NationStates Jolt Archive


Build the Wall for Immigration Control or Not?

La Habana Cuba
02-05-2006, 03:22
I have always wanted to do a thread similar to our NS Nation Issues.

I favor a wall, build a military tunel under it if we have too.

English Class for those who do not speak english to become Citizens, a Social Customs Class for all, to learn,
about American Holidays, and traditions.

The only nation that has these laws is Isreal, but I think Capt Cody did a thread showing Europe is passing similar laws, have to check it out.

On the other hand I have mixed feelings on the subject, as A Cuban American I support the Cuban Adjustment Act, that allows Cubans who make it to the USA in anyway, stay and apply for legal status after a year in the USA.
And the wet foot dry foot policy as dry foot no matter what, but I have to admit it is not fair to other immigrant groups for any reasons and the laws should be abolished.
I waited in Cuba at least 5 years before I emigrated legally to the USA.

Legal immigrants are legal immigrants and all thier rights need to be respected including the right to protest in favor of illegal immigrants.

In many cases, many legal immigrants have illegal immigrant relatives and close family members, and many became legal immigrants during the 1980 s amenesty program.

And illegal immigrants are illegal immigrants.

Just try to be an illegal immigrant in one of my 39 NS Nations.

I will do whatever I can as President to return you to your native land of origin.

We will pay whatever wages we have too, to get the jobs done.
___________________________________________

Border security or boondoggle?
A plan for 700 miles of Mexican border wall heads for Senate -- its future is not assured
Tyche Hendricks, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, February 26, 2006

A proposal to build a double set of steel walls with floodlights, surveillance cameras and motion detectors along one-third of the U.S.-Mexican border heads to the Senate next month after winning overwhelming support in the House.

The wall would be intended to prevent illegal immigrants and potential terrorists from hiking across the southern border into the United States. It would run along five segments of the 1,952-mile border that now experience the most illegal crossings.

The plan already has roiled diplomatic relations with Mexico. Leaders in American border communities are saying it will damage local economies and the environment. And immigration experts say that -- at a cost of at least $2.2 billion -- the 700-mile wall would be an expensive boondoggle.

The December House vote of 260-159 is the strongest endorsement yet for building a wall, which Rep. Duncan Hunter, a San Diego County Republican, has been pushing for two decades as a tactic against illegal immigration. Support for the wall was even stronger than for the bill it was attached to -- a larger plan to curb terrorism and illegal immigration sponsored by Wisconsin Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner that passed 239 to 182.

"It is a tangible demonstration of the seriousness of the United States in not permitting illegal migration into the country," said Jack Martin, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., that favors tighter immigration controls.

Hunter estimates that building two rigid, steel-mesh barriers with a paved road between will cost $2.2 billion, though the price tag could be almost twice that, based on the actual cost of a similar but much shorter fence now under construction in San Diego.

Hunter spokesman Joe Kasper said the money would be well spent.

"The fence in itself is a force multiplier," Kasper said. "It allows Border Patrol agents to refocus their attention to other areas because it won't require as many Border Patrol agents to monitor a location as it would without a fence."

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said in an e-mail interview that she opposes the Sensenbrenner bill, though she supports a similar fence now being built along 14 miles of the border in San Diego County.

"Fencing in combination with other things, is useful," she said. "One of the things I believe is you have to enforce our nation's borders."

Residents fear impacts

The fence plan is likely to change significantly in the Senate when it takes up immigration reform, border security, employment verification and guest worker proposals in March. Two versions of immigration reform have been introduced in the Senate, but a third, released Friday by Sen. Arlen Specter, was the first to mention a fence, calling for a study of building a "physical barrier system" along the U.S. borders with both Mexico and Canada.

Leaders in many border cities already have vehemently objected to a fence. The city of Calexico in Imperial County passed a resolution in early January opposing it.

