More than a million (illegal) immigrants land U.S. jobs

[Captain Oates 910]

Excellent points in the argument on illegal aliens taking jobs from citizens and legal immigrants.

Economic incentives or dis-incentives to prevent American employers from exploiting illegals for profit are the answer. Economic incentives are the problem, fix the problem.

With the current trajectory of American middle class income over the last 10 years, the income differential is fast curing itself

Who knows, the rush of Americans to get into China illegally might be the subject in 2050

I shall watch it with interest as I take an hour off from the floggings and roastings in hell

Edited January 23, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

There is only one way to really fix that problem, and that's at the root: take corporate money out of the election process! Publicly funded elections where every candidate get equal exposure. Corporations are allowed to contribute, and the money is tax deductible as before, but goes into a big pot that feeds all of the candidates.

I would actually go further, but that's pure utopia:

1) get rid of the 2-party system and winner takes all.

2) Allow presentation in congress proportunate to the votes received. This will allow coalitions based on issues, not partisanship.

3) Make it known that members of Congress abide to the same principle. No "government" health care? They don't get any either! Airport screening? Screen them as well, and touch 'em where they don' like it, and so on.

4) Give the President of the United States a vote afterward. If the majority of voters believe he did a good job, he gets a pension; if the majority feels he was a crook or messed up royally, he gets the boot and SS like the rest of the populace.

Vermont is leading the way in taing corporate money out of it. maybe your state will catch up.

Thius is basically blah, blah, blah but typical for the issue. The ROOT cause is economic. Any one with half their brain tied behind their back can see that. When it is economically unfeasible, it will stop. It can be done on a state by state basis. Arizona, for example, could give a huge tax incentive to business in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico. Instead we get stupidity.

PeeJay is right on one thing, when Americans have had enough and DEMAND it be fixed, it will be fixed. Problem is that the Americans are ebing led around by people with an interest in exploiting humans for profit. The "demand" a fence to be built or "demand" amnesty because none of the leaders want to point you in the right direction. Better to split you up, go in different directions, argue about what your wife looks like, blah, blah blah.

we have to focus on the fact that millions of humans are being abused and exploited for profit.

With the current trajectory of American middle class income over the last 10 years, the income differential is fast curing itself

Who knows, the rush of Americans to get into China illegally might be the subject in 2050

I shall watch it with interest as I take an hour off from the floggings and roastings in hell

bye

[james&olya 1,121]

There is only one way to really fix that problem, and that's at the root: take corporate money out of the election process! Publicly funded elections where every candidate get equal exposure. Corporations are allowed to contribute, and the money is tax deductible as before, but goes into a big pot that feeds all of the candidates.

I would actually go further, but that's pure utopia:

1) get rid of the 2-party system and winner takes all.

2) Allow presentation in congress proportunate to the votes received. This will allow coalitions based on issues, not partisanship.

3) Make it known that members of Congress abide to the same principle. No "government" health care? They don't get any either! Airport screening? Screen them as well, and touch 'em where they don' like it, and so on.

4) Give the President of the United States a vote afterward. If the majority of voters believe he did a good job, he gets a pension; if the majority feels he was a crook or messed up royally, he gets the boot and SS like the rest of the populace.

I knew I would agree with you on something!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

There is only one way to really fix that problem, and that's at the root: take corporate money out of the election process! Publicly funded elections where every candidate get equal exposure. Corporations are allowed to contribute, and the money is tax deductible as before, but goes into a big pot that feeds all of the candidates.

I would actually go further, but that's pure utopia:

1) get rid of the 2-party system and winner takes all.

2) Allow presentation in congress proportunate to the votes received. This will allow coalitions based on issues, not partisanship.

3) Make it known that members of Congress abide to the same principle. No "government" health care? They don't get any either! Airport screening? Screen them as well, and touch 'em where they don' like it, and so on.

4) Give the President of the United States a vote afterward. If the majority of voters believe he did a good job, he gets a pension; if the majority feels he was a crook or messed up royally, he gets the boot and SS like the rest of the populace.

NONE of this has anything to do with illegal aliens taking jobs. We do not need to re-write our constitution to make it economically unfeasible to hire illegals.

[james&olya 1,121]

NONE of this has anything to do with illegal aliens taking jobs. We do not need to re-write our constitution to make it economically unfeasible to hire illegals.

Actually I think it might. The political will to see that laws are enforced is not there when your corporate masters dictate you do otherwise. Until politicians are no longer motivated to suck up to corporate interests in order to get the fat campaign contributions they are allowed to give we will never see the laws enforced. The root cause of many of the problems we have has to do with our corrupt campaign finance system that treats corporations as 'persons' with free speech rights, including campaign donations.

[Captain Oates 910]

bye

Don't take it for granted we won't be meeting there - and I don't mean China. They don't have guns in heaven so it won't be too bad there.

However, if immigration is going to be so degrading of the US economy and if the good economy is the reason for illegal immigration, it follows that the problem will be self righting when an equilibrium is reached.

Any successful Americans can then move to their gated communities and tune in to the cracker channel and go to their neighbors barbecues and make like it never happened.

It's only a problem if you are scraping to make the rent on the wrong side of the tracks

It's always followed the same pattern in every richer community throughout the world and throughout history.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Don't take it for granted we won't be meeting there - and I don't mean China. They don't have guns in heaven so it won't be too bad there.

However, if immigration is going to be so degrading of the US economy and if the good economy is the reason for illegal immigration, it follows that the problem will be self righting when an equilibrium is reached.

Any successful Americans can then move to their gated communities and tune in to the cracker channel and go to their neighbors barbecues and make like it never happened.

