point that out like they used to do with Cheney and Halliburton.
Whoever caused this problem should pay for it. As far as I can tell, the fault is as follows:
–Major: The governments the people are fleeing from (and the government of Mexico, which is letting these people through or not preventing them from coming through) caused most of the problem, so our government should seriously consider stopping foreign aid to them immediately.
–Minor: President Obama, for reasons mentioned in other posts. His salary should be garnered, and he should pay a large part of his future income in restitution. As they say, “You break it, you buy it.”
Of course, I know that neither of these things will happen. Somehow it’s OK to borrow more and more money that we can probably never repay. However, I called John Garamendi’s office and told them that the President should be billed.
A billion here and there and it starts adding up but compared to George W Bush’s repeated $100 billion appropriations for Iraq or his $1 trillion for profligate banks that left Uncle Sam holding the bag its not that big an amount. California is the world’s 8th largest economy with an equivalent GDP of over $2 trillion. There is a humanitarian crisis on the border. We have a moral responsibility to help these people. At least that is my understanding of american culture.
Obama has racked up what, $7.5 Trillion in hot checks? And there have been more super-super wealthy created under Obama than Bush with his “quantitative easing”, which has shelled out billions upon billions to Wall Street.
I think Goldman Sachs is in Obama’s pocket, the media doesn’t point that out like they used to do with Cheney and Halliburton.
Whoever caused this problem should pay for it. As far as I can tell, the fault is as follows:
–Major: The governments the people are fleeing from (and the government of Mexico, which is letting these people through or not preventing them from coming through) caused most of the problem, so our government should seriously consider stopping foreign aid to them immediately.
–Minor: President Obama, for reasons mentioned in other posts. His salary should be garnered, and he should pay a large part of his future income in restitution. As they say, “You break it, you buy it.”
Of course, I know that neither of these things will happen. Somehow it’s OK to borrow more and more money that we can probably never repay. However, I called John Garamendi’s office and told them that the President should be billed.
The American Immigration Council thoughtfully explains why so many Central American children are making the dangerous journey to teh United States. Here are some bullet points:
Organized crime, gangs and violence are driving children from their homes
In rural areas, extreme poverty motivates some to seek work
Only 1 in 3 children cites family reunification as a primary reason for leaving home
Leaving their country is often a last resort
Children and their families do not trust the Salvadoran government to help them
Those who are returned from the U.S. face additional threats of violence
And these factors have existed for 10, 20, 30 years. So what is the difference, why now?
Our President has put out the Welcome Mat to the land of milk, honey, and welfare benefits. The “Dream Act”. The promise of “papers”. The promise of Amnesty.
The American Immigration Council thoughtfully explains why so many Central American children are making the dangerous journey to teh United States. Here are some bullet points:
Organized crime, gangs and violence are driving children from their homes
In rural areas, extreme poverty motivates some to seek work
Only 1 in 3 children cites family reunification as a primary reason for leaving home
Leaving their country is often a last resort
Children and their families do not trust the Salvadoran government to help them
Those who are returned from the U.S. face additional threats of violence
And these factors have existed for 10, 20, 30 years. So what is the difference, why now?
Our President has put out the Welcome Mat to the land of milk, honey, and welfare benefits. The “Dream Act”. The promise of “papers”. The promise of Amnesty.
“Our President has put out the Welcome Mat to the land of milk, honey, and welfare benefits. The “Dream Act”. The promise of “papers”. The promise of Amnesty.”
Good for him. I have been to Guatemala, Honduras, and Haiti.
It is my belief that as a very rich nation, we are not doing nearly enough to help with the profound poverty that is afflicting these people. Supporting the escape from these dire situations is the least we can do for the children.
And yes, I do believe that we can afford it, if we only have the will to do so.
I don’t know, looking at our crumbling streets kind of leaves one with the impression that we really can’t afford it.
We can afford to. We just can’t find a mutually acceptable way to do so.
Do you have $1,000 extra a year to help these illegal / undocumented immigrants, and $400 a year for the unmet needs of Davis?
So Tia, how many uneducated, or poorly educated, immigrants can we take in? 50 Million? 100 Million? 200 Million? What is your cap? BTW, you know that once these people get Amnesty, many will work to bring their families here from 3rd world problems.
Have you also thought that we are robbing these nations of their citizens who could improve their nations??
Honduras as far stricter immigration policies than we do. They don’t want to incur unneeded costs, but maybe you’re more generous with other peoples money.
TrueBlueDevil
Well that’s a lot of questions. So let’s take your points one by one.
1) I would be willing to put in the amounts that you have stated if everyone else were
also to be putting in what their budgets would allow.
2) I see this differently. These people are not stupid and they are not free loaders. They are
willing to work hard, and having had the opportunity to meet many of them because of
where I have lived and worked, the are not all looking to come here to live off our
largesse as you seem to believe. Most love their country and have in their hears the desire
to go back to live there, but not to die there.They are very, hard workers who will
contribute to our country for as long as they are here if we allow that. Don was asked if
he was in favor of open borders and his answer was no. My answer is yes.
Those who believe in a “free market” and “free enterprise” believe in this only so long as
they themselves are protected artificially behind our version of a wall. So if we opened the
border what do I believe would happen. An initial large influx, which would result in saturation of the opportunities initially available, which would level off as opportunities dwindled and these folks realized that this is not a Utopia, but merely a place with well intentioned and poorly intentioned people just like in their own country. I don’t believe that we would be “overwhelmed”. See Don’s numbers below.
3) No, I haven’t. We are not going there stealing their citizens. Here I see opportunity,
not theft. I believe that if we fed, clothed and educated these folks some would choose to stay as long as they could. However, others would do exactly what the young doctors I met in Honduras were doing. They were trained at the cost of their government in medicine in various medical schools in the western hemisphere under special arrangements that meant that every year they would return to rural Honduras to do outreach clinics or serve in the equivalent of the favelas. After graduation they were obligated to serve in these conditions for a pre specified number of years after which they could stay or practice in an area of their choice. My role on the medical outreach team was to see the actual patients, but much, much more importantly to share my knowledge with these doctors and pharmacist in training. During that trip, I met many young people whose goal was to get trained in a field and then come back to their country to improve it, just as you say.
4) I am not sure that i understand your point about Honduran immigration policy. I don’t believe that we should base our policy on theirs.
As to my generosity or lack thereof, two points. I answered your first question directly.
As for “other people’s money”, all of us through our votes, affect how “other people’s money” is spent. I for one, did not appreciate one cent of my taxes going to fund what I felt were two futile and immoral wars, one in Afghanistan, one one in Iraq. The system that we have ensures that we are all complicit in “spending other people’s money”. I would much rather spend money, mine and that of others on helping individuals build better lives for themselves than I would in blowing them up with either bombs, or drones, even if I get to call them “collateral damage” and pretend that I do not know this is happening.
Tia, thank you for answering my questions. I’ll try to reply briefly.
I’m glad you’re willing to step up financially to support millions of illegal immigrants, but many here are struggling to keep their homes, pay for their children’s education, etc.
You wrote: “These people are not stupid and they are not free loaders.”
You used the term “stupid”, not I. You seem to have a lack of empathy for the American lower- and middle-class worker who has their wages savaged by millions of people willing to do the job at half the price, competing on an unfair footing.
As far as “freeloaders”, the government makes it tough to gather some of the numbers. I asked a friend who works at a Head Start program what percentage of her clients were Hispanic in this formerly white and asian city. She told me 100 percent. A family member contributes to a coat drive every Christmas in the same city, I posed the same question to her and got the same answer. 100 percent.
I believe we have all seen the massive impact on schools, hospitals, and ER rooms. We’re not blind.
Should we solve all the world’s problems? Can’t Honduras solve her problems?
Why do you put poor Latinos ahead of poor Africans?
Have you been to LA recently? Some would say that LA is already overwhelmed, including the harm to the environment by our growth here in California. (This issue has split the environmental community.)
This whole scenario also blows up the idea of “diversity” when we allow in immigrants from only 2 or 3 countries.
This does look like a brain drain where we take some of the people who could help build their homelands.
“Our President has put out the Welcome Mat to the land of milk, honey, and welfare benefits. The “Dream Act”. The promise of “papers”. The promise of Amnesty.”
Good for him. I have been to Guatemala, Honduras, and Haiti.
It is my belief that as a very rich nation, we are not doing nearly enough to help with the profound poverty that is afflicting these people. Supporting the escape from these dire situations is the least we can do for the children.
And yes, I do believe that we can afford it, if we only have the will to do so.
I don’t know, looking at our crumbling streets kind of leaves one with the impression that we really can’t afford it.
We can afford to. We just can’t find a mutually acceptable way to do so.
Do you have $1,000 extra a year to help these illegal / undocumented immigrants, and $400 a year for the unmet needs of Davis?
So Tia, how many uneducated, or poorly educated, immigrants can we take in? 50 Million? 100 Million? 200 Million? What is your cap? BTW, you know that once these people get Amnesty, many will work to bring their families here from 3rd world problems.
Have you also thought that we are robbing these nations of their citizens who could improve their nations??
Honduras as far stricter immigration policies than we do. They don’t want to incur unneeded costs, but maybe you’re more generous with other peoples money.
TrueBlueDevil
Well that’s a lot of questions. So let’s take your points one by one.
1) I would be willing to put in the amounts that you have stated if everyone else were
also to be putting in what their budgets would allow.
2) I see this differently. These people are not stupid and they are not free loaders. They are
willing to work hard, and having had the opportunity to meet many of them because of
where I have lived and worked, the are not all looking to come here to live off our
largesse as you seem to believe. Most love their country and have in their hears the desire
to go back to live there, but not to die there.They are very, hard workers who will
contribute to our country for as long as they are here if we allow that. Don was asked if
he was in favor of open borders and his answer was no. My answer is yes.
Those who believe in a “free market” and “free enterprise” believe in this only so long as
they themselves are protected artificially behind our version of a wall. So if we opened the
border what do I believe would happen. An initial large influx, which would result in saturation of the opportunities initially available, which would level off as opportunities dwindled and these folks realized that this is not a Utopia, but merely a place with well intentioned and poorly intentioned people just like in their own country. I don’t believe that we would be “overwhelmed”. See Don’s numbers below.
3) No, I haven’t. We are not going there stealing their citizens. Here I see opportunity,
not theft. I believe that if we fed, clothed and educated these folks some would choose to stay as long as they could. However, others would do exactly what the young doctors I met in Honduras were doing. They were trained at the cost of their government in medicine in various medical schools in the western hemisphere under special arrangements that meant that every year they would return to rural Honduras to do outreach clinics or serve in the equivalent of the favelas. After graduation they were obligated to serve in these conditions for a pre specified number of years after which they could stay or practice in an area of their choice. My role on the medical outreach team was to see the actual patients, but much, much more importantly to share my knowledge with these doctors and pharmacist in training. During that trip, I met many young people whose goal was to get trained in a field and then come back to their country to improve it, just as you say.
4) I am not sure that i understand your point about Honduran immigration policy. I don’t believe that we should base our policy on theirs.
As to my generosity or lack thereof, two points. I answered your first question directly.
As for “other people’s money”, all of us through our votes, affect how “other people’s money” is spent. I for one, did not appreciate one cent of my taxes going to fund what I felt were two futile and immoral wars, one in Afghanistan, one one in Iraq. The system that we have ensures that we are all complicit in “spending other people’s money”. I would much rather spend money, mine and that of others on helping individuals build better lives for themselves than I would in blowing them up with either bombs, or drones, even if I get to call them “collateral damage” and pretend that I do not know this is happening.
Tia, thank you for answering my questions. I’ll try to reply briefly.
I’m glad you’re willing to step up financially to support millions of illegal immigrants, but many here are struggling to keep their homes, pay for their children’s education, etc.
You wrote: “These people are not stupid and they are not free loaders.”
You used the term “stupid”, not I. You seem to have a lack of empathy for the American lower- and middle-class worker who has their wages savaged by millions of people willing to do the job at half the price, competing on an unfair footing.
As far as “freeloaders”, the government makes it tough to gather some of the numbers. I asked a friend who works at a Head Start program what percentage of her clients were Hispanic in this formerly white and asian city. She told me 100 percent. A family member contributes to a coat drive every Christmas in the same city, I posed the same question to her and got the same answer. 100 percent.
I believe we have all seen the massive impact on schools, hospitals, and ER rooms. We’re not blind.
Should we solve all the world’s problems? Can’t Honduras solve her problems?
Why do you put poor Latinos ahead of poor Africans?
Have you been to LA recently? Some would say that LA is already overwhelmed, including the harm to the environment by our growth here in California. (This issue has split the environmental community.)
This whole scenario also blows up the idea of “diversity” when we allow in immigrants from only 2 or 3 countries.
This does look like a brain drain where we take some of the people who could help build their homelands.
Mariel boatlift, Cubans to America 1980: 125,000.
Hmong refugees, whose immigration was strongly supported by conservatives in the 1990’s: 200,000+.
Vietnamese boat refugees, 1975 – 1990’s: 400,000+ to the United States.
Haitian refugees, early 1990’s: 40,000+
Current migration from central America: 50,000+ since October.
Some are children.
Some are also M13 gang bangers, Nortenos, Sorenos, and Bulldogs. I’ve seen some photos where clearly 90 percent were women and children, and then I’ve seen others were there are strappung young men who could be 15, 18, 22 or 25.
Should we let gang bangers in? Adult Mexican nationals? How many million do we let in, 50 Million, 70 million, 100 million? This is a serious question, not rhetorical.
These are mostly not “Mexican nationals.”
We need comprehensive immigration reform. Bills that would move in that direction have not moved forward in the House. I expect they won’t any time soon. But this situation doesn’t really relate to that.
50 to 100 million people from south of the border are not trying to come in to the U.S. Did you oppose the Cuban boatlift? The Hmong? The international community deals with refugee crises. We can work with Mexico and the three governments involved in this issue to deal with these numbers of people in a humanitarian manner. That’s one of the things we do, as one of the richest nations in the world. Some will be repatriated. Some will be allowed to stay.
I think we should help true refugees, but why the sudden influx of children from central america? Something smells.
Comprehensive immigration reform (Amnesty) solves nothing without closing the border first. Reagan signed Amnesty in 1986 with assurances that the border would be closed, it wasn’t, and 75% of those new citizens still voted Democrat, the party of Free Stuff.
And once we give Amnesty to 30-40 Million people, we just ring the bell for more to come. This is not a rational way to run a country of 320 Million. Currently we bring in super educated people from China and India (H1B Visa), low-skilled from Central America and Mexico, and we thus pinch our own middle class.
Besides, what about the people from Chile, Africa, the Ukraine, England, Cuba, who try to come here legally, but are placed behind those who cheated? That makes no sense whatsoever.
According to an acquaintance of mine in the news business in Texas, this has been going on for many months with a fair bit of local reporting, but it’s been building in numbers and the national media has finally just caught up with the story.
Nothing will happen with immigration reform until the GOP settles its internal civil war.
Nothing will happen with immigration reform until the GOP settles its internal civil war.
You can blame Democrats and the most polarizing President ever for that.
With the media firmly in Democrat hands, the Saul Alinsky divide and conquer strategy works well to help keep Democrats in power at the expense of the country.
The stain of the mess we find ourselves in is 90% on the hands of leadership in the White House and Senate. I think more will get done after the next election assuming the GOP takes control of both houses of Congress. Otherwise we will keep heading toward the next civil war. And don’t think this is hyperbole.
No, on the issue of immigration there is going to be no progress until GOP incumbents are willing to buck the Tea Party base. Especially after Cantor’s loss. This has nothing to do with the position of President Obama or the Democrats. Anything that even hints at a path to citizenship is dead for now. This is an internal GOP issue entirely.
Anything that even hints at a path to citizenship is dead for now.
Well then it appears that that is the sticking point.
So Don, unless you Democrats get your way it is the other Party’s fault.
I get the way you people think… or don’t think.
Any number of Republicans, including both George W. Bush and Jeb Bush, and John McCain and Mitt Romney, have supported path to citizenship for some of the millions of immigrants working in our country. There have been compromise legislative proposals that almost passed. But they will not pass now, or within the next couple of years, because of Tea Party opposition to anything they perceive as ‘amnesty’. ANY pragmatic immigration bill will deal somehow with the millions of people who are here right now, working here, and that will certainly include some kind of a path to citizenship. That much is agreed by most Democrats and many, probably most, ‘establishment’ Republicans. The absolute opposition is coming from the Tea Party. I guess you’re in that camp.
Reagan agreed to the same and look what happened.
Democrats cannot be trusted with all those potential moocher voters flooding in.
So, the first step is to absolutely secure the borders.
Then we can talk about amnesty.
Otherwise the whiff of amnesty sends a new flood in.
You know this. Democrats know this. Yet they put up their fake media backed argument that the GOP is at fault for the failure of this Democrat-dominated government to get anything done.
Don, your party is the party of excuses. You have an excuse for every mistake and failure. It is in your MO… someone that never says “I’m wrong” or “I was mistaken”.
This president and this Senate are the most divisive and the least effective at governance than we have every seen before. You cannot effectively partner with people that cannot be trusted and that back-stab and politicize every move for their own benefit over what is good for the country. The Democrat Party is the party of narcissists. Otherwise we would see the type of compromise that has historically happened and led to great accomplishments.
The Democrats are like a bunch of babies… demanding it their way and refusing to budge and then blaming others for why things don’t happen.
