“Degenerates.” Perhaps this means hominids that have devolved to subhuman character: Bonobos, Picts, Sicilians, NASCAR fen, and the Irish.
“Perverts.” Ho Mo Sexuals, Poets, Greeks, Mormons, also the Irish.
“Terrorists.” The rebels who ran the Loyalists out of the colonies, Sicilians, also the Irish.
“The Criminal Class.” Sicilians, the Irish (again), Ku Kluxers.
So clearly we need to keep out the Sicilians and the Irish. Not sure where we’re supposed to send the NASCAR fen, Mormons, “patriots,” and Ku Kluxers, though.
More seriously, I’m disturbed by the idea that we want the world’s best and brightest here–the idea that we would condemn other nations to mediocrity while bringing the best of the best to enrich ourselves. How does that help grow the world economy?
Of course, considering that for centuries we were populated by the dregs of Europe, perhaps it’s a corrective. But what shall our comparatively unimpressive natives think of immigration by the elite minds of the world?
Hopefully other countries are also recruiting sharp minds to improve their countries. But who builds up poor countries?
What I find confusing is why people can’t see the difference between legal and illegal immigration.
We need to set up a system where as immigrants can only stay a short time. Say five years after they give up their citizenship and become Americans or return home. None of this dual citizenship stuff. Either you want to be part of this country or not. You can’t have it both ways.
If a job is open and an American can do it, the company should have to explain in detail, why this job isn’t being filled by an American. This is common in other countries. Unless your a highly skilled person like a doctor, there are too many Americans to fill these jobs.
Why should the managers at my Target or Kmart be from Mexico and Canada when we have Americans who could do that job. Why don’t they have that job. It’s a good job. People want it, so why isn’t it filled by an American?
This country was founded by immigrants but it was a different time. We needed people to fill an underpopulated nation. We are not underpopulated now.
It’s an arbitrary, self-imposed difference. This question is asking why we should maintain that difference. Simply saying that the difference exists (because we’ve put it there) does not answer the question. Why not just make all, or almost all, immigration readily legal, and in this way, eliminate illegal immigration? Though your opposition to such a policy has been made clear, you still have not provided any answers to this question.
If the person offering that job wants to give it to someone who happens to not be an American (or a current American), why shouldn’t they be able to? Why should being American bestow upon you the right to preferential treatment?
I don’t mind any ethnic group provided its in reasonable numbers, and I want quotas (based not on nationality but such factors as income and skills) so we get the best and brightest of the planet not people who will leech off our generous systems of welfare and education.
Felons certainly. Also those those who have any history with a criminal organization or terrorist group, and some others
So are you saying anyone who wants to come to the US can just come in without regards to our economic situation. We will get California x100 or x1000. Of course provided some smart politician gets such a law passed he’ll practically rule the mobs.
But why? Adopting the same idea, should Californian employers be forced against their will to give preferential hiring status to native-born Californians? I would find it rather an exorbitant cost to obstruct the flow of human resources in this way.
Here’s an objection to unrestricted immigration: infrastructure. There’s only so fast you can build roads or sewer systems or apartment buildings, so you can’t just flood cities with millions of new people every year. Particular since it’s a big fight to get any basic infrastructure issues dealt with in this country. If we had a better commitment to infrastructure, I’d be amenable to increasing the immigration quotas, but even then, you’d still have to cap it somewhere.
The Homestead Act’s provision was for “any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its enemies. . .”
There was no racial restrictions, and non-whites could and did homestead. The provision tended to exclude non-white immigrants, who couldn’t generally become citizens, but there was nothing preventing non-whites who were citizens born in this country from taking advantage of the Homestead Act, and a lot of blacks, at least, did.
Within America, people often move to another state/city after, and because of, finding a job there – but, you’re right, wouldn’t be so simple across international borders.
Again, it goes back to the gated community analogy. We don’t want unwashed masses of poor people huddling around our cities in favellas and shantytowns.
