NationStates Jolt Archive

Do this IN SEQUENCE:

1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with
both parents who are presently citizens.

2) Hermetically seal the border with Mexico AND Canada (and every other
country as well).

3) All immigrants without legal status (on US territory) have 14 days to get
a "green card" allowing them to remain in the US for 10 years or until they are
found to NOT have been working for more than 200 total days in that 10
years (via a registry of employment).

4) ALL police agencies shall be duty bound to ascertain the citizenship status
of ALL persons they come into working contact with. If that status is "non-
citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

5) ALL government (Local/State/Federal) agencies are to require proof of
citizenship status of anyone who wishes to obtain their services. If that
status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

6) ALL employers shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL prospective and
current employees, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder",
that person is deported.

7) ALL healthcare facilities shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL
persons seeking assistance, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard
holder", that person is duly assisted and then immediately deported.

8) ALL persons with greencards shall remain within the boundaries of the US
for all but 200 days total for 10 years. Otherwise immediately deported.

9) ALL persons with greencards shall otherwise be treated exactly like a
naturalized US citizen but for the above conditions.

10) ALL persons who have within 10 years:
-- Learned a mimimal proficiency of English,
-- Taken the "necessary coursework" for citizenship,
-- Satisfied the above conditions,
..shall be granted citizenship.

11) ALL persons who have not achieved citizenship within 10 years is
immediately relieved of the use of their greencard and deported when found.



Possible refinement(s): (I may add to this..)

*) Establish an island "holding facility" in the arctic for deportees who wish
NOT to go back to their (actual or assigned) countries of origin.


Whatch think..? :)


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

Please explain what closing the borders is going to accomplish besides create MORE illegal immigration. If we are really the "land of opportunity" it should be the opportune nation to move to dont you think?

im to lazy to critique all of it, so i will do just this one



1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with
both parents who are presently citizens.


sounds good, that way an illegal woman cant come over as she is pregnent and give birth here and then be safe to stay.

BUT...

i would rather it be both parents must be here legally, not necesarily citizens. or even one is to be a citizen.

Mmmm ridiculous immigration policies. Smacks of the twenties to me, and they weren't that good a time in the USA.

well I don't think learning English would be necessary seeing as how Spanish is pretty much a second language in the U.S also I think that the police will turn a blind eye to illegal immigrants no matter how many times you tell them

What I propose is open immigration so long as they just fill in some paperwork like a census so you can tell how many people there are mad as it sounds I doubt it will actually affect much other than maybe a immigrants being treated as human beings (yeah I'm wearing a white shirt:) )

Also note how tourists may be confused as being illegal immigrants in the wording of some of those proposals.

Tourist enters healthcare facility due to accident, is treated, then it is noticed that he is not a citizen, so he is deported after treatment... despite that he might have actually meant to stay for another month or two.

For example...

are you kidding me? If I went to switzerland and said "Hi, I'm going to come here illegially. I am going to leech off of your healthcare system and work for less money than one of your citizens while not paying taxes. And, when you finally do allow me to stay, I want to you to change all your road signs, governmental publications, and ballots into my native language." they'd laugh me out of the country!

Please explain what closing the borders is going to accomplish besides create MORE illegal immigration. If we are really the "land of opportunity" it should be the opportune nation to move to dont you think?

That's just it, we're really not a "land of opportunity" any more. We reached the saturation point when it comes to the amount of new immigrants we can accept.

are you kidding me? If I went to switzerland and said "Hi, I'm going to come here illegially. I am going to leech off of your healthcare system and work for less money than one of your citizens while not paying taxes. And, when you finally do allow me to stay, I want to you to change all your road signs, governmental publications, and ballots into my native language." !

I don't know about Switzerland, but that very scenario has happened in Sweden.

That's just it, we're really not a "land of opportunity" any more. We reached the saturation point when it comes to the amount of new immigrants we can accept.

What saturation point? We all came from immigration. Is there a limit somewhere in the constitution that I am missing?

What saturation point? We all came from immigration. Is there a limit somewhere in the constitution that I am missing?

Not in the Constitution, but economically. We just can't afford to take in any more people. The days when there was sufficient land and jobs for all newcomers is long over.

I'll take what I said a step further: If I went to any number of islamic countries (i'll take iran for this one), and demanded that they build me a church so I can worship Jesus, they'd probably just shoot me.

Please explain what closing the borders is going to accomplish besides create MORE illegal immigration. If we are really the "land of opportunity" it should be the opportune nation to move to dont you think?

Closing the borders means,.. CLOSING THE BORDERS,.. or to (apparently)
translate the english, it means NOT LETTING ANYONE INTO THE COUNTRY.

We are the "Land of Opportunity" NOT because we allow everyone who wants
in IN, which we DON'T by the way, but because we have set up a "culture" if
you will, where you don't have to be of a particular faith, color or caste-
family affiliation to FIND opportunity to better yourself and your family.

Please tell me how closing the borders "hermetically" (I didn't say it would be
EASY) would create more illegal immigration than having a completely open
permeable border..?

-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

Why are you trying to make things even tougher for immigrants? Immigrants aren't horrible, nasty people trying to take over your country. They're people who want to make a better life for themselves and their families. You should be flattered when they choose your nation.

im to lazy to critique all of it, so i will do just this one

1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with
both parents who are presently citizens.

sounds good, that way an illegal woman cant come over as she is pregnent and give birth here and then be safe to stay.

BUT...

i would rather it be both parents must be here legally, not necesarily citizens. or even one is to be a citizen.

That actually makes more sense. But how about this,.. The child is given
a "kids greencard" (revoked only if BOTH the "greencard" parents are
deported) and later full citizenship once the parents have become citizens
themselves.

Comments? :)


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

If you close the border hermetically, won't people asfixiate?

Mmmm ridiculous immigration policies. Smacks of the twenties to me, and they weren't that good a time in the USA.

The crux of the matter is to actually make the border impermeable, which is
admittedly EXTREMELY difficult.

Check the immigration policies of other countries in the world. Then we'll talk
about "ridiculous" immigration policies.


-Clamato

are you kidding me? If I went to switzerland and said "Hi, I'm going to come here illegially. I am going to leech off of your healthcare system and work for less money than one of your citizens while not paying taxes. And, when you finally do allow me to stay, I want to you to change all your road signs, governmental publications, and ballots into my native language." they'd laugh me out of the country!

um...wouldn't you have to include the whole working thing and you’ know taxes on your pay check, house and such also if the majority of people already speak your native language (and don't speak a word of Swiss)

Why are you trying to make things even tougher for immigrants? Immigrants aren't horrible, nasty people trying to take over your country. They're people who want to make a better life for themselves and their families. You should be flattered when they choose your nation.

I personally have nothing against immigrants. Immigrants are good, upstanding members of society who are willing to work hard to, one day, assimilate into the country, just as my great great grandfather did before me. Illegal immigrants on the other hand...

Also note how tourists may be confused as being illegal immigrants in the wording of some of those proposals.

Tourist enters healthcare facility due to accident, is treated, then it is noticed that he is not a citizen, so he is deported after treatment... despite that he might have actually meant to stay for another month or two.

For example...

Tourists have passports.

That's why countries make their citizens get them when they want to travel
abroad.


-Clamato

I personally have nothing against immigrants. Immigrants are good, upstanding members of society who are willing to work hard to, one day, assimilate into the country, just as my great great grandfather did before me. Illegal immigrants on the other hand...

And why are illegal immigrants illegal? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US gov't makes it awfully difficult for people to gain citizenship.

This would mean I am not a citizen. My Irish grandfather was never a citizen, thus - by your policy - my mother would not be a citizen and, therefore, I am not a citizen.

To your policy I'm going to say .......... no.

At what point did I support the border controls of anywhere else?

I personally think that the whole world should have open borders, simply because everyone on this planet's a human.

And making a completely impermiable border is utterly impossible for the USA.

Are you really suggesting walling around everywhere, to the extent of destroying your ports on the off chance that people get in there?

Because if you really wanted an impermiable border you'd have to do that, as well as putting SAM batteries pretty much everywhere to make sure that nobody got in illegally.

Would there be a gate that immigrants came in through?

Would they arrive by plane?

What about via ships?

Submarines, maybe?

We are the "Land of Opportunity" NOT because we allow everyone who wants
in IN, which we DON'T by the way, but because we have set up a "culture" if
you will, where you don't have to be of a particular faith, color or caste-
family affiliation to FIND opportunity to better yourself and your family.

Well by closing the borders, youre gonna have to be white america to seek the so-called "opportunity", which sort of eliminates the whole "you dont have to be of a particular faith, color, or caste-family affiliation" thing.

Please tell me how closing the borders "hermetically" (I didn't say it would be
EASY) would create more illegal immigration than having a completely open
permeable border..?

We aren't supposed to let anyone in "illegaly" yet here are 12 million people that have done it.

