Rubio and gang of 8 unveil bipartisan immigration plan.

This kind of common sense law abiding thinking will never be accepted by O'Bama voting leftists. Its fair, its "comprehensive", it protects the border, it insures legal immigration, and provides for deporting the criminal element. To leftists that is racist and immoral and unjust, and worst of all Obama did not think of it. That is just how progressive leftists think.

 

Not true. We are NOT a nation that is going to round up 11million people and send them out of the country. It's OUR fault we LET them come in and didn't secure our borders in the first place. It's not their fault for wanting a better life. Our country obviouisly needed their skills or else they would NOT have found work here. As far as Americans would want a fruit picking job if it paid well enough? Yeah, right.....Unions would want $25/hr plus benefits to pick fruit. And this is the ONLY reason some on the left....the Unions and their supporters.... don't want them here. It's why Senator Barack Obama and other Democrats blew up the 2007 attempt at immigration reform...because they were beholding to the Unions and the Democrat presidential primaries were about to start.

 

Improving border security has two components both of which relate to reducing the number of illegal border crossings. Better enforcement and better immigration laws that allow more legal immigration.

We've seen a dramatic increase in the enforcement of our borders as illegal border crossings have been cut in half over the last four years. This has been accomplished by moving resources closer to the border as well as being more effective in using the resources funded by Congress.

As addressed in the immigration proposal expanding legal immigration will also allow more foreigners to come here legally which will dramatically reduce the number of those that are denied legal immigration that later cross the border illegally.

Only about 200,000 people illegally cross our border today (based upon memory) and if those 200,000 can come here legally then the number of illegal border crossings would theoretically be zero. Of course zero can never be reached because we'll always have those that cross illegally for nefarious criminal purposes like smuggling drugs but by removing those that would come here for ligitimate purposes our border security can focus on those that are coming here for criminal purposes and be far more effective in doing so.

I'd like to point out something that Paul Ryan recently said:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/paul-ryan-meet-press-obama-fiscal-crisis-170944283--election.html

Ryan is correct, the United States was founded upon immigration and when it was founded there were fundamentally no restrictions on immigration so let's return to "traditional American values" where we don't limit immigration based upon discriminatory criteria. Yes, we can prohibit criminals or those that would come here for nefarious criminal purposes but let's allow everyone come to America that wants to participate in the "American Dream" that was the foundation for immigrating to America in the first place.

 

Yes, it's our fault they're here illegally but it isn't because we didn't secure our borders. It's because we didn't allow them to come here legally because we had discriminatory immigration laws. Also of note is that the majority of the estimated 11 million undocumented aliens in the United States did not cross the border illegally. Most came here legally but later had their visa expire. .

It is also true that we need these workers because there is work for them. These workers, regardless of "conservative" propanganda, are not taking jobs away from Americans. Americans won't typically work in the jobs they hold because the pay is too low to live on. How many "Americans" are really willing to live four families to a house or apartment that many immigrants are willing to do and are forced to do because they work at minimum wage?

 

What obligation do we have to them? Who says we need to make it easy for people to immigrate here?

Speaking of propaganda... the idea that 'these workers' are doing the jobs that Americans won't do, is nothing BUT propaganda, a mere talking point. When times are tough, as they are now, people (including citizens) will do what they need to do in order to pay the bills, which includes these 'jobs Americans won't do'... which by the way only accounts for a very small portion of the Jobs that illegal immigrants hold.

 

What govt entitlements did immigrants get when the US was founded? Well you can certainly fix the worlds poverty that way, anyone in the world in real poverty would be crazy not to rock up for the free food, free money, free services, free healthcare ect. It would last while the few with jobs are happy to be taxed at the massive rates it would take to afford all that (95c on every dollar), but then again you're not exactly able to afford services for the people currently or the budget would be balanced.

 

I've done in-depth genealogy research on several of my lineages. And in doing so, one picks up a lot of history; personal history. They all came early....some going back to the 1600's; many came in the 1700's. ALL came BEFORE our country was even a country. They came for many reasons; some were religiously persecuted in the lands they came from; some came because all their families' wealth and lands went to the eldest son and there was nothing for them; some came because of the offer of FREE lands in return for settling these open and untamed lands.....which was hard; extremely hard. IOW's they needed people....and lots of them. Many came with nothing; many of them indentured themselves out to work for a rich cousin for a period of years to pay back their ship passage; many were discrimminated against when they arrived---for being poor and/or for their nationality. SO.....they worked hard; they followed the rules....and many of them FOUGHT in the Revolutionary War and helped form this country. They set up the towns, they built schools, they started businesses......and eventually they achieved a better life for themselves and their families and for the following generations to come. There was no entitlements.

 

It's amazing to me that some people can't figure out why open borders and an entitlement state can't work.

