I haven't replied to much that you have posted but I have noticed that you have some quality contnent and spend the time to explain your ideas, much as I disagree with most of them. You also leave out any personal attacks and outright cutting commentary, which I appreciate.

Your entire post here goes into detail about the socialist ideas that drive me crazy. Many people here in the US would be quite happy with UK style philosophy. I am not one of them.

Let's look at your quote from above. What level would you have people raised up to? Who would determine the amount of the raise?

How do you explain to those that didn't require the "help" and that worked through sweat and wit that the rules have changed?

What is the next increment to be "fixed" after those that are less fortunate have been raised? Do you think this policy will encourage people to do for themselves or just wait around until the gov't helps them out? What about the threefold increase in people that meet the criteria after they realize that they don't have to apply themselves.

To be fair, I do know more than a few liberals that have, at some time in their life taken advantage of some gov't money to get through college or start a bussiness. The few that come to mind really wouldn't care if the tax rate was 80% and that totally confuses me.

The American system works if you work it.Yes, I know you have all sorts of cases where it doesnt but I dont buy that the whole system is broken.

The more these socialistic policies are implemented, the less this country becomes what it was originally intended. A country where anyone can make it but not much, if anything is handed out.

Having spent the better part of 15 years working in a wide variety of eastern cities, I see the trend downward and the good intentions of people creating weaker and weaker people with more and more division.

Commence firing.

You really don't have a fucking clue, do you? What they risked was getting caught and a ticket back to where they came from in an air conditioned bus. How the hell do you know what their intentions are? You wax poetic about the downtrodden people of Latin America like some Elizabethan school girl tucked away in an English Abby.
It so happens we have a shitload of them just west of here in Chester and Lancaster counties. Some of them a hardworking people that send most of their money back to Latin America to support their extended families. BUT, way too many of them are causing crime wave unpresedented the the history of those areas. They've overwhelmed the small town police departments. And whether good ones or bad ones, in total, put a tremendous strain on the social services of the area. You can guess who's paying for that.

Hundreds, no thousands, many of whom I've known personally. They all had one thing in common, they came from varied backgrounds, sometimes fleeing something, sometimes chasing something, but all came legally or at least quasi-legally (misrepresented themselves or past) through the immigration system.

Bullshit, they come like thieves in the night, to take what the can get away with. I suggest you visit South Central Los Angeles, they'd be glad to do a bowl with you........your bowl. :rolleyes:

Yah, what Bruce said!!! :smashfrea

wow - i was starting to feel a little lonely out here. thanks for the support guys.

I've been at work, otherwise I would have been chiming in.

I have an idea.

I'll spring for the concrete. Anyone want to help me patch over the bits on the Statue's base that talk about the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free"? We can cover that over pretty quickly, I'd think.

It's really not that hard to get a work permit for the UK if you have transferrable skills. By that, I mean you can get a job and pay taxes to support the country, just like all the people who are already here and paying taxes to support the country.

If, on the other hand, you don't have transferrable skills which will benefit the country, why should you be allowed in? If you're in immediate danger? Sure. If your native country will persecute you on the basis of your beliefs? Maybe - it kinda depends on the level of persecution. If you just don't like the country you're from, and think you could have a better life (and your kids could have a better life) here in the UK than you can in <insert name of country of origin here>? No. Sorry. You're simply not welcome, if you can't contribute at least as much to the country as you will eventually withdraw from it - there are more than enough people here who are already struggling.

My dad, who's lived in the UK all his life, served in the forces and defended his country against terrorists, and seen friends and colleagues killed in the name of that fight (largely funded by America, incidentally - please don't make the mistake of thinking I believe that the good ol' USofA is saintly and pure), is currently trying to find a job. He's got a proven track record in the telecommunications industry, and has held several jobs in the field. He's been a successful technical director of large companies, turned around departments from losing money to making profit, and generally is good at what he does. And he's struggling to find work, and my parents may ultimately have to sell their house and move out if he can't find a job. He can't get any benefits, because he left his last job voluntarily - the stress was beginning to make him depressed (clinically so) and making his life a living hell, so he left.

So, tell me again how we've got all these jobs we need people to come and fill?

In the financial year April '99 to April 2000, I paid in excess of £40,000 in income tax. The following year, I moved to NYC. More on that later. I spent two years working (as a UK employee of a UK company, paying UK tax) based in NYC. I spent 18 months out there, and then had to come back. I couldn't get a job for several months, because I was "too expensive" - the fact that I was willing to work for a small salary didn't matter; the employers were worried that I'd take their job, find something better, and leave. I couldn't get any benefits either, because I hadn't been made redundant (I was ultimately fired for visa reasons; more on that later too). So I wound up pulling pints behind a bar for well below the minimum wage, just to get enough income to eat. Just to recap, I'd paid well over £40,000 in tax only a year and a half ago, and had been earning a UK salary and paying UK tax and NI on it for the last 18 months.

