Council talks Illegal Immigration Enforcement

[snopes]

The problem has to be fixed or we'll find ourselves in a deeper mess come ten or twenty years down the road. Too many public funds are being used to pay for this and the cost of living is going up drastically already. The article I pointed out already documents that the cost of supporting this massive influx far outweigh the benefits and that trend will only continue and worsen. Property taxes, medical premiums, insurance, they are all going up to support bilingual education, massive increases in the number of students in our schools, prosecution of crime, etc. We can't put our heads in the sand and say that it's too late.
I don't understand why people complain when cities (such as the one in Pennsylvania and others) try and step up to the plate and enforce laws that will dissuade companies from hiring illegal immigrants or landlords from renting to illegals. Saying that there's a problem, but we can't fix it is a defeatest attitude to which I cannot subscribe. We say there's a problem, but when a city or county tries to suggest a fix, such as enforcing the laws, they are taken to court by the ACLU, which is one of the most absurd and crazy things I've ever heard. Sure, there are other problems that this country needs to address, but this one should be at or near the top of the list.

BTW, I just read your post Conan. Excellent points, all of them.

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by snopes

The article I pointed out already documents that the cost of supporting this massive influx far outweigh the benefits and that trend will only continue and worsen.

Unless you posted something I missed, no you didn't. The link you posted only addressed costs.

quote:
Saying that there's a problem, but we can't fix it is a defeatest attitude to which I cannot subscribe.

You might not be talking about me but if you are, I never said that it couldn't be fixed.

quote:
We say there's a problem, but when a city or county tries to suggest a fix, such as enforcing the laws, they are taken to court by the ACLU, which is one of the most absurd and crazy things I've ever heard. Sure, there are other problems that this country needs to address, but this one should be at or near the top of the list.

Everybody has their own list. You should say that it's near the top of YOUR list. Well, I think it would be more accurate to say that I don't see it as a PRESSING problem. A lot of people want to look only at the direct cost and they don't want to take into consideration any other factors or questions. Would the money that is saved by stopping this be greater than the money that's lost to higher grocery prices? (And anyone who thinks that groceries wouldn't go up substantially doesn't know diddlysquat about agricultural economics.) I've yet to see a study that compares these factors...they all only look at the direct COSTS. Some people want to build another Berlin Wall along the southern border. How much would it cost? Would it really do the job? What about the northern (and eastern and western) border? What about the ones that are already here? Would they round them up and ship them all back to where they came from? Anybody got any idea how much THAT would cost?

What I'd REALLY like to see is discussion of some of these questions instead of just 'something has to be done'. If we're really serious about solving the problem, we'd be wise to take a careful look at whether the cost of the solution would be more than the cost of the problem. The solution(s) to this problem needs to be rationally based on economics and security and not on emotion (which, in SOME cases is where I believe it to be based).

[Conan71]

Spot,

IMO, It's pressing because we have huge unprecidented and previously un-budgeted costs associated with disaster recovery, national security, etc. that have popped up in the last five years we didn't have before, and money to support illegal immigrants taking advantage of our system is draining off more and more money with each new immigrant who slips across the border to either come to work or to have an American-born child, or to just squat.

Here's the problem: many of the illegal immigrants take advantage of programs which were designed to help legal American-born citizens.  The over-burden they put on the system means that the people who have a legal right to it, and for whom these systems were originally intended to benefit, get less service and benefits.  

We have made it too easy and too attractive to illegals to keep them out.  Look at quality of healthcare and education they can have- all at no charge!  And if they are really bad, they can stay in a far better prison here than they would be shoved into back home.

Taking a long look at it, I don't think anyone, except the most extreme xenophobes want all the immigrants run out.  There is no doubt they are an important part of the workforce here in America.  I hate the term "amnesty program" but that's basically what we would have to have to keep from crippling agriculture, construction, and many other industries if we had a massive round-up and cast them all out.  

An amnesty program, IMO should not be government-funded, and there should be stipulations with definitive deadlines.  Miss a deadline and you are sent back with no second chance.  Figure out what the administrative cost is to put them on the SS rolls and any other costs associated with citizenship and make them pay every last penny- one day late and you are out of here.  You'd be able to separate real quick who is here for a truly better life and who is here to take advantage of our generosity.  Send the free-loaders back home.

