Posted on 12/26/2004 1:20:04 PM PST by 4.1O dana super trac pak
President Bush says he wants to revamp an immigration system that is "not working" and is "not compassionate" through a program that can't work and would be anything but "compassionate" to Americans forced to pick up the tab.
During his end-of-the-year news conference, the president formally revived his expanded "guest worker" proposal first laid out as a set of "principles" a year ago. But the Bush plan is quite unprincipled and, by any other name, another in a long line of amnesty programs. Bush confidante and former Montana Gov. Mark Raciot disputed that characterization to me during the fall campaign. But that's exactly what it is. And it will do what amnesty programs do best - fail.
Details of the president's plan go to Capitol Hill next month. Mr. Bush wants to allow illegal aliens - up to 8 million if not more - to hold jobs here "legally" by issuing "temporary worker cards." American workers would not be hurt, the president insists; these legalized illegals would fill jobs that U.S. firms supposedly can't fill.
Not only will the administration proposal "take the pressure off" Border Patrol agents who should be "chasing crooks and thieves and drug runners and terrorists," the president said these illegals are innocuous, "good-hearted people." All they want to do is "put food on the table...Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River."
But apparently common sense does.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
To paraphrase:
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Illegal immigration is the abortionist of invention! ;-)
Thanks for bumping the thread.
Man you are such a smart guy! Your time will be coming on this site.
Better inform the mods about all the horrible threads and comments I post.
Let me know how you make out. G'nite.
Yeah, its sad, comical, and frightening how the Left equates modern day advocacy for states rights (there is a 10th Amendment afterall) with slavery.
We are talking about several million employers. Not a few.
No enforcement for 30 years.
The voters want these folks working here. And they are voting with their pocketbooks and the candidates they vote to represent them. Illegal immigration is not a problem with the vast majority of voters.
And the voters have voiced that they don't want to pay those extra costs, but they still want the workers.
They don't get done there.
Why not apply this principle to the jobs "Americans will not do," and allow the free market to bid up wages for American workers?
Some jobs just are not worth that much.
How do you propose to pay for the education, and health care for the families of foreign workers who will do "the jobs Americans will not do"?
The proposal on hand is the workers, but we are already supplying this for illegals so nothing much changes here.
I support the President's proposal for regularizing the flow of Mexican workers in and out of the country. My reasons are:
(1) Demographics. World population will double by 2050 [from six to 12 billion]. The US is maintaining domestic population [at about 300 million], but not growing. With the growth worldwide coming in potentially hostile (muslim) populations, we need friendly immigrants who share our principles to maintain our position in the world. Witness the numerous non-citizen immigrants presently fighting in our armed forces in Iraq. By contrast, Europe is losing domestic population and has primarily muslim immigration.
(2) Peace and Stability. We do not want violent revolution on our southern border. Emigration to the US is a beneficial safety valve for stagnant economic growth in Mexico. Yes, economic reform in Mexico would be desireable, but that will eventually by pressed upon them by global competition (China is beating their pants off by using capitalist means, while Mexico remains too mired in socialist politics).
(3) Social Security and Economic Growth. The SS problems of a growing number of retirees compared with our working population will be eased somewhat by additional workers from Mexico, required to be on the payroll under the president's program.
(4) No Troops or Walls on the Border! Although Hilary and Bill O'Reilly may not have noticed, our troops actually do have something to do already. So they cannot be placed along the Mexican border just to help them pass their time of day. Equally importantly, we do not want armed troops using automatic weapons to keep peaceful families from coming into our country. Nor do we want walls keeping out starving families. The president is entirely right in stating that family values and human worth do not stop at the Rio Grande. We should embrace the Mexican people who come here with an industrious outlook.
President Bush is also right in saying it is simply the right thing to do.
I could go on, but I know everyone is busy. It is important that Republicans begin to understand these important points.
President Bush is proposing the right thing, and conservatives have good reasons for getting behind him to DO the right thing.
Did you miss this thread? 'NOT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS COME HERE TO WORK '
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1292334/posts
Several million ? Hardly.
Several million people do not use illegal nannies and own construction firms. It is the classic economic example of an externality where a business cuts its costs by dumping them on others. A manufacturer who dumps his toxic waste into the river cuts his costs by having people downstream die of cancer. A company that employs illegals cuts its payroll costs by making the taxpayers pay for all the social services that masses of poor people will consume.
It is the voters with their tax dollars who must pay for the social services consumed by huge numbers of poor people. And there are more taxpayers than employers of nannys.
No problem with the majority of voters ? Try peddling that in a border state.
H1B handles that little problem.
Don't get done ? Somehow diapers were changed, dishes were bussed and lettuce was picked before illegals.
Some jobs are not worth that much ? Illegal immigration is corrupt employers forcing down the cost of non to semi skilled labor by dumping on the taxpayer the cost of social services. Do you think Mara Salvatrucha and the rampant lawlessness that is turning border regions into hell is some kind of bargain we can afford for a penny less a pound for lettuce ?
If you cut Americans off from their welfare, minimum wage would be enough to get them to do these jobs (unless they choose to starve instead of working).
It sure didn't take long for you to show up on this thread to post your same old tired sophomorical drivel.
Must you people post 100 of these threads every day? This is obsession of the worst kind.
Like everybody else on FR, YOU have the choice what threads YOU choose to read. It just so happens MANY FReepers have an interest in this topic. Best if you just STFU and move on to another thread.
If those who employ illegals were given tickets and fined for every illegal for every day they employ them they would stop hiring illegals and the illegals would stop coming. This would change the flood of illegals coming across the border to a tricle and would leave just those involved in smuggling or some sort of criminality to pick up. It sickens me the way these supposedly Conservative commentators work overtime to sell this "Guest Worker" nonsense. Their "Put Troops on the Border" talk is just talk to make them sound like they're really tough on illegals,when what they're pushing for would bring even more of the third world here to take jobs use services and drive down wages for everyone. It's a lie that "They are only taking jobs Americans won't do." There are already exemptions for migrant agricultural workers who do the harvesting, as their should be. There should be no fines for those hiring migrant agricultural workers. Under "Guest Worker" however they wouldn't be taking just the low wage jobs. It would be any job where the employer says that they can't get enough people to apply for the job at what they are willing to pay. Might your employer like to pay less? If Rush and Bill O`Reilly love "Guest Worker" so much maybe some graduates of the University of Bombay with degrees in broadcasting can take over their jobs for much less pay.
Putting those workers on the books eliminates some of that.
Do you think Mara Salvatrucha and the rampant lawlessness that is turning border regions into hell is some kind of bargain we can afford for a penny less a pound for lettuce
Having a guest worker program would allow at least some kind of "vetting" process, that could, if used well (big caveat here) reduce these problems.
So, let me get this straight. If a FReeper doesn't agree 100% with President Bush's proposed changes to our immigration laws, then that FReeper is a Buchananite kook? That is some really strange reasoning on your part.
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.