Bush...Mexico...jobs...immigration...connect the dots.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Undecided, Jan 7, 2004.

  1. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    I don't live in the US, so really I couldn't really care. But I know that many posters here are in the US. Consider that illegals could become legalized if they work in the US. The question becomes, are illegals necessary? Some argue that these illegal immigrants work jobs that Americans simply don't want to do. They compose a large part of California's pickers at farms, in the Imperial Valley and other such locales. They are paid very little for the amount of work they do. Also because they essentially pay taxes as well. Shouldn't they be represented? I am not for illegal immigration, it’s not fair to those who came into the country legally, but I recognize that they do many jobs that many don't want to do. So do you support Bush?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. outlandish smoki'n....... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,033
    you take out all the "illeagal" workers from Texas then tell me what happens!!

    .....no restaraunts/construction/manual labour.

    Texas would be Kaput
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    Legalizing illegal alien is a bad move. To make a long story short, basically illegal aliens benefit the economy. They work for cheap and without benefit. They drive the consumer price down. They don't care because they still make more than working in their native countries anyway. Once they become legal, they don't help the economy as much.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Pollux V Ra Bless America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,495
    Perhaps it should be called the Thirteen and a Half Ammendment. Mexican Illegals are essentially slaves, aren't they?
     
  8. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    Slaves work unwillingly. If they work willingly, they can't be slaves.
     
  9. Pollux V Ra Bless America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,495
    I don't know. You don't think illegal workers are being forced to work? They have no choice. They can go back to the poverty and desolation of their Latin American homes (Mexico, Nicaragua...), or they can work here for next to nothing. Which would you choose?
     
  10. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    Life is not fair. Get over it.

    I would choose to work my ass off, get educated, and look for opportunties. If I ever come here, I come here legally.
     
  11. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    That is significantly easier said then done, that is simply impossible to accomplish in many places in Central America. I do not support Illegal immigration either, but we must not lose sight of reality, even when they work in the US they can't even think of going to a place of higher education.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2004
  12. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    If you have never been to Central America, do not make assumptions. There are a lot of very nice places in central America. People don't have college degrees because they don't need it. Every country offer scholarships and crank out Ph.D.'s.

    A lot of people have this attitude that, since they are from a poor country, that means we owe them. Because they are poor, they are entitled to come to a better place. It is wrong to stop them from coming illegally.
     
  13. Undecided Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,731
    No Joeman I have met many people from the region who tell me the desperate poverty of the majority of the population. The minority of the population that can actually afford to go university are the lucky few. The VAST majority of the population is not only poor, but is subjugated due to race, especially in Mexico (i.e. Chiapas). The white Europeans do hold much of the wealth in Latin America (where I have been numerous times, with family there). Luckily I am European, and I was born in a largely European country, in the region. But there are countries like Bolivia, where the majority of the population lives on subsistence. So from talking from experience, I can understand why millions go to the US.
     
  14. 15ofthe19 35 year old virgin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,588
    Joeman has nailed the point. They aren't forced to come here, but if they do, they should do it legally.

    Of course many of them want to come here to make more money than they can at home, and without those that do, get ready to pay higher prices. Many of them are supplying services that are in high demand and making very good money doing so. There is a very argument for legalizing the ones that are here so that we can start taxing them. Many of them aren't even close to as poor as the ignorant casual observer would think.

    I work on the jobsite with some of their crews. Do any of you?
     
  15. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    Illegal aliens are actually already paying taxes. They pay sales tax. They don't make enough money to pay income taxes. The taxes that they don't pay is negligible.

    US actually has a very lax immigration policy compare to Mexico. Mexico really tries to root out illegal immigrants and deport them. US only bother those who might endanger our society.

    The reason Bush is doing this is because he sees this as a watershed moment to make all Hispanics republican supporters, just like what democrates did to blacks in 60's. This is purely racial politics. Right or wrong is irrelavant in this issue.

    I like our immigration policy the way it is. It's not too harsh or too lax. If someone wants to come here and work illegally, that's their business....and should stay illegal.
     
  16. Spyke Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,006
    "Choose" is the key word here. They have a choice. That's not slavery. Their choices may be limited, but they still have the right to choose their fate.
     
  17. sweet Pentax Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    920
    gotta love that "eat shit or die" attitude

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Spyke Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,006
    "
    "

    I can edit too.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    This is election year water-muddying that we'll see much more of from the White House, who intend to benefit from any public confusion that may be stirred up by puffed-up domestic-policy debates.

    As with "No Nation-Building", "Middle-Class Tax Cuts", "No Child Left Behind", "Alternative Energy", "EPA", "Job Recovery", etc. Bush Administration lip-service is consistently belied by reality. It is ridiculous for the President to speak of nullifying or applying waivers to the established law of the land that is not being applied where it counts, far inland from the borders, where big business profits from foreign laborers. Even though American economic exceptionalism and isolationism is utter fantasy, this administration attacking established immigration policy at this moment is highly suspect. The duty of the Executive Branch is to see that existing law is enforced, before meddling in and complicating the job of the Legislative.

    Watch for multiple domestic sideshows like this. Bush strategists are clearly selecting and sparking attention-holding debates to draw attention from a foreign policy steadily exposing itself as grandiose and disastrous: They're sending in the rodeo clowns.

    The American majority doesn't pay enough attention to notice these patterns of subterfuge, but there is still hope, even before elections come: In their spinelessness, the Busheviks are increasingly alienating some core elements of the real GOP, taking big risks at home and abroad: When insider politics turns too far inward, and powerful old Republicans get left out, W and his rogue gang will be unceremoniously run out of town. O happy day.
     
  20. Joeman Eviiiiiiiil Clown Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,448
    I am not voting in this election for sure. Our government is monopolized by two evil institutions. We badly need some kind of 3rd party revolution.
     
  21. then you need to look at the ones already available, "Green" anyone?
     
  22. I think undocumented people do buy houses, pay property taxes, etc. Even income tax, if they use someones' SS#

    Probably right about the motive, I am a 'natural Republican', but they manage to slap Mexicans every chance they get. Look at Pete Wilson, Pat Buchanan, Bob Dornan & 187, hired goons at polling places, etc., etc.

    So, I'll stay a Demo until something comes better

    http://www.mikehersh.com/Racism_as_Republican_Electoral_Strategy.shtml
    http://www.buchanan.org/
     
  23. Vortexx Skull & Bones Spokesman Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,242
    So, basically, Bush wants to keep illegal fruitpickers because they serve the american industry, while getting rid of the others, from an economical perspective and considering that they haven't been able to completely stop illigal immigration this isn't such a bad idea.

    But the really leftwingers will say it's selective and unfair
    And the really rightwingers will say they don't wanna see any sombreros at all in america

    tough decisions, no matter if you are democratic or Republican president. You try (or at least pretend) to make the best of soceity for all, but clearly this isn't possible if the burden of illegal immigrants gets too large...

    Given the political influence of california and having republican governor and a large mexican population, it would be rather stupid if Bush would offend the taxpaying latino voter too much, so while the bush plan derserve no prize in beauty contest, it looks like a pragmatic decision, what would be the alternatives?
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2004

Share This Page