Rewarding Illegal Immigration?

[Baal]

I think the most important thing to realize here is that we are witnessing the double-edged sword of globalization. Globalization is really an advanced form of mercantalism but unlike mercantalism, the lack of protectionism, at least in theory, opens the gateway for issues like immigration. As the saying goes, one cannot have his cake and eat it too. The problem here is that we are unable to decide what we want in the west, and whether we have the foresight to build a more stable global economy where these issues will not arise. If we do not let the rest of the world catch up and surpass us in some respects, the problem will continue, if we do, we will loose relative power, either way, there are simply too many people on the planet for the world to play favorites along any socioeconomic cleavage..sorry,

thats just the way it is............things will never be the same...:sing: lalala...LOL

my:2 cents:

 

[Member2019]

Re: Supply and demand ... (1/2)

I am quite aware of how reality works. That is part of the reason I think capitalism as we know it is as flawed as it is.

I don't deny capitalism is flawed, but I would argue its the best thing we know.

Hard vs. easy and fair vs. unfair should matter.

It does matter. When I interview candidates or size people up, I don't size them up by what they do, but how they do it -- the challenges in their life and how they've coped. That's how I ensure I work with people who can handle challenges the best, and ensure any company I work for, or if they work for/with me, we succeed.

People who hire their friends, companies that maintain a useless, "top heavy" executive or middle management or otherwise don't think of qualified people first, they ultimately pay the price in unemployment themselves -- and often at the expense of their company at the same time. That's the balance of capitalism. It's not immediately, but there is a long-term balance.

Sure, there are people who work hard, know what they are doing, and deserve what they get.

I didn't get that idea from you. I sit in an A/C office. I exert little, physical strength. I read something different about people like myself from what you said.

Now I can appreciate those who do have to exert physical ability. And I can feel lucky that I don't have to. But the reality is that I'm in more demand than they are. I've made myself a valued and rare commodity that is needed. And that's why I am paid what I am.

Not because I have been "privileged." Not because I was "given a job I didn't deserve." And certainly not because I don't know what "hard work" is. As a kid and even a teenager, I trampled around swaps and did a lot of physical work -- and decided I didn't want to do that for a living like my father.

You might have had a point in me picking out the worst scenarios if it was an extremely rare occurrence, but from my observations things like that happen all the time, even more if you count instances that are even milder than that.

And that's exactly what the Social Liberal playbook does too.

Besides very technical jobs where it is impossible to do them without knowing what you are doing, in my experience who you know is a lot more important than what you know or how well and dedicated somebody is to a job and even then if you know the right people you have the advantage.

And capitalism and the consumer eventually result in those companies with such attitudes to eventually go out-of-business. People and their companies who don't hire qualified people eventually die. I've been in several myself. I've told management that things needed to change. And I've not only left, but took a lot of their clients with me (I never sign "non-compete" clauses)!

Even me in the measly jobs I have had got all but one of them because I had some minor connections inside the place that spoke up for me getting hired. It worked out for them because I was a good worker, but that wasn't the reason they hired me.

So, what you want is "fair"?
How do you get it?

Every company in the modern day makes everything as cheaply and as "good enough" as they can get away with. They don't have to be fair.

Oh boy, anytime you start saying "every company" you're not going to listen to anything I say.

In fact I would say going above and beyond would be unthinkable because that would put them at a disadvantage to some corporation that is cutting corners and producing cheaper products.

Huh? Who says? Informed and intelligent consumers think otherwise. Now if consumers are dumb and blind, then they deserve what they get.

The rich

Do you mean "rich" as in "wealthy"?
Or do you mean "rich" as in "high income"?
They are two completely different "rich"

I assume you mean "wealthy."
Just understand those people pay capital gains tax, not income tax.

and corporations have sort of created a culture that has enabled that.

Oh boy, now we get to the heart of the Communist Manifesto.
Like I didn't see this coming.

As long as everybody is doing just enough to peddle their crap on the consumer they will be forced to buy their products to keep them in business.

