<p>
</p>
<p>If I were offered the choice to purchase food and other consumer goods NOT harvested/produced by illegal immigrant labor, I would gladly pay a premium for it.</p>
<p>We need legislation that requires enforcement of our lawsl, eliminates free education (with no child left behind) to non legal residents, eliminates use of public resources by those who are not legally here…this includes the use of our parks, our schools, our emergency rooms (without paying for it), we need to remove all of the entitlements they come here for. If in fact they come to harvest our crops and I would venture to say that less than 5 % do, they certainly deserve special class of benefits. They should register as a guest migrant worker, pay taxes and receive benefits. Any who are not here legally as such should be entitled to absolutely NOTHING. The millions of babies dropped here by illegals should not have citizenship either. That is my humble opinion. The immigration rules are strict for a reason: immunizations-- to protect us all from disease (why are we seeing a rise in hep A and B, whooping cough, polio, tuberculosis etc.? ) Sponsorship–the sponsors insur e that the immigrant will be employed, be housed and not end up on our welfare rolls…background checks–infiltration by those who would do us harm. etc. </p>
<p>Why are a certain group of high living privileged senators and representatives so eager to throw all of these protections aside? They will benefit somehow.</p>
<p>I am far more sensitive to the darfur/sudan plight than i am to illegals who seek a better life. </p>
<p>Wake up america you have been invaded and colonized by mexico…from the words of one of their own…overheard in atlanta
“we colonized the world, we are just taking back what is ours.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are many well-informed people on this board with first-hand experience regarding the impact of illegal immigration on our immediate communities.</p>
<p>I can’t speak to the factory part of it, but I can tell you from experience that illegal immigration has had a major negative impact on hospitals and public education in California. I welcome anyone to dispute this with facts to the contrary.</p>
<p>Bay, you would be in a small minority.</p>
<p>“Bay, you would be in a small minority.”</p>
<p>A small minority of what?</p>
<p>^^ my question exactly, zm.</p>
<p>A small minority willing to pay higher prices if illegal labor is not used in products–see above post #61</p>
<p>Once people start getting educated about how much alternatively they are paying by virtue of taxation (services, schools) & by virtue of wage standards for legal employees, they will realize how much <em>more</em> they are paying for those than for the anticipated differential for any legal-vs.illegal field hand.</p>
<p>I agree with epiphany, and take it even further. </p>
<p>Forget the tax-cost math, many people will pay that premium as a result of looking around their communities and seeing the toll it has taken on available medical services, their kids’ overburdened and underperforming public schools, traffic, ghetto-ization of former lower-income neighborhoods, neighbors they cannot even converse with in English, trashed public parks and beaches, … I could go on but I won’t.</p>
<p>Hanna’s first hand experience described in post 31 reveals another fact about the prevail flawed system; it’s absolutely biased. Ask anyone waiting to immigrate from Haiti or the Dominican Republic whether or not it’s easy to legally move to the U.S.</p>
<p>Barrons, I think the American’s atitudes are changing, such that folks might agree that paying [reasonably] more is the price we pay for societal stabiity. I mean, it’s arguable, but look at the prevailing wage movement, for example. Also, state and municipal governments seek to force entities like Wal-Mart to offer a minimum standard of worker benefits.</p>
<p>^^ = Another very important point made by LW.</p>
<p>A certain degree of stability is central to a well-run society. Predictability is an element of that stability. Knowing that there’s an effective government in charge is another important point. Both essential elements are sacrificed when the governmental attitude toward immigration is passive.</p>
<p>It is <em>because</em> we acknowledge that immigration is an important reality in our society, that we support the basic concept of immigration in the context of assimilation, that a conscious plan is essential. To me, the current proposed bill says, “We, the leaders, give up.” It says that we are willing to be controlled by outside forces and accept no global responsibility to attempt to help shape those.</p>
<p>“The millions of babies dropped here by illegals should not have citizenship either.”</p>
<p>I think that if you don’t like the fact that folks other than yourself are citizens by virtue of the same law and Constitution that makes you one, you should find yourself another country.</p>
<p>What I don’t like is people who ignore the rule of law. I don’t think anyone should benefit from breaking the law. Like robbing a bank and keeping the the loot.</p>
<p>BTW, i totally agree with the poster who said that some of us have personally witnessed the negative effects of unbridled immigration by illegals.