That is your problem and your party’s problem. You and other lefties are so smug in your glee for what you believe is a transformation to a left-leaning country, that you don’t think you have to compromise with people still holding the traditional American principles of conservatism. That is the problem. That is why the GOP is saying “ef you”.
When you are in majority power, you have to reach across to the minority power and concede things to earn trust and cooperation.
There is nothing being done by the left to earn the trust and cooperation of the right. So the right will continue to give the left the finger.
So how does this get solved? You and the media keep pointing fingers at the GOP… you think that is going to help? It will push the country to a civil war.
There is responsibility of leadership when you are vested with majority power. But the left does not know how to lead. They run the country like underdeveloped children still prone to tantrums… stomping their feet and blaming others… (most of them blaming their parents for some gap in their self-worth)… for their failure to get their way.
Frankly: You keep forgetting that this all started with Prop 187 which completely changed the electoral calculations on this issue. Prior to that Latinos voted for Democrat and Republican equally.
The overwhelming majority of Americans favor a path to citizenship. Another smaller group favors a path to permanent-resident status. Those two groups add up to 79% of Americans. Even a majority of Republicans favors a path to citizenship. The only group of Americans overwhelmingly opposed to it is that small percentage that self-identifies as Tea Party. But since they will primary any GOP incumbent who bucks them, no current GOP candidate or incumbent will do so.
That is my simple analysis and that of others. The extreme right will block immigration reform. You are a member, obviously, of the extreme right. Obama, Boehner, and Reid could make a deal right now. Pelosi could carry Democrats in favor of it. A sizable number of Republicans would vote for it under other circumstances. But with the threat of far-right primary challenges? It won’t happen in 2014, 2015, or 2016, that much is for sure.
the easiest way for the republicans to avoid this being a partisan issue is to be part of the solution rather than the force obstructing the solution.
recent Gallup poll: Americans now assign about equal importance to the two major aspects of immigration reform being debated in Washington. Forty-four percent say it is extremely important for the U.S. to develop a plan to deal with the large number of immigrants already living in the United States, and 43% say it’s extremely important to halt the flow of illegal immigrants into the country by securing the borders. This is a shift from the past, when Americans were consistently more likely to rate border security as extremely important.
Which makes sense given the good work Democrats have done to recruit more minority immigrants to voter for the party that gives out the most free stuff.
But note that the number of people wanting border security the first priority is about the same as those that say we need to deal with those here now. And also consider that those that say we need to deal with those here now include people that want them deported… and this point that the majority supports the Democrats dreams of amnesty to farm more reliable moocher voters is a big fat lie.
The Tea Party, or what every label you lefties want to come up with to disparage 50% of the country that does not support another big amnesty give away, is a reality in our political solutions. Eric Cantor lost. There are other GOP politicians that would lose if they adopted the lefts’ stomping foot demand that they get their way with immigration. Either work across the aisle or Democrats are responsible for the mess.
Yes. And the overwhelming majority of them support a path to citizenship, while another percentage (15 – 20%) favor permanent residency status. There you have the framework for an immigration reform bill.
The Tea Party is nowhere near 50% of the country.
The Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House are willing to work across the aisle. So are many Republicans. Just not those threatened by the Tea Party.
You seriously underestimate the impact a minority of Tea Party conservatives are having on the GOP.
Just one of a number of polls showing my statistics; this one is recent as of June 2014: http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014/
So Don, should the Democrats ignore the far left in their party?
Oh wait, the Democrats are controlled by the far left of their party.
You are really demonstrating the problem with your continued use of the Tea Party excuse. Eric Cantor lost. So will other GOP politicians that demonstrate RINOism.
Your words are the same as the Democrat party apparatus. Continue to disparage the conservative wing of the GOP and demand that they be excluded from forming any solution.
I don’t underestimate the impact of the Tea Party. You do. And your party does.
Either we bring them to the table to craft a compromise solution, or they continue to be disruptive to this failing President and Senate with the lowest approval ratings ever.
But that might be okay with you. Fomenting the GOP split so that Democrats are better able to retain power and get nothing done without breaking the law.
The numerical equivalent of the Tea Party in the Democratic Party is the Progressive Caucus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Progressive_Caucus
I’ll let David answer whether he feels the current administration and Democratic Party apparatus favors the Progressive Caucus views. He’s more liberal than I am.
Yes. And the overwhelming majority of them support a path to citizenship,
Stop making up your own survey results without any survey.
There is no “overwhelming majority” supporting amnesty unless you are only counting Democrats.
I provided the survey. Look at it. Jeez.
Consistent with other findings.
You’ll notice Don doesn’t cite his sources for this “overwhelming support” of Amnesty. Was he polling La Raza? This is also not about immigration reform, this is about soft peddling illegal immigration.
There is no natural law or scientific reason why we need to combine nine or ten large, separate items into one gargantuan bill like ObamaCare. (We see how that worked, or hasn’t.)
Can you imagine that you hire a General Contractor to fix your leaking roof in the summer; he never finishes the job; you remodel the interior of the house; it rains all winter; and your carpets, floors, walls and all are ruined!
Would any sane person then hire the same contractor? Would you fix the roof LAST, or FIRST?
Barack Obama halted the building of our double-layered 700-mile fence in 2010. Obama then signed the Dreamers Amnesty Act, which has fueled this tidal wave.
Unfortunately, this is not analogous to the Vietnamese or Hmong refugees as we have had this wide-open border for 3 decades. Obama created this tidal wave and is now blaming some nebulous forces for causing this to happen? And I now know a senior citizen who is trying to get Section 8 housing, but fears that she will be denied because we have allotted too many units to illegal immigrants. That’s her fear as she recovers from a stroke on a limited income.
Obama said he wanted to fundamentally change America. I think we see what he had planned.
Sorry, I did cite it on a previous reply. http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014/
You’ll find similar numbers at Pew polls and elsewhere. It’s a fact that a majority of Americans support some form of a path to citizenship.
Most Americans I know – from both sides of the aisle – want the border closed first, then deal with other issues.
We both know it’s how you write the question which will determine how the answers come out.
So first you said I didn’t provide the source. Then when I provide it, you don’t believe it. And then you cite “most Americans” you “know” as though that is reliable in any way whatsoever.
Interesting rhetorical tactics.
Don, it looks like my opinions and friends are quite reflective of reality.
“80% of American adults support “stricter border control to try to reduce illegal immigration.” This includes 93% Republicans, 76% Democrats, 83% Independents, 74% Blacks, 61% Hispanics, and 75% of 18-39 year olds (ABC News/Washington Post, April 2013).”
“56% of American adults want the border secure before any type of amnesty is granted to illegal aliens. Only 37% want amnesty before border security (CBS News, July 2013).”
“59% of likely voters say that securing the U.S. border is more important than amnesty. 34% say that amnesty is more important than border security (Rasmussen, July 2013).”
“62% believe legalization should occur only after the border is secured,”
“55% of American adults oppose “providing free public education benefits to children of immigrants who are in the United States illegally” (PDK/Gallup, August 2013).”
Latino Opinions, July 2013 — Poll of U.S. Hispanic adults
“60% of registered Hispanic voters support granting amnesty to “undocumented immigrants” only if illegal immigration is reduced by 90%. 34% support amnesty before that goal is reached.”
“60% of Hispanic voters support tougher enforcement, with only 35% opposed. ”
“CIS/Pulse, April 2013 – Poll of likely voters
“72% support reducing the illegal alien population by requiring employers to check workers’ legal status, fortifying the border, and federal cooperation with local police. 54% strongly support this approach.”
http://www.fairus.org/facts/illegal-immigration-and-amnesty-polls
Yes. Americans favor stricter border control, reduced total immigration, a path to citizenship for those already here, delays in benefits to new immigrants, and enforcement of immigration law at the place of employment. And possibly guest worker programs.
All components of a comprehensive immigration bill.
TBD: Latino Opinions, July 2013 — Poll of U.S. Hispanic adults
Your link did not provide a source for this poll. In finally locating it, I note that your link cherry-picked the results of the survey most favorable to a certain position. Other results of the poll were less favorable. Here is a link to the executive summary.
It makes me skeptical of the rest of the survey data cited in your link.
Don, I’m sorry, we don’t trust government, we don’t trust Progressives / Democrats … we were lied to about closing the border several times, over decades, we were lied to about ObamaCare, we are lied to about the IRS and Benghazi. The simple way to solve this problem is to start with sealing the border first, along with more judges.
In this $3.7 Billion emergency funding package, do you know how many judges it funds? According to Dick Morris, 40. 40! We don’t need 40 new judges, we need 400, 600, 800, to handle this kind of deluge.
The game continues.
What the money funds: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/obamas-plans-for-3-7-billion-immigration-crisis-funds/
Mariel boatlift, Cubans to America 1980: 125,000.
Hmong refugees, whose immigration was strongly supported by conservatives in the 1990’s: 200,000+.
Vietnamese boat refugees, 1975 – 1990’s: 400,000+ to the United States.
Haitian refugees, early 1990’s: 40,000+
Current migration from central America: 50,000+ since October.
Some are children.
Some are also M13 gang bangers, Nortenos, Sorenos, and Bulldogs. I’ve seen some photos where clearly 90 percent were women and children, and then I’ve seen others were there are strappung young men who could be 15, 18, 22 or 25.
Should we let gang bangers in? Adult Mexican nationals? How many million do we let in, 50 Million, 70 million, 100 million? This is a serious question, not rhetorical.
These are mostly not “Mexican nationals.”
We need comprehensive immigration reform. Bills that would move in that direction have not moved forward in the House. I expect they won’t any time soon. But this situation doesn’t really relate to that.
50 to 100 million people from south of the border are not trying to come in to the U.S. Did you oppose the Cuban boatlift? The Hmong? The international community deals with refugee crises. We can work with Mexico and the three governments involved in this issue to deal with these numbers of people in a humanitarian manner. That’s one of the things we do, as one of the richest nations in the world. Some will be repatriated. Some will be allowed to stay.
I think we should help true refugees, but why the sudden influx of children from central america? Something smells.
Comprehensive immigration reform (Amnesty) solves nothing without closing the border first. Reagan signed Amnesty in 1986 with assurances that the border would be closed, it wasn’t, and 75% of those new citizens still voted Democrat, the party of Free Stuff.
And once we give Amnesty to 30-40 Million people, we just ring the bell for more to come. This is not a rational way to run a country of 320 Million. Currently we bring in super educated people from China and India (H1B Visa), low-skilled from Central America and Mexico, and we thus pinch our own middle class.
Besides, what about the people from Chile, Africa, the Ukraine, England, Cuba, who try to come here legally, but are placed behind those who cheated? That makes no sense whatsoever.
According to an acquaintance of mine in the news business in Texas, this has been going on for many months with a fair bit of local reporting, but it’s been building in numbers and the national media has finally just caught up with the story.
Nothing will happen with immigration reform until the GOP settles its internal civil war.
Nothing will happen with immigration reform until the GOP settles its internal civil war.
You can blame Democrats and the most polarizing President ever for that.
With the media firmly in Democrat hands, the Saul Alinsky divide and conquer strategy works well to help keep Democrats in power at the expense of the country.
The stain of the mess we find ourselves in is 90% on the hands of leadership in the White House and Senate. I think more will get done after the next election assuming the GOP takes control of both houses of Congress. Otherwise we will keep heading toward the next civil war. And don’t think this is hyperbole.
No, on the issue of immigration there is going to be no progress until GOP incumbents are willing to buck the Tea Party base. Especially after Cantor’s loss. This has nothing to do with the position of President Obama or the Democrats. Anything that even hints at a path to citizenship is dead for now. This is an internal GOP issue entirely.
Anything that even hints at a path to citizenship is dead for now.
Well then it appears that that is the sticking point.
So Don, unless you Democrats get your way it is the other Party’s fault.
I get the way you people think… or don’t think.
Any number of Republicans, including both George W. Bush and Jeb Bush, and John McCain and Mitt Romney, have supported path to citizenship for some of the millions of immigrants working in our country. There have been compromise legislative proposals that almost passed. But they will not pass now, or within the next couple of years, because of Tea Party opposition to anything they perceive as ‘amnesty’. ANY pragmatic immigration bill will deal somehow with the millions of people who are here right now, working here, and that will certainly include some kind of a path to citizenship. That much is agreed by most Democrats and many, probably most, ‘establishment’ Republicans. The absolute opposition is coming from the Tea Party. I guess you’re in that camp.
Reagan agreed to the same and look what happened.
Democrats cannot be trusted with all those potential moocher voters flooding in.
So, the first step is to absolutely secure the borders.
Then we can talk about amnesty.
Otherwise the whiff of amnesty sends a new flood in.
You know this. Democrats know this. Yet they put up their fake media backed argument that the GOP is at fault for the failure of this Democrat-dominated government to get anything done.
Don, your party is the party of excuses. You have an excuse for every mistake and failure. It is in your MO… someone that never says “I’m wrong” or “I was mistaken”.
This president and this Senate are the most divisive and the least effective at governance than we have every seen before. You cannot effectively partner with people that cannot be trusted and that back-stab and politicize every move for their own benefit over what is good for the country. The Democrat Party is the party of narcissists. Otherwise we would see the type of compromise that has historically happened and led to great accomplishments.
The Democrats are like a bunch of babies… demanding it their way and refusing to budge and then blaming others for why things don’t happen.
That is your problem and your party’s problem. You and other lefties are so smug in your glee for what you believe is a transformation to a left-leaning country, that you don’t think you have to compromise with people still holding the traditional American principles of conservatism. That is the problem. That is why the GOP is saying “ef you”.
When you are in majority power, you have to reach across to the minority power and concede things to earn trust and cooperation.
There is nothing being done by the left to earn the trust and cooperation of the right. So the right will continue to give the left the finger.
So how does this get solved? You and the media keep pointing fingers at the GOP… you think that is going to help? It will push the country to a civil war.
There is responsibility of leadership when you are vested with majority power. But the left does not know how to lead. They run the country like underdeveloped children still prone to tantrums… stomping their feet and blaming others… (most of them blaming their parents for some gap in their self-worth)… for their failure to get their way.
Frankly: You keep forgetting that this all started with Prop 187 which completely changed the electoral calculations on this issue. Prior to that Latinos voted for Democrat and Republican equally.
The overwhelming majority of Americans favor a path to citizenship. Another smaller group favors a path to permanent-resident status. Those two groups add up to 79% of Americans. Even a majority of Republicans favors a path to citizenship. The only group of Americans overwhelmingly opposed to it is that small percentage that self-identifies as Tea Party. But since they will primary any GOP incumbent who bucks them, no current GOP candidate or incumbent will do so.
That is my simple analysis and that of others. The extreme right will block immigration reform. You are a member, obviously, of the extreme right. Obama, Boehner, and Reid could make a deal right now. Pelosi could carry Democrats in favor of it. A sizable number of Republicans would vote for it under other circumstances. But with the threat of far-right primary challenges? It won’t happen in 2014, 2015, or 2016, that much is for sure.
the easiest way for the republicans to avoid this being a partisan issue is to be part of the solution rather than the force obstructing the solution.
recent Gallup poll: Americans now assign about equal importance to the two major aspects of immigration reform being debated in Washington. Forty-four percent say it is extremely important for the U.S. to develop a plan to deal with the large number of immigrants already living in the United States, and 43% say it’s extremely important to halt the flow of illegal immigrants into the country by securing the borders. This is a shift from the past, when Americans were consistently more likely to rate border security as extremely important.
Which makes sense given the good work Democrats have done to recruit more minority immigrants to voter for the party that gives out the most free stuff.
But note that the number of people wanting border security the first priority is about the same as those that say we need to deal with those here now. And also consider that those that say we need to deal with those here now include people that want them deported… and this point that the majority supports the Democrats dreams of amnesty to farm more reliable moocher voters is a big fat lie.
The Tea Party, or what every label you lefties want to come up with to disparage 50% of the country that does not support another big amnesty give away, is a reality in our political solutions. Eric Cantor lost. There are other GOP politicians that would lose if they adopted the lefts’ stomping foot demand that they get their way with immigration. Either work across the aisle or Democrats are responsible for the mess.
Yes. And the overwhelming majority of them support a path to citizenship, while another percentage (15 – 20%) favor permanent residency status. There you have the framework for an immigration reform bill.
The Tea Party is nowhere near 50% of the country.
The Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House are willing to work across the aisle. So are many Republicans. Just not those threatened by the Tea Party.
You seriously underestimate the impact a minority of Tea Party conservatives are having on the GOP.
Just one of a number of polls showing my statistics; this one is recent as of June 2014: http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014/
So Don, should the Democrats ignore the far left in their party?
Oh wait, the Democrats are controlled by the far left of their party.
You are really demonstrating the problem with your continued use of the Tea Party excuse. Eric Cantor lost. So will other GOP politicians that demonstrate RINOism.
Your words are the same as the Democrat party apparatus. Continue to disparage the conservative wing of the GOP and demand that they be excluded from forming any solution.
I don’t underestimate the impact of the Tea Party. You do. And your party does.
Either we bring them to the table to craft a compromise solution, or they continue to be disruptive to this failing President and Senate with the lowest approval ratings ever.
But that might be okay with you. Fomenting the GOP split so that Democrats are better able to retain power and get nothing done without breaking the law.
The numerical equivalent of the Tea Party in the Democratic Party is the Progressive Caucus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Progressive_Caucus
I’ll let David answer whether he feels the current administration and Democratic Party apparatus favors the Progressive Caucus views. He’s more liberal than I am.
Yes. And the overwhelming majority of them support a path to citizenship,
Stop making up your own survey results without any survey.
There is no “overwhelming majority” supporting amnesty unless you are only counting Democrats.
