View Full Version : No More Deportation?
Wow, just wow! This is crossing the wire as we speak, and the big O is about to have a press conference....I think I need a drink!:mad:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/15/obama-administration-to-offer-immunity-to-younger-immigrants/
Obama administration to offer Immunity to younger immigrants
Published June 15, 2012
Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration will stop deporting and begin granting work permits to younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives.
The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It also bypasses Congress and partially achieves the goals of the so-called DREAM Act, a long-sought but never enacted plan to establish a path toward citizenship for young people who came to the United States illegally but who have attended college or served in the military.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was to announce the new policy Friday, one week before President Barack Obama plans to address the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ annual conference in Orlando, Fla. Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney is scheduled to speak to the group on Thursday.
Under the administration plan, illegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed.
The officials who described the plan spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it in advance of the official announcement.
The policy will not lead toward citizenship but will remove the threat of deportation and grant the ability to work legally, leaving eligible immigrants able to remain in the United States for extended periods.
“Many of these young people have already contributed to our country in significant ways,” Napolitano wrote in a memorandum describing the administration’s action. “Prosecutorial discretion, which is used in so many other areas, is especially justified here.”
The extraordinary move comes in an election year in which the Hispanic vote could be critical in swing states like Colorado, Nevada and Florida. While Obama enjoys support from a majority of Hispanic voters, Latino enthusiasm for the president has been tempered by the slow economic recovery, his inability to win congressional support for a broad overhaul of immigration laws and by his administration’s aggressive deportation policy. Activists opposing his deportation policies last week mounted a hunger strike at an Obama campaign office in Denver, and other protests were planned for this weekend.
The change is likely to cause an outcry from congressional Republicans, who are sure to perceive Obama’s actions as an end run around them. Republicans already have complained that previous administration uses of prosecutorial discretion in deportations amount to back-door amnesty. Romney and many Republican lawmakers want tighter border security measures before considering changes in immigration law. Romney opposes offering legal status to illegal immigrants who attend college but has said he would do so for those who serve in the armed forces.
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll last month found Obama leading Romney among Hispanic voters 61 percent to 27 percent. But his administration’s deportation policies have come under fire, and Latino leaders have raised the subject in private meetings with the president. In 2011, Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported a record 396,906 people and is expected to deport about 400,000 this year.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/15/obama-administration-to-offer-immunity-to-younger-immigrants/#ixzz1xsRSFldd
Ok, so what has changed other then now it is openly acknowledged policy?
Stargazer
06-15-2012, 09:18
This is acceptable? :mad:
So a family illegally comes to America with two children 3 years ago. One was 15 and 18 now, graduated from H.S. and has no criminal record. The second child, was 12 and now 15, attends high school and has no criminal record. While living here illegally, the mother gave birth to another child which is an American citizen by birth. Are all deported with the exception of the 18 year-old? So, he turns in his family so he can go on to college, military, or get a 2 year work visa (renewable every 2 years without limitation). Do we routinely deport illegal minors without parents?
Since they will not be granted citizenship it doesn't buy any 'legal' votes directly but there is clearly the intent to buy the latino vote.
I think this only adds more shades of grey... when to me, we are a nation of laws. If someone enters this country illegally, they should not be granted any privileges of citizenship and are to be deported.
Obama administration to offer Immunity to younger immigrants
Published June 15, 2012
Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration will stop deporting and begin granting work permits to younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives.
The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation.
Barry needs dem votes...
It you can't get them with your record??
Buy them... :mad:
PHOENIX - Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio sat down at ABC15 to talk about the new changes by the Obama administration to stop deporting younger illegal immigrants.
"I think people from Mexico are now going to feel, 'Hey come on in and we'll get by with it.' But it won't happen in this county. They will still be arrested," Arpaio said
Video (http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/video-sheriff-arpaio-reacts-to-illegal-immigration-change)
PHOENIX - Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio sat down at ABC15 to talk about the new changes by the Obama administration to stop deporting younger illegal immigrants.
"I think people from Mexico are now going to feel, 'Hey come on in and we'll get by with it.' But it won't happen in this county. They will still be arrested," Arpaio said
Video (http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/video-sheriff-arpaio-reacts-to-illegal-immigration-change)
Have always liked Joe, and believe in his tough stance on criminals AND ILLEGALS! Oh wiat, those ARE criminals too!
Have personally known many people who have amazing stories of becomming Legal US Citizens, and it is heart-warming.
The fact that this joke-of-an-administration BYPASSED Congress all-together on this issueance is appalling, disgusting, and tresonous!:mad:
JMHO,
Holly:munchin
Stargazer
06-15-2012, 11:57
Individuals talk about the cost to deport and about children who had no say. I want to state, I recognize that children that crossed the border with their parents, didn't have a say. But, it also makes the assumption that all who did -- were forced to come here. Having said that, this study shows the following fiscal burden, U.S. Taxpayers bear:
key findings
* illegal immigration costs u.s. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. the bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
* the annual outlay that illegal aliens cost u.s. taxpayers is an annual amount per nativeheaded household of nearly $1,000 after accounting for estimated tax collections. the fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
*education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
* at the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. at the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
* most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the u.s. treasury. (there are threads on this BB that go into detail surrounding this issue -- claiming dependents that don't even live in the U.S.)
http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921 (http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921)
With a struggling economy and job shortage, I am amazed that individuals find we need to do more for non-citizens. I believe this is the exact actions Alexander Hamilton warned of in The Federalist Paper - 1
...that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.
Some caveats apply:
People under 30 who entered the country illegally or overstayed their visas when they were under the age of 16 will be immune from deportation if they have not committed a significant misdemeanor or felony and have graduated from a U.S. high school or joined the military.
They can apply for a renewable two-year work permit that won't provide a path to citizenship.
Applicants will have to prove they've lived in the country for five consecutive years.
I think MR2 is correct; it sounds like more "fluff" than "stuff" to me, too.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Badger52
06-15-2012, 12:30
The change is likely to cause an outcry from congressional Republicans, who are sure to perceive Obama’s actions as an end run around them.That's because it is. "the one" has again violated separation of powers. Centralized policy is to be by the Federal government (Legislative, required if for no other reason than taxpayer $$ may be derived in some form of benefit). But not necessarily centralized enforcement (by Holder & Napolitano) because they want someone else to eat the bill on that one. Hell, the DHS et al made half the case against themselves based on their current position vis a vis taking on Arizona.
They have - again - usurped their Constitutional authority. Everyone can holler all they want - this crew does not care.
There's that darn "awkward stage" thing again. And I must be downwind of Valerie Jarrett... whew.
:rolleyes:
Stargazer
06-15-2012, 12:38
It does have meaning and if it doesn't, than it SHOULDN"T be done IMO. It's why everything is a CF -- making decisions on a five second 'thinking fuse'.
According to the Center for Immigration Studies it will cost a great deal. This President bypassed the Dream Act at the congressional level giving a PASS to college.
•On average, each illegal immigrant who attends a public institution will receive a tuition subsidy from taxpayers of nearly $6,000 for each year he or she attends, for total cost of $6.2 billion a year, not including other forms of financial assistance they may also receive.
http://www.cis.org/dream-act-cost
Some caveats apply:
People under 30 who entered the country illegally or overstayed their visas when they were under the age of 16 will be immune from deportation if they have not committed a significant misdemeanor or felony and have graduated from a U.S. high school or joined the military.
They can apply for a renewable two-year work permit that won't provide a path to citizenship.
Applicants will have to prove they've lived in the country for five consecutive years.
I think MR2 is correct; it sounds like more "fluff" than "stuff" to me, too.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Richard Sir,
May I inquire if you believe the above as a, "silver lining," to this manipulation of Our Constituion?
You are far smarter than me Sir, but in this instance, it just seems crystal clear.:(
Holly:munchin
The President is getting very close to initiating a Constitutional Crisis. He clearly does NOT have the authority to do that which he is doing; he is supposed to ENFORCE the laws...NOT pick which ones he likes and dislikes. Sadly, this shamless attempt at vote-buying may very well be successful.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to report to re-education camp to get my mind right to celebrate gay and lesbian month in the Military. I hope I get issued one of those kicky new pink berets (insert squeal of delight "here").
Stargazer
06-15-2012, 13:39
In a speech this afternoon in the Rose Garden, President Barack Obama explained his administration's decision to allow as many as 800,000 young illegal immigrants to apply for temporary legal status and work permits.
Is there a definition for temporary LEGAL status? Are they entitled to all benefits of a legal immigrant.. like voting?
Rep. Allen West Alleges New Obama Policy On DREAMers Is Voter Fraud Conspiracy For 2012 Election
“I can start to ask questions about what is going to happen as far as their right to vote. Is this one of those backdoor opportunities to allow people in the next five months to get the opportunity to vote? Will we see Janet Napolitano and the president come out with a new edict that says ‘since we allow this people to be here legally, we’re now going to allow them to have the opportunity to vote?’… Why is it being done at this point in time? Why have we not allowed a national debate on this issue to really get a sense about what the American people feel?”
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/06/15/500411/west-undocumented-voters/?mobile=nc
Rep. Allen West video addressing his concerns: https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/
I know first hand how broke immigration is on all fronts. As much as it pains me. I have to agree with the big boss on this one.
Why not let responsible adults. Who were brought here as kids, have already been here for years. Be placed on a temporary legal status. I believe they reapply every two years. Now there is a record of them for if they do commit a crime later on. They can legally work and pay Taxes.
With all the Shit Bags living in this country. Do we really need to be spending money and resources deporting some College kid. It is highly unlikely that anyone in the category ever gets caught. So if they are going to live here anyway. Might as well get them the microchip implant like the rest of us
Stargazer
06-15-2012, 14:44
On this principle alone, I respectfully differ with the POTUS.
To mean anything, laws have to be followed. When newcomers choose to ignore them, then the entire structure of jurisprudence crashes as well. If aliens are free to ignore federal immigration law, why can’t citizens likewise pick and choose which statutes they find inconvenient?
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291190/please-little-honesty-about-illegal-immigration-victor-davis-hanson?pg=2
We either are a nation of laws or we are not.
I know first hand how broke immigration is on all fronts. As much as it pains me. I have to agree with the big boss on this one.
Why not let responsible adults. Who were brought here as kids, have already been here for years. Be placed on a temporary legal status. I believe they reapply every two years. Now there is a record of them for if they do commit a crime later on. They can legally work and pay Taxes.
With all the Shit Bags living in this country. Do we really need to be spending money and resources deporting some College kid. It is highly unlikely that anyone in the category ever gets caught. So if they are going to live here anyway. Might as well get them the microchip implant like the rest of us
There was an illegal organizer on the local radio about an hour ago who has been here since age 7. She now in her 20's and has a Mexican Passport.
Seems to me that once they reach the age of 18 and are adults they can make the decision to obey the law or skirt it which she has. If she skirted the law she and every other illegal who has skirted the law should suffer the consequences of their actions.....just as happens to legal citizens who break the law.
There was an illegal organizer on the local radio about an hour ago who has been here since age 7. She now in her 20's and has a Mexican Passport.
There was an illegal, "community organizer," here who became CIC of Our Armed Forces...
Thank God for Our Armed Forces!!!
Holly
May I inquire if you believe the above as a, "silver lining," to this manipulation of Our Constituion?
Meh...politics and an election year combined with a do nothing Congress and the historical precedent dating back over two centuries in which administrations pick and choose where they decide to place their priorities.