If the consumer is that dumb and blind, yes.

It is even worse now that the middle class is starting to slowly evaporate and people are being forced to buy cheaper products.

No, the consumer doesn't question where things come from, and how it affects the economy. Those that do, really do care! And even if it's only 30%, they do affect those corporations.

Furthermore, the erradication of the middle class has more to do with raising income tax on the "high income" of those who make more than US$20,000/year than the alleged "rich" aka "wealthy" who don't pay it. Insurance and medical bills are now becoming the #1 expense, and not commodities.

In fact, our standard of living is so high right now in the US, it's more about the consumer never thinking they have enough.

If they really cared about making products that are sub-quality I wouldn't have to replace my coffee pot, taster, and boots ect…every year and a half because they are broken down already.

That's because 90% of US consumers want the "discount superstore." They don't care how long it lasts, becuase they can now buy a product that costs 1/10th of what it used to. Take the computer for instance. 90% of consumers don't care that their PC, peripherals, OSes and applications are only good for 2-3 years, they want to upgrade all 4 every 2-3 years.

Dude, listen, you're talking to an engineer. The whole concept of the "discount superstore" sickens me. It goes against every fabric of my essence as an engineer. Unfortunately, 90% of US consumers are the ones that caused this, not the "rich and companies." The average US consumer wants this -- they want cheap, they want "loss leaders," they even give into "bait'n switch" sales these days.

Of course the executives at the top always make their money no matter what. If anything they will try to sell their products in some marketing campaign, not by making what the produce better.

And consumers fall for it. Again, what you're talking about are "dumb and blind" consumers.

The essence of freedom is intelligence. The essence of capitalism is intelligence. If you have a dumb and ignorant populous, freedom and capitalism fail. And that's when the populous is easily swayed by socialism, and freedom is erroded.

For every safety net, for every regulation for every new agency, you lose rights in a free society. They take away choice. Now agree some safety nets, some regulation and some agencies are required -- but their proliferation is out of control.

Since the mid-'90s, 99% of US income taxes are now funded by those making several times the poverty income -- of which, *0* is paid by the wealthy. If you go back to the early '70s, when the OMB was founded, it was closer to 95%. Those income taxes are reducing the amount of discretionary income from income earners that can be used to create jobs. That's why only the wealthy -- the ones who do not pay income taxes -- are the creating more and more of the new, private sector jobs. Those with discretionary income are not, because more and more of it is being taken away -- preventing them from acquiring wealth.

I think it's awful that when someone overcomes the poverty line, the first thing they are greated with is, "oh, you're income tax rate just doubled, and the amount you pay now triples (or more!)." At the same time, most people -- who utterly lack the simple relevance of how progressive income tax works -- believe the "problem" is that the "rich" -- i.e., mid to high income earners get all the tax breaks. Duh, they are already paying 99% of the income tax -- so who is going to get a "tax break"?

And yet none of these people are the commonly demonized "rich" aka "wealthy." That's why you see the "rich get richer" and the "poor get poorer." We're taking the income earners more and more, thinking they are the "rich" -- and that's why people who cross from poor to middle class rarely acquire wealth! Because we take discretionary income away before they can even use it to create private sector jobs.

Of course companies that are ethical and fair will go out of business. THEY designed the rules that way.

Bullshit. I run my business fair and ethical. I know many, many others that do! Even large companies, like Hewlett-Packard (one of the last remaining "real engineering" firms in the US) is still largely a firm by engineers for engineers with a 30+ year vision, and not a narrow-minded 3 years.

These "rules" you speak of are more likely the "Common Law" results of litigation and lawyers. That's the root cause of most issues in the US -- lawyers. Just like doctors can't heal someone without the threat of malpractice litigation, engineers come under the same scrutiny and lawsuits when it comes to products. Engineers can't think of everything and accidents can and do happen -- not because so much of their negligence, but because of consumers'.

 

[Member2019]

Re: Supply and demand ... (2/2)

They can't wash their hand of it and say they have no control over those conditions when they (the rich politically elite) created them in the first place to benefit themselves.

