Surge in Immigration Laws Around U.S.
 

Surge in Immigration Laws Around U.S.


Looks like people are tired of waiting.

im tellin ya, we should just merge everything, we could start small, say canada & mexico and see how that turns out.

Good - I hope the states do what the Feds can't lately - The right thing.

Send them to Illinois.

The system seriously needs an overhaul. We need to regulate the passage of immigrants into the country, but at the same time not choke it because like it or not, our country is in part dependent on Mexican workers.
http://www.doleta.gov/agworker/report9/toc.cfm

"Foreign-born workers comprised a large share of the hired crop labor force in fiscal years 2001-2002. Among all crop workers, 78 percent were born outside the United States: seventy-five percent were born in Mexico, two percent were from Central American countries, and one percent of the workers were from elsewhere"

What percent of them came here legally vs illegally?
Perhaps we wouldn't be so dependent on them if we employed more americans. How many of those jobs would have gone to americans if there were not as many illegal immigrants here.

I still vote to build a wall -then decide who and how many can come in. Without control, the situation is therefore out of control.
Stupid, but true.

Yeah man. That's what this world needs...more walls.

I suggest you read this article. It'll help explain what's going on with the crop industry.

From the link: "Fifty-three percent of all respondents were not authorized to work in the United States."
"For the two calendar-year period 2000-2001,[37] the average individual income range from all sources, as well as from farm work only, was $10,000 - $12,499 (fig. 6.1). The average total family income range was $15,000 - $17,499.[38] Based on the poverty guidelines that are issued each February by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and which are based on family size, 30 percent of all farm workers had total family incomes that were below the poverty guidelines." The reason these immigrants have these jobs instead of US citizens is because they are willing to work for so little, whereas Americans are not in general.

You are correct about control. We do need to regain control of the borders and the immigration system so that we can provide a safe and legal means for people to enter the United States. From Wikipedia: "According to the U.S. Border Patrol, 1,954 people died crossing the United States-Mexico border between the years 1998-2004.[2] In the fiscal year ending September 29, 2004, 460 migrants died crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.[1] In 2005, more than 500 died across the entire U.S.-Mexico border.[3] The number of yearly border crossing deaths has doubled since 1995.[4]"

We've already got a wall, it isn't helping the situation: "The United States-Mexico barrier was built to deter undocumented immigration in areas with historically high numbers of border crossings. As a consequence, undocumented immigrants have to cross the Sonoran Desert and the Baboquivari Mountain in Arizona. This has made exposure (including heat stroke, dehydration, and hypothermia) one of the leading causes of death."

So more than half of them entered illegally and thats from '00 & '01 - I'm sure the numbers only get worse.

As far as the income levels - these are mostly temp/part time jobs as well - correct? I mean these are not year round positions - therefore the annual income figures are skewed - no? I understand that the $$$ per hour is very low and most americans refuse to work that hard for that little. but thats another issue.

I read that article Blue, basically nothing new - farmers want the cheap labor to maximize their profits - so???

Dana - I respect your opinions and usually you have something insightful or helpful to ad - why just sarcasm here? - any solutions, ideas, thoughts?

Not really.
"* Seventy-two percent of the workers had one farm employer in the previous 12 months.
* The number of farm workdays in the previous year increased with the number of U.S. farm employers and by years of U.S. farm experience.
* The majority of the workers (72%) said that they expected to continue doing farm work for at least five years."

That majority is doing what they can to support themselves/any family until something better (higher paying) comes along. If you look back that the income estimates, you will see that the average individual income for a farm worker is $10,000 - $12,499. Whereas the average family income is $15,000 - $17,499. That worker's small pay is the foundation of the family's income. Without it they would likely be on the streets or in a shelter

Not only better in terms of higher-paying, but also less grueling--long hours picking crops is about the crappiest job you can have.

Well, there's more to it than that. But if you were already familiar with all the information in the article, then I don't quite understand why you were wondering about Americans working those kinds of jobs...