Personally, I'm hoping this will embarass Congress enough to get off their collective @$$es and do something definitive about our immigration issues. Until that happens, this doesn't seem to be wholly unreasonable an interim solution to me as I'd rather see my $$$ and resources being spent going after serious criminals and threats to national security than an illegal college grad who has a track record of achievement and behavior better than that of many 'legal' citizens who were born here.
However, YMMV - and so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Anyone who has had to go through the "real" immigration bureaucracy as I did with both my wife and an adopted daughter, knows that this is BS. Immigrating here legally is a monumental pain in the ass that takes years to come to fruition followed by years of f---ing around with CIS. This is unjust in the extreme and will provoke only more flaunting of the law.
Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced equally.
Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced equally.
That's a good one for the comedy zone. ;)
Richard :munchin
The Reaper
06-15-2012, 18:07
So, an immigrant wih a PhD in a high demand industry from India, Eastern Europe, or Asia can apply for a visa and be denied for years, but a 30 year old illegal from Central America with a GED and a string of misdemeanors who has been here on welfare for ten years can just apply and get one without any real waiting?
Right. That defines justice these days, doesn't it?
I guess that the secret is to get a visa to Mexico, and just walk to the US, work or go to school illegally for five years, and apply then, Bingo!
Welcome to America.
Sure hope the terrorists don't find out about our porous borders.:rolleyes:
Do you think he would be doing this if he thought 51% or more of the new residents would be voting Republican?
I don't think so.
TR
Michelle
06-15-2012, 18:43
Do you think he would be doing this if he thought 51% or more of the new residents would be voting Republican?
I don't think so.
TR
We now will have another ~one million folks added to the "jobs pool", as "temporary legal citizens"..... so these "newly minted" folks will be competing for jobs that are already scarce to full, legal, United States Citizens.
I'm not seeing the silver lining. I'm seeing Barry hefting 800,000 people as an additional burden to State, Local and Federal budgets, which in turn trickles down to the 50% of us that are actually tax payers, since the burden of unemployment benefits will continue to go up. It's actually clever. He "buys" hundreds of thousands of votes, and pays for it with *our* money.
Not a whole lot different than Solyndra and the other cronies he has bought off with *our* (tax payers) money.
I think the saddest part is the whole idea of "checks and balances", via THREE CO-EQUAL branches of Government appears to be a thing of the past. The Constitution is now merely something that the CIC uses to wipe his feet off on before entering "our" House.
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." - Alexis de Tocqueville
***Or steal it from them to use for their own devices\agenda.
Most people are too busy watching American Idol to really pay attention or care.
I wont say "and so it goes". That's proprietary here. ;) But.... well... you know....
m1
Oldrotorhead
06-15-2012, 19:12
Anyone who has had to go through the "real" immigration bureaucracy as I did with both my wife and an adopted daughter, knows that this is BS. Immigrating here legally is a monumental pain in the ass that takes years to come to fruition followed by years of f---ing around with CIS. This is unjust in the extreme and will provoke only more flaunting of the law.
Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced equally.
you are telling the truth. The legal immigrants I know have spent thousands and in some cases tens of thousands to do all of their paper work and BS correctly.
This is a slap in the face of honest immigrants.
The turd in the punch bowl with this "humanitarian" plan is Mom, Dad, Gma and gpa. They will stay or in some cases come and suck resources. Medicaid, SSI and other programs.
We are no linger a Nation of laws but a Nation of "feelings"
Badger52
06-15-2012, 19:58
Couple other 2nd & 3rd order effects mentioned here. (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/15/obama-move-on-immigration-is-unconstitutional-disaster-for-unemployed/) Extracted:
In essence the president has launched a cottage fraudulent-document industry.
However, running the risk of being greeted by boos at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials is not worth forcing African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans without higher education who live with high chronic unemployment and underemployment to compete with 2 million to 3 million additional job seekers.
And the author spares nothing across the aisle; as Richard indicated...
Republican leadership in Congress up until now has stood by, terrified to tackle immigration priorities. House Speaker John Boehner and his leadership team are currently center stage in blocking a bill that would provide employment for millions of Americans by moving illegal immigrants from the very construction, hospitality, manufacturing, service and transportation jobs sought by most unemployed U.S. citizens and legal immigrants.
Anyone who has had to go through the "real" immigration bureaucracy as I did with both my wife and an adopted daughter, knows that this is BS. Immigrating here legally is a monumental pain in the ass that takes years to come to fruition followed by years of f---ing around with CIS. This is unjust in the extreme and will provoke only more flaunting of the law.
Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced equally.
Agreed. The current immigration process is costly, arduous and time consuming. The level of BS is significant. I have worked through this process first-hand.
IMO, generally speaking, to grant special treatment to those who broke the law to get here is a slap in the face to those who lawfully persevered through a lengthy and expensive process.
Agreed. The current immigration process is costly, arduous and time consuming. The level of BS is significant. I have worked through this process first-hand.
IMO, generally speaking, to grant special treatment to those who broke the law to get here is a slap in the face to those who lawfully persevered through a lengthy and expensive process.
I have heard about the scary time it takes from my sister who just got naturalized as an American citizen last year.Many have advised me to keep Canada as an option for grad school as the immigration process is easier there even though the US would be my first choice.
Golf1echo
06-16-2012, 05:56
The law is black and white, they need to change the law if they want it different. There are legitimate processes for immigration and when you hold up those numbers you will find a great number of immigrants come every year into this country legally.
It is costly and hard to see how this is fair to them.
We are a nation of laws....or not :(
Many hard working Americans have already suffered on the job or can not be competitive because of illegal immigration* others that use them illegally have benefited.
* The cost of living legally is higher than scamming under the radar, pay has gone down for some if they are competing against illegal workers or companies that use illegal workers. I will not even get started about the organizers of illegals or the benefits they are getting that actually cost you and I money. Maybe that is why the immigration laws are in place...to protect Americans...
If my President or Attorney General don't want to abide by the law, I think there is a problem!
Do you think he would be doing this if he thought 51% or more of the new residents would be voting Republican?
I don't think so.
TR
According to the Tampa Bay Times, Republican Senator Marco Rubio (FL) has been working on similar legislation for three months.
"The surprise news came a week before Obama heads to Florida to address a major Hispanic group in Orlando and to campaign in Tampa, and it leaps ahead of Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, who has been working on a similar legislative proposal for three months but has yet to release details.
Obama may have stripped away any momentum Rubio had, driving a wedge into a Republican Party that has struggled over its immigration stances. Rubio and others, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, have called for less heated rhetoric and a more accommodating policy, particularly for younger immigrants."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/obama-to-block-deportations-urge-work-permits-for-young-illegal-immigrants/1235556
According to the Tampa Bay Times, Republican Senator Marco Rubio (FL) has been working on similar legislation for three months.
Rubio is a strong supporter of the South Florida Cuban population. He also wants to get elected.. Fortunately, He doesn't go spiking the ball like Barry...
I don't agree with some of his platform..
Ya veremos.. :munchin
Rubio is a strong supporter of the South Florida Cuban population. He also wants to get elected.. Fortunately, He doesn't go spiking the ball like Barry...
I don't agree with some of his platform..
Ya veremos.. :munchin
Which office is Jeb Bush running for?
Which office is Jeb Bush running for?
None that I know of..
But Jeb and his wife Mrs Columba Garnica Gallo Bush are both active in the Spanish community..
And for my money, would probably make a good VP.
:munchin
greenberetTFS
06-16-2012, 08:45
IMO,what "O" did was a sign of desperation,he's realizing now that Romney can beat him and he'll do anything to try and stop him.........:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
dadof18x'er
06-16-2012, 09:26
Barry needs dem votes...
It you can't get them with your record??
Buy them... :mad:
some think he'll top that in October with a Federal weed ruling to get those Ron Paul votes.......would not surprise me :(
some think he'll top that in October with a Federal weed ruling to get those Ron Paul votes.......would not surprise me :(
This make a lot of sense..
Stop harassing the illegal pot smugglers crossing the border..
New voters with taxable jobs... :munchin
ZonieDiver
06-16-2012, 14:22
IMO,what "O" did was a sign of desperation,he's realizing now that Romney can beat him and he'll do anything to try and stop him.........:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
Given that polls show POTUS has a huge lead in "Hispanic" voter approval (I think I saw 67-25), I doubt this will have much of an impact. Those who approve of this already support the President, and those who don't... well, it won't please them.
The Mexican-American community, at least around here, is not 100% pro-amnesty/Dream Act/etc. I know several "Latino/a" teachers who state that their family discussions are often heated on the subject, with almost as many against as for.
As to what this will accomplish, I'm with Richard. I have seen way too many productive, capable students denied opportunities to enter certain fields because they were illegal. While many tout their Mexican roots, they are about as Mexican as a chimichanga. They are American to their core, and wish nothing more than to be that.
I had a student who was a star in Army JROTC, with a great military bearing, manners, intelligence, great work ethic, etc. I asked if he planned on joining the military. He said he'd love to but the only way he could was to return to Mexico (where he could never remember even being) and try to enlist from there... with no guarantee he'd get in. We are missing the boat with a lot of these kids.
I've said here before that I'd rather send busloads of lazy, entitled, glorying-in-their-ignorance American-born kids away and keep some of these kids.
The Mexican-American community, at least around here, is not 100% pro-amnesty/Dream Act/etc. I know several "Latino/a" teachers who state that their family discussions are often heated on the subject, with almost as many against as for.
ZD,
Agree. Have known Peruvians and Mexicans that went through the whole arduous process of Legally becomming Americans, who seem to now be very angry at the Potus they previously supported, for doing this...and I personally hope this vote-buying is called out for what it is! SHAME on BO, SHAME!:mad::mad:
JMHO,
Holly
I personally hope this vote-buying is called out for what it is! SHAME on BO, SHAME!:mad::mad:
JMHO,
Holly
And that's the crux,,
If Romney or the GOP makes a big deal about the amnesty,
Barry will tout the Great Savior,, that he is,,
and DAM the infidel Republicans for being bigots...
:mad:
Barry will tout the Great Savior,, that he is,,
and DAM the infidel Republicans for being bigots...:mad:
I like a label that was previously posted on here by a QP...,"Major League Infidel"
Hope that I am labeled as one, lock, stck, and panties!:mad:
Holly
Radar Rider
06-16-2012, 19:03
Anyone who has had to go through the "real" immigration bureaucracy as I did with both my wife and an adopted daughter, knows that this is BS. Immigrating here legally is a monumental pain in the ass that takes years to come to fruition followed by years of f---ing around with CIS. This is unjust in the extreme and will provoke only more flaunting of the law.
Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced equally.
Outstanding response. And I feel your pain; I am married (23 years) to a lovely lady from Korea, which leads to my feelings about immigration in general. I am ALL in favor of LEGAL immigration. Standing in line for hours, processing heaps of paperwork and dealing with functionaries, going through background checks and possibly invasive interviews. Not to mention (but I will) the associated out of pocket costs. I have zero regret over having gone through the process, but I also feel that anyone that wants to come to the U.S.A honestly should go through the same process, as well.
As a matter of point, those are the type of immigrants that I am proud to have as fellow American citizens at such time that they achieve that status. I don't hate illegals, I just find it an affront to my own experience that they get a pass and I will never get my valuable time or personal investments returned to me (again, not a big deal in my own life); I simply feel that the process must be respected, or its all just indefensible crap.
Article 2 - The Executive Branch
Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Blue
greenberetTFS
06-17-2012, 04:55
Article 2 - The Executive Branch
Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Blue
Excellent point Blue........ :D But now how do you get him to do it?............:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
The Reaper
06-17-2012, 08:46
Excellent point Blue........ :D But now how do you get him to do it?............:rolleyes:
Big Teddy :munchin
You make sure he leaves the office, never to return, in January of 2013.