"We should be in the construction of bridges of good relationships with Mexico," said Calexico Mayor Alex Perrone, whose city has mutual aid agreements with the police and fire departments in neighboring Mexicali, just over the border in Baja California. Calexico's retail economy depends on Mexican shoppers, he added. "If we don't have Mexico, we don't have Calexico."

Mike Allen, director of the McAllen (Texas) Economic Development Corp., said leaders from along the Rio Grande agreed at a recent gathering: "Every single mayor from Brownsville to El Paso is against it.

"We want people to support our immigration laws because we live here," said Allen, who lives a half-mile from the border. "But this will be a tremendous waste of money, and it will not stop (illegal) immigration. People will just go around it."

Among those hurt most by illegal immigration are members of the Tohono O'odham Indian tribe, whose desert land stretches along 70 miles of the Arizona-Mexico border. But tribal leaders don't want their land to be fenced, as proposed under the Sensenbrenner bill, because that would prevent Indian people and wildlife from crossing the border as they are accustomed to. "We need the Border Patrol, but we have to balance that with respecting the sovereignty of our nation, our land and our people," tribal Chairwoman Vivian Juan-Saunders said in an interview last year. "It's a sensitive balancing act."

Outside Douglas, Ariz., ranchers Warner and Wendy Glenn have seen the number of illegal immigrants crossing their land skyrocket over the past decade. The Glenns rely on the Border Patrol but enforcement doesn't stop the influx; it just shifts where migrants cross, Wendy Glenn said.

A "monster fence" would block migration paths for deer, javelina, coyotes and mountain lions, and damage the sensitive desert ecosystem; accompanying new patrol roads could even create easier routes for smugglers, she said.

"It will only open up more access for drugs and illegals, with more traffic and more damage," Glenn said. "Washington policymakers have no clue what is happening out here on the ground."

Barrier takes many forms

Fencing of some kind already exists along 106 miles of the border, mostly near cities, including San Diego, El Paso and Nogales, Ariz. Most of it consists of welded panels of corrugated steel recycled from portable landing strips the Army used in Vietnam.

Elsewhere, the international line varies from a few strands of barbed wire tacked to wooden fence posts to a winding river where egrets and roseate spoonbills forage.

A fence could be a valuable tool for the Border Patrol, said spokesman Sal Zamora, but building it will be easier said than done.

"Though in theory it might sound like a viable option, in practice it might not be," he said. "I don't know that environmental impact assessments or feasibility studies have been done."

Zamora also said manpower and technology -- night-vision cameras, motion detectors, helicopters and unmanned aerial drones -- are as important as fencing in cutting off illegal border crossings.

Even as fencing and patrols increased steadily over the past dozen years, the number of people arrested trying to cross illegally fluctuated. Illegal crossings may be more reflective of the international economy than border patrol efforts, according to immigration experts.

San Diego's 14-mile double fence has been in the works since 1996. But construction of the 15-foot-high, rigid, steel-mesh barrier, which is the model for the proposed fence, has been stalled by environmental concerns even though Congress gave the Department of Homeland Security authority to disregard environmental and other laws in an effort to speed fence construction.

Roughly $39 million has been spent on the project so far, according to Hunter's office, and Homeland Security plans to spend $35 million more.

If that $74 million is enough to finish the job (Border Patrol officials say the cost could keep rising) and the price is multiplied over the proposed 700 miles, the new fence could run $3.7 billion. Even that estimate doesn't take into account the expense of purchasing or condemning many miles of privately owned land abutting the border or of potential legal challenges.

Other avenues to entry

Illegal border crossings and drug smuggling have dropped in urban areas over the past dozen years, a sign that fortifying walls there and reinforcing them with cameras, buried motion detectors and a doubling of Border Patrol personnel may have worked.

Typical migration routes have shifted to more remote and treacherous regions, however, and border-crossing deaths have increased eight-fold over the past decade to 473 last year. Migrants increasingly hire smugglers, at $1,500 a pop, to help them make the three-day hike through parched and rocky terrain.

