|Sent on:||Sunday, February 3, 2013 2:17 PM|
Mike, +1 all around; again it’s nice to see people defending actual liberty.
Leigh – Agreed that “We have this problem because of government policy.” Your “therefore”, though is all screwed up. If we have this problem because of government policy, then the right solution is to FIX that government policy. NOT to punish and restrict OTHER people for it. It is NOT “up to employers not to make it worse”. It is not just “technically” a right to hire whom you want. It is up to US to fix what’s wrong and do what’s right. Which is to directly address the government’s policies – OUR government’s policies – and not to make it worse by cracking down on working people and employers instead of fixing the real causes of the problem.
Which brings us back to Ken – the big discussion about what the real cause of problems are is important, because if you don’t identify the root causes, you can’t effectively correct the problem.
And we DON’T all “agree that illegal immigration is a problem”. I don’t agree that illegal immigration is a problem. I believe that immigration, legal or not, is a net benefit to this country, even under the current screwed-up system; and that fixing our own stupid policies on immigration itself, on welfare and socialism, on papers and people tracking and having to get government permission to run your own lives, would make that far more beneficial.
Our borders (note: not boarders, BTW) should be open-ish. I think it is reasonable to have the border entries monitored to check ID of people entering and leaving. Any honest person wanting to enter and peaceably exist should have a low barrier to entry. Not *none*, but a simple background check for criminal record, and a test for TB or other public health hazards, would be adequate – takes about 2 weeks and charge about $250. That’s a high enough barrier to know what’s happening, and a low enough one that any legitimate person would do that instead of sneaking in. And then the only people who would be trying to enter illegally would be the much smaller number who do intend harmful activity, and those would be much EASIER to spot and catch entering illegally.
As for jobs, economics is not a zero-sum game. More people working and creating wealth increases the size and richness of the whole system. What reduces it and causes unemployment is unproductiveness – government burdens, over-taxation, over-regulation, socialism, rewarding the unproductive, those who take and do not contribute. Every major wave of immigration to this country has resulted in an economic boom, as the economy grows and more people do more useful work. If we want to reduce unemployment, we need to fight against the CAUSES of unemployment – again, primarily our own government – and not waste our energy squabbling over who gets the biggest piece of whatever scraps that government allows us to keep.
Meanwhile, shutting down the giveaway programs would solve not just the issue of any immigrants freeloading from the system, but also the even bigger problem of Americans doing the same. Again, it’s the socialism that is the root cause; stop the government from taking from some to give it away to others, and you solve the real problem.
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Mike Benoit wrote:
It case you missed it I favor freedom and a system that secures individual
rights not some collective view of rights. I favor people being able to come
into my home as long as they are invited by one of the residents and that they
mean no harm. I favor the idea that jobs belong to those who have them to give
not some mobocracy.
I don't favor socialism by punishing those who defend themselves against it by hiring whom they wish to hire. I don't favor the argument that you can't stop socialism so lets stop work.
I am afraid you don't consider what anyone has to say as being a contribution to the discussion unless they agree with you.
I am sick and tired of folks who think they can dictate to others who they hire or not hire or do what they will with the labeling of their products.
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Leigh Skinner wrote:
We have this problem because of government policy. Therefore, it
is up to employers not to make it worse by bypassing Americans in favor of
another country's peoples. While employers technically have the right to
hire whom they want, they will make their country a wasteland by doing
what our government controllers want them to do, break America so it
can be ushered into the North American Union and then into the New
World Order. See how your liberty will be then. Leigh
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Mike Benoit wrote:
Yea why try to find out the cause (place the blame) just add more fuel
to the fire. Punish employers for doing what they have a right to do. That will
work as we know our wonderful social programs will never be eliminated as the
thing wrong with them is the wrong sort of people are getting the plunder.
This is so funny close borders brought us millions of illegals where when we had open borders a lot less. With open borders migrant workers went home after payday most all won.
Those jobs they come for won't be handle by those who benefit from all the wonderful socialist programs to not work. So lets punish the producers more.
At 2:46 AM 2/1/2013, Ken Costanzo wrote:
>Why the big discussion on where to place the blame? In fact, there's plenty of blame to go around. If we agree that illegal immigration is a problem, we can discuss the best way to solve the problem.
>Some seem to be saying that we should cancel all social service programs because they serve a magnet for illegals to come here. First of all, it's a waste of time to talk about this because it isn't going to happen. In addition, even if all social service programs were cancelled we would still have a problem with illegal immigration because the biggest magnet is jobs. Making the use of E-Verify mandatory is something that can be done and it would solve most of the problem. In fact, it's probably the only way we can effectively address this problem.
>If someone wants to argue in favor of open boarders, they should argue for open boarders on the merits of this issue instead of arguing against measures to deal with this problem or talking about who is to blame.