I provided the survey. Look at it. Jeez.
Consistent with other findings.
You’ll notice Don doesn’t cite his sources for this “overwhelming support” of Amnesty. Was he polling La Raza? This is also not about immigration reform, this is about soft peddling illegal immigration.
There is no natural law or scientific reason why we need to combine nine or ten large, separate items into one gargantuan bill like ObamaCare. (We see how that worked, or hasn’t.)
Can you imagine that you hire a General Contractor to fix your leaking roof in the summer; he never finishes the job; you remodel the interior of the house; it rains all winter; and your carpets, floors, walls and all are ruined!
Would any sane person then hire the same contractor? Would you fix the roof LAST, or FIRST?
Barack Obama halted the building of our double-layered 700-mile fence in 2010. Obama then signed the Dreamers Amnesty Act, which has fueled this tidal wave.
Unfortunately, this is not analogous to the Vietnamese or Hmong refugees as we have had this wide-open border for 3 decades. Obama created this tidal wave and is now blaming some nebulous forces for causing this to happen? And I now know a senior citizen who is trying to get Section 8 housing, but fears that she will be denied because we have allotted too many units to illegal immigrants. That’s her fear as she recovers from a stroke on a limited income.
Obama said he wanted to fundamentally change America. I think we see what he had planned.
Sorry, I did cite it on a previous reply. http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014/
You’ll find similar numbers at Pew polls and elsewhere. It’s a fact that a majority of Americans support some form of a path to citizenship.
Most Americans I know – from both sides of the aisle – want the border closed first, then deal with other issues.
We both know it’s how you write the question which will determine how the answers come out.
So first you said I didn’t provide the source. Then when I provide it, you don’t believe it. And then you cite “most Americans” you “know” as though that is reliable in any way whatsoever.
Interesting rhetorical tactics.
Don, it looks like my opinions and friends are quite reflective of reality.
“80% of American adults support “stricter border control to try to reduce illegal immigration.” This includes 93% Republicans, 76% Democrats, 83% Independents, 74% Blacks, 61% Hispanics, and 75% of 18-39 year olds (ABC News/Washington Post, April 2013).”
“56% of American adults want the border secure before any type of amnesty is granted to illegal aliens. Only 37% want amnesty before border security (CBS News, July 2013).”
“59% of likely voters say that securing the U.S. border is more important than amnesty. 34% say that amnesty is more important than border security (Rasmussen, July 2013).”
“62% believe legalization should occur only after the border is secured,”
“55% of American adults oppose “providing free public education benefits to children of immigrants who are in the United States illegally” (PDK/Gallup, August 2013).”
Latino Opinions, July 2013 — Poll of U.S. Hispanic adults
“60% of registered Hispanic voters support granting amnesty to “undocumented immigrants” only if illegal immigration is reduced by 90%. 34% support amnesty before that goal is reached.”
“60% of Hispanic voters support tougher enforcement, with only 35% opposed. ”
“CIS/Pulse, April 2013 – Poll of likely voters
“72% support reducing the illegal alien population by requiring employers to check workers’ legal status, fortifying the border, and federal cooperation with local police. 54% strongly support this approach.”
http://www.fairus.org/facts/illegal-immigration-and-amnesty-polls
Yes. Americans favor stricter border control, reduced total immigration, a path to citizenship for those already here, delays in benefits to new immigrants, and enforcement of immigration law at the place of employment. And possibly guest worker programs.
All components of a comprehensive immigration bill.
TBD: Latino Opinions, July 2013 — Poll of U.S. Hispanic adults
Your link did not provide a source for this poll. In finally locating it, I note that your link cherry-picked the results of the survey most favorable to a certain position. Other results of the poll were less favorable. Here is a link to the executive summary.
It makes me skeptical of the rest of the survey data cited in your link.
Don, I’m sorry, we don’t trust government, we don’t trust Progressives / Democrats … we were lied to about closing the border several times, over decades, we were lied to about ObamaCare, we are lied to about the IRS and Benghazi. The simple way to solve this problem is to start with sealing the border first, along with more judges.
In this $3.7 Billion emergency funding package, do you know how many judges it funds? According to Dick Morris, 40. 40! We don’t need 40 new judges, we need 400, 600, 800, to handle this kind of deluge.
The game continues.
What the money funds: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/07/obamas-plans-for-3-7-billion-immigration-crisis-funds/
League City, Texas: League City council votes to ban children from entering the suburb if in the country illegally
What would Jesus do?
Jesus had God create food and drink from nothing. Unless you can find those money trees, you are foolish to perpetuate this myth that America can keep importing the worlds’ poor and uneducated.
And damn it pisses me off to get this type of lecture from any elite Davis liberal since there so few poor and educated brown-skinned people living here.
I sit in my yacht offshore and point to other people on the shore to tell them how to live. And as long as they stay away from my yacht, I am satisfied.
The bleeding hearts of liberals are bleeding cities, states and the country dry.
Frankly, those unwashed masses of “illegal immigrants” keep your off-shore yacht in food, water and are repainting it when it is time to be dry-docked. The fact is that more and more service sectors are having a hard time finding workers who will do the work at wages even well above minimum wage. Agriculture, construction, even stuff like HVAC. These very hard-working immigrants are probably what is propping up the U.S. economy more than if they weren’t here.
Okay, unload your fullisade, but I have to go out and fix my own fence since 1) I don’t want to pay someone to do it and 2) I like doing stuff with my own hands.
The flood of uneducated immigrants depresses wages to below what some people would demand to do the work, especially with out generous government handouts given to people that don’t work.
The recent positive jobs report can on the heels of the GOP refusing yet another extension to unemployment benefits six years after the begin of Obama’s jobless “recovery”. Guess what… when the benefits are not provided, people go get a job. The left is fond of saying that regular Americans don’t want these jobs. Well yes, because the government pays them enough, or in many cases more, to not work.
Illegal immigrant labor is just another tax. It supplements business at the expense of the people that need jobs, and need higher paying jobs.
I agree with a guest worker program for agricultural work, but I am also fine paying more for my food to support farmers and ranchers paying a market wage for the labor required.
And don’t get me going on construction. I worked in both agriculture and construction as a young man. I made a slight premium in wages over what lazier kids did for money. I also learned the craft of both businesses.
The wages paid for these jobs have not kept up with trends for alternatives because these industries have been flooded with an oversupply of immigrant workers… and this has depressed the wages simply because of supply and demand.
Demand people in this country work. It is that simple. Do that and we will not need but a small percentage of low-skilled immigrant labor.
Skilled labor is another issue. For that we need to blow up our education system and start over with a brand new model that cranks out more ready skilled workers.
Another component of any likely immigration reform plan. Slowly but surely you’re getting there.
Plenty of people in my family have worked in the trades, honest, hard work.
The going rate in the Bay Area for a carpenter who works for a General Contractor is $90 per hour; $35 an hour if you hire the guy, direct, and pay him cash on the weekend; while the illegal worker with 3-10 years experience is $15-18 per hour.
You are partly true. If we cut some of our social safety net, and if some of the illegal immigration were reduced, wages would rise, and we might tempt some former workers out of Mom’s basement.
If we also did away with useless or cumbersome regulations, more small businesses might sprout up.
Further, if we had more legal immigration from the Ukraine, Chile, Albania and Romania, you’d have HVAC and boat painters who might give you a lecture on the evils of Communism as they worked their butts off.
Dave Hart: Frankly, those unwashed masses of “illegal immigrants” keep your off-shore yacht in food, water and are repainting it when it is time to be dry-docked. The fact is that more and more service sectors are having a hard time finding workers who will do the work at wages even well above minimum wage.
“All cats are libertarians. Completely dependent upon others, yet entirely convinced of their independence.”
COMMENTARY: Christians worship a child who fled violence in his home country
League City, Texas: League City council votes to ban children from entering the suburb if in the country illegally
What would Jesus do?
Jesus had God create food and drink from nothing. Unless you can find those money trees, you are foolish to perpetuate this myth that America can keep importing the worlds’ poor and uneducated.
And damn it pisses me off to get this type of lecture from any elite Davis liberal since there so few poor and educated brown-skinned people living here.
I sit in my yacht offshore and point to other people on the shore to tell them how to live. And as long as they stay away from my yacht, I am satisfied.
The bleeding hearts of liberals are bleeding cities, states and the country dry.
Frankly, those unwashed masses of “illegal immigrants” keep your off-shore yacht in food, water and are repainting it when it is time to be dry-docked. The fact is that more and more service sectors are having a hard time finding workers who will do the work at wages even well above minimum wage. Agriculture, construction, even stuff like HVAC. These very hard-working immigrants are probably what is propping up the U.S. economy more than if they weren’t here.
Okay, unload your fullisade, but I have to go out and fix my own fence since 1) I don’t want to pay someone to do it and 2) I like doing stuff with my own hands.
The flood of uneducated immigrants depresses wages to below what some people would demand to do the work, especially with out generous government handouts given to people that don’t work.
The recent positive jobs report can on the heels of the GOP refusing yet another extension to unemployment benefits six years after the begin of Obama’s jobless “recovery”. Guess what… when the benefits are not provided, people go get a job. The left is fond of saying that regular Americans don’t want these jobs. Well yes, because the government pays them enough, or in many cases more, to not work.
Illegal immigrant labor is just another tax. It supplements business at the expense of the people that need jobs, and need higher paying jobs.
I agree with a guest worker program for agricultural work, but I am also fine paying more for my food to support farmers and ranchers paying a market wage for the labor required.
And don’t get me going on construction. I worked in both agriculture and construction as a young man. I made a slight premium in wages over what lazier kids did for money. I also learned the craft of both businesses.
The wages paid for these jobs have not kept up with trends for alternatives because these industries have been flooded with an oversupply of immigrant workers… and this has depressed the wages simply because of supply and demand.
Demand people in this country work. It is that simple. Do that and we will not need but a small percentage of low-skilled immigrant labor.
Skilled labor is another issue. For that we need to blow up our education system and start over with a brand new model that cranks out more ready skilled workers.
Another component of any likely immigration reform plan. Slowly but surely you’re getting there.
Plenty of people in my family have worked in the trades, honest, hard work.
The going rate in the Bay Area for a carpenter who works for a General Contractor is $90 per hour; $35 an hour if you hire the guy, direct, and pay him cash on the weekend; while the illegal worker with 3-10 years experience is $15-18 per hour.
You are partly true. If we cut some of our social safety net, and if some of the illegal immigration were reduced, wages would rise, and we might tempt some former workers out of Mom’s basement.
If we also did away with useless or cumbersome regulations, more small businesses might sprout up.
Further, if we had more legal immigration from the Ukraine, Chile, Albania and Romania, you’d have HVAC and boat painters who might give you a lecture on the evils of Communism as they worked their butts off.
Dave Hart: Frankly, those unwashed masses of “illegal immigrants” keep your off-shore yacht in food, water and are repainting it when it is time to be dry-docked. The fact is that more and more service sectors are having a hard time finding workers who will do the work at wages even well above minimum wage.
“All cats are libertarians. Completely dependent upon others, yet entirely convinced of their independence.”
COMMENTARY: Christians worship a child who fled violence in his home country
BP
““These are not refugees”, so true, they are future Democrat votes and that’s all Obama and the left care about no matter how much it costs the nation.”
So let me make sure that I am understanding you correctly. You would rather send back a child who is likely to be be killed or forced into prostitution or gang activities than run the risk that they may vote Democratic in some future election ?
Likely be killed or forced into prostitution? Pleeeeease. stop the oversensationalism. Nancy Pelosi might buy it.
I agree. Someone on the Left thought this bum rush out well in advance, this is quite clever in a very cynical way. Cartels usually don’t go after toddlers.
I have empathy for the true refugees, if there are some, but this looks and smells like politics of the highest order and our “feckless President” (TM Hillary Clinton) is again caught flat footed.
If Tia is really worried about young girls going into prostitution, I can tell her of areas where these new Mexican immigrant girls (I think mainly illegal) sell themselves for $25-35 on weekends just for a little spending money. This has become a very strange new phenomena. Apparently they don’t do this in the winter or during the week, so it doesn’t sound like they are doing it for survival money, and rent is often dirt cheap in these areas as some of these new “groups” will often far surpass housing code numbers per apartment.
TBD wrote:
> If Tia is really worried about young girls going into prostitution,
> I can tell her of areas where these new Mexican immigrant girls
> (I think mainly illegal) sell themselves for $25-35 on weekends
> just for a little spending money
She can also go to San Francisco where few (if any) “Asian massage parlors” give normal massages (unless you consider a “happy ending” normal).
For years (decades) the SF cops and politicians have (pretty much) looked the other way at child prostitution since they don’t want the tongs mad at them.
Or its a combination of factors… they don’t want to risk life and limb, and the city is extreme liberal.
There has also been trafficking of young girls on International Blvd in Oakland for years, young boys on Polk Street (in the past), and numerous massage parlors in SF have horrible practices but are rarely checked. Gov’t workers (inspectors) not at work. I read an online hooker website was just shut down after years of doing business.
TBD
How many of these girls have you spoken to in order to understand the story behind why they do what they do. How do you know the are working for “a little spending money” ? If you have spoken with a few of them and would share their stories anonymously here on the Vanguard, it would make a fascinating article.
If your source of information is second or third hand, since you know where to find these girls would you be willing to speak with some of them about their circumstances ?
BP
You may believe that this is exaggeration….but it is not.
When I was in Honduras, one of our stops was at an orphanage. I asked about the children living there on a large and pleasant compound on the inside, surrounded on the distant perimeter by barbed wire with military heavily armed guards, not to keep the children in, but to keep out the heavily armed thugs who would if possible kidnap and or steal from the medical groups that used this compound as housing and the base of operations for the rural medial outreaches that volunteer on a regular basis. These are economic orphanages because their parents are for the most part living but cannot support them.
So I asked the young doctors assigned to me about what happened to these children when they “aged out”. They responded that many would be able to get jobs teaching the younger children or taking care of them and the compound. Those who scored highly in school might be able to take advantage of programs like the one that they were in and build careers for themselves in the medical field. But that seemed like a relatively small number of so many children to me. So I asked about the others and was met with the obvious answer. There are so many……they do what they have to do.
Honduras is meeting the fundamental issue of too many children for too few available resources in a much more responsible manner than we are in the states. They are providing free intrauterine contraception and nominal cost birth control pills to any woman who will accept them. The vast number of women I met on that tour were using IUDs provided by their government for free.
The above comments of TBD and SOD illustrate the point that such things as organized prostitution and child prostitution do exist contradicting your statement that this is exaggeration. I am quite sure that none of the children, and very few of the women, are doing this by choice.
For me it matters little where a child or woman works as a prostitute. The point is that no one should ever be forced into prostitution.
Still not buying it, sure some may but for you to make a blanket statement is false.
BP
All “blanket statements” miss nuances in human behavior. I will maintain that the vast majority of individuals working in the sex trades are there not by free choice by rather because they have been “forced” to. if not by physical coercion then by life circumstances of extreme poverty.
Let me ask you again. Do you really believe that any child. let’s pick under 15 to be sure that we are really talking about children, freely chooses prostitution as their means of supporting themselves ?
Let’s run this by you again, you stated:
“So let me make sure that I am understanding you correctly. You would rather send back a child who is likely to be be killed or forced into prostitution or gang activities than run the risk that they may vote Democratic in some future election ?”
Some may be forced into prostitution, just like in almost any country. But to say they “likely” will be is a gross oversensationalism on your part. Some may but most won’t.
Tia wrote:
> I will maintain that the vast majority of individuals working
> in the sex trades are there not by free choice by rather because
> they have been “forced” to.
How many times had Tia told people not to assume why people do things, but I guess it is only OK for her to do it.
Others need to “speak to many and understand the story behind why they do what they do”, buy not Tia she just “knows”.
Lots of women party with rich guys on their yachts and have sex with them for “fun” without getting “paid”, but the girl in the link below got paid $1K to do it.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Suspected-hooker-s-alleged-heroin-victim-was-5609169.php
I’m betting that Tia has not talked to everyone on the:
https://www.seekingarrangement.com/ web site (where the dead Google exec found the girl to party with) so it might be a good idea to take her own advice and not pretend to know why everyone does something.
South of Davis
Your are absolutely correct that I have not spoken with everyone on your link. However, by the nature of my job, I would be willing to bet that I have spoken with many, many more women than anyone else posting here about their sexual practices and how they feel about them. Only every working day in clinic for the past 28 years. So that certainly does not mean that I “know everything about why people do what they do”, but it certainly is within my area of expertise.
BP
““These are not refugees”, so true, they are future Democrat votes and that’s all Obama and the left care about no matter how much it costs the nation.”
So let me make sure that I am understanding you correctly. You would rather send back a child who is likely to be be killed or forced into prostitution or gang activities than run the risk that they may vote Democratic in some future election ?
Likely be killed or forced into prostitution? Pleeeeease. stop the oversensationalism. Nancy Pelosi might buy it.
I agree. Someone on the Left thought this bum rush out well in advance, this is quite clever in a very cynical way. Cartels usually don’t go after toddlers.
I have empathy for the true refugees, if there are some, but this looks and smells like politics of the highest order and our “feckless President” (TM Hillary Clinton) is again caught flat footed.
If Tia is really worried about young girls going into prostitution, I can tell her of areas where these new Mexican immigrant girls (I think mainly illegal) sell themselves for $25-35 on weekends just for a little spending money. This has become a very strange new phenomena. Apparently they don’t do this in the winter or during the week, so it doesn’t sound like they are doing it for survival money, and rent is often dirt cheap in these areas as some of these new “groups” will often far surpass housing code numbers per apartment.
