Immigrants

dar512 • Oct 28, 2007 5:25 pm
There's been a lot of discussion on the Cellar lately about illegal immigrants. For myself, I care less about how people get here than what they do after they're here.

I got this in the mail today from my Mom. Normally, things of this sort I get from my Mom turn out to be bogus. But in this case snopes says it's the real deal.

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


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.

I can get along with this point of view.
Ibby • Oct 28, 2007 6:34 pm
I think teddy's spewin' bullshit, myself.
bluecuracao • Oct 28, 2007 7:15 pm
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


But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American ...


What did Teddy mean by 'us,' I wonder.

Dar, could be it's simpler to you, but to me, it's a very complex variable. I see 'us' Americans as having many cultures, dialects, even languages...both distinct and blended.

Would you give some details as to what you like about his point of view?
queequeger • Oct 28, 2007 11:23 pm
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.


Isn't this a bit contradictory? First off, who decides what makes an 'American?' It seems to be a little xenophobic... and nationalistic to the point of jingoism.
Clodfobble • Oct 29, 2007 5:10 pm
queequeger wrote:
First off, who decides what makes an 'American?'


The immigrant himself decides what he will identify as. It makes a world of difference when one says and thinks unequivocally, "I am an American," instead of "I am a ______ish immigrant."
TheMercenary • Oct 29, 2007 7:11 pm
Clodfobble;401183 wrote:
The immigrant himself decides what he will identify as. It makes a world of difference when one says and thinks unequivocally, "I am an American," instead of "I am a ______ish immigrant."


Sort of like "African American"?
DanaC • Oct 29, 2007 8:42 pm
Sort of...except the original influx of African 'immigrants' weren't really given a choice. Once in America they weren't able to take on the American identity on account of being classed as subhuman...I suggest the descendents of unwilling slaves have every right to define themselves within modern America.
Clodfobble • Oct 29, 2007 9:12 pm
As they have had the option for over a century to return to their home countries anytime they wish, I suggest that actions speak louder than words.
TheMercenary • Oct 29, 2007 9:21 pm
DanaC;401299 wrote:
I suggest the descendents of unwilling slaves have every right to define themselves within modern America.


There is the rub. Few can prove such a connection but everyone wants to use the term.
queequeger • Oct 30, 2007 12:36 am
My question is.... who the eff cares? If someone wants to identify themselves with some other culture, what difference does it make to you?

You can say 'well, if they like it so much they should leave,' or 'they don't deserve to live here.' In the long run, what difference does it make?? They still pay taxes just like everyone else. They don't make your life any worse. If you have so much of a problem with the existence of China towns, or neighborhoods that are primarily made of folks from Ecuador... well that makes one of us.
binky • Oct 30, 2007 11:16 am
Unfortunately, in the case of someone here illegally, and working under the table, they may not pay taxes like everyone else, not to mention the issue of students in the classrooms who don't speak any english, which(and I've seen this firsthand-working for our school district) slows down the learning process for everyone and uses resources which I feel could be better utilized. Sorry if this post is politically incorrect.
queequeger • Oct 30, 2007 11:24 am
This thread isn't about illegal immigrants, we've beat that horse into the ground. This is about people being absorbed into a culture and leaving theirs behind. I'm saying it doesn't matter if someone calls themselves Japanese Americans and hangs out in Japanese restaurants and hangs a Japanese flag in their bedroom. What difference does it make?
queequeger • Oct 30, 2007 11:25 am
Besides that, we know where I stand on illegal immigration ;)
freshnesschronic • Oct 30, 2007 11:40 am
Clodfobble;401320 wrote:
As they have had the option for over a century to return to their home countries anytime they wish, I suggest that actions speak louder than words.


....The option to return? Uh..... :eyebrow:
Not everyone can afford that plane ticket back to Africa...

But I agree with quee.
Selective acculturation, adopting traits and characteristics essential to surviving in the mainstream atmosphere while retaining non essential cultural values. Like learning the language, laws and social norms but being able to speak the mother tongue at home or celebrate Diwali in two weeks or something like that.

