Illegal immigrants

Remove all ads!

I should of wrote they, not you DR, sorry. But the point is, making excuses or stating the reasons why they hire illegals is not solving anything. If it's that bad, why are immigrants doing it? Are they dropping from heat exhaustion? Nope. They can handle the weather. Why can't the owners? I know why.... they're lazy! If it's really accepted in todays society to not have to cut your lawn and pay an illegal to do it shows how pathetic we really are. That is the attitude of the rich, which most who do that are not. They are living beyond their means and that is the trend in America. That is why illegals thrive here, they can take advantage of our laziness.

Where exaclty are you that it is so bad to go outside?

 

I'm not making excuses for anything. I'm simply trying to explain to you why hiring illegals to do yardwork is far more common in the south. Both because the climate makes people far less willing to do that kind of work themselves, and because we obviously have far more illegal immigrants than northern states do. It's a big business down here. I live in Houston. And yes, many of them get heat exhaustion. But the next day they're back working again because there's no sick leave when you get paid illegally under the table and there's literally hundreds of illegals just like you waiting to take your place.

 

Umm, I've always mowed my own lawn. In fact, just last week I mowed my in-law's lawn because the husband was out of town (for three weeks) and the wife can't handle the heat. We live in a suburb, a very large one, and I honestly wouldn't know where to look for someone else to mow it. Sure, we do see people coming around offering to do that, usually hispanic, and usually about once a year (I take it to mean they don't get much business around here).

Again, not here. I don't know how 'upper' upper-middle-class we are, but we live more than comfortably. Likewise, while our neighborhood isn't filled with the newest model cars, they aren't uncommon.

And, for the record, it's both South and Humid here (and hot). 100+ degree days aren't unheard of, and the standard pattern of weather in the summer is 90+% humidity until late afternoon when it starts pouring until late evening.

 

I think Republicans should have the courage of their convictions and make it illegal for an illegal immigrant to purchase food (Aldeth, I'll be disappointed if you don't understand this).

 

I hope he does too, this way he can explain it to me.

 

I think this is the wrong approach (albeit a simple one), because it does not solve the problem itself, but only works at the symptoms: Immigrants migrate to rich countries because they have no hopes of living well in their own countries. Sure, the solution to that is quite a bit more complicated to reach, because it starts with the western countries to abolish regimes that impede fair trade. But it would adress the problem at it's roots: Make sure that potential immigrants have work in their homelands that pays of, so that they do not see themselves forced to emmigrate in the first place.

 

I see what you're saying Fabius, but to me it's two sides of a coin.

This is probably oversimplified, but the way I see it, there are two overarching reasons why people from Mexico immigrate to the US illegally:

1) American companies and individuals are willing to provide them with jobs and money, and
2) Mexico sucks.

1 is the natural result of 2 (obviously, since if they could find work and money at home they wouldn't leave), but since I believe tackling 1 is a much more realistic proposition than fixing 2, it stands to reason that removing the incentive for them to come here is a good place to start.

I don't know if anyone can do anything about the poverty and corruption that cripples Mexican society, but I do know we can start punishing American companies who are exacerbating the problem. A part of the solution could be to incentivize these same companies to hire LEGAL immigrants, and even make them help these workers achieve citizenship (in some way) in exchange for the privilege of hiring them (and thus saving money on wages). This benefits both the workers and the companies that hire them.

 

Except 2 means that efforts to make the US less appealing are basically futile. Where else are they going to go? Panama? Canada? Western Europe?

 

It makes the US less appealing if you're here illegally. It makes hiring illegals less appealing for American companies because there are significant penalties for skirting the law. It would, in effect, not halt the flow of Mexican immigrants (I don't think this is even possible), but create an incentive for all involved to stay within the law. That would keep the honest immigrants coming and make the leeches stay away (which, I believe, would produce an overall reduction in the number of immigrants from Mexico). It would also prevent unethical US companies from building their business models on exploiting Mexican laborers.

