illegal immigrants (another poll)

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

I'd rather we make it so easy to get a work visa here, that nobody would ever immigrate illegally.

There is a lot of enforcement work to do and a lot more credibility that needs to be established before the American people get suckered into the myth of so called "guestworkers". There's no such thing as a "guestworker" in the USA.

The same people that whine about deporting illegal aliens for breaking the law will cry just as loud about guestworkers being deported for breaking the law. An illegal alien is a guestworker that breaks the terms of their visa. We have millions of visa overstayers already. About 6 to 8+ million of them. An illegal alien by any other name is still an illegal alien. Why add more supply?

I don't buy your logic (illogic).

Actually we have plenty of guest workers here now, the problem is that most of them came into the country with no screening and no background checks so we have a mess.

The truth is that we need a vastly expanded guest worker program but most of our political people don't have the balls to say it openly for fear of sounding racist.

In the scope of global economics, it doesn't make sense that we can export our jobs, but not import labor on the same scale. We either fully protect American jobs by forcing US companies to stay on US soil or we let the great experiment of free trade work by allowing a free flow of labor to come into this country.

did you really say this ?

export jobs .... and import labor? Is this to fill the jobs that were exported?

It's why you won't find Free Trade guru's being fundamentally against open immigration. Just like the Free Market isn't truly free as long as we continue to have corporate subsidies. The 'free' part of such economic ideologies is to allow a free flow of goods and services. I'm not in favor of anything free without it being fair, so I can understand the impact it can have on U.S. jobs and our economy as a whole, however, since we've already have such a system in place, advocating that the government should interfere or impede upon such a system is contrary to the ideology that many here supposedly embrace. You can't really call yourself a free market advocate if you are not. In other words, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

i think you are missing what natty is getting at. if you export jobs, and then import workers, what's to become of the american workers that lost their job when their job was exported? they'll be unemployed with a bleak job outlook due to the imported workers competing with them for jobs.

maybe you really do want to drive down wages......

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

I'd rather we make it so easy to get a work visa here, that nobody would ever immigrate illegally.

There is a lot of enforcement work to do and a lot more credibility that needs to be established before the American people get suckered into the myth of so called "guestworkers". There's no such thing as a "guestworker" in the USA.

The same people that whine about deporting illegal aliens for breaking the law will cry just as loud about guestworkers being deported for breaking the law. An illegal alien is a guestworker that breaks the terms of their visa. We have millions of visa overstayers already. About 6 to 8+ million of them. An illegal alien by any other name is still an illegal alien. Why add more supply?

I don't buy your logic (illogic).

Actually we have plenty of guest workers here now, the problem is that most of them came into the country with no screening and no background checks so we have a mess.

The truth is that we need a vastly expanded guest worker program but most of our political people don't have the balls to say it openly for fear of sounding racist.

In the scope of global economics, it doesn't make sense that we can export our jobs, but not import labor on the same scale. We either fully protect American jobs by forcing US companies to stay on US soil or we let the great experiment of free trade work by allowing a free flow of labor to come into this country.

did you really say this ?

export jobs .... and import labor? Is this to fill the jobs that were exported?

It's why you won't find Free Trade guru's being fundamentally against open immigration. Just like the Free Market isn't truly free as long as we continue to have corporate subsidies. The 'free' part of such economic ideologies is to allow a free flow of goods and services. I'm not in favor of anything free without it being fair, so I can understand the impact it can have on U.S. jobs and our economy as a whole, however, since we've already have such a system in place, advocating that the government should interfere or impede upon such a system is contrary to the ideology that many here supposedly embrace. You can't really call yourself a free market advocate if you are not. In other words, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

i think you are missing what natty is getting at. if you export jobs, and then import workers, what's to become of the american workers that lost their job when their job was exported? they'll be unemployed with a bleak job outlook due to the imported workers competing with them for jobs.

maybe you really do want to drive down wages......

Maybe I want that? Charles, welcome to reality. Your buddies, the free market advocates have brought this all upon us. China is poisoning our children with lead based toys...the lead ironically coming from exported, recycled computer electronics from the U.S.. This is the free market...free flow of goods and services. Unless you're ready to rethink that ideology, you're essentially trying to shut the barn door after the cattle have left.

[Nessa 23]

this thread needs kitty pics

[NavarreMan 10]

I'll play...

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

I'd rather we make it so easy to get a work visa here, that nobody would ever immigrate illegally.

