See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On July 21st, 2004 at 11:43 am, Paul Cella said:

   “Walk Away Wednesday” — has a nice ring to it.

2. #2
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:15 pm, Stephen said:

   They are not illegal aliens. They are merely undocumented VOTERS!

   The police chief errored in not giving them voter registration cards before letting them go!

3. #3
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:21 pm, Martin aka Blogbat said:

   Thanks MS. Malkin, we appreciate your bringing this out. The people of this country vastly oppose what the feds are doing and they are giving us the “salute”.

   Republicans are idiots if they think this will help their numbers: they are gambling “potential” voters against a conservative bloc they already have- it makes no sense. And why do they want the support of criminal businesses who hire the illegals?

   So now we have both parties pandering to criminals— I know, the illegals that get hired are nice, wonderful, splendid and charming people…so next time I visit cancun, I’ll remember to stop by and say hi. They need to learn if they don’t like things in their country they need to stand up and change it. We don’t owe them a bloody thing.

4. #4
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:24 pm, Ralph Gizzip said:

   If it’s truly going to be a catch and release program why not take them out to the 12 Mile limit and release them there?

5. #5
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:30 pm, Martin aka Blogbat said:

   They would cry “racism”, Ralph…unless we did it to the Canadians too! Heyyyyyyyyyyy (evil grin)We could tell the Canadians they can come back once their Country gets Fox. And we’ll tell the Mexicans the same thing except that they may only come back once their country loses Fox.

6. #6
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:36 pm, Surge said:

   I’ll send you photos of illegal immigrants walking away, if you send me pictures of lazy native Americans cleaning toilets, landscaping gardens and yards and cleaning hotel rooms for $5.75 an hour and no health benefits.

   From the non-partisan Urban Institute report, “Setting the Record Straight” on immigration.

   “The most frequently voiced concerns about today’s immigrants fall broadly into two areas—anxiety over the integration of immigrants into American society and a focus on specific, perceived negative economic impacts. Calls for immigration reform that center on these issues often overlook the multiple purposes of U.S. immigration policy and the social, cultural, and moral goals that guide it. Narrow cost-benefit calculations usually fail to capture these aspects of immigration policy. Furthermore, the different domains of policy—legal immigration, humanitarian admissions, and illegal immigration—require their own policy responses. Reducing legal immigration and changing admission requirements for legal immigrants will not alter humanitarian flows or illegal immigration. Nonetheless, the economic and social objections must be addressed.

   The evidence in this report indicates that the economic effects of immigration are largely positive. Most immigrants are integrating socially and economically, and they are doing so without broad negative effects on the receiving community. The data show:

   Overall, immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in public services.

   Average household incomes of legal and refugee immigrant households rise with time in the United States and surpass those of natives after ten years in this country.

   Immigrants generate more jobs than they take. Native job loss to immigrants is limited to labor markets where the economy is slack and immigrants are concentrated.

   Recent immigrants are substantially less likely to be on welfare than are natives.

   Welfare use among immigrants is concentrated among refugees and the elderly.
   If the past is any guide, therefore, the overall effects of immigration—even at today’s high levels—will continue to be positive.”

   I predict you will go the way of Ann Coulter and eliminate your blog and email responses to your arguments because they are so easy to refute.

7. #7
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:40 pm, mojo said:

   Nice talking points, “Surge”.

   But immaterial. They are here illegally, they should be tossed out. End of story. I don’t give a damn whose lawn they’re mowing.

8. #8
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:52 pm, CrazyFool said:

   Good article.

   When I heard of this capture the other day I was wondering what they would do with them. I thought ‘surely they won’t let them go in a high-profile catch like this would they?’. Sure enough they did.

   I wonder how long it will be before the ACLU goes after Chief Chamberlan for ‘racial profiling’ or racism against illegal aliens… (as if being illegal is a race or something).

   And Surge, you miss the point. These people are here ILLEGALLY. as in IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW! By defination they are not law-abiding.

   I support immigration — LEGAL immigration. Heck I’m married to a LEGAL alien. LEGAL immigrats are what made this country great.

   LEGAL aliens have to go through many hurdles including a background check, personal interview and final approval. LEGAL aliens often have sponsors who agree and sign a legally binding document that they will support the alien while they are there.