And who are the "rich political elite"?

#1 contributing class to the US Democrat party ... lawyers!
#3 contributing class to the US Republican party ... lawyers!
Hell, even the #1 contributing class to the US Libertarian party are ... lawyers!
(I'm sure the reason why more lawyers don't like the Republican party is because of their stance on tort reform and other damage-limiting litigation).

Lawyers are "the rich politically elite" you speak of! Not companies!

Through our politicians who they have great access to unlike normal people, they have set up a system where anybody that tries to do things right way will be blackballed out of the system, or will have to compete on a playing field so incredibly unbalanced that they can't hope to win (sort of like politics itself).

And your solution would be to give these people more power with socialism? I admit, the "rich can bend the law," but the "politicians are above it!"

Or what is your "solution"? Is this just a rant, or do you have a "solution"?

If you want me to say "capitalism sucks," then I'll 100% agree!
But what "better" solution do you know? Really?

That is why things like illegal immigrants and outsourcing happen, it gives them a chance to undercut the competition, thus forcing the competition to do like wise, thus forcing us to lose even more good paying jobs, thus forcing people to buy crapier and cheaper products, and the vicious cycle repeats itself.

I don't deny outsourcing is a major problem right now in the US. Stupid business managers looking at their budget for 3 or less years, and not realizing what it is costing them down-the-road. And by the time anyone notices, that business manager has been promoted for saving costs.

And that's why so many US businesses are going under right now!

The US used to have responsible immigration and sound outsourcing. We welcomed skilled immigrants and capable foreign companies. But today, we have programs like H1B Visa and massive outsourcing based on only saving money. So instead of getting "the best the world has to offer," we're not getting "all the crap the world has to offer" en masse.

Dude, I 100% agree there! As an engineer who has worked with many qualified immigrants and foreign companies in the '90s to the utter crap of 60-80% H1B Visa workers and over 90% of the foreign software companies these days, I have been 100% immersed in your frustration!

But the good news is that America is moving back to small businesses. The year with the greatest number of small businesses founded in the US was 2002 -- after massive layoffs in 2001. I seriously hope this is how we survive. So far, this has hurt federal revenue heavily, because far less people are paying tax (which just adds to the already negative growth of 2000, plus the resulting 2001 layoffs and then 9/11 to mention a few).

But now we are starting to see massive growth again -- which is a direct result of th is rebirth. How long it lasts or what effect it has, that's still to be seen. But I am hopeful.

I have yet to see a corporation that was accountable to it's customers.

Bullshit. Again, are you paraphrasing from the Communist Manifesto?

A corporation point of view is that it is accountable to maximizing it's bottom line in any way it can get a way with, then it's shareholders who benefit form the maximizing of the bottom line.

Bullshit. Yes, some business managers and stockholders are the problem. But 80% of those companies also go out-of-business in 5 years! The only ones that starve that off are the ones that have investments in other corporations.

But as we saw with Enron, even that runs out!

As long as it can do that it doesn't give a damn about its costumers or the products it produces. They are necessary evils to the corporation that allow it to keep racking in the dough.

"Evil" and "rich" -- oh yeah, demonizing at its best.

In an ideal ideological aspect of capitalism they would have to care about the customers, but reality is far from ideal because the corporations have to care less about the consumer than the ideological standpoint would dictate.

Unfortunately, the average US consumer has created the low-cost, low-quality industry. Corporations merely moved to support it.

We lost accountability because like all things with people in power we have been set up in a system that no longer allows us any real option,...

But what other system will ensure "accountability"? At least in capitalism, there is an eventual balance. Inefficient companies go under. Efficient companies survive.

well unless it gets bad enough were we have a revolution and start killing people which WILL someday happen again.

I don't disagree with that. And I think it will start with the income earners in this country -- low, middle and even high income. They can no longer support our increasing welfare state. The revenue of the US economy survives on its lower taxation rates of other nations, which means we can't keep spending on social services like other nations if we wish that to continue.

