The Immigration Protests

But, didn't like, everyone come to America pretty much for the sole reason of reaping the benifits/leaving the poorer conditions of their country? I imagine that immigrants for the most part will be asimilated in the coming generations, without the original immigrants having to even make that effort. Their kids will be more Americanized, and their grand children will likely be the same as everyone else.

I'm still very curious as to why the asimilation is important though. If they are working and contributing etc. then what difference does it make if they speak a different language, or retain different cultural manerisms/habbits?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Except that they aren't stealing shit, nor are they 'taking jobs away from Americans'. The handout line is also another argument that somehow gets lumped in there without much cause.

If you are against it from a legal standpoint, that's fine, and it's in flux. If you have a problem with it due to some moral stance, as your American birthright vs. having to 'earn' it suggests, then I don't know what to say. It's hard to understand what it is that you would expect of potential immigrants if it was up to you.

Ridan Krad, it has a lot to do with legal immigration as well. For one, this issue has sparked debate as to how the system might be changed. And it's also been a relatively accepted and sometimes thinly veiled means with which to argue xenophobic and racist points. But of course those doing this won't admit it, and may not even realize it.

"I'm not xenophobic!!1 It's just that I don't like having to deal those damned foreigners. The least they can do is act like I do rather than like they do. It's just a show of respect."

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

Are you saying that no form of entitlement should be passed down from parents to their children? By logical extension of your rationale here, one could make a case against inheritance of any kind.

Inheritance being something that is passed from one person to another, at the giver's discretion is a little different. You aren't entitled to shit, your parents may or may not decide to pass their stuff on to you.

Still amazed at how a 'slippery slope' can be found regarding just about any topic.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

And I'm still amazed at how people seem to disregard the fact that it isn't just the United States that has immigration policies.

Because the policies of other countries are of no concern? Since when does the US base their policies on what other countries do? Each country has their own unique political, ecconomic, and geographic issues to consider. Unless you are suggesting that US policies should try to emulate France's etc, then it's just an attempt to draw attention away from the argument at hand.

Every country's policies need to be evaluated on their own merit. The argument of pointing out that Japan's mom lets it stay up 'till 10:00 doesn't do any good. Justify your stance on it's own merit instead of trying to distract people with what may or may not be issues in other countries.

And thanks for the clarification regarding your previous point.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

I mentioned other countries because it was mentioned that the United States has overly restrictive policies. My response to this is that, relatively speaking, the United States actually has less restrictive policies than many other countries. I am not suggesting that the United States base its policies on that of other countries. My point, rather, is that criticizing the United States for having harsh standards for immigration when we actually have relatively open ones is inaccurate not to mention unfair.

I always assumed that those saying that the US policies are overly restrictive mean that it is more strict than is 'appropriate' for it's situation. Could be wrong.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

...you have ignored several arguments that I actually made to this effect--i.e. the degredation of wages for manual labor jobs; the elimination of jobs from other working class groups.

Because I agree with these points. At least to an extent. The elimination of jobs from other working class groups just sounds like a pile of crap to me, but I can see how it makes sense to some. I can see that it increases the number of people gunning for low end jobs, but I don't see how this has any specific impact on other 'groups', or at least, it shouldn't.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

It's merely a response to what I feel is a general criticism of United States policies (earlier there was criticism of the United States not having enough social programs, in addition to our immigration policies being considered unfair). Maybe it was irrelevent to the main discussion, but I'm pretty tired of people from other countries complaining about the stench of United States policies when there's plenty of sewage in their own backyards.

I believe that the aside regarding social programs was in order to refute the argument regarding immigrants entering the US for a 'free ride'. If that were the reason, then wouldn't it make more sense for them to target countries like Australia instead?

The US does get a lot of flack regarding it's policies, some of it undeserved. That other countries have their own problems, again, doesn't seem relevant when the discussion is clearly centered around the US.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

I linked this article before, but maybe you didn't see it. In any case, it would seem that the black community is not that happy with the state of affairs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060525/ts_csm/atension

Yeah, read it. The issue still seems to be a larger low wage seeking population. That they chose to view it from a race specific angle doesn't mean much to me. Assuming their examples are ones that are as common as they believe, then there has to be a reason for it. Why would the employers favour hispanics over blacks?

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

Getting into Australia would be a bit of a problem, since the Pacific Ocean is in the way.

Hmm, seems that was one of the lines that needs a smiley to come across as a joke... :doh:

The bit about the illegals coming here for a free ride based on US social services was serious. The joke about them swiming to Australia was not. Sorry for any confusion.

I mean, what 'handouts' are these people supposedly given?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

It's not that the employer is favoring hispanics over blacks. It's that he's favoring desperate illegal immigrants, who are willing to work for dirt cheap wages (i.e. below minimum wage), over everyone else. It makes sense why an employer would do this, as he wants to maximise his profits, but this is one central reason why illegal immigration is such a problem.

Egad. That is the first problem, finding a group to express it's concern over it does not a second point make. Illegal immigrants have driven the price for menial jobs below where it should be by law. It appears as though the efforts to legalize the illegals would be to address this. If they are legal, and documented, they should receive at least minimum wage. It's not a solution that many are happy with due to it's, passive, nature though. So really, the 'amnesty' proposed would address the issues regarding minimum wage, and the displacement of other working class people *IF* they find a way to make it work and curtail illegal immigration in favour of legal immigration. Then everyone can be happy aside from language issues, but that is something that the country has had in place for a long time. Sure it's effects have been less than pleasant in recent years with the Spanish vs. English communications issues, but if you don't adopt any official language(s), then everyone is going to consider themselves to have a freedom of language choice.

Double Post:

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

I believe I have now thoroughly explained myself on this point.

Yes you have. Thanks.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

Why? It's an actual example of a group of people who are frustrated over the situation caused by illegal immigration. Is CetteHamsterLa's personal experience with the minimum wage problem also invalidated because he is not a representative of everyone?

These examples do matter, and yeah, sucks to be CetteHamserLa. That kind of thing shouldn't happen, and it's the real problem with illegal immigrants working undercutting wages. It is a symptom of the issue, not another issue. This is the reason why I am against illegal immigration to begin with.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

If all the illegals here now are given amnesty, don't you think that this would send a clear message to others that if they come here illegally, they will, given time, also be given the same reward?

Well, that's the problem. And that's also the part that the proposed changes haven't addressed very well IMO. If legal immigration were made a more attractive option, there would no longer be a reason to do it illegally. To deal with the undercutting of wages it'd require a pretty watchful eye on employers, and that's something many don't seem to want (I'm all for going after those who are the ones undercutting wages illegally. It starts with the employers.)

If wages were raised back to where they need to be by law, and legal immigration were a more attractive (easier) option, why would they come illegally? This option however is quite passive, and is therefore immediately dismissed by many people.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

Unless everyone in the US becomes bilingual (which would be nice, but let's be realistic, with the current education system, this just isn't feasible), I see the language gap to be a major problem when it comes to national unity.

I'm still not sure why this unity is all that important. I mean, is there a significant downside to having, for lack of a better term, Spanish states, as long as they still hold to the roughly accepted ideals of what it is the be American?

If it were officially a bilingual country, everyone wouldn't need to be bilingual. It'd only be relevant in some areas. And I don't see why improving the education system is beyond consideration either. ESL classes are pretty cheap and quick, and get a person enough language that they are able to get by in English. Shouldn't be too much of a reform to add SSL classes in those areas that would benifit. Sadly education is something that doesn't get nearly enough review and reform in every country I know of.

Making language(s) official would go a long way to even starting on the language issues.

Most amazing jew boots