What's the harm with that?
DanaC • Oct 30, 2007 11:45 am
My personal opinion is that nations which have that diversity and celebrate it are stronger societies and ultimately more cohesive.
binky • Oct 30, 2007 11:58 am
queequeger;401508 wrote:
This thread isn't about illegal immigrants, we've beat that horse into the ground. This is about people being absorbed into a culture and leaving theirs behind. I'm saying it doesn't matter if someone calls themselves Japanese Americans and hangs out in Japanese restaurants and hangs a Japanese flag in their bedroom. What difference does it make?

Right but that is my point exactly-if you don't contribute through being a taxpayer, and you and your family don't speak english(thus not assimilating), that is exactly the thread topic's point
piercehawkeye45 • Oct 30, 2007 12:56 pm
Clodfobble;401320 wrote:
As they have had the option for over a century to return to their home countries anytime they wish, I suggest that actions speak louder than words.

Why would they return to Africa, that makes no sense. For one, African American culture is much closer to European than African so they will have to deal with that, then they have to change languages, etc. Finally, there is much of a chance to live a great life in Africa either, I mean, look at the living conditions there, its horrible.
piercehawkeye45 • Oct 30, 2007 12:57 pm
binky;401523 wrote:
Right but that is my point exactly-if you don't contribute through being a taxpayer, and you and your family don't speak english(thus not assimilating), that is exactly the thread topic's point

Ugh, immigrants, legal or illegal, contribute more to the economy than they take away. If the US was losing money over illegal immigrants the border would have been shut down years ago.

Lets not start an argument about this but I can provide sources if you want.
DanaC • Oct 30, 2007 1:21 pm
Binky by implication you are equating an inability to speak English (and thus assimilate) with a lack of legal status. Not all illegal immigrants fit that picture and many legal immigrants do.
Spectacle • Oct 30, 2007 3:20 pm
Without racist nor prejudice attitude--landscaping, tourism/resort and food industries would collapse if the illegal Latin immigrants were deported. How is that for your economy?
DanaC • Oct 30, 2007 3:27 pm
Disastrous?
binky • Oct 30, 2007 4:22 pm
DanaC;401562 wrote:
Binky by implication you are equating an inability to speak English (and thus assimilate) with a lack of legal status. Not all illegal immigrants fit that picture and many legal immigrants do.


Possibly, but didn't the europena immigrants have to learn English, to succeed? Now all you have to do is push #2 on you phone for Spanish
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 4:58 pm
Spectacle;401614 wrote:
Without racist nor prejudice attitude--landscaping, tourism/resort and food industries would collapse if the illegal Latin immigrants were deported. How is that for your economy?

Disastrous?


How so? I don't think anyone is suggesting that we deport every illegal and close the borders - full stop. I believe what we have been talking about is tossing the illegals out (since they are ILLEGAL they obviously have shown a predisposition to not giving a damn about our laws), sealing the borders up tight to stop future illegals from coming in, and fixing the legal immigration programs to allow as many in as are needed/can be gainfully employed.

Now you have Legal immigrants here who have full legal status and access to whatever services are available, and they are part of the normal tax system, AND we have a better opportunity to screen who is here and only allow those in that are able to provide a needed role or service in the economy.

and my view of the assimilation discussion is that it is ok to keep your native languages intact, in fact I think it is desireable, as long as you learn the predominant language of the land you CHOSE to move to and use it to the best of your ability. If you don't want to bother learning how to assimilate and function in the culture you chose to move to, go back to where everyone speaks your preferred language.
TheMercenary • Oct 30, 2007 5:05 pm
We need to have a better handle on those who are here. Those who are hear illegally need to be documented and taxed like the rest of us. The borders need to be shut tight. I have no problem with legal immigrants, and one big rub is that plenty of people have done it right through the application process and waiting periods. But groups of undocumented people pouring across the borders in groups of 10 or 20 is not doing anything to help our system. They need to be captured and deported.
TheMercenary • Oct 30, 2007 5:07 pm
Spectacle;401614 wrote:
Without racist nor prejudice attitude--landscaping, tourism/resort and food industries would collapse if the illegal Latin immigrants were deported. How is that for your economy?


