The liberal love affair with illegal immigration

Subscribe

Until the Obama presidency, liberals actually had a fairly moderate view on illegal immigration: they supported border enforcement and the enforcement of immigration laws. They also talked about how low skilled labor undermines the wages of American workers. If you go back and hear speeches by Bill Clinton and even then Senators Obama and Clinton, their position is not too different from the GOP's current position.

But now, they've gone bonkers. The Democrats realized that their long-term political strategy rests on granting amnesty and citizenship to the 12 million illegal aliens in the United States, thereby adding millions of new voters to their party. Ultimately, that is the core principle guiding their love affair with illegal aliens.

Most conservatives, myself included, are OK with granting legal status to DACA recipients and even to illegal aliens broadly speaking, but in return for several key provisions: 1) no amnesty or citizenship to illegal aliens, 2) mandatory e-verify, 3) border enforcement, 4) elimination of visa lotteries and chain migration, 5) skills based legal immigration system similar to the one used by Canada.

When I hear liberals talk about this issue, they're now saying that immigration law does not matter, that we should selectively enforce the law or ignore it altogether, and they are taking the sides of illegal aliens over Americans. They support using taxpayer dollars to provide services and benefits to illegal aliens, support sanctuary cities, and have displayed zero concern for American low-skilled workers who are most hurt by illegal immigration.

Is this the hill that Democrats are willing to die on? Is their message to voters that they are willing to shut down the federal government because they want amnesty and citizenship for millions of illegal aliens?

We are truly living in absurd times.

Region

Comments (133)

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 6:55pm

Democrats play the incrementalism game well, and understand that as more illegals pour in, they will become part of communities, have kids with Americans, become part of American families, etc. They also understand that no widescale deportation effort for 12 million folks will ever happen-so why not go all in on amnesty? DACA is just the camel nose in the tent

Conservatives have proven to be amnesty shills themselves for the most part-how'd we not manage to make Mandatory e-verify law of the land is confounding. Guys like McCain and Rubio-even going as far back as Dubya himself, have always been wobbly on the issue, so if they won't mount an adequate defense why shouldn't Dems go all in? Blue states already offer de facto amnesty for the most part, any talk against illegal immigration gets you branded a racist, anchor babies are Constitutionally protected, and chain migration is a given whenever children are legalized. Dems can't be blamed for pressing their advantage here.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:11pm

TheGrind:

Democrats play the incrementalism game well, and understand that as more illegals pour in, they will become part of communities, have kids with Americans, become part of American families, etc. They also understand that no widescale deportation effort for 12 million folks will ever happen-so why not go all in on amnesty? DACA is just the camel nose in the tent

Conservatives have proven to be amnesty shills themselves for the most part-how'd we not manage to make Mandatory e-verify law of the land is confounding. Guys like McCain and Rubio-even going as far back as Dubya himself, have always been wobbly on the issue, so if they won't mount an adequate defense why shouldn't Dems go all in? Blue states already offer de facto amnesty for the most part, any talk against illegal immigration gets you branded a racist, anchor babies are Constitutionally protected, and chain migration is a given whenever children are legalized. Dems can't be blamed for pressing their advantage here.

Very good points. Bush, McCain, Rubio, and other Republicans beholden to corporate lobbies, have balked at passing mandatory e-verify and want cheap labor for their donors. For too long, GOP leadership used working class Americans for their votes while implementing policies that hurt them. Trump's capturing of the GOP nomination was in large part the result of this disconnect between the party elite and its voters.

Democrats genuinely want to transform America into a third world country, where people are dependent on government programs, redistribution of wealth, endless affirmative action, and identity politics. Since the New Deal, the Democrats have been a coalition party of various interest groups that want something from the government while since Reagan, the GOP has largely been an ideological party based on principles.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:12pm

Its a stupid policy, among other things. Democrats believe this will give them a permanent politcal edge. When in reality that isn't how politics works. People aren't static drones who have one political view for life. The last time Amnesty happened the democrats thought the same thing, turns out that didn't work.

Also quit calling them liberals, they aren't liberal. They are fucking lunatic left-fascists.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:16pm

heister:

Its a stupid policy, among other things. Democrats believe this will give them a permanent politcal edge. When in reality that isn't how politics works. People aren't static drones who have one political view for life. The last time Amnesty happened the democrats thought the same thing, turns out that didn't work.

Also quit calling them liberals, they aren't liberal. They are fucking lunatic left-fascists.

What are you referring to? Reagan committed an grievous mistake in 1986 by granting amnesty to 3 million illegals. Latinos have consistently voted for Democrats; even when Reagan won a 49-state landslide in 1984, he only received around 30-35% of the latino vote.

Recent immigrants lean pretty left and want more big government programs and benefits.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:22pm

Not really, those numbers are skewed because of generational demographics. A huge percentage of the Hispanic voter base is extremely young. Which tends to trend towards democratic voting. As people age they get more conservative. This is true among all racial groups. The reasons has more to do with age demographic makeups than really racial demographic makeups. If you look at say 50+ for people of hispanic heritage they have a pretty even divide on actual policy. It also doesn't help that most of their options for racial identity voting happen to be democratic. The country works at an equalibrium, if one group grows in power too much their policies will shift until they leave people behind.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:35pm

The illegals are just a pawn in their game. Remember that illegal aliens are generally in support of liberals and leftist policies and obviously the liberals know this so they want give illegals amnesty so they get their vote and therefore would pretty much win every presidential election in the future and thus be able to perpetuate their leftist paradigm even further. If you think they truly care about the illegals they don't.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 7:37pm

TheROI:

The illegals are just a pawn in their game. Remember that illegal aliens are generally in support of liberals and leftist policies and obviously the liberals know this so they want give illegals amnesty so they get their vote and therefore would pretty much win every presidential election in the future and thus be able to perpetuate their leftist paradigm. If you think they truly care about the illegals they don't.

