When I was looking into genealogy a year ago, I looked into how they naturalized in the late 1800s. If I am remembering correctly, after being in the US for 5 years the ancestors went to the local courthouse or county seat, said a pledge and that was all. No expensive paperwork.
That is very true and you are completely correct. The flip side to it is that instead of getting the hardworking family people, we are left with people who actually are criminals and people who for reasons of choice and ability, will not be self-supporting for generations. It isn’t true in actuality that illegal immigrants don’t cost taxpayers, they do. It’s balanced when the population includes more hard workers and fewer not hard workers, but the balance is flipping.
“I was talking to a friend the other day. She commented on how easy it was for her teenage son to get a summer job this year compared to her other sons. She has 4 sons aged btween 16 and 25. She attributed it to the immigration crackdown.”
She can attribute it to that, but that is also leaving out that the economy has improved enough that the unemployment rate has dropped. A lot of the jobs kids would pick up over the summer were being taken by people who couldn’t find anything else, and this is likely the first summer that isn’t true, people are finding better jobs elsewhere that pay better.
That isn’t to say that illegal immigrants haven’t hurt some sectors of the economy, in construction day laborers have replaced a lot of jobs in the industry (yeah, I have heard contractors claim they can’t get good people, no one wants to do it, but that is bs…by hiring day laborers they bill the work out at full pay and pay the laborers cash at like 8-10 bucks an hour, no payroll taxes, no workmen’s comp insurance , and many of them don’t pay the laborers or pay them less than they are supposed to, and basically tell them “I dare you to go to the cops”). The current crackdown only makes it better for the employers, it gives workers even less leverage if they are afraid of being deported. I think it tells a great deal of the story that congress has refused to impose stringent penalties on people hiring illegal immigrants and they don’t pressure point worksites routinely using them like construction sites, landscapers and the like.
No surprise. Much of immigration politics has an undercurrent of race/ethnicity, which makes it a hot button issue. Many of those who rail about illegal immigration are unenthusiastic about the idea of simplifying and increasing legal immigration (to reduce bureaucratic mistakes leading to illegal immigration status, reduce the incentive to try to immigrate illegally, and simplify enforcement of immigration laws) because their real motivation is to keep America mostly white.
Sure, there will always be some instances where law enforcement officials look the other way or make mistakes, but the US government’s official stance on illegal immigration is, and has always been ‘don’t do it’.
And yet this type of thing happens quite regularly to a lot of people. Suppose you want to make renovations to your home… you acquire your permit… you make your renovations… an inspector signs off on it… 10 years later you go to sell your home… buyer pays for an inspection and finds the structure you built is not to code. Is it the state’s fault for making bad structural regulations, or is it the inspectors fault for not enforcing the regulations?
Poor enforcement of the law is a human problem; It does not change the fact that the law is the law.
Wouldn’t emulating Canada mean allowing more immigration, since about 20% of Canada’s population is foreign born, versus 13% of the US population.
Yes, the Canada point system for employment or skill based immigration is much simpler than the US overcomplicated system. Canada also has family and refugee categories.
OK, this is the second time on this thread you have used that argument. Kind of like Godwin’s law - in any discussion about immigration, someone will be called a racist.
How about we agree to stipulate that there are racists, perverts, thieves, heroes, and philanthropists on both sides of any political or economic issue, and that we’ll stick to the discussion of the issue instead of calling names?
Agreed, but it would also be a big loss for the poor, unskilled, non-English speaking immigrants… the same immigrants one political group is most concerned with protecting. Canada’s system is very much built around the idea of ‘what can you bring to the table?’. It’s a highly practical, fair, and commonsense-oriented system.
Is it too difficult for fragile snowflakes to read that some people in the immigration debate, including those who make a “textbook definition of a racist comment”, are likely motivated by racism?
At that point, perhaps their home countries will start to be concerned with the protection of these needy people, and activists will start making demands of those countries that will prevent dangerous passages, human trafficking and the destruction of families and communities. Working with them as I do, I hear many say that they would have preferred to stay at home in their own countries/communities/families/cultures/weather and have access to education and opportunities. It’s just so wrong to never consider the actual needs and wishes of the human beings involved here. It’s also very wrong to allow their struggle and suffering to enrich the actual racists - the elites of their own countries who are happy to push out their own indigenous people for their own profit and security.
I think that there are racists on both sides of the debate. In fact, on any issue about which you feel strongly, there are plenty of racists that agree with you. And plenty who don’t. It’s not a useful argument,
The 'but who will be our maids and nannies" people are if not racist, certainly elitist, wanting to keep bringing in poor people so they can get cheap labor so they don’t have to clean their own toilets.
My cleaning people, who are Brazilian (and I have no idea if they are legal or not, although they have gone back to Brazil and returned multiple times) make about $25/hour.
Am I part of the problem? Am I taking advantage of someone? Seems like a pretty good wage to me for scrubbing toilets.
Sure it’s a good wage. Is it enough to make a dangerous crossing for? $25 for housecleaning is certainly enough money to make it a job that Americans will do.
Is it personally your fault? No. But until there is reform in all countries involved, anyone can be part of the problem. I think I am, but I don’t have a better answer. I support the people who are here because they are here and they are human beings, but the process of enabling illegal immigration is part of the problem.
I know a student who came to the states because the gangs in his city were threatening his life if he didn’t join. Thousands of young girls and women have disappeared into being trafficked.
I think it is a bit disingenuous to say that if only they had stayed put, they could have become activists and created real change in their countries.
I am not even going to get into the history of the US interfering in other countries and how we helped to create this situation.