"Amnesty" for illegal Immigrants: Is it right or wrong?

[Walter Powers]

Recently, the United States Senate passed a ginormous immigration reform bill. The bipartisan - created bill gives all illegal immigrants legal status, or effective "amnesty." The bill still has to pass the House of Representatives, where it will face heavy opposition.

Do you think that people who came illegally into a country should receive legal status? Why or why not?

I personally think that if you broke into our country illegally and want legal status, at the very least you should have to go back home and wait in line behind every prospective immigrant who is respecting our laws. It's unfair and wrong to reward people for breaking them.

[britishboy]

o think the exact same as you, what kind of message is it sending to those considering illegal immigration?

[Kameraden]

I think that those who come here illegally should be deported and put on a list of people who may never immigrate to the United States.

[britishboy]

I think that those who come here illegally should be deported and put on a list of people who may never immigrate to the United States.

what about asylum seekers and is that a Nazi as your profile pic! :@

[Origami]

I understand that for some legal immigration is a next to impossible goal for whatever of many reasons; however, I don't believe giving citizenship to those who come illegally is right. First and foremost it is unfair to those who have went through the burden of obtaining their citizenship legally. Secondly, it will further encourage illegal immigration as it now has no real consequences once successful.

[Kameraden]

what about asylum seekers and is that a Nazi as your profile pic! :@

Asylum should never be granted to a criminal of a nation -- for example, the current case with Snowden v. America, if Russia grants asylum for a traitor, that is to me the equivalent of a diplomatic insult.

And there's a difference between a "Nazi" and a brave defender of the realm.

[saea97]

I'm not sure I'd go as far as never allowing them to immigrate, but they certainly should go through the legal channels.


And there's a difference between a "Nazi" and a brave defender of the realm.

Uh, that's Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goeth (as you obviously know) who was a Nazi in the strongest of terms.

[Harry Smith]

Asylum should never be granted to a criminal of a nation -- for example, the current case with Snowden v. America, if Russia grants asylum for a traitor, that is to me the equivalent of a diplomatic insult.

And there's a difference between a "Nazi" and a brave defender of the realm.

He appears to have a skull and cross bones on his collar, unless it'a pre-ww1 uniform of the light hussars who featured in then he must of been in the SS, an outlawed organisation that puts the German people to shame.

But on the matter of illegal immigration it's political suicide to implement a amnesty based system. I do thought that people should get off the moral high horse about immigration. I mean in end we're all immigrants to some degree. I also dislike the slander of immigrants using the usual rhetoric which makes them all out to be criminals

[Kameraden]

I'm not sure I'd go as far as never allowing them to immigrate, but they certainly should go through the legal channels.
If they broke federal law before they were even discovered in the country, why on Earth would you give them a second chance?

Uh, that's Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goeth (as you obviously know) who was a Nazi in the strongest of terms.
Never claimed Herr Goeth wasn't a Nazi, I just stated there was often a difference between soldier and Nazi.

He appears to have a skull and cross bones on his collar, unless it'a pre-ww1 uniform of the light hussars who featured in then he must of been in the SS, an outlawed organisation that puts the German people to shame.

The Totenkopf was actually more frequently used by the Prussian Freikorps, although I suppose you could say the von Ruesch Husaren Regiment also heavily featured the symbol.

To the remark "he must of been in the SS", I must say you are incorrect in this clause. The Totenkopf was not solely and singularly a Schutzstaffel insignia -- the Heer and the Luftwaffe's Panzer corps, especially the Fallschirm-Panzerdivision Goering, extensively used the Totenkopf.

I would go further to argue that the Waffen S.S. did not at all put the German people to shame. The Waffen S.S. did some terrible crimes, yes, and that must not be forgotten, but they were some of the most valiant and effective soldiers in history -- this too must not be forgotten.

[Harry Smith]

If they broke federal law before they were even discovered in the country, why on Earth would you give them a second chance?


Never claimed Herr Goeth wasn't a Nazi, I just stated there was often a difference between soldier and Nazi.



The Totenkopf was actually more frequently used by the Prussian Freikorps, although I suppose you could say the von Ruesch Husaren Regiment also heavily featured the symbol.

To the remark "he must of been in the SS", I must say you are incorrect in this clause. The Totenkopf was not solely and singularly a Schutzstaffel insignia -- the Heer and the Luftwaffe's Panzer corps, especially the Fallschirm-Panzerdivision Goering, extensively used the Totenkopf.

I would go further to argue that the Waffen S.S. did not at all put the German people to shame. The Waffen S.S. did some terrible crimes, yes, and that must not be forgotten, but they were some of the most valiant and effective soldiers in history -- this too must not be forgotten.

The Waffen SS were war criminals, they killed over 90 British soldiers which is a direct violation of the 1929 Geneva convention. The waffen SS were sickening, they were a disgrace to Germany. It's a shame that the July 20th Plot didn't work, then the Army could of got rid of them.

How you can defend the Waffen SS amazes me. You should go back to Storm-front mate. Nazi's don't tend to fair well in the 21st Century

[Kameraden]

The Waffen SS were war criminals, they killed over 90 British soldiers which is a direct violation of the 1929 Geneva convention. The waffen SS were sickening, they were a disgrace to Germany. It's a shame that the July 20th Plot didn't work, then the Army could of got rid of them.

How you can defend the Waffen SS amazes me. You should go back to Storm-front mate. Nazi's don't tend to fair well in the 21st Century

Really mate? I seem to recall something called the Bombing of Dresden, which killed 25,000 men, women, and children. This is in complete violation of the Hague Convention, in which it is stated that undefended towns or cities are to be spared aerial bombardment.

Also, I will share this little known fact with you: the Nazis got the idea of concentration camps from the British. Have you heard of the British concentration camps used to detain Dutch civilians during the First Boer War? Have a photo of a victim, then: http://tinyurl.com/24tm2d7

Don't speak to me of war crimes -- I am too familiar with them.

[Jean Poutine]

They are already there, where most work and file taxes like any citizen. Why ship them off to the unstable shithole where they came from while dispossessing them of whatever they managed to scrounge?

Also, immigration to the US by legal channels is 1) painfully complicated and 2) requires luck, money, connections or special skills, more often all of those.

Blame the jingoistic "dey r stealinz r jobs!" for having so many illegal immigrants - if more opportunities were offered to third-world citizens (like seasonal jobs) or immigration requirements relaxed somewhat so that they don't require basically a nouveau riche status, there'd be less of them.

[Harry Smith]

Really mate? I seem to recall something called the Bombing of Dresden, which killed 25,000 men, women, and children. This is in complete violation of the Hague Convention, in which it is stated that undefended towns or cities are to be spared aerial bombardment.

Also, I will share this little known fact with you: the Nazis got the idea of concentration camps from the British. Have you heard of the British concentration camps used to detain Dutch civilians during the First Boer War? Have a photo of a victim, then: http://tinyurl.com/24tm2d7

Don't speak to me of war crimes -- I am too familiar with them.

The 1907 Hague convention didn't either air power, and the motion that Dresden was unprotected is invalid, anti-aircraft units and fighers were stationed around the the city. Motion invalid.

I've never justified the action of the British in south Africa, it sickens me what we did. I also want to point out we didn't kill 6 million jews. The Nazis did.

It amazes me that we have people like you who still support the SS. It makes me doubt humanity

[Walter Powers]

They are already there, where most work and file taxes like any citizen. Why ship them off to the unstable shithole where they came from while dispossessing them of whatever they managed to scrounge?

Also, immigration to the US by legal channels is 1) painfully complicated and 2) requires luck, money, connections or special skills, more often all of those.

Blame the jingoistic "dey r stealinz r jobs!" for having so many illegal immigrants - if more opportunities were offered to third-world citizens (like seasonal jobs) or immigration requirements relaxed somewhat so that they don't require basically a nouveau riche status, there'd be less of them.

How do illegal immigrants file taxes, as you claim? The only way I can think of is if they stole somebody's social security number or somehow attained a fraudulent one.

Regardless, the solution is not to tolerate illegal immigration. I don't understand why democrats resist border security measures so much, and yet they don't seem to be campiiagning for more legal immigration! (more visas, etc.)


And whatever the circumstances may be, they still broke federal laws to come here. They should be punished for that. Here's an analogy: Just because somebody's dirt poor doesn't give them the right to steal your wallet.

[Kameraden]

I've never justified the action of the British in south Africa, it sickens me what we did. I also want to point out we didn't kill 6 million jews. The Nazis did.

It amazes me that we have people like you who still support the SS. It makes me doubt humanity

The Romans also massacred the Jews. So did the Greeks. So did the Ottomans. So did the Muslims. You don't hear people complaining about those, yet all you hear about the Nazis is "holocaust holocaust holocaust." Did you know the Nazis invented welfare? And the highway?

Never once did I say that I support the paramilitary actions of the Schutzstaffel, because I don't. Never put words in my mouth.

[Jean Poutine]

How do illegal immigrants file taxes, as you claim? The only way I can think of is if they stole somebody's social security number or somehow attained a fraudulent one.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8711/12-6-immigration.pdf

"However, IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year. Research reviewed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicates that between 50 percent and 75 percent of unauthorized immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes. Illegal immigrants are estimated to pay in about $7 billion per year into Social Security"

Dayum.

