|
To get a job, credit, drivers licence and rent/ lease pretty much all already DO require an ID unless they KNOW their target audience won't and cannot get one to prove identity and legal status. I simply want that law for them all to stop aiding illegals. I thought you were one big on controlling guns, did that not require a proof of id or more?You don't need to be a legal resident to get credit, a driver's license, or rent or lease a home, although credit or a lease would probably be difficult.
It's not actually a crime to be in the US illegally, just unlawful to get a job or go to school.
And yet every time i do any of those the first thing is to prove who i am. i just want that to be made law to take away incentive to come here illegally. No driving, credit, leases or jobs for illegals.
|
|
And yet every time i do any of those the first thing is to prove who i am. i just want that to be made law to take away incentive to come here illegally. No driving, credit, leases or jobs for illegals.It's not a crime to be in the US without specific permission from the US government. It's not even illegal. It's unlawful to not declare yourself at the border (unless you're one of a bunch of excepted classes), unlawful to stay over a certain period without a specific exemption, and unlawful to seek employment or enroll in schooling.
There are plenty of non-residents residing in the US, though, with no visa, permit, permanent residence, or citizenship. They aren't even unwelcome! Plenty of Canadians (and not a few people from other countries) have winter or summer homes in the US, and these people lease or get loans to buy these homes, and get legal drivers' licenses to drive in the six or so months a year that they live in the US. These people are only different from Mexican illegal immigrants in that they don't get jobs; indeed, someone from Mexico who crosses the border legitimately (which people do, in droves, every day) isn't an illegal immigrant for six months or until they look for a job. People who overstay or violate their visas after entering the US are somewhere between a third and half of illegal immigrants, to boot.
What you're proposing would require a complete overhaul of US immigration law and policy, and at that point, it's time to ask why there's all but no legitimate path for would-be immigrants to the US from Mexico.
Those people come here legally, through approved channels. they do not sneak in in the dead of night. Do mexicans have any less chance to legally come here and work than any other? who has it so much easier?
To get a job, credit, drivers licence and rent/ lease pretty much all already DO require an ID unless they KNOW their target audience won't and cannot get one to prove identity and legal status. I simply want that law for them all to stop aiding illegals. I thought you were one big on controlling guns, did that not require a proof of id or more?Just to make this clear...
You think our society would be better if everyone was forced to carry around ID and had to present it to engage in a transaction?
How is this not a Big Brother style of government?
I'm not the one opposed to big government.
What about the free market? If Americans can't get a job, doesn't that just mean the free market has determined they're not worthy of said jobs?
|
|
To get a job, credit, drivers licence and rent/ lease pretty much all already DO require an ID unless they KNOW their target audience won't and cannot get one to prove identity and legal status. I simply want that law for them all to stop aiding illegals. I thought you were one big on controlling guns, did that not require a proof of id or more?Just to make this clear...
You think our society would be better if everyone was forced to carry around ID and had to present it to engage in a transaction?
How is this not a Big Brother style of government?
I'm not the one opposed to big government.
What about the free market? If Americans can't get a job, doesn't that just mean the free market has determined they're not worthy of said jobs?
Do you propose an end to minimum wage and workplace safety laws? Allowing illegal labor to run rampant might as well
I'm not a free market proponent. So you're asking the wrong questions.
|
And what's wrong with free market? Not easy enough to manipulate for your tastes?
To go with some sort of system of controls is to give a small number of people control, and if there is any profit to be had they will control it in their favor thus a non-free market is only good for things that don't produce profit.
We've spent $90 billion over the past 10 years and we still haven't kept them out. The "try to keep them out" hasn't worked. Why are you advocating something we've been doing and we can already see the evidence that it doesn't work.
That same money, if spent on college, could send 4.1 million people to college for one year. There's an estimated 10 million illegal immigrants in this country and Hispanics with a high school diploma or less have a birth rate around 200/1000. If you give them one year of college, it drops to less than 40/1000.
If you really want to change the demographics of this country, border security is NOT the..
...
