Why are there immigration laws

[Jacquelita]

UT and I hare having a debate on this topic and we need some more input - so we are turning to the cellar.

Why are there immigration laws?

I say it's to control the economy - UT says it's because people don't like foreigners

what say the cellarites?

[busterb]

My redneck take on this's mostly about economy, but it's a hell of a lot deeper than that. Maybe more along the lines of haves & have-nots. I find it strange that, with all the staff, resources our law-makers have they can't find, fix the problem. Pandering for votes? You bet. Just look at the laws that pass in this state. My

I'd say both with the economy being the overt reason. I don't see why we bother with them actually other than to make work for the employees of the INS. The immigration problem could be squelched by coming down hard on employers who hire workers without green cards. But I guess those employers grease the right palms, the workers get an all expense paid trip back home and then walk back over to their job again.

"So, why'd you miss work last week, Gonzalez?"

"La migra, senor!"

"OK, just don't get picked up again at the height of the season."

So much for immigration laws.

[fargon]

I don't know, they dont enforce the laws we have. Whats wrong with having the military patrol the borders? Just my

[xoxoxoBruce]

I don't know, they inforce the laws we have.

I don't think so. I know some Africans that live in MA that have overstayed their visas by as much as 9 years. Every year they get a letter from the INS telling them to get out within 30 days.
The INS knows where they are, they send them letters, for gods sake, but they don't come looking for anyone....ever.

Originally Posted by fargon

Whats wrong with having the military patrol the borders? Just my

What? Have the military protect our national borders? What are you? Some kind of whacko libertarian or something? Everybody knows that we have a military to go bring democracy to other countries (preferably oil producing ones) whether they want it or not.

I suppose the next thing you'll want is a congress that is actually responsible to the people and not Halliburten!

Jeez!

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by Jacquelita

Why are there immigration laws?

I say it's to control the economy - UT says it's because people don't like foreigners

what say the cellarites?

You are both correct. Sort of. Immigration laws pacify the isolationists. The utter lack of enforcement pacifies big business. The paradox pacifies the intellectuals. The highly publicized spot enforcement pacifies the rest.

Immigration is a politicians' wet dream.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Immigration laws pacify the isolationists. The utter lack of enforcement pacifies big business. The paradox pacifies the intellectuals. The highly publicized spot enforcement pacifies the rest.

That is a nice little blurb.

Since government is really just an artifact of tribal society, promoting fear of the other is governments most important job.

[fargon]

Originally Posted by fargon

I don't know, they dont enforce the laws we have. Whats wrong with having the military patrol the borders? Just my

This is what I ment to say.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Griff

Since government is really just an artifact of tribal society, promoting fear of the other is governments most important job.

Originally Posted by Beestie

You are both correct. Sort of. Immigration laws pacify the isolationists. The utter lack of enforcement pacifies big business. The paradox pacifies the intellectuals. The highly publicized spot enforcement pacifies the rest.

Immigration is a politicians' wet dream.

Without a doubt, those are the most cynical, paranoid, and concise explanations I have ever seen.

I love you guys!

[xoxoxoBruce]

And accurate, Rich......don't forget accurate.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Jacquelita

Why are there immigration laws?

I say it's to control the economy - UT says it's because people don't like foreigners

First learn reasons why so many immigrants. United States laws for corporate welfare make it virtually impossible for many jobs to be created where jobs would be better located AND where the same labor exists. Sugar and corn are but two industries, heavily subsidized with corporate welfare, but better performed overseas. US government corporate welfare checks lower world prices of sugar and corn making such jobs impossible in Central America, South America, and Africa.

Free trade - we hype it publicly and then subvert it with policies that undermine jobs where immigrants reside. Then we so hype a fear of THEM as to even demand that Canadians carry passports.

The problem is not immigration. Immigration is only a symptom. The problem is why we are not putting vast resources of labor to work - which is historically how America got rich. Another symptom of that failure is a vast disparity created only by that border.

Yes many jobs require immigrants. And there are many industries - such as mushrooms - that are better performed by those immigrants in their home countries. Illegal immigrant numbers around The Cellar are so large that a nearby suburban radio station for those illegal immigrants is 690 AM.

Since not willing to address the problem, then we will waste vast time and resources promoting hate to keep them out - curing symptoms while only make more enemies. The economy controls itself if government does not distort it - tariffs, et al increase the need for illegal immigrants - corporate welfare. Meanwhile hate and fear promotes knee jerk responses such as military border campaigns rather than address the reason for that immigration. Yes, many immigration laws get promoted due to fear of foreigners rather than to address a problem. America historically resorts to walls when America cures symptoms rather than solve a problem.

How entrenched is American corporate welfare? Previously noted was the Cancun WTO conference terminated three days early because of American corporte welfare that also makes illegal immigration worse:
Isolationism

The Cancun challenge of 4 Sept 2003:
The Doha agenda was ambitious, aiming not only to cut barriers in highly protected economic sectors, such as agriculture and services, but to write new rules for globalisation in areas such as investment and competition policy. Most of all, Doha was purportedly focused on helping the poor. Rich countries promised to open their markets in areas, especially farm goods and textiles, which matter most to poor countries. They promised to help poor countries with cash, technical assistance and “special and differential” treatment in implementing any agreement. To underline the pro-poor message, the words “development” and “developing” were included 63 times in the 10-page document that launched the Doha round.

But instead the entire conference failed three days earlier for reasons including this one:

Cancún's charming outcome on 18 Spet 2003:
For all the fine promises made at Doha, rich countries could see no farther than the interests of their own farmers. America's unwillingness to curb its cotton subsidies—which have an especially severe effect on poor-country producers—is unforgivable.

How can one have an informed opinion of illegal immigration and not even know what happened in Cancun? Its called curing symptoms - too often using hate, fear, and other emotions to justify immigration laws.

[tw]

No free trade? Then people flee to where jobs are available. A subtitle from that Economist report was

Champions of the world's poor are celebrating the collapse of global trade talks. Some champions

It included this picture to demonstrate an attitude that also increases our immigration problem:

[busterb]

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
And here is a link to http://www.snopes.com/quotes/teddyroos.asp

[tw]

Originally Posted by busterb

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, ...

So how is Roosevelt's point relevant to this discussion?