Immigration Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
cawacko

cawacko

Well-known member
I thought support or non-support for the bill would fall along traditional partisan lines but after reading Mott's comments maybe that's not the case. I'm curious what others think about it and if you would vote yes or no if you were in office.

For me personally in a perfect world I would give a path to citizenship to those who came here legally and overstayed their visas. I wouldn't for those who came here illegally. I would work to set up a system to allow those who want to come here to do the menial labor most Americans won't a (better) legal way to do so.

If I was in office I would vote yes for the bill. (add usual caveats of its not a perfect bill, things I don't like in it etc.)
 
I agree it's not perfect, but I'd probably vote yes. I do think we need to legalize the ones who are here illegally in order to get them labor protections. I agree we need a "guest worker" system that actually works - in that it provides our farmers and others the resources they need if they can't find them locally; and it protects the workers, keeps them from being exploited; and figures out a way to deal with social security payments they make but won't claim if they retire back to their home country.

Overstaying the visa or coming through the border - they are both illegal. But we need to make the visa process more streamlined and more sensible.

And there needs to be a path to citizenship for those who choose that route.

Just my opinions. Did a bit more in the other thread around the abuse of people with visas...
 
we already have a path to citizenship for those here legally.......all we really need is a way for those here illegally to have a path to being here legally.....I think anyone who can find a job that supports them without government assistance should be granted a work visa....

however, I think an employer who hires a foreign worker should be required to pay a surcharge, say $1-$2 an hour to finance the system of keeping track of work visas.....this would also guarantee that it would be cheaper to hire a US citizen than a foreign worker.......

I also think that until they become a US citizen a foreign worker should not be entitled to SS benefits or pay into the SS fund (though the employer should have to pay the same amount in whether the employee is a citizen or foreign worker)......
 
Since there's already been one amnesty and now people want what is in essence another amnesty (making those here illegally, legal); what do we do the next time we face this?
 
Bush had Congress for the majority of his reign. What did he do about illegals already in America?

Nothing because the Right Wants to use them as new, modern day slavery. Yet all the talk was back once Bush was out of office and the Right expected Obama to do what Bush couldn't.

Obama created a bill in a time of monetary need that he was exposed to when entering the White House. The Dream Act. Todays' bills are just a baby of the dream act "just different enough" so the Right
can say the idea was theirs.........

Because if it's not YOUR idea, it's a bad idea.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Since there's already been one amnesty and now people want what is in essence another amnesty (making those here illegally, legal); what do we do the next time we face this?
Click to expand...

Obama's Dream Act meant the children of illgals had to be in the military or college to become a citizen with time.

Tell me what choice the children of these illgals had, and tell me what should happen with the parents.

I tend to think that the child had no say in the matter and should be grandfathered in since too many presidents before were asleep at the reigns.

Yet this could only happen if the party in power for the last decade or so considered them "humans".

Either Americans need to accept equality and statistics, or they will always be punished by statistics and equality.
 
Anti-Party said:
Obama's Dream Act meant the children of illgals had to be in the military or college to become a citizen with time.

Tell me what choice the children of these illgals had, and tell me what should happen with the parents.

I tend to think that the child had no say in the matter and should be grandfathered in since too many presidents before were asleep at the reigns.

Yet this could only happen if the party in power for the last decade or so considered them "humans".

Either Americans need to accept equality and statistics, or they will always be punished by statistics and equality.
Click to expand...

While that was a nice diatribe, it didn't really provide any substance for the question that I asked.
If you have the time, would you be willing to give another shot?
 
As I said in another post. It's obvious that the rights opposition to a pathway to citizenship is essentially the same group of Bubba's who oppose civil rights for blacks. So only an idiot of the highest order doesn't see what their opposition is based on.

I sympathise with the plight of most illegal immigrants and am open minded about pathways to citizenships for those who have been productive and contribute to our great nation as most do.

But that doesn't change that this piece of legislation is bad legislation and would have the impact of undermining labor standards, mainly wages, for both the working and professional classes. It is essentially bad legislation. Visas should not be prioritized based on industries needs. They should be prioritized based on family needs.