Regardless, the solution is not to tolerate illegal immigration. I don't understand why democrats resist border security measures so much, and yet they don't seem to be campiiagning for more legal immigration! (more visas, etc.)

Amnesty is not tolerance. It's a one time only deal.

And whatever the circumstances may be, they still broke federal laws to come here. They should be punished for that. Here's an analogy: Just because somebody's dirt poor doesn't give them the right to steal your wallet.

Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody. They do menial work nobody wants to do. Crime is a crime only insofar as there are victims.

[Harry Smith]

The Romans also massacred the Jews. So did the Greeks. So did the Ottomans. So did the Muslims. You don't hear people complaining about those, yet all you hear about the Nazis is "holocaust holocaust holocaust." Did you know the Nazis invented welfare? And the highway?

Never once did I say that I support the paramilitary actions of the Schutzstaffel, because I don't. Never put words in my mouth.

Your trying to justify the mass murder of 6 million people. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews.

You can't justify a Genocide. End of.

[Kameraden]

Your trying to justify the mass murder of 6 million people. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews.

You can't justify a Genocide. End of.

I'm not justifying it -- I'm simply raising a point that everyone has a bias against the Germans for it now. No one thinks "Jew killers" when you think "Greek". You think philosophy, artwork, and conquest. The Nazis did all the above, yet all people can see is "Jew killers".

[Emerald Dream]

This thread is about illegal immigrants and amnesty, NOT about genocides or anything similar. Please keep on-topic.

[Walter Powers]

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8711/12-6-immigration.pdf

"However, IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year. Research reviewed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicates that between 50 percent and 75 percent of unauthorized immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes. Illegal immigrants are estimated to pay in about $7 billion per year into Social Security"

Dayum.



Amnesty is not tolerance. It's a one time only deal.



Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody. They do menial work nobody wants to do. Crime is a crime only insofar as there are victims.

Your CBO quote is all fine and good, and it's nothing I didn't know. I asked how do they file? My understanding is that they have to steal a social security number to do it.

"Amnesty is not tolerance. It's a one time deal."

Actually, if this bill is passed it will be the second time we have given "amnesty" to illegal immigrants. We also did it in 1986. We were promised that we'd never have this problem again, but look where we are. And the issue is even larger scale this time around.

"Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody." Talk about a blanket statements. They drive without licenses, as one example! How is that not a danger? They also use up space in our schools and drain social programs intended for Americans. And need I mention how many terrorists are illegal?

[Harry Smith]

Your CBO quote is all fine and good, and it's nothing I didn't know. I asked how do they file? My understanding is that they have to steal a social security number to do it.

"Amnesty is not tolerance. It's a one time deal."

Actually, if this bill is passed it will be the second time we have given "amnesty" to illegal immigrants. We also did it in 1986. We were promised that we'd never have this problem again, but look where we are. And the issue is even larger scale this time around.

"Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody." Talk about a blanket statements. They drive without licenses, as one example! How is that not a danger? They also use up space in our schools and drain social programs intended for Americans. And need I mention how many terrorists are illegal?

Could you be anymore Stereotypical?

I would like to mention the UNABOMBER, the Oklahoma bombings, the fort hood shootings. They were all done by Americans. But America can never have problems can they? You must always blame someone else

[Kameraden]

Could you be anymore Stereotypical?

I would like to mention the UNABOMBER, the Oklahoma bombings, the fort hood shootings. They were all done by Americans. But America can never have problems can they? You must always blame someone else

You. I like you.

[Stronk Serb]

I'm not justifying it -- I'm simply raising a point that everyone has a bias against the Germans for it now. No one thinks "Jew killers" when you think "Greek". You think philosophy, artwork, and conquest. The Nazis did all the above, yet all people can see is "Jew killers".

I must hand it to the Germans, many fought for Hitler to the grave, that is fanatical, but they were fighting for the wrong cause. Yeah, you are kind of right when you say many opinions on nationalities are biased. Germans- Nazis, Jewslayers. Americans- rich fatcats. Brits- royalist pansies. Serbs- no money genocidal cutthroats. Many people in Serbia have biased opinions on every other nationality which pisses me off, many so-called patriots are racist uneducated fascists.

[Emerald Dream]

Once again, please stick to the topic or this thread will be locked very quickly.

[Walter Powers]

Could you be anymore Stereotypical?

I would like to mention the UNABOMBER, the Oklahoma bombings, the fort hood shootings. They were all done by Americans. But America can never have problems can they? You must always blame someone else

Did I say all terrorist attacks were made by illegals?

Stop with the assumptions. I'll say this: By far the worst terrorist attacks on American soil, 9/11, which dwarfs all others, was committed by foreigners, some who were here illegally.

And I'm not blaming someone else. These are facts.

[Harry Smith]

Did I say all terrorist attacks were made by illegals?

Stop with the assumptions. I'll say this: By far the worst terrorist attacks on American soil, 9/11, which dwarfs all others, was committed by foreigners, some who were here illegally.

So by that theory then all illegal immigrants are bad?

[saea97]

By far the worst terrorist attacks on American soil, 9/11, which dwarfs all others, was committed by foreigners, some who were here illegally.


And so naturally, this allows you to cast aspersions on the massive majority of illegals who, believe it or not, aren't terrorists?

[Walter Powers]

So by that theory then all illegal immigrants are bad?

No, we just should prevent illegal immigration so we can prevent terroists from entering our country!

And, like I've said, the illegal immigrants aren't bad, but it is bad to break into our country or overstay your welcome.


And so naturally, this allows you to cast aspersions on the massive majority of illegals who, believe it or not, aren't terrorists?

Why do you defend illegal immigrants so much?

[Harry Smith]

No, we just should prevent illegal immigration so we can prevent terroists from entering our country!

And, like I've said, the illegal immigrants aren't bad, but it is bad to break into our country or overstay your welcome.

This may just be my anarchist side coming out but to quote Pocahontas


You think you own whatever land you land on
The Earth is just a dead thing you can claim

You'll still get terrorists who are American, UNABOMBER etc.

Also lastly being nitpicking didn't American's commit Genocide against the original legal occupiers who were in fact the Native Americans? So the whole argument of it's our country, our land is a bit ipsy turvey considering John Smith and his crew on the mayflower were in fact illegal immigrants

[saea97]

Why do you defend illegal immigrants so much?

Because I don't presume to know the reasons why they are entering America, many of which are in no way unsavoury. Yeah, I'd rather it was done legally, but as has been pointed out, that can be a difficult and biased process.

[Cygnus]

Illegal immigrants give the US a lot of income. Let them stay since they are already there.

[Walter Powers]

This may just be my anarchist side coming out but to quote Pocahontas



You'll still get terrorists who are American, UNABOMBER etc.

Also lastly being nitpicking didn't American's commit Genocide against the original legal occupiers who were in fact the Native Americans? So the whole argument of it's our country, our land is a bit ipsy turvey considering John Smith and his crew on the mayflower were in fact illegal immigrants

So you think that there should be totally open borders throughout every country because somebody else occupied it before they did?


Illegal immigrants give the US a lot of income. Let them stay since they are already there.

Why should they be rewarded for breaking our laws? That's like saying "the criminal stole your wallet but he should get to keep it because he'll spend the money in it and help create a job." It's just nonsense.

And I question how much these people actually contribute to our economy. These aren't exactly doctors and engineers illegally wandering across the borders, you know? And they use up our healthcare systems and schools.

[Harry Smith]

So you think that there should be totally open borders throughout every country because somebody else occupied it before they did?

Nope, I was just exposing a floor in your argument. Nice Politician-esque answer, ignore my main theory, you can't blame illegal immigrants for Terrorists. Closing your borders and having an exclusively american population will not stop terrorism

[Walter Powers]

Nope, I was just exposing a floor in your argument. Nice Politician-esque answer, ignore my main theory, you can't blame illegal immigrants for Terrorists. Closing your borders and having an exclusively american population will not stop terrorism

True. Nothing can stop terrorism. But know who is in the country can help cut down on it.

[Harry Smith]

True. Nothing can stop terrorism. But know who is in the country can help cut down on it.

But illegal immigrants can quite easily fall off the Radar, in order to know who is in the country you would need checkpoints and identity cards on every street. Literally all you need is 500 quid and a knowledge of pressure cooker in order to commit an attack

[Cygnus]

Why should they be rewarded for breaking our laws? That's like saying "the criminal stole your wallet but he should get to keep it because he'll spend the money in it and help create a job." It's just nonsense.

And I question how much these people actually contribute to our economy. These aren't exactly doctors and engineers illegally wandering across the borders, you know? And they use up our healthcare systems and schools.

Doctors and engineers don't make up the whole economy. Without the lower, working class the US would be nothing you spiteful little ninny.

[Abyssal Echo]

Don't get me wrong I'm not against anyone that wants to immigrate here LEGALLY !

we the U.S tried amnesty in the '80's it didn't work the citizens of the U.S. were promised secure borders that didn't happen then it wont happen now.
We have laws about illegal immigration enforce them. As far as I'm concerned if you are here illegally and get caught you should be deported.

