The illegals getting in my country and the dispute about it

Post Reply New Topic

By the way, your problems with Mexicans is nothing at all compared to Europe's problems with muslims. Yugoslavs, Albanians, Turks and Arabs come here and act as if Sweden was their country and the stupid Swedish government let them do it!! ! A muslim fundamentalist can sit in Swedish television and threat Sweden and the whole Western world with terror, openly, without even getting sued for it. And if you point out that most gangbang rapes are done by foreigners (which they are, Swedes usually rape alone), you'll get 1-2 months in prison...

Corruption of all kinds is a big problem in Mexico, but is also a big problem in the US as well. People are people, and I think it is the little guy who always gets screwed.

US taking Mexico of course wasn't very good morally. However, what we perceive is based upon what we think of the combatants.

Free trade, the Mexican elite gets a lot of power from how messed up the markets are due to a lack of competition. Freer trade would allow for foreign competition with the elite owned companies, it would improve economic growth and get the average Mexican more jobs and cheaper products. I think the best way to deal with the elite is to weaken their hold on the economy and allow for average Mexicans to improve their economic positions and weaken their power that way as well, extermination or punitive taxes to redistribute wealth would be a last resort measure. We might have to combine this with anti-corruption methods to keep elites from using illegal methods to maintain power.

I would imagine that it isn't that bad compared to Europe, however, we are not going to allow ourselves to get screwed like that. The sooner we deal with this problem of non-assimilation of Mexicans the less long-run problems we will have.

Illegal immigration is not a problem, and it has never been. The United States needs illegal immigrants, because then it can shove down costs and hire cheap labor. Let's face it: illegals won't complain to the labor boards, because they're too damn afraid they'll get deported.

See, Americans are cutting their throats when they talk about hardcore strategies to end illegal immigration, such as building fence patrols and more. The Minutemen are actually hurting capitalism. They are forcing out the people whom are employed in keeping prices low. Americans will always demand more from their employers than illegals, so America is always in the business of keeping and processing illegal immigrants.

Want to end all this confusion? Then, end this whole visage of illegal immigration, and make them all legal. I bet then you'll hear all the corporations screaming: "Oh! Damn you! Now your prices are going to go up." However, if Americans all chose to stop all them from coming into the country at once and flush out those that are already here, then the patriots would be jumping in joy. That, my friends, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

- Ray M -

The US doesn't have a massive need for illegal immigrants, there are some benefits for the looser restrictions on the labor market for illegal immigrants but not to the point our economy will collapse.

Fences and patrols are problems but they are not extremely destructive and the minutemen are not killing capitalism, all they are doing is reducing the amount of laborers in the labor market. Corporations will probably not like the legality too much, but still benefit more from it than they would from the fence, as corporations simply do not like the labor restrictions. The others who don't like all the immigrants in the first place would be happy, but I don't see how that is hypocritical since that is a part of their stated aim. Corporations like the illegal immigrants because they are willing to work for cheap, which makes sense given the Mexican economy, and social conservatives don't like them because they see them as here illegally and want to maintain a common American culture which includes the English language.

DEY TOOK AR JERBS!! !

Sorry.

Ha ha ha ha ha!! !! !! !!

Wrong on all accounts. Yes it's a big problem or we wouldn't spend billions each year dealing with them. http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/09-2 ... bc5e8.html

I'm lerning to ignore Aetunus' posts. He seems to be little more than a Eurotrash troll.

Aeternus, wait until your an old man and you have no social security, no retirement, no medicaid, or medicare, then tell us illegal immigration isn't a problem.

So, Congress (I think...I'll look it up again later) gave the go-ahead for building The Wall.
All 700 ridiculous miles of it.
I wonder if anyone's thought to ask E. Germany how their wall is doing? Oh, right...
Hm... well, I guess you could ask Chi... oh right, that one didn't work too well either.
Hm... Hadrian's Wall? Oh right, that worked about as well as the Maginot Line.

Well, anyway, good luck with the wall thing.

In the context of managed trade agreements, such as the WTO and NAFTA, you could be right. But, hypothetically, by taking away those managed trade agreements, then the US would need illegal immigrants. It's the same in Europe, also, I hear, where many of the foreigners in countries like France are not well accepted, so this is not an American phenomenon.

America seems to have little interest in building up third world economies, so it should not come as a surprise to Americans that a lot of foreigners come from third-world economies. It is still better here than over there, and America enjoys keeping it that way. Could that be the reason why all the countries the IMF has ever touched turned to s**t? I tend to think that a lot of it has to do with a resistance to change on the part of the management culture, but maybe there is a far more ulterior motive here. At least, it does make sense.

Reducing the amount of laborers in the labor market hinders capitalism. Maybe killing it is more of a euphimism, but nonetheless it is a hinderance and a severe one. Capitalist economists want to increase the labor market nearly constantly, but keeping a select small percentage out of work to reduce inflation. That is why the United States nearly jumped in joy after passing the acclaimed welfare-to-work rule, thus gutting welfare as we know it. This was done to increase the labor market, and welfare recipients tend to get paid very little. Doctor Phil and Dick Clark know how so grand it is to pay their second-rate workers next to nothing. Major corporations are far more hideous.

- Ray M -

No, our economy would simply become worse, it wouldn't collapse though. Markets are flexible and respond to supply and demand. The US doesn't NEED illegal immigrants or even necessarily free trade, we just benefit from these things, however, foreign countries benefit a lot more from free trade than developed nations. The US economics from NAFTA are about .1% of our GDP, the benefit for Mexico is estimated at 4%, as well, without freer trade it is significantly harder for foreign nations to experience economic growth as without trade there is no "catch-up" effect where poorer nations catch up to developed nations, like has happened in many asian countries.

More laborers are preferable to buyers and less preferable to sellers, but capitalism is just the system that deals with allocation of resources. Needlessly limiting the market hinders capitalism but capitalism exists even with less laborers. Capitalist economists usually don't focus on endlessly increasing labor markets, they just hate inefficiencies in labor markets. The reason why the US was happy for passing the welfare to work rule was because having people actually join the labor market rather than choosing to stay away on somebody else's money is a good thing as there is no right to somebody else's money, and the idea is to emphasize that welfare is in many cases supposed to only be a short term period thing.

Haha, you rock!

How is letting hundreds, possibly thousands, of illegal immigrants come here and live and not pay taxes good for us? Do you ever plan on retiring some day?