Limitless unrestricted immigration : How can you defend this 'liberal' viewpoint?

[DrCube]

@Velocity

By the way: DrCube, not singling you out, I just had to grab the nearest suitable post, there are/were plenty of other posters I could have quoted too.

No problem, I was just about to correct our friend, but you jumped in. Thanks.

Honestly, I’ve yet to hear any legitimate defense of immigration restriction, so I would turn the question back around to the OP: “laws against immigration: How can anyone defend this conservative viewpoint?”

The closest I’ve heard is “welfare state/entitlements means people will come to take advantage”. Which is a legit concern. But a) the very reason we instituted those “entitlements” is that we as a society care about the well being of less fortunate strangers. So it is pretty racist/xenophobic/misanthropic/shitty to say “except for those people”. You either care or you don’t. Pick one. I’d prefer to eliminate welfare entirely if the alternative is outlawing the basic human right to move.

But fortunately, that isn’t the alternative. Because b) we maintain those welfare payments and entitlements by asking the working class to pay. Workers pay for the welfare that those who can’t work accept. So more workers = more people paying into the pot = the ability to support more people on welfare. This is a “problem” that fixes itself. People are an economic resource. They work, they build things, they create our economy. The resistance to immigration is based on the misguided assumption that those who were born in foreign countries are all takers, while God-fearing American-born humans are the only hard-working people on earth. This is bullshit, to say the least.

Finally, nobody who is against immigration admits the fact that every single one of their arguments applies to having children, or to people moving from New York to California. Our population grows. Whether it grows because Teenage Johnny got his first job, or because Dad packed up his family and moved to Iowa, or because Muhammad from Iraq started driving a taxi in New York, doesn’t really make any difference.

So you have three options: Either foreign born people are inferior by nature (they don’t even have the skills of an American born 16-year-old, and never will, so therefore are really more like a hospital full of invalids, who always take resources and never give back), they are inferior by practice (Muslims and Mexicans believe icky old things and we shouldn’t allow those beliefs in our country, and they dress weird and smell funny and eat ugly food and that shouldn’t be allowed), or you agree with me that people are people and it doesn’t matter if they came from New York, New South Wales, New Guinea or a new mom’s uterus, they should be treated the same.

Now I can make an exception for known criminals fleeing the law or something, but not “you have the same color skin as a terrorist and speak the same language”, anymore than I would ban Oklahomans from moving because they all speak English and look like Timothy McVeigh.

[DrCube]

@SamuelA

If you let in a bunch of poor, uneducated people from Syria or Africa who’s nations are falling apart into wars and desperate poverty, you are allowing in the culture (or genetics) that created such a mess.

For a country that just elected Donald Trump, it’s a poor argument to claim that because another country has shitty or corrupt leaders, its residents shouldn’t be allowed to live here.

Want to ban Bashar al Assad and Idi Amin from immigrating to the US? Great. Agreed on that point.

[SamuelA]

@DrCube

(they don’t even have the skills of an American born 16-year-old, and never will, so therefore are really more like a hospital full of invalids, who always take resources and never give back),

You’re missing a third option. Many people living in America now, their relatives were here over a century, and fought in various wars that have carved out the very existence of America. Shouldn’t they, as descendents of the people who created this place, get some preference and not having to compete with limitless newcomers willing to work for less?

As a 16 year old, you probably can’t get a job because employers know illegal Mexican immigrants work far harder and for a lot less.

[orcenio]

@SamuelA

So in essence, the EU was a private club of mostly wealthy western nations. These are people who’s ancestors essentially invented the industrial revolution, following a period of widespread enlightenment. Liberals don’t want to believe that genetic differences could affect someone’s mental faculties*, so let’s just say it’s cultural.

If you let in a bunch of poor, uneducated people from Syria or Africa who’s nations are falling apart into wars and desperate poverty, you are allowing in the culture (or genetics) that created such a mess. (snip)

• The reason is simple. IF some people are less intelligent or more violent than others, and IF race is a clear predictor of this, stereotyping or discriminating on the basis of perceived race is a mental shortcut that works. Not every time, but more often than not.