Why are you trying to make things even tougher for immigrants? Immigrants aren't horrible, nasty people trying to take over your country. They're people who want to make a better life for themselves and their families. You should be flattered when they choose your nation.

I love immigrants.

I don't like criminals.

People who break our laws by entering the country through impproper (and
illegal) ways are not immigrants, they are criminal foreign nationals invading a
sovereign country.

If it weren't so easy for them to become criminals, by the path of least
resistance provided so magnanimously by the US government, by simply
walking across the border and getting jobs and having children to "anchor"
them to US soil, them they might develop some ways to both improve
conditions in their own countries and/or come to the US by legal means and
be a part of the greatest "attractor nation" of all time..!


-Clamato

If you close the border hermetically, won't people asfixiate?

Uh,.. no.

There's lots of air in the US. Probably last us,... another several hundred
years. If we get rid of those "suck" too much, of course.

Do YOU suck.. alot, I mean..! 'Cause if you DO..... well....


-Clamato

People who break our laws by entering the country through impproper (and
illegal) ways are not immigrants, they are criminal foreign nationals invading a
sovereign country.

And so, even though they pose no threat to you at all, this argument alone makes you want to kick out every illegal immigrant? What are you afraid of?

I love immigrants.

I don't like criminals.


You ever driven 60 in a 55?

My grandfather was never a citizen. Answer my allegations that your policy proves that *I* am not a citizen. Where would you deport me to?

I love immigrants.

I don't like criminals.

People who break our laws by entering the country through impproper (and
illegal) ways are not immigrants, they are criminal foreign nationals invading a
sovereign country.

If it weren't so easy for them to become criminals, by the path of least
resistance provided so magnanimously by the US government, by simply
walking across the border and getting jobs and having children to "anchor"
them to US soil, them they might develop some ways to both improve
conditions in their own countries and/or come to the US by legal means and
be a part of the greatest "attractor nation" of all time..!


-Clamato

See post #21.

Originally Posted by Mer des Ennuis
I personally have nothing against immigrants. Immigrants are good, upstanding members of society who are willing to work hard to, one day, assimilate into the country, just as my great great grandfather did before me. Illegal immigrants on the other hand...

And why are illegal immigrants illegal? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US gov't makes it awfully difficult for people to gain citizenship.

Is it worthwhile to gain US citizenship?

If it were easier to gai n US citizenship by "legal" means than by "illegal"
means, wouldn't more people do so legally?

The trick is to make it harder to do so illegally, and easier to do legally.

What I'm proposing is the "make it harder to do so illegally" part.

I haven't addressed the "make it easier to do so legally" part.

Once those who are "dependent" on now-illegals find that their supply has
been shut off, they will work (hard!) to make immigrating legally MUCH easier.

But NOTHING will change as long as the supply of illegals is full tap on..!!


Why is it people who LOVE to say, "CONSERVE oil and create a NEED for
those who use it by inflicting PAIN on them so that the planet will smile on
us!" are also the ones saying, "Let the immigrants flow like fountains of mana
from heaven to make the rich gringo who exploits them RICHER..!!"

..a bizzare conundrum to me. Is it to you..!?


-Clamato

This would mean I am not a citizen. My Irish grandfather was never a citizen, thus - by your policy - my mother would not be a citizen and, therefore, I am not a citizen.

To your policy I'm going to say .......... no.

Present company accepted.

In other words,.. you're granfathered in.

Policies (in the real world and not some infantile fantasy) behave that way.
As a policy changes, they may not (and usually aren't) applied retroactively.

If your grandfather came after "my" polices were enacted, he'd have to go
through the same process as everyone else in his situation.

So, you think this policy change is "bad" because your grandfather would
have had to do what everyone else has to?

Now, how selfish is that...!?



-Clamato

Is it worthwhile to gain US citizenship?

If it were easier to gai n US citizenship by "legal" means than by "illegal"
means, wouldn't more people do so legally?

The trick is to make it harder to do so illegally, and easier to do legally.

What I'm proposing is the "make it harder to do so illegally" part.

I haven't addressed the "make it easier to do so legally" part.

Once those who are "dependent" on now-illegals find that their supply has
been shut off, they will work (hard!) to make immigrating legally MUCH easier.

But NOTHING will change as long as the supply of illegals is full tap on..!!


Why is it people who LOVE to say, "CONSERVE oil and create a NEED for
those who use it by inflicting PAIN on them so that the planet will smile on
us!" are also the ones saying, "Let the immigrants flow like fountains of mana
from heaven to make the rich gringo who exploits them RICHER..!!"

..a bizzare conundrum to me. Is it to you..!?


-Clamato

If you're going to make it easier for legal immigrants, you better do it quickly. Perferably before the dependants who have their supply cut off lose their homes and die of starvation.
I don't even understand your bizarre conundrum.

Clamato's plan is actually something that our country needs.

There's nothing wrong with immigrants... but there is upon entering our country illegally. We have immigration limits for a reason. A) We do not want a mass of unskilled laborers who destroy the market of unskilled labor. Yes, we want some immigrants to fulill labor needs. However, they begin to take jobs away from Americans if you allow too many people at once, since believe it or not, there are unskilled American laborers. My uncle, for example, used to work in construction. He lost his job because down here in Southern California illegal immigrants work far below miniumum wage, and they replaced the more expensive American workers. B) Second, our social programs can only support X amount of people at a time, and currently illegal immigrants have overloaded those in Southern California. Our schools and social services are crumbling, and it is largely due to illegal immigrants, who use these services without paying taxes to support them. Maybe other parts of the country can still take immigrants, but we can't. C) It is also a security issue. There are many sorts of people, like criminals and those with chronic diseases (which are becoming an issue again in SoCal after being almost irradicated in the past), whome we do not want. There is also the threat of terrorist crossing the border (more real than most people think, you could easily transport a bomb across the Mexican or Canadian borders)

Most illegal immigrants are nice people, but it is a slap in the face to all the immigrants who came here legally and to Americans. Illegal immigrants do not intregrate into our society as easily, which creates a multitude of other problems.

I would be for increasing the amounts of legal immigrants, but the worst possible thing would be to just open up the borders (not that they really aren't completely open right now anyway)

At what point did I support the border controls of anywhere else?

I personally think that the whole world should have open borders, simply because everyone on this planet's a human.

And this shows you to be,.. shall we say,.. naive in the extreme.


And making a completely impermiable border is utterly impossible for the USA.

Are you really suggesting walling around everywhere, to the extent of destroying your ports on the off chance that people get in there?

No need to destroy the ports.

And yes. I'm suggesting a complete "walling" of the country. Period.


Because if you really wanted an impermiable border you'd have to do that, as well as putting SAM batteries pretty much everywhere to make sure that nobody got in illegally.

That would probably be correct.


Would there be a gate that immigrants came in through?

Would they arrive by plane?

What about via ships?

Submarines, maybe?

Yes. They'd arrive as they do now. And if they came through any of the
usual "ports" (air/sea/land/spaceship) they'd be checked out, and if they
wished to immigrate, they'd go through the process.

..just like we do to get and use a driver's license.

What is your point?


-Clamato

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
We are the "Land of Opportunity" NOT because we allow everyone who wants
in IN, which we DON'T by the way, but because we have set up a "culture" if
you will, where you don't have to be of a particular faith, color or caste-
family affiliation to FIND opportunity to better yourself and your family.

Well by closing the borders, youre gonna have to be white america to seek the so-called "opportunity", which sort of eliminates the whole "you dont have to be of a particular faith, color, or caste-family affiliation" thing.

ALL now-illegals in the country NOW would qualify for greencards (other than
criminals in custody).

The "racial" makeup of the country would be the same as the day before the
policy was enacted.

Tell me how that makes "only white americans" those with any opportunities?


Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Please tell me how closing the borders "hermetically" (I didn't say it would be
EASY) would create more illegal immigration than having a completely open
permeable border..?

We aren't supposed to let anyone in "illegaly" yet here are 12 million people that have done it.

And that's because the government didn't want to deal with the problem of
their own borders being violated.

And your point is....?



-Clamato

Clamato's plan is actually something that our country needs.

There's nothing wrong with immigrants... but there is upon entering our country illegally. We have immigration limits for a reason. A) We do not want a mass of unskilled laborers who destroy the market of unskilled labor. Yes, we want some immigrants to fulill labor needs. However, they begin to take jobs away from Americans if you allow too many people at once, since believe it or not, there are unskilled American laborers. My uncle, for example, used to work in construction. He lost his job because down here in Southern California illegal immigrants work far below miniumum wage, and they replaced the more expensive American workers. B) Second, our social programs can only support X amount of people at a time, and currently illegal immigrants have overloaded those in Southern California. Our schools and social services are crumbling, and it is largely due to illegal immigrants, who use these services without paying taxes to support them. Maybe other parts of the country can still take immigrants, but we can't. C) It is also a security issue. There are many sorts of people, like criminals and those with chronic diseases (which are becoming an issue again in SoCal after being almost irradicated in the past), whome we do not want. There is also the threat of terrorist crossing the border (more real than most people think, you could easily transport a bomb across the Mexican or Canadian borders)

Most illegal immigrants are nice people, but it is a slap in the face to all the immigrants who came here legally and to Americans. Illegal immigrants do not intregrate into our society as easily, which creates a multitude of other problems.

I would be for increasing the amounts of legal immigrants, but the worst possible thing would be to just open up the borders (not that they really aren't completely open right now anyway)
Quoted for Truth. I agree in ever way.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
People who break our laws by entering the country through impproper (and
illegal) ways are not immigrants, they are criminal foreign nationals invading a
sovereign country.

And so, even though they pose no threat to you at all, this argument alone makes you want to kick out every illegal immigrant? What are you afraid of?

Once again, I love immigrants. They are not to be afraid of. But CRIMINALS
on the other hand...

No country NEEDS criminals,.. much less criminals from other countries.

You really should read what I actually said.

ALL NOW-ILLEGALS (other than criminals in custody) WOULD
AUTOMATICALLY GET A GREENCARD..!!

Then,.. if they went through the process (as with getting ANY license) they'd
recieve citizenship for their trouble.

Meantime,.. we'd establish a relatively easy way for foreign nationals to
legally get into the country in a measured way.

AND THESE LATE-COMERS WOULD BE AT THE BACK OF THE LINE, so no one
nationality is "pissed off" by another nationality "jumping the queue" because
they happen to live next door (and for some odd reason think they are OWED
a quick "jump of the back fence").


-Clamato

What does it matter how people get here? Immigration shouldn't be illegal. I don't understand how you can just say "Because its illegal they shouldnt do it." I am very sure that you do things that are "illegal" so i guess we should charge you for every law you broke.

Illegal immigrants pose no threat to the US, and the easiest solution is to eliminate illegal immigration by making all immigration legal. As soon as they cross the borders, give em papers, and ta-da. The only reason illegal immigrants decide not to get citizenship is lack of incentive. It is a difficult process and there are benefits from not doing so.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
I love immigrants.

I don't like criminals.

You ever driven 60 in a 55?

My grandfather was never a citizen. Answer my allegations that your policy proves that *I* am not a citizen. Where would you deport me to?

Yes, I've driven 60 in a 55 zone. The price for that is a ticket.

The price for entering the US when you're not allowed to should be removal.

"Y o u a r e g r a n d f a t h e r e d IN ...!

The policy doesn't apply to your grandfather, nor you.

I don't HAVE to deport you.


-Clamato

Policies (in the real world and not some infantile fantasy) behave that way.
As a policy changes, they may not (and usually aren't) applied retroactively.


Don't talk down to me, son.

I'm not thinking of myself, I'm thinking of future possibilities. What if your policy were enacted before my grandfather came to this country. Let's say he slipped through the cracks.

To where would you deport me?

Yes, I've driven 60 in a 55 zone. The price for that is a ticket.

The price for entering the US when you're not allowed to should be removal.


That's what it is now. You get caught, you get sent home. The protests are about Congress passing a law to make them Felons. That means you're caught, sent to prison for a few years, then sent home.

This protest isn't about letting anyone willy-nilly waltz into the country, it's about not calling them felons. You driving 60 in a 55 makes you a criminal in your black and white world.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Is it worthwhile to gain US citizenship?

If it were easier to gai n US citizenship by "legal" means than by "illegal"
means, wouldn't more people do so legally?

The trick is to make it harder to do so illegally, and easier to do legally.

What I'm proposing is the "make it harder to do so illegally" part.

I haven't addressed the "make it easier to do so legally" part.

Once those who are "dependent" on now-illegals find that their supply has
been shut off, they will work (hard!) to make immigrating legally MUCH easier.

But NOTHING will change as long as the supply of illegals is full tap on..!!


Why is it people who LOVE to say, "CONSERVE oil and create a NEED for
those who use it by inflicting PAIN on them so that the planet will smile on
us!" are also the ones saying, "Let the immigrants flow like fountains of mana
from heaven to make the rich gringo who exploits them RICHER..!!"

..a bizzare conundrum to me. Is it to you..!?


-Clamato

If you're going to make it easier for legal immigrants, you better do it quickly. Perferably before the dependants who have their supply cut off lose their homes and die of starvation.
I don't even understand your bizarre conundrum.

FIRST: Cut off the supply of illegal immigrants to employers (to the US).

SECOND: Give the "greencard holders" a path to citizenship.

THIRD: Figure out what "supply needs" exist for US immigration.

FOURTH: Make it as easy as possible for these WANTED immigrants to enter
the US.

..very simple really.


And the conundrum is why it is that when it's YOUR pain, you want it
lessened, but when it's someone else's pain, you don't care overly much
about it.


-Clamato

What does it matter how people get here? Immigration shouldn't be illegal. I don't understand how you can just say "Because its illegal they shouldnt do it." I am very sure that you do things that are "illegal" so i guess we should charge you for every law you broke.

Illegal immigrants pose no threat to the US, and the easiest solution is to eliminate illegal immigration by making all immigration legal. As soon as they cross the borders, give em papers, and ta-da. The only reason illegal immigrants decide not to get citizenship is lack of incentive. It is a difficult process and there are benefits from not doing so.

I would take it that you are about 9-17 years old.

Your sentiments are "nice" but lacking in perspective to have any value in
discussing this matter.

"Just make it legal ("not a problem"), and it won't be illegal ("a problem") is a
lovely juvenile logical conlusion.

When you have something to say, come back and say it.


-Clamato

um...wouldn't you have to include the whole working thing and you’ know taxes on your pay check, house and such also if the majority of people already speak your native language (and don't speak a word of Swiss)

Plus healthcare there's not free, and you'd have to put a fair bit of effort in to learn French, German and Italian to really get integrated.

Wow, I thought I'd heard bad ideas before, but this one's getting up there.

I would take it that you are about 9-17 years old.

Your sentiments are "nice" but lacking in perspective to have any value in
discussing this matter.

"Just make it legal ("not a problem"), and it won't be illegal ("a problem") is a
lovely juvenile logical conlusion.

When you have something to say, come back and say it.


-Clamato

I'm 22, and thank god for ad hominem otherwise you wouldnt have an argument at all.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Policies (in the real world and not some infantile fantasy) behave that way.
As a policy changes, they may not (and usually aren't) applied retroactively.

Don't talk down to me, son.

Right-O grandpa/grandma..! :)


I'm not thinking of myself, I'm thinking of future possibilities. What if your policy were enacted before my grandfather came to this country. Let's say he slipped through the cracks.

To where would you deport me?

Once again,.. (I have a feeling I'll be saying that quite a bit),.. If these
policies were in place just after your grandfather came to this country
(illegally), then he'd have had his greencard given to him, and if he went
through the process he'd have become a citizen.

In that case, you would indeed be here legally and there'd be no need to
deport you.

If your grandfather came to this country (illegally) just AFTER these policies
were in place, he'd most likely have been found out and deported back to
whereever it was he came from.

In that case, you'd either never have been born, or you'd have been born in
some other country, and therefore there would be no need to deport you.

If you were the (distant) offspring of a criminal-alien grandfather and a legal
grandmother, then there are two possibilities:

*) His "line" would remain in the US with the grandmother.
*) His "line" would go with him to the foreign country.

In either case, the choice of the "line" (descendents) staying in the US is
independent of whether grandpa is deported (which he would be), and in
either case there would be no need to deport YOU, because YOU would be a
legal citizen (or a citizen of another country entirely not subject to
deportation by the US).


-Clamato

FIRST: Cut off the supply of illegal immigrants to employers (to the US).

SECOND: Give the "greencard holders" a path to citizenship.

THIRD: Figure out what "supply needs" exist for US immigration.

FOURTH: Make it as easy as possible for these WANTED immigrants to enter
the US.

..very simple really.


And the conundrum is why it is that when it's YOUR pain, you want it
lessened, but when it's someone else's pain, you don't care overly much
about it.


-Clamato

I don't recall this issue being about my pain. I'm a Canadian citizen, with no desire to enter the US. It's the pain of the "illegal" immigrants I'm talking about.
Your whole process their is extremely insensitive and inhuman. The supply need? What about all those people who need a safe place and a good job? Are they less important simply because they aren't needed to benefit the economy? Secondly, how do you define "wanted"? do you base it on the race or religion of the immigrants? Or how about how well they'll assimilate into American culture?

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Yes, I've driven 60 in a 55 zone. The price for that is a ticket.

The price for entering the US when you're not allowed to should be removal.

That's what it is now. You get caught, you get sent home. The protests are about Congress passing a law to make them Felons. That means you're caught, sent to prison for a few years, then sent home.

This protest isn't about letting anyone willy-nilly waltz into the country, it's about not calling them felons. You driving 60 in a 55 makes you a criminal in your black and white world.

The point is that it's NOW easier to illegally enter the US than it is to
LEGALLY enter the US.

