"Illegal" or "Undocumented" Immigrant

[Chris]

Question:
Why do you think the media and so many of our elected officials are enamored with "illegal" or the political correct "undocumented" alien?

If you listen to them, you would think the US economy would come to a screeching halt without illegal aliens...why?  A few years back, when organized labor came to the rescue of the migrant worker, tomato harvesters (for example) used to be manned by a crew of thirteen or fourteen.  The American farmer and American engineer figured out a way to do the same work with machine that only now needs a crew of two or three.  Nut farmers used to pay for three or four laborers to climb trees to knock nuts out of the trees...now a shaker machine and wind row sweeper does the same thing with a crew of one.  Fruit tree farmers now utilize similar methods to harvest their crops.  Ever see how they harvest rice in the US vs. the rest of the world?  If I look around to see how things are done down on the farm today vs. when I was a kid...a LOT has changed.  Who should get the credit for this increase in productivity...migrant workers or the American farmer and ingenious American engineers.  Field labor was and still is a very important component on the farm...but it would appear migrant labor contributed little to farm productivity gains.

So why are we asked to embrace the "invasion"?  Do Americans have some insatiable desire to finance the well-being of those who come to benefit from our public welfare systems....while so many of us suffer with genuine "domestic" problems?  Perhaps its part of the "one-worlders" plan, to bring the US into the fold, which so many of the Socialist countries now find themselves.  Maybe we're just really nice guys???  

We're all capable of scrubbing toilets, mowing lawns or washing dishes...and that seems to be a popular and frankly disrespectful argument to look the other way.  What do you think about this?  Seems to me unchecked immigration is just as important a problem as fighting terrorism and  legislating from the bench.

Your thoughts please.  ...Chris    :?

[dukkillr]

that's easy.  because documented immigrants of hispanic ancestory side with the illegals and they vote.

[Chris]

Hmm?  I know a bunch of properly documented aliens and naturalized citizens of many races.  They all seem to hold a hard line against illegal immigration...due to the fact that they followed the rules to get here.

I think the you'll find there are far more native-born Americans that want to open our borders to the world.  But just how many?

...Chris

[Chris]

Good stuff TM7.

I don't think (most) corporations are the problem...they are the part of the solution.  From them comes innovation, employment and tax revenue...all good things.  Government's role in our economy should be to regulate only to help ensure business activities don't infringe upon our rights to the pursuit of happiness.

As far as taxing aliens...it's a good thought.  But most, illegal or otherwise, are probably eligible for earned income tax credits under our system of taxation (if they file), so I doubt if there's is a pot of gold there.  If we tax employers (most of which are small) the cost will be passed on to consumers...you and me.  Hardly seems fair and equitable since we already have laws in place to deal with illegal immigration.  Besides, I can't think of a single country that has ever taxed itself into prosperity...can you?

I do fear the one-world scenario...all it will bring us is a more dangerous place to live.  You can be assured it will pull us into the abyss where most of the world now resides.

Thanks for the thought-provoking commentary.  Please keep it coming!

...Chris

[Mainer]

I'll let my opinion rip, and I expect the same in return.

I see plenty of lazy native born folk who are in this country only by accident of birth and who are happy to apply for the next government benefit paid for by their neighbors.  They'd sell out the constitution for a fist full of food stamps.  Why should those bastards have any superior right to be in this country over someone who is willing to come here, work, and otherwise lead a productive existence??

By the same token, if someone illegally sneaks into this country for the purpose of leaching off the system--as far as I'm concerned that person can starve in the streets.

I have a SERIOUS problem with an immigration system that makes people who want to come to this country to work and be product wait for years for legal entry.  They should be fast tracked for citizenship.

I would think that the only people who would want such a system are (a) the leaches, (b) government bureaucrats who make their living enforcing arcane immigration laws, and (c) sleazy politicians who want to rile up people over a non-issue.

Seems to me that our anger and contempt should be directed to the leaches and those who harm others by criminal acts (not merely failing to comply to the letter with bureaucratic immigration BS).

[RaySendero]

Think that when a country cannot control its borders and immigration policies it will eventually fail to be a country!