[Walter Powers]

But illegal immigrants can quite easily fall off the Radar, in order to know who is in the country you would need checkpoints and identity cards on every street. Literally all you need is 500 quid and a knowledge of pressure cooker in order to commit an attack

500 quid won't do you much good in America, just sayin.

I realize we can't keep track of everyone, but we should try to reduce illegal immigration. Don't you agree?



Doctors and engineers don't make up the whole economy. Without the lower, working class the US would be nothing you spiteful little ninny.


The US did once need a large blue collar workforce. It helped us accel in the early to mid twentieth century. But that isn't the case anymore. You see, there have been three basic ages of human development: The Agricultural Age, The Industrial Age, and the Information Age, which we are in right now. In the agricultural age, the most precious commodities were grown on farms. In the Industrial Age, things built in factory's were most prized. And today in the Information Age, the most valuable resource is ideas thought up by people working in offices primarily.

In the Industrial and Agricultural Ages, we needed this labor, you are correct. But that is now longer. Because of advances in shipping, storage and communication technologies, we can build things in other countries. True, we do need a limited supply of garbage men and janitors and the like, but we have plenty of those for what we can afford. We don't need more manual laborers. This is the reality of the mew economy.

Also, regardless to what we need, tolerating illegal immigration is not to get it. If we really need more manual laborers, congress should allow for more visas to be handed out to the low education demographic while enforcing the border, not just let them walk in against what the laws say.

[Southside]

I have nothing against illegal immigrants who come here strictly to work, next time your eating your salad and it says "Grown in California", 9 out of 10 a migrant worker picked it.

Migrants & illegals are doing a lot of the hard labor here in America, you cant simply just kick them out. It's those Mexican & Central American immigrants who are in the fields picking our salad, cleaning our hotel rooms, mowing our lawn. Of course we are in the information age, though at the end of the day its still gonna be people in the fields picking our food.

Most illegals are from Latin America, and I dont believe I have ever heard about a Mexican terrorist....So I dont believe you can connect illegal immigration to terrorism

[Kameraden]

Everyone in America is a illegal immigrant, or the descendant of one.

Think about what you just said.

[Walter Powers]

I have nothing against illegal immigrants who come here strictly to work, next time your eating your salad and it says "Grown in California", 9 out of 10 a migrant worker picked it.

I do have a problem with illegals who come here to steal welfare and benefits and commit crime.

P.S. Everyone in America except native americans are illegal immigrants or the descendant of one.

What the hell? There IS a legal way to come into this country, you know!

Why don't you see anything wrong with people who break our laws to come here? Giving amnesty to them is unfair to everybody who is respecting our laws and waiting in line like everybody else.

[FrostWraith]

I know it's "wrong" and whatnot to reward people for breaking federal laws, but it would be kind of ridiculous to do a comprehensive search for illegal immigrants and toss them back over the border. For one thing, they'd probably just come back. For another, that has huge potential to break up families and leave wives and children without their source of income. It's easier for everyone if we just let the people who are here stay here.

[britishboy]

Asylum should never be granted to a criminal of a nation -- for example, the current case with Snowden v. America, if Russia grants asylum for a traitor, that is to me the equivalent of a diplomatic insult.

And there's a difference between a "Nazi" and a brave defender of the realm.

what about people who are wanted dead by the people of another country? cant go home because of war?
AND FUCK YOU WHY HAVE A FUCKING NAZI?!?! YOU DISGUST ME ON SO MANY LEAVELS! so tell me why have a nazi scum bag as your pic?

What the hell? There IS a legal way to come into this country, you know!

Why don't you see anything wrong with people who break our laws to come here? Giving amnesty to them is unfair to everybody who is respecting our laws and waiting in line like everybody else.

wel said:)

[Stronk Serb]

what about people who are wanted dead by the people of another country? cant go home because of war?
AND FUCK YOU WHY HAVE A FUCKING NAZI?!?! YOU DISGUST ME ON SO MANY LEAVELS! so tell me why have a nazi scum bag as your pic?



Agreed. Many immigrants do jobs for which the US citizens are too lazy to do. I do not know much about Nazism to start a debate. But why tell him to fuck himself? You never really met the guy.

[britishboy]

Agreed. Many immigrants do jobs for which the US citizens are too lazy to do. I do not know much about Nazism to start a debate. But why tell him to fuck himself? You never really met the guy.

and the hard work on organic farms are done for hardly any money, only a immigrant will do that and because he supports a man whi chosen to join the ss (stormtroopers) who massacred millions of jews and also slaughtered gays, gypsies, black men and people with disabilities, they worked with gestapo (secret police) who tortured everyone, including kids, the ss also enforced horrible laws, for example you are put to deatg if you joke about hitler or if you listen to a foreign radio channel! anyone who supports this in my eyes should go fuck them selves, its not debatable like our communism argument, the nazis were pure evil

[Korashk]

Do you think that people who came illegally into a country should receive legal status? Why or why not?
They should get legal status because the very notion of border control is bullshit.

"You can't live here because we say so; even though we have no basis to stop you, and you being here has basically no downside in the vast majority of cases."

And whatever the circumstances may be, they still broke federal laws to come here. They should be punished for that. Here's an analogy: Just because somebody's dirt poor doesn't give them the right to steal your wallet.
That's a bad analogy because the crime of theft has a victim, unlike the "crime" of illegal immigration. As many like to say: no victim, no crime. The law shouldn't be respected because it's the law. Bad laws NEED to be broken for them to change. The entire situation reminds me of a very great quote I once heard.

"When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law."

How do illegal immigrants file taxes, as you claim? The only way I can think of is if they stole somebody's social security number or somehow attained a fraudulent one.
There's stuff like sales tax, income withholdings, local taxes, and many other taxes that can all basically be paid. They are often paid using fake/appropriated identities which is admittedly a problem, but not much of one. It's not like they're stealing identities to rack up credit card bills. They're mostly just paying taxes that they'll likely not receive any benefits for.

"Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody." Talk about a blanket statements. They drive without licenses, as one example! How is that not a danger? They also use up space in our schools and drain social programs intended for Americans. And need I mention how many terrorists are illegal?
I don't honestly see how driving without a license is any more dangerous than driving without one. Hell, people who just got their licenses are literally the most dangerous drivers for their first five years.

The social programs that they use are basically the ones that they help pay for just like legal citizens.

And lastly, I really would like you to cite some terrorist attacks committed on American soil by a person here illegally. Once you do I will then do some math, tell you that as a percentage the difference in those attacks and the ones committed by those in America legally is not statistically significant.

Stop with the assumptions. I'll say this: By far the worst terrorist attacks on American soil, 9/11, which dwarfs all others, was committed by foreigners, some who were here illegally.
The people who actually carries out the hijackings were all in the country legally.

I was going to quote you saying more about keeping terrorists out, but instead I'll just post one of my favorite images.

http://www.lossofprivacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/JubgE.png

So you think that there should be totally open borders throughout every country because somebody else occupied it before they did?
Not for that reason, but yes.

[britishboy]

They should get legal status because the very notion of border control is bullshit.

"You can't live here because we say so; even though we have no basis to stop you, and you being here has basically no downside in the vast majority of cases."


That's a bad analogy because the crime of theft has a victim, unlike the "crime" of illegal immigration. As many like to say: no victim, no crime. The law shouldn't be respected because it's the law. Bad laws NEED to be broken for them to change. The entire situation reminds me of a very great quote I once heard.

"When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law."


There's stuff like sales tax, income withholdings, local taxes, and many other taxes that can all basically be paid. They are often paid using fake/appropriated identities which is admittedly a problem, but not much of one. It's not like they're stealing identities to rack up credit card bills. They're mostly just paying taxes that they'll likely not receive any benefits for.


I don't honestly see how driving without a license is any more dangerous than driving without one. Hell, people who just got their licenses are literally the most dangerous drivers for their first five years.

The social programs that they use are basically the ones that they help pay for just like legal citizens.

And lastly, I really would like you to cite some terrorist attacks committed on American soil by a person here illegally. Once you do I will then do some math, tell you that as a percentage the difference in those attacks and the ones committed by those in America legally is not statistically significant.


The people who actually carries out the hijackings were all in the country legally.

I was going to quote you saying more about keeping terrorists out, but instead I'll just post one of my favorite images.

image (http://www.lossofprivacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/JubgE.png)


Not for that reason, but yes.

your missing the point

[Kameraden]

what about people who are wanted dead by the people of another country? cant go home because of war?

Perhaps they shouldn't take the coward's escape then.


AND FUCK YOU WHY HAVE A FUCKING NAZI?!?! YOU DISGUST ME ON SO MANY LEAVELS! so tell me why have a nazi scum bag as your pic?


For a Briton you certainly don't know your own language well at all. Please learn some grammar before again addressing me. To answer your question and shut you up: both General Olbricht and Standartenfuhrer Peiper were honorable and respectable men. The allegations towards the former have nearly all been proven to be fallic lies, and those that remain were an officer carrying out the orders delivered to him. Tell me, how many people have the S.A.S. killed compared to Panzergruppe Peiper?