Ever wonder if they'll use a universal design so they can just turn the guns around?

How many months out of the year are these people working? Are these year round positions or are they only working 3 or 6 +-months out of the year. If so, that would skew the annual income #'s wouldn't it? The fact that they only had one employer does not correspond to them working the entire year does it? I'm seriously trying to get more of an understanding on this.

All these statistics I am pulling are from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001 - 2002 conducted by The National Agricultural Workers Survey, Employment, and Training Administration's (part of the Department of Labor), site found here.

There are many migrant workers also. "Overall, migrants comprised 42 percent of crop workers in 2001-2002". They may not necessarily have the same employer since they follow-the-crops so to speak. Some also have a home base and are shuttled to farms within a 75 mile radius.

"Crop workers were employed on U.S. farms in 2001-2002 an average of 34 and one half weeks (66% of the year) and in non-farm activities for a little more than five weeks (10 percent of the year). They were in the United States but not working for approximately eight and a half weeks (16% of the year), and were outside of the United States for nearly four weeks (7% of the year) (fig. 4.2)."

"Time in farm and non-farm jobs, as well as time outside the United States, varied by legal status, place of birth and age. U.S. citizens were employed 32 weeks in farm jobs, eight weeks in non-farm jobs, were not employed for 12 weeks, and spent less than one week outside of the country. Compared to citizens, legal permanent residents were employed more weeks in agriculture (35), but only half as many weeks in non-farm employment (4). Legal permanent residents were not working for nine weeks while in the United States and spent four weeks outside of the country. Unauthorized workers (excluding foreign-born newcomers) obtained the most weeks of farm employment (36) and, like legal permanent residents, had four weeks of non-farm employment. These unauthorized workers were not employed for six weeks while in the United States and spent the same number of weeks outside of the country (table. 4.1)."

And just in case reading that paragraph made your eyes numb like me.. here's a visual

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f8...untitled-2.jpg

How many of these crop harvesters are there? tw mentioned we need something like 2 million seasonal agricultural workers. Pretty small percentage of the 15 to 20 million illegals here.

People who want illegals to have a free ride must agree that Americans should stop paying taxes.
It makes no sense to continue to.

Illegal immigrants don't have a free ride. Stop buying into the hype.

They're here illegally and therefore shouldn't get jack.

Am I the only one that thinks this argument is absurd? If you are someone who believes in that character trait that is ‘American,’ you should see that heavily restricting immigration is in itself ‘Unamerican’ as follows:
Why do I, an American born citizen, have a right to live in this country and pay its taxes therefore receiving the benefits of security, welfare, etc? Why does, to use the stereotype, a Mexican born man who cannot get citizenship NOT deserve it?
The only difference between me and the Mexican born man is my place of birth. Since when do we hold the truth ‘right by birth’ to be self evident? This seems something akin to a hierarchical stratification that has no place in the country who’s only (supposed) truth held ‘self evident’ is ‘ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL,’ not ‘all Americans are created superior.’

To anyone who sticks out their ugly argument “they’re here illegally, and shouldn’t get jack” I ask you, what have YOU done to earn your citizenship? Did you have to pay thousands of dollars in fees, take classes, pass a background investigation, effectively prove you’re worthy to live here? No, you came out of your mother within the borders, ergo you’re entitled!? We might as well revert to a royalty system. I was born in Springfield, so I get welfare.

Immigrants who are legally admitted pay taxes and vote, just like every other citizen. While there would be economic instability immediately following a massive immigrant influx (read: a refugee situation, not people from contiguous looking for work), every person who enters this country and ‘gets the rights of an American’ pays for those rights with his taxes. In fact, by only allowing a few members of any family into the country, we’re assuring that their money doesn’t stay in our economy, but is sent back to support their homeland’s economy. Let the whole family in, and they’ll buy American! Genius!

I don’t want walls and guards around the country I live in, that reminds me too much of the guards who used to stand on a wall in Berlin.