The problem is, they come in, do not enroll in employer-sponsored benefit programs like health insurance or retirement, many don't take the same financial responsibilities as I do- like buying auto liability insurance and filing my taxes every year, filing legitimate W-4's with the appropriate amount of withholding (they still pay some taxes via payroll deduction by legit employers who aren't paying under the table cash).  

Many will claim the most deductions they can on their W-4 so they can under-withhold and send money back home to support other non-citizens who don't even live with them here in the states.  This further shorts the government on revenue, that under our tax system, the government is entitled to.

There are native-born Americans who do the same thing, but nowhere is it documented to be on the same scale as the problem with illegals.  There is certainly still a large welfare problem that needs to be better addressed.  And no, I don't ascribe to the opinion that these illegals have stolen all the jobs that people on welfare would have otherwise taken.

We need to stop a lot of the hand-outs that make illegal immigration attractive and that allow a certain part of our native population to be lazy.

One of the reason the illegals operate like this is to stay as much as possible under the radar scope so they aren't sent back home.  Make them legal and many would opt into making the same contributions to our system and society as you do.  The ones that refuse to- send them home and don't let them back in.

What happens is they withdraw more from the system, as the article Snope provided pointed out, than they put in by using our health care, schools, and other government benefits.  This is all well-documented by many sources.

Look at it this way, if California is spending $3 billion a year to provide healthcare, education, and law enforcement to illegal immigrants, that is $3 billion less they can spend on roads, more law enforcement for legal citizens, border patrols, and better schools for kids who were born into English-speaking families.

Granted, they consume and spend money that part of is absorbed into sales tax revenue and corporate taxes.  

However, so do many legal citizens who also provide non-governmental means to pay for their health care, pay their fair share of state and federal income and property taxes, and who withdraw less from the system than they put in.

[papaspot]

Dang, Conan! I'm gonna have to read this one when I get home.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

Dang, Conan! I'm gonna have to read this one when I get home.

You ought to see me when I actually get passionate about something! [][]

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

Dang, Conan! I'm gonna have to read this one when I get home.

You ought to see me when I actually get passionate about something! [][]

[}:)]

You may be the only one here that can get even more wordy than ME.

[Conan71]

Careful Spot, people might think we are getting along too well. [}:)]

Something came to mind when I stopped to catch my breath and get a soda:  

My wife and I honeymooned in the British Virgin Islands last November.  (Second marriage...yeah I'm a slow learner.  Nah, she's a great gal!)

At any rate, I asked our cab driver when we were heading back to the airport at the end of our stay why the crime rate was so low in the BVI's yet reputed to be so high on St. Thomas USVI only ten miles away and very high on Puerto Rico only 60 miles away.

The reason he gave was that it's very hard to get on the government dole under the British Crown.  You want healthcare?  Pay cash or show proof of citizenship.  You want a free public defender?  Not unless you got proof of citizenship.  You want to move there?  Not unless you can prove beyond doubt that you can support yourself.  You want a job?  Not unless you have a government-issued visa.  You want to employ someone?  Not unless they are a citizen or have a valid work visa.  Unemployment stays low because there are enough jobs to go around, and you have to really prove you can't work to get on the dole.  Therefore the crime rate is very low.

You can build a banana boat and float ashore on any of the islands and remain anonymous for awhile.  But you won't be able to get any sort of sustainable employment and if you get sick or injured you will stay sick.

There's no incentive to sneak into a country that provides benefits and jobs exclusively to it's citizens or people who have applied for visas through normal legal channels.

Long ago, if we would have enforced penalties on employers for hiring un-documented workers, turned away illegals at our hospitals and schools, refuse police protection (as Mexican's frequently do to Americans) there wouldn't have been any incentive for people to come across the borders.  We need to quit being so concerned about the rights of illegal immigrants to the point that we wind up impinging upon the rights and priveleges of people who have a native-born or legally-immigrated right to them.

To that end, under the amnesty program I envision, I think the gov't should hold the employers accountable to make their workers come forward and make the company share in the cost with the immigrant of making them legal.  Sure there's enforcement cost to it, but it would bring in more tax revenue and reduce the run-away costs we now have associated with the hand-outs they come here for in the first place.

Honestly, I don't see that enforcement or company participation doubling my grocery bill, or causing construction costs to double.  I realize it might raise the cost for some things, but if it lowers the amount of tax-supported benefits for people who aren't paying the proper amount of taxes, it might cause my taxes to decrease by a like amount.

