Trump wants to deport people here for medical reasons.

Post Reply New Topic

We ARE a nation of immigrants, most demonstrably and which can be proven beyond any doubt. My grandmother was an immigrant.

Immigrants were called “huddled masses,” not “garbage,” in the poem. The allusion was to how poor many immigrants were when they arrived in the US. It was meant to be illustrative for purposes of encouraging compassion for those folks.

Like I said many times, there should be more accountability, more monitoring of immigrants. There should be an Ellis Island type place to document these folks (without the abuses which occurred in the actual Ellis Island).

Try to put yourself in the place of immigrants seeking a better life for themselves.

We must also take care of our own much better.

I would interpret that line as the poet implying that the immigrants were "the wretched refuse" of whatever land they were immigrating from, from the viewpoint of their "old country."

They were thought of as being "wretched refuse" by their "old country." Not by the poet.

Anybody who read the poem during the generation from which it was written would not interpret the line as meaning that the poet thought the "huddled masses" were "wretched refuse." Otherwise, the poem would not have been placed on a prominent location within the Statue of Liberty.

Many of the immigrants who came here were quite literate; no mention was made of the potential "offensiveness" of the "wretched refuse" line back in the time of Ellis island.

Amongst other reasons, this notion that they were "wretched refuse" as far as the "old country" was concerned was behind them seeking a land (the United States) where they would be accepted as relative equals.

Some Americans did, indeed, think of them as "wretched refuse." Of course they did.

The immigrants, for the most part, felt like they had to "prove themselves." And, for the most part, "prove themselves" they did.

The difference, today, is that nativists don't want to give the immigrants the opportunity for them to "prove themselves" like the Irish, Jews, Italians, etc. before them.

The intent of the poem was to emphasize that the "huddled masses" were thought of as being "wretched" refuse by their "old countries."

Yeah...I know about the 1924 laws. They restricted immigration severely. The "golden age" of immigration ended right there.

Like I said, I feel we have to monitor immigrants entering our country more. We have to be vigilant about our security.

But I wouldn't call people seeking a better life "criminals." If they had more avenues to pursue in legally immigrating to the United States, like what occurred before 1924, I am sure the vast majority would pursue it.

Right, nearly 100 years ago. Yet people keep bringing it up like it was a recent policy.

And the The New Colossus poem plaque isn't even a part of the Statue of Liberty itself but rather is mounted inside the lower level of the pedestal built for it years later. And then disregarded almost a century ago. And after that Ellis Island became more famous for deportations.

And the funny thing is people are using that poem and Ellis Island against those who are not against immigration, but rather are against illegal immigration.

The poem is beautiful, and any reference to immigrants as garbage is in a "One country's trash is another country's treasure" kind of way.

However, a beautiful poem and sentiment does not make sound real world policy. Currently immigrants (legal and illegal) in the US make up 47 million. That is 20% of the worlds total immigrants and 14% of the U.S. population. The U.S. is 4.3% of the world's population, so we are taking on a much greater share of the world's immigrants relative to our population.

In the year 1900, there were 10 million total immigrants in the US against a population of 76 million. That is 13% of the U.S. population or lower than the number of immigrants we have now.

The U.S. can not absorb all the people in the world. It's just not practical.

“The New Colossus” is not “disregarded.”

Just because something is old—-doesn’t mean it isn’t viable.

One thing I would like is a coherent vision on immigration from the democrats/left/liberals etc. It seems all I hear is: Immigrants good, Trump bad. I liken it to the republican stance on healthcare. They're anti-Obamacare but have no idea what to actually replace it with.

A few questions I would like straight answers to:

Do you support open borders where anyone who wants to can come to U.S.?

If not, what is the penalty for coming to the U.S. without proper approval?

How many immigrants is a reasonable number to be approved to come to the U.S., and how will you decide who can come to the U.S.?

I understand what you're saying. We can't take in "everybody."

But what would YOU do if you were a Guatemalan who's had years of crop failures, and is beset by drug-dealing gangs? Who has to support a family? And who detests drugs and drug-dealing more than any American can imagine?

I'm not for totally "open" borders----but I am certainly for an Ellis Island type of situation as was constituted circa 1900. I'm sure most of the "illegal" immigrants would go that route, too----rather than spending thousands of dollars on "coyotes" who sneak them into the US.

Ellis Island pretty much only just asked a few questions, did a quick check for communicable diseases and sent them through.

And US still processes millions of immigrants per year. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, the number stood at 44.5 million in 2017.

Meanwhile there are millions of US citizens who are experiencing a housing crisis.

But the "New Ellis Island" wouldn't be like that. They would have the latest in accountability technology. They would keep track of the immigrants once they got the "go-ahead."