Social security is a Ponzi scheme anyways. The only way to keep it soluble under non-growth conditions is to frequently adjust (raise) the age of first beneifts so as to maintain a constant worker:benefit receiver ratio.
NAFTA - That is all you need to know.
Thank you all very much for the interesting discussion. This really just started as an idea off the top of my head (where there is probably a point!). You brought up a lot of things I had not even thought of before. I do not see military service as a punishment, just a way for people to earn the right to become citizens.
As for too many jobs being open if they were not filled by immigrants, I do not think that is true. There are a lot of American citizens who are looking for work who cannot find any job, even one that pays a ridiculously low wage. Jobs they might fill are often not available, though, because someone else already has them and is working for a very low wage and no benefits. There also are a lot of high school and college students looking for work. They need job training and experience, but have a lot of trouble finding anything.
BTW, under a law passed last year, anyone in military service on or since 9/11/01 has any further residency requirement for acquiring citizenship completely waived. Used to be peacetime service shortened it to 3 years. So any legal green-card holding immigrant in the US Armed Forces on or since 9/11 can take the test, and the oath, and become a citizen immediately.
Really, what better proof of your commitment to your new country than directly placing yourself for the next 8 years (total active + reserve obligation once you enlist) at the ready to take a bullet for the sake of upholding its Constitution?
I see Susanann studiously avoiding answering my last posting above. That’s quite telling.
FWIW, I don’t really know how I feel on this issue. I just want to know what Susanann has to say about this, since her asertion that “criminals” have no place in the military.
During the Gulf War, there were reports in local newspapers (in New Mexico and Texas) that apprehensions of illegals droped significantly. Some attributed it to a rumor that the United States was going to reinstate the draft, and include non-citizens in this. I wish I had some definite numbers. Of course, while non-citizens are eligible to serve in the military, it is unlikly that any illegal aliens would register with selective service.
IIRC, North is now listed on the rolls of the United States Marine Corps as Retired.
I think that it would be a horrible idea to conscript illegal immigrants into the US military. “Lets see, we have 5 million people who are poor, uneducated and essentially lacking the most basic skills, but they know how to break the law. I know – lets give them military weapons after we have forced them into risking their lives for a cause they don’t consider their own!” Not my idea of a great way to run a military.
If you need further convincing, look at what happened to Rome after they began to rely on foreign, conscripted soldiers in their military.
regnad kcin
Yes, I would in fact work in construction or in sanitation. Both of these jobs pay incredibly well.
The rhetoric is touching, but patently false. Read the literature out there from the unbiased sources, not just the extreme left (or right for that matter) sources. Try here as a start. Error
They cost us tons of money and will continue to do so at my cost and your cost and the cost of all the tax-payers here in the states.
From http://www.usbc.org/
if you really want to do some research on this topic I would suggest you subscribe here.
http://www.questia.com/Index.jsp?CRID=illegal_immigration&OFFID=se1
monstro
Don’t know about you, but my ancestors bought the land that they moved to, and they came from a 3rd world country legally (and before you spout off again, they were at least as poor as the Mexican nationals coming across the boarder now). Even the people who came on the first colonization ships didn’t steal the land. They traded for it and at the time, both parties thought they had made a good deal, especially since the American Indians didn’t even believe they owned the land. More rhetoric and unthinking hatred – that’s what I like to see.
But they are criminals. If they weren’t we would call them legal immigrants. How do you feel about calling someone a criminal just because he drove around the city in your car without asking for it? How about if he just borrows the stereo out of the car, but leaves the rest of it? Criminals are people who engage in illegal activity, and right now it is illegal to step across that ‘imaginary boundary’ line. You may also want to remember that people have died in the creation of that ‘imaginary’ line and that more people would die to defend it if it became necessary. Makes that ‘imaginary’ line a little more important, at least to them.
I think you mean another real law perhaps? Or maybe you can tell me which laws are real and which aren’t? If a cop catches you speeding or littering, he/she will cite you and you will pay a fine which is what the law has determined those offenses are worth. Maybe you are saying it is ok until you get caught?
For the record, I don’t think they are bad people necessarily. I am just tired of people thinking I am a bad person because I don’t want them here. They have an opportunity to apply and come here legally as citizens, students or with work visas. They just choose to come without.
El Mariachi Loco
I have already talked about the jobs issues with regnad kcin, and I didn’t ask him to site these jobs that were so repellent to American citizens, but since you are the second person to spout off about this, I believe I’ll ask you to give me an actual poll or some statistic that says “X percent of Americans won’t do Y kind of jobs”.