TBD wrote:
> If Tia is really worried about young girls going into prostitution,
> I can tell her of areas where these new Mexican immigrant girls
> (I think mainly illegal) sell themselves for $25-35 on weekends
> just for a little spending money
She can also go to San Francisco where few (if any) “Asian massage parlors” give normal massages (unless you consider a “happy ending” normal).
For years (decades) the SF cops and politicians have (pretty much) looked the other way at child prostitution since they don’t want the tongs mad at them.
Or its a combination of factors… they don’t want to risk life and limb, and the city is extreme liberal.
There has also been trafficking of young girls on International Blvd in Oakland for years, young boys on Polk Street (in the past), and numerous massage parlors in SF have horrible practices but are rarely checked. Gov’t workers (inspectors) not at work. I read an online hooker website was just shut down after years of doing business.
TBD
How many of these girls have you spoken to in order to understand the story behind why they do what they do. How do you know the are working for “a little spending money” ? If you have spoken with a few of them and would share their stories anonymously here on the Vanguard, it would make a fascinating article.
If your source of information is second or third hand, since you know where to find these girls would you be willing to speak with some of them about their circumstances ?
BP
You may believe that this is exaggeration….but it is not.
When I was in Honduras, one of our stops was at an orphanage. I asked about the children living there on a large and pleasant compound on the inside, surrounded on the distant perimeter by barbed wire with military heavily armed guards, not to keep the children in, but to keep out the heavily armed thugs who would if possible kidnap and or steal from the medical groups that used this compound as housing and the base of operations for the rural medial outreaches that volunteer on a regular basis. These are economic orphanages because their parents are for the most part living but cannot support them.
So I asked the young doctors assigned to me about what happened to these children when they “aged out”. They responded that many would be able to get jobs teaching the younger children or taking care of them and the compound. Those who scored highly in school might be able to take advantage of programs like the one that they were in and build careers for themselves in the medical field. But that seemed like a relatively small number of so many children to me. So I asked about the others and was met with the obvious answer. There are so many……they do what they have to do.
Honduras is meeting the fundamental issue of too many children for too few available resources in a much more responsible manner than we are in the states. They are providing free intrauterine contraception and nominal cost birth control pills to any woman who will accept them. The vast number of women I met on that tour were using IUDs provided by their government for free.
The above comments of TBD and SOD illustrate the point that such things as organized prostitution and child prostitution do exist contradicting your statement that this is exaggeration. I am quite sure that none of the children, and very few of the women, are doing this by choice.
For me it matters little where a child or woman works as a prostitute. The point is that no one should ever be forced into prostitution.
Still not buying it, sure some may but for you to make a blanket statement is false.
BP
All “blanket statements” miss nuances in human behavior. I will maintain that the vast majority of individuals working in the sex trades are there not by free choice by rather because they have been “forced” to. if not by physical coercion then by life circumstances of extreme poverty.
Let me ask you again. Do you really believe that any child. let’s pick under 15 to be sure that we are really talking about children, freely chooses prostitution as their means of supporting themselves ?
Let’s run this by you again, you stated:
“So let me make sure that I am understanding you correctly. You would rather send back a child who is likely to be be killed or forced into prostitution or gang activities than run the risk that they may vote Democratic in some future election ?”
Some may be forced into prostitution, just like in almost any country. But to say they “likely” will be is a gross oversensationalism on your part. Some may but most won’t.
Tia wrote:
> I will maintain that the vast majority of individuals working
> in the sex trades are there not by free choice by rather because
> they have been “forced” to.
How many times had Tia told people not to assume why people do things, but I guess it is only OK for her to do it.
Others need to “speak to many and understand the story behind why they do what they do”, buy not Tia she just “knows”.
Lots of women party with rich guys on their yachts and have sex with them for “fun” without getting “paid”, but the girl in the link below got paid $1K to do it.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Suspected-hooker-s-alleged-heroin-victim-was-5609169.php
I’m betting that Tia has not talked to everyone on the:
https://www.seekingarrangement.com/ web site (where the dead Google exec found the girl to party with) so it might be a good idea to take her own advice and not pretend to know why everyone does something.
South of Davis
Your are absolutely correct that I have not spoken with everyone on your link. However, by the nature of my job, I would be willing to bet that I have spoken with many, many more women than anyone else posting here about their sexual practices and how they feel about them. Only every working day in clinic for the past 28 years. So that certainly does not mean that I “know everything about why people do what they do”, but it certainly is within my area of expertise.
In order to avoid the obvious accusation of sexism based on my post above, I want to state that I am equally opposed to men of any age being forced into prostitution. It is that this is statistically less common as men are frequently more valuable as conscripted fighters or laborers which is also abhorrent and quite common.
Tia wrote:
> I am equally opposed to men of any age being forced into prostitution.
If a good looking guy wants to make some extra spending money and is not “forced” in to it would you be against a young 9over 18) guy making some extra money working at ‘bachelor parties” before (now legal) gay weddings?
Are you guys OK with Davis’ first strip club? LOL … that might help the city budget!
In order to avoid the obvious accusation of sexism based on my post above, I want to state that I am equally opposed to men of any age being forced into prostitution. It is that this is statistically less common as men are frequently more valuable as conscripted fighters or laborers which is also abhorrent and quite common.
Tia wrote:
> I am equally opposed to men of any age being forced into prostitution.
If a good looking guy wants to make some extra spending money and is not “forced” in to it would you be against a young 9over 18) guy making some extra money working at ‘bachelor parties” before (now legal) gay weddings?
Are you guys OK with Davis’ first strip club? LOL … that might help the city budget!
A clarification of my post above in which I said that the majority of workers in the “sex trades” are not there by choice. This, not my former post, is an example of a “blanket statement” and the errors it can entail.
I have had in my practice some women who work in the pornography industry. This tends to be, at least, according to my patients, a matter of choice, and when asked some state that they enjoy the work while others consider it
“a job” with all the emotions that frequently accompany doing something one would rather not be doing in order to earn their living. One phrase I remember is “It beats working at Target”. I would say that this is also probably the case for “escorts” whose services include those of a sexual nature. These are not the women that I was talking about. I thought it was clear that I was discussing those who in reality had no other choice for supporting themselves or their children, but apparently I was not.
Both groups of women exist. I was only addressing the needs of those who are in these circumstances because of poverty far beyond what any of us have experienced or are ever likely to see unless we seek out these experiences.
You wrote: ” the needs of those who are in these circumstances because of poverty far beyond what any of us have experienced or are ever likely to see unless we seek out these experiences.”
You assume a whole lot.
A clarification of my post above in which I said that the majority of workers in the “sex trades” are not there by choice. This, not my former post, is an example of a “blanket statement” and the errors it can entail.
I have had in my practice some women who work in the pornography industry. This tends to be, at least, according to my patients, a matter of choice, and when asked some state that they enjoy the work while others consider it
“a job” with all the emotions that frequently accompany doing something one would rather not be doing in order to earn their living. One phrase I remember is “It beats working at Target”. I would say that this is also probably the case for “escorts” whose services include those of a sexual nature. These are not the women that I was talking about. I thought it was clear that I was discussing those who in reality had no other choice for supporting themselves or their children, but apparently I was not.
Both groups of women exist. I was only addressing the needs of those who are in these circumstances because of poverty far beyond what any of us have experienced or are ever likely to see unless we seek out these experiences.
You wrote: ” the needs of those who are in these circumstances because of poverty far beyond what any of us have experienced or are ever likely to see unless we seek out these experiences.”
You assume a whole lot.
BP
“ome may be forced into prostitution, just like in almost any country. But to say they “likely” will be is a gross oversensationalism on your part. Some may but most won’t.”
The people who would consign their children to a 1000 mile + trip with the well known dangers of the use of coyotes , including death, are desperate. If you are going to hang your criticism on my use of the word “likely” then we have a fundamental difference of opinion on how other human beings should be treated.
My believe is that if even a very small proportion of these people would be exploited if sent back, then it is our obligation not to do so. This is an argument for individual evaluation of cases as in any humanitarian crisis management. It is not an argument, or if you like “blanket statement” about the need to “close the border”.
So are we to take in all the world’s children that “might” be subjected to forced prostitution? I hope you don’t mind paying a 90% tax rate because it’ll take that and more for us to pay for it.
NINETY percent? Really?
I’m still waiting for your stats to back up your other statement that the U.K has the HIGHEST crime rate in the world.
After you provide your stats for that, I’d love to see your stats for your claim of 90% tax rate.
Thanks.
I heard one radio commenter state that upwards of fifty percent of the female children / girls are exploited before they arrive here.
Given this, I think your logic makes no sense. They could stay at home and be safe, and have their Mother, Father, brothers and sisters and extended family watch out for them. But by being sent to America, half will be exploited, but then you’re worried they might be exploited when they return home to their extended family? It doesn’t add up.
I also don’t follow the logic of how a desperately poor family can afford $5,000 or $10,000 to hire a coyote to send their toddler 1,000 miles to America. This smells to high hell. Who is aiding and abetting this process?
I cited a few interesting articles in the Arizona Daily Star, in another post on this site. The Daily Star interviews young people coming to America through the Nogales area.
Tia wrote:
> My believe is that if even a very small proportion of these people would be
> exploited if sent back, then it is our obligation not to do so.
Nice of you to speak for all of us (“our” obligation). I’ve got no problem if you want to let some illegal alien kids move in with you (or live rent free in your home in North Davis), but since many of us that are already paying more than half of what we make to the government and (unlike you with kids already out of college) are having a tough time saving as fast as college prices are going up, we just don’t have the money to support every poor person in the world that wants to move here.
P.S. It is just me or does anyone else find it ironic that the person that does not want to develop any more land or build more homes wants to let anyone in the world that is “exploited” move here?
South of Davis
Here we go again. I have written repeatedly that I favor more low cost housing and a housing first policy for any of the homeless who would be receptive to this approach and that what I oppose is more automobile dependent communities targeted to those who can already afford $ 400,000- $ 600,000 dollar homes an thus do not need our help.
I know this is repetitive and as soon as you stop misrepresenting my position, I will stop making the same clarification of my position.
BP
“ome may be forced into prostitution, just like in almost any country. But to say they “likely” will be is a gross oversensationalism on your part. Some may but most won’t.”
The people who would consign their children to a 1000 mile + trip with the well known dangers of the use of coyotes , including death, are desperate. If you are going to hang your criticism on my use of the word “likely” then we have a fundamental difference of opinion on how other human beings should be treated.
My believe is that if even a very small proportion of these people would be exploited if sent back, then it is our obligation not to do so. This is an argument for individual evaluation of cases as in any humanitarian crisis management. It is not an argument, or if you like “blanket statement” about the need to “close the border”.
So are we to take in all the world’s children that “might” be subjected to forced prostitution? I hope you don’t mind paying a 90% tax rate because it’ll take that and more for us to pay for it.
NINETY percent? Really?
I’m still waiting for your stats to back up your other statement that the U.K has the HIGHEST crime rate in the world.
After you provide your stats for that, I’d love to see your stats for your claim of 90% tax rate.
Thanks.
I heard one radio commenter state that upwards of fifty percent of the female children / girls are exploited before they arrive here.
Given this, I think your logic makes no sense. They could stay at home and be safe, and have their Mother, Father, brothers and sisters and extended family watch out for them. But by being sent to America, half will be exploited, but then you’re worried they might be exploited when they return home to their extended family? It doesn’t add up.
I also don’t follow the logic of how a desperately poor family can afford $5,000 or $10,000 to hire a coyote to send their toddler 1,000 miles to America. This smells to high hell. Who is aiding and abetting this process?
I cited a few interesting articles in the Arizona Daily Star, in another post on this site. The Daily Star interviews young people coming to America through the Nogales area.
Tia wrote:
> My believe is that if even a very small proportion of these people would be
> exploited if sent back, then it is our obligation not to do so.
Nice of you to speak for all of us (“our” obligation). I’ve got no problem if you want to let some illegal alien kids move in with you (or live rent free in your home in North Davis), but since many of us that are already paying more than half of what we make to the government and (unlike you with kids already out of college) are having a tough time saving as fast as college prices are going up, we just don’t have the money to support every poor person in the world that wants to move here.
P.S. It is just me or does anyone else find it ironic that the person that does not want to develop any more land or build more homes wants to let anyone in the world that is “exploited” move here?
South of Davis
Here we go again. I have written repeatedly that I favor more low cost housing and a housing first policy for any of the homeless who would be receptive to this approach and that what I oppose is more automobile dependent communities targeted to those who can already afford $ 400,000- $ 600,000 dollar homes an thus do not need our help.
I know this is repetitive and as soon as you stop misrepresenting my position, I will stop making the same clarification of my position.
This is a well done piece from the Heritage Foundation. And it demonstrates the crux of the problem and why the GOP is demanding a different approach to immigration reform. It is a fiscal issue. And again, Democrats refuse to operate a calculator.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer
The typical unlawful immigrant is 34 years old. After amnesty, this individual will receive government benefits, on average, for 50 years. Restricting access to benefits for the first 13 years after amnesty therefore has only a marginal impact on long-term costs.
If amnesty is enacted, the average adult unlawful immigrant would receive $592,000 more in government benefits over the course of his remaining lifetime than he would pay in taxes.
Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits.
The debate about the fiscal consequences of unlawful and low-skill immigration is hampered by a number of misconceptions. Few lawmakers really understand the current size of government and the scope of redistribution. The fact that the average household gets $31,600 in government benefits each year is a shock. The fact that a household headed by an individual with less than a high school degree gets $46,600 is a bigger one.
Many conservatives believe that if an individual has a job and works hard, he will inevitably be a net tax contributor (paying more in taxes than he takes in benefits). In our society, this has not been true for a very long time. Similarly, many believe that unlawful immigrants work more than other groups. This is also not true. The employment rate for non-elderly adult unlawful immigrants is about the same as it is for the general population.
Many policymakers also believe that because unlawful immigrants are comparatively young, they will help relieve the fiscal strains of an aging society. Regrettably, this is not true. At every stage of the life cycle, unlawful immigrants, on average, generate fiscal deficits (benefits exceed taxes). Unlawful immigrants, on average, are always tax consumers; they never once generate a “fiscal surplus” that can be used to pay for government benefits elsewhere in society. This situation obviously will get much worse after amnesty.
Many policymakers believe that after amnesty, unlawful immigrants will help make Social Security solvent. It is true that unlawful immigrants currently pay FICA taxes and would pay more after amnesty, but with average earnings of $24,800 per year, the typical unlawful immigrant will pay only about $3,700 per year in FICA taxes. After retirement, that individual is likely to draw more than $3.00 in Social Security and Medicare (adjusted for inflation) for every dollar in FICA taxes he has paid.
Moreover, taxes and benefits must be viewed holistically. It is a mistake to look at the Social Security trust fund in isolation. If an individual pays $3,700 per year into the Social Security trust fund but simultaneously draws a net $25,000 per year (benefits minus taxes) out of general government revenue, the solvency of government has not improved.
Following amnesty, the fiscal costs of former unlawful immigrant households will be roughly the same as those of lawful immigrant and non-immigrant households with the same level of education. Because U.S. government policy is highly redistributive, those costs are very large. Those who claim that amnesty will not create a large fiscal burden are simply in a state of denial concerning the underlying redistributional nature of government policy in the 21st century.
Finally, some argue that it does not matter whether unlawful immigrants create a fiscal deficit of $6.3 trillion because their children will make up for these costs. This is not true. Even if all the children of unlawful immigrants graduated from college, they would be hard-pressed to pay back $6.3 trillion in costs over their lifetimes.
Of course, not all the children of unlawful immigrants will graduate from college. Data on intergenerational social mobility show that, although the children of unlawful immigrants will have substantially better educational outcomes than their parents, these achievements will have limits. Only 13 percent are likely to graduate from college, for example. Because of this, the children, on average, are not likely to become net tax contributors. The children of unlawful immigrants are likely to remain a net fiscal burden on U.S. taxpayers, although a far smaller burden than their parents.
A final problem is that unlawful immigration appears to depress the wages of low-skill U.S.-born and lawful immigrant workers by 10 percent, or $2,300, per year. Unlawful immigration also probably drives many of our most vulnerable U.S.-born workers out of the labor force entirely. Unlawful immigration thus makes it harder for the least advantaged U.S. citizens to share in the American dream. This is wrong; public policy should support the interests of those who have a right to be here, not those who have broken our laws.
Frankly, thank you very much, I hadn’t seen this.
I think the costs are even greater than this due to various factors. Mexico supplies a huge amount of our illegal drugs, and the Mexican gangs are exploding in the US.
I’m not trying to pick on Mexico, this is a complex problem. Fathers are leaving their families in Mexico and elsewhere for better wages and benefits, and they then leave their homes Fatherless. I have spoken with Mexican and Panamanian (I haven’t been … yet) friends who say that this has helped to spur gang life in their home towns and villages, and the wives sometimes start a “new relationship” while Papa is away for years. Sometimes it is a new relationship, sometimes it is just “Sancho” (the other man). It appears to be having a very negative effect on some Latino families, this extended family separation.
And what happened to Diversity?
TBD wrote:
> I’m not trying to pick on Mexico, this is a complex problem
As bad as things are in Mexico they are worse in Central America (that had had a higher murder rate than Mexico for most of the past 30 years).
