Housing Bubble, credit bubble, public planning, land use, zoning and transportation in the exurban environment. Specific criticism of smart growth, neotradtional, forms based, new urbanism and other top down planner schemes to increase urban extent and density. Ventura County, California specific examples.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The Flood is Coming
How could this happen? Read and find out. Amnesty rumors just rumors caused a sudden rush for del Norte in 2004. And don't call the Senate bill "amnesty." Amnesty is forgiveness for past crimes. This is permission to continue to commit crimes.
So what do you do? Mass deportations will make this country look like Children of Men. Building a wall won't help. Fines for companies using undocumented labor won't stop industries that are dependent upon cheap construction labor. America will always look attractive to despondent Mexicans. Period.
Situations like these call for a work-around to the problem. Embrace and extend, as Microsoft says. Lower the income tax for the lowest two brackets, and tax the hell out of gasoline. Bam, revenues up, problem solved.
@ 5:14... Yeah, like: "As soon as I get situated with free internet somewhere and a quiet place I can call CashCall and see what those guys want."
It might be pretty funny if Cash Call outlets across the nation starting getting calls (like, say, those that can be made on anon calling cards) "Hey, this is Casey Serin. What do you bluffing guys want? I am way down here in Australia and I really can't be bothered by your empty threats. There are too many sweet hostels to check out, and my skype headset is broke, and finding open wifi to rip off is such a drag. So, if you don't like that then I guess you can just bugger off."
Maybe, maybe not but the lowest tax brackets don't really pay all that much in taxes. It would NOT be fair to anybody else if we gave them a pass in payroll tax collection.
My wife and I make over 100K a year. One problem with that...I get hit with that fracking AMT everytime. Of course Bush and his cronies don't give a shit about us middle class folks. He only gives a crap about cheap labor and the elite billionaires.
My friend claims he loves Bush because (this is the only reason he can think of) he got back money. Well, I laugh at him because he likes suing everybody, tying up the courts and not taking personal responsibility for his actions. I don't see one dime (not that I'd want it ---- it's irresponsible of Bush to give tax cut rebates during a time of war and deficits) but I pay MORE because I can't get around the AMT. I can't write off too much and even if I don't write off as much, I still get pegged for not writing off enough.
I don't ask for a lot from this government, but I wish to God these folks would give a crap about how us Middle Class folks feel about Amnesty and deficit spending.
Been gone a week..looked thru all the comments. Didn't LossMitPro say 1 and possible 2 things were going to happen to Serin this week (or be announced).
Call me cynical, but is this new-found loquaciousnesses on Casey's part less honest openness and more an attempt to spike the haterz guns in advance of his interview tomorrow?
"Robbie, I don't know why the haterz make such a fuss about that. I answered those questions, I'm not hiding anything, but still they hound me and try to sabotage my attempts to make an honest living."
Bush said it. Now 1000 weak says it. I still ask why we cannot deport illegals. Why? Costs too much?
No one has any idea how ultimately costly the wholesale dimunition in government trust will be. "You want me to do what? No way. You are the same assholes who wouldn't listen to 80% of the American public. JFK is dead. We are stuck with Teddy." There's gonna be 80 million people who worked hard and played by the rules who not only see themselves getting the short end of the stick but getting the bill for the whole stick.
You want to hit these same people up for new taxes? This goes through and an underground economy will spring up and revenues will plummet and never return. You force third world solutions you can expect third world behavior.
Dawg, as I said yesterday the powers that be could give two shits about what you think. You are simply a taxpaying cow to be milked. Shut your cakehole.
BTW, I heard Voinovich say essentially that on the radio. He blamed talk radio hosts and bloggers for spreading hysteria. When asked if he had actually read the bill, he said no.
Without waving the flag too much....this country can do whatever the hell it sets it's collective mind to do. All that's necessary is commitment and neither party has the political will to deport illegals.
Get a lotta buses Line them up Stop everyone, including blue eyed blondes and ask for their ID No ID, no problem....get on the bus
Oh, Mexico isn't your country of origin?....tough, we aren't obligated to send you home, just kick your ass outside our borders. What's that, Mexico won't take you....tough, find your own way then.
As far as the new law goes.....why is it going to be any different THIS time?
The government surely has no freakin' idea what they are stirring. When the bill was defeated, it was because they saw a storm they couldn't face. Then they thought they could push it through when we weren't looking. They look at the calendar and think 18 months to the next election. Plenty of time to make the sheeple forget. There's no tolerance out there. This is a deal breaker. People plain old will stop participating in a society that throws them under the bus.
I'm a long time follower of IAFF and something seems very out of whack. We are to believe that supporterz have funded/subsidized the transportation, lodging, meals, etc in Australia such that over 2 weeks Casey has had to spend only $200 total on expenses. That is impossible. Think of the things he has done: rental car petting zoos travel up and down the coast from SYD to BNE Marriott hotel (one night alone is over $200) $50/night for a hostel
Travel is not cheap.
Remember this is the guy who had a beg-a-thon for money to send to cashcall just weeks ago. At that time there was no money.
So the question of the day is where is all the money coming from? Somehow either there is cashback money buried in a can OR new credit lines have been opened.
If the latter, how is this happening? I mean all the players have totally ruined personal credit so no new loans would be made there.
Who is continuing to lend? Who is making new loans which would support both min payments on the old loans and living expenses while the debt balance grows?
Imagine we could remove everyone who was here illegally at zero cost overnight. What would happen to the economy? I suspect that government spending would remain the same. Prices would go up and service would go down.
I know I have personally not met ONE person in real life who thinks the amnesty is a good plan, and that includes a bunch of immigrants who had to jump through hoops for YEARS to get here legally.
I think the most interesting and telling reaction is on websites like freerepublic.com. Those are the hardcore of the hardcore of Republicans, the far right end of the pendulum of American politics. Those guys put up with everything that Bush proposed, and rationalized and excused all of his mistakes: until now. There's a seething rage over there I have never seen before, even during the Clinton impeachment circus, or the drama of the Gore/Bush fiasco in Florida.
We may be seeing the end of the GOP forever, and the rise of a new party...or parties. I personally think it's time to drop parties, and make politicians live and die by their own ideas and beliefs - no more party line votes, no more BS, you get out there and say 'I believe THIS."
How cool would it be to have candidates you actually like? I'm so fucking sick and tired of the lesser of two evils everytime I see a ballot.
Immigration could be solved by enforcing the laws on the books. It's not racist, it would require the same damned solution if it were Canadians coming over en mass, or Chinese, or Lithuanians. It will split familes? Let the whole family leave.
And god damn it, start JAILING the employers who hire them. If there's no work, they won't come.
Mexico has damned good immigration laws, that they enforce. Since when are we so special, that we can't enforce our own?
And to back up what Rob says - if the Feds can selectively enforce standing law...why can't we?
Casey is lying. He "thinks" the interest rate is "about" 15%? Lying sh!thead just doesn't want to tell the truth. He still his burning through our money with no cocern for details is cute. It isn't cute anymore. one of these days he's going to befriend a supporterz and insteads of a warm bed he's gonna get a beatin'. He's another that doesn't recognise the limits of some peoples' tolerance.
Rob, the comparison to Bush really stings. Really stings the heart of this Al Gore liberal.
Anyways-- take a couple hours out of your day and Netflix Children of Men. Mass deportations is a nonstarter. You'll start a war inside the borders of the country.
"So the question of the day is where is all the money coming from? Somehow either there is cashback money buried in a can OR new credit lines have been opened."
Casey is either on a high-protein diet if you know what I mean, or he's living on corporate credit. I think he's lying about his expenses and he's burning up the remaining credit.
1000 a weak, you and Bush stand side by side and mostly alone on this issue. I live in a very high illegal region. I can only assume you do not. It is one of those cases where proximity develops perspective.
Mass deportation is easy and ethical. Don't like to obey that law? Fine, baby steps. Let us put a halt to money outflows and close the legal border for a month from Dec26th to Jan 30th.
What Casey MEANT to say in his latest post, but at a whopping $2/hour he just didn't have time to hit the nail on the head...
1. What interest rate is your corp charging you?
Zero. Got a problem? Some haterz do, but what do they know? It's perfectly legit.
2. What is your payment plan?
Pay a few dollars for now, then I’m out of cash, just like on the houses. What else?
3. Have you or anyone else started paying the corp back?
I have made all my payments on the corp debt so far. As of last month. Maybe. I can’t remember. But I can pay it back by putting this blog (asset) under the corp. Sweet, heh? Someone said if I do that, then I can help “pierce the corporate veil”, sounds cool! Is that good? I need a detail man to help me with this because it’s complicated.
4. What interest rate is the corp paying to its creditors?
Zero percent on one card. That’s the one that got the credit line roundabout from the thousands I paid to get the corp. Then 15% on another. Or something. I’m not a detail man.
5. Aside from the initial loan of $4,500 or whatever, has the corp begun paying back any of its creditors?
It’s paying all of them. All I need to do is borrowing just a bit more every month to do it. Sweet corporate finance!
6. Has your guarantor (ahem) made any payments on the corp’s behalf?
No, they refuse. Haterz! So it’s my responsability (sic) and I’ll be ignoring, er… handling it..
7. Why specifically did you have to leave your Aussie hosts?
Complications. They kicked my lazy azz out. But it’s not as bad as it sounds. OK, it’s bad. They became haterz. Like that kangaroo.
8. Where are you staying now?
You mean last week? Oh, week before? Oh wait, you mean now? Oh, that’s hard to say. Details. OK, I’m in Sydney spending my last dollars on a cheap hostel. I hear there’s a nice area called King’s Cross where they let you sleep in the bushes, so I’ll go find some supporterz out there.
8.5 Who has been taking the photos of you in Australia?
Some guy who turned hater. Otherwise, helpful, friendly tourists.
9. Where are you getting the money to live in Australia?
Mooching, mostly. And some from a coffee can.
10. Did you “check into” Cashcall’s threat of a lawsuit?
Not yet. Easier to ignore them. That’s Galina’s problem anyway.
11. How are your taxes coming? Is anyone working on them?
I don’t know. Ask Galina. She better do them because I’m not a detail man.
12. Have you been making quarterly tax payments?
Of course not. Hmm… another detail that the haterz say might land me in jail eventually. What do they know? When’s the deadline anyway? What? You mean EVERY quarter? Crap that’s a lot of busy work I’m gonna have to do. Jail might be easier.
13. Now that you’ve admitted to buying GSPG, why are you still holding it? Why not cut your losses and liquidate?
Well the most likely scenario is its a hold term play and as he dollar keeps going down and gold goes up this thing should play out in the next year or two. As in play out into Chapter 7, I think. Is that good? I don’t remember what NRU said about Chapter 7. I should have brought my valuable binders. I think it’s all good.
14. Are you planning to return to your rented rooms? When?
That might be a problem. But if I can show the sweet deals I have lined up, I know that G and her sister will change their minds. If not, I know I have supporterz I can count on.
15. Do you have money for the rent?
What rent? That’s Galina’s problem. She works. I do deals. Sweet.
16. Do you have money for the ticket back?
Yes. Sweet corporate credit? But I do have an offer from a supporter to pay for it. Except he wants me to fly to Zimbabwe and wait for further instructions and money. I could do some Massive Focused Action there while I wait. I hear there are lots of farms and land you can get sweet deals on if you have the right connectionz.
17. Whose idea was it to register iamfacingdivorce.com?
Not mine. I’d never admit that. No way. But if it brings sweet links and income, I want some credit.
18. Still working with Marty on the book? Have you signed any more people up for NRU? Sold any casinos?
The book should be out next month, if Marty is being a good detail man. No more NRU sales. That’s an _old_ shiny thing, I’ve moved on to new shinier things. I didn’t make any commission, but at least it was half a win-win.
19. What fund offers 5% per month?
A very sweet one that made me promise not to tell anyone, especially my accountant or lawyer, as if I have one of those. It’s always a good sign when they tell you not to run it by others because sometimes other people are too negative, and even if they are not, you can’t let too many people get in on deals like this. Looks like another win-win like NRU.
20. Utah wrap?
Still wrapped as far as I know. It actually helps that I ignore them all because then I _might_ know things, so this way I can still say win-win. Maybe somebody with Wasatch county MLS, er, I mean foreclosure.com access can check and tell me how the sale is going for my “wrapees”
21. Is Marty now writing your posts? BULLET POINTS BABY!
Nobody is writing my posts but me. OK, Marty might edit them. For grammar. And content. And topic. And timing. But I talk to him on Skype and tell him what he can write. I trust him to get it right. He’s a detail man, you see.
How’s that? Lame enough?
[Ed. Yes Casey, lame enough. Now go back to your bush in King's Cross. And watch out for those needles.]
Arbitrage is the new fancy word of the day. Use it often, regardless of its real meaning.
Mak, I think he's staying at CASHBACK hostels. I'm not a sophisticated investor like him with connectionz so I can only admire his deft financial skillz.
"Mass deportations is a nonstarter. You'll start a war inside the borders of the country."
Imagine if we acted like the EU. We'd see two lines of razor wire, guard dogs, armed patrols and floodlights along the entire border. Any that slipped through we'd march them back home to die in the desert.
If we acted like Mexico on their southern border we'd jail them, take their belongings after beating them for a while, then ship them back.
I'm one of those immigrants that had to jump through hoops for years to get here legally. I know plenty of others that had to do the same thing. And I know even more that have been here for years on H1 visa, trying to obtain legal status.
This amnesty is bullshit. Amnesty for those that have amnesty rallys while holding up their Mexican flag? Fuck that.
So what do you do? Mass deportations will make this country look like Children of Men.
Considering that parts of the Southwest are already starting to resemble "Soylent Green", I'll gladly accept that as an alternative. Of course, it's also quite possible that Hollywood got it wrong, and the actual result will be something completely different.
Building a wall won't help.
Then why are the pro-Aztlan/MEChA forces so virulently opposed to the idea? Why waste valuable time and resources fighting something you already "know" will never work?
Fines for companies using undocumented labor won't stop industries that are dependent upon cheap construction labor.
How about us giving it the 'ol college try first before declaring "failure"? Funny, but such fines seem to be working A-ok in other countries with enviable regularity.
America will always look attractive to despondent Mexicans. Period.
Yes, at least until the parts of America they are migrating to start to look just like Mexico (or any other third-world country immigrants are fleeing from).
Casey says MarTay is editing his posts....it sounds like he's answering the questions, or at least has final approval/editing before he posts them. It sounds like MarTay doesn't trust him to handle it...like he's afraid Casey will fuckitup.
I'm getting fed up being treated like an idiot. Teddy boi says on the Sunday morning shows that these people will go to the back of the line. You really think 12 million put into the back end of the pipeline and thus filling quotas for decades is going to happen? The poor guy who was #2 million finds out he's suddenly #14 million is going to stay in line?
The fines for hiring illegals is a joke; now, and will be in this bill. McD held seminars on how to "protect yourself" in your hiring practices. It is a federal offense to knowlingly hire an undocumented worker. The trick is hiring them w/o knowing you did.....and it ain't hard to do. ;)
Give me a fuckin' break....Nazi references are pathetic; you can do better.
Fair enough. But the my inept "papers please" quips aside: do you really think that Americans are going to accept a regime in which they're randomly stopped in the street and, if they're wearing the wrong slacks or forgot their wallet, summarily evicted from their country?
I just don't see it. Protecting the borders is one thing; but I don't see Americans giving up civil liberties to do it.
@Lou: Imagine if we acted like the EU.
Have you *visited* the EU recently? Immigration is a huge hot-button issue there too, particularly in the more affluent countries: freedom of movement leads to huge social pressures.
A key player in this issue is going to be the legitimate American business community.
When they get tired of being the "Toby Punk-Bitches" for the "out-sourcers" and illegal employers and start suing their competitors who do that for unfair business practices, we'll REALLY get the ball rolling.
The thing about us sharks is: all you need to do is wound a few, and the feeding frenzy begins...we'll do the rest to ourselves.
This isn't about mobility. This is about rule of law. Anyone want to adopt on our southern border the methods Mexico uses on its southern border?
The yahoo news article is interesting. The person complaining the largest is the developer building condos. He claims things would cost 10 times as much. That would be goood because those kinds of prices would have stopped the rproject. We have a massive oversupply of dwelling units because of illegal immigration.
"Fair enough. But the my inept "papers please" quips aside: do you really think that Americans are going to accept a regime in which they're randomly stopped in the street and, if they're wearing the wrong slacks or forgot their wallet, summarily evicted from their country?"
Nonsense. Stop using dramatic doom and gloom overtones to avoid the issue that we as a country have the right to know who is IN our country, if they are here legally, and remove them if they are not.
Enforcing laws already on the books regarding illegals does nothing to limit your civil liberties, nor your freedom of travel.
NOBODY is stopped on the streets and forced to show ID, it's not illegal and it's not being proposed.
However, using existing laws, illegals can be intentified in situations where we already are required to have ID - applying for a job, filing tax forms, driving a car, truck, motorcycle, plane, or limo, when stopped by the police in the progress of a criminal investigation, and voting.
At best, enforcing existing laws on illegal aliens will annoy you once in a while, like when you go to the airport, or get pulled over for speeding, and you have to arduously hauly your driver's license out to identify yourself.
And if you want to get into civil rights, this fraud of an amnesty stomps, spits, and shits over the civil rights of every American and legal immigrant who followed the laws and respected the laws.
To answer your question...NO. The ACLU will have orgasmic fit.
Messy problems call for messy solutions and I offered one. If you think about it, all ICE would have to so is begin a huge sweep in a half dozen cities to get the ball rolling and bypass all the liberal whining. Illegals would scatter to the four winds in a panic like you've never seen. Just the threat of massive deportation is a great tactic.
The problem with some pundits who offer up lofty plans and solutions is they have no real world experience in this area. It's easy to sit in Congress, or an office, or write an article, writing words on piece of paper and "decree" a solution; but it's a whole different ballgame in the real world.
The original question is "can we solve the problem".....the answer is yes we can. The only variable is do we have the social will to do it.
All the weed in the world is not enough to create a reality where the illegals currently here will be forcibly deported.
Do the math: To put 12,000,000 people on buses would require something between 150,000 and 200,000 vehicles. All the buses would have to be staffed, as well.
You're talking about a mobilization on the level of WW2 to get the people and machines to make it happen. Not to mention the fact that the geographic dispersement is such that you'd need to put virtually the entire USA into full police-state lockdown to find them all.
Have you *visited* the EU recently? Immigration is a huge hot-button issue there too, particularly in the more affluent countries: freedom of movement leads to huge social pressures."
Well, my point wasn't about legal immigration from eastern EU countries to the UK and Germany and Denmark. My point was about illegal immigration from Africa to the EU and what Europeans are doing about it. The European approach is not discussed for some reason. Perhaps because certain Americans like to pretend that Europeans are more tolerant and enlightened.
Only Haterz and racists are against immigration from Mexico. If it weren't for undocumented workers, there would be no housing boom.
If the US does not increase legal immigration or find a way to legalize the undocumented workers, the housing market will collapse and this is bad for business.
Do the math: To put 12,000,000 people on buses would require something between 150,000 and 200,000 vehicles.
Or 20,000 buses for three weeks or 4,000 buses over 4 months. Trivial. Hey, if they own their own cars they can take them too. Besides as noted above, the first few buses and the voluntary self repatriation will take care of a huge portion.
M&P: However, using existing laws, illegals can be identified in situations where we already are required to have ID.
Quite so. The cynic in me suggests that it'd probably just result in wider availability of well-forged ID cards, though.
Look: I'm not arguing in favor of illegals. I'm not even arguing against enforcement. I'm just saying that doing it isn't as easy as saying it.
Rob talks of an underground economy springing up if amnesty passes. It's worth noting that illegal aliens *already* largely exist in an underground economy; stronger enforcement will simply drive many even further below the radar.
It's very hard to unboil a frog.
(FWIW, I'm an LPR myself; I jumped through all the USCIS hoops; and yes, it does chap my hide that plenty didn't.)