The scary thing is, he sees nothing wrong with the POTUS acting like a dictator, usurping the roles and responsibilities of Congress.
Time to go.
TR
dadof18x'er
06-17-2012, 08:53
You make sure he leaves the office, never to return, in January of 2013.
The scary thing is, he sees nothing wrong with the POTUS acting like a dictator, usurping the roles and responsibilities of Congress.
Time to go.
TR
you would think at some point Congress would actually do their job but they seem scared to death of something.
I've said here before that I'd rather send busloads of lazy, entitled, glorying-in-their-ignorance American-born kids away and keep some of these kids.
I'm with you on that!
You make sure he leaves the office, never to return, in January of 2013.
The scary thing is, he sees nothing wrong with the POTUS acting like a dictator, usurping the roles and responsibilities of Congress.
Time to go.
TR
Have not read a more factual statement ever than this...SCARY...for us all if we do not ACT!
Holly:munchin
(Wish You were running for CIC TR!)
Do you think he would be doing this if he thought 51% or more of the new residents would be voting Republican?
I don't think so.
I don't think so either :(
22333
The best guess on jobs lost - not recovered yet - is somewhere around 4 million.
The best guess on how many this new dictate - I will not call it law - will "legalize" is 800,000 to 1,000,000.
Hmm, does not appear it will help many Americans find a job.
Disturbing back-side to barry's epiphany.
In May we had around 12.7 M unemployed, at a published 8.2% rate.
U.S. Economy Added 69K jobs in May, Unemplyment Rate Up to 8.1%
Published on 6/1/2012 1:41:29 PM | By TradingEconomics.com, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
U.S. Nonfarm payroll employment changed little in May (+69,000), and the unemployment rate went up to 8.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on June 1st. Employment increased in health care, transportation and warehousing, and wholesale trade but declined in construction. Employment was little changed in most other major industries.
Both the number of unemployed persons (12.7 million) and the unemployment rate (8.2 percent) changed little in May.
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.8 percent) and Hispanics (11.0 percent) edged up in May, while the rates for adult women (7.4 percent), teenagers (24.6 percent), whites (7.4 percent), and blacks (13.6 percent) showed little or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was 5.2 percent in May (not seasonally adjusted), down from 7.0 percent a year earlier.
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) rose from 5.1 to 5.4 million in May. These individuals accounted for 42.8 percent of the unemployed.
Total nonfarm payroll employment changed little in May (+69,000), following a similar change in April (+77,000). In comparison, the average monthly gain was 226,000 in the first quarter of the year. In May, umployment rose in health care, transportation and warehousing, and wholesale trade, while construction lost jobs.
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for March was revised from +154,000 to +143,000, and the change for April was revised from +115,000 to +77,000.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
SO,, How many of the 800K new voters will be added to the unemployment statics?
800K is to high, maybe 400K,,
If my FOG math is correct,, the unemployment rate jumps about 3.15%, to over 11.3%,
Not Good for the bean-counters,,
Bad Ju Ju..
Disturbing back-side to barry's epiphany.
In May we had around 12.7 M unemployed, at a published 8.2% rate.
SO,, How many of the 800K new voters will be added to the unemployment statics?
800K is to high, maybe 400K,,
If my FOG math is correct,, the unemployment rate jumps about 3.15%, to over 11.3%,
Not Good for the bean-counters,,
Bad Ju Ju..
A lot of these new legal guests are already gainfully employed, so it might actually show a bump in new hires, job created and overall employment numbers.
10 Things That Will Happen If Barack Obama Continues To Systematically Legalize Illegal Immigration
The following are 10 things that will happen if Barack Obama continues to systematically legalize illegal immigration....
#1 There Will Be Fewer Jobs For American Workers
In the United States today, 53 percent of all college graduates under the age of 25 are either unemployed or underemployed. Many of them are absolutely desperate for work.
Overall, there are more than 100 million working age Americans that do not have jobs right now.
Meanwhile, millions of illegal immigrants are occupying jobs that could otherwise be held by American citizens. Many employers prefer to hire illegals because they work for a lot less money.
Sadly, many prominent politicians actually support the "right" of these "undocumented workers" to steal our jobs as a recent article by Devvy Kidd pointed out....
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/10-things-that-will-happen-if-barack-obama-continues-to-systematically-legalize-illegal-immigration
The following are 10 things that will happen if Barack Obama continues to systematically legalize illegal immigration....
a. #1 There Will Be Fewer Jobs For American Workers
b. In the United States today, 53 percent of all college graduates under the age of 25 are either unemployed or underemployed. Many of them are absolutely desperate for work.
c. Overall, there are more than 100 million working age Americans that do not have jobs right now.
d. Meanwhile, millions of illegal immigrants are occupying jobs that could otherwise be held by American citizens. Many employers prefer to hire illegals because they work for a lot less money.
a. Why would that happen... are illegal immigrants better, more skilled, more highly educated than American workers...or will they work at jobs Americans won't take?
b. How will the illegals affect that? If there are so many college educated Americans out of work because there is a lack of jobs, then how can an illegal take a job from them.... a job that doesn't exist?
c. If 100 million Americans are out of work, then how would an illegal find a job?
d. See "a". IMO, those employers are the problem, not the illegal immigrants. If they didn't hire illegals, then why would they be coming here in droves?
greenberetTFS
06-18-2012, 07:41
a. Why would that happen... are illegal immigrants better, more skilled, more highly educated than American workers...or will they work at jobs Americans won't take?
b. How will the illegals affect that? If there are so many college educated Americans out of work because there is a lack of jobs, then how can an illegal take a job from them.... a job that doesn't exist?
c. If 100 million Americans are out of work, then how would an illegal find a job?
d. See "a". IMO, those employers are the problem, not the illegal immigrants. If they didn't hire illegals, then why would they be coming here in droves?
Very good points WCH,I agree 100% with you........;)
Big Teddy :munchin
d. See "a". IMO, those employers are the problem, not the illegal immigrants. If they didn't hire illegals, then why would they be coming here in droves?
That's like removing money from a bank so it won't get robbed.
a. Why would that happen... are illegal immigrants better, more skilled, more highly educated than American workers...or will they work at jobs Americans won't take?
b. How will the illegals affect that? If there are so many college educated Americans out of work because there is a lack of jobs, then how can an illegal take a job from them.... a job that doesn't exist?
c. If 100 million Americans are out of work, then how would an illegal find a job?
d. See "a". IMO, those employers are the problem, not the illegal immigrants. If they didn't hire illegals, then why would they be coming here in droves?
All good points.
It goes far deeper than employers and it is deeper than Illegals crossing the border.
While the employers do hire them, if the end users (me & you) didn't support the enterprise it wouldn't happen. I mean, most end users are looking at getting the cheapest price for a service or product. From cheap crap at Big Box Stores, home owners insurance to cutting your grass it all about cheap and few care until they get their job taken by something cheaper.
Over time that practice or mindset can come back and bite you in the ass.
All good points.
It goes far deeper than employers and it is deeper than Illegals crossing the border.
While the employers do hire them, if the end users (me & you) didn't support the enterprise it wouldn't happen. I mean, most end users are looking at getting the cheapest price for a service or product. From cheap crap at Big Box Stores, home owners insurance to cutting your grass it all about cheap and few care until they get their job taken by something cheaper.
Over time that practice or mindset can come back and bite you in the ass.
Which big box stores knowingly hire illegal workers as a matter of company policy?
Isn't the cheap crap you mention mostly made offshore, rather than in the USA by illegals?
What do illegal workers have to do with the cost of homeowner's insurance?
How does the consumer determine that a company they do business
with (support) employs illegal workers? Isn't that the job of the government?
IMO, companies that employ illegals, do it for the benefit of the owners (lining their pockets), not to to be competitive. It's nothing more than greed.
Which big box stores knowingly hire illegal workers as a matter of company policy?
Isn't the cheap crap you mention mostly made offshore, rather than in the USA by illegals?
What do illegal workers have to do with the cost of homeowner's insurance?
How does the consumer determine that a company they do business
with (support) employs illegal workers? Isn't that the job of the government?
IMO, companies that employ illegals, do it for the benefit of the owners (lining their pockets), not to to be competitive. It's nothing more than greed.
I agree with you, up to the last point. There are just some jobs Americans won't do. When I went to school in Monterey we were surrounded by farms. If it had not been for the illegal workers, you and I would not enjoy fresh fruits and vegetables year round. A majority of Americans will not do that kind of work. You can talk about how the growers won't pay a fair wage, that is why only illegals will take the job. My retort is that if wages went up, so would the cost of food. Just a simple fact. And we as Americans would piss and moan about that.
In the big scheme of things I don't have a problem, per se, with the new policy. The problem I have with it, is that it is Un-Constitutional in the way it is being implemented. Congress passes the laws in this land, not the President, by Presidential fiat. Same shit, different day, with this guy.
I agree with you, up to the last point. There are just some jobs Americans won't do.
Sorry but, barring a study, that is just anecdotal. We hear that alot with not a shred of proof to back it up.
Also, while one may or may not agree with the policy change itself (as is manifested by the varying opinions on this board), as you stated, it is not the place of the President to decide that he will NOT enforce a specific, lawfully enacted piece of legislation, en masse, with respect to an entire group of people. That is the job of congress.
TXGringo
06-19-2012, 09:08
I agree with you, up to the last point. There are just some jobs Americans won't do. When I went to school in Monterey we were surrounded by farms. If it had not been for the illegal workers, you and I would not enjoy fresh fruits and vegetables year round. A majority of Americans will not do that kind of work. You can talk about how the growers won't pay a fair wage, that is why only illegals will take the job. My retort is that if wages went up, so would the cost of food. Just a simple fact. And we as Americans would piss and moan about that.
.
Americans were doing that work long before the illegals showed up. Americans worked in construction. Americans worked in landscaping. Business owners caught on that they could pay these guys much less, offer no benefits of any kind, and have the protection of a phone call to ICE in case the crowd got rowdy. This reduction in cost of production didn't translate into lower food costs. Or cheaper building construction. Or cheaper lawn care. It translated into more profit.
The goal of business isn't to produce the product at the lowest cost to the consumer. It's to produce the product at the highest level of profit for the business.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/munro-obama-ignores-questions-about-controversial-de-facto-amnesty-decision/
"Obama justified his immigration decision by saying it is supported by business lobbies."
Of course it is. :rolleyes:
Team Sergeant
06-19-2012, 09:14
I agree with you, up to the last point. There are just some jobs Americans won't do. When I went to school in Monterey we were surrounded by farms. If it had not been for the illegal workers, you and I would not enjoy fresh fruits and vegetables year round. A majority of Americans will not do that kind of work. You can talk about how the growers won't pay a fair wage, that is why only illegals will take the job. My retort is that if wages went up, so would the cost of food. Just a simple fact. And we as Americans would piss and moan about that.
In the big scheme of things I don't have a problem, per se, with the new policy. The problem I have with it, is that it is Un-Constitutional in the way it is being implemented. Congress passes the laws in this land, not the President, by Presidential fiat. Same shit, different day, with this guy.
afchic, I think you mean will Americans work for a few dollars an hour with no health benefits then yes you may be right. I've seen the farms across the country and it seems the farmers in Kalif, Arizona, Texas etc. are the ones employing most of the illegals. Cheap illegal labor that will not put up a fight for their wages and benefits, go figure.
European farmers don't have a problem with Europeans doing the work on farms, because the farmers have to pay the proper wages. Centeral and South America doesn't hire illegals. Only American farmers.