[Conan71]

Spot, one more thing for your reading at home tonight and I promise I'll quit for the day-

As far as immigration incentives, it's pretty obvious why the flow is north over the Mexican border instead of south:

For Americans in Mexico:

No protection by or *from* the police, no free healthcare, you cannot get a job, you cannot own land, not to mention no one knows what sanitary water and sewer systems are.  IOW, the Mexican Gov't (for that matter most other countries) does not allow the same rights to foreigners as we do, and I think it would be a good thing if we reciprocated in like manner.

Remove the handsome incentives, and the in-flow will stop.  We need to stop being the charity hand-basket to the rest of the world.

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Careful Spot, people might think we are getting along too well. [}:)]

It's my objective to keep 'em guessing.

But seriously, folks...I read your posts (yep--every word. I wanna gold star!) and I don't find one single thing that I disagree with except your proposed solution. So really, there's nothing for me to say in reply except to reiterate my main two points:

1. ALL the costs and benefits of serious enforcement should be carefully considered before we go wading in and kicking donkey. (Can I still say "donkey" without getting the thread locked?) Will the savings be enough to cover the cost of vigorous enforcement plus the drastic increases in prices?

Geez. Now I can't remember what my second point was. Think I'll just go eat some ice cream.

[Jammie]

Spot, hope your ice cream was good.[] It'd be hard to estimate what the cost of acting vs. the cost of keeping on giving would be. We probably would come out short at the beginning, but we can't let it continue. They've already taken too much from the LEGAL Americans who need it. Or should I say that we've "GIVEN" them too much already.[}:)] They're ILLEGAL, plain and simple. They either need to go through the legal process to be here or stay in their own country. Maybe they could put a bit of effort into improving their own surroundings?[:O]  Oh yea, I guess I said I don't participate in much political banter, didn't I???

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Jammie

Spot, hope your ice cream was good.[]

It was WONDERFUL, thank you!

quote:
It'd be hard to estimate what the cost of acting vs. the cost of keeping on giving would be. We probably would come out short at the beginning, but we can't let it continue.

Well, I agree and I'm not saying we shouldn't do something. I'm just saying we should examine all the factors very carefully (as much as is possible) and not just rush in and start doing something for the sake of doing something. The solution should be well thought out and not based on emotion.

quote:
They've already taken too much from the LEGAL Americans who need it. Or should I say that we've "GIVEN" them too much already.[}:)]

Well, you're right again, we HAVE given them a lot. But it isn't like they haven't given US something. How much do you pay for a head of broccoli? A pound onions? Does it seem like a LOT? Well, I promise you, you ain't seen NOTHIN' yet. They're putting cheap food on your table. If they suddenly disappeared, what would happen? I'll tell ya what would happen. A LOT of food crops would wind up getting plowed under like a bunch of spinach because there'll be no one to harvest them. A few years ago, unemployment in the U.S. was almost zero. Everybody that wanted a job had one. And they were still harvesting our crops. You think you're gonna fill that many seasonal positions with Americans? Certainly not at minimum wage (which is three times more than the illegals get paid).

quote:
They're ILLEGAL, plain and simple. They either need to go through the legal process to be here or stay in their own country.

OH! That was my second point. Thanks!

Only a tiny FRACTION of the people who come here illegally could POSSIBLY qualify to come here legally.

quote:
Maybe they could put a bit of effort into improving their own surroundings?[:O]

Well, that's real easy to SAY... But I expect that many of the people who say it have never even visited a third world country--let alone lived there long enough to realize that you don't just wake up one morning and decide to change conditions that have existed for centuries.

quote:
Oh yea, I guess I said I don't participate in much political banter, didn't I???

Never heard ya say it so you're off the hook with me, at least. [}:)]

[papaspot]

I have a couple of last things to add and then I intend¹ to leave it alone.

Any solution should be flexible enough to allow for humanitarian concerns, ESPECIALLY for children. Children should NEVER be made to suffer, I don't care WHAT the status of their parents is.

And that brings me to my final¹ comment on the topic. Earlier, someone mentioned women sneaking in from Mexico to have their babies so the babies would be U.S. citizens. If you lived in a third world country where poverty and suffering was the rule, the education system was second or third rate and health care almost nonexistent for your class--and you had the opportunity just by sneaking across a border to give your child a bright future with decent education, health care, etc., would YOU do it? You better bet your donkey I'D do it in a HEARTBEAT. And I think any other parent here who will be HONEST will say the same thing.