"I know I have personally not met ONE person in real life who thinks the amnesty is a good plan, and that includes a bunch of immigrants who had to jump through hoops for YEARS to get here legally."
Well I'm in favor of amnesty with reparations. The current plan on the table is rather silly, but its a step in the right direction.
Why grant citizenship to illegals? Grow the tax base. California is bankrupt for one and only reason: approximately 1/3rd of the workforce isn't being taxed. In my mind, it makes no sense to try to eliminate the underground workforce (as mass deportation would seek--and surely fail in the end--to do). Rather, assimilate this workers fully into the economy and tax system so that they can start paying toward the services that they consume.
I'm not some far-right Bush supporter and no one who knows me would call me a bleeding heart. Politically, I'm moderate: left of center on some issues, right of center on others. Rather than seeking to adopt the dogma of either party, I simply try to position myself as a principled pragmatist on every issue.
The cost--both economic as well as human--to a major deportation effort would be unacceptable for both the US and the immigrants themselves. Our economy would falter without that labor force. California, in particular, generates two things of value: intellectual property (technology and entertainment) and agriculture. The rest of the economy is essentially service-based to meet the needs of those two. Devastate the workforce of agriculture at any point in the growing season, and there will be incredible damage inflicted on agriculture. The consequences would be profound on every business involved in commerce with agriculture and every household that consumes its products. In other words, EVERY Californian would suffer from the mass deportation in the short-term.
As a nation, the current generation of new workers approximately my age (27) is not large enough to replace the aging baby boomers. We need an influx of immigrants (especially highly skilled) to support our economy, but more importantly grow our tax base. Social security and Medicare are doomed to collapse (as all Ponzi schemes are), but their lifespan could be increased (no pun intended) with the growth of the national workforce that immigration allows. Assuming that minimum wage laws were respected, simply assimilating illegal immigrants who are already here into the system would provide decades of increased viability to these essential social programs as the country gradually acclimates to new, sustainable system.
It offends my sense of morality and decency as a fellow human being to suggest that we forcibly deport en mass the present illegal population. But, more importantly, it insults my intelligence as an economist to posit that mass deportation would yield a positive outcome for the country. While there would be some advantages (decreased outlays on social services), the collateral damage to the economy would be greater.
Illegal immigration is a problem caused by apathy and incompetence from every presidential administration since Truman. In other words, its a bipartisan failure of epic proportions. But, in my mind and in my heart, the shortest way out of this quagmire is not some vain attempt to reverse course, but rather to boldly charge ahead toward recognition of what those people have been in nearly every sense other than in title and as taxpayers: full citizens of the United States of America.
Dolph, I have only contempt for the middle class and its morality. How about no taxes, no welfare state and open borders? Try a little freedom for once. The nation-state is dead once the deflationary depression hits.
"And if you want to get into civil rights, this fraud of an amnesty stomps, spits, and shits over the civil rights of every American and legal immigrant who followed the laws and respected the laws."
How exactly have my civil rights been offended by illegal immigrants?
Lawn sez: The cynic in me suggests that it'd probably just result in wider availability of well-forged ID cards, though.
....so good you would not believe. I would bet money they could lay a legit SS card or other ID next to a forgery and most people could not tell the difference. Any street corner of a large city.....any ID you want, with overnight service to boot. Nobody is talking about this aspect of the problem....wonder why?
"All the weed in the world is not enough to create a reality where the illegals currently here will be forcibly deported."
Really? If the Feds would give out a nickel bag of weed per illegal reported, it would be over and done with in 2 or 3 years.
All we need to get it done is start paying a per-head bounty, an that bounty (and attendant detention and costs to deport), to be assessed on the illegal's employer.
As I've said...$50 a head for a garden variety border jumper/student visa overstayer.
It slides up from there.
Grab a cell phone, and head to a construction site or agricultural establishment, and then make your reservations at Disneyworld.
Housing boom did not happen thanks to illegals. Illegals made the homes built in this housing boom shoddy. Homes were built just fine before they showed up.
And uhhhh, housing market is collapsing, and it has more to do with folks like Casey that ran up housing prices and defaulting on their loans, than on illegals building them.
Yeah, illegals buy houses, and default, like that strawberry picker making 15k buying that 700k shitbox. Same illegals pack 3 families in a 2 bedroom shack.
Nobody has said that the deportations happen all at once, you'v ecreated a dandy strawman arguement but it's irrelevant because it's not being proposed.
10% a year is a lofty goal, and an expensive one. But it would mean that in a decade we would have solved the problem - AND just as importantly sent the message that there is no free ride in this country anymore, that if you sneak in eventually you WILL be sent home.
Add on top of that businesses scared to hire them, and the flood across the border dwindles. THAT is more important than sending them all home at once. Even i agree that doing it all at once would make groups like Amnesty International have group apoplexy, because we know once back in Mexico they would be left to die in the streets by the Mexican government.
We don't need an amnesty. We need to eforce EXISTING LAWS. You are either for the rule of law, or you are not. It's an important distinction, and one that the Federal government HAS to come down on the law side, or our entire basis of law and order is a joke - and societies have gone to war for a lot less.
If this amnesty passes, our laws will be seen as a joke, and the entitlement of illegal minority groups will grow exponentially. Do you really think this is *just* about Mexicans? This amnesty is going to encourage Chinese, Africans, Europeans (we have a healthy population of Irish illegal aliens), Middle easterners, South Americans, Canadians, Russians, Vietnamese, Cubans, Indians, you name it, to try and get here too, to get on the gravy train.
It's a flood across the Southern border now. If this passes, it will be a literal human tidal wave. It happened in the 80's during Reagan's fiasco of an amnesty (that less than 40% took), there's every expectation it wil be as bad, or worse, now.
With what is coming down the pike in the economy from housing, how you can think we can absorb 20-40 million people overnight, and pay for it all, is beyond me.
I was living in Germany some years back (post Wall, that is) and saw lots of the border with the "East". I'll agree with you. OK, Austria was wide open but that's because the Germans knew the Austrians were pretty good in their end.
But the eastern border along Poland had heat sensors, infrared cameras, and the Grenzschutz (Border Patrol) coming out with their dogs every time they spotted people sneaking in. It wasn't like East Germany where they'd shoot you for crossing (er, getting out, that is), but it was effective.
I also spent some time along the border with Czechoslovakia (later Czech Rep). Didn't see much there but was not inclined to venture too close to whatever the Czechs might have had in place at the time. bad enough getting through that one legitimately.
I'm not sure how it is these days; Poland is not in Schengen, not yet I think, so the Grenzschutz might very well still be watching all night and rounding up the Ukrainers and others as they try to get in.
By the way, there are some VERY anti-immigrant political parties in most of Europe, nothing like anything you see here. Republikaners, Vlaams Blok (Vlaams Belang these days?), etc. Imagine Pat Buchanan 25 years old, less literate, less cultured, shaved head, fist in the air; imagine a hundred of him walking down Main Street with banners. The US is nowhere near that point yet but might be one day.
"The immigration scare was a poor tactic tried in the '06 elections to replace terrorist with immigrant."
A "tactic" by... whom? The top R's are all on board along with the top D's.
I also see that you are deliberately leaving out a key word. That word is ILLEGAL. I don't know anyone here who is against immigrants. You already knew that.
There is no such thing as a downturn in a housing market, unless the government steps in an artificially changes the market to cater to xenophobes who can't compete with hard-working immigrants.
The Nazi's were unified and capable of occupying countries larger than Iraq.
The US is not at all unified on deportations. It was able to round up the Japanese in WWII because of Pearl Harbor and it was a more racist nation at the time. Without Pearl Harbor, the Japanese probably would not have been sent to internment camps. And illegals sneaking acrossthe border for work is not equivilent to Pearl Harbor
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
In short, they are writing law that favors non-citizens, and awards non-citizens with benefits that are not awarded to citizens, and abridges the priviledges we are owed as citizens.
To be more exact, there is an income tax amnesty wrapped up in this sham - we *think*, as they havent released the whole thing to the public yet - we don't get a pass on paying taxes like that, and it's a violation of our civil rights to equal treatment of the laws, IMHO.
There's a lot of violations there - giving illegals in-state college tuition discounts, giving them benefits like welfare and food stamps, the list goes on.
There's a good article that explains it better than I do, it touches back to the Reagan amnesty and a group that wanted to challenge it in the Supreme Court. I can't find it, damn it.
Civil rights cover a lot more than just having to show ID to a police officer. This amnesty is a slap in the face of our rights and priveledges we get from being law abiding citizens, as promised by our Constitution. That it's being rushed through and they're attempting to pass it without much public knowledge is another slap in the face.
I also think it's a massive violation of states rights, but I'd have to dig into that one, and I'm too burned out right now for that kind of homework. In fact, i think, that if this does pass, the fight will shift to the state's rights angle, and be fought there.
Which of you heroes are going into the barrio door-to-door and check for papers? The US needs more people;have you ever driven across country? There is a lot of nothing out there. Amnesty for the entire world is the only moral choice. And end all welfare and public schools.
From late 1941 to 1945, the Third Reich managed to locate,dispossess, detain, deport, and murder about 12 million people.
This while fighting, and losing, a World War.
Ou illegal aliens are VERY deportable.
I suspect that you were just trying to be funny, but that statement is beyond disgusting.
But regardless, your analogy is specious. In the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, it took an all assault by over 2000 troops (daily average) and support that included a German armored tank battalion. Over 13,000 Jews were killed in the assault from direct engagement.
In other words, the Germans only "succeeded" in Operation Reinhard and the like because of their willingness to unleash the full fury of their military against civilian insurgents. Would you suggest that the United States order it's military and police forces against illegal immigrants in such a manner? If not, then the forcible deportation of 12 million people is not a realistic possibility.
" Would you suggest that the United States order it's military and police forces against illegal immigrants in such a manner?"
If they resist the lawful deportation, yes I would.
Why should an illegal alien be shown any more leniency than say...the American parents of the children of Waco were when they defy the Federal government?
Or, for that matter, those Americans who wished to secede in 1861, (which they were, and still are, legally entitled to do).
Again, in this argument, as in others, it seems that the only people against whom it is "approved" for the government to employ deadly force against in furthering it's will is Southern Christian White people.
Sharkey, I don't know if you're trolling or not, but what you're suggesting is simply not possible UNLESS you're willing to see blood in the streets.
Are you? Do you really feel so strongly that these illegals should be pushed out that you're willing to see murder done?
Your comparison with the Shoah was an apt one, then. You're talking about sanctioning a police state and mass murder in order to "cleanse" the country.
Meh. I think we're going to need to save our money deporting folks and take money from them by legalizing the illegals.
Because otherwise, how are we going to balance the budget.
Wait. That won't happen either. We'll just spend the new taxes, pretend things are getting better with faux surpluses for a few years, then go right back to tacking on debt, kept now we'll have 12 million more folks in the country (legally)
There is no good solution that doesn't start with changing how our government works and how we view it.
Stop whining about the Mexicans. We still have bigger problems... like Fliptard trying to leverage is Sweet Passive Debt to make a comeback. The little mursaroo Trying to release volume 4 of his book. This requires a letter to your congressman, seriously.
I'm not sure how it is these days; Poland is not in Schengen, not yet I think, so the Grenzschutz might very well still be watching all night and rounding up the Ukrainers and others as they try to get in.
Now Germany has no "hostile" borders to watch, the "Grenzschutz" (Border Protection) has been renamed "Bundespolizei" (Federal Police). They do apparently keep a watchful eye over the Polish border and the hinterland, but the border itself is now pretty much a joke. Last time I went over there - just after Poland had joined the EU - they'd torn down all the customs sheds etc. and the border was enforced by a couple of uniformed guys from each side checking ID when the mood took them.
Apparently much EU money has been invested in "securing" Poland's eastward borders, where the real action is, though to what effect I don't know.
Ironically the agro industry in eastern Germany, which relies on low-paid short-term migrant workers, is hurting because the Poles now go to places like Spain, UK and Ireland where there are richer pickings.
I actually think that there's a better Fifth Amendment case than a Fourteenth Amendment, but let's explore you're equal protection argument.
You failed to acknowledge the first phrase of the 14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
Under any conceivable interpretation of this language, any child born in the United States is a citizen, regardless of the status of his parents. Under Plyer v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court specifically dealt with how the 14th Amendment applies to children of illegal immigrants:
"no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful"
In other words, current US case law clearly states children of illegal immigrants are citizens. So already, a good number of those who Pat Buchanan and his ilk would like to deport are untouchable by the 14th Amendment.
As for the rest of your argument, the Court has ruled repeatedly the conference of a privilege to an individual does not infringe upon the rights of a citizen. In other words, giving one person (Jose) something does not in itself disenfranchise another person (Joe) unless something of value is TAKEN from Joe.
And, as I said earlier, you have a much better (albeit still flawed) 5th Amendment argument than 14th.
I anyone thinks the number of illegals is high now, just wait until there is an amnesty. Current proposals will make Legal immigration more difficult -- what will all those who have been patiently waiting to legally immigrate do?
Even if there is a requirement for illegals to have been in the country for some time before they get amnesty, what kinds of documents will they be expected to have to prove their "residency"? Most likely, these will be easy to forge, since there is no legal documentation of their status. This will mean even more people trying to get into the country and then have their family say "yes, X has been driving a cab/working in our shop/constructing houses for us" for ? years.
" Do you really feel so strongly that these illegals should be pushed out that you're willing to see murder done?"
What murder, Sprezz?
Did the government commit murder at Waco?
I've seen no Federal officer indicted or tried...have you?
Did the FBI's HRT commit murder at Ruby Ridge?
A 14 year old boy was shot in the back and killed while running home, his mother had her head blown off while holding her infant daughter.
The shooter of the mother, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi, who had made some interesting boasts about the quality of his marksmanship before Ruby Ridge, has never been arrested or tried.
You want equality? What a wonderful and noble ideal...let's have some...all the way around.
"Shot and killed while resisting arrest"...everybody gets to run that risk.
"You're talking about sanctioning a police state and mass murder in order to "cleanse" the country."
If we continue to be overrun by illegals, what results might make a police state look like Paradise.
Ever been to Somalia?
I have.
When native-born are impoverished and dispossessed, while illegals are employed and receive every government benefit, what do you think the worst-case results are going to be?
There will be pogroms.
And there are over 65 million private gun owners in this country.
"If they resist the lawful deportation, yes I would."
Well, as I said, I'm a principled pragmatist. And, respectfully, your amoral solution offends my principles.
I agree that with the full arsenal of the US military, it would be possible to remove 12 million people. But only if one is willing to commit the most atrocious human rights violations seen in the Western Hemisphere since Native Americans were exterminated. If you would be willing to live that, then I feel sorry for your lack of basic human compassion.
But setting aside the humanitarian question, I still don't see how the deportation of presently illegal immigrants yields a net positive result for existing United States citizens. Yes, illegal immigrants do consume a good deal of public resources; however, they have contributed a great deal to our economy and could be a tremendous asset as taxpayers. What SPECIFIC benefits do you believe will be realized by their removal, if such a thing were possible in a morally acceptable manner?
Walt526:In other words, the Germans only "succeeded" in Operation Reinhard and the like because of their willingness to unleash the full fury of their military against civilian insurgents.
Another thing you're all overlooking is that when the Nazis decided they wanted to intern or deport large numbers of their own citizens, all they had to do was make a list and go calling from door to door. Of course, being a totalitarian state with all the controls in place helped, making it difficult to drop of the radar (although quite a few did, and survived through the war).
Meaning: it's not the logistics which are the problem, it's finding the people in the first place.
I fail to see how continued references to Waco and Ruby Ridge justify your position, Sharky. Those two incidents represent gross incompetence and illegal action by federal law enforcement officials. How would repeating that type of mistake serve anyone's interests?
BTW, I happen to agree with you about the Civil War (and that drives my liberal buddies nuts). Lincoln had no constitutional authority to forcibly impose cohesion on the Confederacy. While I vehemently disagree with slavery (again, on both moral and economic grounds), each state has the unalienable right to leave the Union if it so chooses. But again--how does one immoral misuse of federal military power justify the immoral misuse in the present-day?
"Again, in this argument, as in others, it seems that the only people against whom it is "approved" for the government to employ deadly force against in furthering it's will is Southern Christian White people."
What about striving for a federal government that doesn't employ its deadly force on any civilian target? You are insisting that basic respect for both illegal immigrants and existing citizens are somehow mutually exclusive without having proved that to be the case. The Waco/Ruby Ridge/Civil War is a strawman in this discussion because no pro-immigration poster has advocated the use of force against anyone.
Let's stay focused on the three main issues: 1) Whether illegal immigrants actually injure existing citizens to the extent that the latter's constitutional rights have been violated; 2) Whether the net economic effect of immigrants is positive or negative; or 3) Whether humanitarian concerns should temper any government response.
"I'm a principled pragmatist. And, respectfully, your amoral solution offends my principles"
With respect, you are neither principled nor pragmatic.
You are a moral coward.
You seek the protection of the Law only when you subjectively perceive that it is to your benefit.
When that benefit may be to someone else, (in your view), you grow qualms and rationalizations about its' enforcement.
Want the proof of the pudding?
If I learned where you lived, and "emigrated" to your parlor, you would call the police.
Read what I say here, and burn it into your mind:
If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law.
And if you have no Law, then you are Predator or you are Prey.
There is no middle ground.
It's a messy business, democracy, but what can you expect of a system that evolved from the No-Man's Land between two opposing camps of heavily armed men? (I'm assuming you are familiar with Greek history).
Of what specific benefit would the lawful prosecution of Mr. Serin realize?
And yet many here have called for it.
He has made of himself a symbol.
Illegal aliens are, in large part, symbols also.
They are symbols of a tendency of wealthy and powerful Americans to profit personally at the direct expense of other Americans.
Basically, it is one hoplite asking another:
"Are you QUITE sure that you don't belong with those other guys?".
What would you say to a black dude with a high school degree who now has to compete with a flood of unskilled cheap labor?
Seriously, how did we get along as a society for hundreds of years before we had 20 million+ people who aren't here legally?
When I was a kid, I made extra bucks mowing lawns. When I was a kid I worked shit jobs. I worked shit jobs in college to pay the bills. I'll wager that many of us here did. Now? Forget it. Why hire a college kid to wash dishes and bus tables when you can get an illegal for half price?
Up until yesterday I too bought into the idea that Americans are too lazy to do the shit jobs. Then my eyes and ears were opened when I heard a bunch of corporate attorneys lounging around at a conference discussing methods on how to avoid hiring Americans and give those jobs to illegals.
The flood of illegals doesn't hurt rich whitey neocon one bit. Whitey can always move to Vermont and enjoy his whole foods free from Mexicans. The flood of illegals hurts poor and unskilled Americans by driving down their wages and eliminates the way to moving up the economic ladder. This is a fact.
I posted the link to that YouTube video, I recommend that you view it.
You seek the protection of the Law only when you subjectively perceive that it is to your benefit.
No, you simply didn't make a good constitutional argument. If citizens are truly being deprived of property (as you allude to without much support), then you need to appeal to the 5th Amendment, not the 14th. And respectfully, that is the realm of basic 8th grade US Civics, not high powered constitutional scholars.
In any event, it's not my opinion that you disagree with, it's Justice Brennan's (he wrote the majority opinion in Prye). Until overruled, that opinion is standing case law.
If I learned where you lived, and "emigrated" to your parlor, you would call the police... If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law... There is no middle ground.
If you trespassed in my house, I would call the police. But I would not expect them to use deadly force unless someone was in imminent mortal danger. If they came in guns blazing, they could probably stop an intruder 95% of the time. Of course, they'd also cause incredible physical damage to my property and quite likely to my person as well, which is one reason why I'd rather that they use a more proportionate response.
Now if they respond to a threat humanely and intelligently, then there's a better chance that the intruder will escape. But the marginal increase in "ending his threat" is not worth the concomitantly increased risk to his life, the officers' lives, or mine.
They are symbols of a tendency of wealthy and powerful Americans to profit personally at the direct expense of other Americans.