That continent/white-race you hold up as the ‘genetic cream of humanity’ has a history of bloody violence, poverty, and famine that is grandiose, long, recurring, and quite recent. Those magic genes mustavbeen a bit slow to kick-in, eh?

[DrFidelius]

@SamuelA

You’re missing a third option. Many people living in America now, their relatives were here over a century, and fought in various wars that have carved out the very existence of America. Shouldn’t they, as descendents of the people who created this place, get some preference and not having to compete with limitless newcomers willing to work for less?

As a 16 year old, you probably can’t get a job because employers know illegal Mexican immigrants work far harder and for a lot less.

No. Why should they?

In a market economy any given job is “worth” what the person willing to take the least for it is. As has been observed, we do not see many “legacy” Americans fighting for farm worker jobs.

[Richard_Parker]

The economic worldview in which there is a fixed number of jobs and we have to choose between giving them to current residents or to immigrants is not an accurate view of the world.

The way the world actually works is that the overall number of jobs is not fixed. And one of the important things that affects that number if how free people are to come to your country. 40% of current Fortune 500 companies were founded by either immigrants or the children of immigrants.

[DrCube]

@SamuelA

You’re missing a third option. Many people living in America now, their relatives were here over a century, and fought in various wars that have carved out the very existence of America. Shouldn’t they, as descendents of the people who created this place, get some preference and not having to compete with limitless newcomers willing to work for less?

As a 16 year old, you probably can’t get a job because employers know illegal Mexican immigrants work far harder and for a lot less.

Why? Yes, veterans should be treated better than they are. But their great grandchildren should get preferential treatment? That’s a new one to me. And besides, why is “preference” in your mind equated to “ban foreigners”? If you feel so bad for the descendants of veterans, give them a government income or education credits, or small business loans or, you know, actual preference, don’t just ban the movement of another, unrelated group of people. It makes no sense.

And teenagers have high unemployment because they’re competing with adults raising families now. Used to be there were a lot of jobs that were just for teenagers, because older people had better employment prospects. Not anymore. And it isn’t the poor migrant workers picking strawberries that caused that problem. It’s automation, basically, and to a certain extent, the decline of unions.

[DrFidelius]

I apologize for the double post.

We must have been exposed to different Americas while growing up.

I believe in the America where everyone has an equal chance at success, based only on their Horatio-Alger drive and gumption.

It shouldn’t matter if your ancestors landed at Jamestown or not, American respect is based on your achievements not those of your ancestors. If you are not willing to work as hard as that recent immigrant then that is your failing. You do not deserve to be protected against someone striving to fulfill their American Dream.

(For the record, I believe in very strong penalties for businesses who artificially keep wages low by preying on undocumented immigrants.)

[Bone]

“You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say you are free to compete with all the others, and still just believe that you have been completely fair.”

[scr4]

Culture is the reason why unrestricted immigration does not equal uncontrollable mass migration. People tend to stay within their culture. It’s why there hasn’t been a mass exodus from Bulgaria and Romania into Germany, for example.

[Little_Nemo]

@SamuelA

You’re missing a third option. Many people living in America now, their relatives were here over a century, and fought in various wars that have carved out the very existence of America. Shouldn’t they, as descendents of the people who created this place, get some preference and not having to compete with limitless newcomers willing to work for less?

As a 16 year old, you probably can’t get a job because employers know illegal Mexican immigrants work far harder and for a lot less.

What you’re describing is a system where white people get preferential treatment over brown people simply because they’re white. That’s not even subtle racism.

[Little_Nemo]

@SamuelA

If you let in a bunch of poor, uneducated people from Syria or Africa who’s nations are falling apart into wars and desperate poverty, you are allowing in the culture (or genetics) that created such a mess. So ok, well maybe those people can assimilate to the culture of their new home, whether it be France or Germany, etc? The problem is, the new immigrants tend to clump into enclaves, preventing assimilation and in effect, creating tiny hostile nations inside a host nation of ignorant assholes.

This is more or less the truth on the ground. The conservatives who are against limitless immigration may themselves be pretty ignorant assholes, relative to the average liberal with an education, but it’s hard to see how they don’t have a point.