Barring large quantities of people from entering our assigned borders (who, by the way, are hoping to live the ‘American dream’) is not only 'un-American,' it’s inhumane, selfish, and despicable. If you’re so worried about your precious job, work harder than the man next to you, which is, if I remember correctly, the claimed ‘American way.’

I'm not for 'giving rights to immigrants,' I'm for letting anyone who wants to live in this here chunk of land.

Welcome to the Cellar, queequeger.:D
So you feel we should just forget about the borders and let anyone come and go as they please?

Like this guy?

Hey thanks. I've been lurking here a while, but just got registered/activated.

Not 'as they please,' exactly. Borders must be patrolled for smuggling (just like streets need be patrolled for crimes), and people must be registered with the state so that we can tax them, but I think the criteria for citizenship should be somewhere along the lines of:

1. I have not committed crimes equivalent to felonies in other countries. (waivable, in the spirit of second chances ;) )
2. I do no molest little boys.

...and maybe throw something in there about no fat chicks, but you get the idea.

wow, strange coincidence... posted that before seeing yours.

but easy answer! He didn't commit murder because he's an immigrant, he commited murder because he's a dick. And if he was legally admitted (under my new system... vote queequeg in 2008), the police would have had access to his information in the same databases they can access american citizens with prior records. I.E. in this case, him being legal would have been better for society.

Or better yet... these guys.

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?...ZxZWVFRXl5Mg==

You may want to read-up a bit on how many illegal felons try to cross the border EVERY DAY.

Immigration is about the law and nothing more.

So you're comfortable with the idea that any of the billions of people that want to move to the US, except fat chicks, are welcome? That they would not turn the entire country into Calcutta, Kowloon or Mexico City?

And when you come home from the grocery store you wouldn't care that three families had moved in with you?

Welcome indeed, queequeger! I like the way you think--you're able to see the human side of this issue.

Sound like you already have a number in mind--why don't you tell us what it is, and cite your source(s) please. I'd like to know exactly what you mean by 'illegal felons.'

Not true. Immigration is also about business and economics, society, cultures, human rights, work and working conditions, travel, education, families...

Welcome to the Cellar Queequeger! I also like the way that you think. I have much the same attitude to immigration. The harder we (in my case british) make it for people of other nationalities to get in, the more likely we are to end up with 'illegal' immigrants who, for the purposes of taxation and recording, don't exist in our system.

Immigrants usually add more than they detract from the society they move to.

The Illegal-Alien Crime WaveHeather Mac Donald EMAIL

Oh my god, fucking Heather Mac Donald. Figures.

Rk, she likes to make up shit.

That is just one small station.

Apart from the whole making things up aspect, have we also considered the possibility that some of those figures may be skewed by a) an overwillingness to believe illlegal immigrants are responsible for crimes and therefore more likely to be targetted/arrested/accused (similar to the way black men were almost always found guilty of rape in the segregated south) and b) uncharted, illegal immigrants are a very handy place to hang unsolved crimes?

One small station?

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/border_se...valley_sector/

The south.... I thought the rapes I was posting was in NY?
Odd.
The South being more prejudice is a myth.
Edit:
I like how you accuse her of making things up then imply that they were framed with no reason for doing so.

You did post about rapes in NY. I was merely pointing out that prejudice can sometimes skew the police response and justice system. I wasn't linking the rapes in NY with black men in the south being more likely to be found guilty of rape during the Jim Crow era.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the South during the segregation years was not more prejudiced? Are you telling me that the justice system in the South during the Jim Crow era was not weighted against the black community?

The whole 'Lost Cause' romance pushed the image of black men raping virtuous white women. It played out in the courts.

Tell me which historians writing about that era have been able to show that the prejudice of the South was myth?

Who said anything about the past?

Me.