Notice how big of problem this has already become - When hundreds of thousands illegals march in our country showing foreign flags!  Hello, anybody else getting that "something is wrong here"!

There is legal immigration and there is illegal immigration.

It not hard to understand the difference!  Yet most of the debate seems to be pointed toward allowing the illegal immigrates to become legal immigrates.  This is not a solution; it’s also part of the problem - A real big problem now and growing bigger!  My concern is that the more complicated solutions we enact - The more problems we will create for ourselves in the future.

[Mainer]

Without a question I agree that legal immigration is preferable to illegal immigration.

The problem is we have a system that's broken.  It's so slow and bureaucratic that people who would otherwise enter this country legally instead decide to enter illegally.  The result is 11-12 million illegal immigrants.

The worse problem is that with otherwise decent people left with virtually no alternative than to enter the country illegally they're lumped in with criminals--the one's we should be trying to keep out of the country.

I don't buy the argument that "My grandfather came here legally from [insert name of European country]," so there's no excuse for illegal immigrants today." I strongly suspect that past waives of immigrants from Europe faced a much less complicated, far more streamlined immigration process than immigrants from Latin America and elsewhere face today.

I also don't buy the argument that someone who comes to this country illegally should automatically be lumped in the same category as thieves, rapists, murderers, etc.  

There's a huge difference between commiting an illegal act the obviously result of which is to wrongly harm another and violating an arcane web of bureacratic BS laws.  By analogy to immigrants entering this country illegally, I suspect the typical honest, hard-working small business person is in regular violation of one or another environmental, wage and hour, work place saftey, consumer protection, or internal revenue laws, because compliance (or even knowing all of the requirements) is simply impossible.

[victorcharlie]

My 7th great grand father came over as an indentured servant in 1684.  Members of my family provided debate on both the Articles of the Confederation and the U.S. Constitution.   The above fact has no relevance other than historical significance.  If you read the Declaration of independence, immigration, or the lack of it was one of the complaints made against the king.  

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

The point is that immigration has been a problem from before day one.

So, what does James Madison, the "father of the Constitution" have to say?

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

The above statement is from the second Federalist Paper which Madison used to sell the idea of a federal government to the 13 colonies.

We owe it to mere casualty, that very serious embarrassments on this subject have been hitherto escaped. By the laws of several States, certain descriptions of aliens, who had rendered themselves obnoxious, were laid under interdicts inconsistent not only with the rights of citizenship but with the privilege of residence. What would have been the consequence, if such persons, by residence or otherwise, had acquired the character of citizens under the laws of another State, and then asserted their rights as such, both to residence and citizenship, within the State proscribing them? Whatever the legal consequences might have been, other consequences would probably have resulted, of too serious a nature not to be provided against. The new Constitution has accordingly, with great propriety, made provision against them, and all others proceeding from the defect of the Confederation on this head, by authorizing the general government to establish a uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States.

And this, the above, from Federalist paper #42

Is it true that force and right are necessarily on the same side in republican governments? May not the minor party possess such a superiority of pecuniary resources, of military talents and experience, or of secret succors from foreign powers, as will render it superior also in an appeal to the sword? May not a more compact and advantageous position turn the scale on the same side, against a superior number so situated as to be less capable of a prompt and collected exertion of its strength? Nothing can be more chimerical than to imagine that in a trial of actual force, victory may be calculated by the rules which prevail in a census of the inhabitants, or which determine the event of an election! May it not happen, in fine, that the minority of CITIZENS may become a majority of PERSONS, by the accession of alien residents, of a casual concourse of adventurers, or of those whom the constitution of the State has not admitted to the rights of suffrage?

The above from Federalist paper #69.

So, from the Declaration of independence, our fore fathers knew they needed immigration.

From the second federalist paper James Madison tells the colonies that because we have so much in common a federal government will work.

Madison explains in the federalist paper #42 that the federal government needs to control immigration and should have the power to set immigration policy.

Finally, in federalist paper #69 Madison tries to convince the colonies that one of the problems the constitution should prevent is an election being stolen by aliens.

IMO, we need immigration, but we should allow those who we want and need.  We should not allow this invasion of illegal immigrants to continue.