From what I read most of the kids coming here are from Central America and that probably makes the MS 13 guys happy (most MS 13 guys have ties to Central America).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13
It looks like we will soon get the “diversity” that so many want with White, Black, Asian and even more Brown gang members…
This is a great point that is largely ignored by the “caring” left.
American is the giant magnet that rips families apart.
And other thing… Mexico uses America as its ATM sending us its poor to earn money to send back.. This then relieves the pressure for the Mexican government to have to stop corruption and improve social and economic services for the citizens of Mexico… thereby keeping it locked in status quo.
Same with the drug money coming back to Mexico and going into its economy.
If we completely shut the border, and put the military there and declared full war on any human or drug trafficers on our soil… using drones and patrols and state of the art weapons. And immediately deported anyone illegal caught coming over back to Mexico. And we told Mexico that we are sending them a bill for the cost of the ongoing operation. What do you think might happen inside Mexico?
Obama mentioned something tonight at his press conference (CNN) that he brought up. If we want to act right away ‘we could consider sending the National Guard. This may have originally been suggested by Gov Rick Perry, but Obama brought it up. Great! Do it right away. He brought it up 2 times, and said he would be open to do it, aloing with the $3,7 Billion.
Has anyone done the math on the $3.7 billion? I’ve heard that there are 52,000 illegals now on the border that we’re currently dealing with. That’s near $70,000 that would be spent on a per illegal basis because of this crisis.
Yes you’re correct Tia, there are other factors to consider such as you mentioned. But you also have to consider how much more each illegal will cost if and when they go on welfare, food stamps, medicare, section 8 housing, (I could on forever) over their lifetimes. That $70,000 will swell up to much more than that.
Seems to be the conservative solution to everything.
BP
“Has anyone done the math on the $3.7 billion? I’ve heard that there are 52,000 illegals now on the border that we’re currently dealing with. That’s near $70,000 that would be spent on a per illegal basis because of this crisis.”
I have not read the plan and so am completely unaware of the details.
Your statement is making the assumption that the plan is only intended to deal with those who are currently identified and does not have any provision for a potentially higher number of people already here or for prevention of others finding themselves in this situation ( short of a wall,
which didn’t work out so well for Berlin as I recall), or a “war” as advocated by Frankly
Hi Tia,
You are a doctor, so I will use biological terms. The Berlin Wall was to keep people in, and ours would (in general) keep people out. The former was basically impermeable, and the latter is supposed to be semi-permeable. However, you seem to want there to be no wall at all.
Semi-permeable cell membranes (which are a kind of wall) have been the evolutionary model since the dawn of life, but you (and others who believe as you do) think that there is a better way. Why?
Hi Don,
In Wikipedia you will find the following:
“The War on Poverty is the unofficial name for legislation first introduced by United States President Lyndon B. Johnson during his State of the Union address on January 8, 1964.”
LBJ was a Democrat, so this was a liberal approach. How did it work out, by the way?
Interesting the arguments that Grover Norquist makes in favor of a more open immigration policy. Norquist is typically a very pro-business oriented Republican activist. The legislation that he refers to was the recent comprehensive immigration reform proposal of the Senate:
Immigration is labor-cocaine for business. They are addicted to it for short-term pleasure at the expense of long-term damage.
Immigration is a tax to the middle class and a hazard to American low income people. Business has proven to not be motivated to care for either. Business is like a dog. It is easy to understand. The dog is motivated almost exclusively by food. Business is motivated almost entirely by profit. We don’t allow business to make social policy that improves their profit at the net expense of society. Just like a dog, we have to train business and contain business. But we also have to allow the business to run free enough so that it is healthy.
And don’t confuse the business demand for skilled immigrant labor with this issue of illegals flooding in. They are not the same.
Suddenly you’re not so libertarian and free market.
The founders of these companies were legal immigrants, not illegal immigrants or members of M13, Nortenos or Sorenos.
This is a well done piece from the Heritage Foundation. And it demonstrates the crux of the problem and why the GOP is demanding a different approach to immigration reform. It is a fiscal issue. And again, Democrats refuse to operate a calculator.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer
The typical unlawful immigrant is 34 years old. After amnesty, this individual will receive government benefits, on average, for 50 years. Restricting access to benefits for the first 13 years after amnesty therefore has only a marginal impact on long-term costs.
If amnesty is enacted, the average adult unlawful immigrant would receive $592,000 more in government benefits over the course of his remaining lifetime than he would pay in taxes.
Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits.
The debate about the fiscal consequences of unlawful and low-skill immigration is hampered by a number of misconceptions. Few lawmakers really understand the current size of government and the scope of redistribution. The fact that the average household gets $31,600 in government benefits each year is a shock. The fact that a household headed by an individual with less than a high school degree gets $46,600 is a bigger one.
Many conservatives believe that if an individual has a job and works hard, he will inevitably be a net tax contributor (paying more in taxes than he takes in benefits). In our society, this has not been true for a very long time. Similarly, many believe that unlawful immigrants work more than other groups. This is also not true. The employment rate for non-elderly adult unlawful immigrants is about the same as it is for the general population.
Many policymakers also believe that because unlawful immigrants are comparatively young, they will help relieve the fiscal strains of an aging society. Regrettably, this is not true. At every stage of the life cycle, unlawful immigrants, on average, generate fiscal deficits (benefits exceed taxes). Unlawful immigrants, on average, are always tax consumers; they never once generate a “fiscal surplus” that can be used to pay for government benefits elsewhere in society. This situation obviously will get much worse after amnesty.
Many policymakers believe that after amnesty, unlawful immigrants will help make Social Security solvent. It is true that unlawful immigrants currently pay FICA taxes and would pay more after amnesty, but with average earnings of $24,800 per year, the typical unlawful immigrant will pay only about $3,700 per year in FICA taxes. After retirement, that individual is likely to draw more than $3.00 in Social Security and Medicare (adjusted for inflation) for every dollar in FICA taxes he has paid.
Moreover, taxes and benefits must be viewed holistically. It is a mistake to look at the Social Security trust fund in isolation. If an individual pays $3,700 per year into the Social Security trust fund but simultaneously draws a net $25,000 per year (benefits minus taxes) out of general government revenue, the solvency of government has not improved.
Following amnesty, the fiscal costs of former unlawful immigrant households will be roughly the same as those of lawful immigrant and non-immigrant households with the same level of education. Because U.S. government policy is highly redistributive, those costs are very large. Those who claim that amnesty will not create a large fiscal burden are simply in a state of denial concerning the underlying redistributional nature of government policy in the 21st century.
Finally, some argue that it does not matter whether unlawful immigrants create a fiscal deficit of $6.3 trillion because their children will make up for these costs. This is not true. Even if all the children of unlawful immigrants graduated from college, they would be hard-pressed to pay back $6.3 trillion in costs over their lifetimes.
Of course, not all the children of unlawful immigrants will graduate from college. Data on intergenerational social mobility show that, although the children of unlawful immigrants will have substantially better educational outcomes than their parents, these achievements will have limits. Only 13 percent are likely to graduate from college, for example. Because of this, the children, on average, are not likely to become net tax contributors. The children of unlawful immigrants are likely to remain a net fiscal burden on U.S. taxpayers, although a far smaller burden than their parents.
A final problem is that unlawful immigration appears to depress the wages of low-skill U.S.-born and lawful immigrant workers by 10 percent, or $2,300, per year. Unlawful immigration also probably drives many of our most vulnerable U.S.-born workers out of the labor force entirely. Unlawful immigration thus makes it harder for the least advantaged U.S. citizens to share in the American dream. This is wrong; public policy should support the interests of those who have a right to be here, not those who have broken our laws.
Frankly, thank you very much, I hadn’t seen this.
I think the costs are even greater than this due to various factors. Mexico supplies a huge amount of our illegal drugs, and the Mexican gangs are exploding in the US.
I’m not trying to pick on Mexico, this is a complex problem. Fathers are leaving their families in Mexico and elsewhere for better wages and benefits, and they then leave their homes Fatherless. I have spoken with Mexican and Panamanian (I haven’t been … yet) friends who say that this has helped to spur gang life in their home towns and villages, and the wives sometimes start a “new relationship” while Papa is away for years. Sometimes it is a new relationship, sometimes it is just “Sancho” (the other man). It appears to be having a very negative effect on some Latino families, this extended family separation.
And what happened to Diversity?
TBD wrote:
> I’m not trying to pick on Mexico, this is a complex problem
As bad as things are in Mexico they are worse in Central America (that had had a higher murder rate than Mexico for most of the past 30 years).
From what I read most of the kids coming here are from Central America and that probably makes the MS 13 guys happy (most MS 13 guys have ties to Central America).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13
It looks like we will soon get the “diversity” that so many want with White, Black, Asian and even more Brown gang members…
This is a great point that is largely ignored by the “caring” left.
American is the giant magnet that rips families apart.
And other thing… Mexico uses America as its ATM sending us its poor to earn money to send back.. This then relieves the pressure for the Mexican government to have to stop corruption and improve social and economic services for the citizens of Mexico… thereby keeping it locked in status quo.
Same with the drug money coming back to Mexico and going into its economy.
If we completely shut the border, and put the military there and declared full war on any human or drug trafficers on our soil… using drones and patrols and state of the art weapons. And immediately deported anyone illegal caught coming over back to Mexico. And we told Mexico that we are sending them a bill for the cost of the ongoing operation. What do you think might happen inside Mexico?
Obama mentioned something tonight at his press conference (CNN) that he brought up. If we want to act right away ‘we could consider sending the National Guard. This may have originally been suggested by Gov Rick Perry, but Obama brought it up. Great! Do it right away. He brought it up 2 times, and said he would be open to do it, aloing with the $3,7 Billion.
Has anyone done the math on the $3.7 billion? I’ve heard that there are 52,000 illegals now on the border that we’re currently dealing with. That’s near $70,000 that would be spent on a per illegal basis because of this crisis.
Yes you’re correct Tia, there are other factors to consider such as you mentioned. But you also have to consider how much more each illegal will cost if and when they go on welfare, food stamps, medicare, section 8 housing, (I could on forever) over their lifetimes. That $70,000 will swell up to much more than that.
Seems to be the conservative solution to everything.
BP
“Has anyone done the math on the $3.7 billion? I’ve heard that there are 52,000 illegals now on the border that we’re currently dealing with. That’s near $70,000 that would be spent on a per illegal basis because of this crisis.”
I have not read the plan and so am completely unaware of the details.
Your statement is making the assumption that the plan is only intended to deal with those who are currently identified and does not have any provision for a potentially higher number of people already here or for prevention of others finding themselves in this situation ( short of a wall,
which didn’t work out so well for Berlin as I recall), or a “war” as advocated by Frankly
Hi Tia,
You are a doctor, so I will use biological terms. The Berlin Wall was to keep people in, and ours would (in general) keep people out. The former was basically impermeable, and the latter is supposed to be semi-permeable. However, you seem to want there to be no wall at all.
Semi-permeable cell membranes (which are a kind of wall) have been the evolutionary model since the dawn of life, but you (and others who believe as you do) think that there is a better way. Why?
Hi Don,
In Wikipedia you will find the following:
“The War on Poverty is the unofficial name for legislation first introduced by United States President Lyndon B. Johnson during his State of the Union address on January 8, 1964.”
LBJ was a Democrat, so this was a liberal approach. How did it work out, by the way?
Interesting the arguments that Grover Norquist makes in favor of a more open immigration policy. Norquist is typically a very pro-business oriented Republican activist. The legislation that he refers to was the recent comprehensive immigration reform proposal of the Senate:
Immigration is labor-cocaine for business. They are addicted to it for short-term pleasure at the expense of long-term damage.
Immigration is a tax to the middle class and a hazard to American low income people. Business has proven to not be motivated to care for either. Business is like a dog. It is easy to understand. The dog is motivated almost exclusively by food. Business is motivated almost entirely by profit. We don’t allow business to make social policy that improves their profit at the net expense of society. Just like a dog, we have to train business and contain business. But we also have to allow the business to run free enough so that it is healthy.
And don’t confuse the business demand for skilled immigrant labor with this issue of illegals flooding in. They are not the same.
Suddenly you’re not so libertarian and free market.
The founders of these companies were legal immigrants, not illegal immigrants or members of M13, Nortenos or Sorenos.
Radio host and author Mark Levine today noted that Obama has been very open about his schedule. But he left our an apparent secret meeting with Valerie Jarrett, La Raza, and others.
Levine today claims that the essence of the meeting is that Obama will press ahead with more Amnesty this summer, possibly granting 5-6 Million adults a free pass. I did not get the name of his source.
BTW, did you realize that icon Cesar Chavez was a strong opponent of illegal immigration?
Cesar Chavez’s Rabid Opposition to Illegal Immigration Not Covered in New Movie
“As the comprehensive book reveals, Chavez’s battle against illegal immigration and the undocumented immigrants themselves was one of his fundamental strategies in organizing farm workers.”
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2014/03/cesar_chavezs_illegal_undocumented_immigrants.php
You mean this “secret” meeting? http://www.talkradionews.com/white-house/2014/03/14/obama-huddles-immigration-reform-supporters.html#.U73HshZfREc
Radio host and author Mark Levine today noted that Obama has been very open about his schedule. But he left our an apparent secret meeting with Valerie Jarrett, La Raza, and others.
Levine today claims that the essence of the meeting is that Obama will press ahead with more Amnesty this summer, possibly granting 5-6 Million adults a free pass. I did not get the name of his source.
BTW, did you realize that icon Cesar Chavez was a strong opponent of illegal immigration?
Cesar Chavez’s Rabid Opposition to Illegal Immigration Not Covered in New Movie
“As the comprehensive book reveals, Chavez’s battle against illegal immigration and the undocumented immigrants themselves was one of his fundamental strategies in organizing farm workers.”
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2014/03/cesar_chavezs_illegal_undocumented_immigrants.php
You mean this “secret” meeting? http://www.talkradionews.com/white-house/2014/03/14/obama-huddles-immigration-reform-supporters.html#.U73HshZfREc
Dorte
“How can living conditions be intolerable if those who come here want to earn money and return? How can living conditions be intolerable if parents or family members are still there?”
From the border crossing immigrants that I have met (many because of my career) I would respond this way.
The one characteristic that I would say that they all share is hope. They hope that by coming here and making money to send home that they will improve not only their own life, but those of the relatives that are left behind.
Many people around the world live in what we would consider intolerable standards. I do not consider living with open sewage adjacent to my house, or with insufficient caloric intake daily for myself and my children, or with the constant threat of armed militias kidnapping my children, and yet many endure these conditions.
So getting back to hope. The immigrants that I have met have two hopes. The short term hope is that they will earn enough to support themselves and improve the living standard of those left behind. The long term hope is that conditions will improve in their country enough to allow them to return someday.
Also, if they could afford it, I am sure that all members of a family that are living in these conditions would like to come to the US. Circumstances frequently will not permit that. They frequently can raise only enough money for one person to attempt the crossing paying off the coyotes. Also, there is frequently the need for someone to stay behind to care for younger sibs or aging grandparents who would not be able to stand the rigors of the trip north.
I just learned that by world standards, Mexico is a upper middle income country. They have an obesity rate that is higher than ours, and rising. They usually get plenty of calories, just the wrong calories.
The conditions of violence you describe exist in almost every major urban city in America. Chicago, the home of ‘hope and change’, had 85 shootings last weekend. I recently went to the east side of Clear Lake and was astounded by the poverty, mobile homes, and apparent rampant drug problems. Hundreds of old mobile homes a stones throw from a large lake.
Shouldn’t we provide hope for our citizens?
I rarely hear any of the upper income or established people express concern for working-class Americans. Basic economics will tell you that 30-40 Million illegal workers depress wages for these Americans.
I also rarely hear why we should prioritize cheaters from Mexico or Central America over Africa, Poland, or the Ukraine. I think they would like ‘hope’.
Hi Tia,
You said that they were refugees. Now you say that they are hopeful people. I am a hopeful person. Am I a refugee?
Dorte
“How can living conditions be intolerable if those who come here want to earn money and return? How can living conditions be intolerable if parents or family members are still there?”
From the border crossing immigrants that I have met (many because of my career) I would respond this way.
The one characteristic that I would say that they all share is hope. They hope that by coming here and making money to send home that they will improve not only their own life, but those of the relatives that are left behind.
Many people around the world live in what we would consider intolerable standards. I do not consider living with open sewage adjacent to my house, or with insufficient caloric intake daily for myself and my children, or with the constant threat of armed militias kidnapping my children, and yet many endure these conditions.
So getting back to hope. The immigrants that I have met have two hopes. The short term hope is that they will earn enough to support themselves and improve the living standard of those left behind. The long term hope is that conditions will improve in their country enough to allow them to return someday.
Also, if they could afford it, I am sure that all members of a family that are living in these conditions would like to come to the US. Circumstances frequently will not permit that. They frequently can raise only enough money for one person to attempt the crossing paying off the coyotes. Also, there is frequently the need for someone to stay behind to care for younger sibs or aging grandparents who would not be able to stand the rigors of the trip north.
I just learned that by world standards, Mexico is a upper middle income country. They have an obesity rate that is higher than ours, and rising. They usually get plenty of calories, just the wrong calories.
The conditions of violence you describe exist in almost every major urban city in America. Chicago, the home of ‘hope and change’, had 85 shootings last weekend. I recently went to the east side of Clear Lake and was astounded by the poverty, mobile homes, and apparent rampant drug problems. Hundreds of old mobile homes a stones throw from a large lake.
Shouldn’t we provide hope for our citizens?
I rarely hear any of the upper income or established people express concern for working-class Americans. Basic economics will tell you that 30-40 Million illegal workers depress wages for these Americans.
