Low cost living and quality of life/safety issues

[jacob]

People!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom <- if you don't know what this means, please read it!

In an attempt to learn enough history so as not to repeat it, lessons concerning the above feature rather heavily in the curriculum in schools on the continent---because Europe has had a somewhat embarrassing history of such things. It is unfortunately not very prevalent in US history lessons. This is unfortunate because it's probably very helpful to hammer these historical lessons home.

It really doesn't take much economic downturn to make a convincing case that some ethnic minority is the source of all the nation's problems and that if they were somehow eliminated all would be well. It doesn't even matter if the statements are true or false. Unless people are inoculated with the historic consequences of this kind of thinking, it's very easy to fall back into it due to the inherent human tendency to look at differences rather than commonalities.

To fall back on some founding fathers' idealism, the US is supposed to be founded on the commonality of people seeking a better life for themselves. Not the @$@#$ difference in the color of their team's shirt, or the color of their face. Just look at all the BS fighting going on in the world right now due to some minor disagreement that caused the warring factions to split hundreds and hundreds of year ago to see where these impulses naturally lead if they're not checked.

Or hell, you can be like Europe. Cordon immigrants off from the rest of the population. Don't talk to them. Don't hire them. Blame them for all your problems. In twenty years, you'll have political parties enjoying popular support with names like National Front, Golden Dawn, and American People's Party with clean cut youth supporters wearing nice shirts getting voted in based on a promised platform of new prosperity, etc. and if you ignore history, it's unfortunately likely that all this will make sense too because "this time it's different". And so history repeats itself.

[jennypenny]

To fall back on some founding fathers' idealism, the US is supposed to be founded on the commonality of people seeking a better life for themselves.

To be clear, that was my point. One of the big reasons people come here is for access to education.

I don't understand the current perception people have that immigrants should come here healthy and educated and ready to 'contribute' to society. People should visit Ellis Island and see what most immigrants looked like when they arrived. Many children arrived alone then as well because their parents couldn't afford passage for everyone.

We're a nation of immigrants.

[Dragline]

Your historical view is limited and out of context.

Average IQ for Mexico is 86.5, while Ireland is 100. While the Irish were culturally different, the IQ disparity with Mexico is a lot more dramatic, plus greater genetic differences. It will have a more dramatic long-term impact on the US than Irish immigration ever did.

Average people don't immigrate. They can figure out how to do it. They stay home and whine about their lot in life and blame other people for it. Actually, "whinge" is probably more precise: http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2007/ ... whine.html

But given that objection, I take it you objection to one of the next two most prevalent countries of origin these days, India (worse than Mexico) and applaud immigration from the other, China. Or do you deem those people defective as well?

Actually, by the IQ test, we ought to replace most Americans with Chinese people immediately. Great idea, huh?

BTW, Ireland is only a 92: http://khosachonline.ucoz.com/_ld/1/130 ... iqs-ca.pdf (I trust that the Irish researchers did not misrepresent their countrymen).

Which of course, must mean that the Irish are practically Mexican for all intents and purposes. It all comes back to Roman Popery eventually . . .

[Spartan_Warrior]

@Jacob: I understand what you're saying and agree to an extent, but on the other hand in this context you're simply making a slippery slope argument. Expecting the country to enforce immigration laws that are already on the books, thereby ensuring fairness and the rule of law, is not quite the same as advocating a Holocaust...

To further clarify, I don't care about the IQ of immigrants, whether they have any skills to offer, whatever. I have no qualms taking your huddled masses, etc. I just think they should come here legally and that breaking the law to do it is not fair and has negative consequences. Is anyone arguing that illegal immigration is fair, or that it has no negative consequences?

[jennypenny]

@S_W--I'm as unhappy as everyone else about the current free-for-all at the border for humanitarian as well as political reasons. And everyone here knows me well enough to know that I think a secure border should be a priority for any nation.

What disturbs me about this thread is the inability of people to separate their feelings about border issues and immigration policy from their feelings about immigrants and immigration in general.