The protests are about a group of people who want free access to US soil
without going through the process of becoming citizens, or even simply
obeying the laws of the land.

If illegals get caught, as a matter of course, why are there so many in the
US?

It doesn't make a bit of difference whether they are labelled "felons"
or "misdemeanor infractors". They are here because they cheated for a place
in line to the greatest country on the planet, which insults all those
legitimately in line for entry, and the penalty for that should be expulsion with
no chance of readmittance.

The fact that the government hasn't the cajones to enforce their own
borders is merely a comment on the idiotic "niceness" of the US in general.

When I speed in traffic I freely admit I'm a criminal, and will take my
punishment when I'm caught.

Will illegal aliens do the same when they are more aggressively sought out
and deported?

I think not, because they feel entitled to be here.

Why do they feel this entitlement..?


-Clamato

Wow, I thought I'd heard bad ideas before, but this one's getting up there.

Why is it a bad idea..?

Tell me. I'm VERY interested.


-Clamato

Why is it a bad idea..?

Tell me. I'm VERY interested.


-Clamato

A lot of people have already told you why.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
I would take it that you are about 9-17 years old.

Your sentiments are "nice" but lacking in perspective to have any value in
discussing this matter.

"Just make it legal ("not a problem"), and it won't be illegal ("a problem") is a
lovely juvenile logical conlusion.

When you have something to say, come back and say it.


-Clamato

I'm 22, and thank god for ad hominem otherwise you wouldnt have an argument at all.

The fact that your behind the curve in the maturity department doesn't really
help your argument.

The "ad hominem attack" that you see in my statements is, to me, just my
reasoning as to why you'd think the way you do.

If you want to talk about the merits, or demerits, of my proposition, please
do.

My value judgement about you based on what you've written is something
that most people will come to see, but won't tell you about, because they
don't want to hurt your feelings.

I'm not particularly concerned about hurting your feelings. I'm concerned
about having a sensible discussion about the issue at hand.


-Clamato

I can understand not wanting illegal immigrants in the country, but if they enter legally and work hard and contribute to the country, why do they have to become a citizen to stay there? My mom immigrated here to Canada in 1962 and she never became a citizen, but she entered legally, became a landed immigrant, learned English and has been a teacher for 30 years, why is that not okay? Personally, i don't care if people who come to Canada don't become citizens, as long as they obey our laws and do their part.

1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with both parents who are presently citizens.
Thank you, no. Personally I, and other Americans who marry non-Americans, would like my children to be able to claim US Citizenship, no matter if their mother is Japanese.

2) Hermetically seal the border with Mexico AND Canada (and every other country as well).
World's largest ziplock baggie! And how many other countries do you think we have a border with?

3) All immigrants without legal status (on US territory) have 14 days to get
a "green card" allowing them to remain in the US for 10 years or until they are
found to NOT have been working for more than 200 total days in that 10
years (via a registry of employment).
And you're gonna get the workers to handle all this paperwork from where now?

4) ALL police agencies shall be duty bound to ascertain the citizenship status of ALL persons they come into working contact with. If that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.
I can see this: "9/11, please state the nature of the emergency"
"I've been shot! Please send help"
"Of course sir, now please read off your 14 digit citizenship number off of your naturalazation card or your offical US birth cirtificate and I'll dispatch the police after it clears the central computer."
"I've been shot, I don't have my birth records on me!"
"I'm sorry to hear that sir, please hold while I patch you into Homeland Security who will be coming to deport you shortly."

5) ALL government (Local/State/Federal) agencies are to require proof of citizenship status of anyone who wishes to obtain their services. If that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.
So will you be making Americans carry around a national ID card showing that they are a US citizen by birth now too? Well, we might actually get the majority of Americans to get a passport now.

6) ALL employers shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL prospective and current employees, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.
They're supposed to do that already.

7) ALL healthcare facilities shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL persons seeking assistance, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is duly assisted and then immediately deported.
"Wait? I'm a US citizen! I can't be deported!"
"I'm sorry ma'm, but without your offical card, we have to report you to Homeland Security."
"I just gave birth!"
"Don't worry! You're baby will be going with you as since you're not a citizen, neither is he!"

8) ALL persons with greencards shall remain within the boundaries of the US for all but 200 days total for 10 years. Otherwise immediately deported.
My fiancee better hope like hell no one in her family dies in the next ten years then, and she should forget seeing Japan again.

11) ALL persons who have not achieved citizenship within 10 years is immediately relieved of the use of their greencard and deported when found.
So, in otherwords, you HAVE to take US citizenship. Even if you do not want to, even if doing so will invalidate the citizenship of your home country (Some countries, like Japan, refuse to allow dual citizenship). That is so compleatly bullshit. How would YOU like to live in such a system. Would you, as an American, like being treated like you have written above? Would you acceed to the demand that, if you want to stay with your family, your wife, your children, and your job, that you give up being an American within ten years or face never seeing your family again?

Whatch think..? :)
I'm pretty sure you can figure out what I think. I live in another country, I get to see what it's like when you're off your homesoil and at the pleasure of another government. If I was home, I would have walked today in support because I know damn well what it is like to be an immigrant.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
FIRST: Cut off the supply of illegal immigrants to employers (to the US).

SECOND: Give the "greencard holders" a path to citizenship.

THIRD: Figure out what "supply needs" exist for US immigration.

FOURTH: Make it as easy as possible for these WANTED immigrants to enter
the US.

..very simple really.


And the conundrum is why it is that when it's YOUR pain, you want it
lessened, but when it's someone else's pain, you don't care overly much
about it.


-Clamato


I don't recall this issue being about my pain. I'm a Canadian citizen, with no desire to enter the US. It's the pain of the "illegal" immigrants I'm talking about.
Your whole process their is extremely insensitive and inhuman. The supply need? What about all those people who need a safe place and a good job? Are they less important simply because they aren't needed to benefit the economy? Secondly, how do you define "wanted"? do you base it on the race or religion of the immigrants? Or how about how well they'll assimilate into American culture?

That's your opinion (about the proposed process being insensitive and
inhuman).

I see it as eminently sensitive and humane, to both the prospective immigrant
and to the US citizen.

It is sensitive in that is sets clear guidelines about how one becomes a
citizen of the US, and what happens if you don't obey the rules.

This gives clarity and peace-of-mind to the immigrant that there is no need
to constantly be looking over their shoulder for "la migre" if they are doing the
right thing.

It also gives clarity and assurity to US citizens that they needn't fear new
immigrants who may have come here by illegal methods and may well do, or
be forced to do, more illegal acts because of their status or through fear of
being "exposed".

Show me SPECIFICALLY where anything in my proposal is inhumane..!


-Clamato

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Why is it a bad idea..?

Tell me. I'm VERY interested.


-Clamato

A lot of people have already told you why.

Actually, no they haven't.

They've said, "Your idea sucks!", but can't seem to tell me WHY it sucks.

Can you tell me WHY it sucks..?


-Clamato

I can understand not wanting illegal immigrants in the country, but if they enter legally and work hard and contribute to the country, why do they have to become a citizen to stay there? My mom immigrated here to Canada in 1962 and she never became a citizen, but she entered legally, became a landed immigrant, learned English and has been a teacher for 30 years, why is that not okay? Personally, i don't care if people who come to Canada don't become citizens, as long as they obey our laws and do their part.

You're ABSOLUTELY right..!!

I just didn't touch on the "guest worker" issue at all.

I really REALLY agree that it doesn't make a whit of difference whether
someone simply wants to work here or become a citizen as long as they are
law abiding and productive.

The moment they become un-lawabiding and unproductive, though, they
must go.

You might have noticed that one of the bullet-points of my "plan" was
that "greencard holders shall be treated exactly as citizens" if they are
following the process.

That is the answer to this issue.


-Clamato

Actually, no they haven't.

They've said, "Your idea sucks!", but can't seem to tell me WHY it sucks.

Can you tell me WHY it sucks..?


-Clamato
Sure, you end up creating a system that would be incrediably expensive to set up and operate. You created a system that would require all Americans to show proof of citizenship should they go to the post office to get some stamps. You created a system that will create such a red taped mess that it'll make the IRS look like the model of the ideal government service. You created a system that will be ripe for abuse. And you created a system that leads to black and white choices that would end up tearing many familes apart.

AND you did it all due to some quasi "I'm here and I don't want to share, even though my grandfathers waltzed into the US" feeling.

Yeah, your system sucks.

That's your opinion (about the proposed process being insensitive and
inhuman).

I see it as eminently sensitive and humane, to both the prospective immigrant
and to the US citizen.

It is sensitive in that is sets clear guidelines about how one becomes a
citizen of the US, and what happens if you don't obey the rules.

This gives clarity and peace-of-mind to the immigrant that there is no need
to constantly be looking over their shoulder for "la migre" if they are doing the
right thing.

It also gives clarity and assurity to US citizens that they needn't fear new
immigrants who may have come here by illegal methods and may well do, or
be forced to do, more illegal acts because of their status or through fear of
being "exposed".