Absolutely. If the illegal aliens were conservative, the Democrats would be putting them on the next flight to their home countries.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 8:02pm

Isn't it possible that we're being just a little cynical of the Democrats' intentions here? Couldn't it be plausible that maybe, just maybe, the senators and representatives of the Democratic party don't want to deport the shit out of 12 Million people who have family members here because it's just kinda a shitty thing to do to communities, businesses that utilize their labor and the families of said deportees.

 
Jan 17, 2018 - 8:13pm

LReed:

Isn't it possible that we're being just a little cynical of the Democrats' intentions here? Couldn't it be plausible that maybe, just maybe, the senators and representatives of the Democratic party don't want to deport the shit out of 12 Million people who have family members here because it's just kinda a shitty thing to do to communities, businesses that utilize their labor and the families of said deportees.

The vast majority of Republicans do not support deporting 12 million illegal aliens. A majority of them support giving legal status to DACA recipients. If the Democrats were simply telling us to not deport all of them, that wouldn't be an issue. But they are demanding that we give amnesty and path to citizenship to those who broke the law by entering illegally, want to import an endless array of low skilled immigrants through visa lotteries and chain migration, support sanctuary cities that defy federal immigration law, etc.

Moreover, are we not supposed to enforce immigration law because deporting people will hurt their feelings? A common argument I hear is that if an illegal alien is working, not hurting anyone, paying taxes, they should be totally immune from deportation. But that would require us to selectively enforce the law and carve out numerous exemptions. We are a nation of laws. Now, as I said in my OP, I'm ok with legal status for illegals who haven't caused trouble since coming here, but it would need to come with fundamental changes to our immigration system.

Finally, the Democrats' radical leftward shift on immigration is a fairly recent development. Obama realized that he had to jack up the latino vote to win re-election in 2012 and used DACA to do so. Democrats soon realized that they can transform the political landscape if the 12 million illegals became citizens.

 
Jan 18, 2018 - 11:14am

Speaking here as a moderate liberal, what I see is a series of narrow minded perspectives sprinkled with hyperbole and speculation. To start, you say liberal viewpoints were moderate on immigration UNITL Obama's administration.

Obama actually added to border security, patrols, and overall capacity on top of what was in place during the bush administration. Illegal crossings over the US/Mexico border decreased by 90% from 2005 to 2015, and during Obama's term more illegal immigrants were deported than any other president in history. Most estimate we've been at a net loss for illegal immigrant population now for the better part of a decade. On top of this, there were much wider immigration reforms that were laid on the table by democrats in 2013 that were blocked by the republican held house.

So the question begs, if it seems like democrats statistically were just as tough if not tougher on immigration throughout the Obama administration, why would liberals prefer the democrats' immigration policies? In my view, the democrats have taken a more nuanced approach to immigration that is both sensitive to the plight of these people, while also respecting the law and the interests of american workers. DACA is a prime example in that it addresses a specific demographic within the illegal immigrant population that is least at fault and would be most adversely affected. And this type of critical thinking when it comes to immigration seems a lot more attractive than the populist blanket type policies we're seeing from the right, especially now under the Trump administration.

Take the wall for example. From a practical standpoint, this is dumb. The majority of illegal immigrants now are believed to come from visa overstays, not illegal crossings over the southern border. And spending tens of billions on a wall that crosses 2,000 miles over the most rugged and rural terrain in the world seems all the more unreasonable when it can be easily crossed via tunnels & ladders, which are already used to cross the border anyways. But what is least attractive about that option, more so than the practical aspects, is its broader symbolism. From the perspective of the left, the wall is a physical manifestation of the belief that conservative immigration policies are rooted in irrational fear, scapegoating, or in many cases good ol' fashioned racism, which Trump's base seems to respond ever since "rapists and murderers". On top of that, there's the damage this causes to foreign relations and the world's view of the US as trying to separate itself from everyone else. The wall is not the only immigration policy that has been proposed that applies to this.

What confuses me most though is the timing of your post. You said yourself that you'd likely support DACA, or some form of it. But now, with it being the main point of negotiations for immigration policy, liberals have a "love affair" with illegal immigrants? I saw this posted on fivethirtyeight this morning which I thought gave an insightful perspective https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/theres-been-a-massive-shift-to-the… . While people talk about political groups becoming more extreme, perhaps it's not the policies actually changing as much as it is the center of conversations drifting right or left that skews our perspective on what is moderate. This appears to be one of them.

 
Jan 18, 2018 - 2:04pm

MiserlyGrandpa:

Speaking here as a moderate liberal, what I see is a series of narrow minded perspectives sprinkled with hyperbole and speculation. To start, you say liberal viewpoints were moderate on immigration UNITL Obama's administration.

Obama actually added to border security, patrols, and overall capacity on top of what was in place during the bush administration. Illegal crossings over the US/Mexico border decreased by 90% from 2005 to 2015, and during Obama's term more illegal immigrants were deported than any other president in history. Most estimate we've been at a net loss for illegal immigrant population now for the better part of a decade. On top of this, there were much wider immigration reforms that were laid on the table by democrats in 2013 that were blocked by the republican held house.

