Debate Thread 1st Topic: Illegal Immigration- Question Time (1 Viewer)

[Hot Diggity Dog]

OK here is what I would suggest: first, exactly what you propose: positive statements, followed by rebuttals, followed by conclusions. Then allow for 5 serious questions from other posters- unserious questions will be ignored. Each side gets to answer the question, and then a rebuttal. Finally a back and forth discussion for as long as both sides want. After that, we allow other posters to opine on who won- we won’t have a vote (because then it’s just a popularity contest) but let posters offer opinions and we’ll leave it at that. Then we move on to the next topic. 
I propose the first topic is illegal immigration. Let me know if this works for you and I’ll begin preparing my opening statement. 

Ok, but I will warn everyone again it will turn into a long process because of my time limitations.  But it sounds like a fun process.   

Illegal immigration is a large topic.  Are we arguing benefits vs. determents since the 1980's?  The current crisis and remedies? Something else?

 

[timschochet]

Ok, but I will warn everyone again it will turn into a long process because of my time limitations.  But it sounds like a fun process.   

Illegal immigration is a large topic.  Are we arguing benefits vs. determents since the 1980's?  The current crisis and remedies? Something else?

I would propose dividing this topic into 4 interrelated subtopics: 

1. Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States? 
2. What should we do about the millions of illegal immigrants already here? 
3. What should we do about the crisis on the border? 
4. What should be our long term goals regarding immigrants (illegal and otherwise) and refugees)? 
 

I can make the first post tonight if you’d like. 

 

[timschochet]

So I will make the first post tomorrow, which will cover each of the 4 subtopics that I raised. 

I typically object to using the term “illegal immigration”; I prefer the term “undocumented immigration” because I believe that the word “illegal” has a negative connotation, obviously, and I don’t believe a person should be considered “illegal”. That being said, I recognize that not only do most people disagree with me about this, they have no bad intent when they use the term “illegal immigrant.” Therefore, so as not to create any confusion, I will use the term “illegal” in my arguments. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Cool.  I'll moderate.

Tim - After much thought, I have decided that you lost the debate. 

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Sounds good.  I will also try topost tomorrow.   See how long this turns out to be. 

 

[BassNBrew]

So I will make the first post tomorrow, which will cover each of the 4 subtopics that I raised. 

I typically object to using the term “illegal immigration”; I prefer the term “undocumented immigration” because I believe that the word “illegal” has a negative connotation, obviously, and I don’t believe a person should be considered “illegal”. That being said, I recognize that not only do most people disagree with me about this, they have no bad intent when they use the term “illegal immigrant.” Therefore, so as not to create any confusion, I will use the term “illegal” in my arguments. 

Just my two cents but I think you should kick this section to the curb, "1. Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States?"  That's not really a criminal immigrant issue.  One could easily ask if increasing immigration would be a net benefit or detriment to the US?  That's independent of the work legal/illegal, criminal/non-criminal, documented/undocumented.  The path you are headed down would be similar to debating global warming and nuclear energy.  Yes they are loosely related, but when I think of a debate, I think of one specific issue being debated.  

 

[timschochet]

Just my two cents but I think you should kick this section to the curb, "1. Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States?"  That's not really a criminal immigrant issue.  One could easily ask if increasing immigration would be a net benefit or detriment to the US?  That's independent of the work legal/illegal, criminal/non-criminal, documented/undocumented.  The path you are headed down would be similar to debating global warming and nuclear energy.  Yes they are loosely related, but when I think of a debate, I think of one specific issue being debated.  

Appreciate the feedback but I do think it’s central to the debate. I will explain my thoughts in more detail tomorrow. 

 

[timschochet]

Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States? 
The answer is net benefit. In terms of economics there are numerous studies that show a benefit, the latest being one from last year that found that for every $1.00 the state of Texas paid for illegal immigrants, it received $1.21: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2020-05-economic-benefits-illegal-immigration-outweigh.amp

But simple logic should also reach the same conclusion: after all they pay more into the system than they take out: for example, millions paid to Social Security yet they receive no Social Security, etc. Not to mention, specifically in agriculture, they keep prices low. 

Moving beyond economic issues illegal immigrants are a benefit in terms of their contribution to public safety, since they commit less serious crimes than, by percentage, do the rest of us- they are far more law-abiding. If this seems ironic because they came here illegally in the first place it shouldn’t; they are typically both too busy working  and too afraid of deportation to engage in unlawful activity, especially of a serious nature. Again, study after study bears this out, despite awful anecdotes that certain unscrupulous politicians attempt to focus on. 
Illegal immigrants have been more good than bad for us. 