What I suggest is to significantly penalize any american to house or employ them. What we have NOT done is focus on what brings them here, take away the gov. goodies and fine the ass off any american to encourage it. Say $10,000 per illegal per day to anyone caught housing or hiring them. They will go home without the cost of deportation or border wars
Vengeance and retribution feels good and exacting for the short term goal, but economically unfeasible for the long term goal if you think that fining $10k per illegal per day will discourage this.
More than likely, the perpetrators who are smuggling illegal immigrants will likely not have the funds to pay off those fines. That would lead to incarceration and the tab to pay for three hots and a cot will become burden to the tax payer. The illegals get deported. No costs are reimbursed to cover all of the time and energy spent rounding them up. Some of those illegals eventually come back as the employment situation back in their home country and or where they're deported to isn't better for them versus the risk to cross back into the U.S. to perpetuate the cycle again. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
The more intelligent model would be to decriminalize and integrate those illegals that can potentially become a sustaining provider toward the government tax base. The majority of illegal immigrants are coming in to fulfill those job niches that the average American is unlikely to fill in the role as an employee. Determine their criminal background status and then provide a work visa in order to obtain means to collect taxes. Through the years, these individuals can contribute to the economy and slowly work their way toward legitimizing naturalization to gain their citizenship. To incentivize the private sector to participate in legal fashion, some of those monies collected by these illegal immigrants can be subsidized to offset deductions and/or credits to those employers that rely on their labor for production.
Again, some will argue that doing so will keep those legal citizens who are presently unemployed from becoming employed. However, a lot of those job roles being performed by this class are usually not filled by the average American citizen. The whole illegal immigration employment ban / penalty as enacted in Alabama (last year?) bears proof to this. This also aids in some of those wages that would normally be sent back to the illegal immigrants' family outside the U.S. to be contained within the U.S. through various interrelated monetary taxes collection (payroll, sales, etc.).
Barriers and egregious fines penalized toward the class in the existing manner are the least likely to be reimbursed toward the effort to punish them. Too short-sighted. Which is the problem of a lot of right-wing & anarcho-libertarian philosophies to sustain the economy. That method usually hinders rather than legitimizes toward the theory of laissez-faire economy; both socialism and capitalism.
TL;DR - provide a model to incentivize legitimacy. Else the current and/or proposed model as suggested by Andrew R essentially becomes subsidized more (largely) by the middle class which creates a larger national debt as that class is the least likely to obtain the means of (dubious) legal loopholes to avoid them akin to the upper class and the exemption of contribution by the lower class (as well as the avoidance by the undocumented class).
YMMV.
EDIT: Still reading ahead, but I suspect there'll be possibly at least one potential ninja of this train of thought in a similar model provided by thejeff.
|
|
So how do you propose we pay if 20 million or so come straight over here the second your idea gets passed and go directly to welfare? What if it is significantly more? Americans will do the "jobs americans won't do" the day welfare is not an alternative to work. I am all for a legal work visa system but opening the floodgates is a mistake.
So how do you propose we pay if 20 million or so come straight over here the second your idea gets passed and go directly to welfare? What if it is significantly more? Americans will do the "jobs americans won't do" the day welfare is not an alternative to work. I am all for a legal work visa system but opening the floodgates is a mistake.
Some immigrants come here illegally, just so they can avoid taxes. Make it simpler and more profitable for businesses to operate within the law and you remove that incentive for illegals to show up.
Penalties and punishments often don't work as deterrents. There are 14 states without a death penalty, only one of them has a higher murder rate than Texas.
A study done on child day care was pretty telling. They compared several day cares, then had half of them adopt a penalty for the parents arriving late to pick up their kid. The ones that adopted the penalty saw an increase in the number of times parents arrived late.
Inside criminal organisations, going to jail is just part of the cost of doing business. People take their sentences because there is a more severe penalty for snitching on their comrades. There are also a lot of repeat offenders.
While I don't want to go to jail, that isn't what stops me from murdering people. I don't do it because it's wrong and I know that.
Deterrence does have an impact, but it isn't nearly as big as people think it is.
