US Politics: the waiting-for-SCOTUS-to-exhale edition

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

There are so many people that are so eager to see hordes of people come here illegally and steal the fruits of the labor of others, I'm at a loss for words. I only know one thing. The only correct solution to the problem is to seal the borders and remove every person here illegally.

Speaking for myself, since I advocate open borders and the free movement of peoples, I'm far more eager to see hordes of people come here legally. I would however be quite excited to see them "steal" (work 12+ hours per day at low wage jobs) the "fruits of the labor of others" (the societal infrastructure that you "earned" by falling out of the right vagina on the right side of a bunch of imaginary lines in the sand).

[sologdin]

yeah, "steal the fruit of the labor of others" is an odd phrase to apply to someone who works long hours for low pay, rather than the employer of same, or, further, in comparison to those banks, investors, and funds that take advantage of IMF austerity measures abroad and export ill-gotten gains therein via exploitation of sweatshoppe labor and forced servitude, and repatriate same gains to the united states, expanding thereby the available credit pool, so that douchebags might finance their trips to pro-wrestling events and purchase more video games, hunting rifles, cosmetics, and other luxury goods, also all produced by slaves abroad?

[paddington]

The lines aren't so imaginary.

[Hereward]

He's not defending the EU. He's defending the "(limited) free movement of people."

Not even that, really. I'm simply pointing out that the argument "EU has economic problems and EU has free movement of people, ergo free movement of people causes economic problems" is really stupid.

[DanteGabriel]

yeah, "steal the fruit of the labor of others" is an odd phrase to apply to someone who works long hours for low pay, rather than the employer of same, or, further, in comparison to those banks, investors, and funds that take advantage of IMF austerity measures abroad and export ill-gotten gains therein via exploitation of sweatshoppe labor and forced servitude, and repatriate same gains to the united states, expanding thereby the available credit pool, so that douchebags might finance their trips to pro-wrestling events and purchase more video games, hunting rifles, cosmetics, and other luxury goods, also all produced by slaves abroad?

Elegantly stated, but I don't think it will penetrate Deathwalker's "Mexicans suck" defense.

[Newsun]

Elegantly stated, but I don't think it will penetrate Deathwalker's "Mexicans suck" defense.

[Robin Of House Hill]

Speaking for myself, since I advocate open borders and the free movement of peoples, I'm far more eager to see hordes of people come here legally. I would however be quite excited to see them "steal" (work 12+ hours per day at low wage jobs) the "fruits of the labor of others" (the societal infrastructure that you "earned" by falling out of the right vagina on the right side of a bunch of imaginary lines in the sand).

Those low wages you speak of, are artificially low here, but extremely high in countries that have never gotten their acts together to raise their own wage scales. The idea that we need to import labor during times of high unemployment is absurd.

Not even that, really. I'm simply pointing out that the argument "EU has economic problems and EU has free movement of people, ergo free movement of people causes economic problems" is really stupid.

I don't recall stating they were economic problems. They are the inevitable social problems that occur when you import labor from a country with a low pay scale to one with a high pay scale because the cheap bastards that own the businesses and farms aren't willing to pay what the job is actually worth.

Elegantly stated, but I don't think it will penetrate Deathwalker's "Mexicans suck" defense.

I don't think Mexicans suck. I do think the Mexican government sucks. They published guides to help their citizens to enter the US illegally. Come to think of it, when there are over 11 million illegal aliens in the US, it might be more appropriate to call it invasion, rather than immigration.

[TrackerNeil]

You know what is so sad about this? The GOP only selectively became so opposed to this view. I can so easily envision an alternate universe in which John McCain achieves a market-base achievement the legislature that will, despite fluctuations and flaws, ensure vital health insurance for virtually all Americans. It was so close. Maybe it still is. It is worth the fight. And it will continue to be worth it no matter the decision.

Actually, I can't see that alternate universe ever insecting this one, even if McCain had become president. Fact is, the GOP really isn't interested in universal coverage; I think the mandate was simply the alternative to the Clinton plan (and others) they felt they had to propose. Their top preference was for health insurance to be a privilege, just like flat-screen TVs and iPads (I guess at the time it was DVD players and Walkmans), but they would have settled for the mandate.

However, now that the Democrats have attached themselves to the conservative alternative, the GOP really has nowhere to go, as you can see from the complete inaction from the House. The Republicans have controlled that chamber for 18 months, and we have yet to see the replace part of repeal and replace clear a subcommittee. They have no solution that would come close to solving the problem of 30 million uninsured people, because, in truth, they're not looking for one.

[lupis42]

I don't recall stating they were economic problems. They are the inevitable social problems that occur when you import labor from a country with a low pay scale to one with a high pay scale because the cheap bastards that own the businesses and farms aren't willing to pay what the job is actually worth.

The job is worth whatever it costs to make someone capable want to do it. If lots of capable people want the job, it's not going to be worth much.