 

[timschochet]

What should we do about the millions of illegal immigrants already here? 
Nobody is exactly sure how many are here. Everybody agrees at least 10 million, some think as high as 15 million or more. 
We will never be able to afford to deport all these people, nor would most Americans be willing to accept the awful price to civil liberties that it would take even to attempt such an effort. Yet most Americans are also resistant to the idea of simply giving them amnesty and citizenship as this would seem to reward unlawful behavior. But their current status creates tons of discord. 
Most Americans are in favor of DACA, despite continued Republican opposition. But since that affects only a small minority of the overall number of illegals, I won’t address the ins and outs of that program in this argument. 
I am supposed to argue here for the “traditional liberal position”, but that has varied greatly on this question. So therefore I will argue for my OWN position: I believe that illegal immigrants should have to pay a reasonable fine for the crime of coming here illegally- it’s important, in a law and order society, that no crime should be forgiven. Since crossing the border without papers is a misdemeanor, a fine of $5,000 should be enough. Once they have paid this, they should be allowed to remain with all of the rights afforded someone with a green card, with two major conditions: 

1. If at any point in the future they commit a felony or violent crime, they are subject to immediate deportation (following punishment). 
2. There will be no Path to Citizenship. They will never be citizens. They will be given full legal status, but they will never have the right to vote. (That should satisfy those who complain that amnesty is a scheme to create more Democratic Party voters.) Their children will be full citizens with the right to vote. 
 

That’s how I would handle this issue. 

 

[timschochet]

What should we do about the crisis on the border? 
The current crisis on the border is a conflating of two issues: refugees and illegal immigrants. Too often, those who start out as refugees become illegal immigrants due to the interminable waiting period to process these people. Therefore, the first answer to the crisis is pretty easy: speed up the process. That means more judges, more facilities, smaller wait times- essentially it means more money. Neither Congress nor the public has been willing to pay it. But if you want to solve this problem you’re going to have to. The Governor of Texas just pledged $250 million state dollars for a border wall. Texans would benefit incredibly more if he had pledged that money to help process these people. 
The second point is that it’s to our benefit to let in as many of these folks as we can as refugees- the more the merrier. But since that issue doesn’t really address illegal immigration, I will leave that argument for now. 
Kamala Harris’s solution of urging people “don’t come” is completely ineffectual (not to mention being contrary to the uniquely American ideal of society.) They’re coming. What shall we do about it? 

 

[timschochet]

What should be our long term goals regarding immigrants (legal and otherwise) and refugees? 
Two part answer here: 

1. First off, both the refugee and illegal immigration problems are the results of an unstable situation in other countries, particularly to the south of us. The causes for this are many: corrupt regimes of both left and right, climate change creating drought conditions which are only going to get worse. There’s going to be greater migration and more and more pressure on our southern border, and no wall is going to stop it. We need to invest more heavily in creating stable societies south of the border. And we need to come up with technologies that will fight climate change. 
2. The American ideal was written by Emma Lazarus and inscribed on our Statue of Liberty. “Give me your tired, your hungry, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free”- those words define us as a nation, and everything we do on this issue should be with those ideals in mind. If we ever become a society that resists refugees and immigrants (with papers or without) we will be turning our backs on the American exceptionalism that has made this country the greatest in human history. 

 

[timschochet]

So those are my initial arguments on these issues. I tried to keep everything as brief as possible. I eagerly await HDD’s opening arguments, after which we will move to phase 2, which is rebuttals. 

 

[supermike80]

What should we do about the millions of illegal immigrants already here? 
Nobody is exactly sure how many are here. Everybody agrees at least 10 million, some think as high as 15 million or more. 
We will never be able to afford to deport all these people, nor would most Americans be willing to accept the awful price to civil liberties that it would take even to attempt such an effort. Yet most Americans are also resistant to the idea of simply giving them amnesty and citizenship as this would seem to reward unlawful behavior. But their current status creates tons of discord. 
Most Americans are in favor of DACA, despite continued Republican opposition. But since that affects only a small minority of the overall number of illegals, I won’t address the ins and outs of that program in this argument. 
I am supposed to argue here for the “traditional liberal position”, but that has varied greatly on this question. So therefore I will argue for my OWN position: I believe that illegal immigrants should have to pay a reasonable fine for the crime of coming here illegally- it’s important, in a law and order society, that no crime should be forgiven. Since crossing the border without papers is a misdemeanor, a fine of $5,000 should be enough. Once they have paid this, they should be allowed to remain with all of the rights afforded someone with a green card, with two major conditions: 

1. If at any point in the future they commit a felony or violent crime, they are subject to immediate deportation (following punishment). 
2. There will be no Path to Citizenship. They will never be citizens. They will be given full legal status, but they will never have the right to vote. (That should satisfy those who complain that amnesty is a scheme to create more Democratic Party voters.) Their children will be full citizens with the right to vote. 
 