The number of unauthorized immigrants to the United States remained more or less steady from 1996 to 2005, according to demographer Jeff Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington, D.C. He said 700,000 to 750,000 people enter the country illegally each year, helping raise the total to a record 11 million in 2005.

As many as one-third of those 11 million people did not walk across the border illegally, instead entering the country on tourist, student or work visas and simply staying after the visas expired, Passel estimated.

These visa "overstays" are from China, the Philippines, India, South America, Canada, Ireland and many other countries, said Passel, whose estimates are used by the Department of Homeland Security. Passel emphasized that more than 99 percent of the 25 million to 30 million legal foreign visitors to the United States each year follow the law in general and obey the terms of their visas.

All 19 of the Sept. 11 hijackers entered the country on legitimate visas and only six had violated them by overstaying, enrolling in school when they entered as tourists, or failing to enroll when they entered as students.

Effectiveness is debatable

Building a wall won't address overstays, and it may not even slow foot traffic across the border, many analysts said.

"People will seek other ways to come into the country," said Maria Echaveste, an immigration expert at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think-tank in Washington, D.C. "I suspect more use of water, more use of fraudulent documents, more use of criminal smuggling.

"So long as there are jobs and there is a demand for labor and we are not serious about cracking down on employers who hire undocumented workers, people will seek to come in," Echaveste said.

Deborah Meyers, an expert on Mexican immigration at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., said a crackdown at the border without new legal avenues for immigrants to come and work in this country is doomed to fail.

"We cannot nor should we barricade ourselves off from everything. It's completely unrealistic," Meyers said. "With the money we spend on a fence, we could be reducing the backlogs in processing for legitimate applicants, we could be putting in a system for verification of work authorization, we could be helping Mexico create jobs so people wouldn't have to leave."

The $2.2 billion Hunter estimates the fence would cost could fund almost 2,500 new Border Patrol agents for five years, a 22 percent increase in the force. Or it could increase 15-fold the U.S. Agency for International Development's spending on economic development in Mexico over the next five years.

After the Sensenbrenner bill passed in mid-December, Mexican President Vicente Fox condemned the fence as "shameful" and dispatched his foreign minister to Washington to raise concerns with senior State Department officials.

"It has become very emotional in Mexico," said Allen, the Texas economic development official. Fence backers "say it's not akin to the Berlin Wall," he said.

"But it is," Allen said. "Mexico is our second-largest trading partner, and we're building a wall to keep them out."

Wall is the first step

Hunter, the wall's key backer, is not worried about the impact on this country's relationship with Mexico, his aide said.

"Homeland security cannot be put on hold for diplomatic concerns," Kasper said. "We don't need permission from any other nation as to how best to protect our communities."

Al Garza, executive director for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, a self-appointed militia group that has been patrolling the border and drawing public attention to the issue of illegal immigration, said before the Senate considers guest worker programs or any other immigration reform, it must beef up border enforcement as a matter of national security.

"The first thing is to secure the border, the rest will take care of itself," Garza said.

Walls around the world

Mexican President Vicente Fox has likened the $2.2 billion double fence proposed for 700 miles of his northern border to the Berlin Wall, a comparison angrily rejected by fence supporters. Throughout history, nations have built walls to keep people in, keep people out or both.

Great Wall of China: One of the greatest construction projects in world history, the Great Wall runs, with branches, about 4,500 miles. Large parts of it date from the seventh through fourth centuries B.C. Built of dirt, stone and brick, the wall ranges from 15 feet to 25 feet wide and 15 feet to 30 feet tall with a 13-foot-wide road on top and watchtowers at regular intervals.

Berlin Wall: The barrier that separated West Berlin from East Berlin and surrounding areas in the former East Germany from 1961 to 1989 was a series of concrete walls up to 15 feet high topped with barbed wire and enhanced with watchtowers, stationary guns, mines and electrified fencing. By the 1980s, the wall ran 75 miles around West Berlin and 28 miles through Berlin.