'The segregated South' is a fairly clear indication that I was talking about the past

The south is currently no more prejudice than other areas of the nation, in fact the south has a higher rate of women and minorities in management, upper management and business ownership than anywhere else in the nation; as well as being more integrated as far as neighborhoods are concerned.
When I was in NY and LA it amazed me how separated everyone was.
The new Klan, the Order and all the other major hate groups formed above the Mason Dixon Line.

The Phelps family is from where again? Yeah, I thought so.

Well, if we're going to be entirely honest about it, the North was barely less prejudiced than the South during the Antebellum era, through reconstruction and on into Jim Crow. The only real difference was between de facto segregation and de jure segregation.

I was comparing the unfairness of the justice system of that racist era with the system's attitudes to other groups now.

What have the Phelps family got to do with systemised racism?

If you honestly believe that there is no point in having this conversation.
The politicizing of freeing the slaves became a war issue, slavery in homes was common in the North. Just as much so as in the South and prejudice against blacks was as common.
In fact blacks were treated worse by the Northern army than they were by the south and free Southern prisoners of war were shot on sight by the North but Northern prisoners of war were treated the same as whites by the South.
The freeing of the slaves was a last ditch effort by the North and at the time few truly wanted blacks to be citizens.
It's funny, every time I bring-up the South, you go farther back in history, like it's relevant. It is not.

wtf are you talking about rk? I just agreed with you. I just said the North was barely less prejudiced than the South.

You didn't bring up the South btw. I brought up the South to illustrate a point. I specifically brought up the South of the segregation era. You did not bring up the South and me go fly off on a history rant. I drew on a historical understanding of the South in a past era to illustrate a point. You then started on about how the South isn't more prejudiced and were referring to the modern South...I returned the discussion to the historic South.

It's entirely possible. But we don't even need to go that far to show how things can become skewed.

For example, in posts #22 and #25, rk points out two highly-publicized cases of illegal immigrants who have been charged with rape and/or murder. Then, in post #32, he shows us an article from a town in Texas, about how thousands of 'aggravated felons' were identified by the border patrol in their area.

The inference is scary, isn't it--it seems like thousands of violent criminals are trying to cross through a small town in Texas every year!

But then we realize that the numbers apply to a multi-county, 17,000 square-mile area that includes the Texas town. And then we find out that an 'aggravated felony' can mean one of at least 10 different things with varying levels of severity, about 2 of which are violent crimes.

Man, I work for a few hours and I have to play all kinds of catch up.

Ok, as far as I'm concerned, while questioning sources is always a good idea, I do believe that a larger percentage of immigrants are wanted for crimes for the same reason that large numbers of blacks are... because they're poor. If you look at the statistics of serious crime (and serious crime here implies 'felonies +'), the largest disparity of crime in the US (and I'm willing to bet the globe) is that between the rich and the poor. Reasons aside (for that would be a whole other discussion), the faster we get a group of people integrated into a society, the faster they stray from crime and poor lives.

Blind justice is not justice at all... I don't know who originally said it, just that Captain Picard said it in ST:TNG (<--nerd!). 'it's the law' is BS if the law is BS.

And as an adult I have lived in Iowa, northern Virginia, California, Texas and Georgia. Based entirely on anecdotal evidence, it would take multiple polls and studies done by the most reputable sociologists to convince me that the south isn't considerably more racist than the north, for I have seen it's disgusting, institutionalized racism more times than I can count, from afar and near.

The fact is, that if you read newspapers from 50, 100, 150 years ago and later, there was ALWAYS an uproar about some population coming to our country that was just trying to live in a nicer country. Irish, Italian, Chinese, every single one of these groups was routinely called 'a coming problem' and accused of trying to 'hijack america.' To this I say, grow up and give a little love.

And yes, the black community has not yet fully integrated, but that is ALSO another can of beans, and of particular interest to me. We can talk about that later!