[britishboy]

Perhaps they shouldn't take the coward's escape then.




For a Briton you certainly don't know your own language well at all. Please learn some grammar before again addressing me. To answer your question and shut you up: both General Olbricht and Standartenfuhrer Peiper were honorable and respectable men. The allegations towards the former have nearly all been proven to be fallic lies, and those that remain were an officer carrying out the orders delivered to him. Tell me, how many people have the S.A.S. killed compared to Panzergruppe Peiper?

ow refuges are cowards, and the SAS have killed many enemies, but nothing compared to the millions tortured and killed by you nazi basterds! 'honorable men'?! you should be disgusted in yourself!

[Kameraden]

ow refuges are cowards, and the SAS have killed many enemies, but nothing compared to the millions tortured and killed by you nazi basterds! 'honorable men'?! you should be disgusted in yourself!

The S.S. too, only killed who they thought were enemies. Also realize that Olbricht was not in the Schutzstaffel -- he was in the Wehrmacht. Obviously you haven't heard of him, so you should go do your homework. You also should realize that nearly all of the "Nazi" (most were not a member of the NSDAP) commanders knew nothing of the holocaust, and were in fact honourable -- it's just sad that in the Nuremburg trials the allies made up convictions such as "waging wars of aggression" to imprison honourable men.

[Harry Smith]

what about people who are wanted dead by the people of another country? cant go home because of war?
AND FUCK YOU WHY HAVE A FUCKING NAZI?!?! YOU DISGUST ME ON SO MANY LEAVELS! so tell me why have a nazi scum bag as your pic?



wel said:)

That's not a Nazi, that's a German ww2 general who rebelled against the Nazis. Get your facts right

[britishboy]

The S.S. too, only killed who they thought were enemies. Also realize that Olbricht was not in the Schutzstaffel -- he was in the Wehrmacht. Obviously you haven't heard of him, so you should go do your homework. You also should realize that nearly all of the "Nazi" (most were not a member of the NSDAP) commanders knew nothing of the holocaust, and were in fact honourable -- it's just sad that in the Nuremburg trials the allies made up convictions such as "waging wars of aggression" to imprison honourable men.

they were tried in a fair court and no ive not herd of him and dont care to research him, the ss was horrible and ruthless, and the jews wasn't enemies and why was you comparing ss to sas, they completly different

[Harry Smith]

they were tried in a fair court and no ive not herd of him and dont care to research him, the ss was horrible and ruthless, and the jews wasn't enemies and why was you comparing ss to sas, they completly different

You should research him, in fact I respect him much more than many American Generals.

He was in the German Army not the SS, he attempted to other-throw the Nazis in 1944.

[Kameraden]

they were tried in a fair court and no ive not herd of him and dont care to research him, the ss was horrible and ruthless, and the jews wasn't enemies and why was you comparing ss to sas, they completly different

The Nuremburg Trials were far from fair trials -- the Soviet trials were even more unbiased and unfair. And you don't conceivably understand Nazism evidently: the deutschen volk were made to believe that the Jews, Romani, Homosexuals, and both Mentally and Physically disabled were harmful to das vaterland -- they were made into enemies of the state. That does not however suggest that the people and soldiers knew of the atrocities occurring, because they didn't. And when you get down to it, the S.S. and the S.A.S. were created for the same purpose.

[britishboy]

You should research him, in fact I respect him much more than many American Generals.

He was in the German Army not the SS, he attempted to other-throw the Nazis in 1944.

I see, if he was brave and rebelled, he has my respect, as does everyone that tryed to remove hitler from power

The Nuremburg Trials were far from fair trials -- the Soviet trials were even more unbiased and unfair. And you don't conceivably understand Nazism evidently: the deutschen volk were made to believe that the Jews, Romani, Homosexuals, and both Mentally and Physically disabled were harmful to das vaterland -- they were made into enemies of the state. That does not however suggest that the people and soldiers knew of the atrocities occurring, because they didn't. And when you get down to it, the S.S. and the S.A.S. were created for the same purpose.

the soviets was a key factor in winning the war so a unfair trail for a nazi you cant moan about, the sas is the worlds best special forces, made to eliminate or capture the enemy and do the impossible, the ss was created to spread fear and terror, and I killed the jews because 'he told me so' is no excuse,

[Harry Smith]

I see, if he was brave and rebelled, he has my respect, as does everyone that tryed to remove hitler from power



the soviets was a key factor in winning the war so a unfair trail for a nazi you cant moan about, the sas is the worlds best special forces, made to eliminate or capture the enemy and do the impossible, the ss was created to spread fear and terror, and I killed the jews because 'he told me so' is no excuse,

In all fairness the SS in ww2 were much better than the SAS mission wise, I mean they were terrible and a disgrace, christ I hate their treatment of pows but if your a Military Historian you have to ignore the politics. They managed to make Eishenhower hid away in christmass of '44 out of fear he was going to get kidnapped.

It seems very hypocritical of you to oppose the Nazis for their human rights breaches and then praise the soviets for abusing the Nazis.

Both of them were absolute monsters, you need to be more impartial otherwise give up on WW2

[britishboy]

In all fairness the SS in ww2 were much better than the SAS mission wise, I mean they were terrible and a disgrace, christ I hate their treatment of pows but if your a Military Historian you have to ignore the politics. They managed to make Eishenhower hid away in christmass of '44 out of fear he was going to get kidnapped.

It seems very hypocritical of you to oppose the Nazis for their human rights breaches and then praise the soviets for abusing the Nazis.

Both of them were absolute monsters, you need to be more impartial otherwise give up on WW2

I dont praise the soviets at all, they were happy to watch the war unfold without getting involved, im happy they got involved however and the soviets (as far as im aware) didnt treat the germans as bad as the germans threated us

[Kameraden]

I dont praise the soviets at all, they were happy to watch the war unfold without getting involved, im happy they got involved however and the soviets (as far as im aware) didnt treat the germans as bad as the germans threated us

Oh god please... I'm out. Someone else can school him on the matters of quarter on the Eastern Front if they wish.

[Harry Smith]

I dont praise the soviets at all, they were happy to watch the war unfold without getting involved, im happy they got involved however and the soviets (as far as im aware) didnt treat the germans as bad as the germans threated us

The Germans treated the British well.

Jack in WW2 there was

The British Army, the Soviet Army, The German Army

And the Waffen SS

The British and German official armies followed the 1929 Geneva convention on the articles of war. The Soviet Army didn't at all. So your wrong, the SS treated Britain badly, but the German army treated us very well.

[TapDancer]

I believe amnesty should be granted to those illegal immigrants whose circumstances for their illegal immigration include escaping of war, asylum from a government, looking for a better like breaking free of poverty etc. However, it should not be granted to those who are claiming asylum from a government who is trying to persecute them for committing crimes. HAVING SAID THAT, whistle blowing can sometimes be for the benefit of the public, and this is a real grey area here. Julian Assange, I believe did nothing wrong ethically, he did however break the law. (Well, he was in Australia, so he broke no law, but he did leak American secrets, which as an american, is against the law.

While I believe it is a very gray topic, I couldn't even begin to imagine how something like this could be properly patrolled. I mean, how do you differentiate between political prisoner and criminal? I do believe the Americans are after Julian Assange, and I don't believe they are completely non-corrupt and just, particularly in the current situation, but, I am not sure. But, I know now the systems need to change, for Australia at leas anyway.

[britishboy]

The Germans treated the British well.

Jack in WW2 there was

The British Army, the Soviet Army, The German Army

And the Waffen SS

The British and German official armies followed the 1929 Geneva convention on the articles of war. The Soviet Army didn't at all. So your wrong, the SS treated Britain badly, but the German army treated us very well.

alright so its the soviets and ss thats the bad ones? thanks for explaining that:) ive only seen the evils of the ss and assumed all of german was the same, and ive done nothing on the soviets so thanks:)

[Kameraden]

alright so its the soviets and ss thats the bad ones? thanks for explaining that:) ive only seen the evils of the ss and assumed all of german was the same, and ive done nothing on the soviets so thanks:)

Oh god...

[Jean Poutine]

Your CBO quote is all fine and good, and it's nothing I didn't know. I asked how do they file? My understanding is that they have to steal a social security number to do it.

The how is useless. Only the what matters in this case. They pay. End of.

No theft without a victim of theft. They use fake identities.

"Amnesty is not tolerance. It's a one time deal."

Actually, if this bill is passed it will be the second time we have given "amnesty" to illegal immigrants. We also did it in 1986. We were promised that we'd never have this problem again, but look where we are. And the issue is even larger scale this time around.

Then allow laxer requirements instead of shitting on people who've jumped a fence at great personal risk and came here with zilch in the hopes of getting a piece of American dream. Let people live where the Hell they want to. Citizenship is a sham.

"Illegal immigrants don't hurt anybody." Talk about a blanket statements. They drive without licenses, as one example! How is that not a danger? They also use up space in our schools and drain social programs intended for Americans. And need I mention how many terrorists are illegal?

1) as opposed to all the Americans doing the same?
2) they help fund these programs via their taxes, why shouldn't they be allowed to use them?
3) need I mention how many terrorists are legal? Actually, that's been done for me.

