Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

2007-05-23 16:06:53
sfarrar33
Halogenoalkane
+57|7042|InGerLand
"George Bush is dead to me now. . . ."
ooo lets be politically emo

vote Clinton, some quite funny comedian i unfortunately forget the name of once said that anyone can be president if their last name is "Bush, Clinton, or Kennedy" so by voting for her you are guaranteed a winner
2007-05-23 17:14:30
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

jonsimon wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Wouldn't that be close to the reality? Think of the costs, deportation will require budgeting for increased justice activity. Courts, paperwork, remand, officers, investigations, a hefty price. To deport immigrants you must find them, but if you offer citizenship, they will come to you. Immigrants would voluntarily apply for citizenship, their application would be processed in a system that would not need to be expanded, and the problem is solved.

The question is, does it somehow benefit us more to expend for deportation rather than to simply increase immigration quotas to meet demand?
No need to consider the cost, paperwork, remand, or officers. Just eliminate their desire to come here illegally. I think you can figure out where I am going with this. Solving an "illegal" problem by just making it "legal" seems a little weak in my opinion.
Perhaps you should elaborate. The incentive to immigrate is a higher standard of living, are you suggesting we purposefully lower our standard of living? I certainly don't think that's what you're saying.

The problem is only illegal because we say so, we set the quotas that restrict immigration. How is it 'weak' to simply expand those quotas? If we expand the ability of immigrants to do so legally we are essentially removing the incentive to immigrate illegally, is that not the course of action you are suggesting?
You missed the boat on this one. No you don't have to lower your standards, but you can takes real steps to ensure that employers are not hiring illegals. The problem is illegal because we have laws and something called the INS. Most Americans understand that this is not fixing the problems that come with a lax-a-daisy approach on immigration. Even the french get this flawed concept.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-05-23 17:21:08
HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6703

usmarine2005 wrote:

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I hardly find him arrogant.

CameronPoe wrote:

I enjoy annoying people by acting arrogant and condescending - get over it.
He may not agree with you on that also.
My own standard of arrogance may be skewed by my own arrogance

I try not to indulge it too much though, I only allow myself arrogance about a few things. Knowledge of politics and world history is definitley not one of them because I know there are plenty more people out there that are better read and better educated on the subject. But I'm better looking than they are and I get more chicks, so it all balances out in the end.
2007-05-23 17:25:26
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7185

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

But I'm better looking than they are and I get more chicks, so it all balances out in the end.
Aye.
2007-05-23 17:47:34
jonsimon
Member
+224|6919

Kmarion wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


No need to consider the cost, paperwork, remand, or officers. Just eliminate their desire to come here illegally. I think you can figure out where I am going with this. Solving an "illegal" problem by just making it "legal" seems a little weak in my opinion.
Perhaps you should elaborate. The incentive to immigrate is a higher standard of living, are you suggesting we purposefully lower our standard of living? I certainly don't think that's what you're saying.

The problem is only illegal because we say so, we set the quotas that restrict immigration. How is it 'weak' to simply expand those quotas? If we expand the ability of immigrants to do so legally we are essentially removing the incentive to immigrate illegally, is that not the course of action you are suggesting?
You missed the boat on this one. No you don't have to lower your standards, but you can takes real steps to ensure that employers are not hiring illegals. The problem is illegal because we have laws and something called the INS. Most Americans understand that this is not fixing the problems that come with a lax-a-daisy approach on immigration. Even the french get this flawed concept.
Enforcing laws against employers would require budget increases as well. It takes money to eliminate corruption and step up prosecution and investigation. My original point seems to stand that "cracking down" costs considerably more than legalization. As for your sources, a telephone poll? That's laughable at best, who really answers those? I know many people that won't even consider a telephone survey unless they know who the sponsors are and agree with them. Besides, since when has the majority of America been intelligent? The founding fathers weren't completely off the wall when they thought the masses were untrustworthy with their own fate. As for France, what would you expect with a newly elected conservative executive? My proposition wouldn't even require legalizing current illegal immigrants, merely expanding legal immigration.
2007-05-23 17:54:32
fadedsteve
GOP Sympathizer
+266|6914|Menlo Park, CA
The key is border security FIRST!!!

Then once you have a relative moratorium of illegal immigration you tackle the people question (how to process them, whats fair and whats not etc).  There is no point in making new laws when you cannot enforce existing ones. . . .

Secure the border, thats all I am asking!! Thats all any border state citizen is asking!!!
2007-05-23 17:58:25
Villain{NY}
Banned
+44|6768|New York

fadedsteve wrote:

The key is border security FIRST!!!

Then once you have a relative moratorium of illegal immigration you tackle the people question (how to process them, whats fair and whats not etc).  There is no point in making new laws when you cannot enforce existing ones. . . .

Secure the border, thats all I am asking!! Thats all any border state citizen is asking!!!
I agree.  There are many issues that need to be solved at home before we pour our resources into other parts of the world.
2007-05-23 18:02:21
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7024|132 and Bush

jonsimon wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Perhaps you should elaborate. The incentive to immigrate is a higher standard of living, are you suggesting we purposefully lower our standard of living? I certainly don't think that's what you're saying.

The problem is only illegal because we say so, we set the quotas that restrict immigration. How is it 'weak' to simply expand those quotas? If we expand the ability of immigrants to do so legally we are essentially removing the incentive to immigrate illegally, is that not the course of action you are suggesting?
You missed the boat on this one. No you don't have to lower your standards, but you can takes real steps to ensure that employers are not hiring illegals. The problem is illegal because we have laws and something called the INS. Most Americans understand that this is not fixing the problems that come with a lax-a-daisy approach on immigration. Even the french get this flawed concept.
Enforcing laws against employers would require budget increases as well. It takes money to eliminate corruption and step up prosecution and investigation. My original point seems to stand that "cracking down" costs considerably more than legalization. As for your sources, a telephone poll? That's laughable at best, who really answers those? I know many people that won't even consider a telephone survey unless they know who the sponsors are and agree with them. Besides, since when has the majority of America been intelligent? The founding fathers weren't completely off the wall when they thought the masses were untrustworthy with their own fate. As for France, what would you expect with a newly elected conservative executive? My proposition wouldn't even require legalizing current illegal immigrants, merely expanding legal immigration.
How about this Poll? You pay for the program the same way we pay for every other enforcement program. You give heavy fines out to the violators.
Xbone Stormsurgezz

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard