<p>“Where are the innovators more interested in exporting practical expertise to overseas locations & encouraging the initiatives therein?”</p>
<p>You mean like NAFTA? Before NAFTA, there was no flood of immigrants from southern Mexico and Central America. The U.S. was just not that attractive, at least not attractive enough for people to leave the land they had worked for centuries and head north toward an uncertain future. It wasn’t the pull of the U.S. that brought millions across the borders beginning in the mid-90s, it was the push of “initiatives” that made life untenable.</p>
<p>Nope. Go check your data. You might have had some overflow cheap labor from northern Mexico, but other than El Salvadoran refugees fleeing war and oppression, there just weren’t that many.</p>
<p>We in fact have some families who came across in the mid-to-late 80s to the apple orchards and stone fruit areas. Most have settled out. Some used the money earned to buy their own places in Mexico, and have left to go back permanently. Others have kids who became professionals (there are literally two of them working on this floor of my office, including the current president of the National Treatment Network). But the numbers were just never very large, which is also why Reagan felt quite comfortable giving them amnesty.</p>
<p>I also believe that the USA should have an official language and it should be English.
That being said, I am married to an immigrant, who chose to move to this country at the age of 18. He did not come here with his family.
He is severely dyslexic, and a functioning illiterate. Very few people know that about him, and would be shocked if they DID know.
Still, he learned the language by immersing himself in our culture, not by expecting anyone to accomodate him in any way. ( except for those closest to him )
He fully supports assimilation and learning of the English language, even though it was very difficult for him to learn it.</p>
<p>I absolutely agree that after moving to the country where you plan to live for a long time you should do your best to learn the language. I did that, H did that, all our Russian-speaking friends did that. The exception should be made for older people. It becomes increasingly harder to learn after a person turns 55 or so. I still think that just-learning-English parents would do their kids no good by speaking broken accented English at home. I don’t think it will speed up the learning process in any way .</p>
<p>I agree parabella…and I don’t think anyone would expect an older person to learn the language as they would a younger person.
My mother in law speaks no English, but then she only visits for a few weeks every year…my father in law, makes attempts and it shows
I work alongside Russian J-1’s every yr… they all start out barely being able to put a sentance together , but by the end of summer it is remarkable how their language skills progress, as long as they are willing to learn and not limit themselves to only speaking amongst the other guest workers</p>
I can check my data easily by looking around me. This area is filled with illegals and was before NAFTA as well. I have them knocking on my door every week looking for trabajo. They’re standing in certain areas waiting to be picked up for work, living in canyons across the street, filling the emergency rooms in the area, etc. This was all there before NAFTA - really.</p>
<p>I volunteer to teach reading and writing to many illegal immigrants. I was amazed to learn from them how many would very much prefer to make a living at home in their own countries. I always assumed that they just wanted to be here, but many would stay at home if they saw any way to do so. Among many other problems I have with illegal immigration is that we are allowing Mexico, et al. to continue to ehtnically cleanse their countries across our border AND allowing families to be destroyed back in those home countries. I sincerely believe that when there are large groups of unattached young males, trouble follows like the night the day. (I understand that other parts of the country have illegal immigrant populations that skew to families, but that is less the case here in terms of the proportion). It’s really time for Mexico to provide for its own people and to become a real partner to the US. I support enforcing laws that will make it dificult for illegals to stay here. I’ve recently seen some data that shows just what a drain they are on the economy and on our educational system. It’s enough now.</p>
<p>“It’s really time for Mexico to provide for its own people and to become a real partner to the US.”</p>
<p>They were, pretty much, until NAFTA pretty much destroyed centuries-old local communities and economies by opening up land and “opportunities” for exploitation by U.S.-based capitalists (and their Mexican partners.) Before that, there was cheap overflow labor from northern Mexico (yes, they did go to San Diego), but for 10 years I worked on migrant labor issues for the state, and I don’t think I EVER met a single family or immigrant from southern Mexico or the northern parts of Central America that arrived in this country before NAFTA.</p>
<p>Al Gore and Bill Clinton created the current situation - blaming the victims who had no other place to go doesn’t get us anywhere. (And, yes, send them all back - not that it could be done - but send him all back, and Social Security will completely collapse.)</p>