Why don't you see anything wrong with people who break our laws to come here?

Laws =/= justice, and unjust laws must be repealed or not adhered to. Mohandas Gandhi did exactly the same in India : he encouraged the Indians to peacefully disobey the colonial administration. This is the ideal we must all aspire to. A government must answer to its people and blind faith in the justice of laws passed by it is counterproductive in this endeavor.

On Kohlberg's stages of morality, blind adherence to law and order is stage 4. There are 6, arguably 7. There are much higher callings than what a bunch of oligarchic nincompoops decide based on their mandate of representation.

[Southside]

What the hell? There IS a legal way to come into this country, you know!

Why don't you see anything wrong with people who break our laws to come here? Giving amnesty to them is unfair to everybody who is respecting our laws and waiting in line like everybody else.

Considering most of them come here to work the fields in the blistering sun for hours a day, no I dont have a problem with it..


Illegal immigrants are a large source of our agricultural and hard labor work force, like I said, you just cant kick them out..

Probably the only thing I respect George Bush for is he gave out a ton of work permits. He was from Texas so he knows the crucial role illegals play in our work force.
Stop using "terrorism" as a point for your argument against illegals, most of them come here for work. I stopped believing the "BE AWARE, IT'S A TERRORISM THREAT" hype that the media tries to scare us with. Im more likely to die in a drive by shooting than a hijacked aircraft or bombing...

Some of these illegals even pay taxes! GOP'ers always over look that one!

[Capto]

You see, there have been three basic ages of human development: The Agricultural Age, The Industrial Age, and the Information Age, which we are in right now. In the agricultural age, the most precious commodities were grown on farms. In the Industrial Age, things built in factory's were most prized. And today in the Information Age, the most valuable resource is ideas thought up by people working in offices primarily.

In the Industrial and Agricultural Ages, we needed this labor, you are correct. But that is now longer. Because of advances in shipping, storage and communication technologies, we can build things in other countries. True, we do need a limited supply of garbage men and janitors and the like, but we have plenty of those for what we can afford. We don't need more manual laborers. This is the reality of the mew economy.


This is actually so hilarious that I died laughing, reincarnated, and died laughing again. The most valuable resource is ideas? So you prize ideas more than a majority of items in your household? Give me a break.

lolololololololololol

Indeed, traditional industry is being fazed out slowly, but it's not gone yet. You contradict yourself with your garbage idea that we for some reason no longer need traditional industrial labor here in the US, but then you promote the outsourcing of traditional labor positions to foreign nations. lolwut? The reality of the new economy? Don't make me laugh. That's a fantasy of an inconceivably ridiculous economy. I also find it incredibly amusing that you support the outsourcing of labor to foreign countries. These are job opportunities that could be taken by Americans, or, indeed, illegal immigrants that are instead provided to foreign laborers with little to no benefit to the United States' economy.

We still need the labor, and we still need it to maintain inside the United States.

[Stronk Serb]

I dont praise the soviets at all, they were happy to watch the war unfold without getting involved, im happy they got involved however and the soviets (as far as im aware) didnt treat the germans as bad as the germans threated us


Ummm, many Soviet troops were criminals who have been released to fight the Germans, they raped German women and children, hanged German POWs. They killed 1 million of German civilians, and 7 million Germans, both armsmen and civilians died in the war.

[britishboy]

Ummm, many Soviet troops were criminals who have been released to fight the Germans, they raped German women and children, hanged German POWs. They killed 1 million of German civilians, and 7 million Germans, both armsmen and civilians died in the war.

them soviets was ruthless but im grateful because britian would have been invaded with out them

[Charlie48]

case by case basis.

[Walter Powers]

I apologize for letting all these pile up. Here's my mega response:

The how is useless. Only the what matters in this case. They pay. End of.

No theft without a victim of theft. They use fake identities.



Then allow laxer requirements instead of shitting on people who've jumped a fence at great personal risk and came here with zilch in the hopes of getting a piece of American dream. Let people live where the Hell they want to. Citizenship is a sham.



1) as opposed to all the Americans doing the same?
2) they help fund these programs via their taxes, why shouldn't they be allowed to use them?
3) need I mention how many terrorists are legal? Actually, that's been done for me.



Laws =/= justice, and unjust laws must be repealed or not adhered to. Mohandas Gandhi did exactly the same in India : he encouraged the Indians to peacefully disobey the colonial administration. This is the ideal we must all aspire to. A government must answer to its people and blind faith in the justice of laws passed by it is counterproductive in this endeavor.

On Kohlberg's stages of morality, blind adherence to law and order is stage 4. There are 6, arguably 7. There are much higher callings than what a bunch of oligarchic nincompoops decide based on their mandate of representation.

I just have a problem with rewarding people for violating our laws. What kind of message is that sending? Oh, don't bother coming through the legal way, it's so much easier to just overstay your welcome in a visa. Regardless of what you think, these immigration laws were put into place by a democratically elected congress, so it's only fair, especially to the border states, to enforce them. Do you not agree?

And totally open borders is just crazy. I'm sorry. Do you have any idea how many illegal drugs would come through? How about illegal type assault rifles?

And if totally open borders really is the answer, as you claim. America shouldn't be the first to try it. That's never been done in a developed nation before. Chances are we need a test subject. Britain? Germany? Any takers? We need a lab rat.

Illegals NEVER have drivers licenses. Americans do at least most of the time. Nor do they have insurance, which is an even bigger liability.


Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. What about the taxpayers who have to support these people and the millions of statistically uneducated children they'll potentially have? What about my class sizes that get bigger because there is more students? This is the law, and it should be enforced. If the democrats want more lax immigration laws, they should have reformed immigration when they had power over all of congress and the White House, and not have been lazy and waited until now. Change the law if that's what you want, don't just refuse to enforce it.

And you are right in that a government must listen to it's people. And right now the American public doesn't want a nonexistent border.

This is actually so hilarious that I died laughing, reincarnated, and died laughing again. The most valuable resource is ideas? So you prize ideas more than a majority of items in your household? Give me a break.

lolololololololololol

Indeed, traditional industry is being fazed out slowly, but it's not gone yet. You contradict yourself with your garbage idea that we for some reason no longer need traditional industrial labor here in the US, but then you promote the outsourcing of traditional labor positions to foreign nations. lolwut? The reality of the new economy? Don't make me laugh. That's a fantasy of an inconceivably ridiculous economy. I also find it incredibly amusing that you support the outsourcing of labor to foreign countries. These are job opportunities that could be taken by Americans, or, indeed, illegal immigrants that are instead provided to foreign laborers with little to no benefit to the United States' economy.

We still need the labor, and we still need it to maintain inside the United States.

The most valuable resource is, yes ideas. It's not as ridiculous as it may sound. Ideas made Google. Ideas created Apple. Ideas made Facebook. Ideas made Microsoft. Ideas built the Internet and computers, arguably the two most important inventions of all time in terms of how they increase productivity. I guess I could expand it to mental work in general, but yes, the most valuable resource in the new economy isn't something material. It's ideas, data, and analysis.

I'm saying we still do need a little blue collar labor, but none more then we've already got. We have plenty of unemployed laborers in the rust belt, thank you, and don't need anymore. And if we really do, as you claim, let's research that need and legislate to allow more! Don't refuse to enforce the existing laws.

I actually did a school research paper and speech on how outsourcing benefits the US economy. I can explain in another thread sometime if you want, just bring it up; I feel like that's swaying a little off topic for this one.

case by case basis.

And how many government employees will we have to hire to do that???

Considering most of them come here to work the fields in the blistering sun for hours a day, no I dont have a problem with it..


Illegal immigrants are a large source of our agricultural and hard labor work force, like I said, you just cant kick them out..

Probably the only thing I respect George Bush for is he gave out a ton of work permits. He was from Texas so he knows the crucial role illegals play in our work force.
Stop using "terrorism" as a point for your argument against illegals, most of them come here for work. I stopped believing the "BE AWARE, IT'S A TERRORISM THREAT" hype that the media tries to scare us with. Im more likely to die in a drive by shooting than a hijacked aircraft or bombing...

Some of these illegals even pay taxes! GOP'ers always over look that one!

When I see some of them pay taxes, I see the fact that, along with being in our country illegally, they've committed fraud.

And yes, actually you can kick them out. Here's how. You crack down on their employers, heavily fining them for employing illegals. Your require all employers to e - verify all prospective new employees identities. If it comes up negative, you must report it to police and they will face deportation. Also, you require citizenship papers to be kept in an automobile in border states. If the officer pulls you over and you don't have a license, you'll have to show him or face possible deportation. Finally, hire more ICE agents. You have a department a quarter the size of the LA police trying to enforce a border that's thousands of miles long! This will certainly put a good debt in our immigration problem.

They should get legal status because the very notion of border control is bullshit.

"You can't live here because we say so; even though we have no basis to stop you, and you being here has basically no downside in the vast majority of cases."


That's a bad analogy because the crime of theft has a victim, unlike the "crime" of illegal immigration. As many like to say: no victim, no crime. The law shouldn't be respected because it's the law. Bad laws NEED to be broken for them to change. The entire situation reminds me of a very great quote I once heard.