So what? let those systems collapse on a temporary basis. They will rebound. First close the borders and stop the hemorrhage.
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 5:09 pm
They need to be captured and deported.


I live in phoenix, and i can tell you that it is completely pointless if we don't remove the incentive for them to come back or make the consequences extremely uncomfortable. I fully support opening the borders up to just about anyone that passes a basic screening, but I also fully support making it extremely painful for any illegal who is caught here.
Perry Winkle • Oct 30, 2007 5:30 pm
TheMercenary;401658 wrote:
So what? let those systems collapse on a temporary basis. They will rebound. First close the borders and stop the hemorrhage.


Oh yeah? With what man-power?

The number of jobs in those industries is greater than the number of unemployed (that would be willing and able to do those jobs, for that pay).

Let the illegals stay and keep your low, low, low prices. It's worth it. Trust me, I live in England.
TheMercenary • Oct 30, 2007 5:39 pm
Perry Winkle;401669 wrote:
Oh yeah? With what man-power?

The number of jobs in those industries is greater than the number of unemployed (that would be willing and able to do those jobs, for that pay).

Let the illegals stay and keep your low, low, low prices. It's worth it. Trust me, I live in England.

Our prices only seem low to you because the dollar has dived against the BPS and Euro. Our low prices have little to do with the number of illegals employed in our factories. Now those countries who have outsourced to third world nations and employed people at $1.50 an hour, that is another thing.
bluecuracao • Oct 30, 2007 5:41 pm
binky;401641 wrote:
Now all you have to do is push #2 on you phone for Spanish


I don't see that as a bad thing. Where I grew up, this is business as usual. I think some people in places like, say, Pennsylvania, get bent out of shape about it, because it's...different for them.

In NYC, the subway token machines offer a few different languages in which you can make your purchase. It seems to work fine, and I've never seen anyone there get weirded out over it.

I'd like to note here that there are lots of U.S. citizens who speak other languages (including but not limited to Spanish) regularly, whose ancestors were never immigrants.
Clodfobble • Oct 30, 2007 6:02 pm
piercehawkeye wrote:
Why would they return to Africa, that makes no sense. For one, African American culture is much closer to European than African so they will have to deal with that, then they have to change languages, etc. Finally, there is much of a chance to live a great life in Africa either, I mean, look at the living conditions there, its horrible.


Right. So it's a little silly to identify as "African" instead of "American" at this point.

Assimilation doesn't mean abandoning your old culture. It means making your culture a meaningful part of American culture. Sharing and celebrating = good. Isolating yourself among others who are exactly like you and rejecting the rest of American culture = counterproductive.
bluecuracao • Oct 30, 2007 6:05 pm
The big question is then...what is American culture?
piercehawkeye45 • Oct 30, 2007 6:40 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_United_States
Spectacle • Oct 30, 2007 7:09 pm
TheMercenary;401658 wrote:
So what? let those systems collapse on a temporary basis. They will rebound. First close the borders and stop the hemorrhage.


The collapse would not be temporary. It is foolish to think one nation can be easily risen again after quintessential industries to the nation are abandoned.

Who would fill the gap? Another ethnic group? Teenagers? Or would the mainstream populous go for those under-status jobs and still have the nerve to say "those immigrants are stealing our jobs!", which are really the jobs "we" the mainstream do not desire.
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 7:11 pm
actually, those are the jobs we don't desire for "that" wage. all jobs will be filled when they pay a wage that the available workers are willing to accept.
Spectacle • Oct 30, 2007 7:18 pm
I disagree, but the major industries would collapse and there would be a lasting defunct that would not be made up quickly or orderly.
Clodfobble • Oct 30, 2007 7:33 pm
Where do you live, Spectacle?
Perry Winkle • Oct 30, 2007 7:33 pm
lookout123;401748 wrote:
actually, those are the jobs we don't desire for "that" wage. all jobs will be filled when they pay a wage that the available workers are willing to accept.


Sure, and when that happens you'll be paying $10/pound for apples.