Other than that we have no real power as citizens to change either the corporations or the government. We are forced to buy their crappy products or go without because either more people can't afford to do otherwise or in a growing number of cases there just isn't even an alternative that they make the right way to buy anymore.

Bullshit. There are plenty of other products out there! Sure, you can't get them at Wal-Mart or Best Buy. But you can sure get them!

In government we are given the pleasure of choosing the lesser of two evils because of yet again of a system they set up to do exactly that,

Bullshit, I use my vote. I omit many ballots and I vote Libertarian and Independent. If more people thought like that, then it would not be the lesser of two evils!

You're blaming a system with a problem that voters themselves proliferate!
Just like your blaming capitalism for a problem that consumers themselves proliferate!

Be a responsible voter! Be a responsible consumer! Don't be part of the problem!

Freedom requires responsibility and intelligence -- making sure you make informed decisions. Socialism thrives on lack of responsibility and ignorance -- leaving everything to the government. Understand the huge difference!

I could sort of see the same thing in the corporate world. I see little difference in our current government and corporations, both are too corrupt to run us right anymore.

But at least in both cases, by being responsible and making informed decisions, you can affect them within 5 years.

Now the consumer has far more direct power than the voter. The consumer gets to make choices every day, voters do not.

The only difference is that at least with government we get a lousy vote for now and some people run more off an ideological standpoint than one based purely on greed.

So you think "greed" is what drives all companies? Again, you've been reading that little "white paper."

The problem I have with that is I go by the philosophy that just because something is better doesn't mean it is good enough. The whole world is heading towards a breaking point, with its population, with global worming, with recourses available, with a lot of things.

I think the bigger problem is both global and national ignorance. People are less informed, less intelligent and want other people to solve their problems -- let alone blame them for it.

The individual is far from powerless in a free, capitalist society!
The individual is erradicated in a socialist society!

We, for now, are in a position that can handle it a little bit better than most of the world. However just because we are in a better position doesn't mean we should lower everybody here to the hardships of everybody else in the world in some strange concept of equality, a lot of their hardships are created by themselves. Nobody in India or Africa is forcing people by gunpoint to have their population explode. When you have huge families in regions that have been arid since the last Ice Age what should they expect, it seems like common sense. Why should we have to pay for their lack of foresight? If by getting by you mean barely surviving then yes places like India "gets by". That is exactly the type of place I don't want America to turn into, and if we just let everybody in it would bring the standard of living in this country down.

I agree with you, but I don't agree with you on all the "root causes."

Remember who created the H1B Visa program and then expanded it the most. It wasn't W.

 

[Member2019]

The problem here is that we are unable to decide what we want in the west, and whether we have the foresight to build a more stable global economy where these issues will not arise.

And that was why various UN organizations used to "just throw money at the problem" -- but where did that get us? If there is one thing that I'm 100% behind W. on, it's accountability when these organizations send money into developing nations. No more "give money and hope" -- it's "okay, you've proven to us you don't know what you're doing, so you have to do X, Y and Z before you get more."

And I really don't care the fact that W.'s attitude pisses a lot of people off. I'm pissed off that my money, as an income earner, was being mis-used before. I want it to go to actually helping people and their nations!

 

[USNinc]

This was sent to me via email about immigration.
It's intresting but I didn't check to verify if it's 100% factual.


Be sure to read all the way to the end!!!
1. If You Migrate to this county, you must speak the native language.
2. You have to be a professional or an investor. No unskilled workers
allowed.
3. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools, no
special ballots for elections, all government business will be conducted in our
language.
4. Foreigners will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they
are here.
5. Foreigners will NEVER be able to hold political office.
6. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no
food stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs.
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount equal
to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
8. If foreigners do come and want to buy land that will be okay, BUT
options will be restricted. You are not allowed waterfront property.
That is reserved for citizens naturally born into this country.
9. Foreigners may not protest; no demonstrations, no waving a foreign
flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies,
if you do you will be sent home.
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be hunted down
and sent straight to jail.
Harsh, you say? The above laws happen to be the immigration laws of
Mexico!