¹As always, I reserve the right to change my mind.

[papaspot]

And eat your HEART out, Conan! That's 4,356 words to your 4,309!





Candy-donkey. [}:)]

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

And eat your HEART out, Conan! That's 4,356 words to your 4,309!





Candy-donkey. [}:)]

Dammitdammitsonofabitch!  You beat me! [}:)]

No doubt there needs to be a study on how to do it.  I don't think though if we had a "day of reckoning" we'd hear "a great sucking sound" of all the immigrant workers going back to Mexico (apologies to Ross Perot).  Let's get started on the study and get the politicians to do something instead of using this as another form of electioneering.  I want to see action, and I want to see action now.

I believe many of the illegals remain illegal due to ignorance of our legal immigration channels.  They are afraid to come forward out of fear of being deported.  Give them a specific window of time to become legal without fear.

I don't think anyone would disagree with your point that if you had a child, you'd want the best healthcare and education.  However, we need to take away the incentive for parents to do this, unless the Mexican government is willing to pick up the tab.  Otherwise, provide those services only to those who are here legally.  

Just because someone is born here to a mother who doesn't respect our culture or laws, doesn't make them legal in my books, because they won't be brought up to respect our culture, language, and laws.  I don't believe picking up the tab for healthcare and education for every third world immigrant should be incumbent on legitimate American tax payers.

As far as what happens to the children of illegals we'd boot out for non-compliance, sorry to sound hard-hearted, but if the parents weren't willing to get legal, when the opportunity presents itself, that's on the parents of those kids, not our government and not my conscience.

Unless everyone has forgotten, until the early 1900's churches were about charity and governments were about governing.  Now it seems to be reversed.  If it bothers people what would happen to these kids, they can tell their church to start building orphanages.

Real simple summary-

1)Lock down the Mexican border.
2)Give those already here a chance to comply.
3)Kick out the ones who don't.

FWIW- Congress did pass a bill a couple of days ago granting about a billion to build 700 miles of fence.  My apathy toward congress right now tells me it will never come to pass after the November election.

Word count??? []

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

quote:Originally posted by snopes

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

Another obstacle to taking enforcement beyond the level of rhetoric is the cost. Any kind of serious enforcement would require a LOT of money. Many of the people (at least in my view) who feel that this is a major problem also complain about high taxes. I have to wonder if they're willing to pay HIGHER taxes to cover the cost of enforcement.

Medical costs, and a host of other factors have to be considered as well, don't you think?

Certainly not initially. It would eventually result in some savings but not as much as many people think. The medical care that illegal aliens do receive is pretty much bare-bones bottom of the barrel. And in many cases, those costs are borne by private charity hospitals. In the long term, it would probably be a wash with regard to the cost of enforcement but how many politicians do you know that base their decisions on the long term? The runaway inflation that would result would also probably level off in the long run. But the percent of your paycheck that you spend on groceries would go up substantially and never come down.

Statements like this remind me of the tired mantra of those who oppose increasing the minimum wage, saying it will hurt the economy when the fact of the matter is it happened not once, but twice during the Clinton years and we had arguably one of the best economies we've ever had-for all Americans, not just the wealthy. I don't buy this argument opposing minimum wage increases and I sure don't buy this argument in favor of illegal immigration either.

BTW, judging by the failures of other countries who have similar "Guestworker" programs, the outcome seems to be a disenfranchised, second class immigrant citizen communities, that do not assimilate, and become fractured communities, divided from the rest of the society. If there is any truth to the saying united we stand, divided we fall, then a guestworker program potentially poses dire consequences.

We currently have legal immigrant "guestworkers", what about the complete disregard for these honest hardworking immigrants who follow the rules? What about the honest employers that hire legal immigrants and pay all the associated costs(worker's compensation, unemployment, etc.) that illegal employers do not by exploiting loopholes and lax enforcement of labor/immigration laws through worker misclassification? It has been estimated that places honest employers at as much as a 35% competitve disadvantage for doing the right thing by obeying the law and playing by the rules. Please explain why we should reward criminal businesses and border jumpers with amnesty, open borders, and a wage slave program for their criminal misconduct?