Show me SPECIFICALLY where anything in my proposal is inhumane..!


-Clamato

The inhumane part of your policy is the "supply need" part. You know, the one where immigrants are resources, not humans? Honestly, making clear laws doesn't make your policy humane. Example:
TC's Clear Law:
Any person with red hair is sentanced to death. If you have red hair, please contact your nearest law enforcement agency for details on how you may register for execution. Executions will be held every tuesday untill next year. You may bring one (1) guest.
Due to the fact that it is clear, it is automatically humane and sensitive, as Red Heads know exactly what to expect, and don't need to worry about whether or not they can bring a date to their execution.

In addition, there's no reason why US citizens should fear immigrants. That's call xenophobia. The only thing you guys have to fear is someone roofing your house or flipping your burgers for a painfully low wage.

im suprised that no one has mentioned native americans yet, if i was one i would say 'hey Clamatoatoll get the fuck off my land, and go home.'

im sure the statue of liberty is crying tears that are eroding the words, 'give us your tired, wour poor, your hungry.'

Actually, no they haven't.

They've said, "Your idea sucks!", but can't seem to tell me WHY it sucks.

Can you tell me WHY it sucks..?


-Clamato

I've told you, in several different posts. I'm now beginning to feel as though you have poor reading comprehension, as you seem to be under the impression that I said something ("Your idea sucks") that I really didn't.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with both parents who are presently citizens.

Thank you, no. Personally I, and other Americans who marry non-Americans,
would like my children to be able to claim US Citizenship, no matter if
their mother is Japanese.

How's this: Rapid 2 year process for immigrants married to US citizens.



2) Hermetically seal the border with Mexico AND Canada (and every other country as well).

World's largest ziplock baggie! And how many other countries do you think we have a border with?

I specifically said it wouldn't be easy. But if functioning in the US as
an illegal alien is made impossible by various checks, then it would be
more trouble than it's worth to sneek in in the first place.

We are connected to all other countries by air and sea, by the way, or
hadn't you noticed that..?



3) All immigrants without legal status (on US territory) have 14 days to get
a "green card" allowing them to remain in the US for 10 years or until they are
found to NOT have been working for more than 200 total days in that 10
years (via a registry of employment).

And you're gonna get the workers to handle all this paperwork from where now?

Whereever,.. I'm the IDEA guy,.. not the actuator.

BUT,.. it would put a whole bunch of "unemployed" to work, now, wouldn't
it..!!



4) ALL police agencies shall be duty bound to ascertain the citizenship status of ALL persons they come into working contact with. If that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

I can see this: "9/11, please state the nature of the emergency"
"I've been shot! Please send help"
"Of course sir, now please read off your 14 digit citizenship number off of your naturalazation card or your offical US birth cirtificate and I'll dispatch the police after it clears the central computer."
"I've been shot, I don't have my birth records on me!"
"I'm sorry to hear that sir, please hold while I patch you into Homeland Security who will be coming to deport you shortly."

How about this:
*) "911 please help, I've been shot!!!!"
*) "Certainly sir."
..help arrives and the shootee is taken to the hospital and given medical
assistance that saves his life.
*) "Now, sir, I see you're a border-crossing criminal. Please be advised
that you will be deported to your home country, a country of your choice
who may or may not accept you, or if no deportable country is found to out
arctic holding facility. Have a nice day sir."

[quote]
[Quote]
5) ALL government (Local/State/Federal) agencies are to require proof of citizenship status of anyone who wishes to obtain their services. If that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

So will you be making Americans carry around a national ID card showing that they are a US citizen by birth now too? Well, we might actually get the majority of Americans to get a passport now.

It would be linked to all your credit/debit cards and nearly every other
document linked to you anyway, so if someone DIDN'T have "proper ID", that
would be quite a glaring red flag, now wouldn't it.



6) ALL employers shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL prospective and current employees, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

They're supposed to do that already.

Yeah they are but no they don't, so the net effect is it's a meaningless
activity.



7) ALL healthcare facilities shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL persons seeking assistance, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is duly assisted and then immediately deported.

"Wait? I'm a US citizen! I can't be deported!"
"I'm sorry ma'm, but without your offical card, we have to report you to Homeland Security."
"I just gave birth!"
"Don't worry! You're baby will be going with you as since you're not a citizen, neither is he!"

Once again, your status will be linked to nearly every transaction and
document you touch, so this is a moot point.



8) ALL persons with greencards shall remain within the boundaries of the US for all but 200 days total for 10 years. Otherwise immediately deported.

My fiancee better hope like hell no one in her family dies in the next ten years then, and she should forget seeing Japan again.

She has 200 days, and may apply for more with the proper followup.



11) ALL persons who have not achieved citizenship within 10 years is immediately relieved of the use of their greencard and deported when found.

So, in otherwords, you HAVE to take US citizenship. Even if you do not want to, even if doing so will invalidate the citizenship of your home country (Some countries, like Japan, refuse to allow dual citizenship). That is so compleatly bullshit. How would YOU like to live in such a system. Would you, as an American, like being treated like you have written above? Would you acceed to the demand that, if you want to stay with your family, your wife, your children, and your job, that you give up being an American within ten years or face never seeing your family again?

On this I was unclear. There must be a guestworker program in place as
well. Thank you for pointing that out.

I, personally, don't believe in dual citizenship, but that is of no
consequence.

The US should demand that ALL citizens be only US citizens (just as,
apparently, Japan does).

Once you are a US citizen, you may travel the world freely, according to
the custom of the destination country and any "strictures" placed on
travel by the US government.

I *DO* operate under these conditions..!

My policies only address the issue of a would-be immigrant (or
guestworker) who wishes to work and/or become a citizen in the US.

Also, once citizenship is granted, it can not be revoked, except by
ridiculously extreme measures.



Whatch think..?

I'm pretty sure you can figure out what I think. I live in another country, I get to see what it's like when you're off your homesoil and at the pleasure of another government. If I was home, I would have walked today in support because I know damn well what it is like to be an immigrant.

Show me the "oppression" of my policy..?

The "oppression" that people are "demonstrating" against is the oppression
of not having a clear view of their future because the US has badly f*cked
up it's immigration policy that good people fleaing from REAL oppression
(economic and otherwise) come "waltzing" across the border because it's
easier than doing it the "legal" way, and as a consequence are left prey
to economic exploitation, physical brutality, mental anguish through
uncertainty, being driven into crime, and emotional trauma through family
breakup caused by arbitrary immigration enforcement.


So,.. you tell me...

What's your solution..?



-Clamato

How's this: Rapid 2 year process for immigrants married to US citizens.
Great, so my fiancee and I will have to wait two years before starting our family less our children be born without citizenship.

And you don't address what happens if my fiancee doesn't WANT to renouce her Japanese citizenship.

I may live in Japan for the rest of my life, but I don't want to stop being American.

How about this:
*) "911 please help, I've been shot!!!!"
*) "Certainly sir."
..help arrives and the shootee is taken to the hospital and given medical
assistance that saves his life.
*) "Now, sir, I see you're a border-crossing criminal. Please be advised
that you will be deported to your home country, a country of your choice
who may or may not accept you, or if no deportable country is found to out
arctic holding facility. Have a nice day sir."
You carry proof of citizenship with you all the time?

It would be linked to all your credit/debit cards and nearly every other document linked to you anyway, so if someone DIDN'T have "proper ID", that would be quite a glaring red flag, now wouldn't it.
Oh that would be such a violation of privacy laws that it ain't even funny. I don't think the US Government has any business looking at my Visa statements and Bank of America has no buisness deciding if I am a US citizen or not.

She has 200 days, and may apply for more with the proper followup.
It takes the government how long to do things? Well... hopefully no one gets sick and is on their deathbed. I'd hate for her to miss the opertunity to say goodbye to her father because it took the local office one month to process a document.

Once you are a US citizen, you may travel the world freely, according to
the custom of the destination country and any "strictures" placed on
travel by the US government.

I *DO* operate under these conditions..!

My policies only address the issue of a would-be immigrant (or
guestworker) who wishes to work and/or become a citizen in the US.

Also, once citizenship is granted, it can not be revoked, except by
ridiculously extreme measures.
Again, what about those who wish to live in the US, but not work (like, say, a housewife)? Or those who do not wish to renounce their citzenship.

So,.. you tell me...

What's your solution..?
To be continued as I have to go but do not wish to leave the window open. Please hold.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Actually, no they haven't.

They've said, "Your idea sucks!", but can't seem to tell me WHY it sucks.

Can you tell me WHY it sucks..?


-Clamato

Sure, you end up creating a system that would be incrediably expensive to set up and operate. You created a system that would require all Americans to show proof of citizenship should they go to the post office to get some stamps. You created a system that will create such a red taped mess that it'll make the IRS look like the model of the ideal government service. You created a system that will be ripe for abuse. And you created a system that leads to black and white choices that would end up tearing many familes apart.