So the question begs, if it seems like democrats statistically were just as tough if not tougher on immigration throughout the Obama administration, why would liberals prefer the democrats' immigration policies? In my view, the democrats have taken a more nuanced approach to immigration that is both sensitive to the plight of these people, while also respecting the law and the interests of american workers. DACA is a prime example in that it addresses a specific demographic within the illegal immigrant population that is least at fault and would be most adversely affected. And this type of critical thinking when it comes to immigration seems a lot more attractive than the populist blanket type policies we're seeing from the right, especially now under the Trump administration.

Take the wall for example. From a practical standpoint, this is dumb. The majority of illegal immigrants now are believed to come from visa overstays, not illegal crossings over the southern border. And spending tens of billions on a wall that crosses 2,000 miles over the most rugged and rural terrain in the world seems all the more unreasonable when it can be easily crossed via tunnels & ladders, which are already used to cross the border anyways. But what is least attractive about that option, more so than the practical aspects, is its broader symbolism. From the perspective of the left, the wall is a physical manifestation of the belief that conservative immigration policies are rooted in irrational fear, scapegoating, or in many cases good ol' fashioned racism, which Trump's base seems to respond ever since "rapists and murderers". On top of that, there's the damage this causes to foreign relations and the world's view of the US as trying to separate itself from everyone else. The wall is not the only immigration policy that has been proposed that applies to this.

What confuses me most though is the timing of your post. You said yourself that you'd likely support DACA, or some form of it. But now, with it being the main point of negotiations for immigration policy, liberals have a "love affair" with illegal immigrants? I saw this posted on fivethirtyeight this morning which I thought gave an insightful perspective https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/theres-been-a-massive-shift-to-the… . While people talk about political groups becoming more extreme, perhaps it's not the policies actually changing as much as it is the center of conversations drifting right or left that skews our perspective on what is moderate. This appears to be one of them.

This is a well thought out post, although I disagree. I will address some of your points.

  1. The argument that Obama deported the most number of illegal aliens is highly misleading. Here's why. That statistic conflates removals and returns, which are 2 separate categories as defined by DHS. A removal refers to those who are arrested while attempting to illegally enter the United States or very shortly thereafter. Removals are handled by ICE. In contrast, a return is deportation in the true sense of the word because it refers to those who successfully entered our country through illegal means or illegally overstayed their visas and then were subsequently deported. During the Obama presidency, approximately two-thirds of the deportation statistic were removals, not returns. Moreover, Obama selectively enforced existing immigration law by enforcing the "catch and release" program, which instructed border agents to only arrest illegals who satisfy certain criteria. The Obama administration also allowed for arrested illegals to simply be released, at which point many of them would re-enter. Kate Steinle's killer is a prime example of this.

  2. DACA is unconstitutional, period. In 2012, while trying to pump up the latino vote in order to win re-election, Obama unilaterally refused to enforce the removal provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, thus ordering 2 million illegal aliens to not be deported. Congress rejected the DREAM Act since it would have provided blanket amnesty without any substantive reforms to immigration. Obama thus used his executive power to implement DACA, circumventing Congress' purview of creating federal immigration law. Although DACA is supposed to be implemented via "prosecutorial discretion," in practice, anyone who meets the criteria and applies, will be granted deferred status, which confers benefits such as work permits, social security number, drivers licenses.

Trump was right to reverse DACA, as it should have never happened in the first place. The ball is in Congress' court, as it is their job to create actual immigration law while the President signs (if he chooses to sign rather than veto) and then execute that said law.

I never said I support DACA. What I said was I'm ok with granting legal status to a fairly large group of illegal aliens in return for the proposals I outlined in my OP. That would be the result of Congressional law, not an executive order, so it would not be DACA but rather a new comprehensive immigration law.

  1. You make a decent point with the wall. I personally don't care too much about this, since if we impose mandatory e-verify and other measures, it will deter illegals from coming here. After all, they only come here for the jobs. Crush the job supply, and one would imagine that far fewer illegals will try to come here. There are also logistical concerns such as building a wall across rugged terrain and the government using eminent domain to seize private lands to build it. I disagree though that the wall is a symbol of racism and hate. That's hysteria. We are a sovereign nation and have the right to defend our border. Unfortunately, the vast majority of illegals enter through the southern border while very few enter through our northern border. The wall would simply be a measure to make it that much harder for illegals to get through. It also goes without saying that if you are a LEGAL immigrant, you can enter our country, wall or no wall. The mere existence of the wall in no way affects those who make it through our process in a legal fashion.
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 4:25am

I suppose Dances with Newfoundland and Dances with Dachshunds have sexual relations with one another while draped in Don't Tread on Me flags using Karo syrup as lube and using hickory wood as paddles. I think your arguments are flawed and based in a combination of xenophobia and racism.

When you argue immigration, don't argue the constitution. That's a false appeal to authority. Few reading this forum have read the US Constitution, so you're either more informed than your audience (in which case you're seeking to outsmart them, hoping they won't check your references) or you're less informed that you imagine. In this case, it's the latter. I'd bet both my testicles against your one testicle that you've never read the Constitution cover to cover, and that your argument is (at best) nuanced.

I'm inebriated right now, but I write and argue better than you do at your best. What you mean to say is not just that the wall is foolish and a waste of taxpayers' money, but that it's insufficient for border security and unnecessary given our countries net flow of migrants. But that doesn't seem to matter to you. You argue minutia while missing the main point--we need immigration.

We might have the wrong sort of immigration at the moment, but I'm not even sure that's true. An immigration system similar to the UK's or Canada's won't work for the US precisely because we don't have the same employment challenges. It turns out, we need a great deal more migrant farm laborers than people like you might ideally like. We also need a great deal more H1-B visa workers, we need to let their spouses work while here, we need to end the visa lottery, and phase out chain migration. But our economy requires a growing population, and without immigration (including illegal immigration), we'd have a negligible population growth rate since the late 1970s.

