Immigration - August 2007

Aren't they being exploited, and won't that remain in the minds of their children for many generations to come creating hatred and resentment and hindering assimilation of their American born offspring? I realize coming here is a quick fix, but is anyone thinking of the long term picture?

2007-08-21 10:02:29 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

Yes, I asked this question a few days ago. Someone reported the question as a violation before I could vote. Thanks.


Illegal immigrants from Canada, Europe, Africa, and Asia are arrested and deported. The ones who want to stay make efforts to acquire a work visa and green card. This takes many years and lawyer fees in most cases. Then, there is another long wait before they can apply for citzenship. They learn to speak English. They don't demand that the public schools be taught in their native language.

Illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America are allowed to stay. If any are arrested and deported, there are marches in the streets about the unfairness of sending these hardworking (they are ALL hardworking?!?) people back, as if there is something wrong with the USA government. Many refuse to learn English and some want public schools to be taught in Spanish.

Shouldn't all immigrants be required to follow the same immigration laws? Why is leeway given to Latinos?

2007-08-21 08:54:42 · 13 answers · asked by bikerchickjill 5

their answers are always, "go back to Mexico" or something, as if they know everyones' situation. Maybe its time for them to go back to school and stop polluting Y!/A.

2007-08-21 08:48:39 · 17 answers · asked by Agent 99 3

2007-08-21 08:07:16 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

So all you anti's want mass deportation right??
Heres the thing, the leaders in the presidential race don't really talk about mass deportation. They talk about securing our borders and "enforcing" the current immigration laws.
In reallity heres what they want. They want to get elected, "secure" our borders and eventually give amnesty. WHy don't you guys see that...they know mass deportation WILL NOT WORK.. . . .
i have yet to hear a candidate say they want mass deportation and by the year 2012 i predict we will have had amnesty and not mass deportation. . . .and by the way, lou dobbs will probably have a heart attack when this happens lol. . . .

2007-08-21 08:01:54 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

The illegal Mexicans claim they have more of a right to be here because they and the Native American Indians were here first and we came and stole the land from the Native American Indians
Did not the Mexicans decend from the rape and pillage of the Native tribes who were here before them?
Didn't the Spanish actually come here first and show our ancestors how to not just steal the land as we did, but wipe out entire civilizations?
I thought that while our ancestors wer tricking, fighting, and yes killing the Natives, their ancestors were useing them as slaves and exterminating them other than the ones they kept and bred with.
Didn't the Natives actually fight them as hard as they did us even after the Pure-blood Spanish left?
Shouldn't the Mexican decendents of these attrocities hide their heads in shame rather than make false claims against us?
Is this distortion of the fact dues to their cultural machismo and just a by-product of the fact that they are worthless leeches?

2007-08-21 07:39:19 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

my parents used to be illegal immigrants but they raised to me respect the law

2007-08-21 07:38:56 · 20 answers · asked by Jesus 2

I was watching the news, and this illegal alien who was being interviewed claimed that our immigration law was broken. She asked why would we enforce a law that we knew was broken.

I think there might be a problem in communicating to the illegals what exactly is going on here. When the law says not to do something and you do it anyway, that is something we call "breaking the law". The law was "broken" by you because you did not obey it. When we say the law has been broken, we are not claiming or even implying that there is a problem with our laws. The only problem is that you are ignoring our laws and publicly claiming it is your right to disobey our laws. THAT is the problem.

Does anyone else think part of the problem may have to do with a misunderstanding of what "breaking the law" actually means?

2007-08-21 07:29:01 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Mexico will undoubtedly require international aid to assist in their recovery following the devastation wrought by hurricane Dean.

It is only right that the United States join in this international effort and help the Mexicans recover after this disaster.

Clearly, Mexico has suffered tremendous human losses in this natural disaster, and it just so happens that the United States has roughly 11 million Mexican Citizens living in this country illegally.

By returning these criminals, we would help Mexico recover any population losses it may have suffered and remove countless, gang members, drunks, and other alien criminals from the United States. (If these "people" are as "hard working" as Mexico claims, they should be glad to have them back.)

This is clearly a win-win situation and should be implemented immediately.

2007-08-21 07:07:55 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

By Ken Schoolland


I hear it from some of the nicest people one would ever meet. Some dear friends of mine, whom I respect very much, say that all illegal immigrants are criminals because they broke the laws that control who may come into this country. And since these immigrants are criminals, we don¡'t want that kind of person here.
Sadly, such accusations confuse what is legal with what is moral. American history is filled with people who broke unjust laws and were morally justified in doing so.