   And that does not mention the years LEGAL aliens have to wait in line for their turn to legally enter the US. (only to be pooped on when the US government gives amnesty to illegals…)

9. #9
   On July 21st, 2004 at 12:56 pm, Martin aka Blogbat said:

   That sounds like a nice utopia, Surge, and I think we all wish it were the baptized gospel truth. But it isn’t. There is a terrific article in the City Journal (which I believe Michelle has mentioned before) that drops the coffin and tosses the dirt on the notion of “overall positive”:http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_3_immigrant_gang.html

   In addition to Heather Mac Donald’s talking points, there is the fact that 30% of our federal prisoners are now illegal aliens. How much are they costing? What about State and local incarcerations, medical care, education (in some parts of California, illegals are eating up 2/3 of their respective budgets. And billions more are sent back to Mexico each year instead of being put back into the US economy, as would be the case for US citizens. In such cities, crime skyrockets as well. And the economic standard plummets.
   Most illegals offer no allegiance to the United States and in a bind will not stand with her. And Americans of Mexican decent fear that very thing which they came here legally to leave, is now following them up here and they will be unable to provide the opportunities for which they jumped the bureaucratic hoops of citizenship. And the illegals are taken advantage of by their employers, treated as virtual slaves. They begin to resent this and by the next generation begin to hate America and fall into trap of permanent poverty.

   Basically everyone gets screwed.

   Well, except the Liberal: he gains political power for awhile. And baby, it’s all about the power. Oh, and by the way, that’s Vincente Fox’s angle, too.

10. #10
    On July 21st, 2004 at 12:59 pm, Scott said:

    I think the next time the good sheriff takes illegals into custody he should drive them down to DC and invite the press to watch them being released on the Capitol steps.

    As for Surge’s comment(s) they’re based on a false economic model. If you take away the supply of illegals employers would have to raise wages to an amount where US workers would take them.

    This would set off a series of inflationary corrections, which would stabilize over time. I think textbooks say 5-7 years for wage corrections.

    For a good real world example look at sanitation workers. It’s pretty nasty job but there’s no shortage of workers because it pays a decent wage.

11. #11
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:02 pm, Surge said:

    mojo,

    i agree. they’ve broken our country’s immigration laws, and should be penalized somehow for it.

    but it takes two to tango. our corporations here in the u.s. and american consumers exacerbate the illegal immigration problem.

    as long as companies have an insatiable appetite for cheap labor, and our irrepressible desire for low prices for services and goods is here, the illgal immigration problem will not go away, our economy is SO dependent on illegal labor.

    imagine if all illegal immigrants were deported within the next 5-10 years? That would mean our economy would lose over $300 billion dollars in GNP and over $133 billion dollars in taxes!

    it would also drive up costs for consumer goods & services considerably.

    as they say, “money talks, bull&*(+ talks”. it’s no wonder why the democrats and republicans want to keep illegal immigration going.

12. #12
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:03 pm, Martin aka Blogbat said:

    Imagine if you will, the economic loss due to outlawing slavery in the 1860′s….
    So what’s the argument again?

13. #13
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:15 pm, Surge said:

    “Imagine if you will, the economic loss due to outlawing slavery in the 1860′s….
    So what’s the argument again?”

    The South has never fully recovered economically from the outlawing of slavery. Most of the States with the highest poverty rates are in the South.

    Migration to the industrialized North by freed blacks drained the Southern economy of skilled labor. Whites didn’t really know how to pick cotton as good as African Americans did.

    If slavery was still in effect, Atlanta, Georgia would be the financial capital of the United States, not New York.

14. #14
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:21 pm, Acme said:

    If we eleminated illegal immigration the cost of the services they provide would probably rise. So would our security increase. As would the respect for our laws. Pride in citizenship would be enhanced. The US reputation as a nation of laws would be reinforced. A significant criminal element would be removed from our society. Additional burdens on our education, health and welfare systems would be relieved. And, I believe, the stage would be set for some kind of reasonable worker program negotations between Mexico and the US. Sounds good to me.

15. #15
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:31 pm, Lester said:

    Illegal immigrants broke the law. Nuff said; no ands, ifs or buts. Illegal immigrants give a slap to the face of proper immigration procedure.

16. #16
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:39 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Surge,
    “I agree they broke our countries immigration laws and should be penalized somehow for it”
    somehow…let me guess no desert before bed or no TV for a week?
    The fact is the law dictates they be deported and barred from entering the US for 10 years..there is the punishment. But you don’t want that.
    “The south has never fully recovered from the outlawing of slavery”
    Strange some of the fastest growing econimic areas in the country are in the south.
    I would suggest that you read a few history books and maybe an economics text book or two

17. #17
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:39 pm, Surge said:

    “Illegal immigrants broke the law. Nuff said; no ands, ifs or buts. Illegal immigrants give a slap to the face of proper immigration procedure.”

    You shouldn’t just put the blame on illegal immigrants. A big part of the blame belongs to U.S. companies hiring illegal immigrants (Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, etc.) The Immigration Reform and Control Act signed by Ronald Reagan in 1986 expressly forbids companies from hiring illegals and has penalties set up for these practices, which are not begin enforced/

    American consumers like you and I who like cheap goods & services are also breaking the law by patronizing companies that utilize immigrant work.

18. #18
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:48 pm, Martin aka Blogbat said:

    Woah, Surge— advocating slavery??? I was sure you had more moral courage than that. We aren’t the communist Chinese, we don’t enslave people for profits.

