Why can't they get in line like everybody else? (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

One of the arguments that is constantly made against illegal immigrations is that they "refuse to get in line like everybody else," as if that's a viable option which these people decided to forego.

The truth is that in order to get a visa and a green card these days, you need to be able to invest a large amount of money into an American business: it used to be 1 million dollars; now it has been reduced to $500,000- a figure far beyond the dreams of most of the migrant workers who cross our borders in search of better lives:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-500000-is-enough-get-investment-based-green-card-eb-5.html

Essentially, our legal immigration is restricted to the very wealthy- and as a practical matter, that usually means Asians from China and the Pacific rim, who have in recent years swamped our State Department with applications:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/08/27/after-overwhelming-u-s-visa-program-where-will-chinas-emigrants-go-next/

Nothing wrong with these immigrants from Asia- they bring us needed investment income. But my point is that we also need low-income workers, and the illegals not only provide that service, but they have no current legal means to get here. There is no "line".

 

[Joe T]

ugh

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

Does your daddy/boss have any idea the amount of internet posting you do on his dime?

 

[timschochet]

There are, of course, legal ways for Mexicans and other Hispanics to get here- but typically this is restricted to those with family already here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/the-rise-of-legal-immigration-from-mexico/257119/

The vast majority of these came on "family reunification visas"--spouses, parents, children, or siblings of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.

 

[StrikeS2k]

This appears to be for a specific type of Visa, not for just anyone who wants to move here. Ugh.

 

[timschochet]

Does your daddy/boss have any idea the amount of internet posting you do on his dime?

It's my own dime. Almost all of my salary is self-generated. I manage a few of his shopping centers, but I don't earn enough to pay my income that way. My main earnings each month come from commissions.

Thanks for asking, though.

 

[timschochet]

This appears to be for a specific type of Visa, not for just anyone who wants to move here. Ugh.

Yes, that's correct. But it also represents the majority of those who want to move here, and the VAST MAJORITY of those who want to move here from south of our border is restricted. There is no line for them to join.

 

[EYLive]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

 

[Courtjester]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

2. Good question.

 

[timschochet]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

Obviously, you're not one of the "no one" you just described.

 

[quickhands]

Is Obama messing with Putin to create more chaos so isis can grow?

 

[matttyl]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

 

[quickhands]

Maybe military service guarantees citizenship. Send them to Iran to fight?

 

[Insein]

I thought this was going to be a thread on convenience store etiquette where no line is implied. Carry on.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

One of the arguments that is constantly made against illegal immigrations is that they "refuse to get in line like everybody else," as if that's a viable option which these people decided to forego.

The truth is that in order to get a visa and a green card these days, you need to be able to invest a large amount of money into an American business: it used to be 1 million dollars; now it has been reduced to $500,000- a figure far beyond the dreams of most of the migrant workers who cross our borders in search of better lives:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-500000-is-enough-get-investment-based-green-card-eb-5.html

Essentially, our legal immigration is restricted to the very wealthy- and as a practical matter, that usually means Asians from China and the Pacific rim, who have in recent years swamped our State Department with applications:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/08/27/after-overwhelming-u-s-visa-program-where-will-chinas-emigrants-go-next/

Nothing wrong with these immigrants from Asia- they bring us needed investment income. But my point is that we also need low-income workers, and the illegals not only provide that service, but they have no current legal means to get here. There is no "line".

As long as folks can suck off the government teet for about the same income as minimum wage, why waste all that time working. I don't think we'd have a shortage of low-income workers if welfare and other public service programs came with stipulations requiring some sort of employment.

 

[jon_mx]

Can we start a line for people to wait in before they post new threads?

 

[Plorfu]

I think we should start using the word "queue" more often. Why, if that happened, I'd be chuffed to bits!

 

[Cjw_55106]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

Sounds like this is acceptable.

 

[17seconds]

Came in here thinking this was going to be about Asians at the store

 

[avoiding injuries]

I was thinking it was about shoppers with more than 12 items in the express lanes. Very disappointed.

 

[Jackstraw]

One of the arguments that is constantly made against illegal immigrations is that they "refuse to get in line like everybody else," as if that's a viable option which these people decided to forego.

The truth is that in order to get a visa and a green card these days, you need to be able to invest a large amount of money into an American business: it used to be 1 million dollars; now it has been reduced to $500,000- a figure far beyond the dreams of most of the migrant workers who cross our borders in search of better lives:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-500000-is-enough-get-investment-based-green-card-eb-5.html

Essentially, our legal immigration is restricted to the very wealthy- and as a practical matter, that usually means Asians from China and the Pacific rim, who have in recent years swamped our State Department with applications:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/08/27/after-overwhelming-u-s-visa-program-where-will-chinas-emigrants-go-next/

Nothing wrong with these immigrants from Asia- they bring us needed investment income. But my point is that we also need low-income workers, and the illegals not only provide that service, but they have no current legal means to get here. There is no "line".

As long as folks can suck off the government teet for about the same income as minimum wage, why waste all that time working. I don't think we'd have a shortage of low-income workers if welfare and other public service programs came with stipulations requiring some sort of employment.