That’s how I would handle this issue. 

Not my debate and I generally disagree with you on everything, but I 100% agree with this stance on the existing illegals.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Has Illegal Immigration been a benefit or a detriment?  

It is undoubtedly true the American Economy has grown to a larger size than it otherwise would have been if Illegal Immigration had not existed.  So if no Immigrant, Illegal or Legal, had ever come to the United States in the past say 40 years, that would mean that some economic activity simply would never had happened.  But many impacts of the Illegal portion of this Immigration on American society can not be easily monetized but are real, and are in some cases essentially ignored.  

The first cost never considered is cost paid by the Immigrants themselves.  From the money for bribes and payment to smugglers to the very real possibility of death due to the hazards of the trip from all points in Central and South America.  Further the chaos of the journey cannot helped but change the Immigrant themselves.  Especially if the Immigrant is a woman.  Estimates are between 60 and 80 percent of women are sexually assaulted during their trip to the United States.  It is sobering to think that the female Immigrant that makes your hamburger at McDonald's or cleans your hotel room was more than likely sexually assaulted just to have the opportunity to serve you.  Further while crossing the border is considered a misdemeanor, what actions are Immigrants forced to do to get to that point?  Theft for the money to bribe all sorts of officials, drug smuggling to pay off debt to the human smugglers, etc.?   Acknowledging that life in Central and South America is often harsher than life in the the United States, still the trip to the Southern Border is a cost that could be greatly reduced with out the Illegal portion of the Immigration.  

Second is the cost paid by American workers, certainly on the lower end of the income scale.  Estimates range up to -5% for the effect Illegal Immigration has on the wages earned by high school drop outs, a not insignificant loss.  But further African Americans have had twice the rate of unemployment as White Americans since the early 1970's.  This is unjustifiable when we have a sector of the economy that is drawing a significant portion of some 150,000 to 170,000 people every month to risk the chaos of the Southern Border to gain employment in the United States.  We have failed to grasp an opportunity for the an organic racial integration of our society, while also organically addressing an issue with in the African American community.

Third is the costs we inflict on ourselves as a nation.  How can a large and capable country like the United States not have control of it's border?  How can it allow a situation where criminal cartels profit as a direct consequence of that inability?  Why do we let our own citizens in border states bare the costs of this traffic?  Why do prefer the hiring Illegal Immigrants over our own fellow citizens?  In the end answers to these questions are not flattering to our Society.  Some of our hearts have been harden to our traditional role as a country that embraces immigration, it has contributed to slowly eroding our faith as citizens that our Government, whether governed by either party, can solve  problems.   And I think contributes to a general cynicism and disregard for our laws.  Our institutions have failed us by allowing this issue persist for so long without resolve for the Immigrants and American Citizens themselves.  

For these and other reasons allowing Illegal Immigration to become an institution in our society has not been a net benefit for the United States. 

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

How to deal with resident Illegal Immigrants?

Start a program that will grant residency to Illegal Immigrants currently here.  This residency would not grant voting rights and would not be a citizenship.  But it would allow people who have entered the country illegally to have other legal rights and protections.  Their childern could become citizens through normal procedures.  If a person wanted to pursue citizenship they could through the normal procedures.  Conditions for the program, people entering it can not leave the country for more than 31 days out of the year or the residency is revoked.  We want these people to integrate into American Society as quickly as possible.  If an Illegal Immigrant does not  enroll in the program in the first year of  its creation, they are subject to deportation, although if they come forward after the first year to apply for the residency they would not be deported.  Let's end this collective nightmare and move on.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

How to solve the Current Border Crisis?

The border should be closed as quickly as possible.  That is the only way to stop people from coming to the border and extending the crisis.  A wall may or may not be part of that, I think the most important key is more resources in the form of border patrol officers to enforce the border and judges to clear out the people in the holding facilites as quickly as possible.  People captured crossing the border need to be sent back to countries of origin as best as possible.  This will cause pain but there is no way to get off this ride without some pain.  

 

[timschochet]

Excellent job! 
I’m assuming that, after you finish your 4th point, it will be my turn to offer rebuttals to your arguments, after which you offer rebuttals to mine, and then we move on to questions from anyone reading this. 

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Long term immigration goals.  

First we need to attract the best and the brightest in the world to help us maintain our lead and, if I may say this ever so humbly, to allow them an atmosphere where they can be most productive for the betterment of human kind.  We have some large problems headed towards us and we need solutions to them.  

Second we need an evaluation of the impact of automation on the United States.  Very soon we may lose the employment of nearly whole industries,  such as transportation.  Adding more unskilled labor to our population should be done judiciously.  