It's also disturbing that people can't see that they are perpetuating the immigrant pecking order that has existed in the US for over 200 years. My family were "Dirty Irish." I heard that term as late as my 20's. Where they lived in Jersey, the only immigrants that were lower than them in the pecking order were Puerto Ricans. Now, of course, Irish and Puerto Ricans are an established part of the community, and Central Americans and people of Caribbean decent are on the bottom rung.

The more things change ...

[JamesR]

What's fair about trying to prevent people from crossing some arbitrary line on a map?

Everything has negative consequences, the question is does the positive outweigh the negative?

[Chad]

WTF? I come back to this thread after a few days and find this forum spouting off ideas that are beyond the pale. As others have mentioned, the glaring spotlight of sameness shined by history on this issue leaves me dumbfounded on some of the opinions expressed here. I won't go into the history, as others have already covered it. However, I will take a look at this "issue" going forward.

Some interesting points:
- Our current economic model, whether we like it or not, is set up as a growth model. One of the key variables for growth in this model is population growth. Most developed nations won't have population growth or very little going forward.

- It's beneficial to not have one end of the population curve completely out of whack with the rest of the curve. Guess what country is projected to maintain a sweeter spot than most through at least 2050? (See #3. How bad would #4 & 5 be without them?)
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... n-in-2050/

- The "test" to become an illegal immigrant in the US is far more difficult and revealing than any IQ test.

- Is it cheaper and more preferable to educate illegal kids now or to invade their country in 10-20 years to either prop up their failing government or dispose of it? Looking back through history what great power wouldn't have benefited from being able to shape the thoughts of the children from rival powers or problematic neighbors.

- Can anyone actually tell me how to stop 99% of them from coming here? The river, with a fence, and backed by a substantially increased border patrol, who, in turn, is backed by bunch out of shape oldies playing cops and robbers in the desert can't do it now. Or, how we should pay for it? Taxes or more debt? We know it won't be found by cutting other spending.

[jacob]

@S_W - Well, since you're asking, I'm arguing that illegal immigration has positive consequences, at least economically speaking when it comes to those who lobby the politicians. Otherwise, an agreement would very quickly have been reached. Economic studies apparently bears this up. The main contribution is supplying a large amount of unskilled labor at low rates that would be more expensive to supply domestically. So businesses benefit.

Is it fair? Well, it's not fair to us legal immigrants who have jumped through massive hoops involving paying thousands of dollars for background checks and blood tests, etc. However, I also believe the law is the law in the sense that if you move to or even visit another country, you're obligated to follow its laws, since you by definition asked for them.

Now what I object to in this thread is the tone of voice and the underlying sentiments. I understand that it's a normal part of the human condition. However, I also understand, I think perhaps more so, that it comes from one of the darkest impulses of the human psyche and why it needs to be controlled.

These feelings are not a slippery slope to a holocaust, that is, they're not a sufficient condition, but they are a required condition and post WWII continental history lessons have tried hard to ensure that the condition does not appear so something worse can take root in it. In other words, people have tried hard to make sure that the so-called "Good Germans" who looked away or at least made up some rationalization (they're illegals?) to justify persecution won't look the other way again.

Try rereading the thread but replace immigrant with Jew or gypsy and perhaps illegal with some specific religion or intellectual orientation. How does it read now? Like something out of the early 1930s, maybe? Now consider what actions can be justified once such ideas reach popular/populist agreement. Whenever this happens it becomes real easy to justify not taking the moral high ground in the name of expediency [as long as it happens to the other team members to make our team members better/stronger/safer]. I'm sure everybody can think of some recent examples.

[Spartan_Warrior]

What disturbs me about this thread is the inability of people to separate their feelings about border issues and immigration policy from their feelings about immigrants and immigration in general.

I agree with you completely, especially this part--which is why I feel the need to keep reiterating my position. I believe immigration is a net positive and I have nothing against immigrants. I think immigration reform should probably focus on loosening the laws to allow more legal entry, then actually enforce those laws. Then everyone wins--except, you know, drug lords in need of mules, purveyors of fake identities, robber barons seeking ever-cheaper and less empowered labor pools, etc.

