|
7181. greystoke - 4/8/2006 9:32:07 PM I have paged back a bit to look at conversations here and in politics, but didn't spend a lot of time on it. So please forgive me if I repeat what has already been discussed.
I am opposed to the immigration legislation that is currently being considered. To me, it is the equivalent of saying if you have been a thief for less than two years you will be punished for it. But if you have been a thief for at least five years you will not only receive amnesty for past transgressions, but you will receive governmental benefits for having gotten away with it for so long.
I support Senator Sensenbrenner's proposal to make illegal immigration a felony. The talk about sending 12 million people back to their countries of origin is a red herring. No-one is proposing that. The idea is that if you are caught for whatever reason you will be sent back. That's a good idea in my view.
PS: I'm a liberal Democrat. Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy are wrong on this issue. 7182. wonkers2 - 4/8/2006 9:41:19 PM Welcome back! We can always use a contray viewpoint. 7183. arkymalarky - 4/8/2006 9:42:16 PM Hey Grey! Don't be such a stranger.
Kennedy was wrong on NCLB, too. I'm not familiar enough with the legislation to say much, but I do know that corporations don't support it for altruistic reasons. 7184. greystoke - 4/8/2006 9:56:32 PM Hi Arky! You were quite eloquent in the earlier discussion with Adam. My compiments. Your personal experiences really bring your points home.
Ha! Yes, of course the corporations want what's best for the immigrants.
From a national perspective, we already have American technical jobs being lost to India and China and manufacturing jobs being lost to China and several Latin American nations. The fact that there are depressed wages which are a direct result of illegal immigration makes it an assault on our ecomony from mutiple fronts. I, for one, would be willing to pay more for construction (for example) if it means that American citizens will be doing the work at the prevailing wage. 7185. greystoke - 4/8/2006 10:05:02 PM Hey Wonkers! Yes I certainly be contrary. Not like the Ace of Spades, though. Has he shown up recently? 7186. Adam Selene - 4/8/2006 10:17:38 PM Tarzan, I presume that means you don't think much of my points. Oh well.... ;) 7187. greystoke - 4/8/2006 10:32:27 PM Adam,
I do understand your point of view. I have Libertarian tendencies myself. However, I think a pure Libertarian society would not be practical.
With regard to my post, I assume you are in favor of unlimited immigration. Right?
7188. greystoke - 4/8/2006 10:32:36 PM Adam,
I do understand your point of view. I have Libertarian tendencies myself. However, I think a pure Libertarian society would not be practical.
With regard to my post, I assume you are in favor of unlimited immigration. Right?
7189. greystoke - 4/8/2006 10:34:45 PM oops 7190. arkymalarky - 4/8/2006 10:53:28 PM What a nice compliment. Thanks Grey.
I had a post about the immigration issue but the ether ate it.
Basically I asked what focus has been placed on businesses who hire illegals. If this law passes, will they be required to provide the same wages and benefits and pay the same taxes required by law for these newly legitimized immigrants as they do for other workers, whether American citizens or legal immigrants? Will the border security be ramped up to workable and violaters--especially those who hire illegals--prosecuted? If not, all this sounds like a win/win for corporations who want cheap labor and a permanent limbo for the 12 million illegals who may be being misled into believing they will have better circumstances under the new law when it may guarantee them no chance of improved conditions over time as other immigrant workers have achieved. 7191. Adam Selene - 4/8/2006 10:55:48 PM Hmm. Unlimited - no. Libertarian is not libertine... property owners and the existing society have rights to protect their investment.
From a utilitarian cum globalist point of view - it's a real shame to steal the majority of ambitious, productive labor from Mexico. Not to mention short-sighted. How is Mexico ever going to compete for labor if any with ambition are on our side of the Rio Grande? I want to see factories and labor unions on their soil... trading partners need trading partners. Our balance of trade is bad enough already, let's not just keep making it worse. 7192. wonkers2 - 4/8/2006 11:11:15 PM Adam, have you heard of NAFTA? 7193. arkymalarky - 4/8/2006 11:12:33 PM You talk as though there are no skilled, educated workers in Mexico--they're all crossing into the US. Here's a clue to where the advantage is: Vicente Fox wants us to be more lenient wrt illegals from Mexico, he isn't mad that we're skimming off all his best workers. 7194. wonkers2 - 4/8/2006 11:13:37 PM Ah yes, we must protect the people to whom God, in his infinite wisdom, entrusted the property interests in the country! 7195. wonkers2 - 4/8/2006 11:22:52 PM We haven't seen Ace for some time now. I wouldn't mind having him back to liven up the joint! 7196. Jenerator - 4/8/2006 11:25:24 PM I would *LOVE* to see Ace. 7197. judithathome - 4/9/2006 2:52:30 AM Well, go over to where he is, Jen. I'm sure he'd love to see you, too. 7198. Adam Selene - 4/9/2006 4:15:05 AM wonkers2 - well duh. So you tell me why Mexicanos are so eager to come here to mow my grass? NAFTA is a good concept, but until Mexico gets some control over their corruption, there will be very little real investment on their side of the border.
Arky - so what are the skilled Mexicanos doing when they chose to stay there?
I'm not saying EVERY ambitious Mexican is crossing the border - but it sure is biased. 7199. Adam Selene - 4/9/2006 4:43:16 AM wonkers2, it's easy to satirize property rights, until you realize that this also includes the right to not have someone steal the food that you just spent a day working for. If you have a thorough understanding of economics, you will understand that propert rights encompases the ability to trust that what you earn, either by farming, hunting, or as contract labor, will not be stolen from you. Theft only has meaning in the context of property. If you dispute the concept of proprty, then please send me your credit card number and the deed to your house and car, please. 7200. arkymalarky - 4/9/2006 5:15:04 AM Adam, my point was that their own president doesn't seem to have a problem with those particular people leaving. Not that there's anything wrong with them besides poverty.
|