Undocumented migrants are good for some things. If they were legal we'd have to pay them minimum wage, and that would increase costs too. /cynicism
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 7:36 pm
how much does the waitress make? minimum wage is set aside for that industry. you can do the same for the industries now filled with illegals. you toss the illegals, fill the jobs with those who come legally and pay them what is required to get them to take the jobs.

apples get picked. you buy them at the grocery store for a pittance more. but because the lowest level jobs are now paying more all jobs up the skill chain increase as well. that is the way it works. short term disruption for long term benefit.
TheMercenary • Oct 30, 2007 7:37 pm
Clodfobble;401682 wrote:
Right. So it's a little silly to identify as "African" instead of "American" at this point.

Assimilation doesn't mean abandoning your old culture. It means making your culture a meaningful part of American culture. Sharing and celebrating = good. Isolating yourself among others who are exactly like you and rejecting the rest of American culture = counterproductive.


The bigger problem for me is that the term is identified with all people who live here who have dark or brown skin. It ignores the numerous people who have other origins. It ignores the thousands of white Africans who now live here as Americans. It gives advantages to many who do not deserve it. I fully respect our evil past of slavery, but I also recognize that it still goes on now, and was a LARGE part of European culture as well, not to mention the complacity of many African peoples. The term has out lived it's usefullness.
Clodfobble • Oct 30, 2007 7:40 pm
Perry Winkle wrote:
Undocumented migrants are good for some things. If they were legal we'd have to pay them minimum wage, and that would increase costs too. /cynicism


I don't know what the fruit-pickers make. But the construction and landscaping illegals around here generally make $8-$9 an hour, which is equivalent to roughly a $10-$11 wage for someone who pays taxes.
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 7:41 pm
shhh. don't let facts get in the way of political pandering and scare tactics.
Perry Winkle • Oct 30, 2007 7:45 pm
TheMercenary;401673 wrote:
Our prices only seem low to you because the dollar has dived against the BPS and Euro. Our low prices have little to do with the number of illegals employed in our factories. Now those countries who have outsourced to third world nations and employed people at $1.50 an hour, that is another thing.


(You know I'm a native US Citizen, right? I've only been out of the country for two months now. . .)

You pay $.99 USD for a two liter of Coca-cola, I pay £1.75 (that's about $3.5 US). This is pretty universal grocery-wise. The dollar may be worth less in terms of other currencies, but it buys you more of the things EVERYONE routinely buys. (Some products are in near parity, but things are, as a general rule, more expensive here.)

Kick all the undocumented migrants out in a short period of time and the US would be hit with pretty severe inflation.
Perry Winkle • Oct 30, 2007 7:54 pm
Clodfobble;401774 wrote:
I don't know what the fruit-pickers make. But the construction and landscaping illegals around here generally make $8-$9 an hour, which is equivalent to roughly a $10-$11 wage for someone who pays taxes.


That's good. How much would legal skilled (and likely unionized) labor cost?

My cousins are in construction and excavation. I don't know what they make, but it is quite good money, even for the ones who work for the state or county.

Agricultural undocumented migrants make very, very little. They often have to hide out in the wilderness and fight for safe places to sleep. I was shown some documentaries of the life of these people in one of my gen-ed courses. Really interesting stuff.
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 7:57 pm
undocumented migrants


you can't even call them what they are, can you? repeat after me "illegal immigrants". that means they broke the law. that makes them criminals.

geez, do you call murderers "unlicensed life enders"?
TheMercenary • Oct 30, 2007 8:02 pm
Perry Winkle;401779 wrote:

Kick all the undocumented migrants out in a short period of time and the US would be hit with pretty severe inflation.


I think we would weather that storm nicely. I say shut the borders first, then we can figure out who is here legally and how they are contributing or not.
bluecuracao • Oct 30, 2007 8:09 pm
lookout123;401792 wrote:
you can't even call them what they are, can you? repeat after me "illegal immigrants". that means they broke the law. that makes them criminals.

geez, do you call murderers "unlicensed life enders"?


