Laws do not necessarily reflect a measured and moral mindset. Just because it's on the books does not mean a law is well written, well thought or enforceable.
If illegal immigration is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many immigrants ARE illegal. The laws regulating immigration were not in place until fairly recently (1891 was the year of the first law). There are more interesting dates and facts at http://uscis.gov/graphics/aboutus/history/feb1848.htm
As an aside, though I have yet to read anything that states it, it's possible that the first laws to limit the numbers of immigrants coming into the US may have been written to guard against the kinds of tensions that earlier waves of immigrants had sparked when they entered the US with different languages, cultures, and appearances. In its founding and early days, the nation was sparsely settled. Expansion (see Manifest Destiny) and larger numbers of pioneers were considered desirable.
This business about taxes--now that's also interesting since the income tax didn't start in this country until WWI (it was supposed to be a temporary tax by the way). Illegal immigrants still get socked with sales taxes and any other number of taxes (in Missouri, we have personal property tax for motor vehicles, farm equipment, boats, etc--no tax receipt, no license!). For more info on federal taxation go to: http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.html
And I will remind readers once more that the indignation about immigrants is nothing new. It's happened repeatedly. See http://www.mindspring.com/~louve/usimmigration.html People DO feel threatened--look at the rhetoric in the link from the original post. It is set up to be emotional and scary. That's the part that worries me. I KNOW about the excesses of fear, rage and reaction in the post and worry, with public emotion being whipped into a frenzy by overblown appeals to our "American way of life".
I said it earlier but will repeat it again. I am not advocating wide open borders. I just want to avoid the kind of xenophobia that seems apparent to me in the Team America piece.
Speaking only for myself here.. It has nothing to do with xenophobia. It's about using the democratic system to change the laws, not just giving a blind eye to those that break the laws. It's also about fairness and not having double-standards about which illegal immigrants are tolerated, and which ones are not. A lot of my peeves about the US has in fact been about that very thing, on the international level. Ignoring dictators when it fits some american objectives, going after others, etc..
You say "If illegal immigration is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many immigrants ARE illegal." and then seem to conclude that it should be tolerated because it's somehow justified.
What if I said that "if evading taxes is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many corporations are evading taxes"?
Yes, immigration law, and tax laws and whatever other laws should always been under our scrutiny, as it is our DUTY in a democracy. But I don't believe the solution is to bypass or ignore laws we don't like without a vote on it.
Yes, there is a history of concerns about immigrants, but in the last hundred years or more, these were legal immigrants - not quite the same thing. And before that, let's face it, it was somewhat a free-for-all as the population was building up and things were much more fluid. It's all part of the evolution of countries as they build an infrastructure, services and social programs, and collect taxes to also clearly define who is and can become a member of that society.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that laws are the reason why illegal immigrants should not be tolerated (item 8 of the Team America piece). Do you know the US laws on immigration, the procedures, the forms, the sheer bureaucracy? Did you go to the link I posted about US immigration and note that before 1968 there were no restrictions on the number of immigrants from Mexico--the largest source of illegal immigrants? Seems to me that our policies and laws CREATED the problem to a certain extent.
And as I've pointed out, immigration for many of US citizen ancestors was either unrestricted or much more loosely restricted than it is now. I'm not big on hypocrisy. I think it's likely that most of my ancestors would not be able to enter the US were the same laws in place at the time of their migration that now exist. If I would not like it for myself, how can I expect it to be acceptable to others?
Also, just out of curiosity, did you read the web site link in the OP? I used the word "xenophobia" for the way they presented the case against illegal immigrants. I'd also like to throw in a several more words to describe Team America--insular, ethnocentric, rigid, bigoted.
In regards to your quote "Yes, there is a history of concerns about immigrants, but in the last hundred years or more, these were legal immigrants - not quite the same thing" Huh? Are you referring to issues about immigrants or issues about the legalities of immigration? There have been any number of tensions, arguments and concerns about both all along so I'm not sure I understand.
I also found your last paragraph interesting--that societies evolve. One of the most appealing things about the New World was its open mindedness (land of opportunity) and freedom from the past and old schisms--religious, ethnic, cultural, whatever. Now that the New World is no longer "new" it would appear that we have decided that only certain people have those rights, in certain numbers, under certain cicumstances. Somehow, that doesn't sound very "evolved" to me.
To be honest with you I'm not really commenting (for lack of knowledge...) on the american immigration law, but more on a matter of principle. And to me the principle is: don't break the law, change it if you don't like it. No, I had not read the link, so maybe it is just as you describe. I was'n't commenting on that but again just on the principles. In terms of the part you didn't understand (which I'll admit was poorly written on my part) what I meant was that you can't compare true xenophobia with concerns will ILLEGAL immigrations. I have a HUGE issue with people who have problems with LEGAL immigrants. But if people have problem with ILLEGALs when I don't pass judgement until I know what they have a problem with - the fact that they are illegal or the fact that they come from another country, a different culture, are poor or feel threatened because they 'take american jobs'. To be the only good reason for concern is the illegal aspect.