Morocco / Western Sahara: The Moroccan Wall is a 1,600-mile system of sand berms and rock walls built in the 1980s by Morocco to control Western Sahara, where tensions continue between Morocco and Polisario Front separatists despite a U.N.-brokered cease-fire. The wall is an earthen mound about 7 feet high fronted by a 23-foot-wide ditch and studded with bunkers, barbed wire, and anti-personnel and anti-tank mines.

India / Bangladesh: India has built more than 1,300 miles of a planned 3,034-mile barrier at its border with Bangladesh. The fence will be patrolled by 50,000 officers and key stretches will be electrified. Construction of the $1 billion double fence -- which is 10 to 12 feet high, floodlit and razor-wire filled -- began in 1986 and will be done next year. It may extend near a demilitarized zone separating the two countries, to enclose Indian villages on the border.

Israel: Israel has built about 170 miles of the barrier separating it from the Palestinian-dominated West Bank. Another 140 miles are planned or under construction, and 155 more are under review. The barrier, a wire fence in some places and concrete wall in others, has additional enhancements such as barbed wire, electricity, sensors, watchtowers and sniper posts. Supporters say it has been routed to foil terrorists and critics say it unfairly incorporates Palestinian land into Israel.

Sources: Encyclopedia Britannica, Global Security, CIA FactbookCompiled by Chronicle research librarian Johnny Miller and staff writer Matthew B. Stannard

Coming Monday: Environmental delays over a 14-mile-long border fence near San Diego may presage legal entanglements awaiting any fence project.
La Habana Cuba
02-05-2006, 03:35
As I posted, I have mixed feelings on the subject, notice that I voted for a Path to Citizenship as well, on the other hand as a President of a real world NS Nation, I would not be in favor of this law, on the other hand as a one time law, with all the other laws not to allow the hiring of future illegal immigrants, than the laws work.
Nermid
02-05-2006, 03:50
Didn't read a word of that, I just feel compelled in the deepest reaches of my soul to make a Floyd reference...
But for moderation purposes, I'll try to squeeze relevance into them...

I don't need no arms around me! (for my Mexican ex-g/f)
I don't need no drugs to calm me! (for Mexico legalizing drugs this week)
I have seen the writing on the Wall, (leeeeeeeegislation)
Don't think I need anything at all... (Immigrant work)
No, don't think I need anything at all! (Imports)
All in all you were, just bricks in the Wall. (Conservatives supporting it)


All in all YOU were all just bricks in the Wall! (bad management of the situation for generations, on both the parts of people wishing to enter the country and not waiting to do so legally, and government responses to the issue, both American and Mexican)

There. I feel my natural Floydian instinct calming.
Kinda Sensible people
02-05-2006, 04:00
Bah.. A government provided optional course in rudimentary English would be a great boon to most immigrants. A Traditions course is the worst possible idea, because new and different traditions make Americans what we are. Building a wall would be an exercise in futility and a waste of perfectly good money.

