Obama administration to sue Arizona.

[defaultdotxbe]

Why not? They are both seeking to control an activity that a lot of people- immigrants and employers- don't want stopped, so they just ignore the law.

well the immigrants opinion doesnt really count if they arent here legally, and i would wager those who emply illegal immigrant labor make up a small minority of the population

im sure i can find a large contingent of convicted felons who feel laws against armed robbery are unpopular too

 

[Piscivore]

well the immigrants opinion doesnt really count if they arent here legally,

"Well, the opinion of drinkers doesn't count because they are criminals".

The illegal immigrants are not here legally because we've made it difficult if not impossible for most of them to come here legally. It is a difficult process entagled in red tape and beaurocracy for an educated, English speaking person to immigrate legally into this country, how is an uneducated, illiterate Latino trying to escape crushing poverty, rampant corruption, and drug violence supposed to do it?

and i would wager those who emply illegal immigrant labor make up a small minority of the population

"I would wager those producing or smuggling the bootleg hooch make up a small minority of the population"

"Minority" or not, they are just reacting to market forces. Wages are so disproportiontely high in this country and Canada (compared to the rest of the Americas) that the smart, the courageous, and the motivated don't really have a choice that to risk anything to come here to do better than they could at home. That's certainly better motivaton to break a law than wanting to get wasted, isn't it?

im sure i can find a large contingent of convicted felons who feel laws against armed robbery are unpopular too

Could you? Go right ahead. I don't have to look for the people, American citizens or otherwise -on every side of partisan "sides" and among the unaffiliated- that find our current immigration policies a grotesque clusterhump.

Adressing the sentiment behind that smug little comment, laws are not sarosanct and holy just because they are laws. Making it a crime to not vigorously enforce bad laws is just compounding the problem.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Yeah, I am sure that the fact that illegal immigration causes the state problems

<snip>

Can you elaborate on these "problems"? I'm hearing a lot reports lately that seem to indicate that even illegal immigration is a net benefit, economically.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

"Well, the opinion of drinkers doesn't count because they are criminals".

The illegal immigrants are not here legally because we've made it difficult if not impossible for most of them to come here legally. It is a difficult process entagled in red tape and beaurocracy for an educated, English speaking person to immigrate legally into this country, how is an uneducated, illiterate Latino trying to escape crushing poverty, rampant corruption, and drug violence supposed to do it?


"I would wager those producing or smuggling the bootleg hooch make up a small minority of the population"

"Minority" or not, they are just reacting to market forces. Wages are so disproportiontely high in this country and Canada (compared to the rest of the Americas) that the smart, the courageous, and the motivated don't really have a choice that to risk anything to come here to do better than they could at home. That's certainly better motivaton to break a law than wanting to get wasted, isn't it?


Could you? Go right ahead. I don't have to look for the people, American citizens or otherwise -on every side of partisan "sides" and among the unaffiliated- that find our current immigration policies a grotesque clusterhump.

Adressing the sentiment behind that smug little comment, laws are not sarosanct and holy just because they are laws. Making it a crime to not vigorously enforce bad laws is just compounding the problem.

so why favor those who can jump a fence? why not just send busses down to mexico and bring them all up here? or forget that, just tax the legal residents and send all the mexicans checks

and why mexicans? why not the poor and oppressed in other countries? or is it just out of sight out of mind because theres more the river for them to cross?

i know plenty of legal immigrants from mexico, almost all of them are uneducated, many of them do not speak english, and yet they were able to to get here legally. and most them dont want the border jumpers getting a free pass



now im in favor of making it easier to immigrate, but until it is i dont see why the government should concern itself with the financial difficulties of people who are not legal residents

 

[Piscivore]

so why favor those who can jump a fence?

It's a little more involved than that, isn't it? The ones from Central and South America have to travel at least a third of a continent, often on foot, through another country (Mexico) demonstrably hostile to them just to approach the border. Then they, and the Mexicans that join them, have to cross an increasingly deadly drug war zone and after that one of the harshest deserts in NA.

Why the hell wouldn't we want people with that kind of drive and courage?

why not just send busses down to mexico and bring them all up here? or forget that, just tax the legal residents and send all the mexicans checks

Oh, I see you're arguing that all the imigrant's money is going south. Well, putting aside the issue of whether that is true or not, what is the problem with that? Wouldn't dollars flowing south help Mexico and other American countries to prosper, raising their standard of living, giving them money to spend on US products, and thereby lowering the incentive to for their people come here in the first place? Isn't that a free market in action?

and why mexicans? why not the poor and oppressed in other countries?

Why not, indeed? My family were the poor and oppressed in their countries.
""Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

And do you really think that the "illegals" are just Mexicans?

now im in favor of making it easier to immigrate,

If that were true, then why support a law that calls for increased enforcement of a policy that you already recognise is bad?

 

[Uncayimmy]

That is my train of thought. Some people want to stop a behaviour that a signifigantly larger portion of people don't seem to want stopped.

Why don't you "phrase it" to show me where the differences are?

You have given one similarity, so I will give you one difference: Illegal aliens are humans, not a substance that can be created and consumed. So, we're even.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Can you elaborate on these "problems"? I'm hearing a lot reports lately that seem to indicate that even illegal immigration is a net benefit, economically.