    I am a Southerner and I can tell you, the culture got what it deserved for owning slaves and using them for economic benefits. God bless Abraham Lincoln.

    “If slavery was still in effect, Atlanta, Georgia would be the financial capital of the United States, not New York.”

    Nothing personal, Surge, but that is a sick, sick statement.

19. #19
    On July 21st, 2004 at 1:56 pm, brian said:

    This is shocking, but not particularly suprising. If the Bush administration and the federal govt. in general, were really serious about our safety, they would have shut down both borders, or at least made them far more resticitive (esp. our southern border) and really started to deport large numbers of illegals. I know that most are here simply to find a better life, but they are breaking our laws, stealing from our social programs, and generally causing more trouble than good. Pres. Bush made it perfectly clear where he stands on immigration-the illegal variety-when he let Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo (CO) know that he was persona non grata in his White House.
    Politicians won’t listen to us, so what are we supposed to do? A recent article in the Dallas Morning News had an article regarding a poll taken by some group that showed overwhelmingly that about 68% of Americans think that our immigration policy is dead wrong and off the charts. It covered both political spectrums and was not simply limited to the John Birchers or the quacks running around Idaho with machine guns and mres.

20. #20
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:00 pm, americankitty said:

    Surge, I hate to clue you in, but illegals DO get health benefits.

    Ever hear of that little girl from Guatemala whose parents snuck her illegally over the Mexican-American border so she could have an emergency heart transplant? The one that was botched, killing her, and the huge outcry that followed where people were screaming that she “wasn’t treated right” (you know, never mind the 3,000+ tax paying Americans who are already on the waiting list for one)?

    People are not allowed to be turned away from emergency rooms. I work in a hospital in Tucson and we lose a significant amount of revenue by treating illegals first and hoping they’ll pay later. Ambulances are even picking illegals up off the road and carting them from Nogales to Tucson so they can get better health care, from dehydration to colds!

    It may not be “health benefits” by your book, but they are certainly benefiting from our healthcare system.

21. #21
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:03 pm, americankitty said:

    Oh, and that goes for those “lazy Native Americans” and anyone else who never pays their hospital bills.

22. #22
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:05 pm, Surge said:

    “Woah, Surge— advocating slavery???”

    Nope. Just advocating for people to look at both sides of the immigration issue. And pointing out the many holes in your argument.

23. #23
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:51 pm, Lorie said:

    Here are some interesting statistics on crime & illegal immigrants.

    http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/back704.html

24. #24
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:58 pm, Tyler said:

    It makes zero difference to me if they have a positive or negative effect on the economy. The economy takes a back seat when it comes to border control and homeland security.

    Bottom line is this. Julia Roberts can find someone else to ‘weed’ her garden and George Clooney can find someone else to mow his lawn. If there is no cheap labor, I’m sure they’ll buck up and have it done regardless because of the aesthetics. (market forces at work)

    Along the same lines, I don’t give a damn if the south suffered from the ending of slavery. It was an appalling practice and needed to be done away with. Don’t defend the practice because of the ecnonmic benefits it brought the states.

    Should those corporations be punished for hiring cheap illegals? of course. But it’s exceptionally dumb to make the claim that they bear responsibility for someone breaking a known law themselves. Let the company be punished for the law they broke. Let the illegal be deported back to his/her place of origin.

    Personal responsibility. That’s what it’s about in the end. No amount of economic information can negate the fact that they both broke the law and should be punished (to the max) accordingly.

25. #25
    On July 21st, 2004 at 2:59 pm, Lorie said:

    From the Center for Immigration Studies

    In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens.

    A confidential California Department of Justice study reported in 1995 that 60 percent of the bloody 18th Street Gang in California is illegal (estimated membership: 20,000); police officers say the proportion is undoubtedly much greater. The gang collaborates with the Mexican Mafia, the dominant force in California prisons, on complicated drug distribution schemes, extortion, and drive-by assassinations, and is responsible for an assault or robbery every day in Los Angeles County. The gang has dramatically expanded its numbers over the last two decades by recruiting recently arrived youngsters, a vast proportion
    illegal, from Central America and Mexico.

    The leadership of the Columbia Li’l Cycos gang, which uses murder and racketeering to control the drug market around L.A.’s MacArthur Park, was about 60 percent illegal in 2002, says former Assistant U.S. Attorney Luis Li. Frank “Pancho Villa” Martinez, a Mexican Mafia member and illegal alien, controlled the gang from prison, while serving time for felonious reentry following deportation.

    God, I just LOVE California!

26. #26
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:02 pm, Ron B. said:

    The only reason that Mexico has so many poor that need to come here to survive is the absolute corruption of the government there. Mexico is rich in natural resources and given a decent government could be a prosperous country.