 

In case people can't figure it out, immigration reform is about you getting paid less. It has nothing to do with racism.
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/medialink/3102-illegal-immigrants-cause-wage-depression-video.htm

 

What is discriminatory about our immigration laws? Is it simply because we don't want to be overwhelmed by immigrants from third world countries and prefer well off immigrants from first world countries?

 

Yes, not only is it discriminatory it is also delusional. The United States is not going to be "overwhelmed" but those seeking freedom and liberty by immigration to the United States even if they're poor. They're coming here to work their way out of poverty seeking the American Dream and they will benefit our economy and America in the future. It is amazing that there are those that are so ignorant as to advocate protectionism because it doesn't work and places a nation at a disadvantage in the international economy. Protectionism not only relates to products but even moreso to labor. Additionally it is also delusional to believe that immigrants take away jobs from Americans.

If anyone would actually "take away jobs from Americans" it's the college educated foreigners that we'd allow to immigrate and not the unskilled workers. How many are aware of the fact that nearly one half of US college graduates are over-qualified for the jobs they hold today?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...arly-half-are-overqualified-for-jobs/1868817/

In addressing the overall economic effects let's take one simple example how limiting "low skill" immigration "hurts" Americans. Social Security is failing financially because the ratio of workers to retirees is decreasing. Immigration adds more workers. Now, do we want more people working to support Social Security or do we want to raise our FICA/Payroll tax rates? Make a choice, higher tax rates or more immigrants because that's the two choices. Of course many conservatives say "Neither" and instead want to cut the existing poverty level Social Security benefits which will, in turn, require more federal assistance for food and housing which again requires raising the tax rates on workers to fund.

Those that argue against an open, non-discriminatory, immigration policy simply don't have any support for their arguments because they are based upon delusional thinking and prejudice as opposed to facts and data.

 

we have already been overwhelmed by 12 to 25 million illegal aliens who are taking jobs that should belong to unemployed Americans.

 

This is the common problem with "conservative" thinking. It confuses two completely different issues. Immigrants to the United States today are coming here for a better life for themselves and their families. They are the ones that will pay the taxes to build new schools and they will start new businesses and they will succeed because that's why they want to come here. They come here for exactly the same reasons people have come here for the last 300 years.

"Entitlements" are a completely different issue unrelated to immigration. We have serious problems with our entitlement programs that are about mitigating the effects of poverty in America. We've had too many cases, for example, where a person or family that was really in need wasn't "qualified" for assistance because they earned a few dollars too much. The "criteria" we uses often forces a person to give up a job just to qualify for government assistance to cover costs for medical assistance for example.

We have Social Security that only averages about $13K/yr in retirement benefits that forces many retirees to also seek food and housing assistance. Let's work on at least doubling the average Social Security retirement income so that these people don't require food and housing assistance (personally I recommend privatization but that would require roughly $1 trillion in new tax revenue per year for next 30-40 years to make the transistion that "conservatives" oppose).

More importantly we need to address the reasons why we have so much poverty that necessitates welfare spending. Let's work on discrimination that results many millions of families living in poverty. African-Americans require more assistance than anyone else per capita because of racism that denies them equality of economic opportunity in America. Let's address gender discrimination where women earn less than 80% of what a man earns in a comparable job.

If we address the reasons behind poverty we can reduce proverty which eliminates the need for welfare assistance (entitlements). As long as we create the poverty by discrimination then the assistance is required. Only by reducing poverty can we reduce welfare (entitlement) spending.

Bottom line entitlements have nothing to do with immigration so let's not confuse the two issues.

 

I actually believe the estimate is about 11 million illegal aliens and there is no evidence that they are filling jobs that displace American workers. American workers are not typically willing to be domestic housekeepers or agricultural workers for example. Americans are not willing to live several families to a house or apartment because of the low wages these jobs pay but many immigrants do. Yes, people can say that if we didn't have these immigrants the wages would go up but in fact what happens is that if the wages go up then the demand goes down so the jobs simply disappear.

While anacdotal I actually competed in employment with "illegal" aliens very early in my career. I applied for a job willing to accept the same wages and the employer gave me the job because I was an Amercan willing to work at the same wage as the "illegal" aliens. If there is an American willing to do the same work for the same wages then American employers will hire them instead of a foreign worker. If "Americans" are willing to do the same work for the same wages then why did so much of the produce crop in Washington go unharvested last year. As I recall 25% of the apples weren't harvested because of a lack of labor. It's hard work that doesn't pay a lot and Americans didn't apply for the jobs.

 

Firstly i wont quote everything i adress of yours as it'll make the post way to long.

The only disillusion is your thinking, its staggering you lefties actually believe this rubbish. So basically you say people come to America for a better life and now matter their skills, language, age, wealth, health they'll benefit the country (ill say country as this applies to all countries really). You claim more people equals more jobs equals more tax and more to spend on SS/Welfare. If this were the case why then does China and India have such massive poverty and virtually non existent welfare? If the answer is simply more people, any people then they with 1b populations should have no poverty and massive welfare!

