The business needs to buy goods and services and then sell its products. Often these goods and services are transported from or depend upon things transported from other places, the US Navy insures that the sea lanes are open, the Coast Guard provides search and rescue for the ships, the DOT builds an Interstate highway system (shared resources) to transport the goods, the federal, state and local police provides the protection of the goods( by catching and punishing the people who steals, not by being guards). Among other things the government also insures that a gallon is really a gallon and that each business is following the established rules. Now, we have way to many rules and should scale back but not to nothing.

Thus is it simplistic to say that the Feds should have no say in who you hire, the current system depends upon the Feds to work. They establish the rules of who has the right to work, and as other has pointed out, it is not just citizens that can work in the country. Now I believe that the rules can be improved but I not ready to throw away all the rules, remove the border guards and say come on in no question asked.

That worked earlier in our history to open our borders when we were a developing nation and needed more people but things has changed.

I understand limiting immigration to some standard. But then define the standard! If English skills are important, make English a requirement for immigration. Require immigrants to attend ‘constitutional training’. Whatever… just tell me what I need to do to become a permanent resident. I promise I’ll do it. And I suspect lots of people, including many Mexicans, will do the same.

Maybe that’s the angle you libertarians should be looking at instead of trying to claim that immigration cannot be illegal.

Being a member of our club does not have to be synonomous with living here, neither does not being a member require that we vacate a geographical boundary.

As far as problems from social norms changing quickly and that causing problems, well norms are changing within the span of a generation even without outside influences. In addition we have had many large waves of immigration throughout the existence of this country and while they may have caused short term displacements (like all change whether social or technical) in the long term we’ve absorbed them. Remember what the established Protestants thought of the Irish Catholic immigrants?

The whole language thing seems overblown to me. I’ve lived in the southwest for a large part of my life and I can go through every bit of business I need or want without needing a word of Spanish (though the guys in the drive-through seem the hearge “large coke” as “diet coke”) – because even if 1st generation immigrants have difficulty learning English, their children pick it up as a matter of course.

To level the charge of failure to assimulate against immigrants to the US is just bizarre. Isn’t one of the purposes we established this nation for *freedom*? People came here to live as they chose and if *new* immigrants want to do the same why is that now different from before? really the only problem with this is that our government will not allow you to truly associate freely – you can’t choose not to do business with someone just because you don’t like them.

A lot of our problems (well outside of the xenophobia) could be greatly reduced if we just opened up the residency quotas. Honest people are willing to spend an inordinae amount of time standing in lines and filling out forms and answering really personal questions to gain that legitimacy. Then we wouldn’t have to sort out the people that are really dangerous to us – the serious criminals, terrorists, undercover reconquistas – from those who mearly want to make a good living.

There are also problems with Warren’s club analogy. When I have a club, do I or do I not have the ability to set membership requirements? Intuitively, I would not expect a club organized around, say Catholicism, to be required to admit atheists to the club. They may want to do that, but they don’t have a duty to do that.

Warren also claims: “Our current policy is one of coercively preventing cooperation.”. But, that is not true. Warren is free to go somewhere else and cooperate to his heart’s content. But, you simply cannot argue you wish the benefits of the club, but only some of the requirements.

Fun stuff.

Rick

1) Do employers try to avoid SS taxes with illegal immigrants (II’s)?
2) Do II’s avoid paying income taxes as well as SS taxes?
3) Do II’s avoid property taxes by overcrowding apartments while overcrowding local school systems that depend on property taxes?

I realize that these items are not exclusive to II’s, but I can imagine that the incidence rate is overwhelmingly due to II’s in the past decade.

Language assimilation is another problem. If I went to live in Russia, I would enjoy having people around me who spoke English, but I wouldn’t expect them to provide it. The nice thing about English, just about anywhere except France, is that everybody wants to learn it, so they can come to USA and function!

THE FIRST 100 ARE FREE

Hi, my name is Ezequiel, and I invite you to be a part of the 10000 Smiley Faces Community, link your blog and raise your visits. We created this website to everyone who has a blog or personal site and want to tell something to the world.
THE FIRST 100 ARE FREE

Immigration is part of the “secret sauce” that has helped make America great in business and technology. As societies grow and become more wealthy, birth rates drop and innovation plateaus. Historically immigrants have been a solution to that.

However immigration could to rise to a point at which it dilutes the society to where the societial norms excessively change in such a short period of time that it creates problems. Parts of North Carolina and parts of New Jersey currently demonstrate that problem with a large percentage of the people unable to speak the language and following the mores of the countries from which they came and not those of the US.

That eventually creates societal pressures on the group called “voters” and the result is predictable. The solution is to guess the level of immigration we can absorb without too much distruption and set the limits accordingly.

The current problems largely stem from government limits that are too low and which apportion allowed amounts to countries who largely are not the ones from which the pressure to immigrate to the US is felt.

Each citizen and legal resident is in the system. There are social security numbers, available passports or resident status documents and various other items. Illegal immigrants have none of those (none that are legal). It is desirable that immigrants be “in the system”, be legal residents. The problem is what to do with the current level of immigrants and how to better handle immigration pressures in the future. The only viable way to attack the problem is to have the government change to a realistic immigration policy.

The current system results in a far too high percentage of illegal immigrants working as essentially indentured servants, financially barely able to get through the week. Were they able to vie for all jobs, not just those where they can get away without legal status, that percentage would be far less.

As for “how can I maintain my business if I have to pay a living wage”, those problems address business which either need adjustment to be econonomically viable or for which the owners extract a Scrooge-like profit margin earned on the backs of the workers.

No automatic citizenship for anybody.

Everybody has to pass the same exam and process for citizenship.

I am ashamed at my lack of knowledge of US History and Civics (and I earned a degree 15 years back).

I think everyone should demonstrate basic knowledge of how government works and take the oath of citizenship.

I think many take their citizenship rather lightly and have no commitment to the country from which they demand commitment (remember JFK’s famous line? How many do it?).

Okay there’s some raw meat, have at it.