Posted on 01/24/2006 4:19:22 PM PST by Aetius
Bush says guest workers could not stay By Stephen Dinan THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published January 24, 2006
President Bush yesterday said illegal aliens who take part in his guest-worker program would not be allowed to stay permanently. "I do not believe that any guest-worker program ought to contain amnesty because I believe that, if you granted amnesty to people here working now, that would cause another 8 million people or so to come here," he said in response to a question from the audience at a speech at Kansas State University. Mr. Bush said illegal aliens could join the guest-worker program, but they would have to go home just like future temporary workers from overseas.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
If we would just make it a lot less comfortable to remain here illegally they would remove themselves.
The Chinese are an interesting point, they can sneak in from Mex. or Can., but they aren't swimming here from China!
They require organized crime to get here directly from China, and their presence proves yet another weakness in our national defense.
Nothing better to say than things racist and not true, czar?
Hence, your election result winning percentage.
So you don't attend LaRaza meetings then?
Well, OK, if you say so...
"PICKIN AND PLANTIN!"
You kidding?
That was the old days, now they are taking jobs in construction, electronics, retail, etc.
They are moving into jobs many Americans would LIKE to have!
The line about their only doing jobs "Americans won't do" is pure BS.
The reality is that the invaders are here to break the law and keep wages depressed! Working under the table without with holding for taxes and SS that Americans pay, working below the minimum wage, or working a skilled trade for $5 an hour less than prevailing wage.
Unions LOVE them, they do whatever the Union ask, even voting away the worker "rights" the Union has used to justify their own existence.
I don't know the reason that they didn't introduce it. I was asking you since your something of an exspert on the subject.
without immigration (legal), our population growth would be negative, because of abortion, as well as other social factors which result in low birth rates. Its not just in the US, its happening all across europe as well.
but I agree, we cannot have legal immigration so long as we have this massive illegal flow at the same time.
Life must be hell when your interest co-incide with Ralph Nader's.
Certainly you do not mean Tancredo's.
Nader IS for limiting legal immigration, but for entirely different reasons than Tancredo. Nader believes Illegals have a right to social/welfare benefits, drivers licenses and all the rights and benefits of American workers. This hardly coincides with Tancredo's view.
Negative population growth?
FANTASTIC!
One reason the "good old days" were better was that the U.S. was so much less crowded.
Smaller communities, cleaner air (without drastic measures), shorter commutes, easier to draw a hunting tag, less demand on resources!
Crowded "Urban" area's are crime infested liberal area's.
Negative population growth sounds so good to me that I am working on moving to one of the very few Nevada counties that is experiencing it!
yes, except that its a demographic death knell - economically and with regards to sustaining the society. europe is in trouble, and for them its worse because the people they have chosen/allowed to immigrate into their countries (muslims) are so culturally disimilar to their native peoples, that its going to result in huge problems. in the US, that would not be the case - legal hispanic immigrants are culturally similar to americans (although the desire for bi-lingualism is becoming a problem), but we need a sane, orderly system of immigration like we had in the past in this country - that has been lost to us now by the open border with mexico.
I don't buy that.
It's become a mantra I have heard all my life, something we are expected to believe without any supporting evidence.
I have seen what rapid population growth has done to the area I live in, and it's NOT good for most of us.
It's great for the wealthy people moving in, and Hell for the people who have been here for some time.
It's a requirement for the big chain stores, and death to small business.
It's a similar pot of gold for realtors, and toxic waste for families who wanted to be able to leave the farm or ranch to their children.
"Negative Growth" (an oxymoron) would indeed cause problems for Ponzi schemes like social security, and it would be an issue for people who have based their fortunes on double digit increases in real estate prices.
But, with some adjustment to our economic strategy, it could be just what the country and planet needs in the long run.
But without control over our borders, we have no control over our growth in any case.
FDIC would scream bloody murder, of course, about packing all those dudes back home.
As for Nader and others on the far left and their positions on immigration, you'd have to say that they are turning. A large segment of the enviros have already shifted to anti. The marxists were always pro because that was the natural position for their ant-business position. They are also shifting as they begin to percieve immigration as a tool of business. They also correctly percieve that best way to hurt business is to constrict the labor supply.
I knew I would be sorry. Another ignorant comment from Ben. I own a business, I am not against businessman.
"The marxists were always pro because that was the natural position for their ant-business position"
Tell me again, why are you "pro"?
I agree with your assessment.
I think where oceanview is going is, the "native" population finds itself having to match the reproductive rate of the newer arrivals in order to maintain any resemblance of the existing culture. Basically we get out-bred into minority status in our own countries. If I'm wrong oceanview will probably correct me.
You are right, without border control, and an orderly immigration program, growth will always be out of control.
One doesn't have to spend much time on FR immigration or free trade threads to see a whole lot of individuals here who hate the business class plus a lot of general class envy.
As for me being pro, I'm not, that is just your group's way of dealing with those who disagree with you. You try to paint me as pro-illegal or un-american.
The most precise way to describe my position is to say that agree with Greenspan's concept of a "robust labor supply". Given the demographic reality, the US has had to, and will need to, import a lot of labor. I happen to think guest workers are better than illegals or new citizens and I think that the BushPlan is the best choice of the guest worker options. But, knowing the political stand-off in DC on the issue, it is entirely possible that we will be depending on the illegals for a couple of more years.
For a real laugh Google: Greenspan "robust labor supply"
That's right, the only place this exists, is in a post by you, here on FR. LOL!!!
The political cartoon I posted is anti-imported cheap labor, not anti-business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.