I'md def. pro-immigration. I am not for letting anyone and everyone immigrate to the US, but our country's immigration policies are disgusting and unfairly discriminatory. Especially when it comes to ppl coming from the middle east. Just read some of the legislation that was recently passed... esp the patriot act. Get rid of Bush!
I'md def. pro-immigration. I am not for letting anyone and everyone immigrate to the US, but our country's immigration policies are disgusting and unfairly discriminatory. Especially when it comes to ppl coming from the middle east. Just read some of the legislation that was recently passed... esp the patriot act. Get rid of Bush!As for hispanics "taking advantage of the system," how could you expect them not to. The conditions in Mexico, for example, are horrendous, and if you have children, getting them to the US could literally save their lives.... Many hispanics are here in the US working very hard for a living, getting paid way below min wage (ie, not fully benefitng from "the system").
Is the complaint "immigration" or "illegal immigration"?Legal immigrants (my grandparents and father, for example) do some important things: pay taxes, register for the draft, and act like other citizens to support our country.Conversely, ILLEGAL immigrants take--but don't pay. Anong other problems.Now, there's a common and possibly correct argument that illegals perform work that must be done, but which cannot attract citizens due to low wages--migrant farm workers are an excellent example.Of course, there are some obvious counters to that argument.the first is cost. the benefits of farm workers picking grapes are unevenly distributed to farmers--or fruit-eaters, of you want to go farther down the economic chain. Yet migrants are relatively expensive to have in the country: they send kids to public schools, use emergency rooms, and eat up at least some public funds. It's not clear that the overall benefits exceed the costs.the second is impetus for change. Imagine this: no migrant workers. Well, a few things would likely happen--the salaries and living conditions given to farm workers would change for the better to attract employees. Eventually, the wages would get high enough that it would make sense for a jobless worker in Chicago to go grape picking (giving him/her a job is a side benefit). As a response, the price of grapes would rise. Some people would complain. But chances are the country would adapt.Conversely, the large population of workers willing to take jobs well below market keeps the market depriciated. If you wan tto give jobless citizens work, you have to keep them from being undercut by illegals.the third is control. Sadly, anti-immigration activists are viewed as racists. As a proponent of immigration limits, i'm not racist: I don't think we should let in too many uneducated people be they white or brown. The reality is, though, that most of the immigrat population is hispanic, and most of them are uneducted. that means that views such as mine are mistaken for racism, which they're not. back to control: It's a good thing for the future planning of the country if the government has some control over who comes here. Don't you think?We should have much stricter INS enforcement and immigration laws in place, including harsh fines or penalties to deter illegals. Doing so would allow us to increase the number of LEGAL immigrants from central and south america--and keeping them legal means we can help them, educate them, tax them, and generally make them productive members of the US instead of leeches who are just trying to make money that they will take out of the country.