I've asked this question repeatedly and have failed to get a direct answer: what is your evidence that anyone has been economically harmed by the presence of illegal immigrants?
Uhhh, apparently there was nothing illegal whatsoever about either of those events. As I said...no Fed has ever been prosecuted for any of it.
Now you should be embarrassed to have sunk to something so ridiculous on its face. This is Casey logic: no conviction/prosecution means nothing illegal occurred. It's illegal when the act occurs, irrespective of any law enforcement action taken in response to it.
Or, to simply turn your silly little argument on its head, if something isn't illegal until prosecution, then these 12 million immigrants in question are not "illegal" because most have yet to be formally charged, prosecuted, or convicted.
In light of that application, I think that we can both agree how provincial your logic is.
Because who the hell would then work in the meat packing industry in the Midwest - union workers who get paid decent wages?
Not in the America Ronald Reagan gave us, no way.
This inability to see that the 'illegals' (strange, only in America are human beings themselves starting to become 'illegal' - many of them who just happen to have American children - but then, you can solve such classification problems by bringing some old language, like mulatto or octroon, now in regards to citizenship) are a major element of America's new plantation culture. Quite literally in terms of food production, keeping the greenery attractive around the malls and homes, pampering the children of the owners, and cleaning up after them.
And anyone earning/possessing more than an arbitrary amount - 100,000 dollars? - is part of the class benefitting from those 'illegals' - not that anyone actually cares much about that when discussing the subject.
Even more amusing is how massive the law breaking truly is - there have been laws on the books since the last time this was a major political theme in the mid to later 1980s requiring anybody being hired to prove their 'legality' - 2 forms of ID, etc. - and the employer is held responsible when employing 'illegals'. Strangely, in the land of Homeland Security, anybody flying on an airplane needs to prove who they are - but the same system is incapable of dealing with all those undocumented workers. I guess people without valid ID are much less dangerous than people with valid ID - which at least in terms of 9/11 or Oklahoma City is just empirical fact.
See, the major reason we can't deport them yet, though, is that we need Mexico's oil - exurbia über alles - or is that 'Mexifornia über alles' in the latest CD version?. Hmmm.
But keep the outrage up - it will certainly make things better. When it finally cracks up, people like you can blame the 'illegals' for stabbing America in the back - and with Halliburton sitting on a few hundred million dollar camp contracts (just for planning - imagine how much they will cost to actually get up and running - get in on the ground floor now), you can buy some stock, and make some free enterprise money off a good solution to those 'illegals' - though I doubt they have much in the way of gold teeth to extract to help pay the costs of those camps.
Oh well, maybe we could toss in some people who object to what is going on, too.
And it won't be IBM likely getting the contract for the software - it will be Oracle - nothing like those old CIA ties to help grease a big contract.
People say you cannot enforce the rules on such a large border.
I ask how did we hold the Russians at bay for 40 years across the width of Europe?
How is it NOBODY crosses the DMZ north of Seoul since 1955? Hey, you walk through a clearly marked mine field and get blown up, what is the difference from getting blown up walking though a impact field for artillary on a miltary base? Chalk it up to Darwin.
And this BS of nobody wants the jobs is just that. How come the Northern States get by just fine without having to cry a river about not finding some illegal laborer to do do this or that. Go cut your own grass for Pete's sake!
But most of all, why do we never see anyone who hires these illegals go to jail?
You toss a couple CEOs under the bus with 2-3 years in a Club Fed as part of SOX compliance, and 10 days later undocumented illegals will not be able to make a living and will go home.
Rather than pass this BS legislation, increase the numbers of legal citizens allowed in to whatever you want, but enforce the rules and bury the scumbags that hire the illegals to make a bigger profit.
"It's illegal when the act occurs, irrespective of any law enforcement action taken in response to it."
Quite so, I fully agree! So those 12 million illegals are nothing more than unprosecuted criminals. By your own standard,(thanks). As such, there should be no impediment to the immigration laws being enforced aganst them.
"If you trespassed in my house, I would call the police. But I would not expect them to use deadly force unless someone was in imminent mortal danger."
Ahh, what if I resisted the officer in his lawful duty to the point where HE was reasonably in fear of his death or grievous bodily injury?
Bang! Bang! Sharky's Dead!
(Walt...you inhumane BASTARD! Poor, poor Sharky!)
"Now if they respond to a threat humanely and intelligently,"
There's your qualms and rationalizations again...if you really want me out of your parlor, then you'd better be prepared for the chance of shark-guts all over your hardwood floors.
"I've asked this question repeatedly and have failed to get a direct answer: what is your evidence that anyone has been economically harmed by the presence of illegal immigrants?"
Pretty funny insistence from someone who quotes case law at me.
Have not arguments been made for decades that prostitution and the ingestion of illegal drugs are "Victimless Crimes"?
What says case law about those arguments?
"Guilty!".
Frankly, if you deny that the presence of 12 million illegal aliens in our nation causes loss of property to native-born or legal immigrants, then I'm rather shocked that you are not also a Holocaust denier.
As long as ONE illegal is employed while ONE American or legal is denied employment, ALL Americans are harmed.
(Again...are you SURE that you belong in THIS phalanx?)
"No, you simply didn't make a good constitutional argument"
I'm not a lawyer, are you? I'll leave to lawyers to make the arguments that the same law by which I may be fined, jailed and executed, must not be applied to those whose very presence is a crime.
Because walt doesn't think it would "humane and intelligent " to do so.
"I think that we can both agree how provincial your logic is."
My logic may indeed be provincial, but it seems to be an increasingly popular POV.
And in our wonderfully terrible republican democracy, that's really all that's needed.
Let me make this plain for you.
If the American Dream is to be denied to working-class and increasingly middle-class citizens, then it will also be denied to the wealthy.
It'll just take a little more time for their ship to sink.
(The Captain only drowns last, in case you didn't know).
Aw crap, they're already referring to him as a failed entrepeneur. I think that's a bad start. The tone is altogether too light-hearted. They're focusing on his "World's Most Hated Blogger" title, and whether it's deserved. Looks like it's heading to be a fluff piece. Darn.
Robbie Buck is saying that he has never before been contacted and warned about doing an interview, and that dozens of people have contacted him over Casey. (Good work, Haterz!)
Casey is talking about his "mistakes". His completely innocent mistakes.
The feds have become the enforcers for the corrupt fascist corpatist entities.
Actually America is hardly a country anymore. Its a region where people live to get rich and screw each other while trying to get rich.
Whay kind of country has open borders and the cops cant ask if you are here illegally? The schools cant ask if you are here illegally. Or the hospitals.
I'd say America is a second world nation, no longer first world.
sharky said... "If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law."
Yikes. It's illegal to park on the sidewalk (California Vehicle Code 22500(f) ) and it really annoys me, but I am not going out there with a sharp stick to make anybody move. Can't I just call the meter maids?
Jeez...everyone is a Human Rights Champion or a Constitution Expert
I'm neither. As I said, I drive my left-leaning friends nuts with my quasi-libertarian views. Rather, I just have a conscience and a heart, essential for being principled. An IQ above room temperature, which allows me to be a pragmatist.
Quite so, I fully agree! So those 12 million illegals are nothing more than unprosecuted criminals.
I never said that they never committed a crime. I'm seeking to see the law changed--hence the "reform" in "immigration reform." Instead, I stated the fact that the current situation is untenable, that morality and intelligence should temper one's thirst for enforcing laws, and that the economic benefits are most likely greater than the costs.
Ahh, what if I resisted the officer in his lawful duty to the point where HE was reasonably in fear of his death or grievous bodily injury?
If one imminently threatens the life of a peace officer, then the peace officer may take reasonable steps to protect himself and others. Any experienced police officer would only turn to his firearm as a last resort. Again, a specious analogy.
if you really want me out of your parlor, then you'd better be prepared for the chance of shark-guts all over your hardwood floors.
There are variety of non-lethal ways to incapacitate a single assailant in a confined space. But implementing such techniques against 12 million spread out over a vast area is not possible. The only way to forcibly coerce such a mass is through means that will inevitably turn deadly. You may be comfortable with that; I'm not.
Pretty funny insistence from someone who quotes case law at me.
Non sequitur. You didn't answer the question: what evidence does you have to claim that illegal immigrants have harmed the economic interests of others?
Have not arguments been made for decades that prostitution and the ingestion of illegal drugs are "Victimless Crimes"?
Neither here nor there, but I actually support the legalization (and taxation!) of both prostitution and narcotics. In any event, the difference is that those are statutory issues, which can be changed at any time through the normal legislative process. The case law represents a constitutional issue, which can only be changed through a future Court decision. Again, 8th grade US Civics...
Frankly, if you deny that the presence of 12 million illegal aliens in our nation causes loss of property to native-born or legal immigrants, then I'm rather shocked that you are not also a Holocaust denier.
I've seen convincing evidence that the Holocaust occurred. And I have seen evidence that illegal immigration has negatively impacted communities. But there is also evidence that there have been universally enjoyed benefits. In the final analysis, the benefits outweigh the costs in my view--which is supported by virtually every reputable academic study on the issue.
As long as ONE illegal is employed while ONE American or legal is denied employment, ALL Americans are harmed.
I agree that the wage disparity between legal and illegal workers is not in the interest of either. Where we differ is that I want to go forward through the quagmire by making illegals legal, while you prefer to use force to impose a return to a pre-immigrant state. Beyond ethical concerns, the available data does not indicate that the economy has suffered.
I'm not a lawyer, are you? I'll leave to lawyers to make the arguments that the same law by which I may be fined, jailed and executed, must not be applied to those whose very presence is a crime.
No, I am not a lawyer, although I took a number of constitutional law classes in college (3 or 4). In any event, one does not need a law degree to understand injustice any more than one needs a medical degree to know when someone is injured. While not understanding the complete nature of an injury, a reasonably intelligent person can diagnose that a problem exists, its general nature, and apply basic knowledge toward relieving the injured's pain.
My logic may indeed be provincial, but it seems to be an increasingly popular POV
Based on that data, it looks to me that: a) most people don't know enough about the bill to have formed an opinion; b) an overwhelming majorit do NOT support deportation (forced or otherwise); c) a majority wants to see immigration in general kept at its present level or increased.
And in our wonderfully terrible republican democracy, that's really all that's needed.
See above. But anyway, you are wrong about the will of the people having ultimate say. In the end, if the Court believes a law to be a constitutional violation, then the offending law is struck down.
Maybe you should have repeated 8th grade?
If the American Dream is to be denied to working-class and increasingly middle-class citizens, then it will also be denied to the wealthy... It'll just take a little more time for their ship to sink.
Again... evidence supporting the claim that anyone has been hurt? Evidence that there is a "trickle-up" effect?
Companies that hire illegals don't just do it because they can pay them less than minimum wage, which is only 5.35 now. They do it because they can break all sorts of wage (overtime, etc.) and safety laws that American workers would not stand for. The meat packing industry used to be full of union jobs - they used illegals to bust the unions. And not only are the conditions horrid for the workers the meat product is a lot less safer than it used to be. The solution to the illegal problem is not deportations - it is coming down hard on the employers. I say if ANY labor laws are being found to be broken and illegals are present, then it should be assumed that the employer is knowingly hiring illegals and the employer should be fined about $200,000 per illegal. Any government contractor found hiring illegals should be forever barred from government contracts.
The other problem is a lot of individuals benefit from illegals. How many gardeners and housekeepers are illegal in California? When you hire a landscaping company there is really no way to know if they are illegal. A lot of people are total hypocrites too. I know of someone complains incessantly about illegals. But when he need car repairs done in his small town, he took it to a shop known to be run by illegals that fixed his car for 1/2 the price that the legitimate places wanted.
We will never come close to solving this problem while we are spending over one billion dollars per week on our current wars.
You want to solve the problem. Demand that we withdraw from Iraq, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, lobbying for Haliburton to get the contract to build all the buses needed to deprt the illegals. Lobby for Haliburton to get the contract for all the ports of entry and for a new wall at double the cost anybody else could build it for.
Lobby for Haliburton to receive upwards of $15,000 per illegal that they transport back home.
If you can switch the present dynamics so the big boys profit, 12 million illegals will be deported within a year, and the jobs that will be lost will be replaced with workers from a KBR subsidiary.
Not a bad interview. Robbie seemed to be onto him. Casey didn't get to portray himself as the unfortunate real estate ingenue that he would like everyone to believe he is.
Not sure what he really got out of it, actually, except the publicity. Which in his case, I can't belive is "all good".
Heard the JJJ interview. More of the same crap from Casey, but the interviewer was very skeptical:
Why don't you get a job, you say you could earn $50K, surely you could do that, right?
Oh yeah, people say the best thing for me to do would be just declare bankruptcy and get a job but I'm not cut out for a W2 life, I'm entrepreneureal.
Plugged Kiyosaki and the "sweet passive income" crap.
Why are you in Australia instead of just dealing with your debt in the US?
Well I had a friend who offered to let me come over and stay free and the trip was paid for by someone else, blah blah, focus, clear my mind, finish my book (is he even writing it himself? is there any work for him to do in AU on it?)
I don't know if it will be saved online or if someone bothered to record it from the live stream. I listened to the live stream online at 10pm PDT (3pm Thursday Sydney time). Casey was on during the first half hour.
@walt526 wrote: "You failed to acknowledge the first phrase of the 14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
Under any conceivable interpretation of this language, any child born in the United States is a citizen, regardless of the status of his parents. Under Plyer v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court specifically dealt with how the 14th Amendment applies to children of illegal immigrants:"
Plyler v. Doe was an abortion of a case, an intellectually-dishonest, results-driven opinion. The key language is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," which was understood at the time of the 14th Amendment to mean basically "subjects of the United States," i.e. citizens and permanent residents, and not illegal aliens or people here on temporary visas.
Senator Howard of Michigan, the author of the 14th Amendment birthright clause, postulated that "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
If you read the Plyler v. Doe opinion, you'll see that Brennan relies on common English law rather than clearly expressed legislative intent. This case will be overturned by an intellectually honest court. Hopefully soon.
JJJ have a podcast, but it seems to contain only the same episode fragments also listed on the website. Maybe it was popular, or controversial, enough to merit them putting it up form download tomorrow.
Surprised to see Tavington back here; surely you get one shot at trolling, particularly after you admit to it.
Interesting, too, that he's now expunged any trace of the Casey Supporterz Fight Back talkcast from TalkShoe: deleted the episode, and is now using the same talkcast ID to troll Mel Gibson fans.
Correction: the reliance on English common law comes from the Wong Kim Ark opinion (1898), which preceded Plyler v. Doe.
From the dissent in Wong Kim Ark: "The act was passed and the amendment proposed by the same Congress, and it is not open to reasonable doubt that the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the amendment were used as synonymous with the words "and not subject to any foreign power" of the act."
See http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZD.html
So it's your belief that "anchor children" are not in fact US citizens? Because while I've heard/read complaints about Brennan's reasoning, my understanding is that the mainstream view of constitutional scholars is that citizenship is--literally--their birthright.
"The funny thing is… with your attempt at sabotage you’re actually helping my story be more interesting and keeping the World’s Most Hated Blogger label going. Thanks for your help.
You can try to throw sticks into my wheels (is that how they say it) but I will keep ridin’. You may win a few battles there and here but the outcome of the war has already been determined."
I will say this only once...you are not a true conservative if you think Paul is a Nazi and Bush is right.
I can't tell if you are trolling, but given your history I will assume that was posted to poke a stick at some of us who KNOW Bush is no conservative. Try authoritarian since he's the decider, you know.
I am a constitutionalist first and find this Bush character evil. I am far from liberal on fiscal policy and the federal guvmint. I am liberal on things like personal freedom and the like. I guess you can call me a libertarian in the truest sense. My political heroes are everyone from Tom Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and I do like JFK and Truman.
I judge politicians on actions not platitudes and their attempts to divide.
A true conservative is willing to listen and find a solution that works best for the country. Reagan was quite good at that contrary to what some on the far left say. He may have trusted some of his cabinet too much, but he was a decent man. HE is a conservative, Bush is something sickening...a man who TELLS us to do as he says where Reagan inspired us to roll up our sleeves and find ways to make things work.
You have no intention of paying back any debts, so stop already. Your track record is proof enough to back up my factual belief that you are too lazy to have any kind of comeback.
If you were truly interested in paying back your debts, you wouldn't leave your wife alone dealing with YOUR mess (i.e. - Creditors).
Get over yourself. In the end, we will have the last laugh because you may not be a crook, per se but you aren't very honest.
Want to get into a hissy fit over that statement? All I have to do is pull out your letter to Ramit to PROVE you are and have always been out for yourself and would screw over anybody to be able to make a quick buck.
All: Just posted the comments below to IAFF, although I doubt Fliptardian has the guts to post it. In any event, the substance is provided here for your pleasure.
****************** Casey @ #63: ”If people understand how I took out the loans and the lending climate at the time and that I had NO criminal intent and had FULL desire to pay back all those loans maybe people wouldn’t be so quick to call me a CON MAN.”
LOL, well, of all the people you’ve dealt with I understand how you took out the loans and how the LAW interrupts intent (motive). Your aim was to profit; you lied on the 1003s for that end (execution), and failed at the schemed profiteering (damages). Thus it doesn’t matter how you justify your “mistakes,” nor deny wrong doing as the law is clear and specific.
“Desire” to do a thing don’t cut it, Casey, we’ve discussed this before. Want to have a thing materialize doesn’t make it so; and, absconding what you think are jurisdictional limits is your undoing (only you’re too delusional to realize that, again, aspect we’ve discussed already)!
So yeah you’re a con man, playing self as the prime mark.
Casey @ #64: ”The funny thing is... with your [Haterz] attempt at sabotage you’re actually helping my story be more interesting and keeping the World’s Most Hated Blogger label going. Thanks for your help. ... You can try to throw sticks into my wheels (is that how they say it) but I will keep ridin’. You may win a few battles there and here but the outcome of the war has already been determined.”
LOL, I’ll remind you of these words before long.
~Mark (Knowing Casey is too cowardly to post this.)
Nice to see you coming out swinging, and so confident that the outcome of your minor transgressions will not meet the same fate of many others who also committed such minor transgressions.
Of course, occasionally someone speeding on the highway does get the book thrown at them, but they have to be caught first.
And with your amazing story still unfolding, you still seem to possess the last of the V-8 Interceptors. Who says life in Australia can't be like a fairy tale with Mel Gibson in the starring role - there is even the vaguest resemblance between you, I may add in a touch of coquettish flattery, though it comes more from the apparent lack of lavish fresh water than hair styles.
Holiday whatever - 'The Supreme Court, through case law, has created a guideline for U.S. citizenship. The following outlines the rulings of the Court:
* The 14th Amendment completely controls the status of U.S. citizenship and prevents the involuntary cancellation of citizenship. o All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States. + This applies to children born to legal and illegal residents. + This does not apply to children of foreign citizens employed in any diplomatic or official capacity. o Congress has the power to define acts of expatriation (i.e., loss of citizenship). + A person must voluntarily relinquish U.S. citizenship. # It is constitutional to presume it to have been a voluntary act until and unless proved otherwise by the actor. # Congress may revoke citizenship involuntarily if it has been obtained unlawfully.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Or if you prefer more official information -
'LEGISLATION DENYING CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH TO CERTAIN CHILDREN BORN IN THE UNITED STATES
A bill that would deny citizenship to children born in the United States to certain classes of alien parents is unconstitutional on its face.
A constitutional amendment to restrict birthright citizenship, although not technically unlawful, would flatly contradict the Nation's constitutional history and constitutional traditions.'
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/deny.tes.31.htm
Though notice that this information is 12 years old. At that time, the idea that torture would be defended by elected officials such as the vice president without immediate impeachment for violating their oath of office to uphold the Constitution, would also have been considered to 'flatly contradict the Nation's constitutional history and constitutional traditions.'
Oh well, the founders never thought that the republic would endure forever.
After reading a sea of paranoid and racist comments on this site, it's nice to see someone with basic human values who also uses reason. We have people seriously suggesting roundups of 12 million people who came here to better their economic circumstances, and who perform (whether we like it or not) vital services to this country. I didn't say anything until now, but I think I have to.
