Hire people here. If you don’t have enough takers, raise the wage or sweeten the pot some other way.
Are immigrants aggressors looking to claim territory for their home country? Of course not. Therefore the immigration question is not relevant to questions of defense.
Why would people choose to come to America illegally if there was a legal way to do so? Thrill seeking?
You want to put an end to illegal immigration? Offer legal immigration. People wouldn’t be sneaking across the border if they could enter the country legally.
People who wanted to come here for work or freedom or better cellphone service could show up and be processed in at some modern day version of Ellis Island. Which would make it a lot easier to screen the crowd and separate out the terrorists and criminals.
And this would make it a lot easier for the Border Patrol to guard the border from the handful of terrorists and criminals still trying to sneak across. They would no longer have a crowd of peaceful immigrants to hide in or an infrastructure set up to smuggle people across the border. So we’ve have much tighter security to keep out genuine threats.
It would make ICE’s job a lot easier for the same reason. They’d have a much easier time tracking down a few hundred genuine criminals living here illegally if those criminals didn’t have a crowd of millions of peaceful immigrants to hide in. And the peaceful immigrants wouldn’t be afraid to cooperate with law enforcement if they weren’t scared of being deported so they’d be an asset in identifying the criminals living in their communities.
It’s a solution to all of the problems except one: the bigots who think “those people” don’t belong here and hate all immigration, legal or illegal.
Who hates all immigration? That sounds like a strawman.
OK, fair enough. Just brown immigration.
Try telling thatvto my friends in Kazakhstan and Georgia. Not only is it virtually impossible for them to get work visas, they routinely get turned down for tourist visas. It amazed me to learn that people can’t come and visit America if they want.
Because it is. Part of the left’s tactics is to attempt to shut down debate of issues by casting the positions they disagree with as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. When they can’t win a point on the merits—PRESTO—“Racist!”
A country has a right to secure its border sand defend them from whatever they don’t want coming in. If the people of a country decide they don’t want X, the government has the responsibility to keep X out. You might not like them, but laws have been passed on how to handle people who come here without our permission. You can, of course, try to get those laws changed.
You meanin excess of the roughly 750,000 naturalized citizens annually? Roughly 1- 1.2 million green cards annually are handed out.
Is that a lot? I know it sounds like a lot but serious question - would something bad happen if those numbers were doubled or tripled and if so, what and how?
QFT. All the right wing reasoning and rationale about already having too many people are nothing but bullshit excuses and dog whistles. They just get really tweaked when they hear people speaking Spanish at the mall. That’s what this is all about.
No… my point was that on this side of the line, the US government is a legitimate state, and furthermore, it derives that legitimacy from the consent of the governed- on this side.
Which gives the US government all the authority it needs to decide who gets in and who doesn’t, and who we can kick out, etc…
And EscAlaMike, you need to read up on your Texas history. What happened is that the Spanish offered land grants to Anglo (meaning American) “empresarios” to settle the Tejas part of Coahuila y Tejas. The first of the empresarios was Stephen F. Austin, who settled immigrants on his grant, which is in an area that’s just SW of Houston.
From there, the Mexicans had a period of political upheaval, and also came to find out that the immigrants from the US weren’t nearly as compliant as they’d expected. Long story short, Santa Anna revoked the 1824 Constitution which more or less removed a federal system and replaced it with a centralized system. (why the flag at the Alamo was a Mexican flag with “1824” replacing the eagle, snake & cactus) They also abolished slavery around the same time, and all of this pissed the Texans off- in effect they’d been baited and switched about the form of government they’d be living under, etc… So they revolted against the government in Mexico City.
At no point was this some sort of torrent of illegal American immigrants into Mexico- they were explicitly invited and given land to come and settle.
Just illegal aliens, whether they’re white, brown, or purple.
Thanks for the history lesson. I don’t know much of that.
Another lesson I learned recently is that the definition of the word “immigrant,” in both the dictionary and US law, is a person who comes to a new country with the conscious intention of permanently moving there. So, people who are here on student visas or temporary work visas are NOT immigrants. And thus the OP is using the word “immigrant” incorrectly. Why does he call these people “undocumented immigrants?” We don’t know anything about them other than that they’re a bunch of random foreign nationals arriving at our border and attempting to enter the USA. The answer is, turn them back.
You are right. Too bad there is not some way to determine why they are arriving at our border and what their intentions are. Maybe someday.
First, it is not like you can run a criminal history check on these people. Most third world countries do not have extensive computer databases like the U.S. and Canada do. As far as their intentions, we could ask them, but how do we verify that they are telling the truth?
Not sure. How did we do criminal history checks and verify truthfulness before computers were invented?
The response is clearly delineated in U.S. law, and activities to address this issue under direction of DHS are being organized along these lines as we speak.
Are we debating some high-level notion of a proposed change to immigration law?
Yes, but those laws, procedures, and personnel can be thwarted simply by lying. 