The Immigration Protests

The assimilation issue is stupid. Is it a process or a status? What kinds of factors are more important in guaging a successful migration? The word is so lucidly defined. You cannot possibly expect immigrants, legal or not, and guest workers to cosy up from day one. I wouldn't even expect it within twelve months.

And it's not as though it won't occur anyway. There is more to assimilation with a foreign society than not flouting its laws; looking at the process solely through a legal prism is glib and unfair. Besides, once they've saved enough from years of menial labour, they too can enter into the classically American consumption manias of 15MPG transport and 25% of their bodywight weekly in grease/fat/soft-drink.

Leave that stew on the stove even longer and they'll soon assume all the unofficial benefits of genuine citizenship too, like discrimination upon other minorities, tokenisation of white people, the right to keep to their own neighbourhoods, social clubs, dress codes, ethnolects and, of course, the sustenance and direction of all the new consumer markets they've created just by being Spics (I'm sure this one could only be construed as helping your nation's economy).

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Night Pheonix. America has pretty much no welfare compared to other nations.

75% of my University fees are paid outright, the remainder I pay with an interest free loan which I don't even have to pay.
I receive $150 US a week just be being a student over the age of 16. I can earn an additional $170US with paid work if I choose and receive no penalty.
Any medication I want, for anything, even something as meaningless as acne treatment, I have a 90% discount.
Catching public transport costs me 50 cents. And it lasts for three hours, I can catch any combination of ferry, train or bus, paying the one fee.

Fuck people out of work, life Infernal, receive more 3 times as much money as American waitresses do.

And we've had a conservative government cutting back on all of this for the past eleven years.
Australia isn't anywhere near are left as most of Europe too.

America has no welfare in comparison. I mean all the crap you mentioned required permanent citizenship at the minimun to even be eligable for.

Compared to what people could potentially receive in other countries, the USA is no free ride. For the most part, your illegal aliens are paying their own way.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by gukarma

We have overly restrictive policies

Again, couldn't this be said for other countries as well? For instance, in Japan, non-Japanese are not given full citizenship rights, which has led to particular problems in regards to Japan's Korean community and on the whole is a problem for anyone not of Japanese descent who decides to live in Japan (source). And remember, this is for anyone living in Japan, legal or not.

But hey, let's not stop there. What about France, that shining beacon of liberal policies? Like most countries in the immediate aftermath of World War II, it welcomed in large numbers of immigrants, but with the fuel crisis of the 1970s, it reversed this policy focusing on curbing migration, unlike the United States which actually is comparitively welcoming of immigrants, with organized business and ethnic interests lobbying for expansive immigration legislation, which cannot be said for France (source). And finally, to really tie things in, as noted in the article cited, "France and the European Union today are witnessing the same perverse effects that the US experienced along its Mexican border, where new restrictions in some states only redirected flows to others, and raised the price of illegal passage."

The problem of illegal immigration is certainly not limited to the United States. Japan and Europe as a whole, as indicated above, also have restrictive policies, and in fact are, in some cases, more restrictive than the United States. Thus, this problem is not one localized to the United States by any measure. However, as the article quote indicates, the problem, while widespread, is not one that has as of yet had any clear answer. Restrictions put in place have so far only redirected the illegal flow to other, less guarded regions, which seems to suggest that a rethinking of how to guard borders more uninformally is necessary in order to adequately handle this problem.

Originally Posted by gukarma

Also, it is not like immgrants are stealing those jobs from anyone: recently I heard on NPR that immigrants instead HELP the economy by making services more acceptable.

First, we're discussing illegal immigration, not immigration as a whole.

Second, other countries have those same sorts of "undesirable" jobs. How do they manage to keep things going without a steady stream of desperate Mexicans to do the jobs for them? For that matter, how do regions of the United States lacking in illegal immigrants handle their menial tasks? I'll tell you. When no one wants to do a very necessary job for the going wage, the wage rises until someone is willing to. And someone is always willing, if the price is right. The thing about illegal immigrants is that they are more desperate for work than most, given that they aren't exactly eligable for our welfare programs what with, you know, being here illegally. So they work dirt-cheap. I guess it's cool if you own a farm or sweatshop, or want your house/yard taken care of for next to nothing, but it's inaccurate to say that these jobs would go unfilled if the illegal population just disappeared one day.