Beyond that, enforcement of the law shouldn’t be just a matter of public policy. It is outright stupid to make a law that you have no intention of enforcing, and after 911, we have a definite stated public need to tighten the boarders, but in more than a year, there has been little done along that path. The reason isn’t that it serves national interest, it is that select national lobbies backed primarily by the Ford Foundation http://www.fordfound.org/ are out to make our boarders completely open using law suite scare tactics. Do your homework please.
**lekatt **
Uh no. They do make good consumers since they all have so much money to spend thanks to the social welfare system (notice the blatant sarcasm). Besides, there is still a steady population growth without the immigration factor. Even if there weren’t, why would it be so bad to achieve ZPG?
Social Security is another issue entirelly. It is a poor system by any measure and the fact that it requires population growth to sustain it should be seen as it’s failure, not an endorsement for more population. Additionally, if you got rid of the illegals, you would have an additional 8 billion dollars a year by 2006 
Monty
I agree with you. However, the OP is a discussion about conscripting aliens who didn’t want to leave the country into service. I think that is a horrible idea. The idea of a legal alien volunteering for service I fine laudable.
CBEscapee
You should read my response to Monty. This isn’t about legal aliens in the military, but about illegal aliens being give the non-choice of join or get tossed out. I don’t want them on that basis. Conscription was one of the things that the founders of the country hated most about the British. Besides, it is dangerous.
A couple of points for Ewiser:
Yes, I realize that the OP was suggesting conscripting illegal aliens; however, Susanan interjected a patently prejudice-based comment about any aliens serving in our Armed Forces.
As to the Native Americans: I was under the impression that they felt that nobody individually owned land but that certain tracts of land belonged (or was under their protection) to the community and thus, in that sense, did belong to them.
As to applying legally to immigrate: One part of that is a physical examination to ensure the prospective immigrant doesn’t have any of a number of diseases or other health problems. Sneaking into the country obviously circumvents that examination.
Ewiser, If you care to read my post more carefully, you will notice that it was in response to susanann’s comment about aliens in the military. She plainly says all aliens, not just illegal.
I agree with you that conscripted illegal aliens as a group wouldn’t make very good soldiers although I know more than a few that would love the opportunity to trade a few years in the Army for US citizenship. And some those would probably do well as soldiers.
I am sorry. What is your question?
Why are you prejudiced against lawful resident aliens to the extent that you don’t feel they should serve in the Armed Forces? Remember that the government, said government which the Armed Forces serve to protect, feels that lawful resident aliens should get certain advantages over other lawful resident aliens as a consequence of said service.
I suppose “spout off” means “mention”? I would assert that if American citizens were willing to work in unskilled labor and service industries, we would see American citizens working in unskilled labor and service industries. I have not recently seen any evidently American* busboys or landscapers. (*Of course I didn’t ask them what their citizenship was, but it was fairly clear that they were recent arrivals from some Spanish-speaking country).
This study does a pretty thorough job of correlating illegal and legal immigrants to job creation.
Re farm work: “Of the migrants in California today, anywhere from 30 percent to 60 percent, depending upon the crop, are illegal immigrants. Their willingness to work long hours for low wages has helped California to sustain its agricultural production–despite the loss since 1964 of more than seven million acres of farmland. Fruit and vegetable growers in the state now rely on a thriving black market in labor–and without it more farms would disappear. Illegal immigrants, widely reviled and depicted as welfare cheats, are in effect subsidizing the most important sector of the California economy.”
Or if you prefer this: “Immigrant farm workers provide a classic example of the trade-offs inherent in immigration policy making. Permitting Mexican farm workers to enter the US helps to hold down farm wages and thus food prices. The immigrants are eager to come, the farmers are eager to employ them, and because of their presence, Americans have more money to spend on non-food items.”
Re restaurant industry: “Any backlash against foreigners is viewed as a threat by the industry, which relies heavily on workers from Mexico, China, El Salvador and many other countries to cook, wash dishes and wait on tables” … “Many teens increasingly view restaurant work as lower status jobs, Rosenbloom said, lower even than jobs with similar pay in malls and clothing stores. As a result, he said, it’s harder to get native-born workers.”
Agreed, but that’s the way it is whether we like it or not. “There is evidence increased border enforcement is correlated with falling wages for young males in Mexican border cities,” says this report (PDF). Another page from the Dallas Fed: “Laws that exist but are not enforced, such as sanctions on employers who hire undocumented workers, signal acceptance of illegal immigration.”
Please support the assertion that specific lobbying efforts to create open borders, as opposed to simple economics, is behind lax enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. Also please indicate how much is paid in social welfare to illegal immigrants.