 

[Legzman]

I say shoot to kill! :ak47:
that way they would think twice about coming to this country illegally!!! You wanna be in America so bad, fine but do it legally!

 

[Member2019]

I say shoot to kill! :ak47:
that way they would think twice about coming to this country illegally!!! You wanna be in america so bad, fine but do it legally!

Actually, the "illegal immigrant trade" causes enough deaths -- even if they make it. Talk to a border patrol agent -- you'll hear all sorts of stuff you'd never hear in the media about various things.

 

[om3ga]

5. Foreigners will NEVER be able to hold political office.

Betcha he would've been made an exception, though....

 

[4G63]

We torn down the Berlin wall, now we're going to spend billions on legislation, and billions on our own wall? To save money?

That is why I smoke pot. I'd rather be on dope, than to swallow that BS.

 

[niknak2]

Did you hear about the illegal immagrants working for the people to stop immagrants they were the cleaners you should of read this if you lived in UK i cound'nt stop laughing

 

[4G63]

I don't do drugs to numb the pain, so it just hurts, very, very, very much. It's not the money that hurts. It's the impoverished Americans and dying humans elsewhere that could survive given some of that money, being used to build fences to keep out the undesirables along the Rio Grande and in Jerusalem.

Fox

To me the irony, or coincidence is just so blatant it's makes me feel dumber for seeing it, in The House.

 

[D-rock]

It could be argued that the Berlin wall is fundamentally different because it was made to keep people in not shut them out. The way the wall is going up is something that I don't think will work that well and will probably be a waste of money in some respects. There are other more effective methods of cracking down on them, probably all less humanitarian than the way they want to use a wall for that matter to. I am not opposed to a wall because it is a wall. If we do need a wall and it ends up being a total positive then it will be worth the money that is spent on it if we get to spend less on them than the wall cost and the cost of the jobs they will take away from citizens of this country, let alone the fact it will improve security in some ways also.

 

[4G63]

The Great Wall of China was built by slaves or built as a military stronghold. That is what will happen with our wall. The national Guard will build a wall inhabited by Marines and Boarder Patrol. Just like in Europe, OH NO WAIT! Europe doesn't have walls!!!!!!. It will be like Korea though, that'll be fun. IMO it's our leaders not our neighbors to blame.

 

[USNinc]

:1orglaugh
He would be the only one because he was in "Jingle all the way".

Betcha he would've been made an exception, though....

 

[Member2019]

We torn down the Berlin wall, now we're going to spend billions on legislation, and billions on our own wall? To save money?

First off, the Berlin wall about about keeping people in -- this is about keeping people out. The Chinese had their wall too, and it did a great job for its time.

Secondly, I don't think you realize how much organized crime is associated with illegal immigration. Get to know several border patrol agents and they'll tell you how the general, American public doesn't understand a thing about the illegal immigration "trade." It's quite sad.

If anything, the American border patrol's #1 priority is to prevent illegal immigrants from getting killed. And the sad thing is that sometimes the border patrol is shot at. Not just by some of the crime syndicate, but the tresspassing aliens who have been told by the organized crime that American border patrol agents will shoot them on site.

It's far, far deeper than that -- but that's just a taste.

A comprehensive, 3-layer barrier is long overdue. American border agents need to know when and where they are crossing -- even if means they are repairing sections nightly. That will help 100x and require 1/10th the number of agents that they should have now, without a fence (but are nowhere near!)

That is why I smoke pot. I'd rather be on dope, than to swallow that BS.

I like to understand my world. I don't agree with many things -- if not most things -- but I like to understand it. Ironically enough, as much as the politicians cheat, lie and steal, many do come together on common issues that are not "politically correct."

In fact, I love it when the media doesn't get the story right at all -- especially when both Democrats and Republicans agree on something that must be done. That's when you see real leadership, and not just political rhetoric and demonizing.

It's rare, but it happens.