In regards to refugees, it is not possible for America to take in everyone that would claim refugee status if the United States opened it borders to all refugees.  Can we help in some of the most severe current and future problems?  Sure.  But, and I am sure many will cringe at this suggestion, rather than take them, in the best solution is to export our way of life.  In 1895 the average family in the Western World lived on the $1 a day in current dollars, the current U.N. standard for extreme poverty.  Currently that same family lives on $137 a day, assuming an average household income of $50,000 a year.  It would do more for the future of the world to make the world population freer, richer, and more educated, in the place they live now.  

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Excellent job! 
I’m assuming that, after you finish your 4th point, it will be my turn to offer rebuttals to your arguments, after which you offer rebuttals to mine, and then we move on to questions from anyone reading this. 

Well thank you.  I assume you did as well.  I have not read your posts so as not to pollute my original arguments.  Hopefully we will provide some engaging arguments for our fellow board members.  

 

[timschochet]

Has Illegal Immigration been a benefit or a detriment?  

It is undoubtedly true the American Economy has grown to a larger size than it otherwise would have been if Illegal Immigration had not existed.  So if no Immigrant, Illegal or Legal, had ever come to the United States in the past say 40 years, that would mean that some economic activity simply would never had happened.  But many impacts of the Illegal portion of this Immigration on American society can not be easily monetized but are real, and are in some cases essentially ignored.  

The first cost never considered is cost paid by the Immigrants themselves.  From the money for bribes and payment to smugglers to the very real possibility of death due to the hazards of the trip from all points in Central and South America.  Further the chaos of the journey cannot helped but change the Immigrant themselves.  Especially if the Immigrant is a woman.  Estimates are between 60 and 80 percent of women are sexually assaulted during their trip to the United States.  It is sobering to think that the female Immigrant that makes your hamburger at McDonald's or cleans your hotel room was more than likely sexually assaulted just to have the opportunity to serve you.  Further while crossing the border is considered a misdemeanor, what actions are Immigrants forced to do to get to that point?  Theft for the money to bribe all sorts of officials, drug smuggling to pay off debt to the human smugglers, etc.?   Acknowledging that life in Central and South America is often harsher than life in the the United States, still the trip to the Southern Border is a cost that could be greatly reduced with out the Illegal portion of the Immigration.  

Second is the cost paid by American workers, certainly on the lower end of the income scale.  Estimates range up to -5% for the effect Illegal Immigration has on the wages earned by high school drop outs, a not insignificant loss.  But further African Americans have had twice the rate of unemployment as White Americans since the early 1970's.  This is unjustifiable when we have a sector of the economy that is drawing a significant portion of some 150,000 to 170,000 people every month to risk the chaos of the Southern Border to gain employment in the United States.  We have failed to grasp an opportunity for the an organic racial integration of our society, while also organically addressing an issue with in the African American community.

Third is the costs we inflict on ourselves as a nation.  How can a large and capable country like the United States not have control of it's border?  How can it allow a situation where criminal cartels profit as a direct consequence of that inability?  Why do we let our own citizens in border states bare the costs of this traffic?  Why do prefer the hiring Illegal Immigrants over our own fellow citizens?  In the end answers to these questions are not flattering to our Society.  Some of our hearts have been harden to our traditional role as a country that embraces immigration, it has contributed to slowly eroding our faith as citizens that our Government, whether governed by either party, can solve  problems.   And I think contributes to a general cynicism and disregard for our laws.  Our institutions have failed us by allowing this issue persist for so long without resolve for the Immigrants and American Citizens themselves.  

For these and other reasons allowing Illegal Immigration to become an institution in our society has not been a net benefit for the United States. 

Rebuttal 

you essentially make 3 arguments here: 

1. Yes, the sexual abuse, and sometimes slavery, that many women who cross our borders suffer cannot be denied. But it’s important to also acknowledge that they’re taking that horrible risk because they’re desperate to come here and have a better life. If we were to somehow successfully shut off this escape valve for them, would they suffer any less? No, in fact their lives would likely be far worse. But we wouldn’t have to hear about it. Isn’t the answer therefore to make their trek safer by giving them legal access to this country rather than attempting to make it more difficult? That is what I believe. 
 

2. By tying the rate of African-American unemployment to the numbers of illegal immigrants who arrive here, you’re basically saying that blacks should be doing these low level, ill-paying jobs forever. That is contrary to the American ideal, in which each new group of people that come here begin at the bottom rungs of the economy and then advance upward over time. I simply do not believe that, if all illegal immigrants were to magically disappear tomorrow, that black Americans would rush in to take over their jobs, particularly in the blazing heat of farmland in California, Texas, and Arizona. Most Americans wouldn’t take these jobs. 
 