I also rarely hear why we should prioritize cheaters from Mexico or Central America over Africa, Poland, or the Ukraine. I think they would like ‘hope’.
Hi Tia,
You said that they were refugees. Now you say that they are hopeful people. I am a hopeful person. Am I a refugee?
Frankly
You have expressed the strongest belief in the value of a free market of any poster here.
My question for you is why you do not believe that this pertains to the market for labor. I genuinely do not understand why you believe that it only applies if you happen to be a born or naturalized US citizen. Surely the free market does not care about the words on your birth certificate. So why not just open the borders completely and let your free market sort things out ?
It certainly applies when the manufacturer moves production to a country with cheaper labor. In that sense our borders are completely open. Companies are perfectly free to move the production of their products to any place they choose.
These are companies fleeing from liberals’ hostilities and claiming asylum.
Come on Tia. Really? You apparently do not believe in the sovereign rights of a country? You apparently don’t believe there should be borders. You apparently don’t believe that there are limits to what our country can afford in taking in the worlds’ uneducated and under-developed people to care for.
I have kids. Their lives are damaged by the flood of these illegal people.
US society is shaped like pyramid where the bottom is larger and filled with people starting out in their climb to eventual self-actualization. The societies of third world countries are not shaped the same way. They have very few people striving for self-actualization because so many are stuck just trying to survive. They all hang out at the base of the pyramid without much means or motivation or understanding for moving up. Their kids might start to get it… but we are seeing more and more second and third generation immigrants still stuck at the bottom. And when we allow them to steal into our country, they hang out at the same place our kids are starting out and our own poor and uneducated get stuck. There is competition for access to the ladder of prosperity for pulling ones’ self up higher and higher on the pyramid.
I am not against immigration. We should allow skilled immigrants to fill jobs that we cannot fill. But our education system should be repaired so we are actually trying to fill those jobs with our own people. I am also fine with allowing in a number of low-skilled immigrants… especially for agriculture. I would prefer a temporary visa program for seasonal workers. I would also prefer that we cut back on entitlement spending for our own able-bodied poor and require them to work these jobs. Work is good for the soul… humans were designed to work. It is BS that there is work beneath a person’s dignity. Not working when able is the least dignified existence.
But this demand that we accommodate every disadvantaged person in the world that manages to illegally come to our country is beyond absurd. A recent world poll came back that 150 million additional people would flood to this country in a heartbeat if our borders were opened up.
Here you are demanding that Davis stay small and quaint and you support this flood of people coming here. Do you even get the irony in your positions? How about we build a bunch of tenant housing on those precious brown fields that surround our fair city to house all these people?
I think liberals, and yes I am generalizing, have lost perspective for what has contributed to their good life in this country. History matters. Values matter. Culture matters. Economics matter. And flooding in too many people from other cultures into a democratic system dilutes and corrupts the culture and causes tremendous economic problems. Multiculturalism from out of control immigration has proven disastrous for much of Europe. European liberals have come around and there is a renewed understanding of the hazards from too many and a lack of assimilation into the host country’s culture.
And these people are coming to our country illegally. They are breaking our laws as a sovereign country. And our Federal government is not doing near enough and is sticking their finger in the eye of our border states.
The situation is a mess and I see a civil war brewing. We need to put the military all along the border. We are being invaded.
Third time you’ve said this. Please explain why you keep saying it.
So which state will be the first to vote to secede from Federal malfeasance brought to us directly by American liberals?
Have you read anything lately about the IRS email scandal?
When border states are overrun with illegal immigrants directly because of the words, deeds, actions and inactions of the federal government, what do you think might happen eventually?
When so many people are pushed to marginalization and denigration from the leaders of their country, what do you think might happen?
Don’t progressives read history?
Would Texas ever leave the union? Texas and Arizona?
I hold a mixed opinion on Gov Perry. I agree with some of his views, but he doesn’t seem like he is very curious or a hard worker, just like Obama.
I agree with many thins you say, except for the civil war. I don’t think we are there, yet, but there is great discontent. The problems we have are RINOS and the GOP being really poor speakers. Bobby Jindahl is great but comes off like poorly, weak … can’t he channel some Dinesh D’Souza?
I don’t have a problem with even letting in a few million legal blue collar, skilled workers – carpenters, plumbers, etc. We have depressed wages for American workers while we make welfare benefits more plentiful, which is quite perverse.
I’d think Tia would appreciate one of the many unintended consequences of massive numbers of illegal immigrants. Fast food joints get a cheap supply of plentiful labor, which helps keep fast food cheap, which helps to lead to our increasing obesity levels. Employers also don’t have to offer benefits or better wages with 200 people ready to work for them in a moments notice.
There is also a stress on our environment. What happens to scenic California when we are 50, 60, 70 million people?
My family was solid Democrat and Reagan Democrats, but welfare was an insult. Hard work was stressed. When girlfriends got knocked up they married the young lady and took care of their children. Government was the last resort, not the first. The single female head-of-household vote has become very important as a huge percentage of them vote solidly Democrat, while their married counterparts don’t. The logic is simple – single women need more help (i.e. the government), whereas married women have a husband.
Young people today do seem to get indoctrinated at a very early age. I hear kids in high school throwing around the race card like they are liberals in college, and they love the liberal late-night comedians. But they are so naive.
The Obama disaster – recently rated as the worst President since WWII – gives the GOP an opening, but I fear they will screw it up. Women may also vote for Hillary Clinton in droves – even though tapes recently showed her to be a cavalier apologist for a brutal child-rapist – and seal us to a 3rd term of Obama.
Tia, I understand that you work in the medical profession. How would you like it if we imported millions of nurses and doctors – some licensed, some not – and thereby cut your yearly income in half. Is that OK with you?
I’ve had family members face that reality, white, brown, and black.
I understand you don’t care if a Mexican-American family in East LA has their living standards lowered, or a black family losses their home, or a white construction worker can’t buy a house or get married because his wages have gone backwards. These are the losses. The benefit is that illegal workers have plumbing here, sleep 3 to a room, use our ER and food stamps (card), and then sends $500 a month home to Mexico. That is the benefit, along with the employer getting cheaper wages.
The upper classes don’t seem to care, they just like cheap lawn care, house cleaning and nannies.
TBD wrote:
> The upper classes don’t seem to care, they just like cheap
> lawn care, house cleaning and nannies.
Don’t forget that many in the upper (and upper middle) class make MORE money when we let MORE illegal aliens in. The government pays for health care that flows to physicians who make MORE and get more OT, and also pays for education that flows to teachers. I don’t know if it is the case here in Yolo County, but in San Mateo County (20 years ago when I was dating a Mexican American elementary school teacher) the teachers with classes full of Spanish speaking illegal (and legal) aliens got paid MORE than the teachers in the next room over teaching US Citizens that spoke English…
Touche. I know of one immigration lawyer who is probably pretty happy now.
Drudgereport.com now has multiple links on the top of their site on African Americans bemoaning the effect of illegal immigration on their community.
SoD: …full of Spanish speaking illegal (and legal) aliens…
A fully bilingual/bi-literate person in English/Spanish is more valuable in the workforce than an equivalent monolingual.
wdf1 wrote:
> A fully bilingual/bi-literate person in English/Spanish
> is more valuable in the workforce than an equivalent
> monolingual.
True, but since a teacher that speaks Spanish is will not get paid a premium unless they are teaching Spanish speaking kids many will want more Spanish speaking kids to come here (and not learn English so they keep getting paid the premium as a bi-lingual teacher)…
In the workforce? I guess if you’re working painting cars, doing construction, or working fast food.
If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
TBD: If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
If you’re a project engineer who would like to get work for your company in Latin America, then you want to speak fluent Spanish with correct grammar.
SoD: True, but since a teacher that speaks Spanish is will not get paid a premium unless they are teaching Spanish speaking kids many will want more Spanish speaking kids to come here (and not learn English so they keep getting paid the premium as a bi-lingual teacher)…
They’re learning English, just not as well as you, perhaps, because they’re working on their second language, whereas most “natives” can only speak one language.
TBD: If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
…and a bilingual dentist will be able to serve more clients — English speakers and Spanish speakers, and those somewhere in between.
Knowledge of organic chemistry, dentistry, etc is more important.
But if you’re gonna fly the bi-lingual flag, then make the other languages be 10% Cantonese, 10% Russian, 10% Ukrainian, 10% French, 1% Pg Latin, etc.
Creating barrios where there is no “diversity” and immigrants don’t have to learn English helps no one in the long run.
TBD: But if you’re gonna fly the bi-lingual flag, then make the other languages be 10% Cantonese, 10% Russian, 10% Ukrainian, 10% French, 1% Pg Latin, etc.
Those other languages are available for instruction when there is a critical amount of interest in the community.
The reason I’m harping on Spanish is that it is obviously the most dominant second language, and a greater percentage of its speakers in the U.S. are lower income.
Right now kids from Spanish speaking families are given the message that their Spanish is a liability, and that perhaps it would be best if they didn’t speak it at all. The ability to speak Spanish is an asset because they can be bilingual in a society that is so heavily monolingual.
Your insecurity over this argument is that they will never learn English if they are given any instruction in Spanish. We’ve assimilated large numbers of German, Italian, and Polish immigrants who’ve lost those languages within a couple of generations. We also have plenty generations of Latino Americans who have lost their ability to speak Spanish.
Being bilingual is one chance that these kids can have to grow up and have a leg up in the job market with value added skills.
Bilingual is fine, but communication skills are some of the top skills required in the top-paying information economy jobs. And unless the English is very strong, most people cannot function well enough in these jobs.
The problem isn’t bilingual, the problem is Spanish being the only language or the dominant language when the national language of our culture and of business is English.
So anything that perpetuates the clinging to Spanish as the dominant language is bad for the individual and bad for our country in general.
Frankly, that is only part of the problem.
Not only do teachers have to grapple with Spanish speakers; they have to deal with students who never mastered their Mother tongue, formally. Therefore, it makes it even harder than simply teaching a new language. One of many family members who is a teacher pointed this out to me. If you know and have studied another language, can read and write it, it makes learning a new language much easier. The fact is we are dealing with a lot of people who speak no English, limited English, some understand but aren’t comfortable speaking it, as well as Spanglish.
Because of our current lack of “diversity” in immigration, we also have barrios which enable these individuals to stay speaking one language with little need for improvement.
Insecurity? I think not. The Mexican legal and illegal immigration scenario is different on many levels, though the PC police don’t want to talk about it.
Frankly
“You apparently do not believe in the sovereign rights of a country? ”
That is correct. I believe that “countries” are frequently established on the basis of who militarily defeats whom. Countries are not proactively established on moral principles as we would like to believe, but rather on who manages to wield more power and subsequently can control the narrative of “how we came to be”.
“I have kids. Their lives are damaged by the flood of these illegal people.”
I understand this statement, and feel it could equally well have been spoken by the Native Americans while watching their children die of starvation or small pox, both techniques used by our government in its early days.
“US society is shaped like pyramid where the bottom is larger and filled with people starting out in their climb to eventual self-actualization”
You do not seem to appreciate that fewer and fewer people in the US are able to “climb to self-actualization”
When you do appreciate it, as when saying that “your children are being hurt” you attribute it to factors significantly different than those I believe are at play. Were your children really looking for jobs as housekeepers, or field laborers, or possibly at the lower end of the construction trade ? If not, I would say it is much more likely that they might have been hurt by jobs being exported for higher corporate profits, or maybe by the steadily increasing educational costs.
TBD
“I understand you don’t care if a Mexican-American family in East LA has their living standards lowered, or a black family losses their home, or a white construction worker can’t buy a house or get married because his wages have gone backwards”
I know that you like to think that you understand me. It would appear that opinion is in error.
“How would you like it if we imported millions of nurses and doctors – some licensed, some not – and thereby cut your yearly income in half. Is that OK with you?
I would be fine with the second half of your statement since I believe that doctors are grossly over compensated and that this has been achieved by limiting the number of training positions so as to maintain artificially high salaries. This is not good for patients, nor is it good for doctors who are pushed to see more and more patients in less and less time.
As for the first part, some licensed and some not….there is a real problem because it addresses the issue of competency rather than merely the issue of artificially inflating doctors salaries.
You also are choosing to ignore what I have posted repeatedly. I would prefer a complete revision of our economic system to one in which each individual is compensated exactly the same amount for time spent benefiting the society in ways that we have determined have value. The homemaker raising children, the garbage collector, the minister, the school teacher….would all be compensated exactly the same as I am. To the argument, but you had to pay for your education, or you had to spend so many years in training my answer would be, in my preferred system, I would have been compensated for obtaining that education rather than having to pay for it since we would compensate by time, not by some artificially derived judgement about whose work is “worth more”.
Why? Because all honest work has value. Society will certainly be as adversely impacted if the garbage collection is not performed as if doctors don’t show up, and far more so than if movie stars don’t show up.
I believe that our system of compensation is ridiculously tilted against those who actually do most of the “heavy lifting” and would like to see that change systemically.
Thank you for your reply.
I agree that we should pay those better who do “heavy lifting”, but bringing in 30-40 million illegal immigrants has the exact opposite effect! I know, I know plenty of men in the “trades”.
Your analysis of compensation ignores motivation, determination, smarts, inventiveness, book smarts, and many other traits. Why become a programmer when you can make the same money being a barrista?
I agree with your frank and nuanced answer per doctor’s salaries. Why does a sate like California have only 1 veterinary school??!! Amazing. If we doubled the Supply of doctors, might that not solve a number of problems?
I’ve also been told that many American medical students want to become specialists so that they can make huge money ($400,000-600,000++), whereas a “GP” does tremendous good, but makes a more reasonable salary ($200,000?). (My numbers might be outdated.)
I respect all honest work. But obviously, to me, a programmer of a company website offers more value to me than someone who cuts my lawn. And we reward those years of tedious study, ongoing education, and 10- to 12-hour days and weekends with higher pay, and in some cases, stock options.
P.S. India and China failed with Socialism. That’s why they flipped to Capitalism, the system which has feed more people, and and provided more goods, than any system on Earth.
Capitalism also rewards risk taking. The iPhone wasn’t created in France, and neither was the co0mputter, modern airplanes, or the hybreds.
Frankly
You have expressed the strongest belief in the value of a free market of any poster here.
My question for you is why you do not believe that this pertains to the market for labor. I genuinely do not understand why you believe that it only applies if you happen to be a born or naturalized US citizen. Surely the free market does not care about the words on your birth certificate. So why not just open the borders completely and let your free market sort things out ?
It certainly applies when the manufacturer moves production to a country with cheaper labor. In that sense our borders are completely open. Companies are perfectly free to move the production of their products to any place they choose.
These are companies fleeing from liberals’ hostilities and claiming asylum.
Come on Tia. Really? You apparently do not believe in the sovereign rights of a country? You apparently don’t believe there should be borders. You apparently don’t believe that there are limits to what our country can afford in taking in the worlds’ uneducated and under-developed people to care for.
I have kids. Their lives are damaged by the flood of these illegal people.
US society is shaped like pyramid where the bottom is larger and filled with people starting out in their climb to eventual self-actualization. The societies of third world countries are not shaped the same way. They have very few people striving for self-actualization because so many are stuck just trying to survive. They all hang out at the base of the pyramid without much means or motivation or understanding for moving up. Their kids might start to get it… but we are seeing more and more second and third generation immigrants still stuck at the bottom. And when we allow them to steal into our country, they hang out at the same place our kids are starting out and our own poor and uneducated get stuck. There is competition for access to the ladder of prosperity for pulling ones’ self up higher and higher on the pyramid.
I am not against immigration. We should allow skilled immigrants to fill jobs that we cannot fill. But our education system should be repaired so we are actually trying to fill those jobs with our own people. I am also fine with allowing in a number of low-skilled immigrants… especially for agriculture. I would prefer a temporary visa program for seasonal workers. I would also prefer that we cut back on entitlement spending for our own able-bodied poor and require them to work these jobs. Work is good for the soul… humans were designed to work. It is BS that there is work beneath a person’s dignity. Not working when able is the least dignified existence.
But this demand that we accommodate every disadvantaged person in the world that manages to illegally come to our country is beyond absurd. A recent world poll came back that 150 million additional people would flood to this country in a heartbeat if our borders were opened up.
Here you are demanding that Davis stay small and quaint and you support this flood of people coming here. Do you even get the irony in your positions? How about we build a bunch of tenant housing on those precious brown fields that surround our fair city to house all these people?
I think liberals, and yes I am generalizing, have lost perspective for what has contributed to their good life in this country. History matters. Values matter. Culture matters. Economics matter. And flooding in too many people from other cultures into a democratic system dilutes and corrupts the culture and causes tremendous economic problems. Multiculturalism from out of control immigration has proven disastrous for much of Europe. European liberals have come around and there is a renewed understanding of the hazards from too many and a lack of assimilation into the host country’s culture.
And these people are coming to our country illegally. They are breaking our laws as a sovereign country. And our Federal government is not doing near enough and is sticking their finger in the eye of our border states.
The situation is a mess and I see a civil war brewing. We need to put the military all along the border. We are being invaded.
Third time you’ve said this. Please explain why you keep saying it.
So which state will be the first to vote to secede from Federal malfeasance brought to us directly by American liberals?
Have you read anything lately about the IRS email scandal?
When border states are overrun with illegal immigrants directly because of the words, deeds, actions and inactions of the federal government, what do you think might happen eventually?
When so many people are pushed to marginalization and denigration from the leaders of their country, what do you think might happen?