    Also the point has been made and should be made time and time again that, with our pourous borders, so-called Homeland Security is a sham, a very bad joke.

27. #27
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:03 pm, Siobhan said:

    Americankitty knows what she’s talaking about. My son is a Federal agent and I could send you a ton of photos of the garbage dumps in southern Arizona, debris that accumulates nightly from the 24/7/365 line of illegals crossing into this country, destroying crops, livestock, fences, etc. in their paths. Legal residents along the border pay increasingly higher taxes and medical bills because of services offered to these illegals. Oh, and don’t forget, an ever increasing number of these people are coming from the Middle East, not just mexico and Central America. Do you think Middle Eastern men are coming in just to clean toilets or process poultry at minimum wage?

28. #28
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:09 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Surge,
    While I agree that employers need to be held accountable for hiring illegal immigrants that does not change the argument that by entering this country illegally you are committing a crime.
    As far as seeing both sides…that argument can be said for any issue but as far as holes in someone’s argument…I don’t know about that.
    And no illegal imigrants do not contribute more than they cost. If you are going to do a cost benefit analysis you need to include non monetary costs which includes public safety, health, sanitation, education and other hidden costs.
    I live in an area that has a high immigrant population (both legal and illegal)and the costs can be staggering to schools, roads and infrastucture.
    It is a complex issue as far as benefit vs cost but not as far as the violation of the law. Both illegal immigrants and employers who hire them are violating the law. Both need to be held accountable for their actions. Sooner or later the issue needs addressing and until it is addressed by the Pols the people will have to suffer.
    You quote some facts in your post $300 billon to the GNP (Do you mean GDP?) and $131 Billion to taxes. Well having just finished an economics class this last quarter I can tell you a couple facts. The GDP will not suffer as much as you seem to think due to the fact that a free market will always seek balance between supply and demand. The tax loss is false because it will actually go up in the short term due to higher demand for labor which in turn increases wages which increases taxes.
    The next argument is that illegal immigrants do work “Lazy Americans” will not do. True only in the fact that they do the work for a lower wage then the “Lazy Americans”. This in fact decreases wages and hurts the illegal immigrants themselves in the future (especially 2nd and 3rd generations). You add this to the fact that illegals have no protection in wages (overtime, minimum wage etc.) safety in the workplace or any other protections we take for granted. Yes our economy is better them most and so is our standard of living but with an unchecked flow of illegal immigrants and without a better immigration policy that will change.

29. #29
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:30 pm, onetwothree said:

    We all agree then: Illegal immigration is bad.

    So, how many of you are regular contributors to FAIR? Because if you aren’t, your words aren’t worth a thing.

30. #30
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:31 pm, onetwothree said:

    Okay, my HTML didn’t seem to work. FAIR’s address is:

    http://www.fairus.org/

31. #31
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:32 pm, HighLife Rasta said:

    Surge,

    There are very few illegals in Hawaii, and yet all those hotels get plenty of applicants to clean toilets, etc. The work is primarily done by LEGAL immigrants from Samoa and the Philippines . . .

32. #32
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:48 pm, Old Patriot said:

    My wife was the victim of one of those people who believe hiring illegals is “ok”. She was gradually pushed out of a halfway decent job by someone who “preferred” Hispanics – fully 80% of the people she hired between July 2003 when she took over as head housekeeper of a major Colorado Springs hotel and the present were Hispanic, including at least three that I KNOW are not here legally. Five of the eleven people she’s hired don’t even speak ANY English – something the guests are complaining about. My wife got tired of only being scheduled for 16 hours a week when she was hired for 40, and sought other employment. It’s not the first time that’s happened. It’s not that Americans won’t do the job, but that illegals will do it, NOT expect or demand benifits, NOT expect or demand raises, NOT expect or demand decent pay for decent work – because they can’t. If we sent the illegals back to where they came from, and locked up the people that hired them, we could solve the problem fairly quickly. If we don’t have the courage to do that, we deserve the destruction we have staring us in the face. Personally, I think an armed citizen’s patrol shooting a few hundred of these skunks (and the government officials that refuse to stop them) would put an end to it rather quickly, but our government wouldn’t stand for it. Having citizens actually do something to protect themselves? Unheard of! That’s what the Government is for! And if Government doesn’t do it, that’s because the Government doesn’t think it should be done, regardless of what the PEOPLE think. Who do they think they are, anyway?

33. #33
    On July 21st, 2004 at 3:59 pm, Surge said:

    “While I agree that employers need to be held accountable for hiring illegal immigrants that does not change the argument that by entering this country illegally you are committing a crime.”

    I concur. If undocumented folks get caught, they should be punished accordingly.

    “And no illegal imigrants do not contribute more than they cost. If you are going to do a cost benefit analysis you need to include non monetary costs which includes public safety, health, sanitation, education and other hidden costs.”