Tell you what, I'll continue to purchase produce from Central and South America in hopes that the American Farmer pays the proper wages and stops using cheap illegal labor that is making him rich and placing a greater burden of employing illegals (healthcare, education, etc.) on the American economy.
Americans were doing that work long before the illegals showed up. Americans worked in construction. Americans worked in landscaping. Business owners caught on that they could pay these guys much less, offer no benefits of any kind, and have the protection of a phone call to ICE in case the crowd got rowdy. This reduction in cost of production didn't translate into lower food costs. Or cheaper building construction. Or cheaper lawn care. It translated into more profit.
The goal of business isn't to produce the product at the lowest cost to the consumer. It's to produce the product at the highest level of profit for the business.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/munro-obama-ignores-questions-about-controversial-de-facto-amnesty-decision/
"Obama justified his immigration decision by saying it is supported by business lobbies."
Of course it is. :rolleyes:
And now Americans won't do some of those jobs because it is "too hard", or "I am better than that". They make more money sitting on their asses getting food stamps, and welfare. Why should they have to go out and bust their asses in the hot sun doing menial labor.
There is enough blame to go around for everyone. From the people coming in the country illegally, to the Government for growing entitlement generations, to the businesses lining their pockets. But when it is all said and done there are over 20 Million illegal aliens here in the US. We have a government that is completely complicit in allowing it to happen by not securing our boarders. We have politicians that are pandering for votes. We have a system in place that makes it almost impossible for people to come her legally.
As a mother I have often asked myself what I would do if I lived in a country that offered no hope. No hope for a decent job, no hope for the safety of my kids, no hope of a better life. Would I come across the border illegally if I thought it would bring a better way of life for my kids. You bet your ass I would.
So how do we harness the power of hardworking, God fearing, people that want nothing more than to get away from the madness of their home countries. To one that offers "the American Dream" and a better way of lilfe? There is no way that we are going to deport 20 million people from this country. So what do we do? How do we make this work in our favor? How do we bring the honest people out of the shadows so that they start paying taxes, stop sending money back over the boarder and put it into our economy?
How?
Sorry but, barring a study, that is just anecdotal. We hear that alot with not a shred of proof to back it up.
Also, while one may or may not agree with the policy change itself (as is manifested by the varying opinions on this board), as you stated, it is not the place of the President to decide that he will NOT enforce a specific, lawfully enacted piece of legislation, en masse, with respect to an entire group of people. That is the job of congress.
Congress is responsible for enforcement of laws????
How is the President's action any different than, a sheriff, police chief, or any law enforcement agency/ officer choosing which lawfully enacted statutes they will enforce and which they will ignore?
Anybody read what the POTUS or Scty-DHS had to say on the matter?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/06/15/remarks-president-immigration
http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/20120612-napolitano-announces-deferred-action-process-for-young-people.shtm
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Badger52
06-19-2012, 09:53
Congress is responsible for enforcement of laws????
How is the President's action any different than, a sheriff, police chief, or any law enforcement agency/ officer choosing which lawfully enacted statutes they will enforce and which they will ignore?A very valid question & I mulled this over comparing it with a local situation awhile back, pre- shall-issue carry law. A nearby DA had stated outright that he would not, absent any other criminality, prosecute carry violations (open-carry was/is legal). This was consistent with the AG's guidance that simply "being somewhere" visibly carrying a handgun wasn't criteria for officers to do anything.
The President's unilateral Executive determination, with auto-granting of work permits, seems to go beyond the decision to simply not execute the consequences of illegal boots-on-ground. A new benefit has been added to what would've simply been a decision on what statutes to prosecute or not. Since there is ostensibly less risk in popping a flare on wages or working conditions I'd look for some other downstream effects as well.
Which big box stores knowingly hire illegal workers as a matter of company policy?
It's nothing more than greed.
Money is definitely a motivator, but the American worker is too damn expensive, good, bad, lazy or motivated. Forgetting the economic implications, these people broke the law, and should be dealt with as such. On the other hand, they will also learn of the double edged sword of "registration": If we can track 'em, we can tax 'em(well not this administration, but maybe the next)...
My .02
ETA:
And now Americans won't do some of those jobs because it is "too hard", or "I am better than that". They make more money sitting on their asses getting food stamps, and welfare. Why should they have to go out and bust their asses in the hot sun doing menial labor.
Some of that comes from the "I'm special" culture. Gone are days where one did whatever it took to put bread on the table. :(
The President's unilateral Executive determination, with auto-granting of work permits, seems to go beyond the decision to simply not execute the consequences of illegal boots-on-ground. A new benefit has been added to what would've simply been a decision on what statutes to prosecute or not. Since there is ostensibly less risk in popping a flare on wages or working conditions I'd look for some other downstream effects as well.
Have you read the links that Richard posted?
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 11:18
Have you read the links that Richard posted?
Yes and those who are deferred will be given permits if they prove financial necessity.
The Dreams Act although it is a feel good legislation (makes concessions for illegal or unauthorized residents -- (same President's Remarks -- just read DHS for information) -- it ignores that they are here illegally. Many Americans have/had a problem because it also takes grants (federal/state) from U.S. Citizens.
Not all who are deferred are going to pursue higher education. Further, those given deferrals have to reapply every 2 years. To me, it adds another layer of bureaucracy (costs tax dollars) to circumvent the current law and Congress. Is there a guarantee they sign if educated in the U.S. they promise to work for an employer here for x number of years? Isn't there a process for student visa's? Why is this 'deferral' not a form of amnesty? Not to mention takes jobs from Americans - which is the FIRST order of business IMO. Let's not forget if an American is unemployed and currently receiving an unemployment subsidy, flipping hamburgers or any other form of 'above board pay' stops benefit payout. For this reason, most cannot afford to take that 'lazy person' or a second job until their benefits run out and they drop off the governments radar. Also, those on welfare can survive without working -- our humanity created that monster too!
It is very political in nature. Or perhaps it is all about putting in place policies for the good of "specific" young people like DOL did when seeking to limit/control child labor on the farm and Ag industry.
All these anecdotal about who is lazier / more deserving... there can be as many stories that move the arrow in another direction. I have a few of my own. To tell me that ALL just want to be Americans flies in the face of my own observations. Makes a great soundbyte but fails the sniff test...
To me, at the end of the day, we are either a nation of laws or we are not.
And now Americans won't do some of those jobs because it is "too hard", or "I am better than that". They make more money sitting on their asses getting food stamps, and welfare. Why should they have to go out and bust their asses in the hot sun doing menial labor.
???? Where do you get this from? What a biased statement.
Badger52
06-19-2012, 11:40
Have you read the links that Richard posted?I did, as well as the DHS FAQ.
???? Where do you get this from? What a biased statement.
Are you serious? Do you read the news? People recieving food stamps have gone from 17 Million in 2006 to over 46 Million today. Studies show that doesn't correlate with the recession alone, so there is another reason more people are getting them. It because the current administration has lowered the criteria for eligibility. Do we even need to talk about welfare?
You can put on your rose colored glasses all day, but if given a choice between working their asses off in the hot sun and pulling minimum wage, or sitting on the couch pulling full welfare benefits, I think you would be surprised at the number willing to do the latter, before the former. I have seen it with my own eyes.
Congress is responsible for enforcement of laws????
How is the President's action any different than, a sheriff, police chief, or any law enforcement agency/ officer choosing which lawfully enacted statutes they will enforce and which they will ignore?
Not well said.
it is not the place of the President to decide that he will NOT enforce a specific, lawfully enacted piece of legislation, en masse, with respect to an entire group of people. That is the job of congress.
Meant to say that legislation is the job of congress vs. the president.
???? Where do you get this from? What a biased statement.
My 50+ years (32+ owning and operating various enterprises) of experience in the work place (and that of my business associates) tells me that it is very true.
Are you serious? Do you read the news? People recieving food stamps have gone from 17 Million in 2006 to over 46 Million today. Studies show that doesn't correlate with the recession alone, so there is another reason more people are getting them. It because the current administration has lowered the criteria for eligibility. Do we even need to talk about welfare?
You can put on your rose colored glasses all day, but if given a choice between working their asses off in the hot sun and pulling minimum wage, or sitting on the couch pulling full welfare benefits, I think you would be surprised at the number willing to do the latter, before the former. I have seen it with my own eyes.
You ought to know better. A couple of biased news stories (which you don't cite) and people receiving more in food stamps does not equate to Americans being fat, dumb and happy and refusing to do work that illegals will do. That is a straw man argument. Also, am I to presume that you are so all knowing and all seeing as to have seen such a HUGE percentage of Americans all across the US "not" doing this type of work that your opinion would then count as proof? How would you even quantify that?
Sorry, I find your argument ridiculous and offensive.
You ought to know better. A couple of biased news stories (which you don't cite) and people receiving more in food stamps does not equate to Americans being fat, dumb and happy and refusing to do work that illegals will do. That is a straw man argument. Also, am I to presume that you are so all knowing and all seeing as to have seen such a HUGE percentage of Americans all across the US "not" doing this type of work that your opinion would then count as proof? How would you even quantify that?
Sorry, I find your argument ridiculous and offensive.
You find my opinion rediculous and offensive. That's fine. But you have never walked in my shoes, and me yours. I obviously have a different life experience than you do, which informs my opinions.
Never said I was all knowing, but having spent a lot of time volunteering in food banks, soup kitchens etc, there is a large population in this country that would rather take a hand out than work.
If you want to be homeless and have no worries about being taken care of, Monterey CA is for you. Every day at 1200 the local church pulls up in a bread truck and feeds the homeless a hot lunch in the parking lot across from NPS. At night, a bus shows up and takes them to the shelter for the night and gives them a hot meal. The bus then brings them back in the morning.
I got to know quite a few of them volunteering with my church. When asked why they are living the way they are, when there was plenty of opportunity for work in the area, to a man they said why bother? Their needs are taken care of (food and shelter). Plus there is the added bonus of being able to hang out on the beach, drink beer, read a book all day. Why should they bust their ass if someone is willing to do it for them. Especially in the liberal bastion of CA.
Maybe you have been lucky enough to have never experienced things such as this. Sometimes I wish I hadn't
Also, I got my numbers from the CBO not some random biased news source.
You find my opinion rediculous and offensive. That's fine. But you have never walked in my shoes, and me yours. I obviously have a different life experience than you do, which informs my opinions.
Never said I was all knowing, but having spent a lot of time volunteering in food banks, soup kitchens etc, there is a large population in this country that would rather take a hand out than work.
If you want to be homeless and have no worries about being taken care of, Monterey CA is for you. Every day at 1200 the local church pulls up in a bread truck and feeds the homeless a hot lunch in the parking lot across from NPS. At night, a bus shows up and takes them to the shelter for the night and gives them a hot meal. The bus then brings them back in the morning.
I got to know quite a few of them volunteering with my church. When asked why they are living the way they are, when there was plenty of opportunity for work in the area, to a man they said why bother? Their needs are taken care of (food and shelter). Plus there is the added bonus of being able to hang out on the beach, drink beer, read a book all day. Why should they bust their ass if someone is willing to do it for them. Especially in the liberal bastion of CA.
Maybe you have been lucky enough to have never experienced things such as this. Sometimes I wish I hadn't
Also, I got my numbers from the CBO not some random biased news source.
Certainly you have to realize that the things you have seen really are a tiny fraction of the cross section of society. I mean, how many people do you know? Even if it were a thousand people, it would be one thousand out of a population of 310,000,000. That is 0.0003225%. You have made a judgement call about "the American People" based on your infinitesimal interaction with them.