Perhaps you're better than I imagine, but I suspect you're a withering little shit whose dick shrivels at the mere mention of Jews or Asians. And I read your posts with contempt because your mind always tends toward the small and weary, you Lilliputian, lackluster lemon of a man.

 
Best Response
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:53am

Liberal playbook:

1) Call conservatives racist and xenophobic - check
2) Assume you are smarter and better informed - check
3) Resort to vulgar name calling - check

Well done. I'm sure there's a coherent argument somewhere in your post, but its difficult to parse out from the other garbage you've posted.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:54am

'Illegal Immigrant' - not PC (Originally Posted: 04/02/2013)

Besides being liberal psychobabble-PC BS in order to get votes, I'm actually confused as to what immigrants in this country who are here illegally should be called? I always felt like illegal immigrant wasn't descriptive enough since they're not immigrants (that would imply they immigrated here in a legit way - call them illegal aliens, that makes sense), but the issue is with the would 'illegal'...I actually don't get it:

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/press-drops-illegal-immigrant-stand…

My drinkin' problem left today, she packed up all her bags and walked away.
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:56am

In France the expression 'illegal immigrant' has been deprecated (if not outright banned) for many years. The PC term is, literally, 'paper-less' (because they lack the appropriate papers to stay legally in the country). This term strongly suggests that the appropriate fix is simply to give them the papers they lack (visa, passport, etc.)

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:00am

Schumpeter:
In France the expression 'illegal immigrant' has been deprecated (if not outright banned) for many years. The PC term is, literally, 'paper-less' (because they lack the appropriate papers to stay legally in the country). This term strongly suggests that the appropriate fix is simply to give them the papers they lack (visa, passport, etc.)

I'm reminded of the mildly offensive term WOP used towards italian's in the US. It was commonly used up till 25 years ago or so. Anyways it stood for without papers. So basically anything you call them will eventually wind up being considered pejorative.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:57am

Just say "undocumented".

By the way, there are people who have lived their whole lives here, but are still undocumented, because there's a 10-year wait list to become a citizen. You have to empathize with these people, but I don't like the fact that WHEN they do become citizens, they WILL vote Democrat. That's when we're all fucked.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:58am

People who are here for 10 years and waiting to become Americans or get green cards are not undocuments. They have OPT, they have F-1's, they have H1-B's. They have tons of documents and have every right to be here.

Illegal immigrants are those who came into this country without studying, without a visa, without cause. They come here and do not register. They are breaking the law and are illegally here.

Mexico might not be as great as America, but it isn't Liberia, it isn't Somalia, it isn't Haiti. Mexico has guards preventing Guatemalan's from illegally entering Mexico. Mexico has oil, agriculture, a government. Place isn't that bad.

If I went to any other country without a visa or authorization I would be sent home. Same thing here. Just because Republicans love the slave labor and Democrat's love the future voters doesn't mean it is correct.

This is why mainstream news is trash. Reading it harms you. It dehumanizes a person? The person is breaking the fucking law. How about I take your wallet and then get butt hurt when you call me a thief. Stealing is the crime, I am just relieving you of physical property. Kind of like a mover, but you didn't say it was ok first.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 9:59am

TNA:
People who are here for 10 years and waiting to become Americans or get green cards are not undocuments. They have OPT, they have F-1's, they have H1-B's. They have tons of documents and have every right to be here.

Illegal immigrants are those who came into this country without studying, without a visa, without cause. They come here and do not register. They are breaking the law and are illegally here.

Mexico might not be as great as America, but it isn't Liberia, it isn't Somalia, it isn't Haiti. Mexico has guards preventing Guatemalan's from illegally entering Mexico. Mexico has oil, agriculture, a government. Place isn't that bad.

If I went to any other country without a visa or authorization I would be sent home. Same thing here. Just because Republicans love the slave labor and Democrat's love the future voters doesn't mean it is correct.

This is why mainstream news is trash. Reading it harms you. It dehumanizes a person? The person is breaking the fucking law. How about I take your wallet and then get butt hurt when you call me a thief. Stealing is the crime, I am just relieving you of physical property. Kind of like a mover, but you didn't say it was ok first.

+1

"...the art of good business, is being a good middle man, putting people togeather. It's all about honor and respect."
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:01am

TNA:
People who are here for 10 years and waiting to become Americans or get green cards are not undocuments. They have OPT, they have F-1's, they have H1-B's. They have tons of documents and have every right to be here.

Illegal immigrants are those who came into this country without studying, without a visa, without cause. They come here and do not register. They are breaking the law and are illegally here.

Mexico might not be as great as America, but it isn't Liberia, it isn't Somalia, it isn't Haiti. Mexico has guards preventing Guatemalan's from illegally entering Mexico. Mexico has oil, agriculture, a government. Place isn't that bad.

If I went to any other country without a visa or authorization I would be sent home. Same thing here. Just because Republicans love the slave labor and Democrat's love the future voters doesn't mean it is correct.

This is why mainstream news is trash. Reading it harms you. It dehumanizes a person? The person is breaking the fucking law. How about I take your wallet and then get butt hurt when you call me a thief. Stealing is the crime, I am just relieving you of physical property. Kind of like a mover, but you didn't say it was ok first.

Yeah. Spot-on.

"Come at me, bro"- José de Palafox y Melci
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:13am

TNA:
Just because Republicans love the slave labor and Democrat's love the future voters doesn't mean it is correct.

