From the article: America tolerates an immigration policy that adds millions of very low-skilled workers every decade, who come to this country at the expense of low-skilled native workers. Why? There is no good explanation, especially for Democrats, who like to believe that their core constituencies are the middle and lower classes of America.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/democrats_must_buck_the_overcl.html

I'm personally sick of the Republicans trying to cram "amnesty" down our throats instead arresting and deporting these job-snatches instead. Unfortunately, it looks like the rich in both parties just want to get richer.

Fie!

Unfortunately, Dems are busy creating the new One World Order, not to be mistaken for the globalization movement. Same monster, just grabbing onto a different teat.

The DNC needs to put together a SMARTER Unified voice in the immigration debate. Unless they do it well be "Soft on Immigration Democrates"

the Republican party has a long history of voiding HUMAN RIGHTS, and WORKERS RIGHTS on a global scale. The mal treatment of illegal immigrants is but yet another example. Having these people here just so we can ABUSE them is only one part of the problem.

ABUSING THE LESS FORTUNATE of American Citizen is the other side of the problem

...the position you're advocating, for instance. I support amnesty and a pathway to full citizenship combined with strict living wage reforms to force ALL employers to pay a living wage to ALL employees.

And I'm disturbed by those on the right and left saying immigrants are "taking our jobs." I think we're targeting the wrong culprit. They're just doing what ANY of us would do if the other option was watching your family starve, and the notion of tossing people in jail is just ridiculous.

You know I'm right on your side with this one. But why in the world do you use the word amnesty when you know it is THE hot button wedge word of the year. I scream and hollar nobody is proposing amnesty and that path to citizenship is a very different thing. And here you come saying the exact opposite. It's like insisting that the people who insist on using "free" when talking about universal health care. There are words that turn people off to everything else you've got to say. I don't know why that is so hard to understand.

Amnesty is necessary to allow people who've overstayed visas or entered illegally to stay and pursue a path to citizenship. Without the amnesty, they have to go back to their country of origin and begin again. An alternative might be to impose a symbolic penalty instead of amnesty. I'd certainly support that, as long as it didn't exclude anyone who works in America from obtaining citizenship.

And they go to the end of the citizenship application line. Citizenship has a host of requirements as well, including speaking English and learning civics. When people say no amnesty, and then present their laundry list of problems with amnesty, most of it isn't even accurate. When you cut through all the "no amnesty" excuses, seems to me you're left with a completely different issue, if you know what I mean.

Anyway, that's why I like to stick with path to citizenship that includes rigid regulations, because it is accurate and takes "amnesty" completely out of play.

From reading this board it is clear that we can't agree on what we want to do with illegal immigrants, but everyone agrees we need to do something about the employers. Why don't we make that the issue.

"Democrats believe that we need stricter enforcement against employers who exploit anyone."

The subtext is that republicans support exploitation (which is true) but we don't need to come out and say it.

What are the alternatives?

1) put 'em out of work and on public assistance.
2) put 'em out of work and let 'em starve (or steal) for subsistence?
3) put 'em on buses wherever they want to go, and set up the infrastructure so they can't return?
4) create Bush's guest worker (quasi-citizen) program in which they become the permanent serf class? (which does not serve the interests of our working-class constituency).

Think it through, guys. The only solution is #3.

Once we've solved the illegal employer problem there is no need to set up infrastructrue to keep them out. If they aren't making money they probally would rather go back to where they came from anyways. Do we need buses? Maybe, if we are lucky, these people have the skills to make it into another country on their own.

This isn't going to happen overnight of course, but remember the problem didn't develop overnight either.

But your missing 2 very important considerations.

1. 20 - 30% have No intention of staying here in America. They working here sending money home to Mexico making payments on the ranches and homes they have bought there where their family lives. These illegals of course are going to go home and the contribution they make to this country vs: what they take is insignificant.

2. Many are applicable for legal immigration and they need to file their paperwork. Its costly ($1000) and complicated, but many have been able to navigate the system and with some effort they can too.

Still again there are those that would not be applicable because immigration procedures exclude those that have broken the law. Mainly felonies, but do you really want those people here any way

meet eligibility criteria, (and assuming that citizenship slots are available), are employable.

We've had amnesty program before, and it did not stop the huge #s of even more undocumented workers from coming-- which really does have the effect of weakening the bargaining position of, and eroding the rights of ALL workers...

I would agree with felonizing the illegal EMPLOYERS and maybe being less harsh toward the illegal immigarants.

If they cannot find work, they will not come, simple. Those that are here will take care of themselves, and there are no huge price-tags. The resulting new-found prosperity for the working class will drive an economic expansion that would exceed what we thought we saw in the 90's.
Yes, it sucks for the Mexicans. Personally I would support real, direct, assistance for the Mexican People to help them fix Mexico.

The REAL problem are the corporate exploiters on our side, and the countries like Mexico that do NOTHING to help make for a decent middle class in their own countries. If Mexicans (or for that matter other country immigrants that come in through Mexican borders) were able to work for decent pay and standard of living in their own country where they could be with their families, friends, etc. don't you think they'd be happier there too? And we'd be happier having a better standard of living with a living wage here with less "race to the bottom" wage earners to compete with.

You know, I don't support them coming here illegally to work (or getting "amnesty"), but I WILL support controlled and LEGAL immigration the way it's supposed to work here, and if they start organizing down there to get better jobs in MEXICO, I'd say we have it in our interests to help them both financially and vocally to achieve that goal from here too.

You know there's an interesting factoid here that's also not known too, that was mentioned on Thom Hartmann's show about a week ago or so. He was noting that even though Vincente Fox wants us to have lax enforcement of our immigration laws to allow his people to work here, he DOESN'T want to open his borders to illegal immigrants coming into his country. I guess he and his folks at the top there want to protect our jobs for Mexican workers from other countries. Our jobs are there for THEIR illegal workers, not for those illegals from other South American countries that would go through their country. Hartmann's show was citing cases where they actually have killed people apprehending these illegals there. So a bit of inconsistency in philosophy there I think.

If we let people come here uncontrolled from all of the world and destroy our middle class, there will be noplace else for folks in the world to get middle class wages, and we WILL have another worldwide depression. Is that what you all want? Like I said earlier, it's not time to champion the "rights" of people to amnesty for breaking the laws here. It's time to help them get better jobs in their own countries by championing the cause for a global labor movement to stymie the "race to the bottom" that corporations are engaged in also on a global scale.

...of Mexican and Central American people, don't you? What do you think has happened to EVERY central and South American gov't that has tried to put the interests of its lower and middle classes before that of its oligarchy and the U.S. corporations they are aligned with? How many reformers have been killed by the United Fruit Company, for example?

I'm just saying that it is faulty reasoning to feel that the solution to this mess is to give them blanket amnesty here. That is in effect commiting suicide almost globally for any kind of middle class and giving the ruling oligarchs everywhere just what they want! I want to bring up the middle class in other countries to our level, not have ours get torn down to nothing here and everyplace else.

I do say fight the corporations. Get in public financing for political campaigns! Tear down the "corporate personhood" judicial activist rulings of the courts. Let's organize GLOBAL trade unions that can fight for a living wage GLOBALLY, so that we can stop this race to the bottom that the corporate world is doing. As soon as India and other countries we outsource to raise their living standards and salary demands higher, then these corps will find someplace else to move to to exploit (or try having those people be able to come here on the cheap with a guest worker program, amnesty, or turning a blind eye to hiring illegal labor here).