I stand by post #19. There are plenty of immigrants who come here legally and that allows us a measure of contol. Criminals and people with various diseases qand whatnot who come here simply to take what they want or to be a burdon on our "free society" should be kept out. To go along with that, the laws and regulations - the system, if you will - for immigrants to become legal, law abiding citizens should be streamlined. It should be much easier for them and therefore reducing the amount of "good people" having to try and come through illegally. Seems like a win/win to me.
(see below)

That tallies with my perceptions from afar. However, it is still true that during the reconstruction years the North was not much better than the South in their attitudes to blacks. Nowadays, I get the impression than the North has moved further in this than the South.

When the government was trying to sell Immigration Reform, Chertoff said something to the effect of, I'd rather spend our resources on arresting smugglers and dangerous criminals at the border, than apprehending maids and farm workers. I agree with you, if the immigration process is improved, more "good people" would rather go that route.

Oh, and I'm not contesting it. Whoever said (not looking) that it was a tool of those in charge, a war cry if you will, was correct (sounds like communism/terrorism war cries of the 20th and 21st centuries to me!).

Now, that's not to say that there aren't many a rural Yankee who's not terribly racist (I recently heard slurs I'd never heard before in Pennsylvania), but it's instances are more confined and less socially acceptable. The cops in good ol' Augusta GA love to talk about their 'niggers' and 'nappy heads,' out in the open and to the populace. It's so much more open and pervasive, I've got to say I had a case of culture shock worse than my first trip to the ex-soviet bloc.

And of course there's higher instance of minority land ownership, rage, that's because there are more minorities. I live in a burg that is something like 45% white... but I'll bet a dollar to a donut that the white ownership is 60% or so.

And finally, 'criminals and people with disease' make up such a small portion of our immigrants, and indeed the whole planet, that casting these overarching policy nets to capture them (while simultaneously eliminating the 99% of those who would make wonderful editions to any society) is just plain wrong, and based on the racist (yeah I went there) notion that 'Mexi-cuns and negroes is bad.'

First line was in reference to Dana. I've really got to figure out the quote system on here...

Well said. (for your earlier point):P

The quote system: above the box you are posting in are buttons. One of them is a quote button. If you press it this will appear: [quote] followed by the same thing with [/ in front of it. Just cut and paste your quote in between the two. Or, alternatively use the 'Quote' button at the bottom of a post.

Thats cuz you're a falcons fan - j/k

Wow...another 'lefty' to bother the right wing loonies around here. How exciting! lol

Welcome to the Cellar queequeger! (if you're not a lefty I apologize. We're just a bit short of supply at the moment)

Australia should open it's borders to any and all of those Indians, Africans, Asians and Islanders that want to move in.

Australia basically has no restrictions on islanders. A large proportion of south pacific islands have (virtually) automatic dual citizenship with NZ and there are no restrictions for New Zealanders who want permanent residency in Australia. We like to work together in the south pacific.

We take in a large number of refugees from Africa and Asia. We even had a bunch of phillipino sailors wash up on the shore the other day. I don't know what's going on with them. They're part of the navy, but their boat isn't looking so hot.

If you have something to offer, it's a lot easier to get residency in Australia than the US.

Specially doctors. If you're a doctor, we'll take you no matter where you're from. Even if you're not really a doctor, or lie on your application form. Yeah, we need more doctors here. Not enough smart people becoming doctors over here, and the ones that do end up working overseas.

Haha, yesman. If I were a Falcons fan, I wouldn't derive so much joy in seeing their holy Kevin Vick get booted. Not because I'm anti-ATL or anti-Vick, I just always knew that he wasn't as 'classy' as everyone claimed he was.... No, unfortunately I seem to be tied at the hip to the Lions.

And Aliantha, I'm about as left as they come. The only differentiation between my political ideals and most other liberals is that I'm pro-militaries in a general sense, even if they are so frequently misused (it's the one realpolitik philosophy I allow). I find them a necessary and indeed often useful tool of humanity as long as they are wielded with prudence and (more importantly) out of love and not greed.

I'm pretty sure you and DanaC are going to get along very well. BTW, she's single you know. ;)