Team Sergeant
06-19-2012, 12:40
Keep it civil......
afchic,
No one argues with a Special Forces Warrant Officer, no one.:D
TS
Keep it civil......
afchic,
No one argues with a Special Forces Warrant Officer, no one.:D
TS
:)
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 12:55
We are talking about illegal immigration and a pass (deferral) granted by the President through a policy change.
We have an immigration law at the federal level, why? To protect American Workers and Wages. End of story!
Talk about racist -- revisit the immigration laws. Lord, we started off with quotas by nationality. Regardless of agreeing or disagreeing with the actual laws, they evolved with our history. Is it time to change it again? I think so. But this current action, in my view, only exacerbates an already existing problem. It isn't about the hearts or goodness of any group of people. It's about process and law.
It is the President's duty to uphold the immigration laws that are in place to protect and assimilate number of immigrants in balance with this country's economical and social abilities to support. Not to find ways to skirt it. I didn't agree with Reagan's path to amnesty either and I think the Dream Act is another well intended but failed policy.
To dilute the problem of illegal immigration by labeling who is deserving of what, is a disservice to the seriousness of the matter in my view.
Keep it civil......
afchic,
No one argues with a Special Forces Warrant Officer, no one.:D
TS
What TS is really saying is that SFWOs have an innate, sick desire to argue just for the sake of arguing. I thought I left that behind when I retired, but I guess it is just genetic. ;)
What TS is really saying is that SFWOs have an innate, sick desire to argue just for the sake of arguing. I thought I left that behind when I retired, but I guess it is just genetic. ;)
I blame my love of arguing on my dad. SMSgt (Ret). He to this day will argue over anything just for the sake of argument.
Nothin but love here!!!:p
As a mother I have often asked myself what I would do if I lived in a country that offered no hope. No hope for a decent job, no hope for the safety of my kids, no hope of a better life. Would I come across the border illegally if I thought it would bring a better way of life for my kids. You bet your ass I would.
So how do we harness the power of hardworking, God fearing, people that want nothing more than to get away from the madness of their home countries.How?
afchic,
Have read through all of the debate here, and if I may offer my humble opinion?
My family has known of several foreign mothers wanting a better life for their kids, nieces, nephews etc...and how they, "did it," was go about it the legal way, by filling out the paperwork, waiting, learning the language, and becomming US Citizens. Legally.
This is a slap in the face to them and thier families who did it the right way, and there is no denying that fact.
And I agree, foreigners are very hard working, and generally after going through all they did to get here legally, become very productive members of our society.
But this action, and the original point of this thread was to showcase a President who usurped Congress, and THE LAW, by proclaimng himself God, and signing a document to buy votes for an election. His one little small life...effecting millions of American lives, and there is not a damn thing we can do about it...yet.
That fact seems crystal clear to me.
Again, JMHO.:lifter
Holly
We have an immigration law at the federal level, why? To protect American Workers and Wages. End of story!
Are you going to sit there an tell us that federal immigration law has been effective, and effectively enforced by previous administrations? Do you really believe that illegal immigrants are responsible for the state of the US economy today?
We have speed limits set by city, county, state, and federal laws....does that mean they are being strictly enforced?
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 14:11
Are you going to sit there an tell us that, that federal immigration law has been effective, and effectively enforced by previous administrations? Do you really believe that illegal immigrants are responsible for the state of the US economy today?
No, not only am I not saying that, I didn't. My position is non-political. You may note I pointed out my disagreement with the Reagan's action in 1986. If it was effective, we would not have the problem we do, to the level we do.
Where did I state they were "responsible for the state of the US economy today"? Do I think they have an impact on the economy? You are darn tooting. My point is that immigration laws were put in place -- to protect citizens jobs and wages and social integration. You might believe that to be wrong, I consider it prudent. Would you expand the size of your payroll with out regard to your business' ability to sustain it?
Is there a guarantee they sign if educated in the U.S. they promise to work for an employer here for x number of years? .
State taxpayers underwrite the education system in the state, so do we require graduates (high school, and college graduates) to promise /guarantee that they will work for an employer in the state for x number of years?
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 14:23
State taxpayers underwrite the education system in the state, so do we require graduates (high school, and college graduates) to promise /guarantee that they will work for an employer in the state for x number of years?
No, but they aren't non-residents (living here illegally) receiving benefits from taxpayers. However, most employers do to ensure they obtain a ROI. And, I believe that there are different types of visas for students based on whether they are non-resident or not (I may be mistaken here)...
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 14:33
We have speed limits set by city, county, state, and federal laws....does that mean they are being strictly enforced?
No sir, but where I live the level of strictness tends to run in synch with the need for revenue...
We have an immigration law at the federal level, why? To protect American Workers and Wages. End of story!
You either forgot to use the pink font or to place that one in the Comedy Zone.
The NARA has some interesting things to say about the "End of story!" on that one.
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2002/summer/immigration-law-1.html
http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2012/pdfs/prologue-attachments.pdf
The history of US immigration policy is an interesting and complicated one.
On another note, I watched a news report tonight that the fastest growing immigrantion group to the US since Y2K is Asian, risen from 19% to 36% of immigrants vs Hispanic which has fallen from nearly 60% to 21%. One reported fact of note is that the Asian immigrants are some of the best and brightest of their generation, well educated and with a strong, aggressive work ethic.
As the song goes, "The times they are a-changin'..."
And so it goes...
Richard
Stargazer
06-19-2012, 16:53
You either forgot to use the pink font or to place that one in the Comedy Zone.
No. My apology. Oversight on my part -- I should have included the 'social' aspect which I mentioned in a later paragraph.
afchic,
Have read through all of the debate here, and if I may offer my humble opinion?
My family has known of several foreign mothers wanting a better life for their kids, nieces, nephews etc...and how they, "did it," was go about it the legal way, by filling out the paperwork, waiting, learning the language, and becoming US Citizens. Legally.
This is a slap in the face to them and their families who did it the right way, and there is no denying that fact.
And I agree, foreigners are very hard working, and generally after going through all they did to get here legally, become very productive members of our society.
But this action, and the original point of this thread was to showcase a President who usurped Congress, and THE LAW, by proclaimng himself God, and signing a document to buy votes for an election. His one little small life...effecting millions of American lives, and there is not a damn thing we can do about it...yet.
That fact seems crystal clear to me.
Again, JMHO.:lifter
Holly
Those people you mention. Who were here illegally and decided to go legal. They were all deported. Most probably voluntarily. See if you're here illegally. You have to leave the Country and apply in your home Country.
This law Targets a very specific group. People who were brought here as Kids and grew up here. Many have to connection or family where their from.
It was a stupid law that needed to be changed. Yes it was for votes, all presidents do it. At least this vote grab will actually helped someone who is getting fucked over.
Those people you mention. Who were here illegally and decided to go legal. They were all deported. Most probably voluntarily. See if you're here illegally. You have to leave the Country and apply in your home Country.
Sir,
My appologies for ANY mis-understanding. My post was in refference to very dear friends of my family whom I have known for 10+ years, who Legally Immigrated from South America.
They have all told me of their stories of, "winning" as they call it, the lottery, and being able to start the LEGAL process of becomming US Citizens...While still in South America!
Some of their extended family are still waiting IN South America, but I have personally been to all of their Induction Ceremonies, where tears were shed.
They are all examples of Immigrants Legally comming to the US, and are part of my family now as very productive citizens of the U.S.
Holly:munchin
AngelsSix
06-19-2012, 19:31
afchic, I think you mean will Americans work for a few dollars an hour with no health benefits then yes you may be right. I've seen the farms across the country and it seems the farmers in Kalif, Arizona, Texas etc. are the ones employing most of the illegals. Cheap illegal labor that will not put up a fight for their wages and benefits, go figure.
European farmers don't have a problem with Europeans doing the work on farms, because the farmers have to pay the proper wages. Centeral and South America doesn't hire illegals. Only American farmers.
Tell you what, I'll continue to purchase produce from Central and South America in hopes that the American Farmer pays the proper wages and stops using cheap illegal labor that is making him rich and placing a greater burden of employing illegals (healthcare, education, etc.) on the American economy.
It is also becoming true in the construction trades. I actually had a guy at the bar pissing and moaning that the "illegals were taking all the jobs". When I asked him what he meant by that he said: "go drive to the areas in any neighborhood where there is a house being built and count how many of those guys are Mexican." The folks that are building houses in the area will not hire a roofer that has 10, 20 years experience if he can get one guy with enough sense to get the Mexicans to do the job white guys were doing a couple of years ago.
While I don't work in the construction trade myself, I do know plenty of people that do. I have seen some of my friends getting outbid by contractors that are paying illegals peanuts. I feel bad for those guys, they do have a right to bitch.
Sir,
My appologies for ANY mis-understanding. My post was in refference to very dear friends of my family whom I have known for 10+ years, who Legally Immigrated from South America.
They have all told me of their stories of, "winning" as they call it, the lottery, and being able to start the LEGAL process of becomming US Citizens...While still in South America!
Some of their extended family are still waiting IN South America, but I have personally been to all of their Induction Ceremonies, where tears were shed.
They are all examples of Immigrants Legally comming to the US, and are part of my family now as very productive citizens of the U.S.
Holly:munchin
I laud them for doing the right thing. I wish that it wasn't as hard as it is to get the hard working folks who want to become citizens and truly be Americans here.
I don't know your friend's situation but I have spent quite a bit of time in Latin America, in some of the shittiest places you have EVER seen. I knew families that lived in garbage dumps because it is the only way they can feed their children. You take a chance with your life by simply walking down the street. The drug lords rule with an iron fist. They build their houses with cardboard boxes, on the side of a mountain, and when the rains come in the winter, they either loose their house, or quite possibly their lives in a mud slide. I know parents who have abandoned their children in orphanages, because at least then they know they are going to be fed. They also do it in the hopes that their little girls won't have to sell their bodies so they can eat.
Echoes, this isn;t directed at you, but is me on my soapbox (I know, surprising :p)For all the talk of how awful this country is, I don't see people beating down the door to leave, only to come in. It is a place that for the most part being poor here is middle to upper middle class in most places around the world. I get so tired of hearing about poverty in the US. Most folks that think we have a poverty problem have never step foot out of our borders. Go to Tejucigalpa to see what poverty is. Go to Dehli to see what poverty is. Go to Guatemala City to see what poverty is.
As a mother, if I were one of those women, and had even the slightest chance of making it to America, where my children would have a decent chance of making it to adulthood, I would do whatever it takes to get here. Even if it is illegal.
AngelsSix
06-19-2012, 19:46
Are you serious? Do you read the news? People recieving food stamps have gone from 17 Million in 2006 to over 46 Million today. Studies show that doesn't correlate with the recession alone, so there is another reason more people are getting them. It because the current administration has lowered the criteria for eligibility. Do we even need to talk about welfare?
You can put on your rose colored glasses all day, but if given a choice between working their asses off in the hot sun and pulling minimum wage, or sitting on the couch pulling full welfare benefits, I think you would be surprised at the number willing to do the latter, before the former. I have seen it with my own eyes.
I think a little more research is in order, this article lays it out to make a whole lot more sense. Sometime (well, all of the time) I have found that the media is full of false, overblown fact and scarmongering tactics.
Read this: http://livingstingy.blogspot.com/2012/01/50-million-americans-on-welfare-not.html
Excerpt:
One number bandied about by conservatives is that "50 Million Americans are on Welfare!" which is an alarming statistic, because if true, means that 1 in 6 Americans isn't working, but instead staying home and watching TeeVee all day long.
Makes sense, in a sick sort of way. But how many people really are on "Welfare" as we know it? 50- million like the conservatives say?
Try 4.4 million.