If these people need help in fighting for a better living in their countries, they should ask us to help them. We should respond in kind. I would much rather spend time helping them rather raise their bar than lower ours! With as much activism they've had here this last week, if they were to make this a global effort, I think there would be a lot more like me standing next to them then in protest. I like their energy, and am sympathetic to their cause. I just think the solutions that many propose here are misguided and tackling the wrong problems. They are tackling the symptoms rather than the root cause.

It's the only way to go.

How ever they don't reflect the average American.

Small wonder most of then have careers legislatively protected from illegals driving down their standard of living.

would be nice to see a few step into the real world of the MAJORITY of this country

And that's not really their fault, either, but they will continue to be used to drive down wages in the white collar sector.

We are all the majority in this.

degreed occupation, and the employer has to show the Dept. of Labor they are being paid the "prevailing wage."

H-1B workers earn less than American counterparts, report says
The visa holders are supposed to be paid prevailing wages

News Story by Patrick Thibodeau

JANUARY 03, 2006 (COMPUTERWORLD) - WASHINGTON -- H-1B visa IT workers earn on average $13,000 less than their American counterparts, according to a study of U.S. Department of Labor records released by the Center for Immigration Studies.

H-1B workers are paid less, even though the law requires that they receive prevailing wages, according to the study by John Miano, a former chairman of the Programmers Guild, a group that has been critical of the H-1B program.

The H-1B "has destroyed the entry level job market," Miano said in an interview, adding that he believes keeping the cap at its current 65,000 level will at least minimize the damage.

One result is lower wages for H-1B workers. For instance, the study found a mean 2003 wage for H-1B programmers of $49,258. Labor Department data pegged the mean 2003 wage salary for U.S. programmers at $65,000.

The article says that H-1B workers must be paid the prevailing wage under the law. It admits that. Mr. Miano may not agree with the law or with what the previaling wage is, but employers who don't follow the law have other penalties for not following through, but like so much else, enforcement is thin.

There are only 65,000 H-1Bs - the "destroyed the entry level job market," is an hysterical exaggeration. Again, if Mr. Miano does not like the current law, he can argue for changing it, including keeping all the computers programmers out, so US companies won't have the workers they need and won't expand. And you can bet that's not going to be the mega-corporations.

But again, all you have is the U.S. worker wanting to be privileged in the worldwide competition for computer programmers, and the resulting outsourcing to people who are willing to work for less, at this level as well as the bottom level.

requires. Not Mr. Miano's opinion, but the Labor Department's. "H-1B visa IT workers earn on average $13,000 less than their American counterparts, according to a study of U.S. Department of Labor records released by the Center for Immigration Studies.

You haven't put up any evidence to refute Miano's opinion about the effect on the entry-level market. Why should I think you know more about it than he does? And are you trying to tell me that the U.S. does not have an adequate supply of computer programmers, and have to import them? Just coincidentally, for significantly lower wages?

I don't see why workers around the world should be forced to compete with each other in some great race to the bottom. I want everybody to be pulled up, not dragged down.

application would be violating another law. Another enforcement problem.

You have no evidence that Mr. Miano is right either. How do you know I don't know more about it than he does?

Workers are always forced to compete with each other. It's not a race to the bottom if they have a skill. Even unskilled work is worth something. That's capitalism. An employer can't get you to do even the simplest thing without paying you something.

and I still don't want all workers paid less just because some employers can and will illegally pay some of them less. That's clearly when capitalism needs to be regulated.

Yes, there is a law that says H-1B visa workers are supposed to be paid "prevailing wage" under the law. What do companies do that want to hire them at a lower salary? They don't hire them directly, as then they'd have to pay them equivalent wages to those they've hired for similar positions on a permanent basis.

They instead hire contractors from contracting agencies where all they do is hire H-1B visa workers. The contracting agency doesn't have any permanent employees they need to compare salary rates against, so therefore they can pay them whatever they want. Then they make a point of contracting out a "service" to the contracting company instead of contracting out "employees". This has been happening for over a decade now. I used to see this sort of thing happening in Sun, and probably lost my contracting position to another Indian H-1B contractor because of this. I've seen managers joke about this nice "loophole" that they exploited when hiring contractors in keeping their budgets down.

Now there are many companies that are increasingly asking for a removal of the H-1B cap altogether. There's a ship that was to be parked just off the coast here of San Diego outside of territorial U.S., where they have 500-600 foreign workers working on them for firms here in San Diego to work around Visa restrictions.

If I were a college student today, I'd have a lot more second thoughts NOW than I did back in the 80's in pursuing a degree in high tech. The money and effort spent to get such a degree with the future so much more cloudy for domestic tech workers here for many now isn't worth that effort. Many will pursue MBA degrees, etc. instead. It's not so much that they have no desire for pursuing a technical field, or feel they don't have the smarts to qualify like those in the past have. It is that they perceive the risk too high to pursue this degree now. And they would be RIGHT in not pursuing this degree, even though many of us want them to. We can't force them to make poor investments in their career and get stuck with a huge debt. It is more than just educating our people that's at stake here. It is our policiies in outsourcing and hiring foreign workers and the wages we are paying them that is more of a factor that is keeping us from having skilled workers to fill the jobs here.

APPROVAL OF U.S. MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRAQ

Now
69%
Last Week
69%

SHOULD BUSH HAVE GIVEN SADDAM HUSSEIN 48-HOUR ULTIMATUM?

Yes
72%
No
17%



SHOULD BUSH HAVE WAITED FOR PECIFIC U.N. APPROVAL?

Yes
32%
No
65%

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/10/opinion/polls/main543446.shtml

Just like they were in 2003.

Sometimes, there's just a bit too much "Mob rule".

Iraq only started 3 years ago

Illegal immigration has been at issue for 20 years and we have been throwing bandaids at it since then. Just as opposition to Iraq is reaching Critical Mass so is anti illegal immigrant sentiment in this country.

Coupled with the shrinking buying power of the dollar / stressed family budgets further stressed by high oil prices, this is going to get a WHOLE LOT UGLIER in the coming days. Anti-immigrant sentiment is picking up steam all across this country.

If Dems try presenting radical liberal ideals they be tossed on their collective butts come the 06 and 08 election cycles.

Especially "radical" ones like welcoming immigrants. Better to play it safe like those nice "minutemen" or the sweet KKK.

Racism and xenophobia is popular among the majority. Just like killing Iraqis was in 2003.

as long as we play by the same rules. It's unfair to expect American workers to compete with illegal immigrants who make almost nothing and expect no benefits, but if amnesty was passed, how would newly legalized immigrants still be a great threat to American workers? There is more than enough work to be done for everyone currently in our country; our infrastructure is crumbling.

The big problem is that our wealthy are trying to fill their labor needs with a slave caste. We should clamp down hard on the hiring of illegal workers, and open up paths for people already here to become citizens. That really is our only choice, aside from doing nothing. Logistically, I doubt we could deport 10+ million people, and they are just going to keep coming back until we do something about the people illegally hiring them, electrified razor wire topped 40 foot fence or not. Strict enforcement of labor laws, however, is certainly feasible given a new administration. Let those aliens who want to stay and work at American standards become citizens, and severely punish anyone who hires those who won’t.

