Why Americans Won't Do Dirty Jobs

[Ready to do it 101]

I think it's hilarious that this nutjob actually went to the largest city in Texas to talk. What did he think? Someone needs to fill this nuthead in... "Earth to nuthead... we like our illegals in Texas. They cause no problems, are a benefit to society, and most are peaceful living, wellrespected human beings. Stay out of our state as we really don't want to hear the garbage coming out of your mouth." He's lucky he decided not to talk as he would have been run off stage pretty darn quick.

Are you serious. You are gonna call what that senile idiot wrote 'facts'

You really want to stand behind this delusional redneck?

[Ready to do it 101]

Honestly, regardless whether it's an illegal or a lazy American, a contractor is going to push his workers to finish quickly. The same errors could happen either way. On the plus side, your brother's business flourishes because of a poor job done by the original contractor. It wouldn't be fair to say that if that original contractor contracted a lazy American that the same flaws wouldn't be present in the finished product.

I don't call them lawbreakers. I call them people looking for a better way of life. If they commit a crime in the US, then yes I would call them a law breaker. Simply for coming to the US, looking for a better life? No way. It's not one's fault which side of a border they were born on. I believe in everyone getting a fair shake. It's what you do with it that matters. I really don't care about where one comes from, as long as they aren't a hindrance to me. In my opinion, lazy American US citizens and Warhappy folks are a complete waste of my tax dollars. Illegals are a drop in the bucket and actually benefit our society in my opinion, where as lazy American citizens and folks fighting in wars do not benefit our society.

My brother owns a small Home Remodeling company, he employs 7 American citizens. He's had 5 of them for over 7 years. He pays between $12-$30 an hour, depending on laborer or a skilled mechanic. And 90% of his work right now is remedial work on newer homes (ie less than 5 years old) constructed by large builders who utilized this cheap illegal labor. They all have leaks around the windows, doors and in the valleys, in areas where stone or stucco meets the wooden frame and other places where they weren't properly counter flashed. Maybe you say is a design flaw, but a skilled mechanic would have noticed it and had the pride to not have something he made, be faulty. An illegal has the mentality, can't see it from my house. I don't know your age, but I'm in my mid 30's and the majority of my buddies friends and cousin's fathers all worked in some type of trade field, some union, some not, but they all took pride in their work. So I don't agree with this at all.

I can't see any benefit to openly allowing law breakers.

Edited November 13, 2011 by Ready to do it

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Honestly, regardless whether it's an illegal or a lazy American, a contractor is going to push his workers to finish quickly. The same errors could happen either way. On the plus side, your brother's business flourishes because of a poor job done by the original contractor. It wouldn't be fair to say that if that original contractor contracted a lazy American that the same flaws wouldn't be present in the finished product.

I don't call them lawbreakers. I call them people looking for a better way of life. If they commit a crime in the US, then yes I would call them a law breaker. Simply for coming to the US, looking for a better life? No way. It's not one's fault which side of a border they were born on. I believe in everyone getting a fair shake. It's what you do with it that matters. I really don't care about where one comes from, as long as they aren't a hindrance to me. In my opinion, lazy American US citizens and Warhappy folks are a complete waste of my tax dollars. Illegals are a drop in the bucket and actually benefit our society in my opinion, where as lazy American citizens and folks fighting in wars do not benefit our society.

"Lazy American citizens fighting for our country..."

Your a real piece of work. I served my country as many on this board did. As far as willingly breaking the laws of this country by knowingly and willingly entering this country illegally....

Your so full of sh*t you stink. Iv'e seen construction work performed by illegals, most of them with the skills of a ####### roach and I wouldn't let them build my dog house. Zero training, zero skills and zero pride in their work.

It's time for them to go back to their third world sh*t holes and go about entering this country legally. In the mean time they can breed another half dozen kids that they can't afford for the fact most of them have the IQ of a turnip.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm going to stand by the fact that we do not need illegals.

What's the economic impact difference between documented and undocumented immigrants, in your opinion? How is it different between the two?

[scandal 951]

What's the economic impact difference between documented and undocumented immigrants, in your opinion? How is it different between the two?

According to the group behind this TV commercial which ran during the GOP debate tonight, there is no difference. They're against Legal and Illegal immigration due to its economic impact.

[kytwell 179]

If they commit a crime in the US, then yes I would call them a law breaker.

Well then, I guess you better start calling them what they are...LAW BREAKERS, by breaking the following LAW:

8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien

[Karee 4,191]

According to the group behind this TV commercial which ran during the GOP debate tonight, there is no difference. They're against Legal and Illegal immigration due to its economic impact.

I think Ron hit the nail on the head there. Unfortunately, most people can not make the distinction between legal and illegal.

My family came from Poland in the 1910s. I doubt they filed any I-130s to get here. I'm pretty sure 99% of the USCs on this site have ancestors that are immigrants.

It is basically boiling down to a "we were here first" mentality.