Legality ≠ Morality
The American Revolution was fought by men and women who broke the laws of England and of King George III. Had they been arrested, as was Nathan Hale, they would have been hanged for treason to the Crown. If breaking the law makes one a criminal, then the Founding Fathers were all criminals. But no one still believes that today.
Dred Scott and thousands of other slaves defied the Fugitive Slave Acts and ran away, "stealing themselves" from Southern plantation masters in the early 1800's. Those who were arrested were returned to their slave "owners," and anyone found trying to help them escape to Canada was prosecuted as well.
Thankfully, many juries exercised jury nullification. Declaring that the law was unjust, juries often refused to convict operators of the Underground Railroad. No one today would claim that a runaway slave was a criminal. Indeed, anyone who forcibly returned Blacks would now be considered guilty of having collaborated with the slave masters — albeit legal slave masters.
In the 1930's there were hundreds of Jews who came to American shores aboard the SS St. Louis, forcibly sent back by immigration quotas to perish in Hitler's concentration camps. Thousands or millions of potential refugees watched in desperate disappointment.
But suppose those passengers had defied immigration law and jumped ship in Miami harbor. Would anyone today call them criminals? I think not. Indeed, those who returned Jews to their persecutors might be considered guilty of collaborating with villainy — albeit legal villainy.


Treasures of the Earth
It may be illegal for people to seek freedom and opportunity in this country, but it isn't immoral. I admire the courage of immigrants who leave all that is familiar to them, risking life and limb on stormy seas and deadly deserts, in order to move to a strange land where everything is unfamiliar and potentially hostile.
Most of our ancestors moved for freedom and opportunity and we are the beneficiaries. Thank God they weren't arrested and sent packing, as were violators of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Indeed, we might wonder if we could have mustered the same measure of courage if we had been in their shoes.
It is convenient and simple to exclude new newcomers by calling them criminals. But the real reason is much more complex. For some people it is a fear of other races. For others it is a fear that newcomers might work hard and will "take" jobs. Others fear the opposite — that newcomers will not work hard and will take welfare.
In the first case, many immigrants are great entrepreneurs who offer jobs to Americans. Other immigrants take jobs, but they never "take" jobs that are not willingly offered to them by eager employers.
I often ask audiences: "Suppose you are an employer and you know only one thing about two job applicants in front of you: one is native-born and the other is an immigrant? Who would you expect to be the harder worker?" Audiences overwhelmingly favor the immigrant. Why? Americans are surely good workers. But the very act of migration is seen as proof of vigor, ambition, determination, and courageous self-reliance.


Choice: Employees Right, Employers Right
Americans have a moral right to make these choices for themselves — as employees and as employers. Says Robert W. Tracinski, a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute:


"The irrational premise behind our nation's immigration laws is that a native-born American has a 'right' to a particular job, not because he has earned it, but because he was born here. To this 'right,' the law sacrifices the employer's right to hire the best employees — and the immigrant's right to take a job that he deserves. To put it succinctly, initiative and productiveness are sacrificed to sloth and inertia.
"The 'American dream' is essentially the freedom of each individual to rise as far as his abilities take him. The opponents of immigration, however, want to repudiate that vision by turning America into a privileged preserve for those who want the law to set aside jobs for them — jobs they cannot freely earn through their own efforts....Any immigrant who wants to come to America in search of a better life should be let in — and any employer who wants to hire him should be free to do so."

To the legalist, however, who places law above moral right, the employer who hires as he pleases is a criminal. The legalist wants stricter penalties against employers who defy state mandates on hiring. Once again this is reminiscent of historic laws that were used to criminalize employers who dared to hire Blacks, women, and Jews. Violations were illegal, maybe, but not immoral.


Welfare Magnet?
But what of the immigrant who takes welfare? Isn't this a burden on society that must be stopped?
Yes, it is. But politically powerless newcomers are no more responsible for the welfare system in this country than they are responsible for the tyranny and corruption in a country that they are fleeing. Okay, stop the flow of welfare, but at the same time remove the plethora of [anti-] labor laws that make it difficult for newcomers to be hired.
It is wrong to assume that most immigrants come to America to get on the welfare gravy train. If this is true, then immigrants would be moving away from states with the lowest welfare and into states with the highest welfare.
My research (The Journal of Private Enterprise, Spring 2004) demonstrates that the opposite is true. In overwhelming numbers, both the native-born population and the foreign-born population through the decade of the 1990's moved away from states with the highest welfare and into states with the lowest welfare. While there are some high profile exceptions, most immigrants seek opportunity, not welfare.
The brilliant economist, Julian Simon, demonstrated that immigrants are a great source of productivity and economic growth. They always have been. Simon declares that most wealthy industrial nations will depend on the productivity of immigrants to provide revenues for the increasingly costly welfare demands of a native-born population.


Moral Principles
Governments do not decide morality. Governments behave morally when upholding moral action and behave immorally when suppressing moral action. Morality is based on principles far more constant and profound than the variant whims of majority votes.
The people who understood this best, were those rebels who defied the law of the day to pen these words: "WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men Are Created Equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
To George Washington this meant, "...­the bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions, whom we should welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges."