Third, as for the benefits of it lowering the cost of labor, you have to realize that this benefit also has a cost in that it raises unemployment among the working class and thus makes it more difficult for people in the lower income bracket to afford anything, let alone having someone clean their house or weed their yard (for further information, see: Rising black-Latino clash on jobs).

Originally Posted by gukarma

They only want to clean your shit and cook your food, it's not like they are out there for world domination.

No one's saying that. What does concern people is that there is a massive body of people who are here illegally and who are displacing jobs from the working class (which means increased likelihood of crime). Also, with the waving of Mexican flags at recent rallies, sentiments have further deteriorated. Admit it; it's not exactly the greatest way to express a willingness to integrate into American society, now is it?

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by gukarma

We have overly restrictive policies,

How about the restrictive policies of Mexico. Vincente porn mustache Fox isn't very tolerant to foreigners in his workers paradise, yet he sees fit to attempt to dictate what U.S. policy should be towards his people who choose to violate our laws.

http://www.mexperience.com/liveandwork/immigration.htm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060521/...ing_immigrants

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

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.

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 might also add that, while you criticize me for not crafting my arguments on United States policy for its own merit, 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.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

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.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by PUG1911

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.

And that's why I included my reasons for why I believe that it is appropriate.

As I said, mentioning other countries isn't meant to prove that immigration is a problem. 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.

Originally Posted by PUG1911

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.

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

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

Quote:

Those people who just take something they have no right to

Hmm, I'm encountering difficulty deciding on how I want to respond to this. I'll make it multiple choice.

A) What goes around, comes around.
B) Oh, you mean like we did with the Natives?
C) European colonization is a bitch, isn't it?
D) I'm sure the Inca, Mayans, Iroquoi, Blackfoot, Kumeyaay, Swazi, Zulu, Tasmanians and countless other indeginous peoples would agree with you.
E) Your mom.

Whichever sounds pithy to you.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

It almost seems as if you think the American gov't should sit idly by as uncontrolled immigration drastically changes demographics, creates division because an ever-increasing portion of the population shares neither the common language, culture, or values.

It happened before during a time of lawlessness, so the laws should be ignored or changed to allow it to happen again, right? That's your argument, correct?

How ya doing, buddy?

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?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by PUG1911

If that were the reason, then wouldn't it make more sense for them to target countries like Australia instead?

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

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Duo Maxwell

Hmm, I'm encountering difficulty deciding on how I want to respond to this. I'll make it multiple choice.

A) What goes around, comes around.
B) Oh, you mean like we did with the Natives?
C) European colonization is a bitch, isn't it?
D) I'm sure the Inca, Mayans, Iroquoi, Blackfoot, Kumeyaay, Swazi, Zulu, Tasmanians and countless other indeginous peoples would agree with you.
E) Your mom.

Whichever sounds pithy to you.

You keep spouting off this exact same reason as why illegal immigration should be okay, yet it makes no logical sense. What you are trying to say is that since we moved into what became the United States with no immigration laws whatsoever, and destroyed the natives here (with disease, our superior technology wouldn't have done it alone), that it should just be ok for them to walk all over us. We have a SOVEREIGN NATION now with borders to protect.

You seem to have this "eye for an eye" mentality that just DOES NOT WORK in the modern world, even ignoring the fact that this isn't even the same situation happening. We are talking about 200+ years later with an established country. Get your mind up to the present. I highly doubt you would be willing to apply this "eye for an eye" deal to any other situation, even one where it would actually apply. Although maybe I'm just reading you wrong.

Free immigration would wreck havok on any country's economy. What people are largely ignoring in this debate is the fact that EVERY country has immigration laws, but all of the sudden the USA is the big bad wolf when we want to try to do something about the lack of enforcement of those existing immigration laws.

I was speaking idiomatically.

In short: Nothing America does outside of capitulating to anything and everything is right. If America acts in its own interests in any way, it is a tyrannical, empirical state that must be stopped at all costs.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

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?

FELIPE NO

My point is that we don't have the same culture, language or values that the natives who lived here before us had, we took that land. We rationalize this and say it's okay, saying that it was a time of "lawlessness." Again, referring back to the belief in inherent superiority of European culture, labeling everyone else as "savage" or "uncivilized." If civility requires subjugating others to accomplish the my own narrowminded goals (whcih I exhault on a pedestal and call it "culture"), I'd rather not partake.