 

I think the other problem with fixing #2 is that, well, their a foreign and soverign nation. I know some here don't see a problem with that , but a lot of others think that's something we shouldn't mess with without good cause.

 

A good point has been made about worker attitudes, and this is also a serious problem, so long as benefits exist this attitude will.
I know people who won't wait tables because its beneath them, they would rather sit at home on jobseekers, wont do refuse collection because they wont move other people's rubbish.
Because its councils employing refuse collection they pay well and give good holidays because they cant hire illegals.
But you notice one thing in the UK, most restaurants are foreign, only pubs seem to do british food these days.

A panarama program covered this issue, they followed 5 youngsters (on jobseekers allowance) in an attempt to get them jobs, the boys said there were no jobs out there, they found them jobs no problem, only 1 of them showed up. They intervied some polish immigrants, some of them had applied for 22 jobs in one day.

Hireing illegals in the UK can carry a fine of £10.000 per worker to the business, its never enforced though.

 

Yeah, my mother-in-law is English. That may have less to do with immigration or work issues and more to do with English food.

 

cant argue with that, im partial to indian food myself

 

Well, I said that we should punish illegal immigrants. That doesn't always mean deporting them, though. I advocate draconian measures. Here's some thoughts on various options for dealing with people who break a country's laws by entering without following the laws of the target country:

1: Well run work camp service for 2 years. These camps would be regulated and mandatory. The workers could work for a pittance (that's still more than many of them are paid under the table) doing work for the public good (road construction, garbage detail, dirty but not super dangerous jobs.) They would receive no pay during their stint, but they would be well fed, well cared for and their rights would be respected. They would get their wages at the end of their service, at which time they would be allowed to receive citizenship.

2: For anyone who commits a non-violent crime while illegally in a country, implant them with a microchip and send them home -- if they are ever caught again on the country's soil, instant execution without the benefit of trial -- they had their chance and warning.

3: For anyone who commits a violent crime while illegally in the country, a short, cost effective trial followed by death -- it's bad enough to break immigration laws, if while there you assault a citizen of the country, you lose your rights, just like that.

4: If they come and have kids in the target country, send the parents back -- no more giving them a free pass for being sneaky and dishonest. Adopt out the kids to good, well screened families, and send the parents packing with microchips.

I use the microchips because they are a way to mark them without undue humiliation -- a humane form of the branding that was done to some criminals in the past. Not everyone can see the chip, but those with the right tech can.

Harsh, cruel? You bet. But for ones who don't break further laws it gives them a chance to atone for that crime and then stay legally. For criminals, it gets rid of them.

 

LKD, would you advocate the same penaties for someone who sees a "no trespassing" sign and enters private property anyway? Because, in effect, that's what illegal immigrants are - trespassers.

 

You scare me LKD. Camps and microchips? Did you even read what you wrote?

 

Facism with a vengence

 

I like the camps idea. I even like the use of microchips (for criminals as a whole, not just immigrants) except that they'd be too easy to remove (or too invasive to install). I don't like the executions without due process (talk about crazy talk). I'd say repeat-entry into the camps, with decreasing pay each time they come. Since most immigrants, legal and especially illegal, come here to send money home, a decreasing pay for the work would mean less incentive.

Then again, I like the idea of bringing hard labor back to prisons as a whole.

 

Excellent point. This is another thing the feds and states need to start doing. They need to start taxing and taxing heavily money that is being sent overseas. If it turns out the payment is for legitimate business purposes they can apply for a credit when they file their tax return.

 

Funny, I did not think I'd ever see a conservative American advocate the Tobin tax.

Otherwise illegal immigration is only a minor problem here so I have not much to say about the issue except that it's obviously is a difficult one and probably won't be solved until Mexico get their act together. What LKD said is basically insanity and probably breaks half a dozen constitutional clauses and a dozen more international conventions so that sort of measures I'm obviously against.