Who! How did 50 million shrink to 4.4 million? Well the conservatives have a very inclusive definition of "Welfare" as being any sort of government check you may receive other than social security of course!
They count medicaid, which is a program, like medicare, but which provides medical assistance for the very poor. 50 Million people are on medicaid, and that is a scary number. And it is costing us hundreds of Billions a year. But of course, this is much better than "Socialized Medicine" or "Obamacare" and donchuforgetit!
50 Million Americans on Welfare? Try 4.4 Million instead. Counting the working poor who receive food stamps and Medicaid as being "on welfare" is more than a little disingenuous. It is an outright lie.
This is why I read independent of most mainstream news sources, and I no longer have a t.v. in my house.:p
As a mother, if I were one of those women, and had even the slightest chance of making it to America, where my children would have a decent chance of making it to adulthood, I would do whatever it takes to get here. Even if it is illegal.
As a parent, so would I...which is exactly why I think my ancestors packed it all in and risked their lives to come here seeking a chance at a better life in 1650.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
I think a little more research is in order, this article lays it out to make a whole lot more sense. Sometime (well, all of the time) I have found that the media is full of false, overblown fact and scarmongering tactics.
Read this: http://livingstingy.blogspot.com/2012/01/50-million-americans-on-welfare-not.html
Excerpt:
One number bandied about by conservatives is that "50 Million Americans are on Welfare!" which is an alarming statistic, because if true, means that 1 in 6 Americans isn't working, but instead staying home and watching TeeVee all day long.
Makes sense, in a sick sort of way. But how many people really are on "Welfare" as we know it? 50- million like the conservatives say?
Try 4.4 million.
Who! How did 50 million shrink to 4.4 million? Well the conservatives have a very inclusive definition of "Welfare" as being any sort of government check you may receive other than social security of course!
They count medicaid, which is a program, like medicare, but which provides medical assistance for the very poor. 50 Million people are on medicaid, and that is a scary number. And it is costing us hundreds of Billions a year. But of course, this is much better than "Socialized Medicine" or "Obamacare" and donchuforgetit!
50 Million Americans on Welfare? Try 4.4 Million instead. Counting the working poor who receive food stamps and Medicaid as being "on welfare" is more than a little disingenuous. It is an outright lie.
This is why I read independent of most mainstream news sources, and I no longer have a t.v. in my house.:p
Thanks for the info. But I wasn't refering to welfare, but a report the CBO put out on the increase in people recieving food stamps. I agree MSM sucks, and stuff gets spun all the time. But when it comes to the CBO, I don't have reason to not believe what they are putting out there.
AngelsSix
06-19-2012, 20:04
Thanks for the info. But I wasn't refering to welfare, but a report the CBO put out on the increase in people recieving food stamps. I agree MSM sucks, and stuff gets spun all the time. But when it comes to the CBO, I don't have reason to not believe what they are putting out there.
Hey, I love this discussion and I am not being argumentative, because I intend to write a thesis on this eventually.
Is there really a difference in welfare and food stamps? Aren't food stamps a form of welfare? Or "social assistance" as we like to call it now. When did we decide that food stamps weren't welfare?
Social security isn't welfare because everyone that works pays into it. Our taxes pay for food stamps and welfare. If people aren't working, they aren't paying taxes, but they are still pulling benefits. I know it seems like apples to oranges, but perhaps you can teach me something I don't know. I honestly do not know anyone, or have met anyone in my time working a the unemployment office that was receiving food stamps independent of welfare. I know it probably can happen, I just never heard of it.
Hey, I love this discussion and I am not being argumentative, because I intend to write a thesis on this eventually.
Is there really a difference in welfare and food stamps? Aren't food stamps a form of welfare? Or "social assistance" as we like to call it now. When did we decide that food stamps weren't welfare?
Social security isn't welfare because everyone that works pays into it. Our taxes pay for food stamps and welfare. If people aren't working, they aren't paying taxes, but they are still pulling benefits. I know it seems like apples to oranges, but perhaps you can teach me something I don't know. I honestly do not know anyone, or have met anyone in my time working a the unemployment office that was receiving food stamps independent of welfare. I know it probably can happen, I just never heard of it.
I have had many an airman working for me that were pulling food stamps.
I know what you are saying in terms of getting something from Big Daddy Sugar is termed "welfare". But I think they are completely seperate pots of money. For instance, food stamps gets their appropriation from the Farm Bill. I don't know if there is a seperate appropriation for "welfare". As with most things, it is probably an ammendment tacked onto some other piece of legislation that has absolutely nothing to do with government assistance.
I didn't think you were being arguementative. I certainly am not an expert in this arena. I just do a lot of reading of legislative material, and pick some things up here and there. I also like watching CSPAN. I am a total political junkie/geek.
GratefulCitizen
06-19-2012, 20:31
All forms of government assistance are fungible.
If a person doesn't have to spend funds on food, they are free to use unspent funds on something else.
When the assistance comes from the federal government a problem is created.
This problem is rooted in the power to borrow against the credit of the United States.
When the federal government "spends" in any form, it is confiscating a percentage of the economy.
The percentage is simply the amount spent in a given time period divided by the GNP during that given time period.
State governments are constrained in their ability to confiscate because they can't print their own currency to cover debts.
This is why government assistance should be a state rather than a federal function (and probably why it isn't an enumerated power).
Team Sergeant
06-20-2012, 07:49
I agree with you, up to the last point. There are just some jobs Americans won't do. When I went to school in Monterey we were surrounded by farms. If it had not been for the illegal workers, you and I would not enjoy fresh fruits and vegetables year round. A majority of Americans will not do that kind of work. You can talk about how the growers won't pay a fair wage, that is why only illegals will take the job. My retort is that if wages went up, so would the cost of food. Just a simple fact. And we as Americans would piss and moan about that.
In the big scheme of things I don't have a problem, per se, with the new policy. The problem I have with it, is that it is Un-Constitutional in the way it is being implemented. Congress passes the laws in this land, not the President, by Presidential fiat. Same shit, different day, with this guy.
afchic,
This is why "educated" Americans will not work for the Calif farmers, the pay is not even minimum wage.
How I love the hypocritical left-wing Californians and farm workers unions.
TS
California Farm Workers Stuck Between Poverty And Neglect, Suffer From Low Wages And Lack Of Organization
Posted by Farmworkers Forum ⋅ 10 August 2011 ⋅
FRESNO [CA] – No one knows the exact number of farm workers who year after year raise and harvest the crops grown in the Central Valley of California and which earn an estimated $18 billion annually.
Farms in this vast geographic area produce a varied selection of crops, ranging from grapes to nuts, from corn to strawberries. Dominant economic forces try to keep the price of these products low to maintain and increase consumption, while also confronting the growing threat of competition from abroad. This all leads to keeping wages low for field workers, the weakest link in the production chain.
To this end, farm owners use different tactics. For example, piecemeal or “contracted” work is paid per bucket of oranges or cranberries, not by the hour. Using this system, the workload ratchets up in intensity as laborers hustle and scramble to fill enough buckets and equate to the legal minimum wage of $8 an hour. It is a feat they rarely achieve.
“In tomato-picking, the worker follows the tractor and cannot fall behind,” explains Juan Santiago, a 23-year-old farm worker from Madera, Calif. “The ‘tomateros’ work very hard and can earn about $120 a day.”
Although that daily $120 sounds attractive to underpaid laborers, the harsh reality puts things in perspective. “This job lasts about three months,” said Santiago, who at 23 seems to know each row in the Central Valley. “In general, most field workers make about $11,000 annually.”
Cont:
https://farmworkersforum.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/california-farm-workers-stuck-between-poverty-and-neglect-suffer-from-low-wages-and-lack-of-organization/
afchic,
“In tomato-picking, the worker follows the tractor and cannot fall behind,” explains Juan Santiago, a 23-year-old farm worker from Madera, Calif. “The ‘tomateros’ work very hard and can earn about $120 a day.”
Wonder how many Chicago teens would line up for a "tomatero" job. :munchin
Stargazer
06-20-2012, 08:00
Wonder how many Chicago teens would line up for a "tomatero" job. :munchin
I don't know -- but Indiana teens 14-17 would have to get a work permit:
: How does a minor obtain a work permit?
A: Nearly all minors ages 14 through 17 who wish to work in Indiana are required to obtain a work permit. Work permits are obtained from the accredited high school in the school district where the minor resides. To obtain a work permit, a minor must first be hired by an employer. The employer must provide the accredited school with written notice that they intend to hire the minor, as well as the hours the minor will work and the types of duties the minor will perform. To streamline the process, the Indiana Department of Labor has developed the "Intent to Employ/A1" form which includes all of the information an employer will need to provide. The minor must then return the notice, in person, to the Issuing Officer at the accredited high school. The minor will also need to provide proof of age--traditionally by presenting a copy of his/her birth certificate. If the minor does not attend the accredited high school or is homeschooled, the minor may be required to provide a letter from his/her school stating that the minor is in good academic and attendance standing. Once these documents are examined and found to be in good order, the minor should be issued a work permit. There is no cost associated with filing for or issuing a work permit. The work permit must remain on file at the site where the minor is working.
Course -- when I was a teen (and younger), I asked for a job, they hired me, my parents provided transportation until I was able to drive. That's it.
If you were an employer -- you want to hassle with that or go another route, employees willing to work for same wages and less restrictions.
The Ag Industry out West is referred to as California's Second Gold Rush and has produced far more wealth than the original rush for the ore ever did. The plight of the ag workers has always been so - read The Octopus (similar read to The Jungle) and Steinbeck to understand what it's like being a seasonal ag worker out there - and probably always will be. It's a tough life and wears its workers down quickly.
I grew up out there and we began working the fields when we were 10 - work 0600-1200 until we were 13 and then longer days in the almonds, apples, plums, tomatos, hops - drove tractors plowing, discing, harrowing, planing irrigation checks, planting, and harvesting once we were big enough - bucked grain and hay as teens. When baling oat hay, we'd sleep in the fields next to our equipment awaiting the evening dew to come in so we could bale - if you didn't, you'd lose the grain out of the head and wind up with what were basically bales of straw, and too much moisture would either mildew the hay and the livestock wouldn't eat it or when stacked in barns could lead to combustion. Three-wired bales of oat hay weighed about 135# and alfalfa about 165#.
We could get $.25 per lug of tomatos (wooden box filled and stacked at the ends of the rows for pick up) - hauled baled oat and alfalfa hay for $.08 per bale and guaranteed 1,000 bales per day delivered - bucked grain and wild rice for $.75 per hr.
The rules have changed so I don't know what the minimum age is now - back when, if you were big enough to work you did.
We looked forward to the start of football - we got more breaks and it was easier to do 'two a days' than working all summer.
Growing up working the ag industy out in NorCal made it easier to adapt to a combat arms mentality as we were used to being outside for long hours in all kinds of weather. Looking back, I guess I was always in pre-SF training...just didn't know it until I was drafted and met that SF recruiter at Fort Ord. :D
Richard :munchin
We looked forward to the start of football - we got more breaks and it was easier to do 'two a days' than working all summer.
Richard :munchin
I did "two-a-days" in Richardson.
Phase I was a walk in the park compared to that. :D
Dozer523
06-20-2012, 08:20
Wonder how many Chicago teens would line up for a "tomatero" job. :munchinYou can ask the guy who runs the big tomato farm in Chicago-land.
Sometimes the limit of a job search is defined by a bus ride.
I don't think they leave the doors on empty boxcars open any more. Ahh the 1930's Those were the days, needed a job just load up the truck and drive the Mother Road to the Land of Milk and Honey with the Joads. You ought to read that book or at least watch the movie.