Literally the most true thing I've ever read.

My drinkin' problem left today, she packed up all her bags and walked away.
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:03am

lasampdoria:
While Mexico is no Somalia, Northern Mexico is becoming the Pakistan of the Americas.

You can thank the USA and our illegal war on freedom (aka drugs) for that. Why the government tries to prevent free people from doing what they want with their bodies is beyond me. All the lives destroyed through jail and now this. Sickening.

A country founded on freedom putting people in jail for ingesting what they freely choose to.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:06am

Communist States of America. The larger government gets the less freedom we have. $16T trillion in debt and for what? No bullet train, shitting infrastructure, bunch of military bases in cold war countries, a "war on terror" that is endless and against an enemy that simply wants us off their land (aka Revolutionary America). We tell people what to eat, what to drink, what to smoke.

Imagine if the money that was spent fighting drug use was instead used to build better and safer schools, cut taxes, rebuild roads.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:07am

TNA:
Communist States of America. The larger government gets the less freedom we have. $16T trillion in debt and for what? No bullet train, shitting infrastructure, bunch of military bases in cold war countries, a "war on terror" that is endless and against an enemy that simply wants us off their land (aka Revolutionary America). We tell people what to eat, what to drink, what to smoke.

Imagine if the money that was spent fighting drug use was instead used to build better and safer schools, cut taxes, rebuild roads.

I don't buy into the whole libertarian argument against drug legalization. The culture of the working class in america is so screwed up already that making drugs all the more available would totally end any morality they have left. I envision a potential hunger games type of environment. Besides the same libertarians who are up in arms about not being able to smoke pot, will be just as up in arms when bums are using their food stamps to purchase packs of Marlboro Ganja. But let's not stop there. Take a 16 year old kid in Iowa for instance. His access to cocaine is relatively non-existent. But package up lines in little vials and sell them for twenty bucks a pop and surely some 18 year old will buy it for him. After all, how bad can it be since it legal? These are just silly examples though, because we all make the right choices when we're in high school or even college for that matter. The sad truth is that the vast majority of people can not handle freedom.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:21am

Gotta love the name calling. We have a regular savant here boys.

1) Never did I say I support no laws.

2) If someone infringes on another persons freedom then they are committing a crime and should be punished.

3) A fiat currency leads to inflation, over spending and the destruction of value of savers. There is a reason why countries that were on a gold standard left it in times of war.

You want to rule people based on your imagination and contrived scenarios, fine. We are putting people in jail for harming themselves. When you attack someone else, whether on drugs or otherwise, you are committing a crime. This is call assault. Why we try and tell people what to do with their bodies is beyond me. This is not what we create government for.

For someone calling other people names and trying to insult their intelligence you provide extremely cursory and fantasy scenario based arguments. I am still waiting for you to actually engage myself or anyone else on this site with some form of intelligence, especially since you want to establish yourself as some sort of authority. I mean after all you know how others should live their lives and support laws which enforce your own personal opinion.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:22am

TNA:
Gotta love the name calling. We have a regular savant here boys.

1) Never did I say I support no laws.

2) If someone infringes on another persons freedom then they are committing a crime and should be punished.

3) A fiat currency leads to inflation, over spending and the destruction of value of savers. There is a reason why countries that were on a gold standard left it in times of war.

You want to rule people based on your imagination and contrived scenarios, fine. We are putting people in jail for harming themselves. When you attack someone else, whether on drugs or otherwise, you are committing a crime. This is call assault. Why we try and tell people what to do with their bodies is beyond me. This is not what we create government for.

For someone calling other people names and trying to insult their intelligence you provide extremely cursory and fantasy scenario based arguments. I am still waiting for you to actually engage myself or anyone else on this site with some form of intelligence, especially since you want to establish yourself as some sort of authority. I mean after all you know how others should live their lives and support laws which enforce your own personal opinion.

For starters I will not even address IP as it is apparent he has no credibility from the previous posts I've seen.

Thank You for the savant comment. To give credit where credit is due you seem to be blessed with some form of dual exceptionality, though I won't dare to guess what type. This argument is futile as you will not accept reality. Your view could be extended to legalize every single possible action and deal with the consequences after the fact. The gold standard argument lacks any type of intellectual thought. For one, the discovery of gold deposits has proven time and time again that it cannot keep up with economic growth. The argument of the gold standard being the moral solution for savers does have some merit, but it has no place in the civilized world we live in today. Wealth is not fixed and neither should the money supply be as a result. Inflation encourages people to invest in equities which encourages growth. If there was no inflation and the money supply was fixed, you would actually experience money supply depletion as people would hoard their gold. I find it simply amazing how foolish some can be on this.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:27am

TNA:
I think his professional and academic career would contradict this my friend.

You know you're absolutely right. My egregious comments towards him are deplorable in hindsight. We should all admire such a simple man, who against all odds has made it in a world that will never accept him. I'm ashamed of my attempts to belabor the poor little guy. I feel like one of those bullies in the movie "Radio" who hogtied Cuba Gooding Jr. and stuffed him the shed. It truly was a tasteless move on my part and I vow to be more considerate from now on.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:30am

IlliniProgrammer:
Nevermind the apology, I'm just glad subrosa is seeking the professional help he needs.

I am seeking professional help. My dastardly comments about you were so indecent. I picture you just peacefully sitting behind your computer screen trying to make sense of this complex world. Like that character Corky from a life goes on. Your determination is an inspiration to us all.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:33am

IlliniProgrammer:
I know, I know. I just find it hilarious that I managed to get you to directly quote someone you called retarded. Dude you just got trolled.