    Yes they do. From the Urban Institute’s “Setting the Record Straight” report:

    “Recent analyses by government agencies interested in “recovering” the public sector costs of immigrants and nonprofit groups committed to reducing levels of immigration uniformly find that immigrants impose fiscal burdens on governments and on native-born taxpayers. Although some studies are better than others, all overstate the negative impacts of immigrants for one or more of the following reasons:

    Tax collections from immigrants are understated.
    Service costs for immigrants are overstated.
    Benefits of immigrant-owned businesses as well as the economic benefits generated by consumer spending from immigrants are ignored.
    Job displacement impacts and costs are overstated.
    Parallel computations for natives, which would show that natives are also net tax users, are not done.
    The size of the immigrant population—particularly the undocumented immigrant population—is overstated.”

    You quote some facts in your post $300 billon to the GNP (Do you mean GDP?) and $131 Billion to taxes.

    Nope. I meant GNP.

    “The tax loss is false because it will actually go up in the short term due to higher demand for labor which in turn increases wages which increases taxes.”

    In the short term is right. Long term, if companies want to raise wages and provide health care benefits for landscaping, burger-flipping and cleaning hotel rooms, and if Americans want to do that type of labor, GDP will decrease and taxes will increase, because companies will be hitting up the feds, state and local governments for tax breaks and subsidies.

    “The next argument is that illegal immigrants do work “Lazy Americans” will not do. True only in the fact that they do the work for a lower wage then the “Lazy Americans”. This in fact decreases wages and hurts the illegal immigrants themselves in the future (especially 2nd and 3rd generations). ‘

    From the “Setting the Record Straight” report:
    “Immigration has no discernible effect on wages overall, as a number of recent studies agree (Table B-2). Wage growth and decline appear to be unrelated to immigration—a finding that holds for both unskilled and skilled workers (Butcher and Card 1991). And a study of state-level wage declines over a 13-year period finds no evidence that immigration is a factor (Vroman and Worden 1992). Indeed, wage growth is no slower and may be faster where immigration rates are high than where they are low (Enchautegui 1993). ”

    I’m either gonna get banned, or the webmaster of this site will get rid of the “comments” section of this blog, because I’m refuting arguments so easily here!

34. #34
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:06 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Onetreeworth
    Yes I support FAIR and I actively push for Immigration Reform

    Surge,
    You are very intelligent but I don’t see where you show any difference between legal and illegal immigration. Do you feel any immigration (legal and illegal) is acceptable?

35. #35
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:18 pm, Surge said:

    “Here are some interesting statistics on crime & illegal immigrants.

    http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/back704.html”

    This article provides no links to the “evidence” and “statistics” it cites.

    Therefore, it is invalid.

36. #36
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:26 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Surge,
    Maybe if you were actually refuting arguments but you really are not. First the difference between GDP and GNP is GNP includes overseas production by American companies where GDP only looks at domestic production a very big difference. Second The Urban Institute report deals with fiscal costs not impact of life or non fiscal costs
    You seem fond of quoting from one site and one report..it looks at State level but not industry level wages and lets look at the date of this 13 year study hmmmm 1992 so the study started in 1979..gee that is an up to date study the other studies quoted are from 1991 and 1993. So we have studies that ended over 10 years ago. And we have a legal immigration rate of about 1 million people a year and an illegal immmigration rate of at least that. So from the time of the latest study you quote we have added at least 20 million people to the workforce ( I say at least 20 million because that doesn’t include minor children who have grown up).
    Nice try but I don’t see where you have refuted any arguments yet

37. #37
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:32 pm, KB said:

    Gee, I live in AZ and I have a white, citizen cleaning lady and a white, citizen landscaper. I have no problem paying a few extra dollars more than the bottom-feeders who are willing to pay minimum wage or less and further depress wages for jobs that citizens used to be able to do, and make a decent living at.

38. #38
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:35 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    RIGHT ON KB!!!!

39. #39
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:35 pm, Surge said:

    “Most illegals offer no allegiance to the United States and in a bind will not stand with her.” Martin aka Blogbat

    Wrong.

    “General Jonathan Wainwright praised the men of the 200th and 515th units (Southwest U.S., mostly Latino, Guard Units who fought in the Pacific during WWII) saying that “they were the first to fire and the last to lay down their arms and only reluctantly doing so after being given a direct order.”

    http://www.houstonculture.org/hispanic/memorial.html

40. #40
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:56 pm, CrazyFool said:

    I dont give a rats whisker about the ‘costs’ verses ‘benefits’ of ILLEGAL aliens.

    Its really very simple.

    They are here in violation of federal laws.

    The people who hire them do so in violation of federal laws.

    Illegal aliens are not ‘law abiding’ by definition.

    There *is* a legal process for foreigners to immigate to the United States. There is a legal process to seek refuge status (another loophole).