It's only a problem if you are scraping to make the rent on the wrong side of the tracks

It's always followed the same pattern in every richer community throughout the world and throughout history.

bye

[^_^ 5,021]

Don't take it for granted we won't be meeting there - and I don't mean China. They don't have guns in heaven so it won't be too bad there.

However, if immigration is going to be so degrading of the US economy and if the good economy is the reason for illegal immigration, it follows that the problem will be self righting when an equilibrium is reached.

Any successful Americans can then move to their gated communities and tune in to the cracker channel and go to their neighbors barbecues and make like it never happened.

It's only a problem if you are scraping to make the rent on the wrong side of the tracks

It's always followed the same pattern in every richer community throughout the world and throughout history.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Actually I think it might. The political will to see that laws are enforced is not there when your corporate masters dictate you do otherwise. Until politicians are no longer motivated to suck up to corporate interests in order to get the fat campaign contributions they are allowed to give we will never see the laws enforced. The root cause of many of the problems we have has to do with our corrupt campaign finance system that treats corporations as 'persons' with free speech rights, including campaign donations.

And we expect the beneficiaries to change this? If you ask me we ought to ban political ads the same way we ban tobacco ads, but who is going to do it? Limit campaigning to 30 days before an election and congress should recess during that period. Limit spending to tax check off funds divided among the candidates. NO political contributions by anyone for anything. Not even a cup of coffee. No primary election beauty contests. If there are parties, then let them gather up their NADS and submit their candidates. If they choose the wrong oersin they lose. Primaries are nothing but another contribution period and a way for the parties to tesat the water...at our expense. We were afr better off without the primaries.

Appoint Senators, the way we used to. Senators should be appointed by states and not subject to election. They represent states, not people, they should be chosen by state legislatures or Governors as they were originally. If half the congress was not subject to election it would mean half the congress is not subject to corruption and then "checks and balances" would mean something.

Corporations cannot vote, YOU can. But our congress is elected by perhaps 20% of the population because Americans sit on their @ss on election day. YOU can make a difference, as Americans made a difference this last year, but we have to say "enough is enough" and we cannot be diverted. But as we see from this thread, we get easily diverted to who is marrying who for why. Politicians love it.

[james&olya 1,121]

And we expect the beneficiaries to change this? If you ask me we ought to ban political ads the same way we ban tobacco ads, but who is going to do it? Limit campaigning to 30 days before an election and congress should recess during that period. Limit spending to tax check off funds divided among the candidates. NO political contributions by anyone for anything. Not even a cup of coffee. No primary election beauty contests. If there are parties, then let them gather up their NADS and submit their candidates. If they choose the wrong oersin they lose. Primaries are nothing but another contribution period and a way for the parties to tesat the water...at our expense. We were afr better off without the primaries.

Appoint Senators, the way we used to. Senators should be appointed by states and not subject to election. They represent states, not people, they should be chosen by state legislatures or Governors as they were originally. If half the congress was not subject to election it would mean half the congress is not subject to corruption and then "checks and balances" would mean something.

Corporations cannot vote, YOU can. But our congress is elected by perhaps 20% of the population because Americans sit on their @ss on election day. YOU can make a difference, as Americans made a difference this last year, but we have to say "enough is enough" and we cannot be diverted. But as we see from this thread, we get easily diverted to who is marrying who for why. Politicians love it.

More people know who Snooky is than Robert Gates! I think that our current crop of political whores like it this way.

[Captain Oates 910]

And we expect the beneficiaries to change this? If you ask me we ought to ban political ads the same way we ban tobacco ads, but who is going to do it? Limit campaigning to 30 days before an election and congress should recess during that period. Limit spending to tax check off funds divided among the candidates. NO political contributions by anyone for anything. Not even a cup of coffee. No primary election beauty contests. If there are parties, then let them gather up their NADS and submit their candidates. If they choose the wrong oersin they lose. Primaries are nothing but another contribution period and a way for the parties to tesat the water...at our expense. We were afr better off without the primaries.

Appoint Senators, the way we used to. Senators should be appointed by states and not subject to election. They represent states, not people, they should be chosen by state legislatures or Governors as they were originally. If half the congress was not subject to election it would mean half the congress is not subject to corruption and then "checks and balances" would mean something.

Corporations cannot vote, YOU can. But our congress is elected by perhaps 20% of the population because Americans sit on their @ss on election day. YOU can make a difference, as Americans made a difference this last year, but we have to say "enough is enough" and we cannot be diverted. But as we see from this thread, we get easily diverted to who is marrying who for why. Politicians love it.

In the 100 naturalization quetions it asks 'Who do the Senators represent ?'

The approved answer is 'all People of the State' it used to be different many years ago

question 24 on this page:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.2f0cb9a8ddc86a6d856fed10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=9d61772a45c6a210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=c242df6bdd42a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

.

[Captain Oates 910]

More people know who Snooky is than Robert Gates! I think that our current crop of political whores like it this way.

Well I will be voting next time - yet another welcome example of how immigration benefits the country. I will not be an apathetic elector.

I will have a big smile on my face as I relish how I am canceling out a redneck gun toting vote

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

In the 100 naturalization quetions it asks 'Who do the Senators represent ?'

The approved answer is 'all People of the State' it used to be different many years ago

question 24 on this page:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.2f0cb9a8ddc86a6d856fed10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=9d61772a45c6a210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=c242df6bdd42a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

.

Bye

[Pooky 3,366]

Well I will be voting next time - yet another welcome example of how immigration benefits the country. I will not be an apathetic elector.

I will have a big smile on my face as I relish how I am canceling out a redneck gun toting vote

So, you'd vote for a completely nutty Democrat over a Republican who was a moderate advocating sensible policy choices?

Nice to know that political naïveté is alive and well in British expats.

[james&olya 1,121]

a Republican who was a moderate advocating sensible policy choices?

Those still exist? I thought your tea party had eliminated them!