3. I can’t really rebut your last point here- there are moral problems that come with this issue, and it does contribute to cynicism. Though, as I’ve argued I believe these people are a net benefit, it’s also an unsustainable situation and needs to change. That we agree on. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Well thank you.  I assume you did as well.  I have not read your posts so as not to pollute my original arguments.  Hopefully we will provide some engaging arguments for our fellow board members.  

Very good work here by both you and @timschochet.  I'm enjoying this immensely even though I already judged that Tim lost before you guys even started. 

 

[timschochet]

How to deal with resident Illegal Immigrants?

Start a program that will grant residency to Illegal Immigrants currently here.  This residency would not grant voting rights and would not be a citizenship.  But it would allow people who have entered the country illegally to have other legal rights and protections.  Their childern could become citizens through normal procedures.  If a person wanted to pursue citizenship they could through the normal procedures.  Conditions for the program, people entering it can not leave the country for more than 31 days out of the year or the residency is revoked.  We want these people to integrate into American Society as quickly as possible.  If an Illegal Immigrant does not  enroll in the program in the first year of  its creation, they are subject to deportation, although if they come forward after the first year to apply for the residency they would not be deported.  Let's end this collective nightmare and move on.

Rebuttal

Since this is very close to the plan I proposed , I can’t argue against it too much. What a great idea! 
My only point of disagreement is deporting anyone who doesn’t sign up in the first year. That seems way too harsh for me, especially dealing with a lot of people that tend to be on the low information side of things. In any event, I oppose deportation in all instances unless a violent crime has been committed. 
I would also add, per my plan, that they need to pay a fine. They did, after all, break the law and some sort of restitution needs to be addressed. 

 

[timschochet]

How to solve the Current Border Crisis?

The border should be closed as quickly as possible.  That is the only way to stop people from coming to the border and extending the crisis.  A wall may or may not be part of that, I think the most important key is more resources in the form of border patrol officers to enforce the border and judges to clear out the people in the holding facilites as quickly as possible.  People captured crossing the border need to be sent back to countries of origin as best as possible.  This will cause pain but there is no way to get off this ride without some pain.  

Rebuttal 

Putting aside the point that you can’t close the border because there’s too much trade, you’re not really addressing the problem here at all. It’s also important to remember that over half of all of our illegal immigrants don’t come by way of the border at all; they come here legally on planes and simply overstay their visas. 
But as for the folks crossing our borders: these people are coming because if they don’t they are going to starve to death or be murdered in violence or live out lives of pure misery. Do you think walls or border enforcement are going to stop them? It’s a wasted effort. They will dig under the walls, or climb over, or find ways around them. We can’t stop them. We can’t even slow them down through enforcement (the war against drugs we’ve been waging for 59 years now should have taught us that). It’s a wasted effort. The border enforcement is not the root of the problem and will not address it. 
 

(I should take note here that my position on this matter differs from that of the Democratic Party, whom under its current leadership hypocritically pretends that it CAN address this issue through greater border enforcement. They are wrong, they know it, but they’re trying to get votes from the white middle class.) 

 

[timschochet]

Long term immigration goals.  

First we need to attract the best and the brightest in the world to help us maintain our lead and, if I may say this ever so humbly, to allow them an atmosphere where they can be most productive for the betterment of human kind.  We have some large problems headed towards us and we need solutions to them.  

Second we need an evaluation of the impact of automation on the United States.  Very soon we may lose the employment of nearly whole industries,  such as transportation.  Adding more unskilled labor to our population should be done judiciously.  

In regards to refugees, it is not possible for America to take in everyone that would claim refugee status if the United States opened it borders to all refugees.  Can we help in some of the most severe current and future problems?  Sure.  But, and I am sure many will cringe at this suggestion, rather than take them, in the best solution is to export our way of life.  In 1895 the average family in the Western World lived on the $1 a day in current dollars, the current U.N. standard for extreme poverty.  Currently that same family lives on $137 a day, assuming an average household income of $50,000 a year.  It would do more for the future of the world to make the world population freer, richer, and more educated, in the place they live now.  

Rebuttal 

I am opposed to the “best and brightest” immigration ideas that modern day conservatives are proposing for two reasons: first because we simply don’t know where great ideas come from. Most of the greatest innovations created by immigrants were from people with no family background in their chosen fields- they came from all over the place. The daughter of an illegal immigrant farm hand is just as likely to discover a new usable source of energy as a college professor from some notable university- we just don’t know. The second reason is that it tends to lead to racist results- I’m forced to mention here the previous President who sought immigrants from Norway at the expense of “####hole countries” in Africa. I won’t address this further. 
That being said, I do agree about automation and addressing it. I’m not sure how to address it, but we need to have the discussion. 
I also agree that we can’t take in every refugee but we sure as hell can take in a whole lot more than we are now. We’re not even close to full; we’re like the half empty lifeboats at the end of Titanic. We can rescue more and it’s our duty to do so as Americans. 
I absolutely 100% agree with exporting our ideas across the world. This is best done through free trade. But frustratingly, the folks most concerned about our immigration issues are also the ones most opposed these days to free trade. The two issues are intertwined. 

