- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Illegal Immigration vs Legal Immigration
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:25 pm
Before 1914 The US had completely open boarders.
We did not exclude any immigrants regardless of where they came from, their race, ideology, religion, skill set, etc.
We said come if you want and we are happy to have you.
After 1914 we closed our borders and started an immigration policy.
Today why can't we have the same policies as we had before?
Because...
(I added this line since no one seems to read I answer my own question in the following statements)
We have over the course of the last 100 years instituted Government policies that Guaranteed certain rights to all who come here.
We have instituted services that are paid by the general populace through taxes and have made laws that give fundamental rights and services.
For example. Any person who goes to an emergency room is required by law to receive medical care and can not be denied whether you can pay for those services or not.
We have made policies that require by law schools to admit you whether you are a citizen or not.
We have literally made 1000s of such laws and those are just two examples.
Now because of these same laws it has become important to make sure that the ONLY immigrants who now come to the country provide a better benefit to the society as a whole than what they take from the society.
Before the 1960s the best benefit to the country was probably illegal immigrants vs legal immigrants because we did not have many of the laws on the books and did not provide more monies to care for immigrants than what they produced.
Now because of what we require as basic services(social compact) i.e. "rights" by government laws it is detrimental to have practically any immigration whether legal or illegal.
We did not exclude any immigrants regardless of where they came from, their race, ideology, religion, skill set, etc.
We said come if you want and we are happy to have you.
After 1914 we closed our borders and started an immigration policy.
Today why can't we have the same policies as we had before?
Because...
(I added this line since no one seems to read I answer my own question in the following statements)
We have over the course of the last 100 years instituted Government policies that Guaranteed certain rights to all who come here.
We have instituted services that are paid by the general populace through taxes and have made laws that give fundamental rights and services.
For example. Any person who goes to an emergency room is required by law to receive medical care and can not be denied whether you can pay for those services or not.
We have made policies that require by law schools to admit you whether you are a citizen or not.
We have literally made 1000s of such laws and those are just two examples.
Now because of these same laws it has become important to make sure that the ONLY immigrants who now come to the country provide a better benefit to the society as a whole than what they take from the society.
Before the 1960s the best benefit to the country was probably illegal immigrants vs legal immigrants because we did not have many of the laws on the books and did not provide more monies to care for immigrants than what they produced.
Now because of what we require as basic services(social compact) i.e. "rights" by government laws it is detrimental to have practically any immigration whether legal or illegal.
This post was edited on 12/6/16 at 6:57 pm
15
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:27 pm to Loserman
we have indoor bathrooms now as well as plumbing
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:28 pm to Loserman
Wtf are u rambling about 
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:30 pm to Loserman
Why cant we monitor who come in accross our borders? every other country doe it....
this is not 1914.... back then the mid west was sparcly populated....
this is not 1914.... back then the mid west was sparcly populated....
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:31 pm to Loserman
I liked the idea of paying a fee/loan for the right to legally immigrate and that that must be paid back to the government. Supply and demand.
This post was edited on 12/6/16 at 3:32 pm
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:48 pm to Loserman
you still had to get citizenship you nitwit frick
You think Angel Island and Ellis Island didn't monitor who came in?
You think Angel Island and Ellis Island didn't monitor who came in?
Posted on 12/6/16 at 3:52 pm to Loserman
quote:
Before 1914 The US had completely open boarders.
We did not exclude any immigrants regardless of where they came from, their race, ideology, religion, skill set, etc.
You ever heard of the Chinese Exclusion Act?
Posted on 12/6/16 at 4:04 pm to Loserman
And a motherfricker use to get hung in public for stealing a horse.
frick it come to think of is lets go back to open borders and old laws too
frick it come to think of is lets go back to open borders and old laws too
Posted on 12/6/16 at 4:19 pm to Loserman
Not everyone who came was allowed to stay. The diseased and with no demonstrable skills were turned away.
Also, they were coming to become citizens, not residents. The latter is much of what we are getting now.
There is a path to citizenship. Many do not choose that path. If they choose otherwise, then I won't waste a tear over them being sent home.
Also, they were coming to become citizens, not residents. The latter is much of what we are getting now.
There is a path to citizenship. Many do not choose that path. If they choose otherwise, then I won't waste a tear over them being sent home.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 4:37 pm to Loserman
In 1914, there was no possible way to secure our borders. We also didn't have the social welfare state that we have now which would be unsustainable with unlimited immigration. We are a much wealthier nation than we were then, which means we have more people wanting to come here now. Travel is also easier now than it was then, and enemies from other countries can very easily come here to destroy us.
There are so many reasons why open borders are a bad idea. Times have changed and so should our immigration policies.
There are so many reasons why open borders are a bad idea. Times have changed and so should our immigration policies.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 4:51 pm to Loserman
quote:
We did not exclude any immigrants regardless of where they came from, their race, ideology, religion, skill set, etc.
We said come if you want and we are happy to have you.
So you call yourself LOSERMAN......., got it!
