Look at it from any angle you want, it’s very complex. and a simplistic punish, punish, punish apporach isn’t going to solve it. That kind of thinking is on a par with solving international problems by just attacking and bombing.

This is a problem that can only be solved with a two-pronged effort, one prong on each side of the border. Craclomg down on employers of illegals in the US in one prong, but providing employment in Mexico is the other. What is the US doing to encourage Mexico to do its part or tp invest in development in northern Mexico?

It is ever so discouraging to see a complex, long term problem once again be tackled with short term, dead-end techniques. Doing so is just throwing good money after bad.
The process of detention and deportationis very costly; the money would be better spenst to promote employment on the Mexican side of the border.

It’s also callous to ignore the humanitarian crisis fueling the movement of illegels to the US, People die in the desert every day while doing what they can to provide for their families. I know we can’t take in all the world’s poor (we have trouble enough providing for our own), but we have to recognize that by punishing the illegals, we are punishing people for just wanting to survive.

The US has a long history of dealing with problems in a superficial, dead-end way. Punish (and pay the high cost of meting out punishment) without doing anything to prevent the problem from rising to the level of needing punishement.
This is just more of the same wasteful, dead-end manner of problem solving.

DTC, you pen a good post, but this has morphed the point beyond original context. “Rule of law” is oversimplistic shorthand from the conservatives in response to the overbroad shorthand of the left to consider any objection to open borders to be racially motivated.

Frankly, a lot of the ‘fence building’ and ‘border patrol’ crap is racism, and the right is playing to that. And, yes, some of the left is counter-playing to that, and assuming everyone on the other side is motivated by that, when they are not.

But it’s the right standing in the way of reform, and the right-wing politicians are standing in the way (And generating the racism) because they wish to continue to exploit people in the country illegally.

Dustin said,

Also, the entire concept of a nation-state is predicated on protecting it’s citizenry. Why should our immigration policies or economic system be any different?

The entire concept of our nation state is that governments govern by the consent of the governed, and have certain rights that cannot be taken away. Not that we need protection.

But saying we should ‘protect’ our citizens by disallowing immigration is begging the question, you’re assuming that a) citizens are threatened, and b) that this will make them safer.

I don’t think that anyone’s demonstrated either of those are true.

Whereas continuing to exclude people living in the US from the US political process is exactly opposite one of the basic founding principles of this country.

And thanks for, yet again, proving that extreme liberals are just like racist conservatives. Neither group can talk about immigration without turning into a fight over “the brown people”…

We’ve done it with slaves, we’ve done with Native Americans, we’ve done it with the Irish, we’ve done it with free black people, we’ve done it with the Chinese, we’ve done it in the Northern Marina Islands.

We find a group of people without any political representation, we make sure they either have no rights to start with, or at least cannot go to the police, often because they are ‘illegals’. Then we exploit the hell out of it.

Often there is plenty of talk about how evil and immoral these people are, so we’re doing it for their own good, or instead of living here they should leave, or never have come. It’s simply that now doing that is unacceptable, so there’s been some blowback from the left.

But don’t go around pretending that is the actual issue. The actual issue that the politicians, mostly on a right but a few on the left, want a group of poor people that exist outside the laws.

And thanks for, yet again, proving that extreme liberals are just like racist conservatives. Neither group can talk about immigration without turning into a fight over “the brown people”…

Hahaha… I’m not calling you a racist. I’m just saying that politics converge. You’re obviously a protectionist.

You don’t understand anything about immigrant qualification scoring, do you?

I understand it just fine, my point is that because of draconian immigration laws, you aren’t allowed to live where you want. Despite having commited no crime (as far as I know). Where’s the justice in that?

Also, the entire concept of a nation-state is predicated on protecting it’s citizenry. Why should our immigration policies or economic system be any different?

Why are we allowed to buy goods shipped here from China? Why are companies allowed to move their factories to China?

And I though Socialists such as yourself believed in complete government regulation of the economy? Again, I fail to see how you can regulate against the influx an open borders policy would create.