Don’t progressives read history?
Would Texas ever leave the union? Texas and Arizona?
I hold a mixed opinion on Gov Perry. I agree with some of his views, but he doesn’t seem like he is very curious or a hard worker, just like Obama.
I agree with many thins you say, except for the civil war. I don’t think we are there, yet, but there is great discontent. The problems we have are RINOS and the GOP being really poor speakers. Bobby Jindahl is great but comes off like poorly, weak … can’t he channel some Dinesh D’Souza?
I don’t have a problem with even letting in a few million legal blue collar, skilled workers – carpenters, plumbers, etc. We have depressed wages for American workers while we make welfare benefits more plentiful, which is quite perverse.
I’d think Tia would appreciate one of the many unintended consequences of massive numbers of illegal immigrants. Fast food joints get a cheap supply of plentiful labor, which helps keep fast food cheap, which helps to lead to our increasing obesity levels. Employers also don’t have to offer benefits or better wages with 200 people ready to work for them in a moments notice.
There is also a stress on our environment. What happens to scenic California when we are 50, 60, 70 million people?
My family was solid Democrat and Reagan Democrats, but welfare was an insult. Hard work was stressed. When girlfriends got knocked up they married the young lady and took care of their children. Government was the last resort, not the first. The single female head-of-household vote has become very important as a huge percentage of them vote solidly Democrat, while their married counterparts don’t. The logic is simple – single women need more help (i.e. the government), whereas married women have a husband.
Young people today do seem to get indoctrinated at a very early age. I hear kids in high school throwing around the race card like they are liberals in college, and they love the liberal late-night comedians. But they are so naive.
The Obama disaster – recently rated as the worst President since WWII – gives the GOP an opening, but I fear they will screw it up. Women may also vote for Hillary Clinton in droves – even though tapes recently showed her to be a cavalier apologist for a brutal child-rapist – and seal us to a 3rd term of Obama.
Tia, I understand that you work in the medical profession. How would you like it if we imported millions of nurses and doctors – some licensed, some not – and thereby cut your yearly income in half. Is that OK with you?
I’ve had family members face that reality, white, brown, and black.
I understand you don’t care if a Mexican-American family in East LA has their living standards lowered, or a black family losses their home, or a white construction worker can’t buy a house or get married because his wages have gone backwards. These are the losses. The benefit is that illegal workers have plumbing here, sleep 3 to a room, use our ER and food stamps (card), and then sends $500 a month home to Mexico. That is the benefit, along with the employer getting cheaper wages.
The upper classes don’t seem to care, they just like cheap lawn care, house cleaning and nannies.
TBD wrote:
> The upper classes don’t seem to care, they just like cheap
> lawn care, house cleaning and nannies.
Don’t forget that many in the upper (and upper middle) class make MORE money when we let MORE illegal aliens in. The government pays for health care that flows to physicians who make MORE and get more OT, and also pays for education that flows to teachers. I don’t know if it is the case here in Yolo County, but in San Mateo County (20 years ago when I was dating a Mexican American elementary school teacher) the teachers with classes full of Spanish speaking illegal (and legal) aliens got paid MORE than the teachers in the next room over teaching US Citizens that spoke English…
Touche. I know of one immigration lawyer who is probably pretty happy now.
Drudgereport.com now has multiple links on the top of their site on African Americans bemoaning the effect of illegal immigration on their community.
SoD: …full of Spanish speaking illegal (and legal) aliens…
A fully bilingual/bi-literate person in English/Spanish is more valuable in the workforce than an equivalent monolingual.
wdf1 wrote:
> A fully bilingual/bi-literate person in English/Spanish
> is more valuable in the workforce than an equivalent
> monolingual.
True, but since a teacher that speaks Spanish is will not get paid a premium unless they are teaching Spanish speaking kids many will want more Spanish speaking kids to come here (and not learn English so they keep getting paid the premium as a bi-lingual teacher)…
In the workforce? I guess if you’re working painting cars, doing construction, or working fast food.
If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
TBD: If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
If you’re a project engineer who would like to get work for your company in Latin America, then you want to speak fluent Spanish with correct grammar.
SoD: True, but since a teacher that speaks Spanish is will not get paid a premium unless they are teaching Spanish speaking kids many will want more Spanish speaking kids to come here (and not learn English so they keep getting paid the premium as a bi-lingual teacher)…
They’re learning English, just not as well as you, perhaps, because they’re working on their second language, whereas most “natives” can only speak one language.
TBD: If you’re a Project Engineer or dentist, I’d think excelling at your craft is the most important.
…and a bilingual dentist will be able to serve more clients — English speakers and Spanish speakers, and those somewhere in between.
Knowledge of organic chemistry, dentistry, etc is more important.
But if you’re gonna fly the bi-lingual flag, then make the other languages be 10% Cantonese, 10% Russian, 10% Ukrainian, 10% French, 1% Pg Latin, etc.
Creating barrios where there is no “diversity” and immigrants don’t have to learn English helps no one in the long run.
TBD: But if you’re gonna fly the bi-lingual flag, then make the other languages be 10% Cantonese, 10% Russian, 10% Ukrainian, 10% French, 1% Pg Latin, etc.
Those other languages are available for instruction when there is a critical amount of interest in the community.
The reason I’m harping on Spanish is that it is obviously the most dominant second language, and a greater percentage of its speakers in the U.S. are lower income.
Right now kids from Spanish speaking families are given the message that their Spanish is a liability, and that perhaps it would be best if they didn’t speak it at all. The ability to speak Spanish is an asset because they can be bilingual in a society that is so heavily monolingual.
Your insecurity over this argument is that they will never learn English if they are given any instruction in Spanish. We’ve assimilated large numbers of German, Italian, and Polish immigrants who’ve lost those languages within a couple of generations. We also have plenty generations of Latino Americans who have lost their ability to speak Spanish.
Being bilingual is one chance that these kids can have to grow up and have a leg up in the job market with value added skills.
Bilingual is fine, but communication skills are some of the top skills required in the top-paying information economy jobs. And unless the English is very strong, most people cannot function well enough in these jobs.
The problem isn’t bilingual, the problem is Spanish being the only language or the dominant language when the national language of our culture and of business is English.
So anything that perpetuates the clinging to Spanish as the dominant language is bad for the individual and bad for our country in general.
Frankly, that is only part of the problem.
Not only do teachers have to grapple with Spanish speakers; they have to deal with students who never mastered their Mother tongue, formally. Therefore, it makes it even harder than simply teaching a new language. One of many family members who is a teacher pointed this out to me. If you know and have studied another language, can read and write it, it makes learning a new language much easier. The fact is we are dealing with a lot of people who speak no English, limited English, some understand but aren’t comfortable speaking it, as well as Spanglish.
Because of our current lack of “diversity” in immigration, we also have barrios which enable these individuals to stay speaking one language with little need for improvement.
Insecurity? I think not. The Mexican legal and illegal immigration scenario is different on many levels, though the PC police don’t want to talk about it.
Frankly
“You apparently do not believe in the sovereign rights of a country? ”
That is correct. I believe that “countries” are frequently established on the basis of who militarily defeats whom. Countries are not proactively established on moral principles as we would like to believe, but rather on who manages to wield more power and subsequently can control the narrative of “how we came to be”.
“I have kids. Their lives are damaged by the flood of these illegal people.”
I understand this statement, and feel it could equally well have been spoken by the Native Americans while watching their children die of starvation or small pox, both techniques used by our government in its early days.
“US society is shaped like pyramid where the bottom is larger and filled with people starting out in their climb to eventual self-actualization”
You do not seem to appreciate that fewer and fewer people in the US are able to “climb to self-actualization”
When you do appreciate it, as when saying that “your children are being hurt” you attribute it to factors significantly different than those I believe are at play. Were your children really looking for jobs as housekeepers, or field laborers, or possibly at the lower end of the construction trade ? If not, I would say it is much more likely that they might have been hurt by jobs being exported for higher corporate profits, or maybe by the steadily increasing educational costs.
TBD
“I understand you don’t care if a Mexican-American family in East LA has their living standards lowered, or a black family losses their home, or a white construction worker can’t buy a house or get married because his wages have gone backwards”
I know that you like to think that you understand me. It would appear that opinion is in error.
“How would you like it if we imported millions of nurses and doctors – some licensed, some not – and thereby cut your yearly income in half. Is that OK with you?
I would be fine with the second half of your statement since I believe that doctors are grossly over compensated and that this has been achieved by limiting the number of training positions so as to maintain artificially high salaries. This is not good for patients, nor is it good for doctors who are pushed to see more and more patients in less and less time.
As for the first part, some licensed and some not….there is a real problem because it addresses the issue of competency rather than merely the issue of artificially inflating doctors salaries.
You also are choosing to ignore what I have posted repeatedly. I would prefer a complete revision of our economic system to one in which each individual is compensated exactly the same amount for time spent benefiting the society in ways that we have determined have value. The homemaker raising children, the garbage collector, the minister, the school teacher….would all be compensated exactly the same as I am. To the argument, but you had to pay for your education, or you had to spend so many years in training my answer would be, in my preferred system, I would have been compensated for obtaining that education rather than having to pay for it since we would compensate by time, not by some artificially derived judgement about whose work is “worth more”.
Why? Because all honest work has value. Society will certainly be as adversely impacted if the garbage collection is not performed as if doctors don’t show up, and far more so than if movie stars don’t show up.
I believe that our system of compensation is ridiculously tilted against those who actually do most of the “heavy lifting” and would like to see that change systemically.
Thank you for your reply.
I agree that we should pay those better who do “heavy lifting”, but bringing in 30-40 million illegal immigrants has the exact opposite effect! I know, I know plenty of men in the “trades”.
Your analysis of compensation ignores motivation, determination, smarts, inventiveness, book smarts, and many other traits. Why become a programmer when you can make the same money being a barrista?
I agree with your frank and nuanced answer per doctor’s salaries. Why does a sate like California have only 1 veterinary school??!! Amazing. If we doubled the Supply of doctors, might that not solve a number of problems?
I’ve also been told that many American medical students want to become specialists so that they can make huge money ($400,000-600,000++), whereas a “GP” does tremendous good, but makes a more reasonable salary ($200,000?). (My numbers might be outdated.)
I respect all honest work. But obviously, to me, a programmer of a company website offers more value to me than someone who cuts my lawn. And we reward those years of tedious study, ongoing education, and 10- to 12-hour days and weekends with higher pay, and in some cases, stock options.
P.S. India and China failed with Socialism. That’s why they flipped to Capitalism, the system which has feed more people, and and provided more goods, than any system on Earth.
Capitalism also rewards risk taking. The iPhone wasn’t created in France, and neither was the co0mputter, modern airplanes, or the hybreds.
Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty
“The black unemployment rate is almost 11 percent, far higher than that of any other group profiled by labor statistics. African Americans are disproportionately employed in lower-skilled jobs – the very same jobs immigrants take. As Steven Camarota asked in a recent column, why double immigration when so many people already aren’t working?”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382338/black-americans-true-casualties-amnesty-j-delgado
TBD wrote:
> Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty
I remember going to the south for the first time in the 90’s and seeing a black gardener and thinking I bet it has been over 20 years since I had seen a gardener that was not Latino in California (It’s no wonder cops sometimes ask black guys they see mowing the law fro their IDs in this state)…
So funny you say that, I was back in D.C. a couple of weeks ago and saw many black gardeners and thought the same thing.
Is it possible there are recent (legal) African immigrants?
I loved DC and had several wonderful conversations with new Ethiopian immigrants, they have great family bonds and work ethic. Lots of great places to eat in Adams Morgan, an area with West African restaurants, if I recall.
Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty
“The black unemployment rate is almost 11 percent, far higher than that of any other group profiled by labor statistics. African Americans are disproportionately employed in lower-skilled jobs – the very same jobs immigrants take. As Steven Camarota asked in a recent column, why double immigration when so many people already aren’t working?”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382338/black-americans-true-casualties-amnesty-j-delgado
TBD wrote:
> Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty
I remember going to the south for the first time in the 90’s and seeing a black gardener and thinking I bet it has been over 20 years since I had seen a gardener that was not Latino in California (It’s no wonder cops sometimes ask black guys they see mowing the law fro their IDs in this state)…
So funny you say that, I was back in D.C. a couple of weeks ago and saw many black gardeners and thought the same thing.
Is it possible there are recent (legal) African immigrants?
I loved DC and had several wonderful conversations with new Ethiopian immigrants, they have great family bonds and work ethic. Lots of great places to eat in Adams Morgan, an area with West African restaurants, if I recall.
Mexico, Nicaragua, and Guatemala are now making us bend over, and doing so openly.
Mexico made deal to send more illegal aliens to the U.S.
http://www.examiner.com/article/mexico-made-deal-to-send-more-illegal-aliens-to-the-u-s
“The Southern Border Program to Improve Passage, will provide for more border checkpoints along Mexico’s border with Guatemala, and offer more protection and even emergency medical care to those making their way north. The illegal aliens will receive a so-called Regional Visitor’s Card, according to El Universal….”
“…The program will also give special protection and even financial assistance to unaccompanied minors now pouring across our border. Of course, these efforts, chiefly by the Mexican government, will only increase the number of illegal aliens coming to this country by the thousands, now on a daily basis.”
Expect even more illegal crossings. Has Obama brought s Sal Alinsky on a higher level?
Let’s do the math.
The US Mexico border is 1,969 miles. Stationing on average 4 guards per mile gives us 7,876 guards. 4 shifts to give us 24x7x365 coverage gives us 31,504 guards.
31,504 guards would give us 4 guards per mile of US Mexico border, 24x7x365.
Assume generously that each guard costs us $150,000 / yr for pay, benefits, equipment, logistics, training, and administration.
BOTTOM LINE: For a price of 4.75 billion yuppie bucks per year we can have 1 well paid, well equipped guard stationed on average every 1/4 mile along the entire 1,969 miles of the US Mexico border.
No, that doesn’t include facilities and infrastructure to support the operation, but building guard towers, barracks, and administrative buildings is one of the few things that the government excels at.
Like government make-work programs? This is among the best I can think of in terms of jobs created per $$$ because it puts real people on the ground doing what real people do best. Rather than giving billions to some contractor who will employ 1,000 people, we are CREATING 31,504 NEW JOBS, and they are good hard working outdoor jobs, in the service of our nation, that most Americans would be proud to do and to pay for.
I like it!
But we can just use the American military and do a better job for much less. And we just increase the military budget to hire these brave young men and women to do the job, and we also have a bigger ready fighting force when needed.
Yep. Maybe have them work together with the National Guard.
I don’t think I could ever have imagined that 3 countries would conspire to invade our country, and the President would be busy playing pool and laughing.
Maybe it is time for the Minutemen and others to show up? This is really crazy!
TBD
“I don’t think I could ever have imagined that 3 countries would conspire to invade our country,”
Why could you not imagine this? After all, we set the standard by acquiring our entire southwest ( like much of the country ) by military force. Once might reasonably think of the Mexicans at least as merely taking back economically what we took from them militarily. Doubt this ? Our major cities are named Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
I believe these to be reflections of the fact that the predominant language of the time was not English, but Spanish.
We conquered these areas, and therefore we get to write the story on how we should defend “our” culture and “our language”.
As Frankly queried, I believe in human rights. I do not believe in sovereign rights of countries. One look around the world should demonstrate why. Countries are abysmal ways to organize human beings unless you revel in war as the best way to solve human conflict.
I have no doubt that if we imported millions of illegal doctors and nurses, some licensed, many not, and your wages dropped by 50% and you lost your health care, you’d sing a different tune.
The working and middle class who have to compete with 30-40 million illegal immigrants aren’t real happy about this, not are the neighborhoods plagued by gang life.
Apparently, Frankly and others have pointed out your contradiction in that you want tens of millions of illegal immigrants here, but NIMBY.
Your stance would have more substance if you agreed to double the size of Davis to 120,000 residents; you agreed to some low-income and Section 8 housing in your neighborhood; and you were OK with dozens or hundreds of illegal laborers standing on Covell Blvd looking for work, smoking some weed or meth, and flirting with junior high school girls. Not all of them, but some.
I also hear no empathy for the 11% unemployment rate for African Americans, or the upwards of 50% unemployment rate fort young black men / teenagers. I’ve traveled, socilaized, and worked in every major urban cit in California, and the economic situation for AA has been turned upside down the past 30 years.
I’ve also seen plenty of construction sites where there is not a single black or white face. What happened to diversity?
The united States and Europe have both done quite well being organized as countries; and I don’t think the militia’s of Africa or the gangs of Central America are the way to go.
Nothing works like democracy and Capitalism to lift people out of poverty.
P.S. Since the border has been an almost complete failure, we could push to have the 700-mile fence restarted. (Obama stopped it in 2010.)
Given the brutality and repeated rapes of young girls inflicted by many coyotes, I say we come down on them very hard. Let them pound rocks for 10 or 20 years.
TBD
“we could push to have the 700-mile fence restarted”
This approach didn’t work out so well for Berlin.
On a lighter note, it doesn’t seem to be working out so well for the keepers of The Wall in Game of Thrones either.
It works in Israel, and works at the White House. Indeed, many of the places which are most porous at our southern border have no fence at all.
Mexico, Nicaragua, and Guatemala are now making us bend over, and doing so openly.
Mexico made deal to send more illegal aliens to the U.S.
http://www.examiner.com/article/mexico-made-deal-to-send-more-illegal-aliens-to-the-u-s
“The Southern Border Program to Improve Passage, will provide for more border checkpoints along Mexico’s border with Guatemala, and offer more protection and even emergency medical care to those making their way north. The illegal aliens will receive a so-called Regional Visitor’s Card, according to El Universal….”