There is a lot of enforcement work to do and a lot more credibility that needs to be established before the American people get suckered into the myth of so called "guestworkers". There's no such thing as a "guestworker" in the USA.

The same people that whine about deporting illegal aliens for breaking the law will cry just as loud about guestworkers being deported for breaking the law. An illegal alien is a guestworker that breaks the terms of their visa. We have millions of visa overstayers already. About 6 to 8+ million of them. An illegal alien by any other name is still an illegal alien. Why add more supply?

I don't buy your logic (illogic).

Actually we have plenty of guest workers here now, the problem is that most of them came into the country with no screening and no background checks so we have a mess.

The truth is that we need a vastly expanded guest worker program but most of our political people don't have the balls to say it openly for fear of sounding racist.

In the scope of global economics, it doesn't make sense that we can export our jobs, but not import labor on the same scale. We either fully protect American jobs by forcing US companies to stay on US soil or we let the great experiment of free trade work by allowing a free flow of labor to come into this country.

did you really say this ?

export jobs .... and import labor? Is this to fill the jobs that were exported?

It's why you won't find Free Trade guru's being fundamentally against open immigration. Just like the Free Market isn't truly free as long as we continue to have corporate subsidies. The 'free' part of such economic ideologies is to allow a free flow of goods and services. I'm not in favor of anything free without it being fair, so I can understand the impact it can have on U.S. jobs and our economy as a whole, however, since we've already have such a system in place, advocating that the government should interfere or impede upon such a system is contrary to the ideology that many here supposedly embrace. You can't really call yourself a free market advocate if you are not. In other words, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

i think you are missing what natty is getting at. if you export jobs, and then import workers, what's to become of the american workers that lost their job when their job was exported? they'll be unemployed with a bleak job outlook due to the imported workers competing with them for jobs.

maybe you really do want to drive down wages......

Maybe I want that? Charles, welcome to reality. Your buddies, the free market advocates have brought this all upon us. China is poisoning our children with lead based toys...the lead ironically coming from exported, recycled computer electronics from the U.S.. This is the free market...free flow of goods and services. Unless you're ready to rethink that ideology, you're essentially trying to shut the barn door after the cattle have left.

i fail to see just what you are driving at with your posts. yes i'm aware of all of that about lead based toys, etc etc, i do read the news and vj

as you support open immigration, and indeed illegal immigration, could we say you are a free market guru? you have ranted against nafta in the past saying it's all wrong.

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

i fail to see just what you are driving at with your posts. yes i'm aware of all of that about lead based toys, etc etc, i do read the news and vj

as you support open immigration, and indeed illegal immigration, could we say you are a free market guru? you have ranted against nafta in the past saying it's all wrong.

I think I've been clear. Open immigration policy is in line with Free Trade and a Free Market. You're either in favor of those ideologies or not. I've been consistent on my position - I'm in favor of free trade and a free market as long as its fair. Isolationism isn't going to work in the global scheme of things. You can't prohibit the free flow of labor (both export and import) but allow the free flow of goods, if you want the free market to truly be free. What part of that doesn't make sense to you?

Edit: You can regulate the market, but if you prohibit crucial elements of it - it's no longer what you set it out to be.

Edited November 21, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[Marc and Olga 0]

I WOULD agree to a work visa/guestworker program except we already have a large number of overstays under the current visa programs, so how can we believe that there will be enforcement on ANY new programs?

I'm sorry for you Steven, if you think ONLY labor is "flowing" across our border and by this I mean there are criminals crossing as well as the hard working "mushroom pickers"...

I however feel that before ANY guestworker program is allowed there needs to be 2 things:

First, secure our borders and second, remove those here illegally (yep I mean overstays as well).

of course even IF our government did that, I would have a hard time believing that it wasn't all done JUST to get the guestworker program and then we are back to our current status quo, with millions more overstays just from the guest worker program.....

Any less only encourages more illegal immigration, why should they jump through (immigration) hoops when they can just jump the border?

Edit: clarification

Edited November 22, 2007 by Marc and Olga

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

I WOULD agree to a work visa/guestworker program except we already have a large number of overstays under the current visa programs, so how can we believe that there will be enforcement on ANY new programs?

I'm sorry for you Steven, if you think ONLY labor is "flowing" across our border and by this I mean there are criminals crossing as well as the hard working "mushroom pickers"...