If we are going to compare immigration laws from the past (which most current citizens' ancestors had to face) with those from today, then we should also look at the infrastructure, benefits, etc also? These things come hand in hand. Besides, laws change - some for the better (how about civil rights?) - and maybe immigration is one that got worse. But I don't think it's fair to say 'well your ancestors had it easier getting here' than today's immigrants. Many settlers and immigrants had a very tough life. They 'built' the country and its infrastructure. Late arrivers in anything in life tend to have to pay a higher price to 'get in'.
Now one final thought. Our government's mandate is to do what is best for US, the citizens, its EMPLOYER. Maybe the reason immigration needs to be curtailed is that we have figured that above certain levels, it would be detrimental to our society - to us, the citizens. I think any government that did not do what was in its citizens's best interest would be booted out at the next election.
Which is why GW Bush will be booted out in November :)
Edited 7/30/2004 1:19 pm ET ET by nicecanadianlady
>"Illegal immigrants still get socked with sales taxes and any other number of taxes (in Missouri, we have personal property tax for motor vehicles, farm equipment, boats, etc--no tax receipt, no license!)."<
Sales tax is true...if they buy products here, they will pay sales tax. However, in my state you cannot get a driver license unless you have documentation that says you are a legal resident of the country and the state. And, you cannot register a vehicle if you do not have a drivers license, at which point you pay taxes on the vehicle you're registering.
>"In its founding and early days, the nation was sparsely settled. Expansion (see Manifest Destiny) and larger numbers of pioneers were considered desirable."<
You are right about this, at that point in history we desired settlers to cultivate the land and build the country, but now we're talking about a country that is populated with 290 million people. They (being the INS) don't just give out 100 green cards a year. In the diversity lottery alone, they give out 55,000 and that doesn't cover the 4 or 5 other ways you can establish permanent legal residence in this country. We do have to limit the number of new people who come into our country per year, otherwise we *would* end up with too many people within our borders. I have no doubt about this because, despite our nation's problems, this is a great place live. Look at China and what costs people pay for overpopulation. Baby girls given to orphanages, left doorsteps because families are limited to one child per family, and everyone wants a boy to carry on the family name. I will never forget the Baby Story episode I saw on TLC that highlighted births around the world, where a Chinese couple gave birth to fraternal twins, one girl and one boy, and had to give one up! I do worry about this sort of thing...especially since it is becoming more "fashionable" to have larger families again. Another baby boom in this country would significantly spike our population. Because we're not about to tell people how many children we can have, we do need to be careful of how many people we let into our country from other countries.
I have no fear of "foreigners taking over our land". I just fear the increase of people coming into this country illegally if we don't show them that you need to go through proper means to become part of this nation.
Pages
LOL!
I live in Western Washington and I wasn't talking about unionized ag workers who probably wouldn't be illegals.
Laws do not necessarily reflect a measured and moral mindset. Just because it's on the books does not mean a law is well written, well thought or enforceable.
If illegal immigration is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many immigrants ARE illegal. The laws regulating immigration were not in place until fairly recently (1891 was the year of the first law). There are more interesting dates and facts at http://uscis.gov/graphics/aboutus/history/feb1848.htm
As an aside, though I have yet to read anything that states it, it's possible that the first laws to limit the numbers of immigrants coming into the US may have been written to guard against the kinds of tensions that earlier waves of immigrants had sparked when they entered the US with different languages, cultures, and appearances. In its founding and early days, the nation was sparsely settled. Expansion (see Manifest Destiny) and larger numbers of pioneers were considered desirable.
This business about taxes--now that's also interesting since the income tax didn't start in this country until WWI (it was supposed to be a temporary tax by the way). Illegal immigrants still get socked with sales taxes and any other number of taxes (in Missouri, we have personal property tax for motor vehicles, farm equipment, boats, etc--no tax receipt, no license!). For more info on federal taxation go to: http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.html
And I will remind readers once more that the indignation about immigrants is nothing new. It's happened repeatedly. See http://www.mindspring.com/~louve/usimmigration.html People DO feel threatened--look at the rhetoric in the link from the original post. It is set up to be emotional and scary. That's the part that worries me. I KNOW about the excesses of fear, rage and reaction in the post and worry, with public emotion being whipped into a frenzy by overblown appeals to our "American way of life".
I said it earlier but will repeat it again. I am not advocating wide open borders. I just want to avoid the kind of xenophobia that seems apparent to me in the Team America piece.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
You say "If illegal immigration is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many immigrants ARE illegal." and then seem to conclude that it should be tolerated because it's somehow justified.