"When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law."


There's stuff like sales tax, income withholdings, local taxes, and many other taxes that can all basically be paid. They are often paid using fake/appropriated identities which is admittedly a problem, but not much of one. It's not like they're stealing identities to rack up credit card bills. They're mostly just paying taxes that they'll likely not receive any benefits for.


I don't honestly see how driving without a license is any more dangerous than driving without one. Hell, people who just got their licenses are literally the most dangerous drivers for their first five years.

The social programs that they use are basically the ones that they help pay for just like legal citizens.

And lastly, I really would like you to cite some terrorist attacks committed on American soil by a person here illegally. Once you do I will then do some math, tell you that as a percentage the difference in those attacks and the ones committed by those in America legally is not statistically significant.


The people who actually carries out the hijackings were all in the country legally.

I was going to quote you saying more about keeping terrorists out, but instead I'll just post one of my favorite images.

image (http://www.lossofprivacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/JubgE.png)


Not for that reason, but yes.

Like I said to another person, a totally open border has never been tested before, and it is pretty radical to try it on a country of this size.

As for terrorist attack committed by illegals, how about the most deadly one? Some of the terrorist has visas, but they'd expired and thus were illegal.

http://www.fairus.org/issue/identity-and-immigration-status-of-9-11-terrorists

And how can you not see our borders as a way for terrorists to get in? What about illegal drugs and illegal type assault weapons? And if we were to totally open up our borders, there's even the potential a weapon of mass destruction could come through.

I explained how illegal immigration isn't a victimless crime to Jean, above.

I know it's "wrong" and whatnot to reward people for breaking federal laws, but it would be kind of ridiculous to do a comprehensive search for illegal immigrants and toss them back over the border. For one thing, they'd probably just come back. For another, that has huge potential to break up families and leave wives and children without their source of income. It's easier for everyone if we just let the people who are here stay here.

That's what we said in 1986. And we're back to the same spot.

[Capto]

The most valuable resource is, yes ideas. It's not as ridiculous as it may sound. Ideas made Google. Ideas created Apple. Ideas made Facebook. Ideas made Microsoft. Ideas built the Internet and computers, arguably the two most important inventions of all time in terms of how they increase productivity. I guess I could expand it to mental work in general, but yes, the most valuable resource in the new economy isn't something material. It's ideas, data, and analysis.

I'm saying we still do need a little blue collar labor, but none more then we've already got. We have plenty of unemployed laborers in the rust belt, thank you, and don't need anymore. And if we really do, as you claim, let's research that need and legislate to allow more! Don't refuse to enforce the existing laws.

I actually did a school research paper and speech on how outsourcing benefits the US economy. I can explain in another thread sometime if you want, just bring it up; I feel like that's swaying a little off topic for this one.


Frankly, from a purely economic standpoint, the 'ideas are the most valuable' thing is complete and utter trash.

Did you even read what I typed? Nope. I didn't say anything about needing more laborers. That's complete and utter garbage. Rather, we need to provide more jobs to the unemployed laborers currently within the US by regulating the outsourcing of jobs to nations with a higher labor value. There is a decent labor capacity in the US currently, but no corporations are taking advantage of it because of lower labor prices overseas.

Outsourcing benefits a corporation, that's obvious. Whoever can't see that is either blind or an idiot. I'm aware of that. This isn't off-topic at all. We can and shall discuss this here. Outsourcing benefits corporations, which are the basis for the US economy. It is a source of wealth for the corporations and their managements, but is is a vacuum for jobs that could go to Americans.

[Walter Powers]

Frankly, from a purely economic standpoint, the 'ideas are the most valuable' thing is complete and utter trash.

Did you even read what I typed? Nope. I didn't say anything about needing more laborers. That's complete and utter garbage. Rather, we need to provide more jobs to the unemployed laborers currently within the US by regulating the outsourcing of jobs to nations with a higher labor value. There is a decent labor capacity in the US currently, but no corporations are taking advantage of it because of lower labor prices overseas.

Outsourcing benefits a corporation, that's obvious. Whoever can't see that is either blind or an idiot. I'm aware of that. This isn't off-topic at all. We can and shall discuss this here. Outsourcing benefits corporations, which are the basis for the US economy. It is a source of wealth for the corporations and their managements, but is is a vacuum for jobs that could go to Americans.

I'd love to discuss this with you, but I feel like this is swaying to far away from the topic. If you want to create a thread about outsourcing, I can debate you about it in there.

[jayjay's toocool]

Do you think that people who came illegally into a country should receive legal status? Why or why not?
Well to be honest! didn't boston just get bombed from someone getting legal who came illegally? But besides the dangers of anything that could happen whether or whether not someone's illegal or legal I think its not to okay this is America and a lot of people want what it holds but Americans should be completely able to feel .... well what America stands as. free. opportunistic. and safe. It's up to the H.O.R's though but idonthink it'll pass [ Please excuse me for sounding harsh or messed up I am up for making my comment sound better if you want]

[Harry Smith]

Do you think that people who came illegally into a country should receive legal status? Why or why not?
Well to be honest! didn't boston just get bombed from someone getting legal who came illegally? But besides the dangers of anything that could happen whether or whether not someone's illegal or legal I think its not to okay this is America and a lot of people want what it holds but Americans should be completely able to feel .... well what America stands as. free. opportunistic. and safe. It's up to the H.O.R's though but idonthink it'll pass [ Please excuse me for sounding harsh or messed up I am up for making my comment sound better if you want]


UNABOMBER, Oklahoma bombings, the SLA and many other terrorist groups were in fact made up of US citizens

[jayjay's toocool]

UNABOMBER, Oklahoma bombings, the SLA and many other terrorist groups were in fact made up of US citizens[/QUOTE]
Exactly so I don't want people thinking the risk is all about illegal people. They maybe wanna do a job you don't wanna do or came to work or live like they wanted to, me as an American say sure because most Americans don't even take the opportunities seriously and we need people who will, again I feel myself sounding harsh and not very linguistically wise but this is how I feel.

[StoppingTime]

Please understand that this topic is about illegal immigration. If you'd like to argue over people's avatars and what they stand for, make a new thread or contact them privately.

[Korashk]

IRegardless of what you think, these immigration laws were put into place by a democratically elected congress, so it's only fair, especially to the border states, to enforce them. Do you not agree?
No, I don't. An immoral law is an immoral law regardless of who enacted it. Plus, the border states may stereotypically dislike immigration, but the people who actually feel that way would be really sad if there actually were no more illegal immigrants. In texas alone illegal immigrants contribute something like 6 billion dollars to the state economy.

Despite what the ignorantly xenophobic think, illegal immigrants as a group don't hurt people by existing in America.

And totally open borders is just crazy. I'm sorry. Do you have any idea how many illegal drugs would come through? How about illegal type assault rifles?
Don't even get me started on the unconstitutional and legitimately evil bullshit that is the US War on Drugs. I'll say one thing, though. Mexican drug cartels want better border control so that they can more easily regulate what drugs go where in America.

And if totally open borders really is the answer, as you claim. America shouldn't be the first to try it.
America was basically trying it for the first 100 years of its existence, and even after that there wasn't any severe restrictions on immigration until 1921 unless you were trying to come to America from Asia. Things worked out pretty much fine.

Illegals NEVER have drivers licenses. Americans do at least most of the time. Nor do they have insurance, which is an even bigger liability.
This is just wrong. You underestimate how easy it is to get those things fraudulently. Which is something they wouldn't have to do if they could just live here.

Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. What about the taxpayers who have to support these people
There are statistically no more illegal immigrants receiving government benefits than there are legal ones as a percentage. Just like there are statistically the same amount of illegal immigrants who pay taxes as legal immigrants as a percentage. Simply put, they're giving and taking about the same as they would be if they were legal citizens.

And you are right in that a government must listen to it's people. And right now the American public doesn't want a nonexistent border.
It doesn't matter what the American people want. America is not a democracy. The American people want a lot of things they can't legally have including a lot of things that are really stupid for them to want.

When I see some of them pay taxes, I see the fact that, along with being in our country illegally, they've committed fraud.
Yeah, but only because it's live in their country where they're unable to support their family or they live in fear of being murdered by cartels indirectly funded by the American government or break an unjust law in America. I think I know what I'd choose.
Like I said to another person, a totally open border has never been tested before, and it is pretty radical to try it on a country of this size.

Addressed above.

As for terrorist attack committed by illegals, how about the most deadly one? Some of the terrorist has visas, but they'd expired and thus were illegal.
But they ALL got in the country legally is the point. Border control would not have stopped them.

And how can you not see our borders as a way for terrorists to get in?
Our borders are a way for terrorists to get in, I'm just rational enough to realize that border controls won't stop them (because they fucking didn't). You see, border controls don't stop bad people from coming, they just keep good people from getting in. Plus, I'm not all that afraid of being killed by a terrorist when statistics say that I'm way more likely to be killed by a cop.

What about illegal drugs and illegal type assault weapons?
All drugs and weapons should be legal.