I however feel that before ANY guestworker program is allowed there needs to be 2 things:

First, secure our borders and second, remove those here illegally (yep I mean overstays as well).

of course even IF our government did that, I would have a hard time believing that it wasn't all done JUST to get the guestworker program and then we are back to our current status quo, with millions more overstays just from the guest worker program.....

Any less only encourages more illegal immigration, why should they jump through (immigration) hoops when they can just jump the border?

Edit: clarification

Billions of dollars of illegal contraband flows in and out of this country. How do you stop it? I'm not advocating the we don't regulate. I'm saying that we need to reduce the bureaucracy or any governmental inhibitors that will muck up the functionality and potential of a free market. Just a suggestion...have Border Agents be able to grant temporary tourist visas to anyone who can show a valid ID. Have an identification system that cooperates with both Canada and Mexico that Border Agents would have immediate access through a data base, with fingerprinting. Basically, make it easy for those who are coming here to work and prevent convicted felons from coming through. If it's easy and accessible for those who are law abiding people then we can focus our energy on those who want to cause trouble.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

i fail to see just what you are driving at with your posts. yes i'm aware of all of that about lead based toys, etc etc, i do read the news and vj

as you support open immigration, and indeed illegal immigration, could we say you are a free market guru? you have ranted against nafta in the past saying it's all wrong.

I think I've been clear. Open immigration policy is in line with Free Trade and a Free Market. You're either in favor of those ideologies or not. I've been consistent on my position - I'm in favor of free trade and a free market as long as its fair. Isolationism isn't going to work in the global scheme of things. You can't prohibit the free flow of labor (both export and import) but allow the free flow of goods, if you want the free market to truly be free. What part of that doesn't make sense to you?

Edit: You can regulate the market, but if you prohibit crucial elements of it - it's no longer what you set it out to be.

i'm not in favor of wide open immigration, every country has the right to limit who enters or not. i'm not sure what you had for dinner but it musta caused hallucinations as yes, every country can and will limit the flow of labor into the country. perhaps you can be so kind as to point out a country that does not? i'm not in favor of free trade when countries like china use us as a dumping ground for their goods and the usa gets the raw end of the deal. i'm not in favor of mexico exporting their population here with instructions on how to cross the border illegally and yet they are hypocrites in the treatment of illegals in mexico. a free market is worthwhile, yes, but we don't have to abdicate our national identity nor future to appease other countries agendas.

no, you've not been clear - as you've stated you are for any type of immigration yet you are against nafta, how does that match up?

Edited November 22, 2007 by charlesandnessa

[sparkofcreation 0]

Illegal presence is not a crime. It's a civil offense.

Well, yes and no. Illegal presence is a federal felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison *if* you've been deported before (8 USC 1326, Reentry of a Removed Alien, "an alien, who had been previously deported, removed, or excluded... was thereafter found to be present in the United States..."). Illegal entry is a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail (8 USC 1325, Improper Entry by an Alien "an alien... entered the United States at a time and place not designated for lawful entry, or falsified or concealed material information to gain entry...").

BTW possessing alcohol in a national park is also a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail.

But no, an alien's presence per se is not illegal if the alien has not been deported before. (Unlawful, but not illegal, and I wish to God more people would grasp the difference between the two.)

Edited November 23, 2007 by sparkofcreation

[NavarreMan 10]

Illegal presence is not a crime. It's a civil offense.

Well, yes and no. Illegal presence is a federal felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison *if* you've been deported before (8 USC 1326, Reentry of a Removed Alien, "an alien, who had been previously deported, removed, or excluded... was thereafter found to be present in the United States..."). Illegal entry is a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail (8 USC 1325, Improper Entry by an Alien "an alien... entered the United States at a time and place not designated for lawful entry, or falsified or concealed material information to gain entry...").

BTW possessing alcohol in a national park is also a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail.

But no, an alien's presence per se is not illegal if the alien has not been deported before. (Unlawful, but not illegal, and I wish to God more people would grasp the difference between the two.)

I love to see people actually take the time to research the laws they comment about here. As for the unlawful v. illegal:

Ballentine's Legal Dictionary defines the following:

Unlawful adj. Illegal, illicit, contrary to law; not permitted by law; not done in the manner required by law.

Illegal adj. Unlawful, contrary to law, illicit, felonious, forbidden, improper, unauthorized, proscribed.

There is virtually no difference between the two according to one of the leading legal dictionaries.