What if I said that "if evading taxes is an issue, maybe we need to look at why so many corporations are evading taxes"?
Yes, immigration law, and tax laws and whatever other laws should always been under our scrutiny, as it is our DUTY in a democracy. But I don't believe the solution is to bypass or ignore laws we don't like without a vote on it.
Yes, there is a history of concerns about immigrants, but in the last hundred years or more, these were legal immigrants - not quite the same thing. And before that, let's face it, it was somewhat a free-for-all as the population was building up and things were much more fluid. It's all part of the evolution of countries as they build an infrastructure, services and social programs, and collect taxes to also clearly define who is and can become a member of that society.
"So it's possible that we have laws and punishments because people feel threatened--without basis."
So because some of us are against illegal immigration, we are "threatened" by immigrants?
And as I've pointed out, immigration for many of US citizen ancestors was either unrestricted or much more loosely restricted than it is now. I'm not big on hypocrisy. I think it's likely that most of my ancestors would not be able to enter the US were the same laws in place at the time of their migration that now exist. If I would not like it for myself, how can I expect it to be acceptable to others?
Also, just out of curiosity, did you read the web site link in the OP? I used the word "xenophobia" for the way they presented the case against illegal immigrants. I'd also like to throw in a several more words to describe Team America--insular, ethnocentric, rigid, bigoted.
In regards to your quote "Yes, there is a history of concerns about immigrants, but in the last hundred years or more, these were legal immigrants - not quite the same thing" Huh? Are you referring to issues about immigrants or issues about the legalities of immigration? There have been any number of tensions, arguments and concerns about both all along so I'm not sure I understand.
I also found your last paragraph interesting--that societies evolve. One of the most appealing things about the New World was its open mindedness (land of opportunity) and freedom from the past and old schisms--religious, ethnic, cultural, whatever. Now that the New World is no longer "new" it would appear that we have decided that only certain people have those rights, in certain numbers, under certain cicumstances. Somehow, that doesn't sound very "evolved" to me.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
No one is missing your points.
"you're saying that laws are the reason why illegal immigrants should not be tolerated"
Yes, the same way that laws are the reason that
If we are going to compare immigration laws from the past (which most current citizens' ancestors had to face) with those from today, then we should also look at the infrastructure, benefits, etc also? These things come hand in hand. Besides, laws change - some for the better (how about civil rights?) - and maybe immigration is one that got worse. But I don't think it's fair to say 'well your ancestors had it easier getting here' than today's immigrants. Many settlers and immigrants had a very tough life. They 'built' the country and its infrastructure. Late arrivers in anything in life tend to have to pay a higher price to 'get in'.
Now one final thought. Our government's mandate is to do what is best for US, the citizens, its EMPLOYER. Maybe the reason immigration needs to be curtailed is that we have figured that above certain levels, it would be detrimental to our society - to us, the citizens. I think any government that did not do what was in its citizens's best interest would be booted out at the next election.
Which is why GW Bush will be booted out in November :)
Edited 7/30/2004 1:19 pm ET ET by nicecanadianlady
Sales tax is true...if they buy products here, they will pay sales tax. However, in my state you cannot get a driver license unless you have documentation that says you are a legal resident of the country and the state. And, you cannot register a vehicle if you do not have a drivers license, at which point you pay taxes on the vehicle you're registering.
>"In its founding and early days, the nation was sparsely settled. Expansion (see Manifest Destiny) and larger numbers of pioneers were considered desirable."<
You are right about this, at that point in history we desired settlers to cultivate the land and build the country, but now we're talking about a country that is populated with 290 million people. They (being the INS) don't just give out 100 green cards a year. In the diversity lottery alone, they give out 55,000 and that doesn't cover the 4 or 5 other ways you can establish permanent legal residence in this country. We do have to limit the number of new people who come into our country per year, otherwise we *would* end up with too many people within our borders. I have no doubt about this because, despite our nation's problems, this is a great place live. Look at China and what costs people pay for overpopulation. Baby girls given to orphanages, left doorsteps because families are limited to one child per family, and everyone wants a boy to carry on the family name. I will never forget the Baby Story episode I saw on TLC that highlighted births around the world, where a Chinese couple gave birth to fraternal twins, one girl and one boy, and had to give one up! I do worry about this sort of thing...especially since it is becoming more "fashionable" to have larger families again. Another baby boom in this country would significantly spike our population. Because we're not about to tell people how many children we can have, we do need to be careful of how many people we let into our country from other countries.
I have no fear of "foreigners taking over our land". I just fear the increase of people coming into this country illegally if we don't show them that you need to go through proper means to become part of this nation.
Pages