    If you dont like it, change the law. DONT ignore the law or selectively enforce the law – that violates the ‘Rule of Law’ which we live under.

    nuff said.

    Stop trying to blur the distinction between immigration and illegal ALIENS. Illegal aliens are *NOT IMMIGRANTS*! They are, at most, ILLEGAL VISITORS. They have not been granted immigration status and they have no legal standings.

    I consider immigrats to be those who have legally immigrated and followed the procedure, had a background check, interview, and have been granted a immigration-class visa by the INS.

41. #41
    On July 21st, 2004 at 4:59 pm, Digger said:

    Surge,

    I don’t care what that report says.

    When you have a job opening and only 2 people apply you have less room to negotiate their pay than when you have a job opening and 1000 people apply.

    Anyone who believes that a bunch of illegal immigrants have no effect on wages is just full of crap.

    Also anyone who believes that crap has never actually run a business with employees.

42. #42
    On July 21st, 2004 at 5:08 pm, Surge said:

    “First the difference between GDP and GNP is GNP includes overseas production by American companies where GDP only looks at domestic production a very big difference.
    You seem fond of quoting from one site and one report..
    So we have studies that ended over 10 years ago. And we have a legal immigration rate of about 1 million people a year and an illegal immmigration rate of at least that. So from the time of the latest study you quote we have added at least 20 million people to the workforce ( I say at least 20 million because that doesn’t include minor children who have grown up).
    Nice try but I don’t see where you have refuted any arguments yet” James Kotthoff

    From the most comprehensive study on the effects of immigration “The New Americans” by the National Academies of Science:

    “This baseline analysis focuses first and foremost on immigration’s direct effect on the economy through the addition of workers to the labor force. At the most basic level, immigration increases the supply of labor in the economy. More labor means more goods and services being produced, so that national output (GDP) rises.”

    And since the 2000 U.S. Census shows the immigrant population has increased exponentially, you can exponentially increase the benefits of legal and illegal immigration!

    Want the empirical evidence?

    Read: http://books.nap.edu/books/0309063566/html/137.html#pagetop

    I’ve got plenty of information & resources to back up arguments. I haven’t seen much back up from you or others in this blog to try to prove your arguments.

    Oh, and for those that were curious about my citizenship status, I’m an American citizen of Mexican descent, born in the U.S. to hard-working, legal AND illegal immigrant parents.

43. #43
    On July 21st, 2004 at 5:25 pm, Bruce said:

    Serge continually, and I expect deliberately, equates “Illegals” with “Hispanics” Whatever good some native-born Texan grunts did in Vietnam 35 years ago, is automatially credited to some border-running criminals in 2004, because they are of the same racial origin (not Raza, race). I don’t need the obvious, here.

    I’ve had enough of being attacked and challenged my hispanic racist imports, and their fifth-column support, in my own country.

    There isn’t any point we reach, in my opinion, in which these things get better on their own for Americans. We’ve seen the behavior involved here, it is consistant time and time again. These people require someone be made the loser here, and that being necessary for their satisfaction, I propose they be made the losers. We need to turn a deaf ear to this horsehockey from these folk, and their native enablers, and throw ‘em all out. I don’t care if some of these folk are nice individuals. Just as many of our folk are nice individuals, we will get by just dandy on available niceness supplies. What they are doing as a people is exceedingly *not nice*, you owe nothing to people who desire to lay such a thing to your doorstep. Boot ‘em all out. Continue taking down candidates with the ballot until they do what we tell them to do about this.

44. #44
    On July 21st, 2004 at 5:41 pm, Surge said:

    Serge continually, and I expect deliberately, equates “Illegals” with “Hispanics” Whatever good some native-born Texan grunts did in Vietnam 35 years ago, is automatially credited to some border-running criminals in 2004, because they are of the same racial origin (not Raza, race). I don’t need the obvious, here.” Bruce

    Actually, it’s Caucasian-Americans who have continually link Latinos and illegal immigration, and totally ignore the rampant illegal immigration of Europeans (from the former Soviet Republics, Slavic nations, etc.).

    Also, Mexicans, illegal and “Manifest Destiny” American citizens not only fought for the U.S. since Civil War, but they’re combat deaths are disproportionate to their numbers in the U.S. military (In Vietnam, 4.9% enlisted, 19.8% died in combat).

    A few grunts, huh? I’m more than positive that you COMPLETELY LACK the same strength, pride and fortitude these patriots had to fight for your right to express your twisted opinion.

    I’m sure you would not be willing to die for you beliefs like these heroes did.