It's a tough call. One day you want immigrants, the next day you don't. Dpending on how much it costs to get your lawn mowed.

[웃 910]

No one can restore confidence in America's long-term fiscal health without a credible plan to cut spending on entitlements and defense while raising revenues, which are now at a 60-year low as a share of GDP. But don't expect any immediate solutions from Washington. The campaign season will only exacerbate petty partisanship and political gridlock, which means that the structural problems of the U.S. economy are likely to persist.

But the longer-term future appears much brighter for the U.S. than for either Europe or China. America is still the leader in the kind of cutting-edge technology that expands a nation's long-term economic potential, from renewable energy and medical devices to nanotechnology and cloud computing. Over time, these advantages will yield more robust economic growth.

The U.S. also has a demographic advantage. In Europe, declining birthrates and rising sentiment against immigration point toward a population that will shrink by as much as 100 million people by 2050. In China, thanks in part to its one-child policy, the working population has already begun to contract. By 2030, nearly 250 million Chinese will have passed the age of 65, and providing them with pensions and health care will be very costly.

Despite debate over illegal immigration, the U.S. population will likely rise from 310 million to about 420 million by midcentury. Between 2000 and 2050, according to Mark Schill of Praxis Strategy Group, the U.S. workforce is expected to grow by 37%. China's will shrink by 10%. Europe's will contract by 21%.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577029972941870172.html?mod=WSJ_GoogleNews

Edited November 13, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

My family immigrated to this country legally. They broke no laws of this country when they entered it legally. If someone can't identify the differences between the words legal and illegal then they should give it up until they get a better grasp on the English language.

[kytwell 179]

What's the economic impact difference between documented/ legal immigrants and undocumented illegal immigrants, in your opinion?

I rephrased the question into a more appropriate context. In short; I don't think we have to imprison nearly as many legal immigrants, while we do have to imprison illegal ones, then transport them back to their home country and prosecution costs etc. So that's some costs eliminated. We don't have to pay border patrol officers to arrest legal immigrants, so that would be another cost eliminated. I think I read earlier we're using an $18,500,000.00 unmanned drone to patrol our border. We don't have to use those for legal immigrants.

[Karee 4,191]

My family immigrated to this country legally. They broke no laws of this country when they entered it legally. If someone can't identify the differences between the words legal and illegal then they should give it up until they get a better grasp on the English language.

What does it mean in 1908 to come here legally? Laws changed I grant you that. Kip you don't look Nunavit to me. You look European. At some point your ancestors came over here for work probably. Do you think they needed a visa? Doubt it.

[kytwell 179]

What does it mean in 1908 to come here legally? Laws changed I grant you that. Kip you don't look Nunavit to me. You look European. At some point your ancestors came over here for work probably. Do you think they needed a visa? Doubt it.

They most likely needed to wait in a line at Ellis Island and register. I have logged onto http://www.ellisisland.org/ and found my Mom's grandparent's and my Dad's mother and his Dad's father's names there. If that's what our immigration laws were at that time and were followed, then they were considered here legally. Our laws may be different now, but make no mistake if you don't have the proper authorization to be here, than you are here illegally.<----PERIOD

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

What does it mean in 1908 to come here legally? Laws changed I grant you that. Kip you don't look Nunavit to me. You look European. At some point your ancestors came over here for work probably. Do you think they needed a visa? Doubt it.

My moms family needed a visa from Canada, and they did it legally. If there's no laws to break, then no law has been broken. Seeing how we have US immigration laws it makes me want to puke when people break those laws. No excuses for the law breakers who sh*t on this countries immigration laws.

[Karee 4,191]

They most likely needed to wait in a line at Ellis Island and register. I have logged onto http://www.ellisisland.org/ and found my Mom's grandparent's and my Dad's mother and his Dad's father's names there. If that's what our immigration laws were at that time and were followed, then they were considered here legally. Our laws may be different now, but make no mistake if you don't have the proper authorization to be here, than you are here illegally.<----PERIOD

I'm not sticking up for illegal immigration, believe me. I'd just like to know when the switch was flipped. What year was it? You can look at ellisisland.org all day. Did they have a legal visa to come here? I doubt it. Neither did my grandparents.

[scandal 951]

I'm not sticking up for illegal immigration, believe me. I'd just like to know when the switch was flipped. What year was it? You can look at ellisisland.org all day. Did they have a legal visa to come here? I doubt it. Neither did my grandparents.

The Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924 was the first formal, permanent restrictive immigration law in the US to limit the number of new entrants to the country. A temporary law had been on the books for a number of years preceding that.

During the 19th century millions of Irish, Italians, Chinese, Germans, and other nationalities boarded ships in their home countries and embarked for US ports of entry where no officials stood to admit them or check any documents - none were needed. On the contrary, Irish entering New York harbor were greeted with political pamphlets telling them how to vote in elections for Tammany Hall.