Perhaps this would also be a good time to suggest bringing back unions? People want job security, good benefits, and decent pay; I don't see the average person getting those things with the employee employer relationship as it is...

I guess we're a limosine labor union.

I support amnesty, and while we're at it, As they come across the border, Hand them a union card and a voter registration card. We'll never see puglican's ever hold elected office again. They'll get fair union wages, and be involved in our government.

Give them your job

As soon as they graduate college, and prove that they can do the job better than me. That's what competition is about.

who is the real enemy here?

It all boils down to performance. If you are performing your job at a productivity level to justify your pay, you keep your job. If not, you are either let go, or in government, elected out of office. Maria hopping the border is the least of my job worries.

I have worked long enough to know that if you don't perform your job, you won't have one.

It's a distinction without a difference.

No, no to an undocumented worker. But then again, I'm not working the fields, doing landscaping, cleaning hotel rooms, or working in fast food. Which is where the majority go.

Oh, and forgot to mention, while I may not be competing directly with our new democrat friends from the border, I do have to compete with a ton of immigrants, albeit here legally. The difference is education levels.

Or is it something else, really?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

from your disinclination to address my questions about H-1B visas.

That he's just trying to stir up the cr*p

Believe whatever you need to.

You are so clueless about what's going on in the real world. I'm sure "Maria hopping the border" is the least of YOUR job worries. We should all have a party and celebrate YOUR job security.

Well good luck on your education, it doesn’t seem to be having much effect.

Unless you are studying Law or Medicine or some other legislatively protected career of course your wages are affected by competing with undocumented, non-tax paying illegal aliens.

Even business owners and average tax payers are affected severely.

there is nothing protected about the medical field.

Hopefully, you are old enough to know that nothing is ever guaranteed. There are no more "jobs for life" Education is the key to keeping your skills current, and developing new skills for the ever changing jobs landscape. I am not worried about Jose coming over ot pick lettuce taking my job. My main competition is the 20 something job seeker with the desire to work 16 hour days. Me, I value time with my family.

They are not just picking lettuce.

90% of the meat on American tables is processed by illegal immigrants. hence destruction of the meat cutters union and loss of 1000s of jobs able to support a family.

60% of Home construction is performed by illegal immigrants, Hence the loss of 10s of 1000s of union craftsmen and unions that pay a livable wage.

It is Federally Subsidized Union Destroying

Let's make sure that a whole bunch of people who have just moved to this country, many whom have NO IDEA what's going on here, are able to vote. Sure they may not know what the issues are, but they'll vote for whoever offers them the best deal (which at the moment happens to be democrats). Let's watch the politicians pander to all immigrants and run political commercials in foreign nations "Come to America and vote for me. We'll pay for your transportation". That sounds like a recipe for a stable and free nation. :sarcasm:

As wedge issues go, this is one on which the Republicans are vulnerable.

Illegal wiretapping is OK now.
Illegal immigration is OK now.
It's all about setting precedents.
By making everything that was illegal legal we can finally do an end run around those activist judges.

Most of them are US Citizens, natural born US citizens at that, who's going to raise them? Or are we to deport them as well? Look, I don't support amnesty either, however, we helped to fuck up the economy of Mexico, hence the increase in illegal immigration, by almost 10% since 1990. Isn't your idea a little extreme, why make enemies of other WORKING CLASS PEOPLE, when the real enemy are the ones who make off like bandits because of the status quo?

who can't get work or health insurance?

Do we or do we not have LAWS about wire tapping and proper immigration. Should we or should we not enforce laws, whether those laws are broken by the president or by a foreign national?

If we are not a nation under the rule of law then why not not simply declare ALL laws null and void and just throw open our borders to everyone? Hell, if it's people going hungry we are worried about, let's take all the starving masses from Africa and move them all here and put them to work at Wal Mart.

There comes a time when we are no longer capable of financially supporting the rest of the world's poor and hungry. Do you give you whole paycheck away to hungry people in your home town, or do you take care of your family first? This utter disregard for the welfare of American citizens in the name of "being liberal" is going to cost the the Dems a lot of votes if they don't get in touch with the financial realities of limited jobs and limited resources and the physical impossibility of giving away what little we have left to anyone who is allowed to break the law to claim their "share".

In fact, by analogy, if you don't like the house you're living in, just break into Bill Gates' house and squat in one of his extra rooms. When the police come to take you away just tell them it's Bill Gates' fault for not seeing to it that everyone has a mansion like his.

What the FUCK TYPE OF COUNTRY IS THAT!!!!!!!

And what of Americans and legal immigrants? They are not deserving of jobs to support their families?

are you being obtuse on purpose?

That's what I'm talking about.

that's who I'M talking about.

Chanted by a lot of kids during the demonstrations on May 1st. Call it an educated guess. Plus, look up Operation Wetback, if that's what anyone proposes, count me out, too many of our citizens, good citizens were deported during THAT fiasco.

the United States census, perhaps?

Birth records?

Or am I supposed to just take your word for it?

Pew Hispanic Center Offers Fuller Portrait of Unauthorized Migrants
Most Live in Families And An Increasing Number Have High School Educations

Washington, DC - Contrary to the stereotype of undocumented migrants as single males with very little education who perform manual labor in agriculture or construction, a new Pew Hispanic Center report shows that most of the unauthorized population lives in families, a quarter has at least some college education and that illegal workers can be found in many sectors of the US economy.

Building on previous work that estimated the size and geographic dispersal of the undocumented population, the new report offers a portrait of that population in unprecedented detail by examining family composition, educational attainment, income and employment.

"Unauthorized Migrants: Numbers and Characteristics" was prepared by Jeffrey S. Passel, a veteran demographer and senior research associate at the Center, using a well-established methodology to analyze data from the March 2004 Current Population Survey, which was conducted by the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The report estimates the number of persons living in families in which the head of the household or the spouse is an unauthorized migrant--13.9 million as of March 2004, including 4.7 million children. Of those individuals, some 3.2 million are US citizens by birth but are living in "mixed status" families in which some members are unauthorized, usually a parent, while others, usually children, are Americans by birthright.

is there a point to any of this, BTW?

with stats from 2004 to try and prove your point, that's fine with me. My point is there is no way to say for certain how many of the illegals have children who were born here. At any rate, whether these kids were born here is neither here nor there, what I'm asking is who is to say that children whose parents were born here have less of a need or right to eat and have a roof over their head than those whose parents were not born here. Because that sure is what it sounds like to me.

and they don't have any fewer rights because their parents weren't born here.


(lousy grammar edit!)

is all I'm saying.

to be torn away from their familes and sent to some kind of goddawful "foster care?"

Well, maybe it would work, after all. I guess all the people who whine about "illegals" will need someone to wash the dishes and mow the lawn after mom and dad have been packed into the trucks and dumped across the border.

Where in any of my posts did I say anything about tearing kids away from their families and putting them in foster care? Nowhere in any of my posts did I ever say that.

I'm done. I don't need any more words put in my mouth.

and government data sets. The Current Population Survey and other special surveys of the Census are THE data to use for this sort of calculation. The Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigrant group, estimates the same level of U.S. citizen children living in mixed households (their estimate is 'roughly 3 million' vs. Pew's 3.2 million.)