I went into great detail in this post. If you want to argue that we should have unchecked, open immigration, that's a federal issue.

 

[ZirconBlue]

I went into great detail in this post. If you want to argue that we should have unchecked, open immigration, that's a federal issue.

I don't want to argue any such thing. (At least not right now.) It just seems that people are jumping to correct "problems" that don't necessarily need correction. Yes, illegals overconsume healthcare, and, possibly, K-12 education. But, a great many of them pay taxes, including Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, that they will never receive benefits from. If, indeed, they provide a net economic benefit, then it seems pretty stupid to decide to get tough on them in the middle of a massive recession.

 

[WildCat]

I don't want to argue any such thing. (At least not right now.) It just seems that people are jumping to correct "problems" that don't necessarily need correction. Yes, illegals overconsume healthcare, and, possibly, K-12 education. But, a great many of them pay taxes, including Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, that they will never receive benefits from. If, indeed, they provide a net economic benefit, then it seems pretty stupid to decide to get tough on them in the middle of a massive recession.

I really doubt the few who pay payroll taxes compensate for all the expenses, let alone the effects (such as more people requiring government assistance) of lowering the wage scale for low-skilled jobs.

And look, now Mexico has joined in the lawsuit!

 

[Piscivore]

You have given one similarity, so I will give you one difference: Illegal aliens are humans, not a substance that can be created and consumed.

And what does that mean, exactly? Seems to me that such a fact should sway considerations of enfocement to leniency and mercy, not zero-tolerance and inflexibility. After all, it's a much different matter to smash a barrel of bathtub gin with an axe handle than it is the head of a Guatemalan. Well, it is for some people, anyway.

I went into great detail in this post.

You went into a great deal of assertion, not a lot of evidence.

I really doubt the few who pay payroll taxes compensate for all the expenses, let alone the effects (such as more people requiring government assistance) of lowering the wage scale for low-skilled jobs.

"Doubt" is not evidence.

 

[WildCat]

"Doubt" is not evidence.

I'm not the one who made the claim, I expressed doubt over ZirconBlue's claim. The onus is on ZirconBlue to support his claim, not on me to disprove it.

 

[Piscivore]

I'm not the one who made the claim, I expressed doubt over ZirconBlue's claim. The onus is on ZirconBlue to support his claim, not on me to disprove it.

Actually, ZB's "claims" are an expression of doubt about UY's elaborate claims.

This is why I said partisan politics is the most obvious symptom of endemic human stupidity- everyone is arguing the "facts" their "side" believes without any evidence.

ETA: And throwing out wild-assed allegations to see what sticks. See below.

 

[dtugg]

And look, now Mexico has joined in the lawsuit!

There's a shocker. Of course the Mexican government is in favor of poor Mexicans going to the US and sending money back to Mexico. And further, it wouldn't even be surprising if the Mexican government works for a certain drug cartel (the Sinaloa cartel, headed by the second most wanted man in the world according to Forbes).

 

[Piscivore]

There's a shocker. Of course the Mexican government is in favor of poor Mexicans going to the US and sending money back to Mexico. And further, it wouldn't even be surprising if the Mexican government works for a certain drug cartel (the Sinaloa cartel, headed by the second most wanted man in the world according to Forbes).

Glen Beck would be so proud. Work "gay marriage" in there somewhere and Fox might give you your own show.

 

[dtugg]

Glen Beck would be so proud. Work "gay marriage" in there somewhere and Fox might give you your own show.

Do you deny that it is good for Mexico for poor Mexicans to go to the US and send money back? Do you deny that the Mexican government is largly corrupted by drug cartels?

 

[Piscivore]

Do you deny that it is good for Mexico for poor Mexicans to go to the US and send money back?

It is good for poor Mexicans. It seems logical that it would be good in that way for "Mexico". Do you have any reason that that is a bad thing?

Do you deny that the Mexican government is largly corrupted by drug cartels?

I don't know. Do you have proof that they are?

 

[dtugg]

It is good for poor Mexicans. It seems logical that it would be good in that way for "Mexico". Do you have any reason that that is a bad thing?

Well, it's bad in the sense that the money goes out of the USA and into Mexico.

I don't know. Do you have proof that they are?

It is a well known fact that many officials in Mexico are in the pocket of drug cartels, specifically the Sinaloa Cartel.

Here is one news story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/12/world/americas/12mexico.html

 

[Piscivore]

Well, it's bad in the sense that the money goes out of the USA and into Mexico.

Why is that bad?

It is a well known fact that many officials in Mexico are in the pocket of drug cartels, specifically the Sinaloa Cartel.

Here is one news story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/12/world/americas/12mexico.html

"Some of the people who are supposed to be pursuing him are apparently on his payroll" is not the same thing as (and a far cry from) "the Mexican government works for [the Sinaloa cartel]", is it?

Did the US government "work for" Capone?

 

[dtugg]

Why is that bad?

It's bad for the USA because that means less money in the being spent here. Obviously it is good for Mexico because more money for them. That was my original point.

"Some of the people who are supposed to be pursuing him are apparently on his payroll" is not the same thing as (and a far cry from) "the Mexican government works for [the Sinaloa cartel]", is it?

I didn't say they did, I said it wouldn't be surprising if they did.

Did the US government "work for" Capone?

Some officials certainly did.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Why did people say Hillary was smart?