You then claim immigrants do jobs Americans wont because Americans wont work for such low wages. You ignore that those that do are illegals and dont get full welfare (they should get nothing), so of course $3/hour picking fruit is far better than $1/hour doing the same thing in their home countries. What you ignore is once they're made legals you want US citizens to work for below min rates, you ignore theres less incentive once they have full access to the welfare system just like other citizens. And of course why in the hell would you want Americans working and having to live in 3-4 families per house? You call this an increase in the standard of living for US citizens?

You use an argument that skill immigrants are a bigger problem because Americans with college degrees are in jobs for which they're over qualified. It says more about the types of useless degrees they get, the is fact many would be better served doing a trade. But i do agree immigration should be on need basis so if they are hurting citizens prospects then its wrong, cut it back.

The facts are more people does not equal more jobs. Yes they come for a better life and most are more than happy to work if they can find it but they know they'll receive welfare and benefits way over and above what they could earn in their own countries working. How could it not be better, sit on welfare until you find a job..awesome win/ win for the unskilled immigrant. Lose/ lose however for the citizen since competition for work increases, lower wages offered and higher taxes need to fund the massive welfare system.

Its laughable you want to double SS and expect people will still work for $3-$5 hour, its laughable with open border policy (since its discriminatory not to let everyone in) that you wont be flooded with people just to cash in on that welfare, they'd be fools not to. Would you prefer to work in sweat shop for 5k per year or sit on your butt and get 30k+ worth of benefits? And while on discriminatory why allow it to be easier for Mexicans just because they're next door, shouldnt you send some ships to China, India, ME, Asia, Europe to make it just as easy for them?

 

The great irony is that it is the fanatically anti-government crowd that attaches inordinate significance to governmental documentation in their quest for arrested-development nation.

The Founding Fathers, whom they evoke whenever convenient, did not obsess over the bureaucratic apparatus and minutia of citizenship, but were of one voice in proclaiming the imperative of "patriotic assimilation" - the adoption of American civic values by worthy newcomers in lieu of their previous foreign allegiances and mindsets - prioritizing the American temperment over some rigid adherence to legalistic mechanisms.

State apparatchiks frustrating the pioneer spirit should not be the objective in formulating a desperately-needed, comprehensive policy.

Let's make sure the good guys are welcomed; it's the patriotic thing to do.



.

 

In countries like China and India they simply let the poor live in the streets and die of starvation which we don't allow typically allow to happen here. When Mao was the leader of China is has been estimated that as many as 43 million people literally starved to death. And no, the fact that people want to come to America for a better life does not translate to every country. China does not have a capitalistic economy where the average person can improve their economic situation nor does it provide freedom to the people of China. We can also note that China and India are benefiting from the outsource of jobs from America because with their massive populations they do the work for less.

These immigrants don't make $3/hr but instead typically earn minimum wage and Americans won't typically work for minimum wage. While some employers do exploit illegal immigrants and violate US wage laws that happens because the person is "illegal" and they cannot report the employer to the US government. If they did they would be deported. Legal immigration provides protection for the worker as well as a means for identifying and prosecuting employers that don't comply with the US labor laws.

Once agian addressing our welfare laws is a serious issue but it is unrelated to legal immigration.

I don't advocate discrimination against foreigners with college degrees being allowed to immigrate to the United States. I don't avocate any invidious discrimination in our immigration laws.

This is "conservative" hyperbole because immigrants don't come to America for the welfare benefits. That doesn't imply they don't accept those benefits but they're coming here to work and improve the life of their family. Once again, addressing entitlements is unrelated to addressing immigration. They are two completely different issues. And yes, more workers results in more consumption and more consumption results in more jobs and more taxes being collected. Remember that a legal immigrant generate a minimum 15.3% in federal taxes (combined FICA/Payroll taxes) alone on their gross income alone. Because they need housing they increase the number of jobs in the housing industry where Americans earn much higher wages. They also pay state income taxes and/or sale taxes as based upon state laws. They also, often indirectly, pay property taxes in their rent payments which fund the schools (which their children attend creating high paying teaching jobs) and other services like fire and police protection. The also buy commodities and services increasing employment to support those goods and services.

The belief that even a minimum wage earner doesn't contribute to the US economy fails based upon any rational analysis.

Legal immigration eliminates employers that are in violation of the US labor laws including the minimum wage laws. As noted though most "illegal" immigrants already earn at least minimum wage as most employers are in complaince with the US labor laws related to minimum wage. If they are not then the employer needs to be identified and prosecuted. That's a problem with "Americans" breaking the law and not the immigrant.