This study was conducted by a nonpartisan demographer using a rigorous methodology. That's about as good as it gets. It's not like the faux 'studies' conducted by some advocacy group out looking for the right set of data to prove its position.

Not arguing with your other points, just trying to clarify that this study is not one that should be dismissed out of hand.

I'm aware of how accurate the Pew Center is. The data provided was from March 2004, I'm sure the there have been millions of illegal immigrants that have come to this country since then, something current would have been better. And this study specifically addressed Mexican illegals. There are millions of illegals in this country that are not from Mexico, giving me data of only one group fails to make any point to me.

First, March 2004 data was used for this estimation related to children. There are ways to make back-of-the-envelope calculations to update the estimate using March 2006 CPS data but it
is not prudent to release that sort of calculation as a finding. I would hazard a guess that as a percentage of households the number with American children may have decreased but the absolute number of households would have increased, but that is a flat out guess. I would also guess that Pew is working on an update because this is a hot topic.

Second, the Pew Hispanic Center estimation is not limited to illegal immigrants from Mexico, it's an estimate of all illegal immigrants. The estimate is that about 56% are from Mexico, and another 22% from Latin America, and the remaining 22% are from other parts of the world.

The PHC reports on the entire illegal immigrant population except when the data is labeled explicitly as limited to Mexicans or Latinos. The Pew folks are also careful to make clear the difference between estimates based on all immigrants and those limited to illegal immigrants. I wish everyone releasing estimates were this careful.

Hope this helps.

Thank you for addressing my concerns.

Natural born citizens who happen to have parents that aren't legal are worth less than kids whose parents are citizens?

our citizens to sit back and do nothing when people come in from other countries and make the already dismal low-skill job market even more competitive

Children of illegal immigrants, even if citizens ARE worth less than those born of citizens, just wanted to make sure.

:eyes:

Are you going to pay for that, or shall I?

like some of these.

I'd be happy to. It's the least we all can do for having allowed the problem to get this bad.

They're US citizens. If the parents don't want to take the kids back to Mexico, that's the price we'll have to pay.

We face a big cost as a result of our having ignored criminality, and I'd rather pay the check now.

Besides, with all those vacant jobs, we'll be more likely to be employed and better able to pay.

for it.

about divided families. Sometimes how horrible it would be to deport a parent, leaving the American kids behind. Sometimes how horrible it is for a mother or father to illegally immigrate, being compelled (never "choosing") to leave their families behind. In both cases, the conclusion is that US policy--and only US policy--has to promote 'unification' of families.

In a few cases I've read, when I did the arithmetic it turns out the kids actually did qualify for applying for citizenship, but the parents either didn't care, didn't think the US was serious about the deadline, or didn't understand what they were told. But the conclusion is always the same: that US policy--and only US policy--has to promote 'unification' of families.

Surely the fallacies needed for those conclusions are obvious?

So much grief results from illegal immigration, but it's always the US government's fault. It's as though the illegal immigrants are bugs or plants--perhaps a vertebrate, but certainly not very high in the 'evolutionary scale'--completely unable by nature to predict or deal with the consequences of their actions, or being able to sort out any other possible solution. Like sprat that swim, only to affix themselves to grow into oysters, there's no sentience, they're merely tossed about by others with little or no will or volition of their own. I don't want to dehumanize the illegal immigrants and view them as non-sentient life.

That's why people are poor, too.

The stories are not "tearjerkers," and they have been played out time and again in U.S. history. Rounding up anyone with brown skin and a "Mexican name" and their entire families, legal citizens or not, has occurred in the past and with the attitudes of some here, will occur again in the future.

They don't talk about the kid that's run afoul of the law and in jail at age 17, they focus on the 17 year old genius who's not allowed into state schools without paying out of state fees. They talk about how hardworking the parents of the American-born kids are, as though they couldn't be hardworking in their home country; they don't talk about the false ID they used to hold their jobs. They talk about pride in the homeland they rejected, and how they send money back in devotion to their home country; but when necessary, the papers talk about how much they want to be American, and are devoted to building their new land.

They talk about how the kids emphasize an education; they don't talk about drop-out rates. They talk about how horrible it is that Juan Garcia's mother is where he left her--perhaps he makes more money here and it was the wise choice, but the choices aren't mentioned. They must be reunited; i.e., she must be allowed to immigrate. They report how Maria Garcia is here, having left her kids--but they don't pick women that have more kids than they could support (whether due to an oppressive culturally-imposed male hierarchy that US law is supposed to remedy or not), but always the woman whose hardworking husband was killed in some horrible accident. And reunion can only be by allowing the kids to immigrate. In other words, the illegal immigrants are portrayed as sob stories that can not possibly be seen as anything more than basket cases, unable to actually decide their own lives.

People sometimes are poor because of choices they've made; sometimes the choices were collective ones, sometimes not. People are sometimes in jail because of choices they've made. Smart kids sometimes have a hard time getting scholarships because of choices their parents made, sometimes in ignorance, sometimes assuming that Americans either don't care about the rules or can be persuaded to ignore them--and yet they, and reporters, blame others for their choices. Nobody likes penalizing the kids for the mistakes of their parents; but they insist on having the parents' mistakes recognized, because otherwise all you get are more mistakes that others have to somehow accommodate. Their skin color is beside the point; the proportion of illegal immigrants is a factor of geography and ease of getting here, not racism, and used to be at least slightly different.

To say that the brown-skinned people are smart enough and mature enough to make choices, and to say that their choices lead to problems, is racist; to say they're too stupid to possibly think through the consequences of their actions or take into account another culture's attitudes is enlightened. But the latter reasoning, assumed to be good in this context, is racist in circumstances where the people would benefit from being viewed as mature and responsible. But the people don't change: we must change the reasoning we are allowed based on their race. This is foolish, and, indeed, involves evaluating them based on their skin color and our emotions above considering the content of their minds or their characters. It's one thing to view them with sympathy; it's another to like being manipulated, or try to manipulate others, based on sympathy.

that ARE citizens. Do we even have the infrastructure necessary to have up to 2 million or more kids in foster care? How much would that cost? Also, why minimize the damage that US policy has done to Mexico's economy along with our own? Mexico's rich fat cats aren't exactly blameless, but it wasn't what we would call a democratic government till really recently, and even that is questionable. Besides which, arresting and deporting isn't exactly what I would call a good policy. This was a PREDICTABLE consequence to NAFTA as signed by Canada, the United States, and Mexico, and now we complain? Isn't that just a tad bit hypocritical?

Foster care sucks and will only lead to more abused kids. HOW FUCKING CRUEL CAN YOU BE TO ADVOCATE SEPARATING FAMILY?

So why not revive the practice?

MEXICAN AMERICANS AND REPATRIATION. Although a great deal of attention has been focused on Mexican immigration by scholars on both sides of the border, far less attention has been given to emigration of Mexicans and Mexican Americans from the United States. Casual reference has been made in many studies to the repatriation of Mexicans from Texas, but few published studies have examined these departures in detail. The most neglected era of Mexican repatriation from the United States is before 1930. Although substantial Mexican repatriation from Texas occurred at that time, no published study has examined Mexican departures between 1836 and 1930. Mexican repatriation during the Great Depression has received more attention. During the 1930s, a single article on Mexican repatriation from Texas was published; "The Mexicans Go Home" by Edna E. Kelley appeared in the Southwest Review in 1932. Nothing more appeared until the 1980s, when four brief articles on diverse aspects of depression-era repatriation appeared. These included articles on deportation from the lower Rio Grande valley (1981), on Mexican repatriation and the Texas Cotton Acreage Control Law of 1931-32 (1983), on the repatriation of Bridgeport, Texas, coalminers (1984), and on Mexican repatriation from South Texas (1990).....