What you’re describing is not truth. It’s a fantasy based on fear, ignorance, and bigotry. People have those negative beliefs but we shouldn’t base public policy on them.

The facts are that immigrants today are assimilating faster than immigrants did in the past. And there’s no danger about immigrants importing their culture to America; they just don’t have the numbers. If the entire population of Mexico immigrated to the United States, they would still be less than a quarter of the population of America. Our culture would assimilate theirs, not the other way around.

[DrDeth]

@SamuelA

Limitless unrestricted immigration : How can you defend this ‘liberal’ viewpoint? .

It’s actually more of a “Progressive” viewpoint. It’s never been the plank of the Democratic party, for example.

[DrDeth]

@SamuelA

As a 16 year old, you probably can’t get a job because employers know illegal Mexican immigrants work far harder and for a lot less.

Few American born 16yo can or will work in the Ag fields.

Nor do “illegal Mexican immigrants work… for a lot less” as minimum wage is minimum wage.

Actually for Ag work, most are paid by piecework and earn a lot more than minimum wage.

Some farm workers do earn high wages, but not all do

Of course, such work only lasts a short time. By the year, Ag workers dont earn that much.

[XT]

If you let in a bunch of poor, uneducated people from Syria or Africa who’s nations are falling apart into wars and desperate poverty, you are allowing in the culture (or genetics) that created such a mess. So ok, well maybe those people can assimilate to the culture of their new home, whether it be France or Germany, etc?

Weeelllll…we let a bunch of poor and mostly ignorant Europeans in at various times, and that seems to have worked out ok. The thing is, immigration is pretty much what’s built this country. It’s what’s made this country great. Many of the inventions and ideas that have become hallmarks of the modern age came from immigrants to the US.

To me, it’s funny how history keeps repeating itself. At one time, it was eastern European immigrants or Chinese/Oriental (or Irish) immigrants that were the ruination of the country and everything that was bringing us down. Today, it seems it’s folks from the Middle East or Mexico that are the big bugaboo to the same types of folks who fretted about those damned Irish/Jews/Italians/whatever in the past. Do you see the irony?

Limitless unrestricted immigration : How can you defend this ‘liberal’ viewpoint?

This is what is called a strawman argument. Outside of a few folks with odd ideas, no one is talking about unrestricted immigration. At no point in US history has there EVER been unrestricted immigration, and it’s hard to see how that would even work. The fact is that immigration has always been restricted, and today (and for decades now) it’s been pretty heavily restricted. Really, the only way to get into the US that doesn’t involve a lot of heavy vetting is…be rich. Invest over $500k in a US company and you are in! If you don’t have that sort of scratch then it’s going to be a lot more difficult to get in and you are going to be jumping through a lot more hoops than most folks seem to realize…especially most folks who make OPs like yours.

a. ARE liberals for limitless immigration? It sure seems like they are in practice. Please try to explain why you aren’t, if you are against throwing out the millions of people who snuck into America illegally, or against physical barricades of some sort at the border, or against more stringent verification of immigration status for employers. About 90% of the membership on this forum is liberal, it seems, and for the most part I am included with ya’ll, but this immigration issue seems like a problem.

No, as noted no large group is for ‘limitless immigration’. Allowing people who ‘snuck into American illegally’ is a touchier subject than your strawman. My own rationality for that is that many of these people have been working in the US (and contributing through taxes, especially local ones) to the economy for years. Many have children born and raised here now. Most are hard working folks who came here for the opportunity…pretty much what this country is all about. I think that they should be given the chance to become citizens. Doesn’t seem much of a downside, to me, since as noted they are here already.