Oh you so clever! You've got a fine brain, don't listen to anyone else. I'll always respond to you bub. You're a special little guy. You make arnie from what's eating gilbert grape look like oppenheimer, simple jack looks like freaking einstein in comparison. Yet you keep on fighting. You've got the heart of a lion! Sweet dreams little fella.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:54am

speeddemon:

I still don't know anybody in real life who supports illegal immigrants becoming citizens of the US.

This is exactly why conservatives have balked at the Democrats' claim that the GOP will die unless it embraces amnesty. My best friend is Hispanic and I know a TON of Hispanic people in general--none of them support lawlessness and open borders. A better LEGAL immigration system is what they want, by and large. "Open borders" is supported by a few radicals and white liberals.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:53am

the human brain cannot handle (on average) certain drugs. opiates are the best example. something like a quarter of the adult male chinese population was addicted until Mao basically shit all over civil rights with mandatory rehab and executions of dealers/producers. now pot should be legal.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:55am

Texas plans to crack down on illegal immigration - except maids, gardeners, landscapers, etc (Originally Posted: 03/02/2011)

There is no doubt that Southern states are being overran by problems of illegal immigration. Securing border may sound easy, but there is so much you can do when people are determined to do anything for a job.

One of the solutions that was presented was cracking down the demand that bring illegal immigrants to this country - target the employers who employ them.

So Texas is considering a bill that would crack down the demand factor. Why would them come to this country illegally if they can't find a job. Right?

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/01/texas.immigration.bill/index.htm…

But sure, get those illegal immigrants out of Texas - but please do not take away those that clean our lawns, wash our dishes and babysit our children because we are too cheap to look for an American worker.

This bill made me think Meg Whitman - No to illegal immigration- except she got torpedoed by her maid who was an illegal immigrant.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:57am

I wasn't going to comment, but here goes:

Wow, this has HYPOCRISY written all over it. No one had any problem exploiting cheap labor for the last century, but now that the writing on the wall says the coming generation will be political, they want to try and fake the high ground and throw everyone out? Or toss the kids it they don't have jobs...or a parent? Family values, HAH, bullshit, this is about maintaining power, and while I want our country to have control of its borders [it's just a good idea] this just has bad idea written all over it.

It's about as likely as Chinese democracy at this point: not going to happen.

Get busy living
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 10:59am

Last time I checked, less than half their country votes. Why should we be worries about mexican immigrants? Didnt Bush carry the Hispanic vote?

Blacks one of the few racial groups that have solid political ties. Southern Republicans tend to moderate their rhetoric to ensure a chunk of the Hispanic vote.

This is about the USA's right to limit how many people come into this country at any given time.

Let me be so bold.

If you are not against illegal immigration, you are not American and a terrorist.

Sorry, I tried to be moderate about it.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:00am

In their defense, they are actually correct: Without the exception, everyone would be in jail.

Also true--- "When it comes to household employees or yard workers it is extremely common for Texans to hire people who are likely undocumented workers," Pena said. "It is so common it is overlooked"

Unfortunately these things are so true that I'm not sure the bill would really change anything..

 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:01am

I'll take one flaming hot authentic chorizo burrito with some jarito's to wash it down.

This could become a very contentious debate, but at the end of the day what most illegal immigrants, especially in the state of Texas, actually do has absolutely no affect on anyone else. Why be so contentious about an issue that doesn't affect anything you do on a daily basis. I'm going to still wake up every morning, go to work, read my books, and have some beers on the weekend and no increase in illegal immigration will change that. Someone with an opposition towards immigration, illegal or not, should change your paradigm and see things from the other side of their convictions.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:38am

Mr. Cheese:
I'll take one flaming hot authentic chorizo burrito with some jarito's to wash it down.

This could become a very contentious debate, but at the end of the day what most illegal immigrants, especially in the state of Texas, actually do has absolutely no affect on anyone else. Why be so contentious about an issue that doesn't affect anything you do on a daily basis. I'm going to still wake up every morning, go to work, read my books, and have some beers on the weekend and no increase in illegal immigration will change that. Someone with an opposition towards immigration, illegal or not, should change your paradigm and see things from the other side of their convictions.

You stupid fuckhead, ask France and the UK if they want to rewind time and take a harder stance on immigration policy. Try to at least make a logical and coherent argument. You ignore the obvious in free rider problem, unpaid health care (guess where illegals get treated for minor ailments), and citizens who are not educated on American history or issues. Not to mention, they are breaking the law.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:07am

I agree with ANT...again. If I didn't have this long PoliSci paper on Reagan to finish I'd elaborate more. But as long as there exists a welfare state and related collective goods that benefit all of society, we can and should limit immigration. If we get rid of everything except say the military (I realize that this provides a collective good but bear with me) and some regulatory agencies, let's have more non-taxpaying low-income immigrants. Free trade of labor essentially. But as of now illegal immigrants pay no taxes (unskilled workers do not either usually) and benefit from our system. Free-riding is encouraged by the dilemma of collective action, but that doesn't mean our government should propagate it by allowing anyone in that wants it if they will provide no benefit to our society. (Money-wise) Don't get me started on the "they do jobs no one else wants", I need to write more about this Iran Contra Congress vs. the President type shit. lol

Reality hits you hard, bro...
 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:10am

I'd rather have rights and opportunities go to people that are willing to work hard and provide opportunities to themselves as well as their families that our dollars go to entititlement programs and welfare to those people that are lazy, on drugs and welfare, and scam the system so that they can continue to not provide anything of value to our economic system. Illegal or not, if people aren't causing you any harm nor infringing on your rights in order to provide themselves with a life that, unfortunately most, in this country take for granted, then come on over. We're all humans and just because you won some genetic lottery that provided you material wealth and opportunities doesn't give you the right to say someone doesn't.