..the number of repatriates was minuscule compared to those who returned to Mexico during the Great Depression. With the deterioration of the United States economy after 1929, between 400,000 and 500,000 Mexicans and their American-born children returned to Mexico. More than half of these departed from Texas. (The term Mexican is used in this article to refer to all Mexican-heritage repatriates, although a significant number of them were Mexican Americans since they had been born in Texas. For Mexican Americans, the term repatriate is actually inaccurate, for one cannot be repatriated to a foreign country.) Depression-era Mexican repatriation from Texas began in 1929, gained momentum in 1930, and peaked in 1931. In the last quarter of 1931 repatriation reached massive proportions; the roads leading to the Texas-Mexico border became congested with returning repatriates. Mexican border towns were also crowded as thousands of returning Mexicans awaited transportation to the interior of Mexico. The number of repatriates declined in 1932 and again in 1933. During the middle years of the depression-1934 to 1938-only occasional groups of repatriates left Texas. Then in 1939 and continuing into 1940, a significant number of Mexicans were repatriated from the state by the Mexican government.....

Reliable data are not available for the number of deportations from the various areas of the state. Efforts to implement the deportation campaign resulted in widespread violation of civil and human rights, including illegally imprisoning immigrants, deporting United States-born children, not permitting returnees to dispose of their property or to collect their wages, deporting many not legally subject to deportation because of their length of Texas residence, separating families, and deporting the infirm.

www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/MM/pqmyk.html

There's much more information at the link, such as earlier repatriation from Texas & the role of the Mexican government in "helping" those repatriated.

Of course, other Border states had similar situations.

Edited to re-emphasize what many may have missed in the rather large paragraphs above: Most of those deported were immigrants NOT here illegally, according to the laws of that time. That does not include those born in the USA--not all of whom were children.

but they are also minors who will have to stay with their parents until they are old enough to come back on their own, if they wish.

position - which to be fair - he did mention:

"Instead, many Democrats are pushing an increased minimum wage or card-check unionization or - again - more funding for education. They argue that these policies would have a more direct effect on the incomes of lower-skilled workers. And these policies might, in fact, be sufficient to resist the effect of illegal immigration, and, in any event, all are desirable policy and should be enacted at once. But there is no political consensus for such policies, and it is difficult to imagine that the Republican-dominated Congress would even consider them."

Caving to the total GOP plan is nuts. But Border Security is the one part of the GOP plan that we need to agree with for National Security reasons.

A "living wage" gets the not working poor in America working - ending the need for hiring the minimum wage or less illegals, and if you add major fines plus jail time for management that hires illegals via lousy checking of papers, the whole problem goes away.

Most past Repug voters/would-be Dem voters dissagree with allowing illegal immigrants amnesty, and the Dems will lose if they side with those who think there should be less restrictions. I'm personally sick of hearing the phrase..."They take jobs Americans wont do". Many illegal immigrants go to small farming communities where warehouse jobs, factory jobs, and other past middle-class jobs are...and I know personally many are being lost to such a high demand for jobs because of the huge influx of people. I worked on a potatoe sorter for extra money in junior high and high school. Those jobs are gone for kids. Many of my closest friends are Hispanic, so dont try to claim some sort of racism.

It's a HUGE winner for the Dems.

And the GOP set themselves up as anti-immigrant. Once again the GOP proves to be exclusive, while the Dems prove to be their opposite. A giant has been awoken by the GOP's idiotic rhetoric.

The Americans who look to the Democratic party as their champion against corporate and big money interests will not tolerate the fact that the party is putting their needs and concerns aside to take up the cause of foreign nationals.

This is a perfect opportunity to educate the working class that we're looking out for them and that the republicans are only looking out for coporate interests.

That said, there's more than one group that needs to be educated. There is a significant segment of the population that percieves the act of giving an immigrant a current american's job to be an act of charity. Those people, disproportionately, can't see beyond the idea that their jobs, personally, are not at any significant real risk.

I share common cause with the lexus liberals most of the time, but not on this. From a political standpoint I'm demonstrably right. From a moral standpoint, I think I'm right too.

We ignore the working class at our peril, just when we seem poised to bring 'em back.

The OP is absolutely correct.

the democrats want to arrest and deport.
HUH?????????????
how about a comprehensive plan that gives us secure borders ?
increased legal crossing, both permanent, and temp movement
a path to earned citizenship,
along with drastic punishment to American employers who scofflaw
a good fence(figurative in spots) with big gates.
keep in mind Americans will not do agricultural work in the southwest.Job stealers indeed!

he, like most of the other Chicanos don't buy,the "Oh, we're just talking about the illegal ones" bullshit. They smell good old fashioned american racial hate, and they don't like it. I would like to see the Latino military call in sick(yes, I know, impossible)

This is about illegal immigration, regardless of country of origin or skin hue.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the xenophobia is getting thick

and it is. Close down Long Beach for two weeks.

Every time some redneck looses his job to an illegal his reaction will be xenophobic. That's simply human nature. The threat to his family becomes very personal and his reaction will be very visceral.

Good fences make good neighbors. The whole point of the legal immigration policy is to allow in as many people as our economy can support. If we allow in more people than our economy can support then the economy becomes overburdened, and those whose feel the pinch most severly will be the ones who react most stridently.

Amnesty would cause a marked increase in xenophobia. That's unfortunate, but it's also a fact of life. This country is already hrting economically, and the hurt is only getting worse, and the more people hurt the more they look for a scapegoat, and the illegals will become that scapegoat.

I would favor amnesty ONLY if accompanied by tightening the borders to stem the flow, otherwise amnesty just makes the problem worse in the long run.

Robert Frost attributes that tired phrase to a tight-assed New Englander.

...He moves in darkness as it seems to me
Not of woods only and the shade of trees.
He will not go behind his father's saying,
And he likes having thought of it so well
He says again, "Good fences make good neighbors."

The poet's voice? "Something there is that doesn't love a wall."

www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/frost-mending.html

We NEED the 12 million votes they will bring us. And trust me, per what I've heard from our Salvadorean assistant (now a US citizen) the Latino community has no love for Bush.

Sorry to disagree, but it is basic human rights issue for me.

Fight the companies, not the poor workers.

Talking about Cinco de' mayo (sp)

As so eloquently put on Mencia last night, if the guy from Guatemala got your job, and he don't even speak English, how bad was YOUR job interview?

If low-wage American workers are being displaced it is because the Republican policies have made it ever more difficult for low-wage Americans to succeed. The cost of higher education is growing at a rate that many times exceeds the inflation rate, pushing more and more people out of the education track. There are ever increasing numbers of drop-outs -- perhaps because work pays, and school doesn't? If it takes two full-time paychecks to fund the average household, doesn't it make sense that particularly in low-wage areas kids would be quitting school to try to help out financially after one or both of the family bread-winners is laid off or disabled or leaves?

