Comments on: What will 11 million new citizens mean? http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/ Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:47:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Betowess http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-592 Mon, 18 Mar 2013 06:17:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-592 The long festering illegal immigration problem that is never solved (on purpose) is the fact that the farming interests have traditionally asked our government/representatives to look the other way -kind of – especially if its near harvest or spring which is about a half year – or more in the south.

The result: Americans pay extremely low prices for most of our foodstuffs, compared to Europe and other developed places. Yet I don’t buy the writer’s cost argument, since he doesn’t mention law enforcement, drugs, or social welfare benefits. And there isn’t a mention of the tremendous wage devolution in many some of the trades such as constuction and other industries.

With just a small bit of smart discipline, the US could build a workable guest worker program such as Canada has had in place for many years. In Canada, the guest farm worker likes to be able to go home and enjoy decent wages. And in such a program, the American trades worker could command higher wages because of higher demand.

This latest attempt at a distant pseudo amnesty/comprehensive reform should be abandoned and a smart program instituted. The porous border should be closed, laws in place should actually be enforced… including deportations. And we should be allowing immigrants waiting legally to immigrate to be put at the front of the immigrant line.

]]>
By: MrsCrashSmith http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-542 Thu, 07 Feb 2013 15:36:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-542 We gave Amnesty back in 1986 and it did not work. If you came to this country illegally then you need to leave and come back on the legal path. I agree that it is not fair that the children that have been brought here throught no fault of their own should have some recompense. But only for them. It should not apply to their parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. If they are adults then they need to speak English. They need to be working and productive members of society. If they are under 18 then they can all go home. If the people of Mexico put as much effort into their own country as they do here they would succeed. I object to the USA allowing a third World Country to infiltrate our borders. Stop the influx. The role of the Federal Government is to secure our borders to keep us safe from our enemies. Just look at the border states and the crime rates that they are having to deal with. Look at the Latino Gangs that have polluted our society for generations. Look at the daily slaughter of innocents that happen on a daily basis in Mexico.

]]>
By: AdamSmith http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-539 Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:28:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-539 @COindependent – Well said.

Congress and the President are not trying to help the American middle class. They are beholden to the American wealthy.

And the American wealthy see higher profits with immigration. For the wealthy, immigration drives down labor costs, and drives up profits. And immigration overwhelms the apartment rentals business, driving up rents, and increasing profits.

Congress and the Obama have betrayed the American worker for these moneyed interests, and stabbed the American middle class in the back, for the sake of the people of other nations.

Your formula, however, seems exactly right to me. It would be fair and effective.

]]>
By: COindependent http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-538 Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:28:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-538 Take the economic incentives out of the process and you will see illegal immigration diminish dramatically. However, Congress and the President want to softsell the citizens of this country. It’s pretty simple and easy to fix, if the government is willing to make the effort:

A. Seal the borders
B. Employers must use E-verfiy–$10,000 fine per employee if they do not.
C. No welfare to the illegal immigrants–no medicaid, no AFDC, no food stamps, etc. None.
D. Legal immigrants must demonstrate financial ability to support themselves or have a sponsor for five years. No welfare, Medicaid, AFDC–nothing, for five years.
E. Citizenship requires fluency in English, revocation of previous citizenship, and a job.
F. Eliminate chain migration. Only spouses and children. Brothers, parents, and extended family have to apply on their own. No preferences.

There….300 words, simple, and concise. If you think this is harsh you are divorced from reality. It’s exactly how Canada and Mexico have done it for years. The model is there, all we have to do is execute.

]]>
By: AdamSmith http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-537 Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:15:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-537 @MaxClark –

Things are not OK. The American middle class is being destroyed today, right now.

The American workers’ wage-rates are plummeting. They are losing their jobs. Their children, where their hopes and dreams lay, are growing up quickly. It’s now too late. Their children are grown, now, unexpectedly, in poverty and even crime.

All this because the elite of America did not protect them from the onslaught of hordes of impoverished foreigners flooding into America, through a border that was supposed to be defended against invaders.

No, MaxClark, things are not OK for the American worker.

He built this country, but he has been betrayed and stabbed in the back by the legislatures and the president who do the bidding of big corporations who ceaselessly strive to lower wage-rates and increase profits by importing cheaper foreign labor.

The huge wave of immigration today has destroyed the American middle class.

]]>
By: MaxClark http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-536 Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:38:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-536 It seems like most of the comments here are from a perspective of extreme paranoia. Its going to seem like an absolute miracle to all of you when everything turns out to be absolutely fine. Immigrants from Mexico are a very good thing for America. I would go out on a limb and say that Mexico should be considered our top economic ally. Our economies are more entangled than any two countries in the world. The United States and Mexico are dependent on each other, and we need policy that reflects that. There needs to be independence, but these two countries need to work together to survive and flourish.

]]>
By: rikfre http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-534 Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:06:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-534 can I get a version of Reuters en Espanol..? Just watch Mike Judge’s “Idiocracy”..it’s here already.

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-533 Sun, 03 Feb 2013 21:36:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-533 @LysanderTucker,

At least the Russians, via Khrushchev, were “up front” in saying “we will bury you”, even if wrong. But illegal hispanic aliens ARE progressively and intentionally burying America and it’s productive society.

You, sir, are a traitor; citizen or not. Look it up.