That's not to say that we shouldn't consider the needs of business but only a fool would prioritize them over family.....and when push comes to shove my values say family is far more important than business (that's not to say business isn't important).

So yea...as it's currently being proposed I oppose this legislation.
 
I would vote no. I'm pretty sympathetic to law breakers in America, but not on ones of our national sovereignty. Making it easier for them to come here legally sure! All for it. But giving them amnesty? No. They should be returned to their home country ASAP. And I'll disagree with Mott on visa priorities. Bringing people with valuable skills into this country is essential, so they can pass it on down to other Americans.
 
LORD of the FISHFLYS said:
I would vote no. I'm pretty sympathetic to law breakers in America, but not on ones of our national sovereignty. Making it easier for them to come here legally sure! All for it. But giving them amnesty? No. They should be returned to their home country ASAP. And I'll disagree with Mott on visa priorities. Bringing people with valuable skills into this country is essential, so they can pass it on down to other Americans.
Click to expand...
....and cut wages in half. You misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not opposed to permitting them visas. I'm opposed to prioritize them over families. Also the line of shit by corporations that they can't find skilled people to fill job openings is bullshit. They can't find people to fill those positions at the low price point they are offering. I'm not about to expand visa rights on that basis.
 
cawacko said:
I thought support or non-support for the bill would fall along traditional partisan lines but after reading Mott's comments maybe that's not the case. I'm curious what others think about it and if you would vote yes or no if you were in office.

For me personally in a perfect world I would give a path to citizenship to those who came here legally and overstayed their visas. I wouldn't for those who came here illegally. I would work to set up a system to allow those who want to come here to do the menial labor most Americans won't a (better) legal way to do so.

If I was in office I would vote yes for the bill. (add usual caveats of its not a perfect bill, things I don't like in it etc.)
Click to expand...

This movie has already played out once before. Reagan fell for the "Grant amnesty and we will stop illegal immigration". Thirty years later, "there you go again". I would vote no. Of course it will pass. The GOP seems hell bent on self destruction because they have bought into the Beltway bubble of "you can't win elections unless you pander to the hispanics and grant amnesty".


There will be no border. There will be no enforcement. The country is crumbling and people don't care. But hey, as long as they don't call you a "bigot" or a "racist" or a "woman hater" who really cares right?
 
Sending 10 to 15 million people out of this country is NOT the solution.

Yes, we need to fix this enough that we don't end up in the same situation in another 20 years. Along with giving the people already here some legitimacy, that means redoing the visa process and worker program in the future so people don't feel they have to sneak in.
 
stupid is as stupid does.

why is it the right cant ever think things through like adults anymore?


Why is their default setting always set on the idiot setting?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
As I said in another post. It's obvious that the rights opposition to a pathway to citizenship is essentially the same group of Bubba's who oppose civil rights for blacks. So only an idiot of the highest order doesn't see what their opposition is based on.
Click to expand...

That is pure nonsense. The only idiot is one who would suggest such nonsense.

I sympathise with the plight of most illegal immigrants and am open minded about pathways to citizenships for those who have been productive and contribute to our great nation as most do.
Click to expand...

As are most people. However, the argument that granting amnesty only encourages more people to come here via any means necessary rather than via a legal means is valid. While a revamping of our legal immigration policies (especially the costs involved) would help alleviate the illegal means of entry to a point, it still would encourage the illegal means overall.

But that doesn't change that this piece of legislation is bad legislation and would have the impact of undermining labor standards, mainly wages, for both the working and professional classes. It is essentially bad legislation. Visas should not be prioritized based on industries needs. They should be prioritized based on family needs.
Click to expand...

No, Visas should be prioritized based on industry needs. Otherwise you end up with people on work visas that are not qualified (or interested) in the jobs that are available.

That's not to say that we shouldn't consider the needs of business but only a fool would prioritize them over family.....and when push comes to shove my values say family is far more important than business (that's not to say business isn't important).
Click to expand...

Only a fool would say that a families needs should mean they get a visa vs. providing visas for jobs that are available.
 
Only a fool would say that a families needs should mean they get a visa vs. providing visas for jobs that are available.
Click to expand...

Would you feel the same way if it was your family member waiting to enter the country?

But it's not an either/or - we can handle families AND workers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top