AND you did it all due to some quasi "I'm here and I don't want to share, even though my grandfathers waltzed into the US" feeling.

Yeah, your system sucks.

Even if it were an expensive system, which I don't grant it need be, it's a
necessity, and the money would be found to implement it.

(( Ask me WHY it's a necessity..! ))

Proof of citizenship is already required in some places. This simply expands
those places, and backs up detection with consequences.

There is no need for a "red tape" mess, because it's simply another class
added to your "official identity".

Any abuse is trivial compared to the abuse of the system today.

All choices are binary, black and white. If you're afraid to make choices that
affect your, and other's, futures, then you put yourself at the will of those
prepared to make choices for you.

And you object to my proposal because of some quasi "I'm evil because I'm a
member of a society that has produced so much and who should share, and
should have shared, everything with the 'downtrodden' of the world until we
are, and were, at the same wretched level."

So,.. What IS your proposal..?


-Clamato

The inhumane part of your policy is the "supply need" part. You know, the one where immigrants are resources, not humans? Honestly, making clear laws doesn't make your policy humane.

But human labor IS a resource..! People are Humans.

People should always be treated humanely. Resources should always be treated as resources.

Are you simply blind, stupid, or non-comprehending..?


Example:
TC's Clear Law:
Any person with red hair is sentanced to death. If you have red hair, please contact your nearest law enforcement agency for details on how you may register for execution. Executions will be held every tuesday untill next year. You may bring one (1) guest.

Due to the fact that it is clear, it is automatically humane and sensitive, as Red Heads know exactly what to expect, and don't need to worry about whether or not they can bring a date to their execution.

No. It is humane ONLY if it treats people humanely.

This "law" does not do that, therefore it is not humane. It is only clear.

But,.. the clarity of KNOWING the law (however inhumane) at least gives warning to the "red haired" to try to save themselves.


In addition, there's no reason why US citizens should fear immigrants. That's call xenophobia. The only thing you guys have to fear is someone roofing your house or flipping your burgers for a painfully low wage.

We fear those who MAY be a threat.

The logic (however perverse) goes like this:
*) That person looks and sounds like someone who MAY have come here
illegally.
*) If they came here illegally, they MAY have done other things illegally.
*) They MAY do something illegal in respect to our meeting, such as rob me.
*) I don't want to be robbed.
*) I shall not want to associate with them, and MAY persecute them myself,
to pay them back for their past abuses of our laws and their propensity to
lawbreaking.

I don't live in "gee wouldn't it be nice if" land. REAL people with REAL power
have REAL phobias, and xenophobia is a big one these days.

That IS indeed called xenophobia.

And that phobia is strengthened by not being able to more clearly establish
the "lawfullness" of the one we fear.

The purpose of the policy is to make it MUCH more difficult to assume that
someone you meet with a funny accent and different colored skin is a
lawbreaker.

Also,.. if the immigrant has his greencard, and as such is entitled to the same
recognition as a citizen, then he's got more bargaining power to weild against
those who now "exploit" him, and keep him in his low paying job.


-Clamato

im suprised that no one has mentioned native americans yet, if i was one i would say 'hey Clamatoatoll get the fuck off my land, and go home.'

im sure the statue of liberty is crying tears that are eroding the words, 'give us your tired, wour poor, your hungry.'

And I'd say,.. make me go.

..and then some "battle of silly proportions" would ensue, proving that people
will fight over the goofiest old nonsense.

Lady Liberty is happy to have "..your tired, your poor, your hungry."

She just doesn't want your criminals.


-Clamato

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Actually, no they haven't.

They've said, "Your idea sucks!", but can't seem to tell me WHY it sucks.

Can you tell me WHY it sucks..?


-Clamato

I've told you, in several different posts. I'm now beginning to feel as though you have poor reading comprehension, as you seem to be under the impression that I said something ("Your idea sucks") that I really didn't.

Fine,.. you've told me. How apparently memorable your words were.

I said that the criticisms that I've gotten are all variations of "Your idea
sucks".

I'm after some criticism with some MEAT on it, to chew on....!!

Give me MEAT..!! :)



-Clamato

Great, so my fiancee and I will have to wait two years before starting our family less our children be born without citizenship.

Not necessarily. Legislation is born from the injustice of previous legislation.


And you don't address what happens if my fiancee doesn't WANT to renouce her Japanese citizenship.

I do actually. If she wants US citizenship, she MUST renounce Japanese
citizenship. Period.

Your child would then not be eligible for US citizenship, unless he/she later
went through the entire immigration policy him/herself.

Doesn't that seem fair, if not particularly convenient to you, to the queue of
people who are willing to WORK to get US citizenship?

In life decisions must be made. Sometimes they are hard ones.


I may live in Japan for the rest of my life, but I don't want to stop being American.

You don't have to be, do you?

What would compel you to renounce your citizenship?

Is JAPAN evil for not allowing dual citizenship..?


You carry proof of citizenship with you all the time?

If asked to prove who you are, what would you do?

If it were as easy as finding a credit card, or simply some biometric data on
your person, would that be too much of a stress on you?


Oh that would be such a violation of privacy laws that it ain't even funny. I don't think the US Government has any business looking at my Visa statements and Bank of America has no buisness deciding if I am a US citizen or not.

Please. Any half-witted private dick can get that information.

(( I'll leave the "privacy is a fool's delusion" speech for later... ))

The point is that we can all be identified as a unique person, whether
we "want to" of not, and that information WILL be used to establish your
citizenship status.


It takes the government how long to do things? Well... hopefully no one gets sick and is on their deathbed. I'd hate for her to miss the opertunity to say goodbye to her father because it took the local office one month to process a document.

I agree entirely. If citizenshihp status can't be retreived inside of 2 minutes,
the system won't work.

I happen to think that's possible, as my debit card can be checked within
seconds.


Again, what about those who wish to live in the US, but not work (like, say, a housewife)? Or those who do not wish to renounce their citzenship.

Those who don't wish their (foreign) citizenship can live in the US as a
citizen's dependent.

There would likely be more asked of a "dependent-holder" than of other
citizens.


To be continued as I have to go but do not wish to leave the window open. Please hold.

Thank you..!

..please continue...


-Clamato

Even if it were an expensive system, which I don't grant it need be, it's a
necessity, and the money would be found to implement it.
You're asking for a check of every person in the US, multiple times a day and you think this won't be a lot of money?

Proof of citizenship is already required in some places. This simply expands those places, and backs up detection with consequences.
It doesn't expand, it explodes. When I go to the DMV, I do not have to bring my passport with me. When I go to the post office, I do not have to drag along by birth records. If I stop by the police safety fair, I do not need to prove citizenship. You're asking that EVERYTIME I use ANY government services, including healthcare, I need to show proof that I am a US citizen. Not ID, but absolute proof.

There is no need for a "red tape" mess, because it's simply another class added to your "official identity".
There are over 300 million people in the United States of America, you will need to get all 300 million of them to fully register and carry at all times some form of ID. Since you state that this should be embeded on everything I touch, that means I need to replace everything I touch so I'm not acidently deported from my home country.

You're asking for the greatest government intrusion into private companies in history, into our medical records, and into our lives.

Any abuse is trivial compared to the abuse of the system today.
Right...

All choices are binary, black and white. If you're afraid to make choices that affect your, and other's, futures, then you put yourself at the will of those prepared to make choices for you.
Only a sith sees things in absolutes.

And you object to my proposal because of some quasi "I'm evil because I'm a member of a society that has produced so much and who should share, and should have shared, everything with the 'downtrodden' of the world until we are, and were, at the same wretched level."
No, I object because at one point in time YOUR family came to the US and helped build this country. Because of looser immigration laws then, they came in either unopposed or just signed their name in the book. Because of that YOU are an American, and yet you now propose to deny those who would do the same, across the board.

And why? For what reason? Mainly because you don't like it. Well, when your family came here, I'm sure they faced the same discrimination you currently heap on the illegals. Funny how we never seem to learn.

So,.. What IS your proposal..?
I'm getting there, I'm getting there!

Not necessarily. Legislation is born from the injustice of previous legislation.
Two wrongs don't make a right, we're supposed to be fixing things, not making them worse.

I do actually. If she wants US citizenship, she MUST renounce Japanese citizenship. Period.
But what if she does not want to? Am I forced to decide should I be with my wife or my country?

Your child would then not be eligible for US citizenship, unless he/she later went through the entire immigration policy him/herself.

Doesn't that seem fair, if not particularly convenient to you, to the queue of
people who are willing to WORK to get US citizenship?

In life decisions must be made. Sometimes they are hard ones.
Tell you what, why don't we strip YOU (or your children) of your/their citizenship, is that fair?

You don't have to be, do you?

What would compel you to renounce your citizenship?

Is JAPAN evil for not allowing dual citizenship..?
You are attempting to compel those who after 10 years of having a green card to get US citizenship.

If asked to prove who you are, what would you do?