“Either the people residing within the US, born here or not, are entitled to have a say in those who govern them, or those who govern them have declared them to be slaves, or at minimum, lesser human beings.”

Absolutely correct. Whomsoever owned or controlled property or other tangible assets throughout recorded history (and before) has, in the sense you use, been “greater” than those dependent upon them for survival.

An incredible majority of the hispanic hoards invading the existing American society/economy from Mexico (and points south) bring NOTHING “to the table” from which they will eat, money, land, education or skills. Do that in any restaurant and you will go to jail.

The very idea that this is a game, in which those who get here are somehow “entitled” to unearned citizenship, is fundamentally repulsive to any “civil society” in which citizenship is valued and intentionally exclusive. It’s like giving a thief who takes your wallet by stealth or force a “say” in how the cash inside should be divided.

“The problem is in ‘allowing (or blessing)’ a person to be deemed a citizen when residency should be criteria enough for voting.” No it shouldn’t, any more than allowing those who don’t pay taxes to vote. They don’t have “skin in the game”, and America already has a majority of such non-productive voters that are voting themselves raise after raise.

Your “hidden agenda” is that of a Communist, the side that LOST the cold war! Stifle.

]]>
By: AdamSmith http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-532 Sun, 03 Feb 2013 19:32:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-532 Like the Irish, German and Italian? Not so fast.

The pro-immigration political forces in America (employers, landlords and immigrants) often falsely liken the current Latin American immigration as somehow similar to the Irish, German and Italian immigrations of the 1800’s.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The famous Irish, German and Italian immigrations of the 1800’s were tiny in size compared with the current gigantic influx of Latin American immigrants, both in ABSOLUTE numbers, and as PERCENTAGES of the entire American population.

For example the entire Irish immigration to America over the entire 19th century – year 1801 to year 1900 – was around 1 million.

Whereas today, the Latino immigration to America in just the past 20 years, during the Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations, has been over 30 million.

Yes, 30 million over 20 years is a lot different than 1 million over 100 years. And back then, America was building factories.

Consider the Irish. At the turn of the century (i.e., year 1900), Irish born immigrants made up 2.12% of the US population.

Today Latino-born immigrants, legal and illegal, living in America make up over 10% of the US population.

In other words the Latino-immigration dwarfs the Irish immigration in all aspects.

And the cultural aspects are different too. The Irish were fleeing famine, not violent crime. Although there was political contention and poverty in Ireland, the culture itself was well-educated.

If one looks at the current crime rates by country, two areas of the world stand out as having the very highest rates of violent crime: Latin America and Africa.

Mexico, Brazil, Belize, Columbia – the list goes on and on. Much, much higher violent crime rates than America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou ntries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Mexico stands out as one of the most violent cultures in the world, violent being the key word.

Many people don’t realize that Mexico is one of the largest producers of oil in the world, and has been for many years.

The wealthy class of Mexico includes the world’s richest man, Carlos Slim. Not only are the poorest Mexicans flowing into America, flooding American labor markets, but the wealthy Mexicans are busy buying up much of American real estate and American companies. Now, many of the semi-trucks on American highways are owned by the wealthy of Mexico.

The Irish immigration was of poor but relatively well-educated people, with an entirely different cultural and economic effect on America.

And in size, the Irish, German and Italian immigrations to America were all tiny compared to the gigantic, uncontrolled, Latino mass immigrations into America today.

Immigration into any country affects things in a big way. It drives down wage rates and drives up rents. How could it be otherwise?

Thus the big-money interests today continually play the propaganda that the massive Latino immigration today is similar to the Irish, German and Italian immigration of the 1800’s. Nothing could be further from the truth.

]]>
By: gallen89 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/2013/02/01/what-will-11-million-new-citizens-mean/#comment-531 Sun, 03 Feb 2013 19:25:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nicholas-wapshott/?p=210#comment-531 PsuedoTurtle, history doesn’t ‘support’ your facts at all. You are twisting history that in no way supports your facts. America has always been multicultural. Dutch, German, Scandinavian, and English settlers inhabited the East coast. That’s multiculturalism. They had different religions, different languages, different customs. By the middle of the 19th century, we had absorbed areas where large numbers of the inhabitants were Native Americans, Spanish, French. They also had different languages, different religions and different customs. When we absorbed California, Arizona, New Mexico, and the other states of northern Mexico, we inherited a number of people of Latin descent. In the late 19th century, it was the turn of the Irish, the Slavs and the Chinese to immigrate. We absorbed them. Then it was Italians. Then the Japanese. Large influxes of Puerto Ricans into the Northeast was the story of the 19202-30s. German and Jewish immigrants from the 30-40s. Cubans from the late 50s through the 70s. Southeast Asians from the 60s-80s. And Central Americans from the 80s to the 2000s (and yes, the numbers crossing HAVE been declining). This idea that America is historically mono-cultural is ridiculous at its base, ignorant, and un-American. Protection of rights to religion and freedom of association were instituted in our Constitution to protect the state of this country AS a multicultural society. Lincoln’s speech you seem so fond of wasn’t a warning about the dangers of multiculturalism. It was about the danger of using multiculturalism as a TOOL for disunion. Simply stating that the South should secede because it had a different culture was not enough; the union transcends one culture. It is about a civic idea, and civic connectedness. THAT is the essence of Lincoln’s ideas.

]]>