I think you have generated some kind of welfare fantasy land in your head.

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

 

[gianmarco]

I was thinking it was about shoppers with more than 12 items in the express lanes. Very disappointed.

Me too. And on mobile, I thought for sure MOP was back.

 

[timschochet]

One of the arguments that is constantly made against illegal immigrations is that they "refuse to get in line like everybody else," as if that's a viable option which these people decided to forego.

The truth is that in order to get a visa and a green card these days, you need to be able to invest a large amount of money into an American business: it used to be 1 million dollars; now it has been reduced to $500,000- a figure far beyond the dreams of most of the migrant workers who cross our borders in search of better lives:

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-500000-is-enough-get-investment-based-green-card-eb-5.html

Essentially, our legal immigration is restricted to the very wealthy- and as a practical matter, that usually means Asians from China and the Pacific rim, who have in recent years swamped our State Department with applications:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/08/27/after-overwhelming-u-s-visa-program-where-will-chinas-emigrants-go-next/

Nothing wrong with these immigrants from Asia- they bring us needed investment income. But my point is that we also need low-income workers, and the illegals not only provide that service, but they have no current legal means to get here. There is no "line".

As long as folks can suck off the government teet for about the same income as minimum wage, why waste all that time working. I don't think we'd have a shortage of low-income workers if welfare and other public service programs came with stipulations requiring some sort of employment.

Most people already in this country do not accept welfare out of laziness. And for those who come to this country illegally, welfare is the last thing on their minds. 99.99% of them come to work. And they work harder than most Americans do, and at longer hours.

 

[avoiding injuries]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

You can't have open borders and a nanny state. Simple arithmetic will prove it not sustainable.

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

You can't have open borders and a nanny state. Simple arithmetic will prove it not sustainable.

We don't have a nanny state and we don't have anything close to it.

 

[matttyl]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

 

[StrikeS2k]

Gee Tim started a new thread to make the same old tired arguments. what a surprise.

 

[dgreen]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

 

[avoiding injuries]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

You can't have open borders and a nanny state. Simple arithmetic will prove it not sustainable.

We don't have a nanny state and we don't have anything close to it.

Fine. What we have can't support it.

 

[matttyl]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

1. Most illegals don't compete with American citizens for jobs. Practically every study about illegal immigration, even the ones who argue that they are a net drain, has reached this same conclusion.

2. Are you seriously arguing that if illegals shop in American stores, that drives up prices, and therefore punishes American consumers? That is a very odd economic argument, and in contrast to just about every principle of free market economics that I've ever learned. You might try reading up on Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, F E. Hayek, and the rest of the Austrian school and see why they all, to man, favor the free flow of immigration.

3. Finally you have, IMO, a justifiable objection: the cost to our public schools, especially in border states. You could have also added the cost to public health and the cost to our police- these represent the 3 main burdens on our border states, and are the main argument made by detractors of illegal immigration (and increased immigration in general.) I would never deny these problems exist. I consider them to be an affordable cost considering the gain, which I believe to be a net positive.

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

You can't have open borders and a nanny state. Simple arithmetic will prove it not sustainable.

We don't have a nanny state and we don't have anything close to it.

Fine. What we have can't support it.

I believe we can, because what they offer to our society in terms of production and spending power exceeds their cost. And in comparison to those already here who receive government services, illegal immigrants are not static- their situation, and those of their children, are entirely fluid.

 

[dgreen]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

Fine. They're also arguments that can be used against births by natives. Native babies will grow up to want jobs and they'll buy goods increasing demand and they'll increase school populations and use government services.

 

[matttyl]

Tim, I was just coming up with some examples of why I don't think you can say that it is a victimless crime. Everything has consequences - some expected and some not.

The economics one I have no idea about - the example I had in my head was used cars and illegals buying them leaving less inventory for lower income Americans to purchase, and with the increased demand for them and no real change in supply - the price curve could shift. This is just one example.

 

[DocHolliday]

Tim must be bored. This is the dumbest thread in a while. This topic has been beaten to the ground endlessly already.

It would be nice if we could open our borders and let everyone in. Unfortunately, that is not realistic. The US is already drowning in debt trying to support the current citizens. Good paying jobs are already tough to find. Now Timmy wants to add more people fighting for those same few jobs.

 

[Joe T]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

 

[matttyl]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

Fine. They're also arguments that can be used against births by natives. Native babies will grow up to want jobs and they'll buy goods increasing demand and they'll increase school populations and use government services.

Sure, but their parents have been paying taxes to offset those costs for the entire time. Illegal immigrants would get to start at 0.

 

[timschochet]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

Yet the two of you always show up in my threads. Why is that?

 

[Joe T]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

Yet the two of you always show up in my threads. Why is that?

Exaggerate much?

 

[dgreen]

Tim, I was just coming up with some examples of why I don't think you can say that it is a victimless crime. Everything has consequences - some expected and some not.

The economics one I have no idea about - the example I had in my head was used cars and illegals buying them leaving less inventory for lower income Americans to purchase, and with the increased demand for them and no real change in supply - the price curve could shift. This is just one example.