I don’t believe in a controlled economy. That’s why I oppose cartels, monopolies, central banks, the marriage of government and big business, and so forth.

If every government on the planet opened their borders all at once, slowly but surely we’d see the true power of the marketplace to allocate resources. Right now we’re only seeing somewhat effective allocations of capital and not labor.

And thanks for, yet again, proving that extreme liberals are just like racist conservatives. Neither group can talk about immigration without turning into a fight over “the brown people”…

You don’t understand anything about immigrant qualification scoring, do you?

I can guarantee you that your wages would tank (supply and demand and all that), your job security would be nonexistent (same reason), and social security? Kiss it goodbye. Our monetary infrastructure isn’t designed to handle massive numbers of recent immigrants and getting your wish would kill the middle and lower classes.

First off, it’s not like the population would double tomorrow if anyone was allowed to move to the United States. It’s still expensive/dangerous to travel here. You’d still have to find a place to live and pay for it, and you’d need a job to stay here and survive.

But you are getting to the real point of why it’ll never happen. Protectionism. Our immigration policy is predicated on protectionism and racism. It’s all about making sure brown people don’t take our money. We don’t want to compete fairly with laborers the world over. We want to stay rich and fat while the people in the 3rd world starve. Oh sure, they can make tennis shoes for us, but we won’t ever allow them to move next door.

“Freedom to move from one place to another is an essential human right.”

That’s all well and good, but then what’s the point of having immigration requirements or borders?

Take myself for example, I’ve always wanted to live in Bath, England. I’ve got family there, it’s a nice place. The simple fact of the matter is that I can’t, at least not legally.
Not because of money or lack of job skills, but because I simply do not pass the UK immigration requirements. Even though I’ve been working for the same company for a little over 3 years and I’ve going to school now the simple fact I have no college degree and no appreciable job seniority. Without either of those to boost my admission score there’s no way I can emigrate to the UK, they just won’t take me.

Did I decide to sneak into the country anyway despite this? No, I changed priorities and got engaged right here at home. I’m not going anywhere now, the fiancee’d kill me. Because I followed the law it was a wishful pipe dream, nothing more.

Look Chris, it’s obvious you disagree with the entire concept of sovereign nations, borders, and immigration restrictions of any kind. But I ask you this: what do you think would happen to you if you got your wish and anybody who wanted could come to America whenever they wished?

I can guarantee you that your wages would tank (supply and demand and all that), your job security would be nonexistent (same reason), and social security? Kiss it goodbye. Our monetary infrastructure isn’t designed to handle massive numbers of recent immigrants and getting your wish would kill the middle and lower classes.

It’d certainly make for cheap nannies though…

Lynx: I agree with just about everything you’ve said. The only way to fix this problem (and it is a problem) is to crack down of the employers. Make them fear hiring illegal labor. They’ve gotten used to a slap on the wrist fine (if anything), make the punishment for hiring illegal labor hurt them as much as their depression of the labor market hurts their legitimate employees, the American citizens.

Illegal immigration isn’t a victimless crime. Injecting easy to abuse low-skilled laborers into the American economy has one effect, tanking blue collar workers wages and job security. We don’t have the option to work in America and then move back to cheap Mexican living, we’re stuck with lowered American wages and high American living expenses. That makes for a lot of victims.

The illegal immigrants may fall victim to greedy companies who hire them knowing they’ll work for less if no questions are asked, but our governments concern should be for it’s own citizens.

It falls completely apart when they don’t match. Like in the case of speeding, or illegal immigration. I see people waiting at the Mexican grocery to hop in someone’s pickup and spend the day in the sun doing backbreaking labor under the hot sun for less than minimum wage, my, and most people’s, reaction is not ‘Those people should be in jail!’, anymore than I think someone who goes five miles over the speed limit should be in jail.

It falls even further apart when the crimes only effect people involved in them, aka, ‘victimless crimes’, because no one complains. Like in the case of prostitution, or illegal immigration.