As far as how do we afford to protect our own borders--come on now. We can afford to police the rest of the world, can't we? Again, I'm not suggesting a militarized war front, but if we reallocated one iota of our vast military budget and its corresponding tech toward border control, I'm sure it would put a dent in illegal crossing.

The other measure is, again, enforcing the rules at home. Find some way to disincentivize hiring illegals. I'm sure there are a number of solutions for that along the political spectrum--from eliminating minimum wage to increasing government oversight and/or tax regulations on hiring. I don't know what would be most practical and have the least other consequences, but it seems like it could be done. Reducing demand for illegal labor at home and making illegal crossing more difficult seems like a one-two punch that would have a dramatic impact.

Hell, maybe the ass-backwards way we do things now is the best way to do it, in terms of positives outweighing negatives. I don't know. But I do see negatives, and I don't see illegal immigration as totally victimless, which is why I started this tangent in the first place. I'll just shut up.

[workathome]

But given that objection, I take it you objection to one of the next two most prevalent countries of origin these days, India (worse than Mexico) and applaud immigration from the other, China. Or do you deem those people defective as well?

Actually, by the IQ test, we ought to replace most Americans with Chinese people immediately. Great idea, huh?

I think your all-or-nothing reaction is a good representation of how emotional-laden this issue is. Admitting to IQ differences doesn't certainly equate eugenics or "defective" - though this notion does seem commonly and mistakenly held. I think real life examples may help though: Google and the US Military doesn't round up "defectives" for camps just because they use intelligence testing on recruits.

Yes, of course Chinese-only immigration would have a dramatically different impact on the future of America that Mexican-only immigration! Any immigration policy (or no policy) is going to have dramatic effect on the future of a nation based on who comes or doesn't come (obviously!).

There are 5-billion or so people in the world who live below-our-standards and would probably rather-be-here depending on the effort involved.

[Felix]

Sweet Jesus. What a thread!
I'm from Germany and have enjoyed that European education jacob mentioned, maybe especially so since I'm German. I'm shocked at the hatred and racism expressed in this thread - and disappointed. I'm glad discussions like these are stopped early where I live.

[tylerrr]

Sweet Jesus. What a thread!
I'm from Germany and have enjoyed that European education jacob mentioned, maybe especially so since I'm German. I'm shocked at the hatred and racism expressed in this thread - and disappointed. I'm glad discussions like these are stopped early where I live.

I'm shocked at the lengths politically correct souls will go to squelch free speech because it "offends them".

In addition, the race card has been used already in this thread by whites who assuage their own white guilt by pointing the finger at others and calling them racist at every opportunity.

I say bring in all the Mexicans who have PHds , Engineering degrees, programmers, etc. and get them fast track to citizenship while increasing the overall national I.Q.

In return, deport illegal immigrants who have no respect for our laws and come here to work while sending the majority of their money back to their families in the "home country".

Make the American, welfare receiving, rotten dead beats of all races, work the fields, clean hotels, and cook our meals in restaurants instead of importing slave labor from down south....

Since i married a latina, legal immigrant, and have open arms to all immigrants from any country who come here legally with a formal education, I know i'm not a racist.

Again, to be politically incorrect, DEPORT and keep OUT all ILLEGALS.

I want to live in a country of laws with educated people, not a growing Tijuana toilet bowl where nobody speaks English.

[Chad]

As far as how do we afford to protect our own borders--come on now. We can afford to police the rest of the world, can't we? Again, I'm not suggesting a militarized war front, but if we reallocated one iota of our vast military budget and its corresponding tech toward border control, I'm sure it would put a dent in illegal crossing.

Do you really think it's a money issue? If so, is it even worth it?

[Felix]

I'm shocked at the lengths politically correct souls will go to squelch free speech because it "offends them".

In addition, the race card has been used already in this thread by whites who assuage their own white guilt by pointing the finger at others and calling them racist at every opportunity.