I don’t think immigration is a real issue…it’s an issue of people who don’t understand what it is, how it works, how many people actually immigrate here or really who those people who are immigrating here are. Illegal immigration is a minor problem, IMHO, and one we could fix but choose not to because people like buying their farm products cheaply and it’s easier to exploit folks who are here illegally than to fix the problem.

b. If you are for limits, should the limits be selective? Should you only allow in the cream of the crop, picking the best available (in income, earning potential, etc) from immigrants who apply, ignoring race or culture? In practice this would probably mean a lot of immigrants from first world nations over everyone else, simply because they have more in-demand skills and degrees. (not necessarily all white people, plenty of immigrants from Japan and China would get bumped to the front of the line in such a system)

We do this already…which is why it’s ironic that you bring this all up as if it’s some sort of idea that hasn’t occurred to anyone before. We DO pick the cream of the crop for new immigrants, and many of them are the ones who can pony up the money to buy their way in. Of those who can’t most have to show a work skill or ability to get in, then jump through a host of hoops to finally become citizens. The days when we allowed boatloads of poor and skill-less workers in have been over for a long time now. What’s interesting is that you don’t seem to know any of this, yet have opinions on how it should work.

c. Should we throw out all the people who snuck in illegally? It is possible to do this, albeit it would be very expensive and somewhat violent. If you don’t throw them out, then why not just open the border to everyone, because that’s what you have done.

To what ends? What would we gain by doing this? Even if you leave aside how it would look to have officials rousting out a working dad or mom and their kids, herding them into camps to be processed then bussing them en masse across the border, it would cost a huge amount in money and manpower and what would we gain, exactly?

Personally, I’d rather see a process where they are allowed to apply for citizenship or given official work visas…if they aren’t interested in taking that official status THEN we could send them back to Mexico or Canada or wherever. But really you have to fix the root issue…WHY are illegals coming here? There are a lot of reasons, and some of those at least could be addressed.

Full disclosure…my family came to the US from Mexico illegally.

[AK84]

In the real world, like, oh the EU, when immigration controls have been significantly relaxed, the short term result is indeed a large movement from poorer to richer countries as people find jobs there. However in the medium term, (say 15-25 years) you begin to see a significant movement of peoples from richer to poorer countries. So its not all one way and the pattern does not necessarily hold.

[amarinth]

@Little_Nemo

What you’re describing is a system where white people get preferential treatment over brown people simply because they’re white. That’s not even subtle racism.

Actually, what he’s describing is a system where black people get preferential treatment in front of a lot white people (Most of us have been here since the 1700s). And Native Americans in front of everyone. I don’t think that’s what he intended, though.
It’s also still a horrible idea.

[FinsToTheLeft]

@SamuelA

These are people who’s ancestors essentially invented the industrial revolution, following a period of widespread enlightenment.

These are also the people that invented or spread the practice of colonialism, Fascism, The Inquisition, and Apartheid.

Care to try again?

[Musicat]

Time to edit this?

[del]Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door![/del]

[SamuelA]

@XT

This is what is called a strawman argument. Outside of a few folks with odd ideas, no one is talking about unrestricted immigration. At no point in US history has there EVER been unrestricted immigration, and it’s hard to see how that would even work. The fact is that immigration has always been restricted, and today (and for decades now) it’s been pretty heavily restricted. Really, the only way to get into the US that doesn’t involve a lot of heavy vetting is…be rich. Invest over $500k in a US company and you are in! If you don’t have that sort of scratch then it’s going to be a lot more difficult to get in and you are going to be jumping through a lot more hoops than most folks seem to realize…especially most folks who make OPs like yours.

We do this already…which is why it’s ironic that you bring this all up as if it’s some sort of idea that hasn’t occurred to anyone before. We DO pick the cream of the crop for new immigrants, and many of them are the ones who can pony up the money to buy their way in. Of those who can’t most have to show a work skill or ability to get in, then jump through a host of hoops to finally become citizens. The days when we allowed boatloads of poor and skill-less workers in have been over for a long time now. What’s interesting is that you don’t seem to know any of this, yet have opinions on how it should work.

Full disclosure…my family came to the US from Mexico illegally.

1. If you have a back door that has let in more people than all the people who got in legally, you are just screwing over honest people who applied legally and got rejected in favor of criminals. I see nothing straw man about 11.5 million immigrants, if that isn’t “unlimited”, what is?

2. You are badly misinformed about how immigration works. We don’t pick the cream of the crop. Actually we just hold a lottery for visas, so we pick randomly. Even H1B, which is supposed to be the cream of the crop, is actually a lottery among a subgroup of those who qualify.

3. It can be hard to separate your personal feelings from situations.