“…The program will also give special protection and even financial assistance to unaccompanied minors now pouring across our border. Of course, these efforts, chiefly by the Mexican government, will only increase the number of illegal aliens coming to this country by the thousands, now on a daily basis.”
Expect even more illegal crossings. Has Obama brought s Sal Alinsky on a higher level?
Let’s do the math.
The US Mexico border is 1,969 miles. Stationing on average 4 guards per mile gives us 7,876 guards. 4 shifts to give us 24x7x365 coverage gives us 31,504 guards.
31,504 guards would give us 4 guards per mile of US Mexico border, 24x7x365.
Assume generously that each guard costs us $150,000 / yr for pay, benefits, equipment, logistics, training, and administration.
BOTTOM LINE: For a price of 4.75 billion yuppie bucks per year we can have 1 well paid, well equipped guard stationed on average every 1/4 mile along the entire 1,969 miles of the US Mexico border.
No, that doesn’t include facilities and infrastructure to support the operation, but building guard towers, barracks, and administrative buildings is one of the few things that the government excels at.
Like government make-work programs? This is among the best I can think of in terms of jobs created per $$$ because it puts real people on the ground doing what real people do best. Rather than giving billions to some contractor who will employ 1,000 people, we are CREATING 31,504 NEW JOBS, and they are good hard working outdoor jobs, in the service of our nation, that most Americans would be proud to do and to pay for.
I like it!
But we can just use the American military and do a better job for much less. And we just increase the military budget to hire these brave young men and women to do the job, and we also have a bigger ready fighting force when needed.
Yep. Maybe have them work together with the National Guard.
I don’t think I could ever have imagined that 3 countries would conspire to invade our country, and the President would be busy playing pool and laughing.
Maybe it is time for the Minutemen and others to show up? This is really crazy!
TBD
“I don’t think I could ever have imagined that 3 countries would conspire to invade our country,”
Why could you not imagine this? After all, we set the standard by acquiring our entire southwest ( like much of the country ) by military force. Once might reasonably think of the Mexicans at least as merely taking back economically what we took from them militarily. Doubt this ? Our major cities are named Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
I believe these to be reflections of the fact that the predominant language of the time was not English, but Spanish.
We conquered these areas, and therefore we get to write the story on how we should defend “our” culture and “our language”.
As Frankly queried, I believe in human rights. I do not believe in sovereign rights of countries. One look around the world should demonstrate why. Countries are abysmal ways to organize human beings unless you revel in war as the best way to solve human conflict.
I have no doubt that if we imported millions of illegal doctors and nurses, some licensed, many not, and your wages dropped by 50% and you lost your health care, you’d sing a different tune.
The working and middle class who have to compete with 30-40 million illegal immigrants aren’t real happy about this, not are the neighborhoods plagued by gang life.
Apparently, Frankly and others have pointed out your contradiction in that you want tens of millions of illegal immigrants here, but NIMBY.
Your stance would have more substance if you agreed to double the size of Davis to 120,000 residents; you agreed to some low-income and Section 8 housing in your neighborhood; and you were OK with dozens or hundreds of illegal laborers standing on Covell Blvd looking for work, smoking some weed or meth, and flirting with junior high school girls. Not all of them, but some.
I also hear no empathy for the 11% unemployment rate for African Americans, or the upwards of 50% unemployment rate fort young black men / teenagers. I’ve traveled, socilaized, and worked in every major urban cit in California, and the economic situation for AA has been turned upside down the past 30 years.
I’ve also seen plenty of construction sites where there is not a single black or white face. What happened to diversity?
The united States and Europe have both done quite well being organized as countries; and I don’t think the militia’s of Africa or the gangs of Central America are the way to go.
Nothing works like democracy and Capitalism to lift people out of poverty.
P.S. Since the border has been an almost complete failure, we could push to have the 700-mile fence restarted. (Obama stopped it in 2010.)
Given the brutality and repeated rapes of young girls inflicted by many coyotes, I say we come down on them very hard. Let them pound rocks for 10 or 20 years.
TBD
“we could push to have the 700-mile fence restarted”
This approach didn’t work out so well for Berlin.
On a lighter note, it doesn’t seem to be working out so well for the keepers of The Wall in Game of Thrones either.
It works in Israel, and works at the White House. Indeed, many of the places which are most porous at our southern border have no fence at all.
TBD
“Given the brutality and repeated rapes of young girls inflicted by many coyotes, I say we come down on them very hard.”
On this, we agree.
TBD
“Given the brutality and repeated rapes of young girls inflicted by many coyotes, I say we come down on them very hard.”
On this, we agree.
Our disengaged president goes to Texas only 250 miles from the border and doesn’t even visit the illegal alien mess he’s created? He’s says he didn’t want to just create a photo op but then he does exactly that shooting pool at a fundraiser in Colorado.
Our disengaged president goes to Texas only 250 miles from the border and doesn’t even visit the illegal alien mess he’s created? He’s says he didn’t want to just create a photo op but then he does exactly that shooting pool at a fundraiser in Colorado.
I think that photo ops are always tricky propositions. I wonder how long it took before President Bush realized that the “Mission Accomplished” photo had not been the wisest choice.
Or an example from the other side. How about Jane Fonda in a tank in Viet Nam ?
I would just as soon that we did away with “photo ops” altogether since they rarely provide any information or insight in to the issues.
So are you saying no president should ever visit a disaster because it might be considered a photo op? He’s asking for $3.7 billion and was only 250 miles away and he won’t even go down and assess the situation? Tia, your blind allegiance to the failure of a president is astounding.
I avoid using the term “insight” and Obama in the same discussion. He helped create this mess with numerous actions, but I think we already know from his childhood in Hawaii that he was raised to see himself more as a citizen of the world, not an American.
I think that photo ops are always tricky propositions. I wonder how long it took before President Bush realized that the “Mission Accomplished” photo had not been the wisest choice.
Or an example from the other side. How about Jane Fonda in a tank in Viet Nam ?
I would just as soon that we did away with “photo ops” altogether since they rarely provide any information or insight in to the issues.
So are you saying no president should ever visit a disaster because it might be considered a photo op? He’s asking for $3.7 billion and was only 250 miles away and he won’t even go down and assess the situation? Tia, your blind allegiance to the failure of a president is astounding.
I avoid using the term “insight” and Obama in the same discussion. He helped create this mess with numerous actions, but I think we already know from his childhood in Hawaii that he was raised to see himself more as a citizen of the world, not an American.
BP
Did I say anything even close to that ?
I said nothing at all about where a President should or should not go.
My comment was solely about photo ops. And then I didn’t say that they should never exist. Just that they are
tricky.
I also do not see how you can think that I am defending the actions of the President with regard to the border when I have plainly said that I do not believe that we should have borders at all. I am pretty sure that this is not
President Obama’s position unless he changed it over night.
I guess that you are just reveling in the disparagement of what a “liberal” must think, because your comment had nothing at all to do with mine.
I wonder if Tia would change her mind of she lived in South Central LA or The Mission in San Francisco, and had to deal with the reality of illegal immigration? MIBMY much?
using that logic you’d have to move to a mexican farm in order to advocate your position?
Why a farm? Most don’t work on farms… try construction, fast food, restaurants, manual labor, etc.
Live in a neighborhood that is impacted by illegal immigration.
why a farm? a large percentage of the people who come over are agrarian, whether they work in farming here in the us, they’re origins are often agrarian.
“Live in a neighborhood that is impacted by illegal immigration.”
how about work in a vocation impacted by illegal immigration? most people in this discussion do not. that said, i have more confidence that people can weigh these factors and come up with a reasonable conclusion.
My family owned a vacation home in Baja for about 25 years. My brother in high school and college was determined to become fluent in Spanish, so he took every class he could. He played football and was/is a pretty big guy, but he would routinely get in near fights with some of the Mexican locals. He was perplexed until one of our more bilingual friends explained that his conversational Spanish came off as pompous and elite because it was so grammatically and phonically correct. This thought had never occurred to my brother.
We were both in LA a few years back, and stopped into a gas/convenience store in a largely Hispanic neighborhood. The place was busy and we got quite a few looks. My brother had the exact same experience with the checker… a near fight. We were both in suits and it was clear that we were not welcome and his use of Spanish was not welcome.
And most Davis liberals don’t experience this type of thing very much.
And if you visit the US towns along the southern border, you will get more of it.
The issue is not immigration. The issue is invasion. It has been going on for a long while and it accelerated the last couple of decades, and our PC rules prevent most people from commenting on it. So we just move to other places away from where the invaders live and shroud ourselves in a cloak of PC sensitivity and complain about others that complain about the invasion as being racist.
My Spanish is poor, but I’ll try a bit. In big cities, I get attitude. In Supermercados, when I speak Spanish, they answer in English. I think it is part class, part ethnic. In smaller Mom & Pop places, in rural areas, if they understand me they’ll work with my Spanish. The Mexican slang is not used by my former mechanic, who is from Chile (Berkeley ME grad).
I’m told Mexico is horribly, outwardly racist. There are nightclubs where you can only get in if you have light skin and eyes. my friend says there are 40 distinctions based on skin color; upwards of 200 in Brazil. (“Coco brown, cinnamon brown, etc.)
I admire how friends and family stick together, but this also explains why there are few black tradesmen anymore. The language also bars English speakers.
TBD: My Spanish is poor, but I’ll try a bit. In big cities, I get attitude. In Supermercados, when I speak Spanish, they answer in English. I think it is part class, part ethnic. In smaller Mom & Pop places, in rural areas, if they understand me they’ll work with my Spanish. The Mexican slang is not used by my former mechanic, who is from Chile (Berkeley ME grad).
In the U.S., if you’re doing business or commerce, they will likely speak to you in English if you have a thick gringo accent and/or messy Spanish grammar and vocabulary. All they’re interested in is transacting business. They’re not likely interested in humoring you to practice your Spanish. In the U.S., most businesses that seem to have a lot of Spanish speakers, it is highly likely that they can speak English. If you’re not sure, ask. In the U.S., if you want to practice Spanish with someone, then it’s really best to ask first.
Spanish speakers will tend to adopt a more neutral Spanish when speaking with someone who doesn’t have the same accent, meaning that they will tone down their accent and the local slang.
As a gringo, it’s probably safer to use the ‘Ud.’ rather than the ‘tu’ form as a default. If you mess up on which form to use, you can come off as arrogant or rude.
TBD: I’m told Mexico is horribly, outwardly racist.
More than racist, I find Latin Americans tend to be more classist. Class is often distinguished by how you dress, how you speak, where you went to school, maybe what your last name is.
…and in which neighborhood you live.
wdf1 wrote:
> More than racist, I find Latin Americans tend to be more
> classist. Class is often distinguished by how you dress, how
> you speak, where you went to school, maybe what your last
> name is.
We went to a wedding in Mexico City a few years back and the Four Seasons set us up with a great (armed) tour guide who took us around the city in his (nondescript) personal car for a couple days. We visited a bunch of neighborhood churches (in addition to the huge Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe). When we were at the airport about to fly home we commented that the “class structure” in Mexico is a lot like California (only with more Mexicans). In Davis hanging out with my wife’s Ivy League friends I am almost always the only one that didn’t go to grad school, but if I go water skiing/wakeboarding with my cop friends that grew up in Woodland I am almost always the only one with a 4yr degree. Like in Mexico it is rare that anyone here in CA spends equal amounts of time with working class people without a college education, people with “just” a BA or BS and people with (prestigious) advanced degrees…
SOD, I have a relative who has all well-educated friends, predominantly white and Jewish. But then he popped up with a black babysitter, and now has befriended his local cab driver … I guess he is trying to show that he is inclusive.
I have played several sports where we will have high school grads, all the way to Master’s degrees and executives. No PhDs so far.
Funny, I was chatting with a young professor at the MU years ago, and we were discussing the issue of the day, so I started quoting Dr. Sowell. After about 30 minutes, she says … “You do know … he’s black.” LOL What a riot!
BP
Did I say anything even close to that ?
I said nothing at all about where a President should or should not go.
My comment was solely about photo ops. And then I didn’t say that they should never exist. Just that they are
tricky.
I also do not see how you can think that I am defending the actions of the President with regard to the border when I have plainly said that I do not believe that we should have borders at all. I am pretty sure that this is not
President Obama’s position unless he changed it over night.
I guess that you are just reveling in the disparagement of what a “liberal” must think, because your comment had nothing at all to do with mine.
I wonder if Tia would change her mind of she lived in South Central LA or The Mission in San Francisco, and had to deal with the reality of illegal immigration? MIBMY much?
using that logic you’d have to move to a mexican farm in order to advocate your position?
Why a farm? Most don’t work on farms… try construction, fast food, restaurants, manual labor, etc.
Live in a neighborhood that is impacted by illegal immigration.
why a farm? a large percentage of the people who come over are agrarian, whether they work in farming here in the us, they’re origins are often agrarian.
“Live in a neighborhood that is impacted by illegal immigration.”
how about work in a vocation impacted by illegal immigration? most people in this discussion do not. that said, i have more confidence that people can weigh these factors and come up with a reasonable conclusion.
My family owned a vacation home in Baja for about 25 years. My brother in high school and college was determined to become fluent in Spanish, so he took every class he could. He played football and was/is a pretty big guy, but he would routinely get in near fights with some of the Mexican locals. He was perplexed until one of our more bilingual friends explained that his conversational Spanish came off as pompous and elite because it was so grammatically and phonically correct. This thought had never occurred to my brother.
We were both in LA a few years back, and stopped into a gas/convenience store in a largely Hispanic neighborhood. The place was busy and we got quite a few looks. My brother had the exact same experience with the checker… a near fight. We were both in suits and it was clear that we were not welcome and his use of Spanish was not welcome.
And most Davis liberals don’t experience this type of thing very much.
And if you visit the US towns along the southern border, you will get more of it.
The issue is not immigration. The issue is invasion. It has been going on for a long while and it accelerated the last couple of decades, and our PC rules prevent most people from commenting on it. So we just move to other places away from where the invaders live and shroud ourselves in a cloak of PC sensitivity and complain about others that complain about the invasion as being racist.
My Spanish is poor, but I’ll try a bit. In big cities, I get attitude. In Supermercados, when I speak Spanish, they answer in English. I think it is part class, part ethnic. In smaller Mom & Pop places, in rural areas, if they understand me they’ll work with my Spanish. The Mexican slang is not used by my former mechanic, who is from Chile (Berkeley ME grad).
I’m told Mexico is horribly, outwardly racist. There are nightclubs where you can only get in if you have light skin and eyes. my friend says there are 40 distinctions based on skin color; upwards of 200 in Brazil. (“Coco brown, cinnamon brown, etc.)
I admire how friends and family stick together, but this also explains why there are few black tradesmen anymore. The language also bars English speakers.
TBD: My Spanish is poor, but I’ll try a bit. In big cities, I get attitude. In Supermercados, when I speak Spanish, they answer in English. I think it is part class, part ethnic. In smaller Mom & Pop places, in rural areas, if they understand me they’ll work with my Spanish. The Mexican slang is not used by my former mechanic, who is from Chile (Berkeley ME grad).
In the U.S., if you’re doing business or commerce, they will likely speak to you in English if you have a thick gringo accent and/or messy Spanish grammar and vocabulary. All they’re interested in is transacting business. They’re not likely interested in humoring you to practice your Spanish. In the U.S., most businesses that seem to have a lot of Spanish speakers, it is highly likely that they can speak English. If you’re not sure, ask. In the U.S., if you want to practice Spanish with someone, then it’s really best to ask first.
Spanish speakers will tend to adopt a more neutral Spanish when speaking with someone who doesn’t have the same accent, meaning that they will tone down their accent and the local slang.
As a gringo, it’s probably safer to use the ‘Ud.’ rather than the ‘tu’ form as a default. If you mess up on which form to use, you can come off as arrogant or rude.
TBD: I’m told Mexico is horribly, outwardly racist.
More than racist, I find Latin Americans tend to be more classist. Class is often distinguished by how you dress, how you speak, where you went to school, maybe what your last name is.
…and in which neighborhood you live.
wdf1 wrote:
> More than racist, I find Latin Americans tend to be more
> classist. Class is often distinguished by how you dress, how
> you speak, where you went to school, maybe what your last
> name is.
We went to a wedding in Mexico City a few years back and the Four Seasons set us up with a great (armed) tour guide who took us around the city in his (nondescript) personal car for a couple days. We visited a bunch of neighborhood churches (in addition to the huge Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe). When we were at the airport about to fly home we commented that the “class structure” in Mexico is a lot like California (only with more Mexicans). In Davis hanging out with my wife’s Ivy League friends I am almost always the only one that didn’t go to grad school, but if I go water skiing/wakeboarding with my cop friends that grew up in Woodland I am almost always the only one with a 4yr degree. Like in Mexico it is rare that anyone here in CA spends equal amounts of time with working class people without a college education, people with “just” a BA or BS and people with (prestigious) advanced degrees…
SOD, I have a relative who has all well-educated friends, predominantly white and Jewish. But then he popped up with a black babysitter, and now has befriended his local cab driver … I guess he is trying to show that he is inclusive.
I have played several sports where we will have high school grads, all the way to Master’s degrees and executives. No PhDs so far.
Funny, I was chatting with a young professor at the MU years ago, and we were discussing the issue of the day, so I started quoting Dr. Sowell. After about 30 minutes, she says … “You do know … he’s black.” LOL What a riot!