You can ask the guy who runs the big tomato farm in Chicago-land.
Sometimes the limit of a job search is defined by a bus ride.
I don't think they leave the doors on empty boxcars open any more. Ahh the 1930's Those were the days, needed a job just load up the truck and drive the Mother Road to the Land of Milk and Honey with the Joads. You ought to read that book or at least watch the movie.
I'll read it as soon as I get through with "How to Take Points Completely Out of Context" by Dozer. ;)
White House: Manufacturing millions "I Heart Gringos" welcoming guest worker uniforms will save or create enough jobs to compensate for the 800,000 taken away by new arrivals.
AFAIK, in NY(C), you can collect SNAP(EBT/Foodstamp) benefits depending on your reported income. In 2009, the ARRA relaxed[1] and/or eliminated the asset limitations in many cases, additional discretion was left to the states.
[1] http://theccpp.org/issues-food-stamp-reform.html
TS i agree with what you are saying about wages. But before we can go about fixing the problem we need to know what caused the problem in the first place.
As Richard stated he grew up working in the ag business. I would be willing to bet on a family farm or the farm of a friend, etc. My dad grew up on a farm. Farm kids know how to work! The owners knew all their employees and probably their families as well. They paid a fair wage because they knew how hard the work was.
So we no longer have many family farms left thanks to the inheritance tax. A.parent leaves their kid the family farm that has been owned by the same family for generations. Now because of the inheritance.tax, instead of taking over the family business the recipient is sellingit just to pay the taxes on the inheritance. So big business comes in and buys the land and it becomes part of a huge conglomerate. The owners of the conglomerate more than likely have never worked on a farm only seen them in pictures :) There is no relationship between employee and employer. The kids that would have worked the farm now have to learn a new trade. In order to make.bigger profits the owners hire illegalls.
To me.this situation just exemplifies how the "family" structure has broken in this country. Instead.of generations of future land holders and farmers we.now.have generations of welfare babies.
Yes I am sure there are lots of people that would do the work if a fair wage was offered. But until we are a generation past the entitlement generation and get back to one where menial labor is something we teach our kids to do in order to learn a business from the ground up or just to learn the value of plain old fashioned hard work we are going to be stuck on this merry go round.
Team Sergeant
06-20-2012, 11:53
TS i agree with what you are saying about wages. But before we can go about fixing the problem we need to know what caused the problem in the first place.
As Richard stated he grew up working in the ag business. I would be willing to bet on a family farm or the farm of a friend, etc. My dad grew up on a farm. Farm kids know how to work! The owners knew all their employees and probably their families as well. They paid a fair wage because they knew how hard the work was.
So we no longer have many family farms left thanks to the inheritance tax. A.parent leaves their kid the family farm that has been owned by the same family for generations. Now because of the inheritance.tax, instead of taking over the family business the recipient is sellingit just to pay the taxes on the inheritance. So big business comes in and buys the land and it becomes part of a huge conglomerate. The owners of the conglomerate more than likely have never worked on a farm only seen them in pictures :) There is no relationship between employee and employer. The kids that would have worked the farm now have to learn a new trade. In order to make.bigger profits the owners hire illegalls.
To me.this situation just exemplifies how the "family" structure has broken in this country. Instead.of generations of future land holders and farmers we.now.have generations of welfare babies.
Yes I am sure there are lots of people that would do the work if a fair wage was offered. But until we are a generation past the entitlement generation and get back to one where menial labor is something we teach our kids to do in order to learn a business from the ground up or just to learn the value of plain old fashioned hard work we are going to be stuck on this merry go round.
How about two hundred years of American Farmers using illegal aliens as slaves? (Especially California Farmers.):munchin
So we no longer have many family farms left thanks to the inheritance tax. A.parent leaves their kid the family farm that has been owned by the same family for generations. Now because of the inheritance.tax, instead of taking over the family business the recipient is selling it just to pay the taxes on the inheritance. So big business comes in and buys the land and it becomes part of a huge conglomerate. The owners of the conglomerate more than likely have never worked on a farm only seen them in pictures :) There is no relationship between employee and employer. The kids that would have worked the farm now have to learn a new trade. In order to make.bigger profits the owners hire illegalls.
It is far more than inheritance tax at play. Government regulations and Corporate AG driving prices down which make it unaffordable for the family farmer. Once the small guy is out of the way corporation like Tyson's set up shop and bring in slave labor from South of the border and places like Somalia.
But it keeps the corporate profits high, investors happy and the shelf prices cheap.
1. As Richard stated he grew up working in the ag business. I would be willing to bet on a family farm or the farm of a friend, etc. My dad grew up on a farm. Farm kids know how to work! The owners knew all their employees and probably their families as well. They paid a fair wage because they knew how hard the work was.
2. So we no longer have many family farms left thanks to the inheritance tax. A.parent leaves their kid the family farm that has been owned by the same family for generations. Now because of the inheritance.tax, instead of taking over the family business the recipient is sellingit just to pay the taxes on the inheritance.
3. Yes I am sure there are lots of people that would do the work if a fair wage was offered. But until we are a generation past the entitlement generation and get back to one where menial labor is something we teach our kids to do in order to learn a business from the ground up or just to learn the value of plain old fashioned hard work we are going to be stuck on this merry go round.
1. I grew up in an area with family farms, and I can't recall any farm worker's (hired hands) families having incomes that came close to that of the average family in the area.
2. Lack of financial planning is the root cause of that. One of my brother-in-laws grew up on a farm with 10 brothers (5) and sisters, none chose farming as their career. Some went to college their family ( 1 to law school), others became general contractors. Despite the passing of both parents, the farm still remains in the family (good financial planning), but is not being farmed as a business
3. One does not have mop floors, and clean toilets to be learn the janitorial business.
I started a manufacturing business in which aluminum welding played a primary part of, without ever having any experience in that field. I was taught early in that working smarter not harder was the key to success. BTW, I never was adverse to hard work....I had my first paper route when I was 9, installed (dug ditches) underground sprinkler systems for 6 years starting around 10 years of age (my fathers part time business). While in college I also unloaded tractor trailers from midnight til 8 am, and did pick and shovel work for a cement contractor ( no need to pay to use a health club for "rock hard abs").:D
Historically hasn't the USA relied on slaves and immigrant workers (legal and not) to do it's hard, undesirable, underpaid jobs?
While in college I also unloaded tractor trailers from midnight til 8 am, and did pick and shovel work for a cement contractor ( no need to pay to use a health club for "rock hard abs").:D
Historically hasn't the USA relied on slaves and immigrant workers (legal and not) to do it's hard, undesirable, underpaid jobs?
I don't know-were you a slave or an immigrant? Those jobs you did seem hard and undesirable to me.
GratefulCitizen
06-20-2012, 15:47
The problem is entitlement programs and federal spending in general.
Increasing immigration is not a problem (I would argue that it is a solution...), so long as the people coming to this country produce more than they consume.
More people working creates wealth, it does not destroy it.
This remains true so long as other externalities are kept under control.
More people means more use of the commons (public infrastructure and programs).
If immigration is increased, it is necessary to shrink or privatize "the commons".
The marketplace will naturally adjust the commons to an appropriate size, if the federal government is uninvolved.
Since the states cannot print their own money, they are more subject to market discipline.
Shrink government, increase immigration.
In that order.
I don't know-were you a slave or an immigrant? Those jobs you did seem hard and undesirable to me.
Since I born in the USA, I must have been a slave....a well paid slave...10 weeks of unloading trailers paid for my college tuition, books, room and board, car expenses, beer money, ect. for the year, and still have money in the bank.:D Oh and BTW it put money into a pension fund that I collect from today. To me, the job was physical, but not hard. I consider myself fortunate to have been 1 of 8 to get the job. Sure beat those easy jobs that paid 50 to 75 cents an hour. Working midnight to 8am, allowed me to enjoy my days on the beach with lots of hot beach babes while other dudes were working their easy day jobs.
The cement work was way more physical, but how could a 20 year old consider it hard if the 63 year old boss was doing the very same work, unless he's a whimp? The SFQC was a piece of cake physically, with out all the prep today's recruits need to do.
Since I born in the USA, I must have been a slave....a well paid slave...10 weeks of unloading trailers paid for my college tuition, books, room and board, car expenses, beer money, ect. for the year, and still have money in the bank.:D Oh and BTW it put money into a pension fund that I collect from today. To me, the job was physical, but not hard. I consider myself fortunate to have been 1 of 8 to get the job. Sure beat those easy jobs that paid 50 to 75 cents an hour. Working midnight to 8am, allowed me to enjoy my days on the beach with lots of hot beach babes while other dudes were working their easy day jobs.
The cement work was way more physical, but how could a 20 year old consider it hard if the 63 year old boss was doing the very same work, unless he's a whimp? The SFQC was a piece of cake physically, with out all the prep today's recruits need to do.
So, the work is there if one is willing to do it.
So, the work is there if one is willing to do it.
How can you say that??? I was 1 of 8 guys (college students) lucky enough to get the job (a temporary summer position)....there where hundreds (maybe thousands) of job seekers (students and adult) who would have jumped through hoops to get the job. ...so no there wasn't work for the willing.
As an employer, anytime I was hiring, there was always way too many people wanting to apply to even spend the time to consider them. So again, the work isn't always there.
Sir,
My apologies for ANY mis-understanding. My post was in refference to very dear friends of my family whom I have known for 10+ years, who Legally Immigrated from South America.
They have all told me of their stories of, "winning" as they call it, the lottery, and being able to start the LEGAL process of becomming US Citizens...While still in South America!
Some of their extended family are still waiting IN South America, but I have personally been to all of their Induction Ceremonies, where tears were shed.
They are all examples of Immigrants Legally comming to the US, and are part of my family now as very productive citizens of the U.S.
Holly:munchin
No apologies needed. My Wife was recently forced to return to her home country. Even thou we are legally married and have a two year old together. Because she violated her original Visa. No way around the deportation, it's the law.
No apologies needed. My Wife was recently forced to return to her home country. Even thou we are legally married and have a two year old together. Because she violated her original Visa. No way around the deportation, it's the law.
Sir,
Am so very sorry. :(
The Immigration system in the US clearly needs an overhaul!
My hope, as well as those I have known who have immigrated is that the paperwork, waiting, and the BS in general is cut out!!!
Luv my SF guys, and the families that support them...hope all turns out well Sir.
Holly
The Reaper
06-20-2012, 19:26
The Ag Industry out West is referred to as California's Second Gold Rush and has produced far more wealth than the original rush for the ore ever did. The plight of the ag workers has always been so - read The Octopus (similar read to The Jungle) and Steinbeck to understand what it's like being a seasonal ag worker out there - and probably always will be. It's a tough life and wears its workers down quickly.
I grew up out there and we began working the fields when we were 10 - work 0600-1200 until we were 13 and then longer days in the almonds, apples, plums, tomatos, hops - drove tractors plowing, discing, harrowing, planing irrigation checks, planting, and harvesting once we were big enough - bucked grain and hay as teens. When baling oat hay, we'd sleep in the fields next to our equipment awaiting the evening dew to come in so we could bale - if you didn't, you'd lose the grain out of the head and wind up with what were basically bales of straw, and too much moisture would either mildew the hay and the livestock wouldn't eat it or when stacked in barns could lead to combustion. Three-wired bales of oat hay weighed about 135# and alfalfa about 165#.
We could get $.25 per lug of tomatos (wooden box filled and stacked at the ends of the rows for pick up) - hauled baled oat and alfalfa hay for $.08 per bale and guaranteed 1,000 bales per day delivered - bucked grain and wild rice for $.75 per hr.