I think amnesty is a reasonable and valid first step to ending a lot of the black market economy that runs atop these people's backs. By incorporating "illegals" into the economy, we can also bring them into the normal market economy and enforce proper working conditions in ALL workplaces, not just those in the "white market." I have a hard time seeing how this could possibly be a bad thing for this country. The problems some have claimed about the wage-depressing effects of an illegal workforce will be eliminated when minimum wage laws can finally be enforced properly. Additionally, this adds to the US tax base, so all of the arguments about "illegals consuming services they haven't paid for" will no longer be accurate for these people.
So that leaves us with all of the "ZOMFG!!! I'm gonna have to learn Spanish" comments, which are pretty much a big pile of dog doody.
Liberals, they never use logic or reason, they emote, then they toss out the racist canard and congratulate themselves for being morally superior.
Illegals kill an average of twenty five murrikans a day, 13 by drunk driving homocide and 12 by criminal homicide. For you emotional non thinking liberals that is 9125 people per year. Would you like to discuss the percentage of criminal illegals in our prison system?
Finally, liberals just love to emote about fairness, how fair is it to the people who played by the rules, waited in line and paid their fees to become residents?
By the way, since the rule of law doesn't seem to matter, why shouldn't the rest of us law abiding tax paying citizens just pick and choose which laws we will abide?
opal: if the United States learned to be like the rest of the civilized world, racists such as yourself would be criminally charged for inciting racial hatred.
But no--the Supreme Court and the xenophobes misinterpret the Constitution and think that hate speech is free speech... NOT!
Once the 2nd amendment is abolished and the US is more politically correct and cosmopolitan, the redneck racist hillbillies (who vote overwhelmingly RethugliKKKlan) won't terrorize minorities and good-thinking people.
Find me two high school educated Americans who work half as hard as any one Mexican. The ones I deal with are soft spoken family people who work harder than anyone - and management pays them MORE than what a similarly qualified American (about $12 an hour) might earn elsewhere. But here's the rub. Americans won't take the job because it isn't GOOD enough for them. Or they come to work drunk, or don't show up at all.
I think the problem is greatly that we have a lazy, entitled generation of American youth that won't roll up their sleeves because Mommy and Daddy don't want their little snowflake to suffer the same hardships they did. God forbid they should compete for anything.
Fucking bullshit. We are screwed. We've created an entire society that is reliant on cheap imported labor. We're like Dubai. The whole system is busted at this point.
We also need to stop making this about the cost of labor and about the quality of it. If Mexicans work harder than Americans, then they not only deserve the work, but they deserve to be properly compensated for it.
Not that there aren't always going to be assholes like those lawyers.
About Casey,
The result of the war has already been determined? Truer words have never been spoken. But he doesn't get that it isn't going to end the way he hopes.
I like that HE doesn't even know how he'll be received at home. He can post thank yous to get under Haterz' skin, but we already know we've won the war.
Yes, most definitely. I think that 1 million per year is not enough--the US could easily absorb 3-4 million per year. With this increase, the backlogs would be cleared and there would be much less disincentive for hard-working latinos to become 'undocumented'.
With increased immigration, America will benefit from increased diversity. Immigrants tend to vote more for progressive Democrats as opposed to RethugliKKKlans. African Americans vote 90% for the Democrats, while Latinos give 70% of their votes to them.
Imagine, without these crucial nonwhite votes, America would have re-elected a reactionary, right-wing RethugliKKKlan congress in 2006.
Of course not all Republicans are racist. In fairness, although I have serious reservations with George Bush in regards to policy, I fully support his being reasonable in regards to immigration.
So the next time you hear someone complain about "those immigrants" remind them that they help elect the politicians who are more likely to support a Universal Health Care system.
Thank you immigrants for making America more prosperous, diverse and progressive!
You are a fucking racist, Robert Cote. Stop bitching about illegal aliens - if you are so bothered by them, lobby your congressman, OR start cleaning your damn house (you said YOU HIRED ILLEGALS YOURSELF - your maid, remember?). You are a top class hypocrite - hiring illegal aliens because they are cheaper, and yet bitch and moan about them. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP or be consistent with yourself. Hypocrite.
I must disagree regarding his trolling quality. He is just too obvious, because nobody that phenomenally stupid could ever have been taught to read and write.
We've been too busy outside of our borders to do anything about what's going on inside.
America's problem, isn't with immigration. We were once supposed to be the shining beacon for all the tired, hungry masses to come to a land of better opportunity. Of course, xenophobia's existed since before Lady liberty, and all immigrant groups received alot of undue flack.
Maybe if we spent more time fixing our house, and not trying to fix other folk's homes as our gutters fall of, we wouldn't be having this debate to begin with.
I'd also like a Casey thread. There were some gold nuggets in that Robbie Buck interview as well as his FAQ replies (whoever got him to respond, good job!)
@Demantoid: Working with The Public has taught me that people are far, far stupider than one could possibly imagine. I find Tavington to be a superb parody of the folks who take it upon themselves to inform me - in all sincerity - that plants aren't actually alive, so they didn't need to be on Noah's Ark; ergo, evil-lution is an atheist conspiracy.
Is ASPETH a man or a woman? Is he/she gay or straight? Its not important and I am not trying to insult him/her. I am just confused about his/her point of view. I want to think that ASPETH is a drag queen? A he that goes by she? Am I right or wrong. Anyone?
As far as I can tell Aspeth is a liberal chick who's probably kind of bookish, and was sort of nerdy in high school and might actually be into some weird shit. Like this dorky chick and her disturbing goth husband who tried to get an ex girlfriend and I to come over to their little rat's nest after dinner to screw. Eeessh.
I am sick of casey serin...all it does is raise my blood pressure to see this two bit conman go unpunished and sink further into denial about how fucked he is.
If someone wants to take over the haterzcasts for a couple weeks until I get repassioned into his story..that is fine.
the only websites I am going to anymore related to him are caseypedia and stephj's.
I am taking a break from IAFF and EN for a couple weeks.
June 27, 2007 7:56 PM )
CHJTS,
Now that you are forced to look internally at yourself, because of your accident, don't you feel a bit foolish now about being so enraged about Casey in the first place?
There are men out there physically abusing their wives. Don't you think working at a shelter or something like that is more worthy of all the energy you wasted on the Casey story in the first place?
@walt: "So it's your belief that "anchor children" are not in fact US citizens? Because while I've heard/read complaints about Brennan's reasoning, my understanding is that the mainstream view of constitutional scholars is that citizenship is--literally--their birthright."
It's my belief that Wong Kim Ark was wrongly decided, and so was Plyler v. Doe (which technically was not about birthright citizenhip, but construed "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"). The mainstream view of constitutional scholars is surely that "citizenship is their birthright"--the Supreme Court ruled that way, after all. This doesn't mean the case was correctly decided.
Find me two high school educated Americans who work half as hard as any one Mexican. The ones I deal with are soft spoken family people who work harder than anyone - and management pays them MORE than what a similarly qualified American (about $12 an hour) might earn elsewhere. But here's the rub. Americans won't take the job because it isn't GOOD enough for them.
Do tell us more. The name of the employer to start? Thought not. And now don't you see what is happening? You know of a crime and multiple criminal and you won't even name them anonymously. Talk about driving a general breakdown of society. This whole mess is turning everyone into criminals and criminal enablers.
Of course the job is lousy. It is ONLY lousy because there are people who will do it, not the other way round. We don't mine coal with hand picks. Why is that? The reason there are crappy jobs in the US is because there is a supply of exploited labor to fill them. Part of stopping illegal immigration is humanitarian; to stop job exploitation, to stop decanting the best people from impoverished regions, to reduce ethnic predation of unenfranchished popualtions here.
I get this but only very rarely and only when people get frustrated that I present my arguement in race neutral terms.
Stop bitching about illegal aliens - if you are so bothered by them, lobby your congressman, OR start cleaning your damn house (you said YOU HIRED ILLEGALS YOURSELF - your maid, remember?).
I said she was illegal at the time I hired her? Hmm, that would be strange as she had a Green Card at the time. A real one. I'm positive. You can either show evidence or apologize. Wait, what am I saying? That's assuming you have a cintilla of human decency. My bad.
You are a top class hypocrite - hiring illegal aliens because they are cheaper, and yet bitch and moan about them. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP or be consistent with yourself. Hypocrite.
Where I live it is virtually impossible to not at least indirectly employ illegal workers. This because their emplyment is protected by layers of complicit government that selectively enforces laws.
Being called a hypocrite by an anon is a compliment.
"We've been too busy outside of our borders to do anything about what's going on inside."
Thank you. The illegal alien problem has been brewing for years, and the gang in DC has avoided it untill now - the severity of the problem is directly in their laps, and they are, IMHO, taking the easy way out, with a lot of vote pandering and social engineering thrown in (the welfare state will grow as a result of this bill, and thus the power of those who administer it).
I've said it before, we send tanks to Iraq for "democracy", but we won't patrol our borders.
People are all of a sudden feeling disenfranchised over this issue, as their elected officials proceed to ignore the public and act in defiance of it. That's nothing new, just ask any war protestor, but this is more widespread. In one way it's good that people wake up to how truly broken our government is, and I think the next couple of rounds of elections may be very eye opening to the elitists in Washington one can hope).
Meanwhile, it looks like the fix is in, but there's hope this bill will still be defeated. The ramifications of it passing are huge, huge enough that we would see massive, radical changes to communities, cultures, economies, and demographics, and such rapid change is never easy. To have 20-40 million people suddenly emerge from the shadows demanding good paying jobs, benefits, bennies, and their cultural needs catered to, it's too big a shick to NOT caus massive rifts across the country. This isn't just low paying much jobs - all of the people who would suddenly becoime legal with this bill would now be in direct competition for the jobs Americans DO want, and with the economy slumping and jobs disapearing in housing and finance, this is going to put additional pressure on an already potentially explosive situation.
And I'm sorry, I'm sick and fucking tired of the "Americans are lazy" bullshit. Maybe some are, but I know people who work their asses off every day, including myself, and I'm tired of it. When a chicken processing plant was raided last spring, all those jobs held by illegals were lined up for by local Americans, who supposedly would'nt do the job - and they replaced all of the positions within a week. A large percentage of my family back east work in the trades, painting houses, doing drywall, electric work, and all of them have lost contracts to Mexican work crews (who are uninsured, untrained, and half the time rip off the houses they work on). They are not lazy, and would loosen your teeth if you accused them of being lazy, and they are ground zero in this fight, these are not ditch digging or lettuce picking jobs, these are decent, career jobs for the working class like my cousins and uncles, and illegal alien work crews are KILLING them. Just lower their prices? They can't - they follow the law, and between workman's comp and insurance and payroll taxes, they can't lower prices to compete with illegals.
Anon @ 5:57 AM: ”You are a fucking racist, Robert Cote.”
LOL, that’s rich; said as one of Hispanic (Spanish) heritage whose family was here (in Cali) long before the likes of Piss Ant anons. Think I’m lyin? Then check out some little ditties written by one of my Kinsmen (who’s even so much too liberal for my tastes): “Rain of Gold,” “Thirteen Senses,” or “Wild Steps To Heaven.”
In other words, I happen to agree with many of Cote’s views on illegal immigration. So I guess that makes me, what, a “racist” against my linage..? (Jag-off!)
Mark, You still here? oooooooooooooh I forget, you still gotta keep kissing dawg ass till this Casey thing blows over. What with the non-anon thing and all. Never mind. Go on.
This post is very stupid.. You are using data from 3-4 years ago...
And let me clear... NAFTA is and was the cause of this migration...
Instead of creating a loss of jobs for the US.. it created a huge loss of jobs in Mexico... therefore people are coming here to get back the jobs they lost in Mexico..
'Where I live it is virtually impossible to not at least indirectly employ illegal workers.'
Or if you shop at any national food chain.
Or if you don't do your own child care.
Or your own lawn care.
Of course, you aren't to blame directly - it is all someone else's fault.
Always.
But remember, as long as Mexico is the third largest exporter of oil to America, exurbia needs Mexico at least as much as Mexicans need America.
And did you see how Pemex's production continues to decline? I guess they need to call in the invisible hand to do its magic, as the oil fairy with nitrogen injection seems a bit peaked. You could say the elephant is leaving the room.
As for the racism charges - in many ways, you are just like Kunstler - white males of a certain time and place, who just don't understand why things are different from those glorious days in the mid 1960s (though in fairness, you don't seem anywhere near as homophobic, and likely nowhere near as seething about 'ghetto' culture as a cover for his deeper beliefs). Ah, the 1960s - time when a white and a black American citizen couldn't legally marry in the Commonwealth of Virginia, where the supreme court which banished them from the commonwealth quoted the Bible in defense of separating the races as part of God's plan.
At least you don't quote the bible when justifying your opinions, just your self-interest - as long as you don't have to change how you live, since it is all the state's fault, not yours.
and this applies to everyone else who so casually tosses out this pejorative when yourun out of reasonable arguments in favor of amnesty for illegals.
A wee bit of a history lesson for you.
The roots of our crisis today extend 20 years before the 1986 Immigration Reform Act.
In the 60's,the LBJ Administration lowered the immigration quotas for Europeans and raised them for immigrants from underdeveloped (cheaper labor), nations.
Prior to that,agribusiness had had the "Bracero" (guest worker) programs to take advantage of.
The fact that many, if not most of these nations were populated by colored people may have been a coincidence.
But I don't think so.
By the way, Ford today built their final F-150 at their Norfolk, VA assembly plant, which first built Model T's in the 1920's. It's closed for good tomorrow
I assume that Ford's Mexican maquiladoras are still perking along.
3 other firms that supplied the plant are also going under.
Any of you motherfuckers want to come talk your shit down the Tidewater?
Hey everybody...I beat Travington....again. Further proof he can't debate any of my points.
I find when people post provocatively troll-like rants (that I DO NOT believe they live by in real life) and won't answer me, I win.
Thanks for proving I own you troll. Facts are a tough thing to fight with, right? But I guess it's easy to hide and insult others with false claims of racism. Prove to me I am a racist, dipwad? Oh you can't because if you truly knew me, you'd know that is NOT the case.
A troll must generalize and act like a poor man's class clown to get attention. Well, some posters think you are funny but I don't quite understand how that can be true. All I see is a troubled little boy who likes to throw out unsubstantiated falsehoods to make himself feel like a real man.
Sweet, Your comments do not fall on closed ears. You have some legitimate observations although the dieoff and Kunstler bits touch a nerve.
Exurbia is not disproportionately impacted by energy issues. In fact the response to energy disruptions would be to accelerate the exurban diaspora. The cities only recovered a little '95-'05 because of stable energy. Coincidence? I think not.
Cantrell II looks promising. Now don't get me wrong, not soon and not cheap but you have to understand a couple things. One, Cantrell II has at the low estimate more recoverable oil than the peakenese claim could EVER be found anywhere in the entire world going forward. Two, since 1975 US domestic production has far exceeded the known recoverable reserves identified in 1975 and yet today we have MORE reserves than in 1975. Peak oil is a fatally flawed theory.
Illegal aliens cost this country hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
Anyone who thinks people making $7.50 an hour are going to be PAYING taxes, rather than collecting EIC, WIC, etc. is more retarded than our favorite real estate scam artist.
Some people need to learn how income taxes work in this country....
164 comments:
First?
Why is this a problem?
Snowflake just posted weak ass answers to some questions as a comment at the end of his last post.
Murst
So what do you do? Mass deportations will make this country look like Children of Men. Building a wall won't help. Fines for companies using undocumented labor won't stop industries that are dependent upon cheap construction labor. America will always look attractive to despondent Mexicans. Period.
Situations like these call for a work-around to the problem. Embrace and extend, as Microsoft says. Lower the income tax for the lowest two brackets, and tax the hell out of gasoline. Bam, revenues up, problem solved.
(For those disinclined to visit IAFF, Casey's update is reproduced in the comments of the post below. Heh.)
@ 5:14...
Yeah, like: "As soon as I get situated with free internet somewhere and a quiet place I can call CashCall and see what those guys want."
It might be pretty funny if Cash Call outlets across the nation starting getting calls (like, say, those that can be made on anon calling cards) "Hey, this is Casey Serin. What do you bluffing guys want? I am way down here in Australia and I really can't be bothered by your empty threats. There are too many sweet hostels to check out, and my skype headset is broke, and finding open wifi to rip off is such a drag. So, if you don't like that then I guess you can just bugger off."
1000,
Maybe, maybe not but the lowest tax brackets don't really pay all that much in taxes. It would NOT be fair to anybody else if we gave them a pass in payroll tax collection.
My wife and I make over 100K a year. One problem with that...I get hit with that fracking AMT everytime. Of course Bush and his cronies don't give a shit about us middle class folks. He only gives a crap about cheap labor and the elite billionaires.
My friend claims he loves Bush because (this is the only reason he can think of) he got back money. Well, I laugh at him because he likes suing everybody, tying up the courts and not taking personal responsibility for his actions. I don't see one dime (not that I'd want it ---- it's irresponsible of Bush to give tax cut rebates during a time of war and deficits) but I pay MORE because I can't get around the AMT. I can't write off too much and even if I don't write off as much, I still get pegged for not writing off enough.
I don't ask for a lot from this government, but I wish to God these folks would give a crap about how us Middle Class folks feel about Amnesty and deficit spending.
LOL Anon.
Been gone a week..looked thru all the comments. Didn't LossMitPro say 1 and possible 2 things were going to happen to Serin this week (or be announced).
Thanks and sorry if I missed it somewhere.
I can call CashCall and see what those guys want.
Hmmmmm...what could they want? (Scratches head)
Call me cynical, but is this new-found loquaciousnesses on Casey's part less honest openness and more an attempt to spike the haterz guns in advance of his interview tomorrow?
"Robbie, I don't know why the haterz make such a fuss about that. I answered those questions, I'm not hiding anything, but still they hound me and try to sabotage my attempts to make an honest living."
Bush said it. Now 1000 weak says it. I still ask why we cannot deport illegals. Why? Costs too much?
No one has any idea how ultimately costly the wholesale dimunition in government trust will be. "You want me to do what? No way. You are the same assholes who wouldn't listen to 80% of the American public. JFK is dead. We are stuck with Teddy." There's gonna be 80 million people who worked hard and played by the rules who not only see themselves getting the short end of the stick but getting the bill for the whole stick.
You want to hit these same people up for new taxes? This goes through and an underground economy will spring up and revenues will plummet and never return. You force third world solutions you can expect third world behavior.
Dawg, as I said yesterday the powers that be could give two shits about what you think. You are simply a taxpaying cow to be milked. Shut your cakehole.
BTW, I heard Voinovich say essentially that on the radio. He blamed talk radio hosts and bloggers for spreading hysteria. When asked if he had actually read the bill, he said no.
So BOHIC.
Without waving the flag too much....this country can do whatever the hell it sets it's collective mind to do. All that's necessary is commitment and neither party has the political will to deport illegals.
Get a lotta buses
Line them up
Stop everyone, including blue eyed blondes and ask for their ID
No ID, no problem....get on the bus
Oh, Mexico isn't your country of origin?....tough, we aren't obligated to send you home, just kick your ass outside our borders. What's that, Mexico won't take you....tough, find your own way then.
As far as the new law goes.....why is it going to be any different THIS time?
The government surely has no freakin' idea what they are stirring. When the bill was defeated, it was because they saw a storm they couldn't face. Then they thought they could push it through when we weren't looking. They look at the calendar and think 18 months to the next election. Plenty of time to make the sheeple forget. There's no tolerance out there. This is a deal breaker. People plain old will stop participating in a society that throws them under the bus.
When will snowflake learn what Arbitrage means!
I have made all my payments on the corp debt and its current.
I'm sure Casey's other creditors will be very happy to hear this.