If it were as easy as finding a credit card, or simply some biometric data on
your person, would that be too much of a stress on you?
There is a big difference between having to prove ID and prove citizenship. I can prove my ID through many different means.

Not to mention your system is ripe for idententy theft.

Please. Any half-witted private dick can get that information.

(( I'll leave the "privacy is a fool's delusion" speech for later... ))

The point is that we can all be identified as a unique person, whether
we "want to" of not, and that information WILL be used to establish your
citizenship status.
So you have no qualms if the government looks into your private medical files? And what if all these databases are breached and your ID suddenly becomes traded in Russia? No worries?

I agree entirely. If citizenshihp status can't be retreived inside of 2 minutes, the system won't work.

I happen to think that's possible, as my debit card can be checked within
seconds.
Big different between checking a bank account and checking someone's status.

Those who don't wish their (foreign) citizenship can live in the US as a citizen's dependent.

There would likely be more asked of a "dependent-holder" than of other
citizens.
There already is.

In an ideal world, I would love to see a world without borders, where, like the EU, you are free to come and go at will. In reality I know that this would not be possible.

So here are my ideas,
Remove the cap limits on immigration. Part of the problem with the current system is that there is a limit on how many people we allow into the US. This system takes years to get someone offical permission to come to the US.

Direct more money to immigration, help speed up the processing system. If we make it faster, cheaper (it takes a lot to come to the US, far more than most people in the world can afford), and more open that will help direct the illegals into legal channels.

Start a guest worker program that will fast track the workers to perminate resident status, make it easy for those who want to come to work, come to work. Make it easy for them to stay if they work hard and fullfil their requirements.

Does that sound like I am opening up the floodgates? Yes, I am. If we channel it to legal status, things will start to even out. If more people are coming legally, we can start assuming that those attempting to cross illegally are probably up to no good. Right now we're shooting blind.

That's the start, I'll finish up after a bit.

Originally Posted by Clamatoatoll
Even if it were an expensive system, which I don't grant it need be, it's a
necessity, and the money would be found to implement it.

You're asking for a check of every person in the US, multiple times a day and you think this won't be a lot of money?

Do credit card companies stress overly about what it "costs" them to verify
identities?


Quote Clamato:
Proof of citizenship is already required in some places. This simply expands those places, and backs up detection with consequences.

It doesn't expand, it explodes. When I go to the DMV, I do not have to bring my passport with me. When I go to the post office, I do not have to drag along by birth records. If I stop by the police safety fair, I do not need to prove citizenship. You're asking that EVERYTIME I use ANY government services, including healthcare, I need to show proof that I am a US citizen. Not ID, but absolute proof.

You will have your biometric data on (or linked to) every "commercial/official"
instrument you own, therefore a match will be verifiable between any
document/instrument (credit card, ID card, etc) and your person (your BODY)
which will allow verification upon lookup of your official status.

Period.


Quote Clamato:
There is no need for a "red tape" mess, because it's simply another class added to your "official identity".

There are over 300 million people in the United States of America, you will need to get all 300 million of them to fully register and carry at all times some form of ID. Since you state that this should be embeded on everything I touch, that means I need to replace everything I touch so I'm not acidently deported from my home country.

You're asking for the greatest government intrusion into private companies in history, into our medical records, and into our lives.

Well,.. maybe it IS time for the "privacy is an illusion" speech...

It's a quick speech,.. goes rather like this:

PRIVACY IS AN ILLUSION..!! Get used to the fact that less and less of what
you think of as "privace life" is actually not recorded somehow by someone.
The only question is to what uses will your "non-private" information be put?
And what are the consequences to those who put "private" information to
BAD use..!?

The simple fact is that you can't de-engineer information technologies, and al
long as they exist they will be used to collect so-called "private" information.
There is no Ludite solution here. There IS, though, a sensible "legislation of
use" solution.


Quote Clamato:
Any abuse is trivial compared to the abuse of the system today.

Right...

This is what I base my statement on: "Immigration" status has only X states:
*) citizen
*) citzen dependor ("in charge" of a non-citizen)
*) non-citzen worker
*) non-citzen resident
*) non-citzen visitor
*) non-citzen dependent
*) (( whatever other weird LEGITIMATE status you might think up ))
*) none of the above (ILLEGAL ALIEN)

How much overhead do you REALLY think this engenders in your "official"
record?


Quote Clamato:
All choices are binary, black and white. If you're afraid to make choices that affect your, and other's, futures, then you put yourself at the will of those prepared to make choices for you.

Only a sith sees things in absolutes.

I see,.. you're thinking of this in (adolescent) mythic terms, which basically
means you're ignoring the realities of the world. If you don't like the way
REAL reality (as opposed to your personal fantasy reality) is evolving, then
you must fight for how you think reality should be.

I applaud you for that if you do it. I laugh at you if you simply whine at it.


Quote Clamato:
And you object to my proposal because of some quasi "I'm evil because I'm a member of a society that has produced so much and who should share, and should have shared, everything with the 'downtrodden' of the world until we are, and were, at the same wretched level."

No, I object because at one point in time YOUR family came to the US and helped build this country. Because of looser immigration laws then, they came in either unopposed or just signed their name in the book. Because of that YOU are an American, and yet you now propose to deny those who would do the same, across the board.

Many of my people were sent back because they were diseased.
Many of my people never came because they were too poor for passage.
Many of my people were instantly imprisoned because they were criminals.

I'm an american because my ancestors (I'm pretty thoroghly mongrelized)
stomped the crap out of the natives because we had overwhelming
technological superiorities.

I'm an american because my ancestors would live where even the natives
wouldn't live, because they could cut down entire forests and build cities in
places the natives called "holy impenetrable wilderness".

My ancestors (and yours, and even the "natives" of every "country") were
once the "invader" to someone else's "holy land".

And at some point the land they took became "theirs". And then they chose
to let people "in" or not as they pleased, and at their discretion.

The fact that it was advantageous at one point to let people in and at
another point NOT advantageous to let them in merely says that conditions
change.

In many people's opinion, some condition(s) have changed such that it
doesn't seem advantageous to let anyone who wants in IN right now.

Show me any country that thinks it's advantageous to let ANYONE in to their
country at all times forever and ever..?


And why? For what reason? Mainly because you don't like it. Well, when your family came here, I'm sure they faced the same discrimination you currently heap on the illegals. Funny how we never seem to learn.

I don't like WHAT?

I like immigrants who come here through proper channels, as they show
respect for our laws and customs.

I don't like immigrants who come here through improper channels, as they
prove themselves to be criminals.

WE NEED IMMIGRANTS,.. and not just because they do work that "we" won't
do, which is nonsense. We need immigrants because it keeps the
national "gene pool" well fortified and better representative of the entire
planet! Our strength is in our ability to evolve, and NOT in our ability to ossify.

Do I worry about the US becoming a "non-white" nation? Hell no. It will
become whatever it will become, racially, but it must ALWAYS be a nation of
law where individuals can make the best of an environment of equal
opportunity (but not equal possesion).

I don't care what race you are, or your preference in music, but criminals can
not be welcomed here.

(( And of course my plan makes it possible for veritably everyone to come
here as a non-criminal,.. if it were properly implimented. ))


Quote Clamato:
So,.. What IS your proposal..?

I'm getting there, I'm getting there!


Quote Clamato:
Not necessarily. Legislation is born from the injustice of previous legislation.

Two wrongs don't make a right, we're supposed to be fixing things, not making them worse.

What I meant by that was that sometimes (oft-times) a rule meant to cure
one injustice creates a situation where another injustice is suddenly thrown
into sharp relief, which calls for the creation of ANOTHER rule to address the
newly highlighted injustice.

IE The law of unintended consequences.


Quote Clamato:
I do actually. If she wants US citizenship, she MUST renounce Japanese citizenship. Period.

But what if she does not want to? Am I forced to decide should I be with my wife or my country?

What if I want to take 5 sticks of dynamite (with blasting caps and electro-
mechanical detonator) onto a 747 for a flight to Honolulu..?

Why does she have a "RIGHT" to have dual citizenship if dual citizenship
is "illegal"..!?


Quote Clamato:
Your child would then not be eligible for US citizenship, unless he/she later went through the entire immigration policy him/herself.

Doesn't that seem fair, if not particularly convenient to you, to the queue of
people who are willing to WORK to get US citizenship?

In life decisions must be made. Sometimes they are hard ones.

Tell you what, why don't we strip YOU (or your children) of your/their citizenship, is that fair?

Why would you do that?

What is the reason for stripping me or my children of our citizenship?

The reason for having your wife "renounce" (voluntarily) her Japanese
citizenship is because it has been deemed proper that citizens of the US have
no other citizenship but US citizenship.

If this is not what whe wants to do, if US citizenship is not worth enough to
her to do that, then she is free to keep her Japanese citizenship and not
recieve US citizenship. She can still live in the US as a resident non-citizen
for as long as she doesn't have that privalege revoked.


Quote Clamato:
You don't have to be, do you?