Get real. Crossing a border doesn't put you on the same level as a murderer by a long shot. It's more akin to jaywalking. Does getting a traffic ticket make you a damn criminal?
lookout123 • Oct 30, 2007 8:14 pm
i was addressing the severity of their crime, i was addressing your inability to call them what they are.
bluecuracao • Oct 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Did you mean to say "I wasn't addressing the severity of their crime"? ;)
piercehawkeye45 • Oct 30, 2007 8:39 pm
If you want to get rid of illegal immigration start with getting rid of free trade and NAFTA along with American subsidies to companies that hire illegal immigrants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States#Trade_liberalization

This is more biased but I haven't seen any good rebuttal against it yet:
http://usliberals.about.com/od/immigration/a/IllegalImmi.htm

Here is a pdf file so it must be accurate. ;)
http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2007/2007-021.pdf
queequeger • Oct 30, 2007 10:01 pm
So what you're saying, lookout... and let me get this straight, is that the label 'criminal' applies to anyone who breaks the law regardless of severity or motive? So someone being civilly disobedient- sit-ins, protests, etc - is a criminal? So someone who gets a traffic ticket is a criminal?

The reason we need to curb illegal immigration isn't for any practical reason, but that they broke the law? Blind justice isn't blind and if it does more harm to a system than good, punishment has no place.

I think everyone makes some pretty disastrous predictions as to what would happen if we kickalltheimmigrantsout/letalltheimmigrantsin. The likely case is that not much would happen on either side of the coin. Our economy would be less stable, as with any sharp change in population, but the US economy is pretty damned enormous. It wouldn't crash/bolster/explode/urinate on the carpet.

So, if we're going to control 'who's allowed in,' especially based on crimes... why aren't we exporting more citizens? Because they have a right to be here. You see, they were born with their rights. Like Kings. And Aryans.

I saw this coming a mile away, btw. The topic shifted into illegal immigration almost instantly.:sniff:
freshnesschronic • Oct 30, 2007 10:38 pm
lookout123;401792 wrote:
you can't even call them what they are, can you? repeat after me "illegal immigrants". that means they broke the law. that makes them criminals.

geez, do you call murderers "unlicensed life enders"?


You're a criminal too lookout.
Or have you not broken the law?

I can't remember what I posted it in earlier, but it was on a wine company who picked up illegals to work all day in their vineyards and then called the cops to deport them that night. Who's the criminal, the illegals trying to find work and get by? Or the big corporate sitting above the law.

EDIT: Whoops this is overkills, pierce said the same thanggg.
bluecuracao • Oct 30, 2007 11:45 pm
queequeger;401874 wrote:
I saw this coming a mile away, btw. The topic shifted into illegal immigration almost instantly.:sniff:


I put all the blame on Pierce--he should've known better than to post a wiki link right after my discussion-inducing question. He should have addressed it with his own thoughts on what American culture is. :cool:
lookout123 • Oct 31, 2007 12:05 am
actually they are both criminals and if caught should pay to the full extent of the law.

and yes, i am a criminal in that i drive above the speed limit. everytime i get caught i pay for my crime.

if you don't agree with the punishment for the crime as set by our dear lawmakers then work to change the laws, i'm only trying to get them to do their jobs and enforce the laws that are on the books.

what part of "illegal" immigration do you not get? enforce laws, get illegals out, punish those that choose to employ them. Update immigration laws to make it easier to gain legal entrance. This isn't a "get the brown people" movement. it is an attempt to live up to the laws that we have and to kill this as a talking point for the scum sucking politicians. figure it out.
queequeger • Oct 31, 2007 12:30 am
Well, I DON'T agree with the laws, I've been saying that all along. I will always vote for people who don't agree with the laws, so I am doing a part. That simple 'If you don't like it, fix it' argument is crap, you've got to realize that, because clearly others don't agree with me. Also, if you come back and say 'well, if the majority of americans agree with it, tough titties,' you deserve a slapping. Many unjust laws were supported by the people, that doesn't make them any more just.

There is an option juries have to forgo punishment if they believe the law is unfair, btw. Law is not unbendable.

I'll say it again- Blind justice is not justice. Just because there's a law in place doesn't mean it's right. Punishing people without considering the law just because it's there is ridiculous... that's something the nazis did. ;)
bluecuracao • Oct 31, 2007 12:33 am
lookout, we've been over the points you're bringing up many times...while you'd been away, I think. In a nutshell, I agree that immigration laws should be updated to make immigration easier.

