The real problem with the immigration issue...

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by OPTIONAL777, May 7, 2010.

  1. One of the big arguments against the illegals being here, is that they are here illegally.

    Damn right, they are here illegally.

    Should we punish those who break our laws?

    Darn right.

    Should we punish those who profit from the breaking of laws, but are not directly involved?

    Damn straight.

    Okay. So here is what we do.

    We find the illegals, and interrogate them to find out whom they worked for.

    Then we prosecute those who hired the 20 million illegals.

    Then we require everyone who bought anything, or had any service performed by illegals to pay back a "rebate" the US government for participating in the entirety of the crime.

    Think this is silly?

    Say you innocently go on Craig's list and buy something some stranger is selling. Then you go to resell it, and find out that it is stolen property.

    Have you committed a crime by receiving stolen merchandise in the first place?

    Yep. How are you punished? If you are deemed innocent in the sense that you did not know it was stolen when you bought it...all that routinely happens is you lose your purchased merchandise and the money you paid for it.

    So here is how it works.

    1. We get the illegals and their confession of whom they worked for...offering them a deal for their testimony against the employers who broke the law.

    2. They we find out who purchased the goods and/or services that came from the employers breaking the law, and we charge them a fine for purchase goods/services produced by the illegals.

    This way all the guilty parties are punished.

    What a great plan! Punish all the guilty parties, set a precedent for punishment of illegal actions (knowingly or innocent) Mexican or American, and get back to good old American or legally permitted workers...

    Of course no one will complain about the higher prices for goods/services when only legal workers are employed...
     
  2. Great idea. They always try to pin it on the little guy; who's littler than some immigrant trying to get by the best he can and ignores borders because he has to feed himself somehow.
     
  3. I'll take it a step further. Punish those douche bags in the states that provide sanctuary, provide healthcare, and other benefits.

    I can think of no bigger bunch of criminals than the state and local governments in California.

    do you agree?


     
  4. Anyone who knowingly engaged in a crime, or support of a crime would be culpable.

    That means California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and all the other states...

    No need to single out California though...the problem would also include anyone who profited from illegal activity, including money saved by buying any product or service that was cheaper because of the labor of illegals...

    It is a national problem, not a state problem...

    It really is pretty stupid to point at one state and say they were the worst...when all are at fault.

    If California was the worst offender, does that exonerate other states?

    Absolutely not...

     
  5. PatternRec

    PatternRec Guest

    Bad plan. Even in spirit. Here's why;

    Let's leave your plan in place as is. Since ignorance is no excuse of the law, if YOU bought any product or service unknowingly, you to are liable. You can't arbitrarily end the extent and scope of prosecution.

    So if your landscaper used illegal aliens, since you a paid for the service of landscaping with this contractor, you too are as guilty as he is and should be subject to the sanctions you put forth.

    Not all employers knowingly hire illegals. They just don't have the facility to verify the falsified documents a great many illegal aliens purchase and use.

    Therefore if you want to enforce the law, the plan that is in keeping with that notion is to round up all the illegal aliens and deport them. Period. That alone severely punishes those who hired them as they are now without employees and since their business model was based on using illegal employees, they won't be able to compete and will likely lose their livelihood. Of course it affects the community they serviced as prices will invariably go up for services they had provided to attract legal employees.

    Another plan that isn't as disruptive is to close and secure the border with a mix of strategies. Basically militarize the border with Mexico. Then grant probationary amnesty to all illegal aliens here so they can work towards citizenship. Many of them have family here and have built a life here - becoming valuable members of the community where they work. Yes, they came here illegally. But the Us government is partly to blame for making it so damn easy and for failure to enforce the law all these years. Especially post Clinton when illegal immigration spiked. The economics of illegal immigration is so intertwined into the local and national economy that draconian deportation measures would collapse many local economies that support people of Latino descent.
     
  6. If they militarized the border, that would mean they would win the war on drugs?

    LMAO...

    Stupid fools don't understand the basic principle of supply and demand.

    If there is demand for something illegal, and if there is a profit in selling it or providing it to satisfy the demand...the criminals will find a way to get it across the border...

    Good Gordon, people sure are stupid to focus on the supply and ignore the demand...just like the war on drugs...

     
  7. PatternRec

    PatternRec Guest

    Funny. I don't recall saying or implying anything about the failed war on drugs.

    Hmmm...

    And since supply and demand is a two way street. Cut one, either one, and the other is curtailed by default. Economics 101.

    Hey, no worries. Other posters with actual reading comprehension skills will come along in a little while to help you understand.
     
  8. Illegal drugs and illegal aliens: both coming across the border.

    Illegal drugs: Supply rises up and meets the demand. No demand for illegal aliens, no market for supply.

    Illegal aliens: Supply rises up and meets the demand. No demand for illegal aliens, no market for supply.

    Yet the nitwits focus on the supply side...idiotic.

    Let's see, how about making alcohol illegal (i.e. prohibition). Lets control the supply side. What happens? Bootlegging, speakeasy, homegrown, etc.

    So how well does trying to control the supply side work?

    Government (the evil government of the US of course) makes it their job to control the supply. Drug lords (or illegal alien providers) know that the border control can be bought off...so they by off the border control...and the supply continues...

    It is ridiculous to think that supply side economics works, it is ridiculous to think supply control war on drug works, and it is equally ridiculous to think that supply control of illegals will end the demand...and the corruption that gets them in when greed prevails.

    When greed was elevated to a virtue, then breaking the law became more acceptable, if not rationalized as virtuous.

    It is not going to be until Americans renounce greed in favor of genuine patriotism will these problems we have change.

    It all goes back to greed, and the rationalization of breaking the law (i.e. hiring illegals) in the name of greed...over what is best for America.

     
  9. PatternRec

    PatternRec Guest

    Illegal drugs: Supply drops, price increases. Demand therefore drops in favor of alternatives.

    Illegal aliens: Supply drops, wages for remaining illegals increases since they are no longer a mere commodity. Therefore demand for illegals drops since they now have wage elasticity that is on par with legals and they have a skill set based on experience that legals won't have since they haven't been doing some of the work these illegals have been dominating for years.

    Like I said, Economics 101. These studies have already been done. So you should drop the "nitwits" and "idiotic" since you are inadvertently referring to yourself with your simple and anecdotal understanding of economics.
     
  10. PatternRec

    PatternRec Guest

    Very poor example. I'll let you figure out why. You might discover it in what will likely be your hapless attempt at defending it.
     
    #10     May 7, 2010