Our subgroups at our h.s. have routinely failed to perform. THey come to school long enough to get the paperwork to get a Drivers permit and then quit. THey never study. They don’t want to learn, but the law requires them to be there to get the permit. So two laws bite us in the butt, the no child left behind that requires the school to bring these subgroups up to performing…making many illiterate in their native tongue literate in ours…and then the stupid driving laws that require attendance certificates.</p>
<p>Our hospitals in areas highlyt concentrated with illegals are SHUTTING DOWN b/c they have no paying customers. The state can pay all of the cost either and so the hospitals have to absorb it. It does not make financial sense to operate in an area where no one has income that is reported and seldom is a dime paid for any treatment. If you dont see the tidal wave approaching from this immigration bill, it will be a tsu nami of epic proportions. Find some high ground.</p>
<p>Laws are made to be updated to new realities. When they wrote the Constitution it took months to get to the US by any means. Now that can be done in hours.
The prevailing wage movement is a creation of the unions and others with little stake in actually paying the wages and making a business work. And the same collection of folks are behind the Wal-Mart attacks. Wal-mart pays better than welfare last time I checked. That’s the fair comparison. Most of these Wal-Mart people were already getting government healthcare-it just got moved from one program to another.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The actual quote might have been:
</p>
<p>By the way, Altmom, please excuse anything Mini says. He’s been anti-american even when he was on government board.</p>
<p>The truth seems to be, as said by many posters, is that the US is going to legalize illegals that we, the middle class, supprort, while current citizens are feeling the effect by a downward spiraling of wages and benefits, as well as a loss of qualty education and health care facilities while we support them. </p>
<p>They are here at the invitation of the governmnet for big business to make more profits. Do you realize how much business owners save not having to pay Soc Sec, unemployment taxes or benefits, as well as paying lower wages? The evasion of Soc Sec and unemployment taxes can be as much as up to 15% of wages in some states that get paid out. This is a huge chunk of money to save. by hiring illegeas and not having accountability. Do the math on even $1 million of wages a year, let alone $10-20 million a year. This money and lower wages drive the hiring of illegals. What happened to the required I-9 forms and accountability?</p>
<p>I just don’t understand where the Congressional leaders get the “70% mandate from the American people” to pass this bill? </p>
<p>I would say, built the fence around the entire border, strengthen all border checks, have people return home to their countries and apply for admission here, and then reevaluate the needs and the social services. </p>
<p>Would that mean some of us would have to mow our own lawns? Pay slightly more for peaches? I would make the adjustment, if the citizens here could find decent jobs again.</p>
<p>The other thing would be that when the illegals apply for readmission into the US, they must be required to have health screenings and criminal checks. The health screenings should include TB tests and chest x-rays, as well as proof that immunizations are up-to-date. If they need immunizations, then they would have to pay for them, or the public health system in the outgoing country, since it is in the best interest of a country like Mexico to export workers here. </p>
<p>I would say no entry until all entrants are up-to-date on shots and TB status is verified. Otherwise we have to pay for this as US taxpayers. It’s hard enough to afford immunizations for citizens in this country, and costs the US governments a huge amount every year to immunize kids. (But of course now immigrants’ kids can get free shots in the US through the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program.)</p>
<p>As for criminal checks, this is fairly routine for most jobs, and could be built into their immigration/guest worker requirement.</p>
<p>I just do not see why or how these illegals are currently exempt from this type of screening.</p>
<p>Barrons, I misspoke. I meant to say “living wage.”</p>
<p>In any event, I don’t know if unions instigated such advocacy and the holier-than-thou advocacy of some ‘living wage’ supporters is grating, but I’ve read arguments for it from charitable organizations as well from persons who know something about public finance. I don’t knock WalMart just because it’s big and successful. I do believe that there’s a price to pay by companies like WalMart whom at times demand pubic subsidies (road infrastructure, zoning breaks, etc.) and other outright grants from the city treasury, but then pay low wages (for even longtime and seasoned workers) and “encourage” their low paid employees to apply for public benefits, again essentially raiding the city treasury, so to speak.</p>