This is true for many of them and in fact, the term ‘illegal immigrants’ is a misnomer. For many the term should be ‘illegal migrant’. A lot of them send their money, often wages paid in cash with no tax withheld from it, back to their home countries.</p>
<p>Maybe more of these young, energetic, and hard-working people should stay in their countries and help fix the problems there so they don’t feel the need to seek opportunities in our country and breaking laws and breaking up their families in the process. </p>
<p>Given that, I do think that a certain symbiotic opportunity exists for both the USA and our bordering third-world countries if the USA would implement a well thought out and realistic guest worker program to allow for an adequate number of ‘legal’ migrant and immigrant workers to the mutual benefit of both countries.</p>
<p>"Al Gore and Bill Clinton created the current situation - blaming the victims who had no other place to go doesn’t get us anywhere. "</p>
<p>Do you feel that the government of Mexico has any responsibility to its poorest and least educated citizens? I am seriously asking for your opinion on that because I don’t recall ever reading it.</p>
<p>In this entire debate, I have not seen anybody talk about the strongest argument: the argument from morality. How is it immoral for somebody to travel and take a job? It’s not. Hence, any and all immigration should be welcomed.</p>
<p>“It’s not. Hence, any and all immigration should be welcomed”</p>
<p>No. There is a case to be made that knowingly breaking a law is immoral. There is also the case to be made that it is immoral to disenfranchise native-born blacks in terms of employment. There is also the case that it’s immoral to take taxpayer money to support people in this country illegally. There’s also the case that it’s immoral to have an entire population spread throughout the country of whom no background is known and vaccination is not a sure thing. THere’s also the case that it’s immoral to knowingly support ethnic cleansing and the destruction of families.</p>
<p>I don’t think we’ll have to worry about illegal immigration much longer. George Bush is making sure our economy is so weak no one will want to come here ;)</p>
<p>“There is a case to be made that knowingly breaking a law is immoral.”</p>
<p>You and I both know that the law is not based on morals.</p>
<p>“There is also the case to be made that it is immoral to disenfranchise native-born blacks in terms of employment.”</p>
<p>You and I both know that granting rights to people based on their place of birth is ridiculous.</p>
<p>“There is also the case that it’s immoral to take taxpayer money to support people in this country illegally.”</p>
<p>You and I both know that is an argument against those taxpayer-funded programs, not against the people who use those programs.</p>
<p>“There’s also the case that it’s immoral to have an entire population spread throughout the country of whom no background is known and vaccination is not a sure thing”</p>
<p>So if somebody lives somewhere and nobody knows anything about him, is he immoral?</p>
<p>Vaccination is not based on morality either. What ethical code supports such a thing?</p>
<p>“THere’s also the case that it’s immoral to knowingly support ethnic cleansing and the destruction of families.”</p>
<p>Ethnic cleansing? What does that have to do with immigration?</p>
<p>How do immigrants destroy families, something which is not a right in the first place?</p>
<p>“Do you feel that the government of Mexico has any responsibility to its poorest and least educated citizens? I am seriously asking for your opinion on that because I don’t recall ever reading it.”</p>
<p>In theory, or in practice? In practice, Mexico is a client state of the United States, much like the United States is a client state of Saudi Arabia (and, soon enough, China). Like its patron, the Mexican government has embraced “neo-liberalism”, and the “trickle-down” idea that goes with. But governments are only tools of corporate socialists, and corporate socialists embrace both the forces that pushed millions of southern Mexicans off their lands, and the forces that exploit them and their labor power once they arrive here. </p>
<p>So it’s not question of “feeling”; it is a matter of understanding what is.</p>
<p>Afruf23, you have no idea what I know so don’t speak for me.</p>
<p>I believe in the concept of a sovereign nation. You don’t, that’s fine, but don’t twist my words.</p>
<p>Morality is a personal thing. I made arguments based on my view of morality and you did the same. Your views are no more valid than mine. In case you’re not being disingenuous, Mexico is cleansing itself of its Indian minorities. It’s not the tall, light-skinned Spanish descendants who cross the border. I work with illegal immigrants and they are the first to tell you that having their men here and women and children there destroys families. Not too complicated.</p>
<p>"So it’s not question of “feeling”; it is a matter of understanding what is. "</p>
<p>I don’t agree (surprise!). I don’t think the government of Mexico is even attentive enough to its poor for trickle-down to come into play. I think the elite in Mexico affirmatively wants the poor to leave Mexico and send back their remittances.</p>
<p>Well, I am showing how your views of morality/ethics are inconsistent. That is why they are not valid. If you do not believe that to be the case, then prove the case for sovereignty.</p>
<p>If you’re against ethnic cleansing, can you please explain how curbing immigration will fix that problem in particular. Thanks! (note: that is not sarcastic)</p>