WalMart has done far more to suppress wages in this country than illegal workers has. Maybe we should round up and deport all WalMart employees.

if they are underpaid for the job they are doing or demand rights for themselves as part of a union. They will be quiet and they will do what they are told. They won't make waves. That is why the situation you depicted would happen.

but only the brown ones

we don't mean those other Mexicans

Many Working Class votes, just for being 'tough' on illegal immigration.

The only thing Democrats had to do, would not have even targeted illegal immigrants. They only had to demand massive fines for employers employing illegal workers. And, introduce a three strikes and your out of business proposal, where the Feds would seize any employer's business and it's assets for getting caught employing illegal workers on the third occasion. All proceeds from fines and seizures would go into an Extended Unemployment Fund, which would be additional to existing unemployment funds, for legal workers. No employer is going to risk losing so much money and/or their business, just to cheat blue collar workers out of a fair wage and adequate conditions to begin with, like they have been doing, and they would immediately be able to determine which employees were illegal workers.

Illegal workers would not be able to find anymore work, and would be forced to exit the expensive cost of living in the U.S., compared to their native country. So there would be no need to round any up, nor would it even add any additional laws against or for illegal immigrants. They already chose to break and accept the outcome of the enforcement of the existing laws and loss of any further employment.

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

...just passing through......

.....all illegal aliens. Apparently it takes an advanced degree in economics:banghead:, which obviously most Democrats don't have:banghead: otherwise they would be able to figure out what some people already know, ".....have concluded that the vast increase in low-skilled immigration over the last forty years has depressed the wages of low-skilled citizens."

Vincente Fox has already gotten this down pat:hi:, which is why he touts everyone crossing our southern border and then sending money back to Mexico.:bounce: It leaves less people in Mexico:bounce: to provide for and up goes their standard of living. Meanwhile our standard of living goes down because our hospital emergency rooms, schools, etc., are crowded to overflowing.:wtf: Too bad people in this country can't see the same thing or purposely choose to ignore the fact.:banghead:

The MAJORITY 51% want the illegals deported. But that is a bit unfair, I like making it a serious felony to hire illegals.

impacted economically yet. If they had, they may veiw this issue from a broader perspective.

OK, I worked at a plastics factory till I got injured, OK, the funny thing was this, all of the workers at this factory were from a temp agency, what was even funnier was that we had maybe only one or two Latinos working in the factory. Of course, they used to have full time employees, but it was simply too expensive to pay them 12 bucks an hour plus benefits, it was cheaper to pay us 6 bucks an hour with no benefits. Can't compete with China otherwise. This isn't unique in my area, go to any of the day labor spots at 6 am, as I did on several occasions, and you would see lines of people hoping someone would have a job for them. Oddly enough, most of those people waiting in line spoke English, including me.

The point being that I don't fear an Illegal or legal immigrant taking my job, more worried about the factories closing shop altogether, hell, that happened to my buddy at another factory, and that was with GOOD employers who were paying their employees OUT OF POCKET, it was a family-run business, before they had to close up shop entirely. This happens all over, and is having as great or even a greater effect than just illegal immigration can account for.

....want to move operations overseas just to avoid paying our wages and benefits. We also need to change our laws so that corporations and the officers can have corporate and personal finances frozen for hiring illegal aliens. Not just a few thousand dollars a day in fines but fines starting at $5 million a day for every illegal alien they hire, and $1 million a day of personal finances. Want to end the illegal alien issue overnight - that's how to do it.

Remember investors in corporations in the United States have the right to sue the government because of ANY regulation or law that hinders profitability. If you don't believe me, look at these 15 cases(Warning, PDF file), and get back to me on how we would pass such a law and it would be enforcable.

The problem is that the reason for the increase in illegal immigration doesn't go away with amnesty, unless we wish to grant all of Mexico's citizens amnesty at once, it would probably save on paperwork. :)

All amnesty would do is give THIS wave of illegal immigrants legal status in this country, and then another wave will replace them as the low wage earners. That isn't a solution, its a stop-gap measure at best. Just like deportation, which would basically have the same effect, except they will just keep returning, like a big assed revolving door. Neither are solutions, hell, you could build a 200 foot high concrete wall between the borders and it STILL wouldn't work, you'd bankrupt the country, then people would be scaling that wall to GET to Mexico, rather than the reverse. But that is besides the point, these "sound bite" solutions are not solutions at all, we need a multi-faceted approach, one that takes into account the long term consequences of our actions now.

....but I still say that fining the holy crap out of anyone who hires illegal aliens at a minimum of $5 million a day per illegal alien would work and work quickly.

make a difference, hell, companies get fined a pittance when they outright KILL employees, and we expect them to pay millions for doing what they do best, that is, make as high a profit as possible? Also, there is the problem of just having these companies pack up and leave, some of the service/construction ones can't, but many more would, which means American jobs will get lost too. Hate to rain on your parade or anything, but this is the world we live in, and unfortunately, they have all the power.

.....psychic.:rofl:

This means excersizing total control over our trade negotiations, repealing NAFTA, getting out of the WTO, and then we could institute such a policy, but until then, its impossible, not to mention being political suicide. Its called being realistic, try it sometime.

of China, get your facts straight for once.

the decimation of Unions, especially under Reagan, the nearly static minimum wage that doesn't even keep up with inflation, or the explosion in the income disparity between the rich and poor? Oh thank goodness, just deport the illegals and all those problems go away, thank the Gods that you found the solution! :sarcasm:

....much more than anyone is accomplishing right now.:eyes:

We would have a "War on Immigration" think "War on Drugs" but on a much grander scale, and it will accomplish just about as much as the other war accomplished. Why not work on actual, workable solutions, like getting rid of NAFTA, relieving Mexico of any debt we hold to them, and encouraging them to rebuild their economy their OWN way, instead of directed by US companies. Just a thought, I mean its not like the illegal immigrants that do come here come here for a reason like lack of JOBS in their own damned nation.

.....and we gain nothing except to take on all of Mexico's citizens:eyes: while relieving them of all debt.:freak: :sarcasm:Great idea:wtf:

http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_ag.pdf

http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_mexico.pdf

http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_jobs.pdf

Read and learn, our economy and Mexico's are ONE AND THE SAME, they are LINKED, understand that?

.....that is what we are doing now and what we'd do with automatic amnesty. :banghead: I prefer the approach of look out for our own first.:shrug: That's certainly what Vicente Fox is doing by emptying out his country on us.:eyes:

of the rnc

Blame low wages on illegals? Get serious..

I mean seriously, does anyone truly think that illegal workers are treated fairly and humanely? No, employers hire them so they can break laws without having to worry about workers complaining.

I've seen illegals injured on the job recieve $2000 cash and a ticket home before OSHA could take their statements.

We need the ARREST the EMPLOYERS

When?

1980 to 1988.

.....rate of $5 million a day for corporations and $1 million a day for corporate owners/employers.:applause: When we truly shut down and secure our borders:bounce: no one would be supported except the American worker.:yourock: Wouldn't that be a phenomenal idea - support America first.:wow:

American Workers First

Completely flies in the face of Bush's amnesty proposals. You know that could get some legs

NOT the worker.

This is a perfect issue for Democrats. Fair wage legislation would make all of us come out winners. Going after corporations instead of people should be the goal.