[Robin Of House Hill]

The job is worth whatever it costs to make someone capable want to do it. If lots of capable people want the job, it's not going to be worth much.

And when they can't import cheap labor, they have to pay what people here are willing to do it for. In effect, you are saying that it is ok to screw our own citizens for benefit of illegals because the cheap business owners can get more wealthy, that way.

[Robin Of House Hill]

How do you even propose to do this constitutionally? The only way to really do it would be a door to door, nationwide sweep of every person in the U.S., which violates the 4th Amendment and would be logistically impossible.

Focusing exclusively on Latinos would also violate the 4th and would reveal the racist underpinnings of the "no illegals" movement, which is what so much of the outcry against the Arizona law focused on, is that it would fall disproportionately on Latinos who are here legally or who are U.S. citizens, like this guy.

And even if you got your wish, what about all the young children of illegal immigrants who were born here and are U.S. citizens? You can't just deport U.S. citizens and someone has to take care of them. And then there is the already mentioned fact that removing 10+ million people would wreck an already struggling economy. Those immigrants work here. They provide services. They buy things, pay rent and even pay taxes. Your so-called "solution" would cause even more problems than it would supposedly fix.

Constitutionally? The same way we do security screening at airports. We can do it at bus and train stations, on the highways, etc. It will inconvenience everyone, but God forbid, we don't want to be accused of racial profiling.

As far as the chance of those who are here legally getting deported accidentally. It is an unfortunate risk, but preferable to giving 11 million law breakers a free pass.

A short term economic problem would have to be dealt with, but this country has to be weaned from cheap foreign labor for the good of its own citizens.

[awesome possum]

But illegal immigrant shouldn't just be given a free pass, we shouldn't just welcome anyone and everyone who comes to this country illegally.

Ahh, so working a shit job for shit pay, living in shitty housing situation, facing the loathing and oftentimes anger of the people around them now constitutes a free pass and a hearty welcome. Gotcha.

There are so many people that are so eager to see hordes of people come here illegally and steal the fruits of the labor of others, I'm at a loss for words. I only know one thing. The only correct solution to the problem is to seal the borders and remove every person here illegally.

I can't figure out if you're a racist or just a generally terrible person...

[TrackerNeil]

Constitutionally? The same way we do security screening at airports. We can do it at bus and train stations, on the highways, etc. It will inconvenience everyone, but God forbid, we don't want to be accused of racial profiling.

The mass detention and deportation of millions of people will be an inconvenience? I'd say so, certainly. I expect the the Cherokees found the Trail of Tears most inconvenient as well.

[Robin Of House Hill]

I can't figure out if you're a racist or just a generally terrible person...

The smart money is on the latter.

Since they consider their housing, pay and work to be better than what they had in their country of origin, it is a free pass. I'll concede it is not a hearty welcome.

TN.

The screening will be an inconvenience to all. I'd give them 180 days notice, during which time they can take or sell their belongings and take the proceeds with them if they will voluntarily leave within that time. After that, deportation. There is another way. Enact a law that requires the forfeiture of businesses found to be employing illegals.

[Frog Eater]

DW,

I think you are being incredibly niaeve in your view on illegal immigration. Whether this is from GOP soundbytes or just not thinking it through, I dont know.

Since you have focused on the economic effects of illegal immigration, lets do that for a moment. "illegal" immigrants come here and do a whole lot of manual work: Build houses, clean, cook, landscaping, etc. Many of these "illegal" immigrants work for small businesses, those "job creaters" we always talk about. If these small businesses had willing, qualified, legal laborers who could do the work for wages required to be paid, dont you think they would have them doing it instead of exposing themselves to fines and penalties from employing illegal immigrants? The problem is that business owners have a hard time finding people to perform the menial tasks that require doing on a daily basis. Immigrant labor is willing to do it, but because the legal immigration system is broken, we resort to illegal immigration.

It is an unfortunate truth, but our economy relies on cheap labor, the cheap labor performed by illegal immigration. If there was no illegal immigration, the price of everthing you buy would skyrocket, but your wages would not. The price of a house, increased. The price of landscaping, skyrocketing, The price of groceries, meat, etc. Through the roof.

I am not advocating illegal immigration for cheap goods. I hope we can fix our immigration policies so those people who want to come to our country and perform those services which need performed can do so. But in the meantime, rounding up the illegal immigrants with mass deportations is not the answer.

[Robin Of House Hill]

So, employing illegals is more beneficial than employing blacks? The last I saw, the statistics on black unemployment was about 14%. Oh, wait...they demand to be treated as human beings.

People keep talking about the need for people performing needed services, but they always omit that we are only willing to pay substandard wages for those services. But, hell, if it is going to cost money, fat white folks might actually mow their own lawns.

[Frog Eater]

So, employing illegals is more beneficial than employing blacks? The last I saw, the statistics on black unemployment was about 14%. Oh, wait...they demand to be treated as human beings.