If immigration reform were to stop being so damned restrictive and elitist, I would be fine with trying to keep illegal immigrants out (although, frankly, It's as futile as the War on Drugs is), but as long as we forget that America is a nation of immigrants, I have no tolerance for this nonsense.
The Chinese Republics
02-05-2006, 04:01
La Habana Cuba, if the wall and other anti illegal immigration laws are in place, I don't think it would be much easier for your Cuban buddies to flee Cuba to the US.
The Chinese Republics
02-05-2006, 04:06
On the other hand I have mixed feelings on the subject, as A Cuban American I support the Cuban Adjustment Act, that allows Cubans who make it to the USA in anyway, stay and apply for legal status after a year in the USA.I call this favorism.
Ginnoria
02-05-2006, 04:35
I heartily concur. This ingrateful foreign race has gone too far in its invasion of our country and its assault on our American moral values. They refuse to learn American, pay no taxes, leech off of our expensive social welfare programs, and steal jobs from honest hardworking Americans. A wall must be constructed; all other things aside, think of the terrorist threat. But not just any wall. A simple barrier between the US and Mexico will spark an arms race, which will inevitably lead to the Mexicans physically catapaulting illegals into our country. We must build four walls AND a ceiling to completely enclose the USA, with the only airholes guarded by military garrisons around the clock, and opened only to allow our armed forces out into the world to spread freedom and recover oil deposits.
Greek Olivepicking
02-05-2006, 04:35
build a wall? and what purpose is this for? want to waste some more money, you know there is a war in Iraq going on?
this is all that needs to happen, enforce immigration control laws. No new laws need to be passed nor does this "wall" need to be built.
The Chinese Republics
02-05-2006, 04:39
Things I suggest to anti-immigrant idiots:

1. Buy SaranĀ® Wraps. Lots of them.
2. Start wrapping your whole damn country.
Soheran
02-05-2006, 04:43
I don't care about a "social customs" class. I oppose a wall, support voluntary English classes, and support offering easy citizenship for all residents who want it.
The Chinese Republics
02-05-2006, 04:48
I don't care about a "social customs" class. I oppose a wall, support voluntary English classes, and support offering easy citizenship for all residents who want it.same here. ;)
Nermid
02-05-2006, 04:49
To justify illegal immigration by saying that America is an immigrant nation is to show yourself as not knowing your history.

Irish immigrants: thought of as less than human. In some instances, slaves were thought to be worth more than "the Irish"

Chinese immigrants: forced to work on a railroad, worked like the black slaves around them...yeah, very loving.

African Americans: That whole slavery gig, a century of civil rights movements to get anything...

The Italians, the Japanese (especially during WWII), the list goes on.

Yeah, we're an immigrant nation, but you've got to work your ass off to be anything more than a filthy doormat. We hand out NOTHING.

So, if Central Americans want better treatment, they should prepare for several decades of horrible oppression and filth that will make the argument that they deserve better treatment because "well, we clean the toilets!" seem like...well..."we clean the toilets!"

Don't take this as me supporting one side or the other. I don't. Honestly. I just hate when people use an example that negates their point.
Brains in Tanks
02-05-2006, 04:55
If the U.S. doesn't want illegal immigrants it could just fine companies that hire them. This would be much cheaper than building a wall.

Personally I don't see illegal immigrants as doing more harm than good. Why not make Canada/U.S.A./Mexico a free work zone and build the wall at the bottom of Mexico? It would be much narrower and cheaper to build.
Undelia
02-05-2006, 05:13
My opinion:
Let them in, teach them English, make them citizens and put them to work.
The Godweavers
02-05-2006, 05:20
I don't like the idea of this nation building a wall to keep people out. It's not necessary now, and I doubt that it will ever be. There are other, better ways to keep people from physically crossing the borders. Like fly-over surveillance.

On the economic front, the best way to keep illegals from coming over is to simply enforce the existing employment laws in the US. If employers have to pay every employee minimum wage, provide breaks, provide benefits, and all the other stuff that they are already required to do by law, then there will be no benefit for them to hire illegals.
Kinda Sensible people
02-05-2006, 05:22
To justify illegal immigration by saying that America is an immigrant nation is to show yourself as not knowing your history.

Irish immigrants: thought of as less than human. In some instances, slaves were thought to be worth more than "the Irish"

Chinese immigrants: forced to work on a railroad, worked like the black slaves around them...yeah, very loving.

African Americans: That whole slavery gig, a century of civil rights movements to get anything...

The Italians, the Japanese (especially during WWII), the list goes on.

Yeah, we're an immigrant nation, but you've got to work your ass off to be anything more than a filthy doormat. We hand out NOTHING.