This is a human rights issue, right up the Democrats' alley.

the next election. If we run strongly on this issue we may take the House or Senate back.

We can't demonize the undocumented workers by calling them 'illegal' and 'aliens'. For one thing, how do we know who is legal and who is not? My city is full of Hisapanics. How does one decide which ones are citizens and which ones are not? Do we start branding them like the Nazis branded the Jews?

I work with Hispanics every day. I have been here for many years. And even I don't know who is legal and who is undocumented. So it was easy for me to choose not to be angry with the undocumented workers as I had no idea who they are.

We absolutely MUST turn the hate away from the people and on to the employers who hire them. That is where the solvable problem is. Force employers to pay a fair wage, and penalize them severely for hiring undocumented workers.

It is unrealistic if not impossible to send 12 million people back to their country of origin. So we need to promote an amnesty program where they have an honest chance to become citizens.

and attaching Human Rights and International Living standards.

2 things the Repukes actively seek to destroy world wide

Remember if you are republican no matter what you must support Bush, Conservatism, War, etc if you're a Democrat you must support illegal exploitation err immigration. If you belong to either party and are anti-war, anti-conservatism, anti-illegal exploitation err immigration err amnesty and anti-Bush you are a freethinker and free thinking as no place today's politics.

Whats perceived good for the party is all that matters today, pathetic isn't it?

do! I challenge any Democrat here to give me real examples of how illegal immigration has hurt them. Be real, don't say I pay for their services. They pay taxes to, they pay social security and don't get it, they pay the medicare tax also. They pay all the same sales tax and gasoline tax you do. Taxes are withheld from their pay unless they are paid under the table which by the way is the way many of us get paid.

They are responsible for hold the costs down on the food we eat. It is my opinion that all the reasons you use against the illegals really has the roots in the fact that you do not like the cultural changes that they bring to this country. In other words racism, flame away.

That's one of the key reasons why employers hire illegals.

that they will NEVER be able to claim. Yes, some are hired by employers who don't withhold taxes, but the majority have taxes withheld from their paychecks.

Just quit your current job, and go apply for part time status at the nearest McD's. I guarantee your taxes will go down.

Illegals drag down living standards to the low-skilled working class

If I destoyed that dream career to the FF station. On the other hand, our cities street sweeper drivers make 34.00 an hour. Lat time I checked, no PhD was required.

Just work for less.

They buy stuff and pay sales taxes. Pay property taxes on their rental property. If they used forged SS cards, they're paying social security for which they will never collect. they pay income taxes or the employer would not be able to deduct their wages on his/her taxes. Your argument holds as much water as a collander.

You have to be a CITIZEN to draw any SS. Undocumented immigrants are NOT eligible for ANY govt services. They don't get TANF or SS or food stamps or Medicaid.

How many times do we have to post this info? I swear, some days I feel like I am posting on free republic instead of democratic underground.

you don't have anything remotely resembling an argument, let alone facts or evidence.

You are reaching on the other two. How about some credible evidence that law enforcement and legal costs are up because of undocumented workers?

We asked for CREDIBLE sources. I mean, this is a site with Malkin on its home page. What a lame-ass attempt.

Do you know anything about FAIR? I am guessing not since you posted this link. LOL

EXTREMELY biased organization. I wouldn't trust diddly squat from FAIR. Sorry.

First, many have fake social security numbers. Indeed, the IRS makes money off these folks since they often don't claim refunds to
which they would otherwise be entitled.

(Undocumented workersare contributing as much as $7 billion a year into the Social Security system.
http://compensation.blr.com/display.cfm/id/154024)


But, second, many do file, and increasingly so. They use an ITIN (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) to file return with IRS. By law, anyone who makes enough money regardless of legal status must file a tax return. So those that file are "legal" in that respect.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/04/11_tonessb_illegal/

Tax time is for everyone, including illegal immigrants
by Bianca Vazquez Toness, Minnesota Public Radio
April 10, 2005

The April 15 tax deadline to file taxes causes most Americans stress and anguish. But for the millions of people living and working illegally in the United States, filing taxes can be an opportunity to prove their economic contribution and document their residence here. The IRS allows them to file using a special number. But some immigration critics don't like the idea of a federal agency accommodating illegal immigrants.

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/04/11_tonessb_illegal/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1109483.php

Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Illegal immigrants eager to pay Uncle Sam
Records show illegal immigrants filed more tax returns this year despite tensions over immigration; most filers cite hopes for citizenship.

By CINDY CARCAMO
The Orange County Register

* * *

It's a common misconception that illegal immigrants don't file income tax returns, said Francine Lipman, a professor at Chapman School of Law.

"A lot of undocumented immigrants pay taxes and actually pay more in taxes than your similarly situated low-income family who is here legally," said Lipman, who recently completed a law-review article titled "The Taxation of Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation."

* * *

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1109483.php

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-taxes17apr17,0,2638694.story?coll=la-home-headlines

It's a common misconception that illegal immigrants don't file income tax returns, said Francine Lipman, a professor at Chapman School of Law.

"A lot of undocumented immigrants pay taxes and actually pay more in taxes than your similarly situated low-income family who is here legally," said Lipman, who recently completed a law-review article titled "The Taxation of Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation."

And actually pay more in taxes than your similarly situated low-income family who is here legally!!!

To me it is kind of sad the extent to which the public "debate" on the issue of undocumented workers is based on a lot of incorrect yet widely held assumptions.

at least, when someone posts something so easily refuted, along will come intelligent DUers to do so.

having trouble keeping up?

I provided links to four (4) news stories from mainstream news media. The sources are New York Times, Minnesota Public Radio, Orange County Register, Los Angeles Times. Which of these news stories do you find less than credible?

Again, the four stories are:

1. New York Times (as reprinted in the Businees & Legal Ledger)
Illegal Immigrants Are Bolstering Social Security With Billions
April 5, 2005, Tuesday
By EDUARDO PORTER (NYT); Business/Financial Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 1, 1746 words
(http://compensation.blr.com/display.cfm/id/154024)

2. Minnesota Public Radio News
Tax time is for everyone, including illegal immigrants
by Bianca Vazquez Toness, Minnesota Public Radio
April 10, 2005
(http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/04/11_tonessb_illegal/)

3. Orange County Register
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Illegal immigrants eager to pay Uncle Sam
By CINDY CARCAMO
The Orange County Register
(http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1109483.php)

4. Los Angeles Times
Here Illegally, but Choosing to Pay Taxes
Some undocumented workers hope that by establishing a record of their time in the United States, it will be easier to gain citizenship later.
By Anna Gorman, Times Staff Writer
April 17, 2006
(http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1109483.php)

than we can determine if they cost more than what they pay into the system

My post and links address what they pay into system. I posted in response to unfounded but commonly held assertion that they don't pay in. And I'm still confused about which stories you found less than credible.

or STFU.

from the Federation for Immigration Reform

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_floridacostsstudy

Costs of Illegal Immigration to Floridians: Executive Summary (Revised 10/05)

(snip)
The nearly two billion dollars in costs incurred by Florida taxpayers annually result from outlays in the following areas:

Education. Based on estimates of the illegal immigrant population in Florida and documented costs of K-12 schooling, Floridians spend more than $1.5 billion annually on education for illegal immigrant children and for their U.S.-born siblings. About 8.7 percent of the K-12 public school students in Florida are children of illegal aliens.