And if we were to totally open up our borders, there's even the potential a weapon of mass destruction could come through.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/059/143/Ohwow.jpg

I'm not even going to respond to a notion that stupid.

[Walter Powers]

No, I don't. An immoral law is an immoral law regardless of who enacted it. Plus, the border states may stereotypically dislike immigration, but the people who actually feel that way would be really sad if there actually were no more illegal immigrants. In texas alone illegal immigrants contribute something like 6 billion dollars to the state economy.

Despite what the ignorantly xenophobic think, illegal immigrants as a group don't hurt people by existing in America.


Don't even get me started on the unconstitutional and legitimately evil bullshit that is the US War on Drugs. I'll say one thing, though. Mexican drug cartels want better border control so that they can more easily regulate what drugs go where in America.


America was basically trying it for the first 100 years of its existence, and even after that there wasn't any severe restrictions on immigration until 1921 unless you were trying to come to America from Asia. Things worked out pretty much fine.


This is just wrong. You underestimate how easy it is to get those things fraudulently. Which is something they wouldn't have to do if they could just live here.


There are statistically no more illegal immigrants receiving government benefits than there are legal ones as a percentage. Just like there are statistically the same amount of illegal immigrants who pay taxes as legal immigrants as a percentage. Simply put, they're giving and taking about the same as they would be if they were legal citizens.


It doesn't matter what the American people want. America is not a democracy. The American people want a lot of things they can't legally have including a lot of things that are really stupid for them to want.


Yeah, but only because it's live in their country where they're unable to support their family or they live in fear of being murdered by cartels indirectly funded by the American government or break an unjust law in America. I think I know what I'd choose.

Addressed above.


But they ALL got in the country legally is the point. Border control would not have stopped them.


Our borders are a way for terrorists to get in, I'm just rational enough to realize that border controls won't stop them (because they fucking didn't). You see, border controls don't stop bad people from coming, they just keep good people from getting in. Plus, I'm not all that afraid of being killed by a terrorist when statistics say that I'm way more likely to be killed by a cop.


All drugs and weapons should be legal.


image (http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/059/143/Ohwow.jpg)

I'm not even going to respond to a notion that stupid.

"All drugs and weapons should be legal?" Did you seriously just say that? I mean, drugs is a valid argument, but ALL weapons? I mean I'm a pretty strong supporter of the second amendment but still. You seriously think private citizens should be allowed to own ICBMs?

I think we're way to far apart on this issue, so I think I'm gonna have to stop this debate.

[Bougainvillea]

"All drugs and weapons should be legal?" Did you seriously just say that? I mean, drugs is a valid argument, but ALL weapons? I mean I'm a pretty strong supporter of the second amendment but still. You seriously think private citizens should be allowed to own ICBMs?

I think we're way to far apart on this issue, so I think I'm gonna have to stop this debate.

Yeah that's typical.


Look at the long reply he just gave, and you want to stop now.

[britishboy]

ALL DRUGS AND WEAPONS SHOULD BE LEGAL? wtf?! you must be trolling!!! what about, for example, ground to air missiles?!

[Walter Powers]

Yeah that's typical.


Look at the long reply he just gave, and you want to stop now.

He thinks all drugs and weapons should be legal and the border should be completely unregulated. His opinion is obviously too extreme for a productive discussion.


ALL DRUGS AND WEAPONS SHOULD BE LEGAL? wtf?! you must be trolling!!! what about, for example, ground to air missiles?!

Possibly. Who would think that I should be able to buy a nuke and put it in my back yard? What if I go crazy or a terrorist breaks in and decides to launch it at downtown Portland?

[britishboy]

Possibly. Who would think that I should be able to buy a nuke and put it in my back yard? What if I go crazy or a terrorist breaks in and decides to launch it at downtown Portland?

I waa being sarcastic, of course there should be weapons on what weapons you can buy, for the reason you gave

[Walter Powers]

I waa being sarcastic, of course there should be weapons on what weapons you can buy, for the reason you gave

"Weapons on what weapons"? I thought you were going to be more careful about grammar :)

[britishboy]

"Weapons on what weapons"? I thought you were going to be more careful about grammar :)

sorry:P im typing this on my phone, I believe there should be limits on weapons to limit terrorism, make society easier to police and lower the number if school shootings

[Walter Powers]

sorry:P im typing this on my phone, I believe there should be limits on weapons to limit terrorism, make society easier to police and lower the number if school shootings

That's for another debate.

Oh, and by the way, I've been typing on my iPod Touch almost
exclusivly on VT since I have joined. I can still capitalize don't you think? :)

I guess it doesn't really matter.

[Korashk]

"All drugs and weapons should be legal?" Did you seriously just say that? I mean, drugs is a valid argument, but ALL weapons? I mean I'm a pretty strong supporter of the second amendment but still. You seriously think private citizens should be allowed to own ICBMs?
ALL DRUGS AND WEAPONS SHOULD BE LEGAL? wtf?! you must be trolling!!! what about, for example, ground to air missiles?!
If you can afford them, sure. The thing is, I'm aware that those things are too expensive for 95% of people to ever buy and that in using them basically sentence themselves to death or the rest of their lives in prison which is something that almost everyone is too smart to do.

You don't see people calling for the outlawing of civilian ownership of miniguns, flamethrowers, rocket launchers, or tanks do you? All of which are legal to own in the USA. It's because even though those things are legal to own, basically nobody does. If these incredibly dangerous items don't cause peoblems today, what makes you think people being able to own missiles would?

[britishboy]

If you can afford them, sure. The thing is, I'm aware that those things are too expensive for 95% of people to ever buy and that in using them basically sentence themselves to death or the rest of their lives in prison which is something that almost everyone is too smart to do.

You don't see people calling for the outlawing of civilian ownership of miniguns, flamethrowers, rocket launchers, or tanks do you? All of which are legal to own in the USA. It's because even though those things are legal to own, basically nobody does. If these incredibly dangerous items don't cause peoblems today, what makes you think people being able to own missiles would?

ok obviously if theyre expensive were all safe? a rich man could fund terrorism and making them legal will mean they can be imported, and the Taliban don't lack missiles! and actually many Americans dont want the miniguns and the flame throwers and want gun control, including your president!

[Korashk]

a rich man could fund terrorism
This is basically what already happens.

and making them legal will mean they can be imported,
No it doesn't.

and the Taliban don't lack missiles!
So what? The Taliban doesn't operate out of America. American laws have literally no effect on them.

and actually many Americans dont want the miniguns and the flame throwers
That's exactly my point. People don't want them, so they don't have them.

and want gun control, including your president!
Gun control nuts are just deluded. They completely ignore statistics that basically prove that their stance is pointless. Such as countries with high rates of gun ownership with very little gun crime like Canada and countries with nigh universal gun control with very high rates of violent crime like the UK.

[Walter Powers]

ok obviously if theyre expensive were all safe? a rich man could fund terrorism and making them legal will mean they can be imported, and the Taliban don't lack missiles! and actually many Americans dont want the miniguns and the flame throwers and want gun control, including your president!

We don't want a ton of gun control, obviously the right to bear arms is something most of us hold dear. However, we certainly don't thing absolutely every weapon there is should be able to be owned by private citizens. No nukes for the masses.

[Guillermo]

Yes, they should get amnesty. If everyone actually realized how integral immigrants are apart of this country, then no one would be questioning whether or not immigrants should be granted citizenship or deported.

[Sugaree]

Yes, they should get amnesty. If everyone actually realized how integral immigrants are apart of this country, then no one would be questioning whether or not immigrants should be granted citizenship or deported.

But they've come here illegally. Why should we offer free things to people who break the law, but punish those who legally immigrate here? If you were in a country where the illegal immigration rate was high, you'd feel the same way. The illegals in this country do not deserve amnesty, as important as they are to the national economy. They should pay a fine, get back in line, and wait their turn. The system should also be more stream lined so those who ARE waiting can get in in at least one year or less. Some people wait almost a decade to get in and when there are people moving in illegally, those opportunities waiting for people wanting to move in legally are going to disappear.

[Guillermo]

But they've come here illegally. Why should we offer free things to people who break the law, but punish those who legally immigrate here? If you were in a country where the illegal immigration rate was high, you'd feel the same way. The illegals in this country do not deserve amnesty, as important as they are to the national economy. They should pay a fine, get back in line, and wait their turn. The system should also be more stream lined so those who ARE waiting can get in in at least one year or less. Some people wait almost a decade to get in and when there are people moving in illegally, those opportunities waiting for people wanting to move in legally are going to disappear.

Deport the illegal immigrants who do most of the jobs that Americans don’t take? That doesn't really make much sense. You’re claiming that illegal immigrants should be deported on the premise that they’re breaking the law – that’s not a very good argument. Why do illegal immigrants come in here in the first place? To escape their impoverished lives in search of better opportunities. Yeah, working in the fields picking tobacco or working in a dangerous factory or construction site may not sound like a better opportunity to us, but it’s way better for people who come from poverty stricken areas that aren't really existent in America. You’re making it seem as if these immigrants have another choice, which most basically don’t – but to starve. And that’s not a choice at all. And with America's horrible immigration system that could take years to be granted citizenship (or not at all), who has time to wait? I do agree with you that the immigration system should take less time to wait, though.