2007-08-21 07:07:53 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous

There will be lots of jobs in Mexico after Hurricane Dean moves through, do you think we could send a few thousand mexicans home to help out?

2007-08-21 07:03:15 · 20 answers · asked by photoguy1967 3

and send everyone back to the Old Country who had ancestors from somewhere else that did not have the proper documentation? I don't speak Norwegian. Can someone translate for me?

2007-08-21 06:56:24 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Dis is serious question.

2007-08-21 06:46:38 · 10 answers · asked by Cat-man-do 1

...of this whole immigration thing, please feel free to speak your mind. do you REALLY think the US would be better off without illegals?????

2007-08-21 06:24:46 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-21 05:30:24 · 28 answers · asked by Va smiley 2

With all the illegal immigration and decline seen in the USA over the past 7 years, do you think that they will be a Third World country soon? The UK is already halfway there too. Are the Chinese destined to take over after the US becomes weaker?

2007-08-21 05:12:26 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

I have this co-worker who is always making snide remarks about my relationship,and he has NO room to talk at all.

2007-08-21 04:57:26 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

I think they should be afforded no protection under the law either. If you are found to be an illegal you have no rights and all crimes committed against you are null and void.

2007-08-21 04:33:41 · 14 answers · asked by Michael C 2

I am not trying to be ugly, nor am I anti-immigration. I am truly wanting to understand.

I have been doing some genealogy, and 100 years ago almost every immigrant from any other country learned english within a few years of coming? What is different now? Why don't they learn english?

2007-08-21 04:32:04 · 37 answers · asked by Free To Be Me 6

I have a 2-1 Electrical Engineering degree and may move there, i work as an Account Manager in Sales in the UK?
I have a flat in Canada in Montreal but it's French i don't speak French so i am not sure if i want to live there really as i may not find work?
I will retain my flat there though for vacations.
My Wife is Canadian i was married there, does that mean i can work there also.
Can i work in the USA legally?

2007-08-21 04:01:15 · 11 answers · asked by VWBeetleBus 2

financially speaking, wouldn't the United States be better off prioritizing criminals for deportation instead of those who illegally receive benefits?

2007-08-21 03:54:10 · 5 answers · asked by CHARITY G 7

You've been so mean to us.



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/synopsis

2007-08-21 02:59:37 · 16 answers · asked by Carlos 3

One a scale of 1 - 10 . . . 1 being send everyone home regardless of circumstance and 10 being blanket amnesty for everyone regardless of circumstance . . . where are you? I'm about a six . . .

2007-08-21 02:40:40 · 15 answers · asked by CHARITY G 7

Is he still in the U.S. or is he in Mexico with his mother? If he returns to Mexico with his mother will that affect his citizenship in the U.S.? I think the U.S. will see this happen time and time again . . . is it reasonable to send the child home with his family but guarantee citizenship once he is eighteen?

2007-08-21 02:21:58 · 11 answers · asked by CHARITY G 7

Considering our country is 200+ years old and needs to show some dynamicism, I think that children born here are granted automatic citizenship ONLY if both parents are US Citizens. I really think this makes a lot more sense than having illegal aliens come here, have a child, and claim its a US citizen.

What do you think??

2007-08-21 01:09:20 · 6 answers · asked by Paul 6

Hi, I want to apply for re-issue of passport in india , my old passport did not have spouse name on it. I dont want to include the same on the new one as well since we are seperated for last five year. Is it mandatory to include the spouse name in the passport. Please advise

2007-08-20 23:36:02 · 4 answers · asked by mvg20002000 1

I am an EU citizen, and I would like to become a citizen...I heard that if you join the army they give you a greencard...is that true, or is it a myth?

2007-08-20 20:03:41 · 7 answers · asked by ingrid 2

Thay Are Asking Me That I Have To Pay 1250 Pounds for Immigrations Clearance and all that
Pls Guide Me

2007-08-20 17:43:35 · 9 answers · asked by nirav p 1

as I read many of the Q&A on yahoo I conclude we have some pretty stupid people here in the U,S, have they forgotten the men who have died fighting for this country and to uphold its ideas and way of life? many want a one world gov, others want to let any and all come to our country and so many of them want to live on welfare when they come here , evidently these people don't work for a living and pay half of ther salary or earnings in taxes to support these free loaders, is it so important to be P.C. that you would give away your birth right? our forefathers came to this country with nothing and damned near starved to death in the process, and since then our men have died to preserve this nation, what kind of stupidity is this wanting to accept people who have nothing to offer not even their allegience, and many will destroy us if they can, you must know America is getting weaker daily.

2007-08-20 16:23:34 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-20 16:14:10 · 32 answers · asked by ♥ ~Sigy the Arctic Kitty~♥ 7