45. #45
    On July 21st, 2004 at 6:02 pm, James Kotthoff said:

    Nice try Surge but I suggest you go look at the FAIR report on the cost of ILLEGAL immigration in Arizonia which takes into account both studies you quote.
    And from the economic stand point you missed the basic fact that a higher supply of labor creates a lower wage which in turn creates a lower demand for goods and services. Granted more labor resources allow for more output but only when the cost of labor is lower I.E. lower wages and fewer benefits. Which in turn would create a lower demand for goods and services (less money to spend). Which in turn would create less of a demand for labor (less jobs). So we sit in a situation of more labor resources driving labor cost down…driving demand for goods and services down…driving demand for labor down. This is especially true in less skilled positions.

46. #46
    On July 21st, 2004 at 7:18 pm, onecent said:

    “General Jonathan Wainwright praised the men of the 200th and 515th units (Southwest U.S., mostly Latino, Guard Units who fought in the Pacific during WWII) saying that “they were the first to fire and the last to lay down their arms and only reluctantly doing so after being given a direct order.”

    Hey, Surge, they were American citizens you are citing. Hispanics have always distinguished themselves in the armed forces, same with Native Americans. They are citizens of long standing after all. Want to give us some numbers on Mexican national serving in our armed forces? They can,you know. But, that’s not what illegals are here for or the committment they want to make to us? Next catastrophic event by terrorists, I’m not counting on illegal Mexican brigades to save me.

    Here’s some insight for you first hand, as New Mexico is my home state, Hispanics – those legal Americans of many generations here – resent illegals for all of the same reasons we all do. This isn’t an ethnic issue. Illegal immigration is a form of identity theft. It is hijacking the space, culture and order of another’s home.

47. #47
    On July 21st, 2004 at 8:39 pm, PDN said:

    Surge:

    I have noticed that those who believe latinos were robbed of the southwest have a tendency to use certain talking points when argueing about the cost/benefits of illegal immigration: in point of fact they do not distinguish between legal and illegal but just say immigrants. Your talking points also jumble legal and illegal together. I submit to you that you probably don’t care at all about illegal european or asian aliens, only latino. Given this bias, and the fact that you think you are answering the arguements about the costs of illegal aliens with data about legal immigrants, I don’t think you want to find the truth about costs at all but have a hidden agenda about taking back what you believe was stolen. Unfortunately, bitterness only hurts the person who is bitter.

    PDN

48. #48
    On July 22nd, 2004 at 12:27 am, KB said:

    Ok, here’s a post that actually addresses the point of this blog:

    The Tucson Border Patrol sector releases, on average, 75-80 illegals, all OTM’s (other than Mexicans) every week. They get a piece of paper by which they promise to appear at their nearest immigration office within a month, and promise to show up for court.

    Now considering that virtually none of these people are eligible to remain in the US and face removal if they bother to go to court, how many do you think show up? And that’s just one, single BP sector.

    How many come to commit crimes, or turn to crime (they have no right to work.) How many gave false identities? How many are criminals, and gave false identities, thereby avoiding arrest or one of the few and far between detention beds?

    And how many, after successfully evading immigration for say five years, and have settled comfortably into their lives in the US with little fear of the migra, will howl and scream bloody murder when a broken tailight or driving without a license thrusts them under the eyes of an immigration agent working in a jail?

    When they profess ignorance about the long-standing deportation order, and cry about the two or three US citizen children they sired, and the wife, parents and 2 or three other kids they sent for via smuggler, who is huddled at home, because they too are illegal?

    And then the newspaper plasters his puppy-dog mug on the front page of the paper with the headline, “American dream shattered for hard-working immigrant!” And the story about how his kids have asthma/learning disabilities/the sniffles/ that only US health care can cure (at taxpayer expense.)

    And some senator blusters about how immigration is picking on fine, upstanding would-be citizens, and calls for immigration to leave him alone, and let him live a normal life with his adorable family?

    And when the employer, who whines about him being the “best worker they ever had” (despite paying him minimum wage for a job that paid three times that 10 years ago) and letters to the editor come in, demanding that immigration find the “real criminals” or how it’s “racist”, or pointing out how immigration could go to any number of street corners and pick up illegals if they wanted to.

    Or, of course, the thousands of illegals from Europe, Asia, Central America, Mexico, Africa and everywhere else in the world) many of whom have been arrested and released, or ignored, or skipped out on a ridiculously low bond a sanctimonious immigration judge imposed to ensure the illegal’s “freedom” while waiting for the hearing date two years down the road at which time he will be ordered removed, or the beneficiary of sanctuary policies, or the result of lack of detention) who murder, rob, rape and commit all manner of felonies and misdeameanors against US citizens, residents and other illegal aliens.

    Nope, releasing thousands of illegals into the US isn’t any big deal or harmful to this country on so many levels ‘tall.