People keep talking about the need for people performing needed services, but they always omit that we are only willing to pay substandard wages for those services. But, hell, if it is going to cost money, fat white folks might actually mow their own lawns.

But we aren't just talking about mowing a lawn. Who will work in the slaughterhouses, pick crops, build houses, and everything else that happens behind the scenes?

As long as the poor in this country can continue to live in relative comfort while doing nothing, they wont be doing those jobs.

At least the illegal immigrants are willing to work, we have lots of folks right here already that wont.

It isnt that illegal immigrants take their jobs, they arent willing to work.

[sToNED_CAT]

What's the theoretical result of removing 10 million people from the "Demand" side of the US economy? In a quick search, I found $150 billion in consumer spending from illegal immigrants, is that accurate, if so, can you put that in some kind of perspective for me?

Wery little. Keep in mind that those people don't make much, so their purchasing power is low. Besides part of that demand will not dissapear - it will be replaced by increased wages of legal immigrants and citizens. The same thing about taxes they pay.

How do you even propose to do this constitutionally? The only way to really do it would be a door to door, nationwide sweep of every person in the U.S., which violates the 4th Amendment and would be logistically impossible.

And even if you got your wish, what about all the young children of illegal immigrants who were born here and are U.S. citizens? You can't just deport U.S. citizens and someone has to take care of them. And then there is the already mentioned fact that removing 10+ million people would wreck an already struggling economy. Those immigrants work here. They provide services. They buy things, pay rent and even pay taxes. Your so-called "solution" would cause even more problems than it would supposedly fix.

The mass detention and deportation of millions of people will be an inconvenience? I'd say so, certainly. I expect the the Cherokees found the Trail of Tears most inconvenient as well.

Of course mass deportation is not the best answer. Mass self deportation would be much better. But in order to do so you need to drastically increase fines for employers and offer absolutely no social benefits to illegal immigrants. No college (Dream Act), no welfare, no healthcare (maybe except urgent emergency cases). If they don't have jobs or welfare they will leave alone. Those who don't can be deported by traditional means.

'

Since you have focused on the economic effects of illegal immigration, lets do that for a moment. "illegal" immigrants come here and do a whole lot of manual work: Build houses, clean, cook, landscaping, etc. Many of these "illegal" immigrants work for small businesses, those "job creaters" we always talk about. If these small businesses had willing, qualified, legal laborers who could do the work for wages required to be paid, dont you think they would have them doing it instead of exposing themselves to fines and penalties from employing illegal immigrants? The problem is that business owners have a hard time finding people to perform the menial tasks that require doing on a daily basis. Immigrant labor is willing to do it, but because the legal immigration system is broken, we resort to illegal immigration.

It is an unfortunate truth, but our economy relies on cheap labor, the cheap labor performed by illegal immigration. If there was no illegal immigration, the price of everthing you buy would skyrocket, but your wages would not. The price of a house, increased. The price of landscaping, skyrocketing, The price of groceries, meat, etc. Through the roof.

These arguments are not valid because even majority of "dirty" jobs are still performed by US citizens even in agriculture most affected part of economy 50% of workforce are "legals". American employment in construction industry is very significant. So if "legals" are able to do most of those jobs today, why shouldn' t they be able to pick up a few more if the wages slightly increased. Oh and the enployers are not exposing themselves to anything. After Obama became president he actually banned workplace raids. It's quite difficult to fine employer if you don't make controls.

The problem with illegals (but also free immigration of large number of cheap labor) is this : if you are willing to accept it, you must accept the poverty. Because with excessive inflow of cheap workforce you will never be able to deal with povery problem. Illegals create poverty, after all that's the reason why some corporate lobbies are suporting them. And toleration of illegal immigration in time of high unemployment (ironically administration complains about high unemployment in cosntruction industry, yet they tolerate illegals who are causing it) is quite amoral. After all FDR was expelling people left and right during Great Depression (even some legal immigrants).

[Maithanet]

Constitutionally? The same way we do security screening at airports. We can do it at bus and train stations, on the highways, etc. It will inconvenience everyone, but God forbid, we don't want to be accused of racial profiling.

Do you really want this? REALLY? This is a bafflingly bad idea. Let's say you're out driving with your buddies, and there's a surprise toll both to check the identity of everyone on the highway. One of your friends (not the driver) forgot his wallet, and has no id. Do they detain you all, until someone can bring him a valid id? How long is that going to take, and how many millions of times is this pointless charade going to be repeated across the country every year?

This is your "if only the US would do things my way" kinda change? Wow.

preferable to giving 11 million law breakers a free pass.

A free pass to live as second class citizens, only slightly better off than they were in their previous country, and careful to avoid any interaction with the authorities for fear of being discovered and deported. Over 400,000 people were deported in 2010, so it's not like they have nothing to worry about on their "free pass".

[IheartTesla]

I am now of the opinion that the Court will uphold ACA. This is because of the dissents written in the cases this week by the conservative Justices, they seem to be venting some deep frustrations.

Glad someone was around to stay their bloodlust.