Also, some farmers are having trouble. Without the cheap labor, they have to raise their prices on their crops. With increasing cost comes decreased demand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If illegals actually were deported, I'd be more inclined to buy into the whole "evil hordes stealing all our jobs and destroying our culture!" hype. But instead of being deported, they're being put into private prisons.
In short, our tax dollars are used to round up people to be put into for-profit prisons funded by our tax dollars. This has no more to do with "justice" than the "war on drugs" -- another excuse to use our tax dollars to throw more people in prison, so that the said prisons can profit more from our tax dollars.
Get rid of private prisons and abolish a lot of the laws that are intended solely to swell the prison population? Then I'm all on board with illegal = bad. Until then, the hype against illegals, to me, just seems like a big advertising campaign for the Corrections Corporation of America -- an excuse to enrich them at my expense, and at the cost of the lives of people coming here to try and find work.
Hmmm.
This looks like a very interesting article.
[Steals it]
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If illegals actually were deported, I'd be more inclined to buy into the whole "evil hordes stealing all our jobs and destroying our culture!" hype. But instead of being deported, they're being put into private prisons.
In short, our tax dollars are used to round up people to be put into for-profit prisons funded by our tax dollars. This has no more to do with "justice" than the "war on drugs" -- another excuse to use our tax dollars to throw more people in prison, so that the said prisons can profit more from our tax dollars.
Get rid of private prisons and abolish a lot of the laws that are intended solely to swell the prison population? Then I'm all on board with illegal = bad. Until then, the hype against illegals, to me, just seems like a big advertising campaign for the Corrections Corporation of America -- an excuse to enrich them at my expense, and at the cost of the lives of people coming here to try and find work.
I agree that private prisons are a bad idea and expensive as hell. I also think we need to bury a large number of dangerous and repeat offenders instead of paying to keep them alive.
Also i want to take away the incentive for them to come here at all, never to put them in prison unless they commit a prison worthy crime.
|
|
So how do you propose we pay if 20 million or so come straight over here the second your idea gets passed and go directly to welfare? What if it is significantly more? Americans will do the "jobs americans won't do" the day welfare is not an alternative to work. I am all for a legal work visa system but opening the floodgates is a mistake.Some immigrants come here illegally, just so they can avoid taxes. Make it simpler and more profitable for businesses to operate within the law and you remove that incentive for illegals to show up.
Penalties and punishments often don't work as deterrents. There are 14 states without a death penalty, only one of them has a higher murder rate than Texas.
A study done on child day care was pretty telling. They compared several day cares, then had half of them adopt a penalty for the parents arriving late to pick up their kid. The ones that adopted the penalty saw an increase in the number of times parents arrived late.
Inside criminal organisations, going to jail is just part of the cost of doing business. People take their sentences because there is a more severe penalty for snitching on their comrades. There are also a lot of repeat offenders.
While I don't want to go to jail, that isn't what stops me from murdering people. I don't do it because it's wrong and I know that.
Deterrence does have an impact, but it isn't nearly as big as people think it is.
Maybe my punitive fines won't stop it all but the money coming in from them will definitely help cover the costs to society
I've got another one:
Train the lower classes to not actually seek out information, but rather rely on soundbites that sound true. That way you can use mass media to aim their discontent at other lower class groups.
I've got another one:
Train the lower classes to not actually seek out information, but rather rely on soundbites that sound true. That way you can use mass media to aim their discontent at other lower class groups.
Possibly too subtle...but still funny.
Possibly too subtle...but still funny.I've got another one:
Train the lower classes to not actually seek out information, but rather rely on soundbites that sound true. That way you can use mass media to aim their discontent at other lower class groups.
Historically it's also pretty accurate. During the 19th century, Jews were widely painted as both capitalists and communists. They were accused of controlling all the world's banks, and leading labor movements to overthrow governments. Europe already had a history of making up stories of how evil Jews were (blood libels, inquisitions), so they became pretty widely accepted. Plus Jews had been bankers for centuries, even though the nobility had repeatedly exiled them and confiscated any wealth they might have had (and cancelling their debts to them as well).
If you look in America during some of the big immigration waves, you see the same thing repeating itself over and over. The working class being angry at immigrants and African-americans, instead of the wealthy class.