[NavarreMan 10]

Ooops, I almost forgot. The status of any immigrant is illegal or unlawful if it is obtained by any means that is not lawful or legal. Whether it is a misdemeanor or criminal offense is the variable.

[sparkofcreation 0]

I love to see people actually take the time to research the laws they comment about here. As for the unlawful v. illegal:

Ballentine's Legal Dictionary defines the following:

Unlawful adj. Illegal, illicit, contrary to law; not permitted by law; not done in the manner required by law.

Illegal adj. Unlawful, contrary to law, illicit, felonious, forbidden, improper, unauthorized, proscribed.

There is virtually no difference between the two according to one of the leading legal dictionaries.

Did you actually read what you posted?

Besides the fact that Black's is the leading US law dictionary, the distinction is quite clear: things that are illegal are "forbidden" and "proscribed"; that is, the law specifically forbids them. Things that are unlawful are "not done in the manner required by law"; that is, the law requires things be done a certain way, and it is unlawful to do them a different way.

To use an example I'm sure most people are more familiar with (traffic offenses): driving under the influence is illegal. The law specifically forbids it and--the relevant part to this discussion--you can go to jail for it. Whereas speeding is unlawful (not illegal) because the law sets a maximum speed and therefore by going faster than that you are not obeying the law--and you can be assessed a civil penalty, but not sent to jail (unless you don't pay the penalty).

Assuming someone has not been deported before, entering the country by sneaking over the border is both unlawful (not done the way the law says it should be) and illegal (under 8 USC 1325), therefore you can be sent to jail for it. However, simply being here is merely unlawful and not illegal, therefore you cannot be sent to jail simply for being here, but you can have a civil penalty (deportation or removal) imposed. So VJTroll is correct when he says that mere presence is not a criminal offense.

Ooops, I almost forgot. The status of any immigrant is illegal or unlawful if it is obtained by any means that is not lawful or legal. Whether it is a misdemeanor or criminal offense is the variable.

If the alien has not been deported before, the status is unlawful. If the alien has been deported before, the status is illegal (and also unlawful).

Also, a misdemeanor is a type of criminal offense. Saying "whether it's a misdemeanor is a criminal offense" is like saying "whether it's a Golden Retriever or a dog."

[prpplague 0]

i certainly would and do turn in suspected illegals. i pay a significant amount of property taxes for the local school district. our local school has a very high number of illegals attending, so many that many times school papers and announcements are sent home ONLY in spanish. i don't think that my children's school should bear the burden of illegals sending their kids to school at my expense. in addition there are many other expense that are accrued by illegals such as car wrecks by uninsured drivers, other criminals acts, and the burden on local medical resources(since they generally only go to emergency rooms).

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

i fail to see just what you are driving at with your posts. yes i'm aware of all of that about lead based toys, etc etc, i do read the news and vj

as you support open immigration, and indeed illegal immigration, could we say you are a free market guru? you have ranted against nafta in the past saying it's all wrong.

I think I've been clear. Open immigration policy is in line with Free Trade and a Free Market. You're either in favor of those ideologies or not. I've been consistent on my position - I'm in favor of free trade and a free market as long as its fair. Isolationism isn't going to work in the global scheme of things. You can't prohibit the free flow of labor (both export and import) but allow the free flow of goods, if you want the free market to truly be free. What part of that doesn't make sense to you?

Edit: You can regulate the market, but if you prohibit crucial elements of it - it's no longer what you set it out to be.

i'm not in favor of wide open immigration, every country has the right to limit who enters or not. i'm not sure what you had for dinner but it musta caused hallucinations as yes, every country can and will limit the flow of labor into the country. perhaps you can be so kind as to point out a country that does not? i'm not in favor of free trade when countries like china use us as a dumping ground for their goods and the usa gets the raw end of the deal. i'm not in favor of mexico exporting their population here with instructions on how to cross the border illegally and yet they are hypocrites in the treatment of illegals in mexico. a free market is worthwhile, yes, but we don't have to abdicate our national identity nor future to appease other countries agendas.

no, you've not been clear - as you've stated you are for any type of immigration yet you are against nafta, how does that match up?

If a Canadian or Mexican citizen could show a border agent a valid ID which could be immediately checked through a data base, would you agree to let that person be given free access to travel here? Also, if they could secure a job, grant them a temporary work visa. The EU has similar provisions. I don't how you could or why you would want to limit how many people can travel here, if you eliminate any reasonable fear of them being convicted felons.