So, if Central Americans want better treatment, they should prepare for several decades of horrible oppression and filth that will make the argument that they deserve better treatment because "well, we clean the toilets!" seem like...well..."we clean the toilets!"

Don't take this as me supporting one side or the other. I don't. Honestly. I just hate when people use an example that negates their point.

Because, y'know, the fact that immigrants were treated like shit totally negates the fact that the longest that most Americans have had famkily in this nation is 400 years, completely disprooving the statement that up until the xenophobic 1890's, this nation was not so disgusting as to put immigration quotas in place?

Have you read the plaque at the base of the statue of liberty? What happened to "Give me your huddled masses, yearning to be free."?

Those damned inconvenient facts...
The Chinese Republics
02-05-2006, 05:26
I found out Nermid voted for two things: "Build the wall" and "Against the wall".

LMAO!!! :D
La Habana Cuba
02-05-2006, 19:02
Some posters seem to make a good point, we dont need to build the expensive $ wall, just enforce the immigration laws, penaltys for hiring illegals, checking documents to see who is illegal at work and apply the law.

No hiring of illegals, no illegal immigration, just legal immigration.

The only reason to build the expensive $ wall, with security features, like cameras, sensors and such, would be to help keep out terrorists from crossing the border.

Is it still worth it $ and why?
Gift-of-god
02-05-2006, 19:15
The existing situation will not change.

A large part of the economy in that area depends on a steady influx of exploitable labour. If you build the wall, no more cheap labour. If you grant them citizenship, no more cheap labour.

Follow the money.
Saladador
02-05-2006, 19:37
I said I'm for the wall and against everything else suggested. That is, I favor more enforcement. I do favor more legal immigration. If we could let more people in legally, they could replace the jobs currently filled by illegal aliens, and the illegal aliens would go back to the countries they came from. If, after that, they decided to enter our country in what I would call "the right way," than I'd be fine with that.

Making the current illegal aliens citizens wouldn't work. No immigrant is going to pay back taxes and fines just so they can be certified legitimate. Opening up immigration a little will help us tremendously.
Yootopia
02-05-2006, 19:40
The only reason to build the expensive $ wall, with security features, like cameras, sensors and such, would be to help keep out terrorists from crossing the border.

Unless they learn how to operate an aircraft or ship. In which case it's pointless.
MaylaKae
02-05-2006, 19:42
haha, wow. i just made a thread about this.
I suppose i'll stick around in here then...

Now we've all heard of these new immigration laws that congress wants to pass. Though the senate has drafted a friendlier, more reasonable bill, the House is actually considering building a wall, or even placing a mine field. The US DOES have a problem with the Mexican boarder and illegal immigrants, but a wall, really?

What I think:
Ok, we're already spending money on taking care of these immigrants anyway, but they are obviously coming here for a reason. Why don't we help fix the SOURCE of the problem, Central America and Mexico. I think that average american's don't know its right to live a poverty ridden life where you have no chance to make it in life. These people just want to feed their families and give their kids an education. Though I don't condone illegal immigration, and just letting them go scott free, kicking them out and building a wall will NOT solve the problem.



That was the first post of my thread, and how i feel about the immigration act.
I'm white and female, by the way, in case that matters.
It did in my government class today.
MaylaKae
02-05-2006, 19:43
The existing situation will not change.

A large part of the economy in that area depends on a steady influx of exploitable labour. If you build the wall, no more cheap labour. If you grant them citizenship, no more cheap labour.

Follow the money.

Don't you love capitalist society?:)
The Psyker
02-05-2006, 20:07
I'm kind of suprised that the social class is geting as much criticism as it is, it doesn't have to be aimed at geting people to abbandon their culture, nor should it, but it could help people adjust to the custums of the new society they moved to and reduce culture shock, besides it sounds like it could be interesting.
Greek Olivepicking
03-05-2006, 02:41
here's my condensed reasoning against illegal immigration

Immigration x Assimilation = Cultural renewal & growth

Immigration x Multiculturalism = cultural suicide
Psychotic Mongooses
03-05-2006, 02:51
Unless they learn how to operate an aircraft or ship. In which case it's pointless.