 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:13am

Solid rhetoric in your arguments there ant. Meh I agree to disagree I approach the issue with simple logical while your too bogged down with whatever emotional bias you have to formulate a reason why, besides "this is america'. Newsflash man, on social issues like this its worthless debating, I'm wrong your right it doesn't matter because this country you love so much and the politicians that making headlines with social issuses-issues that we will never find out who's wrong or who's right because illegal immigration will always be here. It's a lot different up North that in states like California, Arizona, and Mexico. Best to just accept it now

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:14am

It is a law because every nation has a right to define it's boarders. I really can't believe we have to have such a basic argument.

Entering Mexico illegally results in prision. Entering China illegally can get you killed. Entering Europe illegally can get you deported.

Entering the USA illegally is a god given right.

Complete bullshit.

Also, prin, talk about a cop out. Racist? Wow. Perfect example of a liberal in action.

Also Cheese, I didn't win any lottery. My great grandparent immigrated to this country LEGALLY.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:15am

It's just a risk they take. They want a better chance. I am just saying I respect those that try to get a better life for themselves and their kids. Sure it is illegal and stuff, but there's so many other things that are illegal like driving .5mph above the speed limit and such, but who cares?

And before I get bombarded by haters saying that our unemployment is so bad, I say half (note the HALF part) would be present almost no matter what. So the people that are "taking our jobs" are taking the menial jobs mainly that most people wouldn't want to do anyways. Go look at Dirty Jobs. That's what they do for us.

This country is falling hard, and pathetically. We aren't half what we used to be in the earlier years. All that is in our name is a reputation that we can barely uphold and a debt that is bigger than my junk.

Love you guys

It's what you put into it
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:16am

Logic? Your argument sounds like emotion to me.

It is worthless arguing. I am correct and you are wrong. Fact.

You believe that people should be allowed to enter the USA because they want to be here. Law means nothing to you as long as the intentions are good.

I believe that the USA has the RIGHT, legally, to define it's boarders and have a LEGAL process to become a citizen. Millions of people have gone through the LEGAL process of immigrating to the USA. I think ALL people should be held to the same standards.

See. Legal, all, standards, law.

Take notes, you might learn something.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:17am

I respect their right to try. I also respect our right to fortify the border, to militarize it.

Go try illegally entering another Country and see how much sympathy you get.

Also, if we are going to allow immigration based on bleeding heart rhetoric, let's allow all hatians, afghanis, etc free immigration before Mexico. They are all worse countries.

What about the Hatians right to work and be an American? If mexicans are allowed to just come here for a better life, why not allow everyone from even worse countries.

Or maybe you just support the genetic lottery. The one that placed Mexicans right next to the USA.

Hahahahhahaha

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:18am

I am both for and against it.
Just curious, but what's the main reasons why immigrants don't go through the legalization process...? I mean is it fear of being rejected by America? I know friends that have their parents stay in other countries because they aren't allowed in, but the kids are under education visas and whatnot. Is a work Visa hard to get? Then become a green card while you're here?

It's what you put into it
 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:20am

Ant. Clearly you have never been to a Texas Cinco de Mayo celebration. This is an absolute outrage. It's in 2 short months. Fajitas, cervesa a la dos equis and corona(lime is a must), beautiful pools and partying all day on into the morning time. Beautifull Latina women flocking like the salmon capistrano. Come on down

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:23am

Mr. Cheese:
Ant. Clearly you have never been to a Texas Cinco de Mayo celebration. This is an absolute outrage. It's in 2 short months. Fajitas, cervesa a la dos equis and corona(lime is a must), beautiful pools and partying all day on into the morning time. Beautifull Latina women flocking like the salmon capistrano. Come on down

LOL... What are you smoking Cheese? I must not be close enough to the border to see this, and yet I see girls flock the Galleria with their Quinceañeras and their fire hazard dresses.

For future Houston visitors, go to Lupe Tortilla for the best fajitas, not because they are a good price, but also because they are fucking AMAZINGLY good. I swear the Holts slather crack on them, along with that good lime. And for the corona, does the lime actually help? I can't imagine it helping something so disgusting.

It's what you put into it
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:31am

Mr. Cheese:
Ant. Clearly you have never been to a Texas Cinco de Mayo celebration. This is an absolute outrage. It's in 2 short months. Fajitas, cervesa a la dos equis and corona(lime is a must), beautiful pools and partying all day on into the morning time. Beautifull Latina women flocking like the salmon capistrano. Come on down

I have no way of proving this via a link, but I read last year that more WHITE people celebrate Cinco de Mayo than do Mexicans. Funny little tidbit I thought. Yes, I will be celebrating it and I'm white.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:24am

ANT:
Immigration is a bunch of work. My GF, who is getting her H1 LEGALLY, is doing tons of paperwork.

If they want to come here to work, they can get documented worker cards. Not as hard as straight up immigration.

See, the USA allows for free movement labor. People still don't care.

I really like you ANT :)
No sarcasm really. You are helpful.
+1

It's what you put into it
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:22am

I can see the perspective of both sides on this. As much as I empathize with their desire for a better life, you just can't have such a chaotic immigration situation in any country, it just doesn't work. People try to paint those opposed to illegal immigration as racists but aversion to illegal, and legal, immigration is present in almost every society. Its human nature to want to preserve the status quo.