49. #49
    On July 22nd, 2004 at 11:44 am, TXLonghorn_Mike said:

    It is utterly ridiculous what our country is doing regarding illegal immigration. An earlier post mentioned the Dallas Morning News article saying 68 percent of Americans said our immigration polict was too lax and ineffective. I live outside of Dallas and read that same article which continued on to say over 85 percent of Texans and over 87 percent of Americans oppose illegal immigration and any kind of amnesty program.
    Does the administration listen? No. Do the Democrats (Kerry/Edwards) listen? No. People are wondering what GW Bush’s second term legacy will be- I fear that a total opening of the borders will be that legacy. Maybe not “amnesty” per se, but as close as he could possibly get to it. I think 9/11 is the only reason Bush didn’t do this in his first term. In 2005/06 after re-election I think he will make this a centerpiece of his domestic policy.
    I think John Kerry is missing a pretty golden opportunity here. If he came out against illegal immigration and could convince the people he wouldn’t flip flop on it after being elected. Oops I just went too far I guess. I would vote for a Democrat if I believed he gave a darn about border security.
    There are anywhere from 9 to 20 million illegals in the USA right now. The fact that estimates vary so widely is scary in and of itself. Every year Texas spends billions for them and gets in back from its citizens via one of the highest real estate property tax rates in the nation.
    It only shows the short-sightedness of minority politicians who don’t come out in favor of enhanced border security. Lower skilled workers of color, followed by lower skilled rural white workers are clearly the ones most effected by mass illegal immigration. Even in this economic recovery the NY Times laments actual wages decreasing. One of the main reasons is clearly illegal immigration keeping blue collar wages low.
    For those liberals out there that see this as a southern/southwestern issue and not a national one: have you heard of interstate highways? Nearly 10% of Georgia and Tennessee are now Hispanic. Undocumented nationals are flocking to Atlanta and Nashville.
    The chief in Michele’s post is in New Hampshire. This is clearly a national threat.
    Look at what illegal immigration is doing in Europe: in 2002 65% of rapes in Norway were committed by illegal Middle Eastern immigrants. Paris and London both have a permanent underclass of illegals that now resent the French and British citizens there. How long before Los Angeles, Dallas, Phoenix, etc. have that? Or do they already?
    If I were running for office my proposal would be as such: any undocumented worker would have 180 days to leave the US. Upon day 181 I would use the national guard, state police, local police, Border Patrol, even federal agencies and/or the military. This is where the ACLU would denounce me as “draconian”, La Raza calls me “racist”, MALDEF calls it “ethnic cleansing” etc.
    The illegals captured after the 181 days would be returned to their “mother” countries and not be allowed the option to legally immigrate to the US in the future. I would also deduct $100,000 for any foreign aid paid to that country as a fee for the removal of that illegal alien.
    The illegals that left in the first 180 days would be allowed to legally immigrate to the country, but would not be eligible for any government entitlement save social security (only if they contribute to it). Legal immigration would be limited to 100,000 annually to ease population and they would be required to be able to speak at the minimum basic conversational English.
    Any takers??

50. #50
    On July 22nd, 2004 at 1:15 pm, Surge said:

    “I have noticed that those who believe latinos were robbed of the southwest have a tendency to use certain talking points when argueing about the cost/benefits of illegal immigration: in point of fact they do not distinguish between legal and illegal but just say immigrants. Your talking points also jumble legal and illegal together. I submit to you that you probably don’t care at all about illegal european or asian aliens, only latino. Given this bias, and the fact that you think you are answering the arguements about the costs of illegal aliens with data about legal immigrants, I don’t think you want to find the truth about costs at all but have a hidden agenda about taking back what you believe was stolen. Unfortunately, bitterness only hurts the person who is bitter.” PDN

    I’ve noticed people like you who can’t make a valid argument tend to resort to personal attacks and assumptions about one’s beliefs and views, in order to justify your invalid and wrong views.

    I’ve EXPLICITYLY stated both legal and illegal immigration is beneficial to the U.S. I advocate for immigrant rights here in Chicago, and work closely with Polish and Filipino immigrants, as well as Latinos.

    Also, please take the time to read the reports I have posted here. It covers the BENEFITS of immigration, LEGAL or ILLEGAL, at the local, state and national level.

    And please stop making assumptions about people you do not know. You know what they say about people who ASS U ME!

51. #51
    On July 22nd, 2004 at 9:46 pm, PDN said:

    Surge:

    Ok. I admit I made assumptions. Never the less, I didn’t just cast aspersions, I also noted that you JUMBLED legal and illegal together (I did not say you didn’t include illegal and legal). You really haven’t adequately responded to the separate costs of illegal immigration as cited by Mr. Kotthoff. So far, everyone seems to agree with you that legal immigrants are a net plus. The only area of disagreement is on illegal aliens. Because you haven’t really addressed as a separate issue the costs of Illegal aliens, it is hard not to wonder if you have a hidden agenda. By the way — I have not decided yet whether I think we should have open borders but fewer benefits, or closed borders and full benefits. Maybe you made assumptions also?

    In true debate comraderie,

    PDN