I'm a long time follower of IAFF and something seems very out of whack. We are to believe that supporterz have funded/subsidized the transportation, lodging, meals, etc in Australia such that over 2 weeks Casey has had to spend only $200 total on expenses. That is impossible. Think of the things he has done:
rental car
petting zoos
travel up and down the coast from SYD to BNE
Marriott hotel (one night alone is over $200)
$50/night for a hostel
Travel is not cheap.
Remember this is the guy who had a beg-a-thon for money to send to cashcall just weeks ago. At that time there was no money.
So the question of the day is where is all the money coming from? Somehow either there is cashback money buried in a can OR new credit lines have been opened.
If the latter, how is this happening? I mean all the players have totally ruined personal credit so no new loans would be made there.
Who is continuing to lend? Who is making new loans which would support both min payments on the old loans and living expenses while the debt balance grows?
Imagine we could remove everyone who was here illegally at zero cost overnight. What would happen to the economy? I suspect that government spending would remain the same. Prices would go up and service would go down.
I know I have personally not met ONE person in real life who thinks the amnesty is a good plan, and that includes a bunch of immigrants who had to jump through hoops for YEARS to get here legally.
I think the most interesting and telling reaction is on websites like freerepublic.com. Those are the hardcore of the hardcore of Republicans, the far right end of the pendulum of American politics. Those guys put up with everything that Bush proposed, and rationalized and excused all of his mistakes: until now. There's a seething rage over there I have never seen before, even during the Clinton impeachment circus, or the drama of the Gore/Bush fiasco in Florida.
We may be seeing the end of the GOP forever, and the rise of a new party...or parties. I personally think it's time to drop parties, and make politicians live and die by their own ideas and beliefs - no more party line votes, no more BS, you get out there and say 'I believe THIS."
How cool would it be to have candidates you actually like? I'm so fucking sick and tired of the lesser of two evils everytime I see a ballot.
Immigration could be solved by enforcing the laws on the books. It's not racist, it would require the same damned solution if it were Canadians coming over en mass, or Chinese, or Lithuanians. It will split familes? Let the whole family leave.
And god damn it, start JAILING the employers who hire them. If there's no work, they won't come.
Mexico has damned good immigration laws, that they enforce. Since when are we so special, that we can't enforce our own?
And to back up what Rob says - if the Feds can selectively enforce standing law...why can't we?
Casey is lying. He "thinks" the interest rate is "about" 15%? Lying sh!thead just doesn't want to tell the truth. He still his burning through our money with no cocern for details is cute. It isn't cute anymore. one of these days he's going to befriend a supporterz and insteads of a warm bed he's gonna get a beatin'. He's another that doesn't recognise the limits of some peoples' tolerance.
Rob, the comparison to Bush really stings. Really stings the heart of this Al Gore liberal.
Anyways-- take a couple hours out of your day and Netflix Children of Men. Mass deportations is a nonstarter. You'll start a war inside the borders of the country.
@The Dude:
Get a lotta buses
Line them up
Stop everyone, including blue eyed blondes and ask for their ID
No ID, no problem....get on the bus
This sounds vaguely reminiscent of another regime that favored blue-eyed blonds.
Would Americans accept compulsory carrying of ID? Or are they all conditioned into it anyway by the omnipresent drivers licenses?
"So the question of the day is where is all the money coming from? Somehow either there is cashback money buried in a can OR new credit lines have been opened."
Casey is either on a high-protein diet if you know what I mean, or he's living on corporate credit. I think he's lying about his expenses and he's burning up the remaining credit.
BTW, if you are one of the few who hasn't seen it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
It's a lawyer's conference where they discuss how to not hire American workers and skirt the law and only hire illegals. They are quite proud of this.
1000 a weak, you and Bush stand side by side and mostly alone on this issue. I live in a very high illegal region. I can only assume you do not. It is one of those cases where proximity develops perspective.
Mass deportation is easy and ethical. Don't like to obey that law? Fine, baby steps. Let us put a halt to money outflows and close the legal border for a month from Dec26th to Jan 30th.
What Casey MEANT to say in his latest post, but at a whopping $2/hour he just didn't have time to hit the nail on the head...
1. What interest rate is your corp charging you?
Zero. Got a problem? Some haterz do, but what do they know? It's perfectly legit.
2. What is your payment plan?
Pay a few dollars for now, then I’m out of cash, just like on the houses. What else?
3. Have you or anyone else started paying the corp back?
I have made all my payments on the corp debt so far. As of last month. Maybe. I can’t remember. But I can pay it back by putting this blog (asset) under the corp. Sweet, heh? Someone said if I do that, then I can help “pierce the corporate veil”, sounds cool! Is that good? I need a detail man to help me with this because it’s complicated.
4. What interest rate is the corp paying to its creditors?
Zero percent on one card. That’s the one that got the credit line roundabout from the thousands I paid to get the corp. Then 15% on another. Or something. I’m not a detail man.
5. Aside from the initial loan of $4,500 or whatever, has the corp begun paying back any of its creditors?
It’s paying all of them. All I need to do is borrowing just a bit more every month to do it. Sweet corporate finance!
6. Has your guarantor (ahem) made any payments on the corp’s behalf?
No, they refuse. Haterz! So it’s my responsability (sic) and I’ll be ignoring, er… handling it..
7. Why specifically did you have to leave your Aussie hosts?
Complications. They kicked my lazy azz out. But it’s not as bad as it sounds. OK, it’s bad. They became haterz. Like that kangaroo.
8. Where are you staying now?
You mean last week? Oh, week before? Oh wait, you mean now? Oh, that’s hard to say. Details. OK, I’m in Sydney spending my last dollars on a cheap hostel. I hear there’s a nice area called King’s Cross where they let you sleep in the bushes, so I’ll go find some supporterz out there.
8.5 Who has been taking the photos of you in Australia?
Some guy who turned hater. Otherwise, helpful, friendly tourists.
9. Where are you getting the money to live in Australia?
Mooching, mostly. And some from a coffee can.
10. Did you “check into” Cashcall’s threat of a lawsuit?
Not yet. Easier to ignore them. That’s Galina’s problem anyway.
11. How are your taxes coming? Is anyone working on them?
I don’t know. Ask Galina. She better do them because I’m not a detail man.
12. Have you been making quarterly tax payments?
Of course not. Hmm… another detail that the haterz say might land me in jail eventually. What do they know? When’s the deadline anyway? What? You mean EVERY quarter? Crap that’s a lot of busy work I’m gonna have to do. Jail might be easier.
13. Now that you’ve admitted to buying GSPG, why are you still holding it? Why not cut your losses and liquidate?
Well the most likely scenario is its a hold term play and as he dollar keeps going down and gold goes up this thing should play out in the next year or two. As in play out into Chapter 7, I think. Is that good? I don’t remember what NRU said about Chapter 7. I should have brought my valuable binders. I think it’s all good.
14. Are you planning to return to your rented rooms? When?
That might be a problem. But if I can show the sweet deals I have lined up, I know that G and her sister will change their minds. If not, I know I have supporterz I can count on.
15. Do you have money for the rent?
What rent? That’s Galina’s
problem. She works. I do deals. Sweet.
16. Do you have money for the ticket back?
Yes. Sweet corporate credit? But I do have an offer from a supporter to pay for it. Except he wants me to fly to Zimbabwe and wait for further instructions and money. I could do some Massive Focused Action there while I wait. I hear there are lots of farms and land you can get sweet deals on if you have the right connectionz.
17. Whose idea was it to register iamfacingdivorce.com?
Not mine. I’d never admit that. No way. But if it brings sweet links and income, I want some credit.
18. Still working with Marty on the book? Have you signed any more people up for NRU? Sold any casinos?
The book should be out next month, if Marty is being a good detail man. No more NRU sales. That’s an _old_ shiny thing, I’ve moved on to new shinier things. I didn’t make any commission, but at least it was half a win-win.
19. What fund offers 5% per month?
A very sweet one that made me promise not to tell anyone, especially my accountant or lawyer, as if I have one of those. It’s always a good sign when they tell you not to run it by others because sometimes other people are too negative, and even if they are not, you can’t let too many people get in on deals like this. Looks like another win-win like NRU.
20. Utah wrap?
Still wrapped as far as I know. It actually helps that I ignore them all because then I _might_ know things, so this way I can still say win-win. Maybe somebody with Wasatch county MLS, er, I mean foreclosure.com access can check and tell me how the sale is going for my “wrapees”
21. Is Marty now writing your posts? BULLET POINTS BABY!
Nobody is writing my posts but me. OK, Marty might edit them. For grammar. And content. And topic. And timing. But I talk to him on Skype and tell him what he can write. I trust him to get it right. He’s a detail man, you see.
How’s that? Lame enough?
[Ed. Yes Casey, lame enough. Now go back to your bush in King's Cross. And watch out for those needles.]
Lawn,
Give me a fuckin' break....Nazi references are pathetic; you can do better.
Arbitrage is the new fancy word of the day. Use it often, regardless of its real meaning.
Mak, I think he's staying at CASHBACK hostels. I'm not a sophisticated investor like him with connectionz so I can only admire his deft financial skillz.
At 6:02 PM, Mak said...
I'm a long time follower of IAFF and something seems very out of whack.
Sorry, Galina -- a boi has to have some spendin' coin when he goes walk-about!
"Mass deportations is a nonstarter. You'll start a war inside the borders of the country."
Imagine if we acted like the EU. We'd see two lines of razor wire, guard dogs, armed patrols and floodlights along the entire border. Any that slipped through we'd march them back home to die in the desert.
If we acted like Mexico on their southern border we'd jail them, take their belongings after beating them for a while, then ship them back.
@Mouse and Pencil
I'm one of those immigrants that had to jump through hoops for years to get here legally. I know plenty of others that had to do the same thing. And I know even more that have been here for years on H1 visa, trying to obtain legal status.
This amnesty is bullshit. Amnesty for those that have amnesty rallys while holding up their Mexican flag? Fuck that.
So what do you do? Mass deportations will make this country look like Children of Men.
Considering that parts of the Southwest are already starting to resemble "Soylent Green", I'll gladly accept that as an alternative. Of course, it's also quite possible that Hollywood got it wrong, and the actual result will be something completely different.
Building a wall won't help.
Then why are the pro-Aztlan/MEChA forces so virulently opposed to the idea? Why waste valuable time and resources fighting something you already "know" will never work?
Fines for companies using undocumented labor won't stop industries that are dependent upon cheap construction labor.
How about us giving it the 'ol college try first before declaring "failure"? Funny, but such fines seem to be working A-ok in other countries with enviable regularity.
America will always look attractive to despondent Mexicans. Period.
Yes, at least until the parts of America they are migrating to start to look just like Mexico (or any other third-world country immigrants are fleeing from).
Casey says MarTay is editing his posts....it sounds like he's answering the questions, or at least has final approval/editing before he posts them. It sounds like MarTay doesn't trust him to handle it...like he's afraid Casey will fuckitup.
Here is an interesting article
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070627/ap_on_re_us/sheriff_illegal_immigrants;_ylt=ArkSrwLVK93QUsj1pdS2GPBH2ocA
I'm getting fed up being treated like an idiot. Teddy boi says on the Sunday morning shows that these people will go to the back of the line. You really think 12 million put into the back end of the pipeline and thus filling quotas for decades is going to happen? The poor guy who was #2 million finds out he's suddenly #14 million is going to stay in line?
Rob Dawg:
"Bush said it. Now 1000 weak says it. I still ask why we cannot deport illegals. Why? Costs too much?"
You want the illegals gone?
Let the government start hiring illegal aliens to replace state and federal civil service workers.
Every one of those mothafuckas will be history inside a month.
Gah-Ron-Teed.
@1000 a week:
" the comparison to Bush really stings. Really stings the heart of this Al Gore liberal."
Huh...two millionaire sons of Senators
who went to exclusive private schools and then to the Ivy League.
Gore? Bush? In the context of this front in the class war, "Democrat" and "Republican" are distinctions without a difference.
HARM,
The fines for hiring illegals is a joke; now, and will be in this bill. McD held seminars on how to "protect yourself" in your hiring practices. It is a federal offense to knowlingly hire an undocumented worker. The trick is hiring them w/o knowing you did.....and it ain't hard to do. ;)
@Dude:
Give me a fuckin' break....Nazi references are pathetic; you can do better.
Fair enough. But the my inept "papers please" quips aside: do you really think that Americans are going to accept a regime in which they're randomly stopped in the street and, if they're wearing the wrong slacks or forgot their wallet, summarily evicted from their country?
I just don't see it. Protecting the borders is one thing; but I don't see Americans giving up civil liberties to do it.
@Lou: Imagine if we acted like the EU.
Have you *visited* the EU recently? Immigration is a huge hot-button issue there too, particularly in the more affluent countries: freedom of movement leads to huge social pressures.
A key player in this issue is going to be the legitimate American business community.
When they get tired of being the "Toby Punk-Bitches" for the "out-sourcers" and illegal employers and start suing their competitors who do that for unfair business practices, we'll REALLY get the ball rolling.
The thing about us sharks is: all you need to do is wound a few, and the feeding frenzy begins...we'll do the rest to ourselves.
This isn't about mobility. This is about rule of law. Anyone want to adopt on our southern border the methods Mexico uses on its southern border?
The yahoo news article is interesting. The person complaining the largest is the developer building condos. He claims things would cost 10 times as much. That would be goood because those kinds of prices would have stopped the rproject. We have a massive oversupply of dwelling units because of illegal immigration.
"Fair enough. But the my inept "papers please" quips aside: do you really think that Americans are going to accept a regime in which they're randomly stopped in the street and, if they're wearing the wrong slacks or forgot their wallet, summarily evicted from their country?"
Nonsense. Stop using dramatic doom and gloom overtones to avoid the issue that we as a country have the right to know who is IN our country, if they are here legally, and remove them if they are not.
Enforcing laws already on the books regarding illegals does nothing to limit your civil liberties, nor your freedom of travel.
NOBODY is stopped on the streets and forced to show ID, it's not illegal and it's not being proposed.
However, using existing laws, illegals can be intentified in situations where we already are required to have ID - applying for a job, filing tax forms, driving a car, truck, motorcycle, plane, or limo, when stopped by the police in the progress of a criminal investigation, and voting.
At best, enforcing existing laws on illegal aliens will annoy you once in a while, like when you go to the airport, or get pulled over for speeding, and you have to arduously hauly your driver's license out to identify yourself.
And if you want to get into civil rights, this fraud of an amnesty stomps, spits, and shits over the civil rights of every American and legal immigrant who followed the laws and respected the laws.
Lawn,
To answer your question...NO. The ACLU will have orgasmic fit.
Messy problems call for messy solutions and I offered one. If you think about it, all ICE would have to so is begin a huge sweep in a half dozen cities to get the ball rolling and bypass all the liberal whining. Illegals would scatter to the four winds in a panic like you've never seen. Just the threat of massive deportation is a great tactic.
The problem with some pundits who offer up lofty plans and solutions is they have no real world experience in this area. It's easy to sit in Congress, or an office, or write an article, writing words on piece of paper and "decree" a solution; but it's a whole different ballgame in the real world.
The original question is "can we solve the problem".....the answer is yes we can. The only variable is do we have the social will to do it.
All the weed in the world is not enough to create a reality where the illegals currently here will be forcibly deported.
Do the math: To put 12,000,000 people on buses would require something between 150,000 and 200,000 vehicles. All the buses would have to be staffed, as well.
You're talking about a mobilization on the level of WW2 to get the people and machines to make it happen. Not to mention the fact that the geographic dispersement is such that you'd need to put virtually the entire USA into full police-state lockdown to find them all.
It will not happen. Ever.
"@Lou: Imagine if we acted like the EU.
Have you *visited* the EU recently? Immigration is a huge hot-button issue there too, particularly in the more affluent countries: freedom of movement leads to huge social pressures."
Well, my point wasn't about legal immigration from eastern EU countries to the UK and Germany and Denmark. My point was about illegal immigration from Africa to the EU and what Europeans are doing about it. The European approach is not discussed for some reason. Perhaps because certain Americans like to pretend that Europeans are more tolerant and enlightened.
Only Haterz and racists are against immigration from Mexico. If it weren't for undocumented workers, there would be no housing boom.
If the US does not increase legal immigration or find a way to legalize the undocumented workers, the housing market will collapse and this is bad for business.
Those you call 'illegal' aliens buy houses too.
America was built by immigrants.
Do the math: To put 12,000,000 people on buses would require something between 150,000 and 200,000 vehicles.
Or 20,000 buses for three weeks or 4,000 buses over 4 months. Trivial. Hey, if they own their own cars they can take them too. Besides as noted above, the first few buses and the voluntary self repatriation will take care of a huge portion.
M&P: However, using existing laws, illegals can be identified in situations where we already are required to have ID.
Quite so. The cynic in me suggests that it'd probably just result in wider availability of well-forged ID cards, though.
Look: I'm not arguing in favor of illegals. I'm not even arguing against enforcement. I'm just saying that doing it isn't as easy as saying it.
Rob talks of an underground economy springing up if amnesty passes. It's worth noting that illegal aliens *already* largely exist in an underground economy; stronger enforcement will simply drive many even further below the radar.
It's very hard to unboil a frog.
(FWIW, I'm an LPR myself; I jumped through all the USCIS hoops; and yes, it does chap my hide that plenty didn't.)
So it turns out that you Haterz are actually racist RethugliKKKlans... why am I not surprised?
California is better than ever because of immigration. As America becomes more and more diverse, the Rethugs become unelectable... SWEET!
Hello Tavington! You are still the dumbest mutherfocker I've ever talked to.
I'm surprised you came back here after the Supporterz debacle/ass kicking you took....did you get banned from the Star Wars discussion boards?
"I know I have personally not met ONE person in real life who thinks the amnesty is a good plan, and that includes a bunch of immigrants who had to jump through hoops for YEARS to get here legally."
Well I'm in favor of amnesty with reparations. The current plan on the table is rather silly, but its a step in the right direction.
Why grant citizenship to illegals? Grow the tax base. California is bankrupt for one and only reason: approximately 1/3rd of the workforce isn't being taxed. In my mind, it makes no sense to try to eliminate the underground workforce (as mass deportation would seek--and surely fail in the end--to do). Rather, assimilate this workers fully into the economy and tax system so that they can start paying toward the services that they consume.
I'm not some far-right Bush supporter and no one who knows me would call me a bleeding heart. Politically, I'm moderate: left of center on some issues, right of center on others. Rather than seeking to adopt the dogma of either party, I simply try to position myself as a principled pragmatist on every issue.
The cost--both economic as well as human--to a major deportation effort would be unacceptable for both the US and the immigrants themselves. Our economy would falter without that labor force. California, in particular, generates two things of value: intellectual property (technology and entertainment) and agriculture. The rest of the economy is essentially service-based to meet the needs of those two. Devastate the workforce of agriculture at any point in the growing season, and there will be incredible damage inflicted on agriculture. The consequences would be profound on every business involved in commerce with agriculture and every household that consumes its products. In other words, EVERY Californian would suffer from the mass deportation in the short-term.
As a nation, the current generation of new workers approximately my age (27) is not large enough to replace the aging baby boomers. We need an influx of immigrants (especially highly skilled) to support our economy, but more importantly grow our tax base. Social security and Medicare are doomed to collapse (as all Ponzi schemes are), but their lifespan could be increased (no pun intended) with the growth of the national workforce that immigration allows. Assuming that minimum wage laws were respected, simply assimilating illegal immigrants who are already here into the system would provide decades of increased viability to these essential social programs as the country gradually acclimates to new, sustainable system.
It offends my sense of morality and decency as a fellow human being to suggest that we forcibly deport en mass the present illegal population. But, more importantly, it insults my intelligence as an economist to posit that mass deportation would yield a positive outcome for the country. While there would be some advantages (decreased outlays on social services), the collateral damage to the economy would be greater.
Illegal immigration is a problem caused by apathy and incompetence from every presidential administration since Truman. In other words, its a bipartisan failure of epic proportions. But, in my mind and in my heart, the shortest way out of this quagmire is not some vain attempt to reverse course, but rather to boldly charge ahead toward recognition of what those people have been in nearly every sense other than in title and as taxpayers: full citizens of the United States of America.