So what if these people don't have the same culture or language? Just because they don't communicate with YOU, at least directly, they can still function within their own social group. I guess people outside of the border states really don't realize what it is to live in a multilingual area. It's not intrusive, it's not "threatening your culture," you're all driven by some irrational fear.

The belief that immigration "drains" an economy is flawed. Yes, because of the (oh, hey, let me quote night phoenix) "bullshit protectionist policies" we have regarding labor and healthcare it can be a drain, yet still manages to produce a huge surplus due to the drop in labor costs.

They're not stealing your jobs, they're not on some bullshit cultural crusade, they're here to live and work in a better environment than where they came from. Again, this DOES sound oddly familiar.

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

And yet nothing that you say in anyway gives me any good reason as to why we should allow these people to come here en masse.

How ya doing, buddy?

Honestly living in new Mexico I'd say it's pretty damn intrusive. Doubly so if you're competing with them for the lowest income job market which I am. Hell I'd take some of the cleaning jobs they have down here if it wasn't for the fact that they don't hire people who can actually demand minimum wage and I wouldn't be able to speak with my coworkers as the majority of them only speak spanish. Hell in area's of town you can't even communicate with people behind the counter in the majority of business's.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by PUG1911

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.

It does when people try to single out the United States as some kind of horrible country with no sympathy for others' plights. Anyway, I'm just repeating myself now, so whatever. If you think it's irrelevent, that's fine, but I believe I have now thoroughly explained myself on this point.

Originally Posted by PUG1911

Why would the employers favour hispanics over blacks?

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.

In any case, I think CetteHamsterLa's post illustrates this point far better than I can.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

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.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Duo, none of what you said makes any difference at all. In fact, it doesn't have any relevance to this topic at all. Get your mind out of the past, please. We live in a completely different world with completely different requirements and needs than 200+ years ago. The very idea that we should just let them come in because we destroyed the native american population 250-some years ago is preposterous and utterly ridiculous. Although I'm pretty sure congress would like it, considering some of the BS they've gone with in the past.

Night Phoenix summed up what your point is coming across as quite well.

Originally Posted by Night Phoenix

In short: Nothing America does outside of capitulating to anything and everything is right. If America acts in its own interests in any way, it is a tyrannical, empirical state that must be stopped at all costs.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Quote:

Egad. That is the first problem, finding a group to express it's concern over it does not a second point make.

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?

Anyway, whatever, if you don't like specific examples, fine. We'll stay on generalities only. We have minimum wage. Illegals will work for less than minimum wage, thereby undermining it. You seem to recognize this point, but have an answer for it, so I'll move on from here.

Quote:

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.

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?

I think that it would, and that's precisely the type of precedent that will encourage illegal immigration on an even greater scale than it is at now, not to mention encourage the use of future such amnesty programs to be put into effect.

Quote:

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.

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.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

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

The majority of illegal immigration to Australia orignates from Central Asia. Clearly a body of water is no problem, nor are other nations, as a buffer for this. And theres plenty of other welfare states in the Americas that would offer a far better free ride than America. If that's what they were after, that's where they'd go.

Mexicans leave Mexico and come to the US because they wan't to be American.

Originally Posted by PUG1911

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

Looks like no one can answer this one.

How ya doing, buddy?

Quote:

If that's what they were after, that's where they'd go.

What other country can millions of Mexicans get into with no kind of scrutiny whatsoever besides the United States?

Your argument fails because it ignores the fact that America's proximity and ease of entry into the country (illegally) is the primary reason why Mexicans come to America instead of someone else.

People almost always take the path of least resistance.

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

A body of water may not be a perfect barrier, but it makes it harder, especially as the body of water gets bigger. The distances between Australia and Indonesia make attempting to get in by boat more practical than for Mexicans to try to go to Australia illegally to cash in on the freer ride Australia offers over America.

Similarly, the Florida Channel doesn't deter people who really want to get out of Cuba, but the Atlantic and Pacific do inhibit Asians and Africans from trying to get into the U.S. illegally in numbers similar to those of Latin Americans.

Jam it back in, in the dark.