 

[timschochet]

That concludes my rebuttals. It’s now your turn and then we move on to the next phase. 

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States? 
The answer is net benefit. In terms of economics there are numerous studies that show a benefit, the latest being one from last year that found that for every $1.00 the state of Texas paid for illegal immigrants, it received $1.21: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2020-05-economic-benefits-illegal-immigration-outweigh.amp

But simple logic should also reach the same conclusion: after all they pay more into the system than they take out: for example, millions paid to Social Security yet they receive no Social Security, etc. Not to mention, specifically in agriculture, they keep prices low. 

Moving beyond economic issues illegal immigrants are a benefit in terms of their contribution to public safety, since they commit less serious crimes than, by percentage, do the rest of us- they are far more law-abiding. If this seems ironic because they came here illegally in the first place it shouldn’t; they are typically both too busy working  and too afraid of deportation to engage in unlawful activity, especially of a serious nature. Again, study after study bears this out, despite awful anecdotes that certain unscrupulous politicians attempt to focus on. 
Illegal immigrants have been more good than bad for us. 

There are also many studies I can produce that dispute your conclusion that they pay more in taxes than the benefits.  A particular point of contention in the comparison between studies is the status of the children of Illegal immigrants.   The child is a citizen so not counted as immigrant receiving aid but the child wouldn't be here if not for the parents.  Doing research for this debate I find you can get a study that will support either position and many seem to have an agenda either way.  Net benefits for government spending on the state level is very region dependent.   And on the Federal level inclusion of children of immigrants begins to muddy the argument.  This could be the subject to a long debate by itself.  

In regards to lower prices of labor , products etc. we are paying lesser prices because of the desperation and the illegal nature of the immigrants.  This is a stain on us and contributes to a negative stereotype of the immigrants themselves and the labor they perform and its value.  Something similar to buying products produced by child labor from overseas except it is happening here, to our new neighbors.  Is that worth a dollar or two less per pound of strawberries?

In regards to public safety; would not their fear of deportation also make a victim of a crime less likely to report it?  We have a set of potential crime victims with another layer of reasons to not report crime.  My own common sense tells me this is closer to the truth.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

What should we do about the crisis on the border? 
The current crisis on the border is a conflating of two issues: refugees and illegal immigrants. Too often, those who start out as refugees become illegal immigrants due to the interminable waiting period to process these people. Therefore, the first answer to the crisis is pretty easy: speed up the process. That means more judges, more facilities, smaller wait times- essentially it means more money. Neither Congress nor the public has been willing to pay it. But if you want to solve this problem you’re going to have to. The Governor of Texas just pledged $250 million state dollars for a border wall. Texans would benefit incredibly more if he had pledged that money to help process these people. 
The second point is that it’s to our benefit to let in as many of these folks as we can as refugees- the more the merrier. But since that issue doesn’t really address illegal immigration, I will leave that argument for now. 
Kamala Harris’s solution of urging people “don’t come” is completely ineffectual (not to mention being contrary to the uniquely American ideal of society.) They’re coming. What shall we do about it? 

It sounds like we agree on the need to process the people at the border as quickly as possible but not in service of the goals.  

Harris's "don't come" solution won't work because it has no teeth to back it up or any alternative to it.  If we had a border that was secure and a policy on refugees we could stop the flow.   Add in better facilities, designed to take in immigrants and refugees, at our embassies in these countries we could have a legal, and honorable system for all involved to address these problems. 

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

What should we do about the millions of illegal immigrants already here? 
Nobody is exactly sure how many are here. Everybody agrees at least 10 million, some think as high as 15 million or more. 
We will never be able to afford to deport all these people, nor would most Americans be willing to accept the awful price to civil liberties that it would take even to attempt such an effort. Yet most Americans are also resistant to the idea of simply giving them amnesty and citizenship as this would seem to reward unlawful behavior. But their current status creates tons of discord. 
Most Americans are in favor of DACA, despite continued Republican opposition. But since that affects only a small minority of the overall number of illegals, I won’t address the ins and outs of that program in this argument. 
I am supposed to argue here for the “traditional liberal position”, but that has varied greatly on this question. So therefore I will argue for my OWN position: I believe that illegal immigrants should have to pay a reasonable fine for the crime of coming here illegally- it’s important, in a law and order society, that no crime should be forgiven. Since crossing the border without papers is a misdemeanor, a fine of $5,000 should be enough. Once they have paid this, they should be allowed to remain with all of the rights afforded someone with a green card, with two major conditions: 

1. If at any point in the future they commit a felony or violent crime, they are subject to immediate deportation (following punishment). 
2. There will be no Path to Citizenship. They will never be citizens. They will be given full legal status, but they will never have the right to vote. (That should satisfy those who complain that amnesty is a scheme to create more Democratic Party voters.) Their children will be full citizens with the right to vote. 
 