Dolph,
I have only contempt for the middle class and its morality. How about no taxes, no welfare state and open borders? Try a little freedom for once.
The nation-state is dead once the deflationary depression hits.
The easiest way to solve the 'illegal' immigration problem is by simply INCREASING legal immigration. It's win-win for everyone.
"And if you want to get into civil rights, this fraud of an amnesty stomps, spits, and shits over the civil rights of every American and legal immigrant who followed the laws and respected the laws."
How exactly have my civil rights been offended by illegal immigrants?
Lawn sez: The cynic in me suggests that it'd probably just result in wider availability of well-forged ID cards, though.
....so good you would not believe. I would bet money they could lay a legit SS card or other ID next to a forgery and most people could not tell the difference. Any street corner of a large city.....any ID you want, with overnight service to boot. Nobody is talking about this aspect of the problem....wonder why?
Anon:
"All the weed in the world is not enough to create a reality where the illegals currently here will be forcibly deported."
Really? If the Feds would give out a nickel bag of weed per illegal reported, it would be over and done with in 2 or 3 years.
All we need to get it done is start paying a per-head bounty, an that bounty (and attendant detention and costs to deport), to be assessed on the illegal's employer.
As I've said...$50 a head for a garden variety border jumper/student visa overstayer.
It slides up from there.
Grab a cell phone, and head to a construction site or agricultural establishment, and then make your reservations at Disneyworld.
@Tavington
Housing boom did not happen thanks to illegals. Illegals made the homes built in this housing boom shoddy. Homes were built just fine before they showed up.
And uhhhh, housing market is collapsing, and it has more to do with folks like Casey that ran up housing prices and defaulting on their loans, than on illegals building them.
Yeah, illegals buy houses, and default, like that strawberry picker making 15k buying that 700k shitbox. Same illegals pack 3 families in a 2 bedroom shack.
Out of the many ills in our society, the things the government does or does not dot, immigration is so not important to me.
The immigration scare was a poor tactic tried in the '06 elections to replace terrorist with immigrant.
@Anonymous
Nobody has said that the deportations happen all at once, you'v ecreated a dandy strawman arguement but it's irrelevant because it's not being proposed.
10% a year is a lofty goal, and an expensive one. But it would mean that in a decade we would have solved the problem - AND just as importantly sent the message that there is no free ride in this country anymore, that if you sneak in eventually you WILL be sent home.
Add on top of that businesses scared to hire them, and the flood across the border dwindles. THAT is more important than sending them all home at once. Even i agree that doing it all at once would make groups like Amnesty International have group apoplexy, because we know once back in Mexico they would be left to die in the streets by the Mexican government.
We don't need an amnesty. We need to eforce EXISTING LAWS. You are either for the rule of law, or you are not. It's an important distinction, and one that the Federal government HAS to come down on the law side, or our entire basis of law and order is a joke - and societies have gone to war for a lot less.
If this amnesty passes, our laws will be seen as a joke, and the entitlement of illegal minority groups will grow exponentially. Do you really think this is *just* about Mexicans? This amnesty is going to encourage Chinese, Africans, Europeans (we have a healthy population of Irish illegal aliens), Middle easterners, South Americans, Canadians, Russians, Vietnamese, Cubans, Indians, you name it, to try and get here too, to get on the gravy train.
It's a flood across the Southern border now. If this passes, it will be a literal human tidal wave. It happened in the 80's during Reagan's fiasco of an amnesty (that less than 40% took), there's every expectation it wil be as bad, or worse, now.
With what is coming down the pike in the economy from housing, how you can think we can absorb 20-40 million people overnight, and pay for it all, is beyond me.
"So it turns out that you Haterz are actually racist RethugliKKKlans... why am I not surprised?"
Last time I checked the poll numbers, average working stiff Democrats are just as alarmed by this as average working stiff Republicans.
Lou,
I was living in Germany some years back (post Wall, that is) and saw lots of the border with the "East". I'll agree with you. OK, Austria was wide open but that's because the Germans knew the Austrians were pretty good in their end.
But the eastern border along Poland had heat sensors, infrared cameras, and the Grenzschutz (Border Patrol) coming out with their dogs every time they spotted people sneaking in. It wasn't like East Germany where they'd shoot you for crossing (er, getting out, that is), but it was effective.
I also spent some time along the border with Czechoslovakia (later Czech Rep). Didn't see much there but was not inclined to venture too close to whatever the Czechs might have had in place at the time. bad enough getting through that one legitimately.
I'm not sure how it is these days; Poland is not in Schengen, not yet I think, so the Grenzschutz might very well still be watching all night and rounding up the Ukrainers and others as they try to get in.
By the way, there are some VERY anti-immigrant political parties in most of Europe, nothing like anything you see here. Republikaners, Vlaams Blok (Vlaams Belang these days?), etc. Imagine Pat Buchanan 25 years old, less literate, less cultured, shaved head, fist in the air; imagine a hundred of him walking down Main Street with banners. The US is nowhere near that point yet but might be one day.
"The immigration scare was a poor tactic tried in the '06 elections to replace terrorist with immigrant."
A "tactic" by... whom? The top R's are all on board along with the top D's.
I also see that you are deliberately leaving out a key word. That word is ILLEGAL. I don't know anyone here who is against immigrants. You already knew that.
@ eek:
There is no such thing as a downturn in a housing market, unless the government steps in an artificially changes the market to cater to xenophobes who can't compete with hard-working immigrants.
Also, those who don't support Bush's guest worker program are not true conservatives.
I believe Sean Hannity when he says that those who don't support Bush are traitors.
OH AND BY THE WAY:
RON PAUL IS A RACIST NAZI
12 million huh?
I think I read somewhere once that there were 25 million Natives on this continent before Europeans hove-to and dropped anchor.
Where are they now?
Where did they go?
And this was done without the internal combustion engine, telecommunications, or computers.
The Nazi strawman IS a useful argument though, but not in the sense it is usually intended.
From late 1941 to 1945, the Third Reich managed to locate,dispossess, detain, deport, and murder about 12 million people.
This while fighting, and losing, a World War.
Ou illegal aliens are VERY deportable.
Tav, have you tried trolling Casey as well?
BTW, Congress gave themselves a nice payraise today.
http://www.examiner.com/a-802741~House_Appears_Ready_to_Accept_Raise.html?cid=rss-Politics
Interesting timing, that.
The Nazi's were unified and capable of occupying countries larger than Iraq.
The US is not at all unified on deportations. It was able to round up the Japanese in WWII because of Pearl Harbor and it was a more racist nation at the time. Without Pearl Harbor, the Japanese probably would not have been sent to internment camps. And illegals sneaking acrossthe border for work is not equivilent to Pearl Harbor
@walt
It's in the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
In short, they are writing law that favors non-citizens, and awards non-citizens with benefits that are not awarded to citizens, and abridges the priviledges we are owed as citizens.
To be more exact, there is an income tax amnesty wrapped up in this sham - we *think*, as they havent released the whole thing to the public yet - we don't get a pass on paying taxes like that, and it's a violation of our civil rights to equal treatment of the laws, IMHO.
There's a lot of violations there - giving illegals in-state college tuition discounts, giving them benefits like welfare and food stamps, the list goes on.
There's a good article that explains it better than I do, it touches back to the Reagan amnesty and a group that wanted to challenge it in the Supreme Court. I can't find it, damn it.
Civil rights cover a lot more than just having to show ID to a police officer. This amnesty is a slap in the face of our rights and priveledges we get from being law abiding citizens, as promised by our Constitution. That it's being rushed through and they're attempting to pass it without much public knowledge is another slap in the face.
I also think it's a massive violation of states rights, but I'd have to dig into that one, and I'm too burned out right now for that kind of homework. In fact, i think, that if this does pass, the fight will shift to the state's rights angle, and be fought there.
Which of you heroes are going into the barrio door-to-door and check for papers? The US needs more people;have you ever driven across country? There is a lot of nothing out there. Amnesty for the entire world is the only moral choice. And end all welfare and public schools.
For all you looser W2 job commuters.....an innovative solution to get people to move over.
ENJOY
From late 1941 to 1945, the Third Reich managed to locate,dispossess, detain, deport, and murder about 12 million people.
This while fighting, and losing, a World War.
Ou illegal aliens are VERY deportable.
I suspect that you were just trying to be funny, but that statement is beyond disgusting.
But regardless, your analogy is specious. In the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, it took an all assault by over 2000 troops (daily average) and support that included a German armored tank battalion. Over 13,000 Jews were killed in the assault from direct engagement.
In other words, the Germans only "succeeded" in Operation Reinhard and the like because of their willingness to unleash the full fury of their military against civilian insurgents. Would you suggest that the United States order it's military and police forces against illegal immigrants in such a manner? If not, then the forcible deportation of 12 million people is not a realistic possibility.
walt:
"I suspect that you were just trying to be funny, but that statement is beyond disgusting."
No, walt, it wasn't intended to be funny, it was a bald statement of fact.
As disusting as the Shoah was, it does serve to give the lie to the claim that "12 million illegals cannot be deported".
The evidence of history dictates otherwise.
walt:
" Would you suggest that the United States order it's military and police forces against illegal immigrants in such a manner?"
If they resist the lawful deportation, yes I would.
Why should an illegal alien be shown any more leniency than say...the American parents of the children of Waco were when they defy the Federal government?
Or, for that matter, those Americans who wished to secede in 1861, (which they were, and still are, legally entitled to do).
Again, in this argument, as in others, it seems that the only people against whom it is "approved" for the government to employ deadly force against in furthering it's will is Southern Christian White people.
Sharkey, I don't know if you're trolling or not, but what you're suggesting is simply not possible UNLESS you're willing to see blood in the streets.
Are you? Do you really feel so strongly that these illegals should be pushed out that you're willing to see murder done?
Your comparison with the Shoah was an apt one, then. You're talking about sanctioning a police state and mass murder in order to "cleanse" the country.
If the (brown) shirt fits.....
Meh. I think we're going to need to save our money deporting folks and take money from them by legalizing the illegals.
Because otherwise, how are we going to balance the budget.
Wait. That won't happen either. We'll just spend the new taxes, pretend things are getting better with faux surpluses for a few years, then go right back to tacking on debt, kept now we'll have 12 million more folks in the country (legally)
There is no good solution that doesn't start with changing how our government works and how we view it.
Stop whining about the Mexicans. We still have bigger problems... like Fliptard trying to leverage is Sweet Passive Debt to make a comeback. The little mursaroo Trying to release volume 4 of his book. This requires a letter to your congressman, seriously.
I'm not sure how it is these days; Poland is not in Schengen, not yet I think, so the Grenzschutz might very well still be watching all night and rounding up the Ukrainers and others as they try to get in.
Now Germany has no "hostile" borders to watch, the "Grenzschutz" (Border Protection) has been renamed "Bundespolizei" (Federal Police). They do apparently keep a watchful eye over the Polish border and the hinterland, but the border itself is now pretty much a joke. Last time I went over there - just after Poland had joined the EU - they'd torn down all the customs sheds etc. and the border was enforced by a couple of uniformed guys from each side checking ID when the mood took them.
Apparently much EU money has been invested in "securing" Poland's eastward borders, where the real action is, though to what effect I don't know.
Ironically the agro industry in eastern Germany, which relies on low-paid short-term migrant workers, is hurting because the Poles now go to places like Spain, UK and Ireland where there are richer pickings.
I actually think that there's a better Fifth Amendment case than a Fourteenth Amendment, but let's explore you're equal protection argument.
You failed to acknowledge the first phrase of the 14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
Under any conceivable interpretation of this language, any child born in the United States is a citizen, regardless of the status of his parents. Under Plyer v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court specifically dealt with how the 14th Amendment applies to children of illegal immigrants:
"no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful"
In other words, current US case law clearly states children of illegal immigrants are citizens. So already, a good number of those who Pat Buchanan and his ilk would like to deport are untouchable by the 14th Amendment.
As for the rest of your argument, the Court has ruled repeatedly the conference of a privilege to an individual does not infringe upon the rights of a citizen. In other words, giving one person (Jose) something does not in itself disenfranchise another person (Joe) unless something of value is TAKEN from Joe.
And, as I said earlier, you have a much better (albeit still flawed) 5th Amendment argument than 14th.
Amnesty
=======
I anyone thinks the number of illegals is high now, just wait until there is an amnesty. Current proposals will make Legal immigration more difficult -- what will all those who have been patiently waiting to legally immigrate do?
Even if there is a requirement for illegals to have been in the country for some time before they get amnesty, what kinds of documents will they be expected to have to prove their "residency"? Most likely, these will be easy to forge, since there is no legal documentation of their status. This will mean even more people trying to get into the country and then have their family say "yes, X has been driving a cab/working in our shop/constructing houses for us" for ? years.
Sprezz:
" Do you really feel so strongly that these illegals should be pushed out that you're willing to see murder done?"
What murder, Sprezz?
Did the government commit murder at Waco?
I've seen no Federal officer indicted or tried...have you?
Did the FBI's HRT commit murder at Ruby Ridge?
A 14 year old boy was shot in the back and killed while running home, his mother had her head blown off while holding her infant daughter.
The shooter of the mother, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi, who had made some interesting boasts about the quality of his marksmanship before Ruby Ridge, has never been arrested or tried.
You want equality? What a wonderful and noble ideal...let's have some...all the way around.
"Shot and killed while resisting arrest"...everybody gets to run that risk.
"You're talking about sanctioning a police state and mass murder in order to "cleanse" the country."
If we continue to be overrun by illegals, what results might make a police state look like Paradise.
Ever been to Somalia?
I have.
When native-born are impoverished and dispossessed, while illegals are employed and receive every government benefit, what do you think the worst-case results are going to be?
There will be pogroms.
And there are over 65 million private gun owners in this country.
That would be a VERY BAD thing.
Surf's up on DHC!
"If they resist the lawful deportation, yes I would."
Well, as I said, I'm a principled pragmatist. And, respectfully, your amoral solution offends my principles.
I agree that with the full arsenal of the US military, it would be possible to remove 12 million people. But only if one is willing to commit the most atrocious human rights violations seen in the Western Hemisphere since Native Americans were exterminated. If you would be willing to live that, then I feel sorry for your lack of basic human compassion.
But setting aside the humanitarian question, I still don't see how the deportation of presently illegal immigrants yields a net positive result for existing United States citizens. Yes, illegal immigrants do consume a good deal of public resources; however, they have contributed a great deal to our economy and could be a tremendous asset as taxpayers. What SPECIFIC benefits do you believe will be realized by their removal, if such a thing were possible in a morally acceptable manner?
Walt526:In other words, the Germans only "succeeded" in Operation Reinhard and the like because of their willingness to unleash the full fury of their military against civilian insurgents.
Another thing you're all overlooking is that when the Nazis decided they wanted to intern or deport large numbers of their own citizens, all they had to do was make a list and go calling from door to door. Of course, being a totalitarian state with all the controls in place helped, making it difficult to drop of the radar (although quite a few did, and survived through the war).
Meaning: it's not the logistics which are the problem, it's finding the people in the first place.
I fail to see how continued references to Waco and Ruby Ridge justify your position, Sharky. Those two incidents represent gross incompetence and illegal action by federal law enforcement officials. How would repeating that type of mistake serve anyone's interests?
BTW, I happen to agree with you about the Civil War (and that drives my liberal buddies nuts). Lincoln had no constitutional authority to forcibly impose cohesion on the Confederacy. While I vehemently disagree with slavery (again, on both moral and economic grounds), each state has the unalienable right to leave the Union if it so chooses. But again--how does one immoral misuse of federal military power justify the immoral misuse in the present-day?
So angry.
So white.
So male.
Yawn.
"Again, in this argument, as in others, it seems that the only people against whom it is "approved" for the government to employ deadly force against in furthering it's will is Southern Christian White people."
What about striving for a federal government that doesn't employ its deadly force on any civilian target? You are insisting that basic respect for both illegal immigrants and existing citizens are somehow mutually exclusive without having proved that to be the case. The Waco/Ruby Ridge/Civil War is a strawman in this discussion because no pro-immigration poster has advocated the use of force against anyone.
Let's stay focused on the three main issues:
1) Whether illegal immigrants actually injure existing citizens to the extent that the latter's constitutional rights have been violated;
2) Whether the net economic effect of immigrants is positive or negative; or
3) Whether humanitarian concerns should temper any government response.
If we stay focused on those
Ack, accidentally posted to early...
My last sentence was going to be:
"If we stay focused on those three issues, we'll keep the debate moving on a productive course."
Considering the screw ups of the past twenty years I just don't have it in me to care about the immigration problem anymore.
If the mexicans want to come here and turn the country into mexico, I don't really care. It's not like I have a dog in the fight.
walt:
"I'm a principled pragmatist. And, respectfully, your amoral solution offends my principles"
With respect, you are neither principled nor pragmatic.
You are a moral coward.
You seek the protection of the Law only when you subjectively perceive that it is to your benefit.
When that benefit may be to someone else, (in your view), you grow qualms and rationalizations about its' enforcement.
Want the proof of the pudding?
If I learned where you lived, and "emigrated" to your parlor, you would call the police.
Read what I say here, and burn it into your mind:
If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law.
And if you have no Law, then you are Predator or you are Prey.
There is no middle ground.
It's a messy business, democracy, but what can you expect of a system that evolved from the No-Man's Land between two opposing camps of heavily armed men?
(I'm assuming you are familiar with Greek history).
Of what specific benefit would the lawful prosecution of Mr. Serin realize?
And yet many here have called for it.
He has made of himself a symbol.
Illegal aliens are, in large part, symbols also.
They are symbols of a tendency of wealthy and powerful Americans to profit personally at the direct expense of other Americans.
Basically, it is one hoplite asking another:
"Are you QUITE sure that you don't belong with those other guys?".
Viva La Raza!
You Fat Fukin Walrus
Gold Star for nodebt:
"Meaning: it's not the logistics which are the problem, it's finding the people in the first place."
You got my point. Congratulations.
"So angry.
So white.
So male.
Yawn."
What would you say to a black dude with a high school degree who now has to compete with a flood of unskilled cheap labor?
Seriously, how did we get along as a society for hundreds of years before we had 20 million+ people who aren't here legally?
When I was a kid, I made extra bucks mowing lawns. When I was a kid I worked shit jobs. I worked shit jobs in college to pay the bills. I'll wager that many of us here did. Now? Forget it. Why hire a college kid to wash dishes and bus tables when you can get an illegal for half price?
Up until yesterday I too bought into the idea that Americans are too lazy to do the shit jobs. Then my eyes and ears were opened when I heard a bunch of corporate attorneys lounging around at a conference discussing methods on how to avoid hiring Americans and give those jobs to illegals.
The flood of illegals doesn't hurt rich whitey neocon one bit. Whitey can always move to Vermont and enjoy his whole foods free from Mexicans. The flood of illegals hurts poor and unskilled Americans by driving down their wages and eliminates the way to moving up the economic ladder. This is a fact.
I posted the link to that YouTube video, I recommend that you view it.
walt:
"Those two incidents represent gross incompetence and illegal action by federal law enforcement officials."
Uhhh, apparently there was nothing illegal whatsoever about either of those events.
As I said...no Fed has ever been prosecuted for any of it.
This is fact.
Hey, I'm a card-carrying ACLU member even if I don't always agree with them.
nodebt:
BTW, tangential to your point.
Read "IBM and the Holocaust"
Interesting read on the use of the Hollerith punch-card tabulator/proto-computer in the task of identifying the people the Nazis wanted to get rid of.
You seek the protection of the Law only when you subjectively perceive that it is to your benefit.
No, you simply didn't make a good constitutional argument. If citizens are truly being deprived of property (as you allude to without much support), then you need to appeal to the 5th Amendment, not the 14th. And respectfully, that is the realm of basic 8th grade US Civics, not high powered constitutional scholars.
In any event, it's not my opinion that you disagree with, it's Justice Brennan's (he wrote the majority opinion in Prye). Until overruled, that opinion is standing case law.