Does this mean “form an opinion that agrees with mine”? The fact that we have dissimilar points of view doesn’t mean that either one is necessarily uninformed.
This might be out of place for one so new to the board, but I do have an awfully strong opinion on this.
Can I just ask, how in the world is it possible to have Free Trade without freedom of movement? If we in the West can take our companies over there to take advantages of the lower wages, why is it unfair to allow people over here to move here and take advantage of our higher wages and higher standard of living?
Surely that’s just playing fair?
Monty,
An alien is: a foreigner (and he is usually a citizen of another country).
I dont like mercenary armies.
I dont think a free country should have, depend on, or use mercenary armies.
I dont think the United States needs, or should rely or depend on foreigners for our own self defense. Americans are fully capable of defending our country and protecting our Constitution by ourselves - we dont need to depend on citizens of Korea who are living here, legally or illegally, to be in our armies and air forces, and navies if we have to fight Korea.
I dont want any american soldier to ever take orders from a foreigner(I am not talking about joint allied war operations with allied countries), esp battlefield operations, bombing decisions, strategies, or tatics.
Mercenaries(aliens) may care more about the “pay”, than the “cause”.
How can a foreigner, an alien, who was born elsewhere, who knows nothing at all about our constitution, our history, our form of government, our Bill of Rights, our founding fathers, our American Revolution, who is still a citizen of another culture…, honestly and faithfully defend something that he knows nothing about, and who has not passed any of our tests to verify that he knows, and sincerely believes, in our government?
An alien(mercenary) may hesitate to fight to his utmost against his fellow citizens if we ever went to war against his country.
I dont want foreigners, mercenaries, aliens, or whatever you want to call them, to have access to high security areas.
I dont want foreigners, mercenaries, aliens, or citizens of other countries guarding Area 51, flying our secret aircraft, or to have access to any United States military base.
I dont want “Iraqi resident aliens” who hold citizenship in Iraq to be aware of, or have knowledge of, any of our plans in how we are going to invade Iraq. Same reason I didnt want german resident aliens in ww2 to join our army and have access to United states military intelligence, and I didnt want japanese resident aliens who held citizenship in Japan to defend Pearl Harbor.
If you have a son or daughter going to Iraq this month, do you want him or her to be in a platoon full of Iraqi citizens who enlisted into our army ?
If we let one foreigner, one alien into our army, how many more do we let in? 10% 50% 100%? Do we keep them all privates? How will an Iraqi citizen sargent in our army handle a platoon full of American citizens in this invasion into Iraq?
How do we assign our troops to guard sensitive bases, if there is a substantial number of foreign citizens in those units?
Should I go on, or go you get the point?
We are not talking about legal immigrants who came to this country in a legal manner, who are not felons, who wanted and became United States citizens, and who believe in our form of government, who renounced all allegance to foreign governments and to their former country, and who are now American citizens.
A naturalized citizen can join our army, and help defend it. Many legal naturalized citizens/immigrants have served very well in our history, and in our past wars.
I’m a citizen of another country.
<---- Look.
Bad evil nasty me, eh?
- Yep!!!
Are you aware of the “Too much wrong?” problem?
Reagan suffered from it. Bush suffers from it. It comes about when someone says “no, really, what exactly don’t you agree with? What exactly is wrong here?” And you can’t think of a single thing, not because there isn’t one, but because there are twelve. What do you say? It comes out all twisted and garbled.
There is so much wrong with the opinion that no “foreign national” can serve in the US Military, not least the assumption that only those who have chosen to live in the US have a decent moral compass, that it’s hard to know where to begin. I have lived in the US for a few months, it served to reinforce my opinion that it’s a lovely place to visit and the people are nearly all smashing, but I would never become a US citizen. I much prefer the EU for a number of reasons. I would pick a UN decision over a unilateral US one any day of the week. I oppose unilateral military intervention in Iraq. Does that make me a bad person? Do I hate freedom and liberty? Am I untrustworthy, an example of “Old Europe?”
More to the point, how do you define foreigner? If an Iraqi is naturalised in the US, does he automatically lose all connections with the “fatherland?” What if his family is in Baghdad and he’s a pilot in the USAF on a bombing run? What if he’s second generation, but his grandparents are in Iraq? What if he’s a seventeenth generation apple-pie American, but is in the army for the money and isn’t exactly sold on the cause of bombing Iraq? Where do you draw the line at who is “worthy” of serving and protecting your interests by putting their life on the line?
I believe that without the aspect of conscription the suggestion in the OP is the basis upon which the French Foreign Legion is built. In return for a 5 year commitment to the Legion one is grated French citizenship and a passport upon completion. After 15 years they are entitled to a French military pension.