What would compel you to renounce your citizenship?

Is JAPAN evil for not allowing dual citizenship..?

You are attempting to compel those who after 10 years of having a green card to get US citizenship.

Not at all.

At ten years they would simply reapply for "greencard" status, and go to the
back of the line (and in their home country) behind those (chronologically)
who applied for "greencard" status before them.

A "greencard" is a visa, which allows you into the country for a certain length
of time, after which you must leave the country. Period.


Quote Clamato:
If asked to prove who you are, what would you do?

If it were as easy as finding a credit card, or simply some biometric data on
your person, would that be too much of a stress on you?

There is a big difference between having to prove ID and prove citizenship. I can prove my ID through many different means.

And if the "ID" system in this country were rational, your citizenship status
would simply be a "field" of your normal identity, and as easy to "prove" as
your "personal ID".


Not to mention your system is ripe for idententy theft.

That's why ALL identity systems need to be "rationalized". So that it's easier
to identify ID thieves, and unbelievably difficult to forge ID's.


Quote Clamato:
Please. Any half-witted private dick can get that information.

(( I'll leave the "privacy is a fool's delusion" speech for later... ))

The point is that we can all be identified as a unique person, whether
we "want to" of not, and that information WILL be used to establish your
citizenship status.

So you have no qualms if the government looks into your private medical files? And what if all these databases are breached and your ID suddenly becomes traded in Russia? No worries?

They can, and probably do, look into my (and your) medical files, telephone
history, etc, etc, etc, all the time.

The question is, what are they DOING with my "private" information?

This is why we don't need laws to make the impossible happen (make "the
government" NOT look at our private info), but we need to make laws that
spell out in excruciating detail and severity the consequences of
ANYONE "misusing" our "private" information.

I don't care if anyone LOOKS at my private records, as long as they can't DO
anything with them or because of them.


Quote Clamato:
I agree entirely. If citizenshihp status can't be retreived inside of 2 minutes, the system won't work.

I happen to think that's possible, as my debit card can be checked within
seconds.

Big different between checking a bank account and checking someone's status.

Show me why there's a NECESSARY difference between the two..!


Quote Clamato:
Those who don't wish their (foreign) citizenship can live in the US as a citizen's dependent.

There would likely be more asked of a "dependent-holder" than of other
citizens.

There already is.

In an ideal world, I would love to see a world without borders, where, like the EU, you are free to come and go at will. In reality I know that this would not be possible.

But why!? Specifically WHY..!?

Your specific answers to THAT question will tell you what "your ideal"
immigration policy should be.


So here are my ideas,
Remove the cap limits on immigration. Part of the problem with the current system is that there is a limit on how many people we allow into the US. This system takes years to get someone offical permission to come to the US.

Why are there limits on the number of people we allow into the US? Why does
Mexico have cap limits on immigration? Why does Canada? Why does Peru?

The reason that it takes years to get here is because the law abiding
immigrants have queued up for entry, so that they can be properly
accounted for and "assisted" in what they want to do.

I agree that it takes a long time (probably too long) to get permission to
come here, but I haven't heard anyone say that that process can't be
streamlined.

I'm ALL FOR making it easier for people to legally get here. I'm also all for
making it nearly impossible for people to get here and stay here illegally.


Direct more money to immigration, help speed up the processing system. If we make it faster, cheaper (it takes a lot to come to the US, far more than most people in the world can afford), and more open that will help direct the illegals into legal channels.

Hear hear..!! I completely agree..!! :)


Start a guest worker program that will fast track the workers to perminate resident status, make it easy for those who want to come to work, come to work. Make it easy for them to stay if they work hard and fullfil their requirements.

Hear hear again..!! With the 10 year limit, I agree wholeheartedly..!!


Does that sound like I am opening up the floodgates? Yes, I am. If we channel it to legal status, things will start to even out. If more people are coming legally, we can start assuming that those attempting to cross illegally are probably up to no good. Right now we're shooting blind.

So, weirdly enough, we basically agree..!!

When those who we "want", because they have labor we can use, are
allowed to come in to the point where they saturate the labor niches that
they are wanted for, we can then "turn off the tap", because our borders are
now more impassable and they won't be able to find jobs and will be quickly
deported as "un-greencarded" anyway.

Of course, many of these "laborers" will NOT want to leave after ten years,
so they will go for citizenship, and become citizens, and then it will be
decided that we can now let in some more immigrants.

And of course SOME of these greencard holders will not get citizenship, and
will probably think of staying illegally, but will be picked up for lack of a
greencard, and deported.

And perhaps, because suddenly the way for the poor and downtrodden folks
to get to the US is blocked, these poor and downtrodden folks will look at
their own countries and say to themselves, "We used to run away to other
places to make our living, forsaking making changes in our country because it
was easier to run away. Maybe it's time to see if our country can be as great
as where we used to run away to? We can get LOTS of help from our
relatives that were lucky and became citizens of that other place. Are we not
as good and worthy human beings as the people of that other place to live in
prosperity and good soicety? Perhaps we can change our country to look like
their country? Perhaps...."


That's the start, I'll finish up after a bit.


-Clamato

are you kidding me? If I went to switzerland and said "Hi, I'm going to come here illegially. I am going to leech off of your healthcare system and work for less money than one of your citizens while not paying taxes. And, when you finally do allow me to stay, I want to you to change all your road signs, governmental publications, and ballots into my native language." they'd laugh me out of the country!

Ha! Yes, if you want to live in Switzerland then you should have to learn Swiss. :p

Do this IN SEQUENCE:

1) Amend the constitution to grant "citizenship by birth" only to those with
both parents who are presently citizens.

2) Hermetically seal the border with Mexico AND Canada (and every other
country as well).

3) All immigrants without legal status (on US territory) have 14 days to get
a "green card" allowing them to remain in the US for 10 years or until they are
found to NOT have been working for more than 200 total days in that 10
years (via a registry of employment).

4) ALL police agencies shall be duty bound to ascertain the citizenship status
of ALL persons they come into working contact with. If that status is "non-
citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

5) ALL government (Local/State/Federal) agencies are to require proof of
citizenship status of anyone who wishes to obtain their services. If that
status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder", that person is deported.

6) ALL employers shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL prospective and
current employees, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard holder",
that person is deported.

7) ALL healthcare facilities shall ascertain the citizenship status of ALL
persons seeking assistance, and if that status is "non-citizen non-greencard
holder", that person is duly assisted and then immediately deported.

8) ALL persons with greencards shall remain within the boundaries of the US
for all but 200 days total for 10 years. Otherwise immediately deported.

9) ALL persons with greencards shall otherwise be treated exactly like a
naturalized US citizen but for the above conditions.

10) ALL persons who have within 10 years:
-- Learned a mimimal proficiency of English,
-- Taken the "necessary coursework" for citizenship,
-- Satisfied the above conditions,
..shall be granted citizenship.

11) ALL persons who have not achieved citizenship within 10 years is
immediately relieved of the use of their greencard and deported when found.



Possible refinement(s): (I may add to this..)

*) Establish an island "holding facility" in the arctic for deportees who wish
NOT to go back to their (actual or assigned) countries of origin.


Whatch think..? :)


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

I like it, now add some teeth to it.

I don't recall this issue being about my pain. I'm a Canadian citizen, with no desire to enter the US. It's the pain of the "illegal" immigrants I'm talking about.
Your whole process their is extremely insensitive and inhuman. The supply need? What about all those people who need a safe place and a good job? Are they less important simply because they aren't needed to benefit the economy? Secondly, how do you define "wanted"? do you base it on the race or religion of the immigrants? Or how about how well they'll assimilate into American culture?

Hey, if it's so terrible for the illegals to come to the US, why don't you petition the Canadian government to allow all the people who want to come to the US into Canada? You have plenty of land and resources for the Mexicans and Central Americans who come the US illegally. You have much more land and a smaller population, so they can fill Canada out a bit.

Let them clog your healthcare and education system awhile and see how Canada copes with it. While they're at it, they'll also want you to change all your road signs and legal documents to include Spanish, so make some room between the English and the French.

If that's fine with you and your government, then we'll deport them to Canada instead of their home countries. You can give them all the wonderful treatment you want... in YOUR country.

I was not paying a helluva lot of attention to names, but to whoever said that we dont all carry some sort of ID on us.. let check the wallet. Hm. A California ID card with my drivers # on it. And a drivers license. both have a number that ties directly to me and shows that i'm a legal resident of the US! how handy!

Lets not forget that everybody born into the USA is given a Social Secutiry # as well. There is another way of tracking people that is already in place. Would it be impossable to tie a picture or thumb print along side either of those #'s and put it into a huge database so that if any government official needed to check my status, he would just have to type in the number and then compare me with what my record said? I dont think so.

As for how expensive it would be.. Yea, setting up a giant mainframe like that would be pricey. But, the money could come out of the funding that goes towards paying all of the Illegal Immigrants welfare and such. Seeing as how they would not be here anymore due to being Illegal.