If I learned where you lived, and "emigrated" to your parlor, you would call the police... If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law... There is no middle ground.
If you trespassed in my house, I would call the police. But I would not expect them to use deadly force unless someone was in imminent mortal danger. If they came in guns blazing, they could probably stop an intruder 95% of the time. Of course, they'd also cause incredible physical damage to my property and quite likely to my person as well, which is one reason why I'd rather that they use a more proportionate response.
Now if they respond to a threat humanely and intelligently, then there's a better chance that the intruder will escape. But the marginal increase in "ending his threat" is not worth the concomitantly increased risk to his life, the officers' lives, or mine.
They are symbols of a tendency of wealthy and powerful Americans to profit personally at the direct expense of other Americans.
I've asked this question repeatedly and have failed to get a direct answer: what is your evidence that anyone has been economically harmed by the presence of illegal immigrants?
Uhhh, apparently there was nothing illegal whatsoever about either of those events. As I said...no Fed has ever been prosecuted for any of it.
Now you should be embarrassed to have sunk to something so ridiculous on its face. This is Casey logic: no conviction/prosecution means nothing illegal occurred. It's illegal when the act occurs, irrespective of any law enforcement action taken in response to it.
Or, to simply turn your silly little argument on its head, if something isn't illegal until prosecution, then these 12 million immigrants in question are not "illegal" because most have yet to be formally charged, prosecuted, or convicted.
In light of that application, I think that we can both agree how provincial your logic is.
Jeez...everyone is a Human Rights Champion or a Constitution Expert
'I still ask why we cannot deport illegals.'
Because who the hell would then work in the meat packing industry in the Midwest - union workers who get paid decent wages?
Not in the America Ronald Reagan gave us, no way.
This inability to see that the 'illegals' (strange, only in America are human beings themselves starting to become 'illegal' - many of them who just happen to have American children - but then, you can solve such classification problems by bringing some old language, like mulatto or octroon, now in regards to citizenship) are a major element of America's new plantation culture. Quite literally in terms of food production, keeping the greenery attractive around the malls and homes, pampering the children of the owners, and cleaning up after them.
And anyone earning/possessing more than an arbitrary amount - 100,000 dollars? - is part of the class benefitting from those 'illegals' - not that anyone actually cares much about that when discussing the subject.
Even more amusing is how massive the law breaking truly is - there have been laws on the books since the last time this was a major political theme in the mid to later 1980s requiring anybody being hired to prove their 'legality' - 2 forms of ID, etc. - and the employer is held responsible when employing 'illegals'. Strangely, in the land of Homeland Security, anybody flying on an airplane needs to prove who they are - but the same system is incapable of dealing with all those undocumented workers. I guess people without valid ID are much less dangerous than people with valid ID - which at least in terms of 9/11 or Oklahoma City is just empirical fact.
See, the major reason we can't deport them yet, though, is that we need Mexico's oil - exurbia über alles - or is that 'Mexifornia über alles' in the latest CD version?. Hmmm.
But keep the outrage up - it will certainly make things better. When it finally cracks up, people like you can blame the 'illegals' for stabbing America in the back - and with Halliburton sitting on a few hundred million dollar camp contracts (just for planning - imagine how much they will cost to actually get up and running - get in on the ground floor now), you can buy some stock, and make some free enterprise money off a good solution to those 'illegals' - though I doubt they have much in the way of gold teeth to extract to help pay the costs of those camps.
Oh well, maybe we could toss in some people who object to what is going on, too.
And it won't be IBM likely getting the contract for the software - it will be Oracle - nothing like those old CIA ties to help grease a big contract.
People say you cannot enforce the rules on such a large border.
I ask how did we hold the Russians at bay for 40 years across the width of Europe?
How is it NOBODY crosses the DMZ north of Seoul since 1955?
Hey, you walk through a clearly marked mine field and get blown up, what is the difference from getting blown up walking though a impact field for artillary on a miltary base? Chalk it up to Darwin.
And this BS of nobody wants the jobs is just that. How come the Northern States get by just fine without having to cry a river about not finding some illegal laborer to do do this or that. Go cut your own grass for Pete's sake!
But most of all, why do we never see anyone who hires these illegals go to jail?
You toss a couple CEOs under the bus with 2-3 years in a Club Fed as part of SOX compliance, and 10 days later undocumented illegals will not be able to make a living and will go home.
Rather than pass this BS legislation, increase the numbers of legal citizens allowed in to whatever you want, but enforce the rules and bury the scumbags that hire the illegals to make a bigger profit.
walt:
"It's illegal when the act occurs, irrespective of any law enforcement action taken in response to it."
Quite so, I fully agree! So those 12 million illegals are nothing more than unprosecuted criminals. By your own standard,(thanks).
As such, there should be no impediment to the immigration laws being enforced aganst them.
"If you trespassed in my house, I would call the police. But I would not expect them to use deadly force unless someone was in imminent mortal danger."
Ahh, what if I resisted the officer in his lawful duty to the point where HE was reasonably in fear of his death or grievous bodily injury?
Bang! Bang! Sharky's Dead!
(Walt...you inhumane BASTARD! Poor, poor Sharky!)
"Now if they respond to a threat humanely and intelligently,"
There's your qualms and rationalizations again...if you really want me out of your parlor, then you'd better be prepared for the chance of shark-guts all over your hardwood floors.
"I've asked this question repeatedly and have failed to get a direct answer: what is your evidence that anyone has been economically harmed by the presence of illegal immigrants?"
Pretty funny insistence from someone who quotes case law at me.
Have not arguments been made for decades that prostitution and the ingestion of illegal drugs are "Victimless Crimes"?
What says case law about those arguments?
"Guilty!".
Frankly, if you deny that the presence of 12 million illegal aliens in our nation causes loss of property to native-born or legal immigrants, then I'm rather shocked that you are not also a Holocaust denier.
As long as ONE illegal is employed while ONE American or legal is denied employment, ALL Americans are harmed.
(Again...are you SURE that you belong in THIS phalanx?)
"No, you simply didn't make a good constitutional argument"
I'm not a lawyer, are you?
I'll leave to lawyers to make the arguments that the same law by which I may be fined, jailed and executed, must not be applied to those whose very presence is a crime.
Because walt doesn't think it would "humane and intelligent " to do so.
"I think that we can both agree how provincial your logic is."
My logic may indeed be provincial, but it seems to be an increasingly popular POV.
And in our wonderfully terrible republican democracy, that's really all that's needed.
Let me make this plain for you.
If the American Dream is to be denied to working-class and increasingly middle-class citizens, then it will also be denied to the wealthy.
It'll just take a little more time for their ship to sink.
(The Captain only drowns last, in case you didn't know).
Good discussion tonight, folks.
I hope nobody feels left out if I haven't offended them.
There's always tomorrow.
Actually it already IS tomorrow where I am, so I'm off to bed.
Have to work real hard to keep from being replaced by an illegal alien work-bot, y'know.
"one of these days he's going to befriend a supporterz and insteads of a warm bed he's gonna get a beatin'"
We can only hope...
Triple J Radio Interview Beginning Now.
Aw crap, they're already referring to him as a failed entrepeneur. I think that's a bad start. The tone is altogether too light-hearted. They're focusing on his "World's Most Hated Blogger" title, and whether it's deserved.
Looks like it's heading to be a fluff piece. Darn.
Casey on Triple J:
Robbie Buck is saying that he has never before been contacted and warned about doing an interview, and that dozens of people have contacted him over Casey. (Good work, Haterz!)
Casey is talking about his "mistakes". His completely innocent mistakes.
Sweet!! They're taking calls!! I'll be back...
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/default.htm
Live listening over the internet - Robbie is going to ask questions sent to him by haterz
I agree with Sharky and Lou.
The feds have become the enforcers for the corrupt fascist corpatist entities.
Actually America is hardly a country anymore. Its a region where people live to get rich and screw each other while trying to get rich.
Whay kind of country has open borders and the cops cant ask if you are here illegally? The schools cant ask if you are here illegally. Or the hospitals.
I'd say America is a second world nation, no longer first world.
sharky said... "If you are not willing to enforce the Law at the point of a bayonet, then you HAVE no Law."
Yikes. It's illegal to park on the sidewalk (California Vehicle Code 22500(f)
) and it really annoys me, but I am not going out there with a sharp stick to make anybody move. Can't I just call the meter maids?
Jeez...everyone is a Human Rights Champion or a Constitution Expert
I'm neither. As I said, I drive my left-leaning friends nuts with my quasi-libertarian views. Rather, I just have a conscience and a heart, essential for being principled. An IQ above room temperature, which allows me to be a pragmatist.
Quite so, I fully agree! So those 12 million illegals are nothing more than unprosecuted criminals.
I never said that they never committed a crime. I'm seeking to see the law changed--hence the "reform" in "immigration reform." Instead, I stated the fact that the current situation is untenable, that morality and intelligence should temper one's thirst for enforcing laws, and that the economic benefits are most likely greater than the costs.
Ahh, what if I resisted the officer in his lawful duty to the point where HE was reasonably in fear of his death or grievous bodily injury?
If one imminently threatens the life of a peace officer, then the peace officer may take reasonable steps to protect himself and others. Any experienced police officer would only turn to his firearm as a last resort. Again, a specious analogy.
if you really want me out of your parlor, then you'd better be prepared for the chance of shark-guts all over your hardwood floors.
There are variety of non-lethal ways to incapacitate a single assailant in a confined space. But implementing such techniques against 12 million spread out over a vast area is not possible. The only way to forcibly coerce such a mass is through means that will inevitably turn deadly. You may be comfortable with that; I'm not.
Pretty funny insistence from someone who quotes case law at me.
Non sequitur. You didn't answer the question: what evidence does you have to claim that illegal immigrants have harmed the economic interests of others?
Have not arguments been made for decades that prostitution and the ingestion of illegal drugs are "Victimless Crimes"?
Neither here nor there, but I actually support the legalization (and taxation!) of both prostitution and narcotics. In any event, the difference is that those are statutory issues, which can be changed at any time through the normal legislative process. The case law represents a constitutional issue, which can only be changed through a future Court decision. Again, 8th grade US Civics...
Frankly, if you deny that the presence of 12 million illegal aliens in our nation causes loss of property to native-born or legal immigrants, then I'm rather shocked that you are not also a Holocaust denier.
I've seen convincing evidence that the Holocaust occurred. And I have seen evidence that illegal immigration has negatively impacted communities. But there is also evidence that there have been universally enjoyed benefits. In the final analysis, the benefits outweigh the costs in my view--which is supported by virtually every reputable academic study on the issue.
As long as ONE illegal is employed while ONE American or legal is denied employment, ALL Americans are harmed.
I agree that the wage disparity between legal and illegal workers is not in the interest of either. Where we differ is that I want to go forward through the quagmire by making illegals legal, while you prefer to use force to impose a return to a pre-immigrant state. Beyond ethical concerns, the available data does not indicate that the economy has suffered.
I'm not a lawyer, are you?
I'll leave to lawyers to make the arguments that the same law by which I may be fined, jailed and executed, must not be applied to those whose very presence is a crime.
No, I am not a lawyer, although I took a number of constitutional law classes in college (3 or 4). In any event, one does not need a law degree to understand injustice any more than one needs a medical degree to know when someone is injured. While not understanding the complete nature of an injury, a reasonably intelligent person can diagnose that a problem exists, its general nature, and apply basic knowledge toward relieving the injured's pain.
My logic may indeed be provincial, but it seems to be an increasingly popular POV
See:
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=1660
Based on that data, it looks to me that:
a) most people don't know enough about the bill to have formed an opinion;
b) an overwhelming majorit do NOT support deportation (forced or otherwise);
c) a majority wants to see immigration in general kept at its present level or increased.
And in our wonderfully terrible republican democracy, that's really all that's needed.
See above. But anyway, you are wrong about the will of the people having ultimate say. In the end, if the Court believes a law to be a constitutional violation, then the offending law is struck down.
Maybe you should have repeated 8th grade?
If the American Dream is to be denied to working-class and increasingly middle-class citizens, then it will also be denied to the wealthy... It'll just take a little more time for their ship to sink.
Again... evidence supporting the claim that anyone has been hurt? Evidence that there is a "trickle-up" effect?
I emailed both Robbie Buck and John Safran about Casey. Didn't get a reply, but I expect they are both now well informed.
Thanks for the live link . . . neat to listen . . . the DJ has a great upbeat radio voice -- but is sounding like a hater!
"It was fraud."
Companies that hire illegals don't just do it because they can pay them less than minimum wage, which is only 5.35 now. They do it because they can break all sorts of wage (overtime, etc.) and safety laws that American workers would not stand for. The meat packing industry used to be full of union jobs - they used illegals to bust the unions. And not only are the conditions horrid for the workers the meat product is a lot less safer than it used to be. The solution to the illegal problem is not deportations - it is coming down hard on the employers. I say if ANY labor laws are being found to be broken and illegals are present, then it should be assumed that the employer is knowingly hiring illegals and the employer should be fined about $200,000 per illegal. Any government contractor found hiring illegals should be forever barred from government contracts.
The other problem is a lot of individuals benefit from illegals. How many gardeners and housekeepers are illegal in California? When you hire a landscaping company there is really no way to know if they are illegal. A lot of people are total hypocrites too. I know of someone complains incessantly about illegals. But when he need car repairs done in his small town, he took it to a shop known to be run by illegals that fixed his car for 1/2 the price that the legitimate places wanted.
We will never come close to solving this problem while we are spending over one billion dollars per week on our current wars.
You want to solve the problem. Demand that we withdraw from Iraq, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, lobbying for Haliburton to get the contract to build all the buses needed to deprt the illegals. Lobby for Haliburton to get the contract for all the ports of entry and for a new wall at double the cost anybody else could build it for.
Lobby for Haliburton to receive upwards of $15,000 per illegal that they transport back home.
If you can switch the present dynamics so the big boys profit, 12 million illegals will be deported within a year, and the jobs that will be lost will be replaced with workers from a KBR subsidiary.
Its a fucking no brainer.
Not a bad interview. Robbie seemed to be onto him. Casey didn't get to portray himself as the unfortunate real estate ingenue that he would like everyone to believe he is.
Not sure what he really got out of it, actually, except the publicity. Which in his case, I can't belive is "all good".
Heard the JJJ interview. More of the same crap from Casey, but the interviewer was very skeptical:
Why don't you get a job, you say you could earn $50K, surely you could do that, right?
Oh yeah, people say the best thing for me to do would be just declare bankruptcy and get a job but I'm not cut out for a W2 life, I'm entrepreneureal.
Plugged Kiyosaki and the "sweet passive income" crap.
Why are you in Australia instead of just dealing with your debt in the US?
Well I had a friend who offered to let me come over and stay free and the trip was paid for by someone else, blah blah, focus, clear my mind, finish my book (is he even writing it himself? is there any work for him to do in AU on it?)
Where can I listen to the interview?
I don't know if it will be saved online or if someone bothered to record it from the live stream. I listened to the live stream online at 10pm PDT (3pm Thursday Sydney time). Casey was on during the first half hour.
@walt526 wrote:
"You failed to acknowledge the first phrase of the 14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States
Under any conceivable interpretation of this language, any child born in the United States is a citizen, regardless of the status of his parents. Under Plyer v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court specifically dealt with how the 14th Amendment applies to children of illegal immigrants:"
Plyler v. Doe was an abortion of a case, an intellectually-dishonest, results-driven opinion. The key language is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," which was understood at the time of the 14th Amendment to mean basically "subjects of the United States," i.e. citizens and permanent residents, and not illegal aliens or people here on temporary visas.
Senator Howard of Michigan, the author of the 14th Amendment birthright clause, postulated that "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
If you read the Plyler v. Doe opinion, you'll see that Brennan relies on common English law rather than clearly expressed legislative intent. This case will be overturned by an intellectually honest court. Hopefully soon.
JJJ have a podcast, but it seems to contain only the same episode fragments also listed on the website. Maybe it was popular, or controversial, enough to merit them putting it up form download tomorrow.
Surprised to see Tavington back here; surely you get one shot at trolling, particularly after you admit to it.
Interesting, too, that he's now expunged any trace of the Casey Supporterz Fight Back talkcast from TalkShoe: deleted the episode, and is now using the same talkcast ID to troll Mel Gibson fans.
Correction: the reliance on English common law comes from the Wong Kim Ark opinion (1898), which preceded Plyler v. Doe.
From the dissent in Wong Kim Ark:
"The act was passed and the amendment proposed by the same Congress, and it is not open to reasonable doubt that the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the amendment were used as synonymous with the words "and not subject to any foreign power" of the act."
See
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZD.html
@ Holiday Inn
So it's your belief that "anchor children" are not in fact US citizens? Because while I've heard/read complaints about Brennan's reasoning, my understanding is that the mainstream view of constitutional scholars is that citizenship is--literally--their birthright.
Casey's latest post is a blast.
"The funny thing is… with your attempt at sabotage you’re actually helping my story be more interesting and keeping the World’s Most Hated Blogger label going. Thanks for your help.
You can try to throw sticks into my wheels (is that how they say it) but I will keep ridin’. You may win a few battles there and here but the outcome of the war has already been determined."
I think he has his panties in a bunch!! HAHAHA
Travington,
I will say this only once...you are not a true conservative if you think Paul is a Nazi and Bush is right.
I can't tell if you are trolling, but given your history I will assume that was posted to poke a stick at some of us who KNOW Bush is no conservative. Try authoritarian since he's the decider, you know.
I am a constitutionalist first and find this Bush character evil. I am far from liberal on fiscal policy and the federal guvmint. I am liberal on things like personal freedom and the like. I guess you can call me a libertarian in the truest sense. My political heroes are everyone from Tom Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and I do like JFK and Truman.
I judge politicians on actions not platitudes and their attempts to divide.
A true conservative is willing to listen and find a solution that works best for the country. Reagan was quite good at that contrary to what some on the far left say. He may have trusted some of his cabinet too much, but he was a decent man. HE is a conservative, Bush is something sickening...a man who TELLS us to do as he says where Reagan inspired us to roll up our sleeves and find ways to make things work.
Casey,
You have no intention of paying back any debts, so stop already. Your track record is proof enough to back up my factual belief that you are too lazy to have any kind of comeback.
If you were truly interested in paying back your debts, you wouldn't leave your wife alone dealing with YOUR mess (i.e. - Creditors).
Get over yourself. In the end, we will have the last laugh because you may not be a crook, per se but you aren't very honest.
Want to get into a hissy fit over that statement? All I have to do is pull out your letter to Ramit to PROVE you are and have always been out for yourself and would screw over anybody to be able to make a quick buck.
Prove us wrong? You can't...so STFU.
All:
Just posted the comments below to IAFF, although I doubt Fliptardian has the guts to post it. In any event, the substance is provided here for your pleasure.
******************
Casey @ #63:
”If people understand how I took out the loans and the lending climate at the time and that I had NO criminal intent and had FULL desire to pay back all those loans maybe people wouldn’t be so quick to call me a CON MAN.”
LOL, well, of all the people you’ve dealt with I understand how you took out the loans and how the LAW interrupts intent (motive). Your aim was to profit; you lied on the 1003s for that end (execution), and failed at the schemed profiteering (damages). Thus it doesn’t matter how you justify your “mistakes,” nor deny wrong doing as the law is clear and specific.
“Desire” to do a thing don’t cut it, Casey, we’ve discussed this before. Want to have a thing materialize doesn’t make it so; and, absconding what you think are jurisdictional limits is your undoing (only you’re too delusional to realize that, again, aspect we’ve discussed already)!
So yeah you’re a con man, playing self as the prime mark.
Casey @ #64:
”The funny thing is... with your [Haterz] attempt at sabotage you’re actually helping my story be more interesting and keeping the World’s Most Hated Blogger label going. Thanks for your help. ... You can try to throw sticks into my wheels (is that how they say it) but I will keep ridin’. You may win a few battles there and here but the outcome of the war has already been determined.”
LOL, I’ll remind you of these words before long.
~Mark
(Knowing Casey is too cowardly to post this.)