So, tell me again how we've got all this "spare money" we need to give away to people who aren't:

a) legitimate asylum seekers
or
b) skilled immigrants

Please note, at no point have I suggested that any of my job-hunting woes, or my father's, are the result of any kind of immigration policy. I'm just attempting to set the stage to support this contention:

We have more than enough people in this country already, who need help. You talk of a duty to help people less fortunate than us, and of society's obligation to give something back; why start with people from another country? Why not give something back to those people living below the poverty line, or who've worked their entire life and may now have to sell their house because they can't find a job, despite their very best efforts?

No such system exists. It's REALLY hard to get into the US and work legally, for me. I don't have a degree (never really saw the point in the UK, so left after 6 months and got a job instead) but I do have 8 years of experience in the high-tech industry. If I do say so myself, I'm damned good at my job, and every single one of my employers will back me up on that.

Yet I couldn't get a visa to get into the US. We spent a great deal of time and money on immigration lawyers, we petitioned senior members of the INS (friends of my boss), and all to no avail. I wound up moving to the US on the UK payroll, and spending my time flitting about between countries. We got a lawyer to draft - at considerable expense - an opinion on what I could and couldn't do on a B1 "business visitor" visa, and stuck to that. I'd go see a client in the US, but I couldn't actually bill for my time. I'd agree to do some work for them, and I'd fly back to the UK, do the work in our UK office, and then fly back out and deliver it. I'd be paid in UK pounds, into a UK bank account, by the UK office. I paid $5 or so every time I used an ATM, because my account was in the UK. I had to rent an apartment from one of the guys at work because without a social security number no landlords would let anything to me. Quite the pain in the ass. In the end, I wound up getting fired because the costs of travelling back and forth, and the associated inconvenience, made it impossible for me to stay.

I really enjoyed my time in the US, but it's really not easy to immigrate there, for anyone. The system is not inherently racist, it's inherently exclusive. And that's just fine, when you think about it; those with the skills, determination and qualifications to immigrate are allowed to do so, but those who already work in the country aren't unfairly disadvantaged by an influx of cheap labour. And yes, it's cheap labour; I took £20 - £30k less than I'd have wanted for the same job in the UK simply because I'd get to live in New York for a while.

So I've been on both sides of the table. I'm all for immigration when it adds something to the country, and I don't give a damn where someone comes from. I'm all for asylum when it's genuinely necessary to protect someone, and I don't give a damn where they're running from.

It is worth noting the best thing that could be done for most of the world's impoverished would be to lift all the fucking tariffs and trade bans so they could make some money at home. Governments wouldn't waste money propping up inefficient industries and 3rd world nations could compete and trade with the rest of the world on an even platform. Godo cheaper, poor people richer, world a better place.

The ones that I like are the ones that cross the border so they can have their kid naturalized by birth (for free) and then they get naturalized by extension.

Well said Jag. Inject some actual capitalism into the picture.

Let's also remember that as a % of total population immigration is nowhere near a historic high.

Americas nativists have always felt threatened by immigrants, because they see the character of the country changing. People fear that we'll turn into a third world country but they miss the point that most immigrants come here to pursue the American dream, not to soak up welfare (of course we can address those who want to play the system). If we want a vibrant economy we need the influx of motivated people. That tendency to close borders and exclude people comes from the same kind of statist thinking afflicting other western economies. Too much state control in the name of conserving or liberalizing a country crushes individual initiative.

Somebody brought up the we're all immigrants thing, which reminded me of the beginning of the thread. I'd like to see the family tree of the BNP nutter, Griffin is a pretty common last name throughout Europe but especially in Ireland... If he's a British Nationalist of Irish descent there are some real strange social dynamics at work here.

griff - i don't think anyone here is arguing against immigration. we are talking about illegal immigration. big difference. it isn't racist,statist,nationalist, or any other ist to say that it is foolish to support the influx of illegal aliens we see on a daily basis.

Griff, 20 years ago he would have been kicking in Irish heads, today it's south asian ones, logic doesn't matter to these people as long as they've got someone's head to kick in. That said, it would be pretty funny.

The real problem with illegal or legal immigration is where it is poorly handled in terms of location and integration, illegal immigration makes it harder to manage it properly exacerbating the problem.

That said, I don't see thousands of 'bona fide' Americans lining up to pick oranges. Dumping a pile of people at the bottom end of the wage scale can help push some people up.

actually there are legal migrant workers who do that work jag. and just to throw another little curve in here...

if there are low end jobs that sit empty, rather than importing labor from another country - wouldn't it make more sense to take the folks that have been on long-term unemployment and say "see here is a job" now they are earning their money.

There are a lot of people that consider a lot of work 'below' them and would rather sit unemployed than clean toilets and pick oranges in the midday sun.

that is what i am saying though. instead of importing more workers and paying unemployment, make it mandatory for long-term (TBD) unemployment recipients work in these positions in order to keep receiving their checks. i used to be a hiring manager and i had guys turning down $10-15/hour jobs because it was beneath them and it was hardly worth giving the unemployment checks.

seems to me it would be a pretty easy way to get the long-term unemployment abusers off their butts.

I thought the US unemployment was really, really tight? Like you get cheques for a month or so then it was just food stamps and the like. Yes, I am entirely ignorant on this stuff.

Australia has work for the doll schemes that keep most people doing something, you also have to apply for a certain amount of jobs and the employer reports to the unemployment guys if you're not really trying.