 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:28am

Ant-
Argument aside. What do you think is a way to solve this. Not theoretical, but something practical? I truly don't think there is any silver bullet to stop illegal immigration. Perhaps a capitalistic approach that involves cutting our welfare system by shipping all the lazy people that don't work to Mexico so they can experience what life is like without opportunities. At the same time letting all who want to work hard and take advantage of the "American Dream" come on it and see what they're made of

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:30am

Mr. Cheese:
Ant-
Argument aside. What do you think is a way to solve this. Not theoretical, but something practical? I truly don't think there is any silver bullet to stop illegal immigration. Perhaps a capitalistic approach that involves cutting our welfare system by shipping all the lazy people that don't work to Mexico so they can experience what life is like without opportunities. At the same time letting all who want to work hard and take advantage of the "American Dream" come on it and see what they're made of

I respect the idea of trying to find a practical idea, everyone wants that. But the thought of shipping an American to Mexico is some way to say... wow I have no words. It is just too broad of a subject, encasing too many different aspects of the American economy and things that no one would be in favor of really... Ethical reasons too....

It's what you put into it
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:34am

HFFBALLfan123:
I am completely with Texas on doing everything to rid this country of illegal immigrants (except Maria because if she was gone than me and ChemBanker would have been doing the dishes at Thanksgiving, which is NO BUENO).

You said it.....there is no WAY i could have done the dishes esp. after we cracked open the Johnnie Walker Blue Label.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:32am

Back to the OP, this copout of a freaking bill pisses me off. What pisses me off more is that it came from a Tea Party Candidate. It's all or none, no in between.

I heard a few interesting things on the radio this morning. One being an illegal family came to Texas, had something like 4 babies, one of them had some sort of health problem that meant putting it(I say it because I don't know it's gender) into a hospital that cost taxpayers $300k. The "Anchor baby" loophole is a big problem!

 
  • Anonymous Monkey's picture
  • Anonymous Monkey
  • Rank: Chimp
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:33am

^^^ this is unfortunate, and definately a travestry. I've read this happens a lot. I actually did a presentation against illegal immigation in college and this was a point I brought up. There are plenty of examples of this too

@rbkchoi. I was being sarcastic. I don't think there is anything to be done about it. Certainly politicians will never arrive at a practical solution, for when have they ever

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:35am

I hate how the media and people view this as an Anti-Hispanic issue. Its not at all. Its about right versus wrong. Lawmakers and opponents of Illegal Immigration are not saying they don't like Hispanics or Latinos, but just want respect for the laws and borders of our country.

My dad was born in South America and came to Queens, NY when he was 21, legally I should add. He worked his way up from entry level computer programmer to being CIO for half of a Fortune 100 company. He gets offended when all these fringe groups protest laws that crack down on Illegals by making this a Hispanic vs non-Hispanic issue. America is great because we welcome legal immigrants and they have the opportunity to rise from nothing to successful positions in business and politics. This is not helped by the allowing tons of cheap, illegal labor to flood our country.

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:37am

Midas Mulligan Magoo:
There are only two issues here that matter:

1) States Rights

2) Legal Immigration

Everything else being debated is girl talk.


I would also like to add that the only attack on American soil that was never avenged was out of Mexico: Pancho Villa.

What this has to do with anything, I don't know. It just seemed somewhat relevant.

Get busy living
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:43am

I just moved to Kansas City. There are a lot of illegals here, but there are far less in the metro area than in my native Washington, D.C. You know what? Whites work at car washes. Whites are doing landscaping here. Blacks are janitors. I really didn't think it was true that illegals took American jobs. Based on pure OBSERVATION (no "facts" or "stats"), it looks to me like a lot of Americans would take a lot of jobs that the illegals currently have. Granted, cost of living in KC is nothing so $10/hour for a job goes further than $10/hour in D.C.

The solution is to shut down the southern border as best we can--walls, cameras, troops, etc. In conjunction with that, we need to enforce labor laws against employers and tenancy laws against apartment communities and land lords. On the other hand, we need to set up very large scale TEMPORARY (say, 7 years) guest worker programs with South and Central American nations because the United States does, in fact, have a special economic relationship with our hemispheric neighbors that we don't have with, say, Zimbabwe or Egypt. We also need to have the Supreme Court clarify the 14th Amendment to mean what it ACTUALLY means--i.e. that no former slave could be denied American citizenship because a former slave state determined them to be unqualified based on their birth as slaves. The way the American Left butchers the Constitution is a travesty to the rule of law.

Array
 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:46am

Oh, I was just commenting on your thing about American's being willing to take those jobs. I actually agree with you, but I think that misses the point, since presumably illegals do it cheaper and that benefits us all. Now, I think a better case can be made that they will take advantage of public goods that they don't pay taxes for, and that they might change the political environment in a harmful way. Personally, I'm not very sympathetic to those arguments, but I think they're much more compelling (but maybe that's just me).

 
Jan 23, 2018 - 11:47am
Array
Start Discussion

Total Avg Compensation

September 2020 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (17) $704
  • Vice President (45) $323
  • Associates (256) $228
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (37) $203
  • 2nd Year Analyst (142) $153
  • Intern/Summer Associate (134) $141
  • 1st Year Analyst (564) $129
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (545) $82

Leaderboard See all

1
LonLonMilk's picture
LonLonMilk
98.3
2
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.3
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
98.2
4
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
97.8
5
Edifice's picture
Edifice
97.6
6
Addinator's picture
Addinator
97.6
7
redever's picture
redever
97.6
8
frgna's picture
frgna
97.5
9
NuckFuts's picture
NuckFuts
97.5
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
97.4