Archive-
Nice to see you coming out swinging, and so confident that the outcome of your minor transgressions will not meet the same fate of many others who also committed such minor transgressions.
Of course, occasionally someone speeding on the highway does get the book thrown at them, but they have to be caught first.
And with your amazing story still unfolding, you still seem to possess the last of the V-8 Interceptors. Who says life in Australia can't be like a fairy tale with Mel Gibson in the starring role - there is even the vaguest resemblance between you, I may add in a touch of coquettish flattery, though it comes more from the apparent lack of lavish fresh water than hair styles.
Holiday whatever -
'The Supreme Court, through case law, has created a guideline for U.S. citizenship. The following outlines the rulings of the Court:
* The 14th Amendment completely controls the status of U.S. citizenship and prevents the involuntary cancellation of citizenship.
o All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States.
+ This applies to children born to legal and illegal residents.
+ This does not apply to children of foreign citizens employed in any diplomatic or official capacity.
o Congress has the power to define acts of expatriation (i.e., loss of citizenship).
+ A person must voluntarily relinquish U.S. citizenship.
# It is constitutional to presume it to have been a voluntary act until and unless proved otherwise by the actor.
# Congress may revoke citizenship involuntarily if it has been obtained unlawfully.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Or if you prefer more official information -
'LEGISLATION DENYING CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH TO CERTAIN CHILDREN
BORN IN THE UNITED STATES
A bill that would deny citizenship to children born in the United States to certain classes of alien parents is unconstitutional on its face.
A constitutional amendment to restrict birthright citizenship, although not technically unlawful, would flatly contradict the Nation's constitutional history and constitutional traditions.'
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/deny.tes.31.htm
Though notice that this information is 12 years old. At that time, the idea that torture would be defended by elected officials such as the vice president without immediate impeachment for violating their oath of office to uphold the Constitution, would also have been considered to 'flatly contradict the Nation's constitutional history and constitutional traditions.'
Oh well, the founders never thought that the republic would endure forever.
walt:
After reading a sea of paranoid and racist comments on this site, it's nice to see someone with basic human values who also uses reason. We have people seriously suggesting roundups of 12 million people who came here to better their economic circumstances, and who perform (whether we like it or not) vital services to this country. I didn't say anything until now, but I think I have to.
I think amnesty is a reasonable and valid first step to ending a lot of the black market economy that runs atop these people's backs. By incorporating "illegals" into the economy, we can also bring them into the normal market economy and enforce proper working conditions in ALL workplaces, not just those in the "white market." I have a hard time seeing how this could possibly be a bad thing for this country. The problems some have claimed about the wage-depressing effects of an illegal workforce will be eliminated when minimum wage laws can finally be enforced properly. Additionally, this adds to the US tax base, so all of the arguments about "illegals consuming services they haven't paid for" will no longer be accurate for these people.
So that leaves us with all of the "ZOMFG!!! I'm gonna have to learn Spanish" comments, which are pretty much a big pile of dog doody.
And, yes, I am from "Mexifornia."
And after all of that ranting (sorry)-- I came across the real guy who inspired Casey:
So here it is at point-blank range: Hard work is worthless. No, it is worse than worthless. It is downright harmful and should be avoided at all costs.
eebee: I agree with everything you said, unlike most of the racists and xenophobes here who hate anyone with brown skin.
Immigrants like Casey and Mocha are enriching America and making it better and better for everyone.
Liberals, they never use logic or reason, they emote, then they toss out the racist canard and congratulate themselves for being morally superior.
Illegals kill an average of twenty five murrikans a day, 13 by drunk driving homocide and 12 by criminal homicide. For you emotional non thinking liberals that is 9125 people per year. Would you like to discuss the percentage of criminal illegals in our prison system?
Finally, liberals just love to emote about fairness, how fair is it to the people who played by the rules, waited in line and paid their fees to become residents?
By the way, since the rule of law doesn't seem to matter, why shouldn't the rest of us law abiding tax paying citizens just pick and choose which laws we will abide?
Sharky, I'm liking you more and more!
opal: if the United States learned to be like the rest of the civilized world, racists such as yourself would be criminally charged for inciting racial hatred.
But no--the Supreme Court and the xenophobes misinterpret the Constitution and think that hate speech is free speech... NOT!
Once the 2nd amendment is abolished and the US is more politically correct and cosmopolitan, the redneck racist hillbillies (who vote overwhelmingly RethugliKKKlan) won't terrorize minorities and good-thinking people.
Well, I guess that settles the debate, Tavington agrees with Walt526 and eebee. Move along folks, nothing further to discuss here.
Snark
You just proved my point Tavington, thank you so much!
Find me two high school educated Americans who work half as hard as any one Mexican. The ones I deal with are soft spoken family people who work harder than anyone - and management pays them MORE than what a similarly qualified American (about $12 an hour) might earn elsewhere. But here's the rub. Americans won't take the job because it isn't GOOD enough for them. Or they come to work drunk, or don't show up at all.
I think the problem is greatly that we have a lazy, entitled generation of American youth that won't roll up their sleeves because Mommy and Daddy don't want their little snowflake to suffer the same hardships they did. God forbid they should compete for anything.
Fucking bullshit. We are screwed. We've created an entire society that is reliant on cheap imported labor. We're like Dubai. The whole system is busted at this point.
We also need to stop making this about the cost of labor and about the quality of it. If Mexicans work harder than Americans, then they not only deserve the work, but they deserve to be properly compensated for it.
Not that there aren't always going to be assholes like those lawyers.
About Casey,
The result of the war has already been determined? Truer words have never been spoken. But he doesn't get that it isn't going to end the way he hopes.
I like that HE doesn't even know how he'll be received at home. He can post thank yous to get under Haterz' skin, but we already know we've won the war.
Should America increase immigration?
Yes, most definitely. I think that 1 million per year is not enough--the US could easily absorb 3-4 million per year. With this increase, the backlogs would be cleared and there would be much less disincentive for hard-working latinos to become 'undocumented'.
With increased immigration, America will benefit from increased diversity. Immigrants tend to vote more for progressive Democrats as opposed to RethugliKKKlans. African Americans vote 90% for the Democrats, while Latinos give 70% of their votes to them.
Imagine, without these crucial nonwhite votes, America would have re-elected a reactionary, right-wing RethugliKKKlan congress in 2006.
Of course not all Republicans are racist. In fairness, although I have serious reservations with George Bush in regards to policy, I fully support his being reasonable in regards to immigration.
So the next time you hear someone complain about "those immigrants" remind them that they help elect the politicians who are more likely to support a Universal Health Care system.
Thank you immigrants for making America more prosperous, diverse and progressive!
ARRIBA!!!
@Tavington: I doff my cap to you, good sir! Most excellent trolling!
Seriously, you crack my shit up.
You are a fucking racist, Robert Cote. Stop bitching about illegal aliens - if you are so bothered by them, lobby your congressman, OR start cleaning your damn house (you said YOU HIRED ILLEGALS YOURSELF - your maid, remember?). You are a top class hypocrite - hiring illegal aliens because they are cheaper, and yet bitch and moan about them. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP or be consistent with yourself. Hypocrite.
@kitty,
I must disagree regarding his trolling quality. He is just too obvious, because nobody that phenomenally stupid could ever have been taught to read and write.
Tavington needs sweet trolling lessons from Casey
We've been too busy outside of our borders to do anything about what's going on inside.
America's problem, isn't with immigration. We were once supposed to be the shining beacon for all the tired, hungry masses to come to a land of better opportunity. Of course, xenophobia's existed since before Lady liberty, and all immigrant groups received alot of undue flack.
Maybe if we spent more time fixing our house, and not trying to fix other folk's homes as our gutters fall of, we wouldn't be having this debate to begin with.
I'd also like a Casey thread. There were some gold nuggets in that Robbie Buck interview as well as his FAQ replies (whoever got him to respond, good job!)
And on the Serin story, let's all start singing Kelly Clarkson's Independence Day, for no particular reason
hehehe
@Demantoid: Working with The Public has taught me that people are far, far stupider than one could possibly imagine. I find Tavington to be a superb parody of the folks who take it upon themselves to inform me - in all sincerity - that plants aren't actually alive, so they didn't need to be on Noah's Ark; ergo, evil-lution is an atheist conspiracy.
Cracks my shit up, I tell you.
Is ASPETH a man or a woman? Is he/she gay or straight? Its not important and I am not trying to insult him/her. I am just confused about his/her point of view.
I want to think that ASPETH is a drag queen? A he that goes by she? Am I right or wrong. Anyone?
As far as I can tell Aspeth is a liberal chick who's probably kind of bookish, and was sort of nerdy in high school and might actually be into some weird shit. Like this dorky chick and her disturbing goth husband who tried to get an ex girlfriend and I to come over to their little rat's nest after dinner to screw. Eeessh.
CHJTS said:
(another thing.
I am sick of casey serin...all it does is raise my blood pressure to see this two bit conman go unpunished and sink further into denial about how fucked he is.
If someone wants to take over the haterzcasts for a couple weeks until I get repassioned into his story..that is fine.
the only websites I am going to anymore related to him are caseypedia and stephj's.
I am taking a break from IAFF and EN for a couple weeks.
June 27, 2007 7:56 PM )
CHJTS,
Now that you are forced to look internally at yourself, because of your accident, don't you feel a bit foolish now about being so enraged about Casey in the first place?
There are men out there physically abusing their wives. Don't you think working at a shelter or something like that is more worthy of all the energy you wasted on the Casey story in the first place?
Glad you are feeling better by the way.
R-boy,
Do you mean Carrie Underwood's Independence day?
The song where the wife "takes action" against her abusive husband?
Will Galina lit up the 4th of July?
You city boyz need to listen to country radio more often......
Independence Day is by Martina McBride
@walt:
"So it's your belief that "anchor children" are not in fact US citizens? Because while I've heard/read complaints about Brennan's reasoning, my understanding is that the mainstream view of constitutional scholars is that citizenship is--literally--their birthright."
It's my belief that Wong Kim Ark was wrongly decided, and so was Plyler v. Doe (which technically was not about birthright citizenhip, but construed "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"). The mainstream view of constitutional scholars is surely that "citizenship is their birthright"--the Supreme Court ruled that way, after all. This doesn't mean the case was correctly decided.
@sweet: so, what's your point?
Find me two high school educated Americans who work half as hard as any one Mexican. The ones I deal with are soft spoken family people who work harder than anyone - and management pays them MORE than what a similarly qualified American (about $12 an hour) might earn elsewhere. But here's the rub. Americans won't take the job because it isn't GOOD enough for them.
Do tell us more. The name of the employer to start? Thought not. And now don't you see what is happening? You know of a crime and multiple criminal and you won't even name them anonymously. Talk about driving a general breakdown of society. This whole mess is turning everyone into criminals and criminal enablers.
Of course the job is lousy. It is ONLY lousy because there are people who will do it, not the other way round. We don't mine coal with hand picks. Why is that? The reason there are crappy jobs in the US is because there is a supply of exploited labor to fill them. Part of stopping illegal immigration is humanitarian; to stop job exploitation, to stop decanting the best people from impoverished regions, to reduce ethnic predation of unenfranchished popualtions here.
Obviously, I listen to ALOT of music
=)
Sigh. Good things are coming. Its all Good Sweet!
You are a fucking racist, Robert Cote.
I get this but only very rarely and only when people get frustrated that I present my arguement in race neutral terms.
Stop bitching about illegal aliens - if you are so bothered by them, lobby your congressman, OR start cleaning your damn house (you said YOU HIRED ILLEGALS YOURSELF - your maid, remember?).
I said she was illegal at the time I hired her? Hmm, that would be strange as she had a Green Card at the time. A real one. I'm positive. You can either show evidence or apologize. Wait, what am I saying? That's assuming you have a cintilla of human decency. My bad.
You are a top class hypocrite - hiring illegal aliens because they are cheaper, and yet bitch and moan about them. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP or be consistent with yourself. Hypocrite.
Where I live it is virtually impossible to not at least indirectly employ illegal workers. This because their emplyment is protected by layers of complicit government that selectively enforces laws.
Being called a hypocrite by an anon is a compliment.
@R-boy
"We've been too busy outside of our borders to do anything about what's going on inside."
Thank you. The illegal alien problem has been brewing for years, and the gang in DC has avoided it untill now - the severity of the problem is directly in their laps, and they are, IMHO, taking the easy way out, with a lot of vote pandering and social engineering thrown in (the welfare state will grow as a result of this bill, and thus the power of those who administer it).
I've said it before, we send tanks to Iraq for "democracy", but we won't patrol our borders.
People are all of a sudden feeling disenfranchised over this issue, as their elected officials proceed to ignore the public and act in defiance of it. That's nothing new, just ask any war protestor, but this is more widespread. In one way it's good that people wake up to how truly broken our government is, and I think the next couple of rounds of elections may be very eye opening to the elitists in Washington one can hope).
Meanwhile, it looks like the fix is in, but there's hope this bill will still be defeated. The ramifications of it passing are huge, huge enough that we would see massive, radical changes to communities, cultures, economies, and demographics, and such rapid change is never easy. To have 20-40 million people suddenly emerge from the shadows demanding good paying jobs, benefits, bennies, and their cultural needs catered to, it's too big a shick to NOT caus massive rifts across the country. This isn't just low paying much jobs - all of the people who would suddenly becoime legal with this bill would now be in direct competition for the jobs Americans DO want, and with the economy slumping and jobs disapearing in housing and finance, this is going to put additional pressure on an already potentially explosive situation.
And I'm sorry, I'm sick and fucking tired of the "Americans are lazy" bullshit. Maybe some are, but I know people who work their asses off every day, including myself, and I'm tired of it. When a chicken processing plant was raided last spring, all those jobs held by illegals were lined up for by local Americans, who supposedly would'nt do the job - and they replaced all of the positions within a week. A large percentage of my family back east work in the trades, painting houses, doing drywall, electric work, and all of them have lost contracts to Mexican work crews (who are uninsured, untrained, and half the time rip off the houses they work on). They are not lazy, and would loosen your teeth if you accused them of being lazy, and they are ground zero in this fight, these are not ditch digging or lettuce picking jobs, these are decent, career jobs for the working class like my cousins and uncles, and illegal alien work crews are KILLING them. Just lower their prices? They can't - they follow the law, and between workman's comp and insurance and payroll taxes, they can't lower prices to compete with illegals.
Anon @ 5:57 AM:
”You are a fucking racist, Robert Cote.”
LOL, that’s rich; said as one of Hispanic (Spanish) heritage whose family was here (in Cali) long before the likes of Piss Ant anons. Think I’m lyin? Then check out some little ditties written by one of my Kinsmen (who’s even so much too liberal for my tastes): “Rain of Gold,” “Thirteen Senses,” or “Wild Steps To Heaven.”
In other words, I happen to agree with many of Cote’s views on illegal immigration. So I guess that makes me, what, a “racist” against my linage..? (Jag-off!)
~Mark
Mark,
You still here?
oooooooooooooh I forget, you still gotta keep kissing dawg ass till this Casey thing blows over. What with the non-anon thing and all. Never mind. Go on.
Anon as stfu...
Did you know that there are fireworks scheduled for next week? Yes, the 4th of July ison a few days away.
Bill is DOA
This post is very stupid..
You are using data from 3-4 years ago...
And let me clear... NAFTA is and was the cause of this migration...
Instead of creating a loss of jobs for the US.. it created a huge loss of jobs in Mexico... therefore people are coming here to get back the jobs they lost in Mexico..
That's the law of Karma...
This post is very stupid..
You are using data from 3-4 years ago...
That's the point. It happened in 2004 and 1986 and EVERY time.
'Where I live it is virtually impossible to not at least indirectly employ illegal workers.'
Or if you shop at any national food chain.
Or if you don't do your own child care.
Or your own lawn care.
Of course, you aren't to blame directly - it is all someone else's fault.
Always.
But remember, as long as Mexico is the third largest exporter of oil to America, exurbia needs Mexico at least as much as Mexicans need America.
And did you see how Pemex's production continues to decline? I guess they need to call in the invisible hand to do its magic, as the oil fairy with nitrogen injection seems a bit peaked. You could say the elephant is leaving the room.
As for the racism charges - in many ways, you are just like Kunstler - white males of a certain time and place, who just don't understand why things are different from those glorious days in the mid 1960s (though in fairness, you don't seem anywhere near as homophobic, and likely nowhere near as seething about 'ghetto' culture as a cover for his deeper beliefs). Ah, the 1960s - time when a white and a black American citizen couldn't legally marry in the Commonwealth of Virginia, where the supreme court which banished them from the commonwealth quoted the Bible in defense of separating the races as part of God's plan.
At least you don't quote the bible when justifying your opinions, just your self-interest - as long as you don't have to change how you live, since it is all the state's fault, not yours.
Mornin' kids;
'”You are a fucking racist,...'
and this applies to everyone else who so casually tosses out this pejorative when yourun out of reasonable arguments in favor of amnesty for illegals.
A wee bit of a history lesson for you.
The roots of our crisis today extend 20 years before the 1986 Immigration Reform Act.
In the 60's,the LBJ Administration lowered the immigration quotas for Europeans and raised them for immigrants from underdeveloped (cheaper labor), nations.
Prior to that,agribusiness had had the "Bracero" (guest worker) programs to take advantage of.
The fact that many, if not most of these nations were populated by colored people may have been a coincidence.
But I don't think so.
By the way, Ford today built their final F-150 at their Norfolk, VA assembly plant, which first built Model T's in the 1920's.
It's closed for good tomorrow
I assume that Ford's Mexican maquiladoras are still perking along.
3 other firms that supplied the plant are also going under.
Any of you motherfuckers want to come talk your shit down the Tidewater?
Hope you like wearing false teeth.
Hey everybody...I beat Travington....again. Further proof he can't debate any of my points.
I find when people post provocatively troll-like rants (that I DO NOT believe they live by in real life) and won't answer me, I win.
Thanks for proving I own you troll. Facts are a tough thing to fight with, right? But I guess it's easy to hide and insult others with false claims of racism. Prove to me I am a racist, dipwad? Oh you can't because if you truly knew me, you'd know that is NOT the case.
A troll must generalize and act like a poor man's class clown to get attention. Well, some posters think you are funny but I don't quite understand how that can be true. All I see is a troubled little boy who likes to throw out unsubstantiated falsehoods to make himself feel like a real man.
LOL on you.
Sweet,
Your comments do not fall on closed ears. You have some legitimate observations although the dieoff and Kunstler bits touch a nerve.
Exurbia is not disproportionately impacted by energy issues. In fact the response to energy disruptions would be to accelerate the exurban diaspora. The cities only recovered a little '95-'05 because of stable energy. Coincidence? I think not.
Cantrell II looks promising. Now don't get me wrong, not soon and not cheap but you have to understand a couple things. One, Cantrell II has at the low estimate more recoverable oil than the peakenese claim could EVER be found anywhere in the entire world going forward. Two, since 1975 US domestic production has far exceeded the known recoverable reserves identified in 1975 and yet today we have MORE reserves than in 1975. Peak oil is a fatally flawed theory.
Kunstler and I are such polar opposites that I can see how there can be some confusion. "See, Coté & Kunstler are both extremist poles." Besides the obvious that he hates the exurbs and loves the cenurbs while I do not love nor hate either you correctly notice a bit of the displaced from the throne waspish in him. Kunstler has anger and bitterness and looks for someplace to direct those. Despite that we share a great love of skewering bad planning and artitecture (not mispelt). The only signficant disagreement over his Eysore Of The Month was when he bitched about a stret running through MIT that was stark and barren. He just didn't know it was a special snow emergency route that needed to be like that.
Thank you for reminding me. Ghetto is not a bad word or necessarily a bad thing. I will make a post about how the word has been hijacked.
Illegal aliens cost this country hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
Anyone who thinks people making $7.50 an hour are going to be PAYING taxes, rather than collecting EIC, WIC, etc. is more retarded than our favorite real estate scam artist.
Some people need to learn how income taxes work in this country....
Post a Comment