Posted on 12/6/16 at 4:59 pm to Loserman
We can't just open the boarders to everyone otherwise they would be a massive influx of people from all the world. Many of them wouldn't even contribute very much to society. If someone wants to move to the US they should do so like legal immigrants do so today.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 5:00 pm to Loserman
The early immigrants all the way up to the 60's & 70's were coming here to work, build a better life and become part of the American dream.
Most of the people coming in illegally now are coming for free benefits, don't believe in the American dream and or want to destroy or transform the country due to their religious/ideological beliefs.
A country is defined by it's borders and you can't have any security or rule of law today without secure borders.
dims want them here to get on the gravy train (Cloward & Piven Strategy) and to sign them up to vote dimocrap so they can continue transforming the country.
Most of the people coming in illegally now are coming for free benefits, don't believe in the American dream and or want to destroy or transform the country due to their religious/ideological beliefs.
A country is defined by it's borders and you can't have any security or rule of law today without secure borders.
dims want them here to get on the gravy train (Cloward & Piven Strategy) and to sign them up to vote dimocrap so they can continue transforming the country.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 5:06 pm to Loserman
Well ya see, there's this thing called population growth and limited resources.
Oh, and with technological advances, weapons of mass destruction.
At some point you Libtards need to understand what the term "unsustainable" means.
Oh, and with technological advances, weapons of mass destruction.
At some point you Libtards need to understand what the term "unsustainable" means.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 6:09 pm to Loserman
Controlling your borders is common sense and as others have stated, it was not really feasible to do so prior to 1914. Similar to Australia in the same time frame, the US needed immigration to bring people to the US willingly. The problem has arisen that you can't take everyone. A saturation point was reached where immigration has become a net negative on people already here.
What people refuse to accept is that having controlled borders and entry/immigration into the United States is the key to a stable and successful nation. The government is hemorrhaging in debt all over the place in large part due to entitlement programs that often provide those here illegally, whom do not pay taxes (save me the sales tax bs) that help support the country.
The excuse to allow this? It keeps prices low for everyone. This is an utter fallacy. It doesn't do that at all in the big picture:
1) They pay no income tax, and companies avoid payroll taxes/social security/medicaid, etc.
2) They utilize more public services for health care, education, legal representation (they get that free if you didn't realize it), as well as many other things.
3) A small portion increases both violent and non-violent crime.
4) It leads to more Americans on the government sustenance system because they aren't getting jobs nor are they pushed to get jobs.
These are just a few factors, so yes, while we pay less for some things, we pay more in the end both in taxes, built up debt and loss of benefits that we already paid into (such as Social Security and Medicare).
If you spend a fraction of that on enforcement, provide more jobs with slightly hire pay for actual American citizens/legal immigrants, you can then reduce tax burdens on the average American and companies together.
You may net paying a slightly higher figure on some of things, but society will be all the better for it, because you won't have a government that can't pay for infrastructure development, or health care development, etc.
Finally, by legalizing even "children" brought here illegally, you set the precedent that it is okay and will be rewarded eventually and discouraging people using the legal means which is quite expensive. If you want to legalize "illegals" in some way, offer them no path to citizenship but work visas with harsh restrictions and high taxation. Money should stay here, and not be allowed to leave the country. This is harsh, but will start showing people that there is bite in immigration laws and their enforcement.
What people refuse to accept is that having controlled borders and entry/immigration into the United States is the key to a stable and successful nation. The government is hemorrhaging in debt all over the place in large part due to entitlement programs that often provide those here illegally, whom do not pay taxes (save me the sales tax bs) that help support the country.
The excuse to allow this? It keeps prices low for everyone. This is an utter fallacy. It doesn't do that at all in the big picture:
1) They pay no income tax, and companies avoid payroll taxes/social security/medicaid, etc.
2) They utilize more public services for health care, education, legal representation (they get that free if you didn't realize it), as well as many other things.
3) A small portion increases both violent and non-violent crime.
4) It leads to more Americans on the government sustenance system because they aren't getting jobs nor are they pushed to get jobs.
These are just a few factors, so yes, while we pay less for some things, we pay more in the end both in taxes, built up debt and loss of benefits that we already paid into (such as Social Security and Medicare).
If you spend a fraction of that on enforcement, provide more jobs with slightly hire pay for actual American citizens/legal immigrants, you can then reduce tax burdens on the average American and companies together.
You may net paying a slightly higher figure on some of things, but society will be all the better for it, because you won't have a government that can't pay for infrastructure development, or health care development, etc.
Finally, by legalizing even "children" brought here illegally, you set the precedent that it is okay and will be rewarded eventually and discouraging people using the legal means which is quite expensive. If you want to legalize "illegals" in some way, offer them no path to citizenship but work visas with harsh restrictions and high taxation. Money should stay here, and not be allowed to leave the country. This is harsh, but will start showing people that there is bite in immigration laws and their enforcement.
Posted on 12/6/16 at 6:48 pm to Loserman
quote:
Today why can't we have the same policies as we had before?
Two world wars, and a Great Depression were the catalyst for the stricter immigration policies. Now, add in the fact that the US has moved towards capital intensive goods and we don't need open borders as the incomes in labor intensive industries are being depressed.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News