That’s how I would handle this issue. 

I think there is no major disagreement here. I think the major issue here is it can't be alone, only in conjunction with totghtening the borders etc.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Someone has made the obligatory shining path quote reference here, I presume?

 

[timschochet]

I’m waiting for @Hot Diggity Dogto make a rebuttal on my 4th point, and then we will open this up to questions. 

 

[ScottNorwood]

I OBJECT!

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I’m waiting for @Hot Diggity Dogto make a rebuttal on my 4th point, and then we will open this up to questions. 

Are you Lincoln or Douglas? @shining path

 

[timschochet]

Are you Lincoln or Douglas? @shining path

I only got to know shining path briefly before he passed, but he seemed like a great guy. 
Not sure about the reference, but I’m certainly not worthy of either gentleman. 

 

[sho nuff]

I OBJECT!

Overruled...your objection was not strenuous.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

What should be our long term goals regarding immigrants (legal and otherwise) and refugees? 
Two part answer here: 

1. First off, both the refugee and illegal immigration problems are the results of an unstable situation in other countries, particularly to the south of us. The causes for this are many: corrupt regimes of both left and right, climate change creating drought conditions which are only going to get worse. There’s going to be greater migration and more and more pressure on our southern border, and no wall is going to stop it. We need to invest more heavily in creating stable societies south of the border. And we need to come up with technologies that will fight climate change. 
2. The American ideal was written by Emma Lazarus and inscribed on our Statue of Liberty. “Give me your tired, your hungry, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free”- those words define us as a nation, and everything we do on this issue should be with those ideals in mind. If we ever become a society that resists refugees and immigrants (with papers or without) we will be turning our backs on the American exceptionalism that has made this country the greatest in human history. 

American exceptionalism is the reason people want to come, not the process of them coming here.  And if we ever took in all the people that wanted to come here and could what would that look like?  500 million, 1 billion people?  What problems would that solve?

Immigration in the past was used almost literally to fill up the country.   Are we full now?  More so than ever before that is for sure but we can and should maintain a level of immigration.   However the "system" we have allowed to fester on our Southern Border dishonors our country's heritage and the immigrants that come here. 

 

[timschochet]

Excellent job, @Hot Diggity Dog

OK we are now open to questions from anyone. You can pose them to one of us, or both. After the initial answer there can be a rebuttal or a prolonged discussion in which anyone can take part, 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Excellent job, @Hot Diggity Dog

OK we are now open to questions from anyone. You can pose them to one of us, or both. After the initial answer there can be a rebuttal or a prolonged discussion in which anyone can take part, 

Okay I'll throw out two questions. 

First -You both spent a little bit of time on whether or not illegal immigration was a net benefit in terms of dollars and cents with some discussion on cost and benefits of a more human nature.   Speaking strictly to the dollars and cents and ignoring whether on net the aggregate is a positive or negative, do you think that the costs and benefits are evenly shared across the nation both regionally and among people of various classes and whatever other subgroups?   If so who are the winners and who are the losers?  And how does that ultimately shape the debate?  Both in what is the normal debate and what (if anything) additional you think it should mean to the debate?

Second - While unseemly is there a benefit to a system where those that take the initiative to do what is necessary legal or otherwise to make it into America to pursue achieving the American goal cut to the front of the line via illegally entering the country?

 

[timschochet]

Okay I'll throw out two questions. 

First -You both spent a little bit of time on whether or not illegal immigration was a net benefit in terms of dollars and cents with some discussion on cost and benefits of a more human nature.   Speaking strictly to the dollars and cents and ignoring whether on net the aggregate is a positive or negative, do you think that the costs and benefits are evenly shared across the nation both regionally and among people of various classes and whatever other subgroups?   If so who are the winners and who are the losers?  And how does that ultimately shape the debate?  Both in what is the normal debate and what (if anything) additional you think it should mean to the debate?

Second - While unseemly is there a benefit to a system where those that take the initiative to do what is necessary legal or otherwise to make it into America to pursue achieving the American goal cut to the front of the line via illegally entering the country?