But I strongly disagree that this issue is not affected by a "get brown people out" movement. For the most part, it may not be the case here, but much of the anti-immigrant propaganda floating around and even used as citations here originates from prejudiced sources.
Spectacle • Oct 31, 2007 12:44 am
Here, here, all. Cheers.
piercehawkeye45 • Oct 31, 2007 1:12 am
bluecuracao;401905 wrote:
I put all the blame on Pierce--he should've known better than to post a wiki link right after my discussion-inducing question. He should have addressed it with his own thoughts on what American culture is. :cool:

Can I only get 10 lashes this time please?
Clodfobble • Oct 31, 2007 11:18 am
Perry Winkle wrote:
That's good. How much would legal skilled (and likely unionized) labor cost?

My cousins are in construction and excavation. I don't know what they make, but it is quite good money, even for the ones who work for the state or county.


Sorry man, this isn't the midwest; there are a couple of unions, but they are far from universal. They are generally considered much more hassle than they're worth. Those who are unionized usually own their own businesses, they're the ones hiring other people to actually do the work. All the grunts--white, brown, or other--make exactly the same if they're paid in cash, and a little higher if they're regular employees (who pay taxes). There's plenty of under-the-table employment for legal residents as well.

I find it rather ironic that you suggest the illegal workers aren't "skilled;" they are usually just as trained and experienced in their jobs as the other people who do them, and often bring their own equipment. Are they ready to be site supervisors? Not usually, but that's not necessarily something they would somehow learn faster or better if they were legal residents. The number one skill that holds anyone back--legal or not--is an inability to speak English, which is not something they would magically get were they granted legal status.

Being "in" construction and excavation doesn't say what your cousins' role in the business is. Do they own it? Are they estimators? Are they ordering/delivering supplies? Site supervisors? Machine operators? Grunts shoveling the leftover debris into wheelbarrows? It obviously makes a huge difference.
Perry Winkle • Oct 31, 2007 12:18 pm
Clodfobble;402013 wrote:

I find it rather ironic that you suggest the illegal workers aren't "skilled;"

... snip ...

Being "in" construction and excavation doesn't say what your cousins' role in the business is. Do they own it? Are they estimators? Are they ordering/delivering supplies? Site supervisors? Machine operators? Grunts shoveling the leftover debris into wheelbarrows? It obviously makes a huge difference.


I never said that illegal workers weren't skilled. I just asked a specific question regarding the pay of, and I quote, "legal skilled workers." I never implied I was contrasting them with "illegal unskilled workers." It wouldn't make sense to make that comparison.

They are heavy equipment operators, one of them has worked his way up to some sort of site management position. Their friends are also in construction: tapers, painters, framers, ad nauseum. I have another cousin married to some high-up engineer for some civil engineering firm. I wasn't talking about that in my previous post.
Clodfobble • Oct 31, 2007 1:42 pm
Perry Winkle wrote:
I never said that illegal workers weren't skilled. I just asked a specific question regarding the pay of, and I quote, "legal skilled workers." I never implied I was contrasting them with "illegal unskilled workers." It wouldn't make sense to make that comparison.


So your only comparison was that the legal employees make more? Jobtask-to-jobtask being equal, that isn't the case here. Legal employees have more opportunities for advancement within a larger company--like I said, the illegals are unlikely to become site managers, but they do often operate the heavy machinery--but the illegals are also more than capable of running their own businesses, assuming they speak English well enough to do so. You don't have to go legit for business tax purposes until you want to start taking credit cards.

My overall opinion on the matter is similar to lookout's (crazy, I know, since we're two of the very few people on the board who actually are affected by the situation on a daily basis): I am pro-immigration, overall. We need the workers--but we need them to be part of the same system everyone else is. We need them to have auto insurance, and not use the closest ER as a walk-in clinic, and not send all of their wages back to Mexico. I think immigration should be a lot easier than it is. I also think cheating the system, (which not all, but more than enough, do) is not an acceptable solution.