I say bring in all the Mexicans who have PHds , Engineering degrees, programmers, etc. and get them fast track to citizenship while increasing the overall national I.Q.

In return, deport illegal immigrants who have no respect for our laws and come here to work while sending the majority of their money back to their families in the "home country".

Make the American, welfare receiving, rotten dead beats of all races, work the fields, clean hotels, and cook our meals in restaurants instead of importing slave labor from down south....

Since i married a latina, legal immigrant, and have open arms to all immigrants from any country who come here legally with a formal education, I know i'm not a racist.

Again, to be politically incorrect, DEPORT and keep OUT all ILLEGALS.

I want to live in a country of laws with educated people, not a growing Tijuana toilet bowl where nobody speaks English.

That's a textbook example for hate speech.

[workathome]

That's a textbook example for hate speech.

Don't worry comrade, I have reported him to the Stasi. I am told his reeducation will begin immediately.

[Spartan_Warrior]

@Chad: It seems like a policy issue more than it is a money issue, insofar as our current policy is to police the globe and empire-build rather than protect our own borders. I personally think it would be totally worth it to reduce our military presence globally and let the same manpower and resources go toward border control. Do the powers that be? Well, obviously not. I suppose we're speaking in hypothetical, but I thought that was a given as soon as we started discussing policy since in reality politicians would always prefer to kick the can.

That said, merely disincentivizing illegal hiring and easing the barriers to legal immigration might be enough without even beefing up the border. It's similar to my stance on drug policy. A lot of what's considered criminal activity is morally harmless, but by virtue of being criminal, it encourages other negative consequences, like further criminal activity that IS harmful (black markets, gang wars, weapons trafficking, murder, etc). The solution is to make the otherwise harmless behavior that's happening anyway legal instead of criminal--and the whole criminal network supporting it falls apart. Make it easier to immigrate legally and less profitable to do it illegally, same thing.

[tylerrr]

I'm shocked at the lengths politically correct souls will go to squelch free speech because it "offends them".

In addition, the race card has been used already in this thread by whites who assuage their own white guilt by pointing the finger at others and calling them racist at every opportunity.

I say bring in all the Mexicans who have PHds , Engineering degrees, programmers, etc. and get them fast track to citizenship while increasing the overall national I.Q.

In return, deport illegal immigrants who have no respect for our laws and come here to work while sending the majority of their money back to their families in the "home country".

Make the American, welfare receiving, rotten dead beats of all races, work the fields, clean hotels, and cook our meals in restaurants instead of importing slave labor from down south....

Since i married a latina, legal immigrant, and have open arms to all immigrants from any country who come here legally with a formal education, I know i'm not a racist.

Again, to be politically incorrect, DEPORT and keep OUT all ILLEGALS.

I want to live in a country of laws with educated people, not a growing Tijuana toilet bowl where nobody speaks English.

That's a textbook example for hate speech.

thanks for proving my point....."Hate speech" and "racist" are the terms used most often to try and silence opposing viewpoints....Sorry, but we have free speech in America as much as some try to take away that free speech...

[jacob]

@workathome - I'm sure the "Department of State Security" already knows.

That's another one of those lessons of history that's easily forgotten or never taught in the first place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi

[Felix]

That's a textbook example for hate speech.

Don't worry comrade, I have reported him to the Stasi. I am told his reeducation will begin immediately.

He can say it. But calling it politically incorrect does not somehow magically stop it from being hate speech. It's almost like "racist" or "hate speech" have to be called "politically incorrect" to be politically correct. Funny how that works.

So I have the choice between the Stasi and racism. Hm. Yeah. Keep teaching me more about German history.

[Felix]

thanks for proving my point....."Hate speech" and "racist" are the terms used most often to try and silence opposing viewpoints....Sorry, but we have free speech in America as much as some try to take away that free speech...

Saying "you said hate speech and racist" to silence opposing viewpoints is okay. Yeah. Got it. Political correctness is A okay when you call it political incorrectness. George Orwell would be proud.

Free speech seems not to include my right to call racism and hate racism and hate.