• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Birthright Citizenship

Malerin said:
In California, we have an unemployment rate of 12%. We don't have a labor shortage.
Click to expand...

Actually many seasonal farm jobs go unfilled. That's why the UFW's "Take Our Jobs" campaign has had relatively few takers. (These are by far the most common jobs taken by illegal immigrants.)

Here's the Bureau of Labor Statistics assessment of the job outlook for these kind of jobs:

Job Outlook
Job opportunities for agricultural workers occupations should be abundant because large numbers of workers leave these jobs due to their low wages and physical demands. Little or no change in employment is expected over the 2008-18 decade, reflecting in large part the outlook for farmworkers in crops, nurseries, and greenhouses, who make up the largest majority of all agricultural workers.

Employment change. Overall employment is expected to show little or no change in employment. Fewer agricultural workers will be needed overall because of continued consolidation of farms and technological advancements in farm equipment that is raising output per farm worker. The agriculture industry also is expected to face increased competition from foreign countries and rising imports, particularly from Central America and China because of trade agreements with those regions. Nursery and greenhouse workers might experience some job growth in this period, if the demand for landscaping plants resumes its growth pattern.

Job prospects. Job openings should be plentiful because of relatively large numbers of workers who leave these jobs for other occupations. This is especially true for jobs as agricultural equipment operators, and crop, greenhouse, and nursery farmworkers. Those who work with animals tend to have a more settled lifestyle, as the work does not require them to follow crops for harvest.
Click to expand...

Linky.
 
Thunder said:
what large & intractable problem did the 22nd and 27th Amendments solve?
Click to expand...

You're really running off topic now, and grasping at straws. At best, it seems that you're trying to come up with a tu quoque argument. (Even if you were able to prove that an amendment was enacted unnecessarily, it doesn't prove in any way whatsoever that repealing the first section of the 14th Amendment is necessary.)

At worst, it seems that you're trying hard to avoid the questions I've asked.

But I'll play along:

Amendment 22 set a limit to presidential terms. The only way to accomplish this was through a constitutional amendment. The problem was perceived as very large to avoid establishing a kind of de facto monarchy.

We already talked about Amendment 27--but the idea is to avoid letting House Representatives vote themselves a pay raise without there being an election before that pay raise takes effect. The framers of the constitution saw the House as being much more responsive to elections (and the Senate less so). But again, the only way to accomplish this such that it couldn't simply be voted away by Congress was through an amendment to the Constitution.

It seems that you and supporters of this move to repeal part of the 14th Amendment disagree one way or another with federal immigration policy. In fact, the problems you assert that this amendment would address fall into two categories: barely or non-existent, or only indirectly related to citizenship for people born in the U.S.

You can address immigration issues without changing the 14th amendment. We probably won't make any of the changes you want (like closing the borders to all immigration when unemployment reaches a certain level) because the federal government sets its immigration policy to balance a number of interests and concerns, whereas people with your position are only considering a subset of those concerns.
 
deepatrax said:
The benefits of allowing ILLEGALS to be U.S. citizens is overwhelming.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you've got your facts wrong here.

The topic is not about allowing illegals to become U.S. citizens. It's not about naturalization at all. People born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens--they're not and never were illegals. In fact, they're not immigrants at all, since they were born here.

ETA:
In fact, the 14th Amendment should be changed to read:

"Any person who crosses the U.S. Border will become a U.S. citizen"
Click to expand...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: when you invent quotations that nobody actually said, it's a pretty good sign you're arguing against a straw man (even when you're being sarcastic).

No one here is proposing anything like that. However, that was more or less the status quo of the law at the time the 14th Amendment was enacted. But, as has been amply shown, legislators did consider the ramifications of the first section to various types of immigrants.
 
Last edited:
JoeTheJuggler said:
In fact, they're not immigrants at all, since they were born here.
Click to expand...

this is what needs to change.

how about this, as a compromise:

children born of illegal aliens and vacation/student/work visas in the USA, shall become immediate Permanent Residents of the USA.

once they become 18, they can apply for citizenship.

how's that?
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Actually many seasonal farm jobs go unfilled. That's why the UFW's "Take Our Jobs" campaign has had relatively few takers. (These are by far the most common jobs taken by illegal immigrants.)

Here's the Bureau of Labor Statistics assessment of the job outlook for these kind of jobs:



Linky.
Click to expand...

Someone should tell these guys:

illegals_at_hd-332x250.jpg


Ever driven by a Home Depot in L.A.?

The Home Depot is not pleased. Blaming the job seekers for causing accidents and driving away customers, the world's largest home improvement retailer has been working to discourage them from rushing vehicles in the driveways and trespassing in the parking lot.


But the need for work keeps pushing the men forward, and the result has been an entrenched standoff.


Garcia, an undocumented Guatemalan national who had a regular job in construction until being laid off late last year, said he and the others only want to work and have no other way to find steady pay.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2009/03/08/a1a_homedepot_0309.html

These guys didn't get the memo either:

90.jpg



Been to Vegas in the last five years or so?


Of the roughly one million farm workers in the United States, most are immigrants, and an estimated one-quarter to one-half of them are illegal.
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/US-Farmers-Depend-on-Illegal-Immigrants-100541644.html

God forbid the agricultural industry should have to pay a decent wage for back-breaking dangerous labor :rolleyes:
I submit that if workers would rather hand out porn for less than minimum wage (and hang out at Home Depot hoping for a day laborer job) than work in agriculture, farm jobs may not be all they're cracked up to be:

The average life expectancy of a migrant farm worker working in the United States is 49 years.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, agricultural laborer is one of the top ten most dangerous jobs in the country. More farm workers died from work-related injuries in 2009 than truck drivers, construction workers, or industrial machinists.

