Posted on 06/11/2014 10:46:34 AM PDT by illiac
Heck, I favor immigration.
The LEGAL kind.
That’s a fair point. Bottom line for me is I’d rather bring in skilled workers who can be productive and not unskilled who are quickly new dependents.
I’ve seen good productive employees from Asia have to go home and quit their jobs...would rather see people like that stay if they want to. Our immigration system is way outdated.
That’s not taking into account American job losses though.
A baited hook if I ever saw one in a poor excuse for journalism...
See, the way I see it, the Tea Party is not so much against immigration, its the ILLEGAL stuff that has everyone’s bowels in an uproar...And rightfully so...
I figure in some countries, you get in there illegally they usually shoot you on the spot, leave yer body to rot as an example to others following your path...
But hey, we be a civilized nation of laws here...
BTW, FMs 4u...
The cost ALREADY is prohibitive-—on both counts.
Putting lipstick on a pig doesn’t make it smell any better.... i.e. federal immigration..
AND those lips are disgusting.. whew...
the breath.... <<<— don’t ask..
Immigration policy should always serve the interests of citizens first and foremost.
This is something you will never hear in any public policy discussion among the DC grandees. How many immigrants should be admitted, and how did they arrive at that number... from what countries, for what reason, to what advantage to the citizenry.
LOLOL! Indeed.
Written by a hyphenated name. I don’t trust folks who do that; it screams liberal..
Tea partiers are not against immigration...
We’re against “ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION” and open borders. Legal immigrants who want to become American are more than welcome.
>> Immigrants increase gross domestic product growth.
Enough to cover themselves and the displayed unemployed?
>> Immigration expands the American workforce
According to the bogus unemployment numbers that fail to record indefinite unemployment?
>> and encourages more business startups
By providing off-the-books labor otherwise subject to Min Wage rates that discourage legal labor hiring?
... the displaced unemployed?
Without controls on immigration, America is in serious danger of losing our character: what makes us distinctly American, as those who have come here overwhelm existing culture and rather than become American become balkanized splinter groups who describe themselves as hyphenated subsets of the population. Not only does this deprive us all of a national sense of purpose and identity, it creates readily exploitable rifts in our population which have been shamelessly used for political ends, to our universal detriment, as those scalywags who would utilize those rifts tear down any sense of national unity.
What is left is a scrum of gibsmedats, scuttling after whatever freebies their political benefactors will throw them, while the nation is thrown into debt to support that largesse.
Some, controlled, immigration is a good idea, but the uncontrolled melee at the borders is far from that.
Yes, we should. However, when more than half of the people occupying the space in which the Republic exists truly believe otherwise and vote that way, that, for that majority, will become the invalid question.
So the question is, "How close are we?" The particular genius of our founders was to balance "Democracy" with "The Republic." The balance is skewing toward "Democracy," at the expense of "The Republic."
Thanks for pointing out that I wrote the question in the wrong form. "....should we more like Chile ...or Bolivia? really ought to read "....WILL we become ...?"
The Romans spent 3 centuries trying in one way or another to restore their Republic. They failed. How do we not fail? We have many more resources than they did. How are we going to use them?
That was the original, somewhat sensible thought behind the regulation of earlier waves of immigration. (Of course it was influenced by Nativism, Anti-Catholicism, Anti Semitism, Anti-Bolshevism, Racism, Xenophobia of all sorts. TS!) Control the flow from various countries to give those who needed it time to "americanize," to learn to communicate with Americans and each other. Think of it as "Diversity." If a Swede were going to do any business with an Italian, it more or less had to be in English of some sort. (Learned, no doubt from an Irishman.)
Scumbag Kennedy's "Immigration Reform" of 1965 knocked all this quaint Americanism into a cocked hat. The numbers pouring in from Mexico alone dwarfed the previous waves of immigration and as we have learned over the past 50 years, if everyone is a Latino, why learn English? IMO, we would be writing exactly the same thing if 30%+ of the population were suddenly Czechs or Poles.
At the 100-year anniversary mark of Terrible Teddy's Plan for Eternal Democratic Domination, Latinos just might very well be in the majority. ¡Bienvenido a tu ex-país, Gringo! OBTW, as the Congressional Black Caucus might suddenly realize any day now, "minorities and children will suffer the most."
No argument here...
Mexico, such a great country... /s
It’s so bad it’s adults and children flee.
Yep, that’s Liberal utopia alright.
“Lipstick on a pig.” An apt description of every attempt by a Liberal to justify any item on their agenda.
“No thank you very much.”
LOL! Exactly.
Thanks for the BEEP.
I favor imigration. Legal, and within limits. What I don’t favor is unchecked and illegal immigration, especially from third-world country immigrants with no respect for anything here. They are net drains on society, not consumers who add to it.
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.