Or gee, I dunno, use that whoop ass open border between Canada and the US instead maybe? :rolleyes:
Fleckenstein
03-05-2006, 02:55
<sniptastic>

forgot germans. you know, the whole 'everyone hates you' from 1914-1950? plus the fact that everyone actually accepted german immigrants because they learned to *gasp* integrate into society.
Nermid
03-05-2006, 04:07
*yawns, responds to concerns*

Fleckenstine, the examples are as numerous as the places you can immigrate from. Every group's got their story, even the folks who were here before the nation existed (I believe the term used to be "the injuns")

Chinese Republics, I just voted for any answer the "The Wall" in it. The Pink Floyd compulsion, remember? :D

Kinda Sensible, I have an insane amount of trouble understanding your point...so, treating people like slime negates that Europeans conquered this place, which disproves that the nation was nice at the start? Seriously, I don't know what you're saying.

However, if you're trying to put the "The white people who treated people horrible from the start were immigrants, too" spin on this, let us remember that when they came over, they were citizens of an Empire, moving to another part of their Empire...and then they broke off from their Empire, making them Founding Citizens. To act like they're no different than anybody else who crossed the ocean to live here is like saying that if I move to Montana and Montana leaves the Union, I'm just as much an American immigrant to the sovereign nation of Montana as somebody who comes in afterward. I just moved to another part of my country (The urge to refer to Montana as wilderness like unto pre-colonization Boston is strong, but I must resist!)

Maybe a better example is people living in states annexed into the US. They aren't immigrants. A country moved to them, not vice versa.

Besides, if you want to ignore all of that, we could just say that the immigrants that formed the nation were treated badly by their Empire. They fought for better treatment in the Revolutionary War.

Every group has its big boom in migration, where they are treated terribly and don't want to integrate into the big, congealed mass of culture that is America (excepting, again, those first folks, who set the standard purely by being there). Eventually, they fade to the background and they're treated more or less fine, while some other group booms in immigration and shouts that they are being treated worse than any other group in history.

Again, I really don't have a stance on this issue, so much as I have a stance on the way it is argued amongst people that do...that, and I just love playing devil's advocate.
La Habana Cuba
03-05-2006, 09:06
I'm kind of suprised that the social class is geting as much criticism as it is, it doesn't have to be aimed at geting people to abbandon their culture, nor should it, but it could help people adjust to the custums of the new society they moved to and reduce culture shock, besides it sounds like it could be interesting.

That is the intent of the Social Customs Class along with the English Class, to learn the Traditions, Holidays, language, you can do whatever you wan later, talk in whatever you want, this is still America, the USA.

I still like my Lechon Asado - Roasted Pig for Christmas,
and my Pavo - Turkey dinner for Thanksgiving, El Dia de Dar Gracias.

I now have non hispanic American relatives in the family,
that now roast a pig for Christmas.
La Habana Cuba
03-05-2006, 09:32
I will post this post on this thread as well to discuss, because I dont think it has been discussed on these terms, and it fits well on this thread also.

I am refering to the second paragraph mostly, but all these issues are inter-related.

Lets say they deport all 12 million or so illegals, business is not supposed to hire any future illegal immigrants, a document check takes care of this as part of immigration reform.

I have to admit, deporting all 12 million or so illegals is alot of people to deport to thier native nation of origin, will
thier native nation take them in, how do we make them take them in, what kind of economic, political and social problems will it cause for these nations all of a sudden?

lets say they pass a path to Citizenship, business is not supposed to hire any future illegal immigrants, a document check takes care of this as part of immigration reform.