The rules have changed so I don't know what the minimum age is now - back when, if you were big enough to work you did.
We looked forward to the start of football - we got more breaks and it was easier to do 'two a days' than working all summer.
Growing up working the ag industy out in NorCal made it easier to adapt to a combat arms mentality as we were used to being outside for long hours in all kinds of weather. Looking back, I guess I was always in pre-SF training...just didn't know it until I was drafted and met that SF recruiter at Fort Ord. :D
Richard :munchin
I had a similar job in the tobacco fields of NC.
When I left, it had gotten to the point that the only people who would work tobacco for the going wage, which was well above the minimum, was family and Mexicans.
The rest just stayed home, drunk or stoned, and lived off the government checks, and that was 1976 or so.
They finally had to mechanize, just before the bottom dropped out of the tobacco business and the government ended it. Nowdays, most of the barns sit empty, the mechanized equipment is rusting away, and the fields have cotton or grain in them. Those that aren't subdivisions already.
TR
This is one of those threads that has certainly broached a wide range of topics, it’s a thread with much thought provoking discussion and it has certainly taken on a life of its own. As I recall it all started with the POTUS waving his magic wand to stop the deportation of young illegal immigrants. I guess that I was not aware that the U.S. was doing a whole lot of deporting en masse of any illegal immigrants short of the occasional meat packing plant raid which takes place every now and then. This whole thing boils down to election year I feel your pain it’s the right thing to do politics at its finest, someone had to do it! Can anyone name a president or congress for that matter that ever made a real effort at enforcing our nation’s immigration laws? Whenever an effort is made to crack down on undocumented workers it is usually snuffed out by some industry, generally farm related that cannot flourish without these workers. We then got into the debate concerning those who would rather sit on their backsides, the “welfare crowd.” I learned from one of the posters that there is somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.4 million people on welfare not the 50 million as claimed by conservatives. As a person who has been gainfully employed for the past 41 years I tend to use the term welfare in very broad terms, to me if you are getting something for nothing it’s welfare. Social Security was then brought into the discussion, “Social security isn't welfare because everyone that works pays into it.” Yes everyone that works pays into it however everyone that draws out of it has not necessarily put into it. Have you ever watched Judge Judy and saw the endless parade of 20 something’s who do not work because of their disability yet draw a monthly check from SSI. I used to think SS was for retired people, I was wrong. My investment guy sits down with me once a year to go over my retirement accounts, last year he asked me for my SS info and I informed him that I was not even counting SS into my retirement equation as I do not think It will be available, my SS is going to 28 year old woman from California who is afraid to go out in public. I guess I could go on and on but enough already. Good thread with a lot of good points made by all.
This is one of those threads that has certainly broached a wide range of topics, it’s a thread with much thought provoking discussion and it has certainly taken on a life of its own. As I recall it all started with the POTUS waving his magic wand to stop the deportation of young illegal immigrants. I guess that I was not aware that the U.S. was doing a whole lot of deporting en masse of any illegal immigrants short of the occasional meat packing plant raid which takes place every now and then. This whole thing boils down to election year I feel your pain it’s the right thing to do politics at its finest, someone had to do it! Can anyone name a president or congress for that matter that ever made a real effort at enforcing our nation’s immigration laws? Whenever an effort is made to crack down on undocumented workers it is usually snuffed out by some industry, generally farm related that cannot flourish without these workers. We then got into the debate concerning those who would rather sit on their backsides, the “welfare crowd.” I learned from one of the posters that there is somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.4 million people on welfare not the 50 million as claimed by conservatives. As a person who has been gainfully employed for the past 41 years I tend to use the term welfare in very broad terms, to me if you are getting something for nothing it’s welfare. Social Security was then brought into the discussion, “Social security isn't welfare because everyone that works pays into it.” Yes everyone that works pays into it however everyone that draws out of it has not necessarily put into it. Have you ever watched Judge Judy and saw the endless parade of 20 something’s who do not work because of their disability yet draw a monthly check from SSI. I used to think SS was for retired people, I was wrong. My investment guy sits down with me once a year to go over my retirement accounts, last year he asked me for my SS info and I informed him that I was not even counting SS into my retirement equation as I do not think It will be available, my SS is going to 28 year old woman from California who is afraid to go out in public. I guess I could go on and on but enough already. Good thread with a lot of good points made by all.
There are two types of Disability payments:
1. Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is only applies to people who have paid into SSI or their eligible dependents.
2. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter to aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income. It's funded by general tax revenues not your Social Security taxes!
I can't believe anyone would admit that they watch Judge Judy!
I can't believe anyone would admit that they watch Judge Judy!
lol Or American Idol, for that matter. :D
There are two types of Disability payments:
1. Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is only applies to people who have paid into SSI or their eligible dependents.
2. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter to aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income. It's funded by general tax revenues not your Social Security taxes!
I can't believe anyone would admit that they watch Judge Judy!
Thanks for defining that for me.
Regarding Judge Judy, the woman is no fan of the welfare /nanny state that we now live in and when she gets these clowns in front of her that do nothing but sponge off of the rest of us she voices her obvious disdain for them. What is American Idol?
Thanks for defining that for me.
Regarding Judge Judy, the woman is no fan of the welfare /nanny state that we now live in and when she gets these clowns in front of her that do nothing but sponge off of the rest of us she voices her obvious disdain for them.
2. What is American Idol?
1. If you derive pleasure from watching that made for TV garbage, then I guess you are a fan of Jerry Springer too!
2. You'll have to tell me, I've never watched it.
1. If you derive pleasure from watching that made for TV garbage, then I guess you are a fan of Jerry Springer too!
2. You'll have to tell me, I've never watched it.
Lighten up, Francis! (You probably don't know where that came from, either, do you)
ZonieDiver
06-21-2012, 07:29
Lighten up, Francis! (You probably don't know where that came from, either, do you)
Betcha a beer that he does (or will have figured it outby the time he responds)!
Everyone who is anyone knows... from our 'Big Toe'! :D
My Aunt Catherine used to say that to my Uncle Frank! Lord knows where she got it from.
ZonieDiver
06-21-2012, 07:58
My Aunt Catherine used to say that to my Uncle Frank! Lord knows where she got it from.
I owe you a beer, sinjefe!
Stargazer
06-21-2012, 12:39
I read a question presented on another thread that asked which modern day President has been the toughest on deportations. I always like to verify data for myself. I guess it depends how one defines toughest, but I believe once again, Americans have been mislead...
My source for this data is the DHS website under enforcement actions.
http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/immigration.shtm
I seem to recall that only a couple of years ago just after the crash the news was all abuzz about the number of illegals who were self deporting their way back "home".
It appears theydo follow jobs.
Stargazer
06-21-2012, 13:02
I agree Pete. Perhaps mislead is not the best choice of words. However, anyone who has worked with statistics knows, those who present numbers often 'cherry pick' in order to tell the story they want heard. :D Clearly the number in criminal deportations is higher. Also, the total should be deported v. removed.
The level of apprehensions has dropped but it's hard to know why by looking at numbers alone.
Badger52
06-21-2012, 13:18
My source for this data is the DHS website under enforcement actions. Ditto here but, like any monolith, I'm not sure they can get their own reporting metrics to jive. For total aliens removed, both non-criminal & criminal status the figures here (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2010/table38d.xls) are:
2001: 189.026
2002: 165,168
2003: 211.098
2004: 240,665
2005: 246,431
2006: 280,974
2007: 319,382
2008: 359.795
2009: 395,165
2010: 387,242
Numbers are all over the place in any agency - especially the ones they publish, but the above trend would indicate that the current admin could only say, "well.... he started it!"
Stargazer
06-21-2012, 13:31
Ditto here but, like any monolith, I'm not sure they can get their own reporting metrics to jive....... Numbers are all over the place in any agency - especially the ones they publish
Agreed. The data I used was from annual reports which they state is based off of workload and case tracking systems.... :)
I owe you a beer, sinjefe!
So where did my aunt get it from?
So where did my aunt get it from?
You have GOT to be kidding!
So where did my aunt get it from?
Lighten up, Francis! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pA1h1FjBZg) ;)
Pat
GratefulCitizen
06-21-2012, 14:52
2. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter to aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income. It's funded by general tax revenues not your Social Security taxes!
The difference between general tax revenues and the payroll tax is an accounting fiction.
It does not matter.
The amount of money supposedly in the "trust fund" is an accounting fiction.
It does not matter.
All that really matters is how much money is being spent and where it is spent.
Taxes are just a game.
The purpose of the tax game is to manipulate behavior, create a relative advantage for the politically connected, and to ensure the dollar actually has value.
It also is a way in which the federal government pretends that it plays by the same rules as everyone else.
Debts, deficits, taxes, and earmarks are just tools of political manipulation and theater.
The amount spent and where it is spent is the true "tax" burden.
Money isn't real.
Goods and services are real.
The difference between general tax revenues and the payroll tax is an accounting fiction.
It does not matter.
The amount of money supposedly in the "trust fund" is an accounting fiction.
It does not matter.
All that really matters is how much money is being spent and where it is spent.
Taxes are just a game.
The purpose of the tax game is to manipulate behavior, create a relative advantage for the politically connected, and to ensure the dollar actually has value.
It also is a way in which the federal government pretends that it plays by the same rules as everyone else.
Debts, deficits, taxes, and earmarks are just tools of political manipulation and theater.
The amount spent and where it is spent is the true "tax" burden.
Money isn't real.
Goods and services are real.
Hear, hear! Well f'n said.
The purpose of the tax game is to manipulate behavior, create a relative advantage for the politically connected...
And to create advantage for others "in the know" or those who can pay large sums of money to those in the know.
Debts, deficits, taxes, and earmarks are just tools of political manipulation and theater.
The tax code is and has been the currency of the political elite for some time.
The authors of the code can make or break an entire industry.
Stargazer
06-22-2012, 08:07
By Charles Krauthammer
Obama explained that it would be illegal. “Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. . . . But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”
With a single Homeland Security Department memo, the immigration laws no longer apply to 800,000 people. By what justification? Prosecutorial discretion, says Janet Napolitano.
This is utter nonsense. Prosecutorial discretion is the application on a case-by-case basis of considerations of extreme and extenuating circumstances. No one is going to deport, say, a 29-year-old illegal immigrant whose parents had just died in some ghastly accident and who is the sole support for a disabled younger sister and ailing granny. That’s what prosecutorial discretion is for. The Napolitano memo is nothing of the sort. It’s the unilateral creation of a new category of persons — a class of 800,000 — who, regardless of individual circumstance, are hereby exempt from current law so long as they meet certain biographic criteria.
Imagine: A Republican president submits to Congress a bill abolishing the capital gains tax. Congress rejects it. The president then orders the IRS to stop collecting capital gains taxes and declares that anyone refusing to pay them will suffer no fine, no penalty, no sanction whatsoever. (Analogy first suggested by law professor John Yoo.)
What about those who languish for years in godforsaken countries awaiting legal admission to America? Their scrupulousness about the law could easily cost their children the American future that illegal immigrants will have secured for theirs.
But whatever our honest and honorable disagreements about the policy, what holds us together is a shared allegiance to our constitutional order. That’s the fundamental issue here. As Obama himself argued in rejecting the executive action he has now undertaken, “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that.”
Except, apparently, when violating that solemn obligation serves his reelection needs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-obamas-amnesty-by-fiat--naked-lawlessness/2012/06/21/gJQAa5PltV_story.html
This article does a good job of articulating, for me, the issue...
As usual Krauthhammer is spot on, thanks for posting his comments.