I guess it's fine if you want to argue those aren't victimless. But, we'd then have to split victimless acts into two categories: 1) victimless acts we should care about and 2) victimless acts we shouldn't care about. All of your examples so far fall into category 2 for me.

 

[timschochet]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

Fine. They're also arguments that can be used against births by natives. Native babies will grow up to want jobs and they'll buy goods increasing demand and they'll increase school populations and use government services.

Sure, but their parents have been paying taxes to offset those costs for the entire time. Illegal immigrants would get to start at 0.

Actually this is completely wrong as well. New babies that are born are takers for nearly the first two decades of their lives- rarely do they ever during that time produce anything of value to our society (outside of the tremendous pleasure their existence provides to their families in most cases, of course.) On the other hand, almost every illegal who comes here goes to work immediately, producing. Usually they don't start costing until they have been here for quite some time.

 

[gianmarco]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

Yet the two of you always show up in my threads. Why is that?

Exaggerate much?

Why yes, yes he does.

 

[timschochet]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

Yet the two of you always show up in my threads. Why is that?

Exaggerate much?

Not really no. Every time I start a new thread, especially dealing with subjects like this which tend to anger nativists and a certain group of conservative populists, somebody always comes in to post that I should be ignored. Oftentimes it's you, or Court Jester, or Stinger Ray, or Strike, or whoever. It makes me laugh every time. If you want to ignore me so badly, then ####### do it already.

 

[StrikeS2k]

If no one responds to a thread created by Tim, did it ever even exist at all.

Hmmm.....

POTY candidate

Yet the two of you always show up in my threads. Why is that?

Exaggerate much?

Not really no. Every time I start a new thread, especially dealing with subjects like this which tend to anger nativists and a certain group of conservative populists, somebody always comes in to post that I should be ignored. Oftentimes it's you, or Court Jester, or Stinger Ray, or Strike, or whoever. It makes me laugh every time. If you want to ignore me so badly, then ####### do it already.

Link to a thread where I said you should be ignored?

 

[-fish-]

A doctor, a priest and a lawyer are playing golf. The group ahead of them is incredibly slow. They call the marshall over and complain, asking him what the holdup is. The marshall says, "they're blind."

The doctor says, "I feel awful. I do pro bono work doing cornea transplants to help blind people see again. I can't believe I was so insensitive."

The priest says, "I know. Part of my ministry is helping the blind. I feel like such a hypocrite."

The lawyer says, "Why can't they play at night?"

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Tim is to immigration what RaiderNation is to pron.

 

[matttyl]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

Fine. They're also arguments that can be used against births by natives. Native babies will grow up to want jobs and they'll buy goods increasing demand and they'll increase school populations and use government services.

Sure, but their parents have been paying taxes to offset those costs for the entire time. Illegal immigrants would get to start at 0.

Actually this is completely wrong as well. New babies that are born are takers for nearly the first two decades of their lives- rarely do they ever during that time produce anything of value to our society (outside of the tremendous pleasure their existence provides to their families in most cases, of course.) On the other hand, almost every illegal who comes here goes to work immediately, producing. Usually they don't start costing until they have been here for quite some time.

Between my wife and I, we've both been paying local, state, and federal taxes for roughly 30 combined years. If we have a child tomorrow, any additional societal cost would be offset by all that we've already paid, correct?

If an illegal family with a child were to cross the border here, even if they started working tomorrow, they are already behind what my wife and I have already paid. Again, they get to start at 0.

 

[dgreen]

They can't afford to come legally, so it's OK to break laws to get in?

If we need low income workers, why is the minimum wage being raised?

1. Yes

So if I don't have enough money to fill my gas tank so I can get around, is it OK to gas and dash?

If you steal gas from a gas station, you're hurting the gas station. It's not right to steal from anyone. But crossing our border illegally in order to look for work is a victimless crime, which is why it's a misdemeanor. I'd be much more willing to prosecute it harshly if we had open immigration again, but since we don't, it's stupid and a waste of time. Let them in.

What if the job they obtain is one that would have otherwise gone to an American citizen? I wouldn't call that victimless. What if the stores that they now shop in, which now have increased demand, increase their prices (you know, basic economics) - how is that victimless? What if the schools that their children now attend are more crowded and need additional funding, which means increasing taxes - how is that victimless?

Those aren't arguments against immigration. They're arguments against the increase in people regardless of where they come from.

And one way they come here is from immigration, correct? So then yes, they are arguments against immigration.

That's like saying "Tobacco causes cancer isn't an argument against Marlboro, it's an argument against all cigarettes."

Fine. They're also arguments that can be used against births by natives. Native babies will grow up to want jobs and they'll buy goods increasing demand and they'll increase school populations and use government services.

Sure, but their parents have been paying taxes to offset those costs for the entire time. Illegal immigrants would get to start at 0.

I'd be surprised if poorer parents pay enough taxes to offset costs. I propose we ship our poor families to Honduras. Think how awesome our country would be then!

And, the thing about illegal immigrants is, well, they're illegal. And, being illegal, they probably try to hide and avoid taxes, right? Maybe if it was easier for them to be legal, we'd get more tax money from them.