That is the intent of the law.
Solarlandus
03-05-2006, 10:27
$2.2 billion? O_O

Sheesh! No wonder the "build a wall" advocates would never give me any numbers when I asked them how much they thought it'd cost.:eek: And I'm willing to bet this ignores little extras like maintenance and manning the wall as well (Although in fairness to them it the figure would probably be paid out over several years since I doubt this would be constructed in just one year either). I can think of plenty of better uses of $2.2 billion then *that*.

That said, my own position would be a simple one: Make illegal immigration harder, make legal immigration easier, make sure that every new citizen speaks English and understands basic civics. The trick of course is in the implementation. :)
La Habana Cuba
15-05-2006, 19:27
Since President Bush is going to adress the nation tonight on illegal immigration, I think this is a good time to bring this poll thread out one more time.

I think I have a good thread with some good poll options to vote on that covers most of the issues on immigration.
Carnivorous Lickers
15-05-2006, 19:36
Didn't read a word of that, I just feel compelled in the deepest reaches of my soul to make a Floyd reference...
But for moderation purposes, I'll try to squeeze relevance into them...

I don't need no arms around me! (for my Mexican ex-g/f)
I don't need no drugs to calm me! (for Mexico legalizing drugs this week)
I have seen the writing on the Wall, (leeeeeeeegislation)
Don't think I need anything at all... (Immigrant work)
No, don't think I need anything at all! (Imports)
All in all you were, just bricks in the Wall. (Conservatives supporting it)


All in all YOU were all just bricks in the Wall! (bad management of the situation for generations, on both the parts of people wishing to enter the country and not waiting to do so legally, and government responses to the issue, both American and Mexican)

There. I feel my natural Floydian instinct calming.


Ok ok ok ....just a little pinprick...
La Habana Cuba
15-05-2006, 19:38
The Social Class is to teach the customs and traditions of the USA to new immigrants along with the english clas.

This is still America and in public and private you can still speak whichever language you want, I still love my Lechon Asado - Rosted pig for Christmans and my Turkey dinner for thanksgiving.

I now have non hispanic American relatives in the family who roast a pig for christmas.
Psychotic Mongooses
15-05-2006, 19:39
...who roast a pig for christmas.

Barbarians....
What did the pig ever do to you?
Lunatic Goofballs
15-05-2006, 19:42
The Social Class is to teach the customs and traditions of the USA to new immigrants along with the english clas.

This is still America and in public and private you can still speak whichever language you want, I still love my Lechon Asado - Rosted pig for Christmans and my Turkey dinner for thanksgiving.

I now have non hispanic American relatives in the family who roast a pig for christmas.

The only custom or tradition of the United States is the incorporation of other customs and traditions.
Khadgar
15-05-2006, 19:44
A wall is a stupid idea. Frankly I don't see why anyone cares about Mexicans coming into this country anyway. Hell we ought just annex Mexico and be done with it. All this bluster about national security is a load of horseshit. The least secure boarder we have is Canada.
Iztatepopotla
15-05-2006, 19:57
I think a moat would work much better than a wall. Think about it: you make a moat, then fill it with water, add crocodiles and piranhas, and then you can have reality TV shows and bets on the immigrants who are trying to get across. Those who make it to the other side can stay legally in the US, there's your dry-foot / dry-bone thing.
Keruvalia
15-05-2006, 19:58
Only dieing empires build walls.
Eutrusca
15-05-2006, 20:09
I for one, cannot understand the opposition to whatever steps are necessary for protecting our borders, up to and including a wall.
Eutrusca
15-05-2006, 20:10
Only dieing empires build walls.
Nice cliche.
Lunatic Goofballs
15-05-2006, 20:17
I for one, cannot understand the opposition to whatever steps are necessary for protecting our borders, up to and including a wall.

Because it isn't a necessary step. :p
Checklandia
15-05-2006, 20:31
seems a bit hypocritical for a nation that illegaly took native american land to be preventing immigrants from coming into the country and preventing them from doing work that other americans dont want to do.