 

[lordvader1]

I say shoot to kill! :ak47:
that way they would think twice about coming to this country illegally!!! You wanna be in America so bad, fine but do it legally!

Goddamn right:thumbsup:

 

[KungFuDude]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/24/Dobbs.Oct25/index.html

Take that Mexico!

 

[Roughneck]

Q: If we eliminated the Welfare State, would you folks still vote to restrict immigration?
Q: How many of you know or realise that our "quota limit for Visa" system is a hold over from our racist days of restricting "undesirables" from immigating to this country?

The "wall" we are erecting is a mere show - it will do little to stem the flow.
You know why?

Because we as a people lack the WILL to be RESPONSIBLE with our liberty and freedom. The State loudly trumpets its slogan - "Freedom isn't free!" Damn right it isn't - but the "cost" isn't the lives our grunts casually expended in our ever growing list of interventionist foreign wars.

No - the "cost" is assuming responsibility for liberty.

We'd rather parrot out our SSN than drive down to the office and sign statements to prove our identification. We'd rather present "two forms of government ID" than refuse services.

The government parasite grows larger everyday, engorging itself on the blood of our toil - but we are more interested in supporting candidates for political office who are good at doing what WE DO --- point out fingers at the other guy.

The govenrment is our fucking servant, not our bloody master. They day we stop copping out, stop pointing fingers at anyone but ourselves, grow a pair and take responsibility for allowing this bullshit to reach the stage it has - is the day our experiment in governance has a shimmer of hope.

Freedom and Liberty are NOT easy. We have grown too soft as a people. Too pliant as a nation. Many of us cannot comprehend a LIFE without a Social Security Number - much less a government restricted to the roles enumerated in our Constitution.

Liberty? Who needs that when you have "convenience" ?


cheers,

 

[Iamforever]

I say shoot to kill! :ak47:
that way they would think twice about coming to this country illegally!!! You wanna be in america so bad, fine but do it legally!

i will take it a step back. if you dont mind.


if someone comes here, then they should embrace the flag and its laws. im not saying that only illegals commit crime, but they should think twice about doing it. its like this: lets say that some stranger came to your house and ate all your food, drank all your drinks, slept in your bed, and then stole everything right from under your nose. you dont like that? do you? this country has too much crime in the first place. we dont need more criminals coming here. that my friends is my only beef with illegals. they exploit the flag, not embrace it. we all exploit, but most real americans also embrace "old glory" i know i do at least.

 

[Torre82]

I dont usually join into a topic in its 6th page, but I'm adamantly against immigration for the purpose of giving away jobs that just *arent there*. Okay, so you hire 6 chico's for the price of 2 whiteys? That's exploitation on so many levels.. Because its hard enough to get a job as it is.

Because the workers shove a dozen mexicans into a cheap one bedroom.

Because money is being sent BACK to mexico. The system perpetuates itself if money is fed back into the gears. If money is being sent to Mexico and family members out of state.. that doesnt benefit the economy. OR.. it benefits the economy in the same way that Wal-Mart does, by appealing to the wallet and screwing the providers. The manufacturers. Hiring immigrants and paying ridiculous wages without health insurance.

I remember some time ago that Chicago is going to/already has instated a wal-mart law regarding their wages and insurance options. Wal-Mart, said.. if I remember correctly.. that 'it would basically kick W-Mart out of the city'.

And rightfully so. If we can put up 'Trepassers will be shot' on our property, we can do so with a vengeance on our borders. Bullets are cheaper than green cards + paperwork + labor on the INS side of things.

I remember hearing a joke that pseudo-said:

Prisoners (insert: immigrants) should be released, IF! Once a year, for 10 minutes, a gate will be opened that's one inch smaller than your waist.. across a mile-long field with punji sticks, razorwire.. murder-holes.. and its all LIVE ON FILM. You can vote for who you think will make it. Hell, if they can get across that.. they DESERVE freedom!

Likewise, if you're that guy.. c'mon over. You're Darwin's favorite. Have a fish biscuit, bro!