Lamigra! Lamigra!!

Minnesota just ratified some changes to the way you are able to qualify for state aid.... to the point that you now have to be a US citizen. No more free rides, and I could not be any happier.

Osterkraut wrote:

MitchellC wrote: Most Hispanic immigrants are fully fluent in English by the second generation... I have read that this is much, much faster than immigrants of different lineages in our nation's past.

The Irish beg to differ.

Are you talking about the Irish who fled their terrible living conditions due to food shortages, corrupt government, etc..? Did they fill out all required paperwork before coming into the country, have it notarized, or did they jump on the boat thinking, "Dear God, anything is better than this E36 M3hole Ireland without even dirt to eat"?

My question is this: How are the modern immigrants different than any of the large population shifts that have occurred in times past? Somehow, we made do, and the additional culture was assimilated into the stew of America. I'm sure that some of my family was part of the Got-damn Irish/German/whatever immigrants who were making life marginally and temporarily more difficult for the existing residents. From what I see, the major difference is that we are writing more laws to maintain status quo.

A bit off subject, but here's an informal poll: What will generate more letter-writing: Citizens writing their senators because illegal immigrants are taking their jobs, or angry customers writing McDonalds because the McNuggets fell off the dollar menu once the plants are staffed by legals?

Feel free to call me a pinko liberal hippie if you wish.

If the economy gets much worse, the coming race riots will be huge, long lasting, and bloody. (on both sides)

I hate to see my country go through that because some politicians don't do their jobs.

MitchellC wrote: My question is this: How are the modern immigrants different than any of the large population shifts that have occurred in times past? Somehow, we made do, and the additional culture was assimilated into the stew of America. I'm sure that some of my family was part of the Got-damn Irish/German/whatever immigrants who were making life marginally and temporarily more difficult for the existing residents. From what I see, the major difference is that we are writing more laws to maintain status quo. Feel free to call me a pinko liberal hippie if you wish.

The big differences:

• Most of our modern immigrants are here illegally.

• We expect existing federal laws to be enforced, not supplemented by state laws.

• You see things differently than others.

I've no wish to call you a pinko, liberal hippie; your post defines your position.

MitchellC wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

MitchellC wrote: Most Hispanic immigrants are fully fluent in English by the second generation... I have read that this is much, much faster than immigrants of different lineages in our nation's past.

The Irish beg to differ.

Are you talking about the Irish who fled their terrible living conditions due to food shortages, corrupt government, etc..?

Actually I think he meant the Irish who already spoke English. As opposed to the Scottish.

Hmm... ask a Sioux how he feels about this.

MitchellC wrote: Can we hold our own to the same standards while we're at it?

Dear god thank you.

Joey

Appleseed wrote: Hmm... ask a Sioux how he feels about this.

If I did I bet he or she would say "Geez, I really wish my ancestors had put up more of a fight to keep those darn white immigrants out of North America, then we would still have our traditional way of life."

Bob

of course their ancestors were the immigrants at one time .... soooooooo....

Take the guys in Iraq/Afghanistan, bring them home, stick them on the souther border.

But I do love authentic Mexican food.

But the main argument against illegals is that we simply don't have the resources to support them.

Appleseed wrote: Hmm... ask a Sioux how he feels about this.

i'm pretty sure they would say that they needed more military might and more modern military tactics.. but they lost and the invaders won, so it's a moot point.

Am I the only one who's tired of hearing the "lets ask the Native Americans" or "People used to just come over all the time" arguments?

Things change people. Some could argue that what's going on right now is just more of that change I mentioned.

But these days we have laws, as does every other country. Laws that need to be followed. I'm not about to excuse them from following the laws because they came from a country that's having issue. I'm having trouble paying my bills right now, does that mean I can just stop paying them? It'll improve my quality of life.

I 100% think the immigration system needs to be fixed. But it isn't an excuse to let people enter the US illegally.

Salanis wrote:

MitchellC wrote:

Osterkraut wrote:

MitchellC wrote: Most Hispanic immigrants are fully fluent in English by the second generation... I have read that this is much, much faster than immigrants of different lineages in our nation's past.

The Irish beg to differ.

Are you talking about the Irish who fled their terrible living conditions due to food shortages, corrupt government, etc..?

Actually I think he meant the Irish who already spoke English. As opposed to the Scottish.

Look the guy who really is a pinko commie got the joke!

MitchellC wrote: My question is this: How are the modern immigrants different than any of the large population shifts that have occurred in times past?

big difference ... then there weren't any laws AGAINST their immigration ... now there is... you can make all the argument you want about the "fairness" of that but the fact is the illegals are just that illegal... and breaking the law should have consequences for them the same as if you broke the ( a ) law

Thought exercise:

If we make English the official language of the U.S.A. what happens in Puerto Rico?

Puerto Rico's a state ?

Puerto Rico is a territory or some E36 M3 like that. So basically nothing would change in Puerto Rico.

Ojala wrote: 2. Mexico is by and large a poverty stricken, violent, drug/cartel infested, and corrupt E36 M3 hole where often you cannot honestly feed your family.

Just to point out, you do realize this is in large part due to the US, right?

I mean, if the US didn't want the supply of drugs, the cartels would be a lot smaller.

HiTempguy wrote:

Ojala wrote: 2. Mexico is by and large a poverty stricken, violent, drug/cartel infested, and corrupt E36 M3 hole where often you cannot honestly feed your family.

Just to point out, you do realize this is in large part due to the US, right? I mean, if the US didn't want the supply of drugs, the cartels would be a lot smaller.

if we'd just stop this insane war on drugs, the cartels wouldn't make money any more and a lot of the problems there would go away. all of their profits would go to reputable companies like Pfizer that have nothing but our best interest in mind..

At least Pfizer isn't beheading people and hanging them from bridges?

No, I believe that they destroy their enemies in court with patent lawsuits.

Puerto Rico is a U.S. Commonwealth Territory. It has the same President, plus they are represented in Congress, if I recall correctly. Everyone born there is a U.S. citizen, and you don't require a passport to travel there.

There is a lot of debate there if Puerto Rico should become a state, become a sovereign nation or remain a US Territory.

Brett_Murphy wrote: Puerto Rico is a U.S. Commonwealth Territory. It has the same President, plus they are represented in Congress, if I recall correctly. Everyone born there is a U.S. citizen, and you don't require a passport to travel there. There is a lot of debate there if Puerto Rico should become a state, become a sovereign nation or remain a US Territory.

as a DC resident, this peeves me off.

not that I think they shouldn't be, just that we're not.

yes, i know, i choose (well, swmbo chose) to. at least it's easier to go heckle someone about it than it would be from the caribbean.

If any of these states actually wanted to enforce their immigration laws they would start throwing people in jail for employing them. That would take balls though instead of this B.S. political posturing.

The current policy is acceptance of illegal immigrants while kicking some dirt in their face every couple years to keep people pumped up for the next election. Come down hard on anyone who hires illegals and many illegal immigrants would self deport when they couldn't find employment.

I live in San Diego. I'm surrounded by Mexicans. For the most part they seem to all speak English. Many of them learned English by attending schools. If you are going to pursue a national policy that continues to encourage people to come here illegally to search for jobs, which i think we do, then you should probable educate them. In the long run it would probable have a lower cost to have them around if they are English speaking and educated.

Its easy to start thinking that most policies that target the immigrant side of the illegal immigration problem are thinly veiled racism when this type of enforcement seems to be largely ineffective. Mix this with an at best halfhearted effort to enforce and strengthen our current employment regulations and i'm left rolling my eyes every time i read a story like this. It feels like a cheap trick to get a couple votes.

I prupose a new policy: Cane the E36 M3 out of anyone responsible for hiring an illegal immigrant and seize their property. I've just solved the illegal immigrant problem. After its effective we can move towards a less draconian policy that keeps our illegal immigrant population at an acceptably low level.

BAM!

Next up I'll fix our national drug policy while simultaneously re-stabilizing large swaths of the third world.

I find this quote somewhat topical: If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. - a black person

TLDR: This policy is stupid, cane the E36 M3 out of white people and take their money.

GlennS wrote: If any of these states actually wanted to enforce their immigration laws they would start throwing people in jail for employing them. That would take balls though instead of this B.S. political posturing. The current policy is acceptance of illegal immigrants while kicking some dirt in their face every couple years to keep people pumped up for the next election. Come down hard on anyone who hires illegals and many illegal immigrants would self deport when they couldn't find employment. I live in San Diego. I'm surrounded by Mexicans. For the most part they seem to all speak English. Many of them learned English by attending schools. If you are going to pursue a national policy that continues to encourage people to come here illegally to search for jobs, which i think we do, then you should probable educate them. In the long run it would probable have a lower cost to have them around if they are English speaking and educated. Its easy to start thinking that most policies that target the immigrant side of the illegal immigration problem are thinly veiled racism when this type of enforcement seems to be largely ineffective. Mix this with an at best halfhearted effort to enforce and strengthen our current employment regulations and i'm left rolling my eyes every time i read a story like this. It feels like a cheap trick to get a couple votes. I prupose a new policy: Cane the E36 M3 out of anyone responsible for hiring an illegal immigrant and seize their property. I've just solved the illegal immigrant problem. After its effective we can move towards a less draconian policy that keeps our illegal immigrant population at an acceptably low level. BAM! Next up I'll fix our national drug policy while simultaneously re-stabilizing large swaths of the third world. I find this quote somewhat topical: If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. - a black person TLDR: This policy is stupid, cane the E36 M3 out of white people and take their money.

just so we're clear- you want the children of illegals to be educated in our public school system, but you don't want their parents to be able to legally work and pay taxes to help pay for their children's education?

i like my way better- kick them out and let them come here legally.. if their children are anchor babies that were born here and are legal citizens, then give the kids the option of being able to stay here with foster families.