Health Care. Taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to about $165 million a year.

Incarceration. The uncompensated cost of incarcerating illegal aliens in Florida’s state and county prisons amounts to about $155 million a year (not including local jail detention costs or related law enforcement and judicial expenditures or the monetary costs of the crimes that led to their incarceration).

State and local taxes paid by the unauthorized immigrant population go toward offsetting these costs, but they do not come near to matching the expenses. The total of such payments can generously be estimated at about $910 million per year.

The fiscal costs of illegal immigration do not end with these three major cost areas. The total costs of illegal immigration to the state’s taxpayers would be considerably higher if other cost areas such as special English instruction, welfare programs used by the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, or welfare benefits for American workers displaced by illegal alien workers were also calculated.
(snip)

That features racist Malkin on its homepage, babbling about the "reconquista."

Your use of such a garbage source really does not reflect well on you.

The enforcement of existing immigration laws is what the majority of Americans want. Fair and legal immigration is what mainstream America wants, and is it not just part of an extremist RW agenda. It is true that there are RW racists in the camp, but there are also people who realize that an unlimited influx of the world's poor will destroy any possibility of a more socialized government support system for America's citizens. Ironically, that's exactly what the right wing wants.

In your world view, everything is Black/White Good/Evil - you're no better than Dubya. Your use of slime and slander tactics in your posts against others who disagree with you shows that you have adopted the tactics of rove and the swiftboaters, and this does not reflect well on YOU.

I have no familiarity with FAIR, but I read their site to look for Malkin and the "racist babbling" that you referred to. I did not find it. This is from their website:



It doesn't sound right wing, but I suppose all that liberal talk is just a front for shadowy RW Evil Doers. :eyes:

It is a widely-known anti-immigrant hate site.

Why didn't you post the link, so everyone could see where you cherry-picked your quote?

http://www.fairus.org

Their front page features links to stories such as:

Malkin: Yes, There Really is A Reconquista Movement

Minutemen Wrap Up Successful Patrol In Arizona: FAIR Was There


Malkin and the Minutemen are racists, and this is a right-wing garbage site. The enemy of your enemy is not any liberal's friend.

The Minutemen and the Reconquista are just two sides of the same coin.

It's true that there are radical extremists, mostly young Mexican intellectuals, who want to take back the Southwest from the United States because they maintain it rightly belongs to Mexico. The U.S. took this land by force from Mexico in 1850, only about two lifetimes ago. Some Mexicans want it back, and who is to say they are wrong. Population migration is a natural part of history, but so are national border changes and redrawn maps.

A lot of people here don't seem to have much respect for Mexico or Mexicans. They just see Mexicans as a bunch of waifs with their noses pressed against the glass of the American storefront. They think we need to pity them and that they need our help so they can come here and shake off the terrible stigma of being Mexican.

One person here actually said "hey let's just annex Mexico!" and solve the problem. People need to remember that Mexico is a sovereign nation, with a history longer than our own and a proud heritage. The only thing really wrong with Mexico is the great divide between the rich and the poor, but that is going to be our future too thanks to the repugs.

A utopian open border policy could just result in a NEW border to the north. I don't see any reason why some of the SW wouldn't eventually fall back to Mexico, and maybe that is what should be. The U.S. is on the decline thanks to since bush is running us into the ground, and our days as a great nation are coming to a close.

There is disagreement here because there are two ways to look at the issue: Is it a civil rights issue, or a geo-political issue? Are illegals hard workers looking for opportunity, or are they foreign nationals with an allegiance to the south? The reality is probably somewhere in between.

But 1850 is far more than "two lifetimes ago" !! How old are you??? :D

The difference between whatever some radicals call the reconquista and the reality is POWER -- they may want it, but they are not going to achieve it.

I think it's an interesting way to approach it: civil rights or geopolitical, but I would argue it's both, they cannot be separated. According to Pew research, most undocumented residents live in families -- most of them are not young males seeking to work here for a time and then return to Mexico.

:rofl:

Not me!!

Those paid under the table do not, saving the employer 14% right off the top. But those who have documents, whether real or bogus but unquestioned, pay into SS but have no way of ever collecting. How many times have you heard of "identity theft", in that someone was using a SSN in Phoenix that belonged to somebody in Bangor? The SS administration will flag it as suspect, and determine that the original is still in Bangor, but will do nothing to apprehend the person using it in Phoenix, meaning that everything the Phoenix worker pays in, SS admin keeps.

Not every undocumented worker is a day laborer hanging out in front of Home Depot. And not every documented worker has legitimate documents. And not every employer hiring "illegals" is aware that he is doing so.

How do we sort them out?

The first thing, is don't accept any 'simple' solutions. There aren't any. The most important step would be to assist Mexico with its own serious problems so the people would not feel compelled to leave there. Most don't really want to - they are economic refugees. How many here would want to pick up and move several thousand miles to live in a foreign culture where nothing is the same, where you can't speak the language, where you are instantly targeted for discrimination because of language, accent and skin tone?

We need to go after the employers who knowingly hire 'illegals' and get them on tax evasion. Those who inadvertently hire people who have bogus documents can get a pass until we do something about the deliberate violators.

Sometimes, I feel like I accidentally logged onto FR by accident. I truly worry about the loss of compassion being displayed by so called liberals.

Compassion is volunteering one's own job, and the value of one's own labor.

Assuring that the price of lettuce remains 59 cents a head is not compassion.

so bad for so many people. And I don't think it's compassionate to not manage immigration if the inflow of unskilled workers drives down wages for existing citizens.

I am stunned by the xenophobic crap long time DUers are posting.

So don't be stunned by the xenophobia, it's human nature 101 :puke:

...that's how.

It's real, and I frankly find it troubling that:
a) this doesn't seem to matter much to democrats for whom "working" doesn't involve sore muscles, blisters, sunburn or a stiff back. So much for liberal empathy.
b) the current situation of unhindered immigration is justified on the basis that the subset of illegal workers who use a ripped-off social security number pay taxes. News flash: The american worker who they displaced in that job paid MORE taxes on his higher income, and those workers are a minority compared to the millions who work under the table, many for less than minimum wage.

Most employers are forcing out unions. Hispanics who work in the service industry are beginning to unionize and are fighting for the living wage. In Santa Monica the hotels have to accept unions and pay living wages. You will benefit from this. You are not fighting to form unions are you? You are not fighting for a living wage are you?

...is a stupid way to fight for a living wage.

And Santa Monica is not representative of the entire US.

Not sure who you are talking about.

That is not the common definition of native, which generally refers to one's place of birth or origin. I think use of term "native workers" is telling because it reveals the "nativist" tendencies of a lot of the diatribes against undocumented residents.

not because I blame them for coming here to take jobs that the corporate elite give them, but because it's so interesting to me, that all the people ranting about "illegals" don't want to discuss it. Makes me wonder just what they are really so afraid of, after all.

Clearly, you're not really "wondering". From the multiple times in this thread that you've made similar comments, it's apparent that you have a pretty clear idea.

Innuendo is not a language in which I'm fluent. Please elaborate.

Immigration levels are set by policy. Given the inability of our job market to keep up with population growth, it's set too high. Illegal immigration is another thing altogether. It should not be tolerated.