Note I’m not saying illegal immigration is ‘victimless’, or that whether or not a ‘victim’ exists is even a useful judge of a law, I’m saying, crimes that happen against someone’s wishes are easy to locate, crimes that everyone involved agrees with are much harder to locate. This is why murders are harder to solve than assaults.

The exact same problem, incidentally, arise in drug use. If there was some magical yardstick that demonstrated the amount of pot smoking in this country, it would be obviously be the worse crime problem in existence. (Actually, speeding might beat it.)

But, anyway, back to illegal immigration, the solution is not to yell ‘rule of law’, the solution is to find some actual set of laws that function by being roughly matched to what society wants.

And I though Socialists such as yourself believed in complete government regulation of the economy? Again, I fail to see how you can regulate against the influx an open borders policy would create.

Of course, it would be self correcting eventually. Once the 50 to 100 million people crossed over, the entire economic and social fabric of the US would collapse under the strain, and then we would see a surge of emigration.

However, for the short version, his curious ideas would allow (for instance) one million extremists from Pakistan to move here, just as long as they were good workers.

If they commit real criminal acts, like theft or violence, then send them back or put them in prison. Whatever. Besides, that entire example is pure fantasy. If we could determine there are “extremists” (whatever that means) living in this country now, should they be deported or jailed if they never attempt or commit a crime? Holding certain political views should never suddenly deprive you of your rights as a human being.

Or, it would allow Mexico to send us 20 million more people; if most settled in one region that would have the impact of giving Mexico condominium over part of our territory.

If the people of any state or country around the world wanted to change their form of government, why shouldn’t they? Was it wrong for the United States to separate itself from Britain? How about popular uprisings in France? The U.S.S.R.?

Buoyed by the success of the illegal immigrant elimination program, whereby all US citizens were embedded with RFID chips and all non-chip wearers were stunned unconscious upon entering a WalMart store, federal officials announced the completion of the new Rule of the Federal Law (ROTFL) Highway project.

Utilizing high-tech sensors spaced every 100 yards along our nation’s freeways, car tires are spiked when any driver exceeds the speed limit by so much as a tenth of a mile per hour.

“It’s about time,” says Arizona resident Florence Junction, a 63 year old widow. “I am just a mainstream citizen who wants the rule of law enforced. This country was going to hell in a handbasket what with all those people breaking the law everyday.”

Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County Sheriff for nearly 30 years says, “Yup, this new system sure put the “law” back into “law enforcement”. Our nation’s highways are safer and, what with the fine revenue, we can ensure the rule of law is returned to this great nation of ours. Here in Arizona, we intend to focus next on people who have more than two dildos in their house. God bless America.”

However, for the short version, his curious ideas would allow (for instance) one million extremists from Pakistan to move here, just as long as they were good workers. Or, it would allow Mexico to send us 20 million more people; if most settled in one region that would have the impact of giving Mexico condominium over part of our territory.

Obviously, if you’re able to think things through, you can see why we have immigration controls.

America isn’t some exclusive country club, it’s a collection of immigrants that happen inhabit land that is inside of some very arbitrary borders. And despite what you may think, it survived just fine for a long time without draconian walls and quota systems. If you were lucky enough to find your way here, and didn’t kill anyone or steal the land you lived on, then it was nobody’s business where you came from.

On the flip side, there are businesses that are exploiting these workers, and that should stop. In America we do have laws about wages, taxes and worker safety, and if you don’t follow those, you should be punished.

But there’s no reason to punish the people that are just here to contribute. They aren’t part of some sinister army that is here to take your jobs away. They are just like you, trying to make the best of life.

Although, it appears the polling firms go out of their way to aid and abet the confusion by never asking a simple sentence question…….rather, look at their questions on pollingreport.com……always compound, if not run-on sentences and usually employing double negatives.

Of course mainstream citizens want rule of law enforced…….and they’re probably wondering why that elegantly simple concept is never quite grasped in some quarters……..does everything have to be a heinous subterfuge nowadays?