[Sugaree]

Deport the illegal immigrants who do most of the jobs that Americans don’t take? That doesn't really make much sense. You’re claiming that illegal immigrants should be deported on the premise that they’re breaking the law – that’s not a very good argument. Why do illegal immigrants come in here in the first place? To escape their impoverished lives in search of better opportunities. Yeah, working in the fields picking tobacco or working in a dangerous factory or construction site may not sound like a better opportunity to us, but it’s way better for people who come from poverty stricken areas that aren't really existent in America. You’re making it seem as if these immigrants have another choice, which most basically don’t – but to starve. And that’s not a choice at all. And with America's horrible immigration system that could take years to be granted citizenship (or not at all), who has time to wait? I do agree with you that the immigration system should take less time to wait, though.

What part of the definition of "illegal" do you not comprehend? Of course they broke the law; they came here without going through the system already set in place. That said, I don't really blame them since it's so costly. But that doesn't mean we should give them amnesty. Only in rare circumstances should amnesty ever be given to anyone.

[Walter Powers]

Yes, they should get amnesty. If everyone actually realized how integral immigrants are apart of this country, then no one would be questioning whether or not immigrants should be granted citizenship or deported.

But they broke the law. Why do they desearve citizenship more then the poor guy in China who's waiting in line to get in legally? It's encouraging illegal behavior.

We tried amnesty in 1986, and we are right back in the same spot.

[Guillermo]

What part of the definition of "illegal" do you not comprehend? Of course they broke the law; they came here without going through the system already set in place. That said, I don't really blame them since it's so costly. But that doesn't mean we should give them amnesty. Only in rare circumstances should amnesty ever be given to anyone.

Honestly, there’s not much left to discuss, since you’re spitting back out your “breaking the law” argument which is basically your last on only crutch to lean on in this argument. Most already pay taxes and take jobs that no one wants. If they were deported, then there would be a larger need for people to work in these jobs. No one here wants to take them. Most illegal immigrants literally do no harm by being in the America; whereas, they actually positively help the country in many ways. And besides, you contradicted yourself. You stated that you don’t blame them for coming in illegally since it’s so costly and takes too much time. Yet, they still shouldn't be granted amnesty because they broke the law? So how can you blame them for not going through such a stupid immigration system from the start? But go ahead, spend millions upon millions trying to deport all 11-12 million illegals.

But they broke the law. Why do they desearve citizenship more then the poor guy in China who's waiting in line to get in legally? It's encouraging illegal behavior.

We tried amnesty in 1986, and we are right back in the same spot.

Well, I wonder why he is too? Maybe it's due to the fact that the immigration system in the U.S. is costly, takes years, and well, you're basically fucked if you don't already have family/friends here or have skills - and hell, add good luck while you're at it. Canada has an extremely well-drawn out immigration system that should seriously be considered in America - much easier and quicker.

[Capto]

Most already pay taxes and take jobs that no one wants. If they were deported, then there would be a larger need for people to work in these jobs. No one here wants to take them.

I can kind of agree with everything else that you're saying except for this. Kudos to you.

[Sugaree]

Honestly, there’s not much left to discuss, since you’re spitting back out your “breaking the law” argument which is basically your last on only crutch to lean on in this argument. Most already pay taxes and take jobs that no one wants. If they were deported, then there would be a larger need for people to work in these jobs. No one here wants to take them. Most illegal immigrants literally do no harm by being in the America; whereas, they actually positively help the country in many ways. And besides, you contradicted yourself. You stated that you don’t blame them for coming in illegally since it’s so costly and takes too much time. Yet, they still shouldn't be granted amnesty because they broke the law? So how can you blame them for not going through such a stupid immigration system from the start? But go ahead, spend millions upon millions trying to deport all 11-12 million illegals.

Clearly you don't understand how deportation works. How it's SUPPOSED to work is that you deport those who come in illegally and then bring in someone else. Yes, there would be a HUGE gap left if we were to deport all the illegal immigrants. I can agree with that. It would also lead to a big drop in tax revenue for the government.

But my plan would be to deport the illegal immigrants, put them in line, have them pay a small $50 fine, and have them go through the system. After that, bring in all those who have been in the system and waiting patiently so they can get their opportunity. The jobs won't be great, and it may even be years before they get to where they want to be, but that's how the United States is supposed to work. You work your way from the bottom and go as far as you want. If you're an illegal immigrant who has already paid taxes and worked for years here in the United States, I would consider amnesty if you could pass the citizenship test and you can get off free and clear. But it's not known if all illegal immigrants pay taxes, so it's safe to assume there's a fair number that haven't. For those who never paid taxes, they pay a heavier fine if they were on government programs like Medicaid or Welfare.

This is a balanced approach to the problem. It won't be easy, but no one said completely overhauling an immigration system was easy in the first place. Simply giving amnesty to people who are unknown to deserve it or not is not the answer. As stated before, we did this in 1986 and it didn't change a thing. Instead, it increased the problem we already had. Giving amnesty should only be a last option and should never be used in such large amounts.

[Walter Powers]

Honestly, there’s not much left to discuss, since you’re spitting back out your “breaking the law” argument which is basically your last on only crutch to lean on in this argument. Most already pay taxes and take jobs that no one wants. If they were deported, then there would be a larger need for people to work in these jobs. No one here wants to take them. Most illegal immigrants literally do no harm by being in the America; whereas, they actually positively help the country in many ways. And besides, you contradicted yourself. You stated that you don’t blame them for coming in illegally since it’s so costly and takes too much time. Yet, they still shouldn't be granted amnesty because they broke the law? So how can you blame them for not going through such a stupid immigration system from the start? But go ahead, spend millions upon millions trying to deport all 11-12 million illegals.



Well, I wonder why he is too? Maybe it's due to the fact that the immigration system in the U.S. is costly, takes years, and well, you're basically fucked if you don't already have family/friends here or have skills - and hell, add good luck while you're at it. Canada has an extremely well-drawn out immigration system that should seriously be considered in America - much easier and quicker.

Canada doesn't border a less developed country. That's why they don't really have immigration problems. Did that thought occur to you?


The legal immigration system needs to be reformed. Not the illegal system: if you come here you should be deported under any reform. I don't understand why the democrats refuse to enforce the border, and yet don't seem to want to try to make the legal immigration system easier! They had a political trifecta for two years...why didn't they do it then?

[Guillermo]

But my plan would be to deport the illegal immigrants, put them in line, have them pay a small $50 fine, and have them go through the system. After that, bring in all those who have been in the system and waiting patiently so they can get their opportunity. The jobs won't be great, and it may even be years before they get to where they want to be, but that's how the United States is supposed to work. You work your way from the bottom and go as far as you want. If you're an illegal immigrant who has already paid taxes and worked for years here in the United States, I would consider amnesty if you could pass the citizenship test and you can get off free and clear. But it's not known if all illegal immigrants pay taxes, so it's safe to assume there's a fair number that haven't. For those who never paid taxes, they pay a heavier fine if they were on government programs like Medicaid or Welfare.

It doesn't make sense to deport illegal immigrants who already pay taxes, though. Sure, yeah, if there are illegal immigrants who don't pay taxes and use government programs, then they should be deported. But most illegal immigrants do pay taxes. Why spend billions (after doing research I did indeed find out it costs billions upon billions instead of millions upon millions) deporting them when way less can be spent to give them citizenship?

This is a balanced approach to the problem. It won't be easy, but no one said completely overhauling an immigration system was easy in the first place. Simply giving amnesty to people who are unknown to deserve it or not is not the answer. As stated before, we did this in 1986 and it didn't change a thing. Instead, it increased the problem we already had. Giving amnesty should only be a last option and should never be used in such large amounts.

It wouldn't even be a problem if they were just granted citizenship. Simply having an open border would solve the problem even better, but that's another story. The bill in 1986 didn't work "per-say" because it didn't cover a new legal, easier, and quicker immigration system all together. No one could foresee that more immigrants wanted to get in - and would do it either legally or illegally - but mostly illegally. Especially since Mexico had extremely hard economic times in the early 90s and on up into the early 2000s. However, economic times seem to be getting better in Mexico and illegal immigrants reached a peak in 2006-2007 and are now slowly decreasing.

Canada doesn't border a less developed country. That's why they don't really have immigration problems. Did that thought occur to you?


The legal immigration system needs to be reformed. Not the illegal system: if you come here you should be deported under any reform. I don't understand why the democrats refuse to enforce the border, and yet don't seem to want to try to make the legal immigration system easier! They had a political trifecta for two years...why didn't they do it then?

But, if America had a more efficient immigration system, don't you think there would be less illegals? Throw in seasonal workers and you'd have even less illegals.

But why should you be deported if you're already paying taxes and a law abiding citizen (besides the law they broke when they came)? They came here because there was no other choice than to migrate illegally. If I'm desperate enough, I'm going to do whatever it takes to live and have better opportunities, even if I break a law.

[Slippers]

Utterly wrong! If you provide an amnesty for illegal immigrants then the message you send to others is too lenient and indicates that they will also be granted an amnesty should they wish to enter a country illegally.