Infant mortality among families of farm workers is 125% higher than that of the general U.S. population. Higher rates of breast cancer, prostate cancer, miscarriage and Parkinson's disease have been found in farm workers worldwide.

Most of the people who grow and harvest the food most Americans buy at the supermarket work long hours with few breaks, performing repetitive manual labor, toiling in every kind of weather, often enduring heavy rains or dangerous heat for days at a time, with no paid holidays or sick days. Laborers on large-scale industrial farms work with heavy machinery, and may be repeatedly exposed to toxic pesticides known to cause birth defects and cancer.

And for all they do, and all they risk, to provide those of us who do not farm with food, most migrant farm workers -- those who travel the country to help harvest crops as they ripen -- are paid less than $12,000 a year.
http://www.care2.com/causes/real-food/blog/support-farm-workers-this-labor-day/


I guess we should keep exploiting people who come here illegally and have no rights. Is that what this is all about? Keeping our food prices low?
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
this is what needs to change.

how about this, as a compromise:

children born of illegal aliens and vacation/student/work visas in the USA, shall become immediate Permanent Residents of the USA.
Click to expand...

that's not a compromise. YOU are still creating a second class of citizens.

You do realize that most who are born here, who go back to their home country RARELY return to take advantage of their US Citizenship?
 
Thunder said:
how about this, as a compromise:

children born of illegal aliens and vacation/student/work visas in the USA, shall become immediate Permanent Residents of the USA.

once they become 18, they can apply for citizenship.

how's that?
Click to expand...

Leave my constitution alone. It works pretty well, and that's an unmotivated, complicated, and downright bad idea.

Malerin said:
Doesn't look like SOL wants to give me $20.

How dare you harm me like that, Sol!
;)
Click to expand...

You didn't answer any of the my questions, Malerin. Since you want to punish children for minor crimes of their parents - for example, you want to strip them of their citizenship and deport them if it turns out that 20 years ago mom overstayed her work visa - what other crimes of the parents do you want to punish the children for?

Will they inherit their parent's debts? Will they lose their citizenship if their father commits murder? Fraud? Shoplifting?
 
sol invictus said:
Leave my constitution alone. It works pretty well, and that's an unmotivated, complicated, and downright bad idea.



You didn't answer any of the my questions, Malerin. Since you want to punish children for minor crimes of their parents - for example, you want to strip them of their citizenship and deport them if it turns out that 20 years ago mom overstayed her work visa - what other crimes of the parents do you want to punish the children for?

Will they inherit their parent's debts? Will they lose their citizenship if their father commits murder? Fraud? Shoplifting?
Click to expand...

That's not what I've said. In fact, I've said the opposite. How many times have I referenced Britain's immigration policis? About a dozen now?

Other cases where persons may be entitled to registration (either as a matter of law or policy) include:

- children born in the UK where a parent obtains British citizenship or indefinite leave to remain after the child is born
- children born in the UK who live in the UK until age 10.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nationality_law#From_1983

Are you withdrawing your ridiculuous claim that denying a benefit is harming someone? Or do you want to harm me some more and deny me $100 this time? :rolleyes:
 
Arus808 said:
You do realize that most who are born here, who go back to their home country RARELY return to take advantage of their US Citizenship?
Click to expand...



Quible 1: If they are born here, then the U.S. IS their "home country."

Quible 2: I rather think that very few who are born and raised here to adulthood elect to return to their parents home country.
 
Thunder said:
children born of illegal aliens and vacation/student/work visas in the USA, shall become immediate Permanent Residents of the USA.
Click to expand...

And what exactly would that accomplish?

Remember that the so called motivation for those who advocate eliminating birthright citizenship is the costs that those children impose on the social services provided by the state.

Would "Permanent Residents" cost any less than citizens?
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
Permanent Residents are "second-class citizens"?
Click to expand...

Well, are permanent residents immune from deportation?

Can permanent residents vote?

Can permanent residents stand for office?


If the answers to any of those questions are "no," then, yes, permanent residents are indeed second-class. Of course, the reason that they're second-class is because you're specifically -- and bigotedly, narrow-mindedly, and unjustifiably -- denying them citizenship.
 
Malerin said:
That's not what I've said.
Click to expand...

Sorry? I simply asked you a question, which you still have't answered.

Presumably you don't believe that children should be stripped of their citizenship if their parents commit crimes of most sorts. And yet, you do believe they should be stripped of their citizenship if it turns out that their parents committed an immigration violation.

Are you withdrawing your ridiculuous claim that denying a benefit is harming someone?
Click to expand...

Denial of a constitutional right is most certainly harming someone. For example, I have the right not to be imprisoned without a fair trial of my peers. I have the right to free speech and free assembly. But according to you, denying me that "benefit" isn't harming me.
 
drkitten said:
Well, are permanent residents immune from deportation?

Can permanent residents vote?

Can permanent residents stand for office?


If the answers to any of those questions are "no," then, yes, permanent residents are indeed second-class. Of course, the reason that they're second-class is because you're specifically -- and bigotedly, narrow-mindedly, and unjustifiably -- denying them citizenship.
Click to expand...

Actually as Thunder has defined it, "Permant resident" is the functional equivalent of citizenship. The only difference would be voting rights. A permanent resident can not vote, but then again, neither can a minor child who is a citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom