That’s an argument for exceedingly harsh penalties for people found to employ those who are in this country illegally. Loss of business, retroactive loss of profits, prison time, things like that.
So, what would you call someone who thinks there should not be open borders, but who thinks that all of the severe penalties for employing people who shouldn’t be working here should be borne by the employers?
Too crude a bludgeon. Applied fairly, it would bankrupt many, and leave crops in the field to rot. And the prospective illegal employees would be worse off. It may be a* just* solution, but it is not a humane solution, nor a practical one.
Myself, personally, I call that person “Uncle Fred”.
I’m honoured, thanks.
Acting justly is not the same thing as acting in accordance with the law. Justice is when each person is treated right. It’s certainly possible to make differing valid arguments about what “treating each person right” is supposed to mean, but “simply follow the law and that’s it” is never one of the valid ones.
I’m not an Uncle Fred, I’m just using the idea to sharpen the debate a bit.
You’re right that it isn’t a “good” solution by most measures, but it is the only solution that would work. The reason is the same reason we lost the War on Drugs: Trying to restrict supply while demand remains constant does not work. You can whine about law and morality all you want, but you can’t whine reality into complying with your desires, so as long as there are people who are willing to hire undocumented people, undocumented people will show up to be hired.
We have situation we define to be a problem. We have a solution we will not use. We have other actions which are not solutions. We can continue to attempt the non-solutions, in which case nothing changes. We can change our mind about the solution we don’t want to use, and use it, in which case we’ll solve the problem. Or we can change our mind about how much of a problem the situation is, and side-step the whole mess.
Have you just woken up from a coma? This has been one of the top issues being argued over for the last year.
A huge group of adults all playing the same game of make-believe, constantly and without stopping, for an entire year or actually much longer, is IMO worth remarking on. Maybe the whole thing belongs - as a sort of case study - in the recent thread on shared hallucinations.
Yes, I agree that we should treat adults who voluntarily moved here without prior authorization as a different class of people than those that have been productive US citizens their entire lives. I think the answer to this sort of question is not to focus on the fact that someone was here without prior authorization, but that they are living here without having prior proven their usefulness to a society that provides many protections that they may find useful. I think an important step is to lump more people into the currently “illegal” category, which obviously would get a different name. Those who are able to graduate from a US high school and remain out of trouble would automatically get a pass at being lumped into the “productive citizen” group, with those to young to be able to have done that yet currently treated as second-class citizens these days anyway. Thus, I would advocate for some other status in the same sort of way we have one for those under 18 years old, that could be used to more effectively ration society’s resources without disallowing people who have the means and desire to move here in search of opportunity the right to such an opportunity. Such people would not have the right to participate in government and would not be allowed as large of a share of certain public benefits, but they would receive the ability to earn a living, have children, see those children become “full citizens” through participation in the American education system, and do all these things while having the same rights as any other human in the country while not being subject to a risk of deportation.
I’m just another person who believes in truly open borders, and has done at least a little thinking about the ways to combat the problems that such a state of affairs would cause. Would such a system work? I don’t know. Maybe it would hinge on whether we came up with a good name for the “second class citizen” category, which would probably be best dealt with by just giving a prestigious name for the “first class citizen” that doesn’t totally imply inferiority of the others. I’m not good with names, but I suspect that if we had a good name for those who currently have full access to everything citizens currently have access to that non-citizens don’t, redrawing the line between the two groups such that everyone is some kind of citizen just by virtue of living here, we could get past the current focus on “illegals taking our resources” by showing that their status is fundamentally not taking our resources and is in fact contributing to the wealth of those of the higher status (which is more often the case these days right now, but none of the “anti-illegals” seem to understand it), we might get a good resolution.
How about an internet meme of a head of iceberg lettuce with a $10/ea price?
The presence of unauthorized workers is ingrained into our agriculture. One of those things officially illegal that everybody ignores. Don’t want to get into the sorts of things greedy men do to the helpless, you most likely know.
Point being, the legality of the thing is pretty much moot at this point, we’ve been doing this shit for generations, not just years. We have an obligation to work towards a solution that is humane, just and reasoned. What we had, and what we have, doesn’t even come close.
Further, Il Douche fanning the dark flames of fear in our people is loathsome. Goddam scorpion has more humanity that that!
Would this be a “sexy” man? Oh wait, I’m sorry, an “attractive” man? I meant no disrespect. 
Illegal or black market labor is not a necessity to get things done. We pass counterproductive labor laws then turn a blind eye to immigration or just off shore manufacturing. Why a backlash against this sort of economic distortion was downplayed is a great mystery.
A rare admission of the oft-denied slippery slope strategy.
The make believe is the current crop of conservatives pretending that the people who want to come to America today are somehow significantly different than their own ancestors who came to America a hundred years ago.
Yes, but the same conservatives are also playing make believe that the people currently in the US illegally can be completely ignored - that they are not a category, that because there are immigration laws then by definition there’s no such thing as an illegal immigrant. Because if a human being doesn’t even exist, then you don’t have a moral obligation to treat him justly.
i say we open 3-5 ellis island style places and just process them 1870-1920 style after a physical/background check let em in … Only reason we stopped was the scare of too many ww1 refugees let the anti immigration idiots win …
that way we don’t have to go through this bs …
I’m sure the slave owners used similar arguments prior to the civil war. They never thought they were the bad guys, and probably thought they were awesome slave holders.
Sure, black market or grey market labor is not a necessity. However, it is a longstanding feature of the American labor market. Why do you think that is? We have laws against employing people who don’t have documentation of their right to work, but people still keep showing up here and working. So why is it that whenever people talk about illegal immigrants coming here and taking our jobs, the solution on offer is to round up those illegal immigrants and send them back to Mexico, but never to prosecute the people who gave the illegal immigrants our jobs?
Why do you think this long-standing problem of black market labor exists? It exists because the solutions are politically impossible. The Republican donor class wants cheap workers from Mexico to come here and work. The Republican voter class wants cheap workers from Mexico to go back to Mexico. We could decide to do either one, but we can’t decide to do both at the same time.
And so the actual plan is to tell the voters that we’re going to send everyone back to Mexico, and then make a big show of pretending to send everyone back to Mexico, but in reality not do much at all about it, so that the donors can keep their cheap workers.
Why is it an important question? It wasn’t for most of our history. Did your ancestors have to demonstrate some sort of special merit to be allowed in? I did, but I don’t see why I am any worthier than any other person.
Not really seeing it. I only see a poster stating their individual position. You seem to be seeing a conspiracy of all of those to your left.
Ummm, I doubt it. In fact, it wasn’t all that long ago, you don’t have to guess, you can read exactly how they felt about their slaves.
In any case, to the OP. IT is illegal, it should be classified and treated as illegal. The question is, is what is the appropriate punishment?
IMHO, the most appropriate punishment for someone who has crossed the border illegally is to subject them to a background check and vetting, and have them pay for it, along with a fine above and beyond that.
Sentancing them to a life of poverty and privation at best, and even quite often to a death sentence, is not an appropriate punishment.
It surely was an important question, for all of your history. Some of my ancestors arrived on that very famous little ship, so I suppose they didn’t have to demonstrate a whole lot other than arriving, but… Suppose that, in the 1780s, boatload after boatload of people had started arriving from China and India. Do you seriously think they would have been welcomed?