1. I never thought they shared equally. My assumption was always that while the entire USA benefited (both short term and long term) the border states (California, Arizona, Texas, etc) suffered. But the study I quoted about Texas seems to contradict this. I would still guess that in terms of social costs (education, medical, public services) it’s higher for these states. It’s never had much affect on the overall debate for me. 
 

2. I think I get the point of what you’re trying to say here and I agree with the intent, but not the format of the question because there is no cutting in line, that’s a false analogy because for most of these folks that cross the border there is no line. Either they come here illegally or they don’t come here; unless we change our laws they will never make it any other way. But if you’re asking me if they’re worthy of admiration, of course they are. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

1. I never thought they shared equally. My assumption was always that while the entire USA benefited (both short term and long term) the border states (California, Arizona, Texas, etc) suffered. But the study I quoted about Texas seems to contradict this. I would still guess that in terms of social costs (education, medical, public services) it’s higher for these states. It’s never had much affect on the overall debate for me. 
 

2. I think I get the point of what you’re trying to say here and I agree with the intent, but not the format of the question because there is no cutting in line, that’s a false analogy because for most of these folks that cross the border there is no line. Either they come here illegally or they don’t come here; unless we change our laws they will never make it any other way. But if you’re asking me if they’re worthy of admiration, of course they are. 

For  #1 - That is regions.  Do you think the benefits are share across economic classes?  Racial classes?  Political classes (not parties but those with "clout" versus those that don't.)

#2 - Get the point about not having legal avenues, not really asking if you "admire" them as much as if the willingness to take these steps to get here bring any qualities or characteristics with them that are good for the nation (or bad)?

(After this I'll quit and read.  Just wanted to clarify the questions a bit and certainly don't want to step all over the quality back and forth so far.) 

 

[timschochet]

For  #1 - That is regions.  Do you think the benefits are share across economic classes?  Racial classes?  Political classes (not parties but those with "clout" versus those that don't.)

#2 - Get the point about not having legal avenues, not really asking if you "admire" them as much as if the willingness to take these steps to get here bring any qualities or characteristics with them that are good for the nation (or bad)?

(After this I'll quit and read.  Just wanted to clarify the questions a bit and certainly don't want to step all over the quality back and forth so far.) 

1. Interesting question which I haven’t considered. I’ll think about this and get back to you. 
 

2. I would argue mostly good qualities. These are people who risk everything to better their lives. They’re exactly the sort of person I want to be here. 

 

[timschochet]

Bump. Any more questions? Really enjoyed doing this but if nobody is reading it we can stop. 
If no questions, who do you think won the debate and why? Give us your thoughts. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Bump. Any more questions? Really enjoyed doing this but if nobody is reading it we can stop. 
If no questions, who do you think won the debate and why? Give us your thoughts. 

How are we judging?

I think @Hot Diggity Dog would win the first question (net positive or negative) because in all honesty his human suffering as a result of the journey was unexpected.  It didn't change my opinion (which is closer to yours) but it did cause me to pause and give it thought.    For the current "illegals"  I don't think there was much separation.  Your ideas are too similar.  For current "border crisis"  @Hot Diggity Dogis docked for "closing the border", but I don't think your trade rebuttal was the best.  I would think having a process to welcome these people for processing (as well as those without refugee claims) is the only way to "control the border".  That is they won't sneak in if they can just walk through the front door.  For the fourth question - long term I think I hinted at an opinion on "brightest and best" with "take initiative" question.  I also think if automation means the opportunities for work dry up then the immigration problem will take care of itself.  So it really comes down to the optimism, American "can do" spirit of your reply and @Hot Diggity Dog"we can't".  That is a win for you.

So do you win for the excitement of the debate and the optimism of what an America can do, or does @Hot Diggity Dogwin because his first answer crossed me up and made me think?    Maybe I'll just let you both take victory laps and say the PSF was the real winner.  (Even if it was just me.)

 

[matuski]

I would propose dividing this topic into 4 interrelated subtopics: 

1. Has illegal immigration been a net benefit or net detriment for the United States? 
2. What should we do about the millions of illegal immigrants already here? 
3. What should we do about the crisis on the border? 
4. What should be our long term goals regarding immigrants (illegal and otherwise) and refugees)? 
 

I can make the first post tonight if you’d like. 

1) It is a net benefit for businesses exploiting it (and thereby communities anchored by said businesses - meat packing plants for example), and 1000000000% a benefit to politicians (the reason it doesnt get fixed).

2) If they are contributing to our society, get them SS#'s and paying taxes.  If not, deport.

3) Shut it down, deport, establish the message illegals are not welcome. Move to #4

4) Create a more streamlined method for LEGAL immigration, whereby they pay taxes upon entry in order to benefit from our healthcare and infrastructure.