Yes, I want to reduce "entitlements" which means eliminating poverty. Social Security subjects about 1/2 fo those collecting SS retirement benefits to a poverty level income where they also need food and housing assistance (welfare) so it's stupid. Yes, we should either raise the average Social Security benefit to above the levels required for food and housing assistance (about $23K as I recall) or privatize it so that a person accumulates enough personal wealth during their working career so that they don't require any "welfare" assistance which includes Social Security, Medicare and other welfare programs. To do either (increase the benefits of the current SS welfare program or privatization) requires roughly $1 trillion per year in additional taxation but with privatization that is only required for about 30-40 years while continuing the SS welfare program would require that plus far more forever. I support the lower cost alternative of privatizatio and I'm willing to accept the addtional tax burden today so that our children don't have to carry a much higher tax burden in the future. BTW based upon historica investment data a person earning minimum wage that invests in a diversified and age-adujusted portfolio would have a retirement income of roughly $55K/yr and they would be able to afford private health insurance when they retire eliminating the need for Medicare. Two birds with one stone if we privatize Social Security.

What people don't seem to understand that if we have someone receiving $13K/yr in SS retirement benefits plus $10k/yr in "welfare" benefits the total cost is $23K/yr. Why not just pay that in SS benefits while we privatize the system instead? I've actually read somewhere that a family, if they take advantage of all "welfare" programs, has a equivalent to a $30K/yr income but I don't know if thats accurate. Whatever it is if we don't increase incomes to that level then we don't reduce the need for welfare assistance.

Back to the point and that is entitlements and immigration are two different issues address by two different parts of US staturory law. Both need an overhaul. We need to address ending discrimination in our immigration policies that actually violate the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment as well as addressing our "entitlements" that are insufficient in mitigating the effects of poverty in the United States. We can only address the cost of mitigating the effects of poverty by reducing poverty and we've do nothing in that regard. Discriminatory in any of our actions as a nation increase poverty and does not reduce it.

 

Back then we were a new nation with few people. We were hoping to grow and just about anyone was allowed in. That isn't true today. Now we have 20 million Americans out of work or only working part time. Why should we allow anyone who wants to come in and steal jobs from them?
Many of those that come here from Mexico do not want to assimilate into our culture. They keep much of their loyalties to their old country. Bring much of their troubles to this country. Much like immigration is doing in Europe. Europe has had an open door policy for years, but they are now working to close their borders because many moving there are also not trying to assimilate into their culture. To me, this is the best way to handle the problem of illegal immigration.


We allow them to stay, work and pay taxes, we can't deport 12-15 million people. Make them register and be fingerprinted. Now we know who is here legally. Anyone caught that isn't registered gets deported. Anyone caught committing a crime gets deported. But we don't make them citizens. Now their Hispanic friends and relatives no longer have to worry about them being caught and thrown out. They can be out in the open. They would work under our government guidelines which means companies could not pay less than min wage, so there would be no incentive to hire them over an American citizen. They wouldn't be eligible for federal assistance.

 

Well, that's fine. We''ll just let immigrants come here with an axe and a bag of corn meal, find a spot of land they like, run off the current occupants, and carve themselves out a life the way your great-great-greatgrandpappy did.

Deal?

 

RNC is tired of losing and doesn't want to see the GOP go the way of the Whigs into the 21st Century.

The Nativist white vote won't abandon them....too scared about losing their guns and "saving the unborn babies".....so Reince Priebus and Marco Rubio can offer up "tough amnesty" and not lose any votes in 2016 and maybe gain some.

 

If we did it the way I suggested, we would know who is in this country legally and be able to throw out anymore that came in. Those here would be able to come out of the shadows and work, but not have an advantage over other Americans looking for work. Their friends and family would be happy they no longer have to worry they would be deported. Both sides could take credit for it and we would once and for all have some control of our borders. If you agree, write your representative. Their address is here. Just click on your state and get their E-mail address to write them.

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

 

As is often noted, the Founding Fathers were living in a far different world, yet most still uphold the values they espoused and adapt to the changes. We even keep their hoary Constitution.

We shouldn't. The twelve million+ who have been providing cheap labour for American businesses for years, just as unpaid slaves once built a thriving economy, are not about to suddenly "steal jobs" although citizenship will facilitate their contributing to American society in more significant ways and move up the economic ladder, it is true.

Yes, that has been the perennial complaint of nativists since the nation's founding. Many early German settlers remained in insular communities and retained their language for generations, but nowadays, most young folks Americanize readily. Of course, those who have grown up here are now as American as descendants of the undocumented Mayflower crowd. Kids don't normally identify with a foreign country they never saw.

Actually, most European nations have long had and still have extremely strict requirements for attaining citizenship. If you wish to emulate their current policy, all members of the EU are mandated to permit the free movement of labour across national boundaries within the EU. So, a comparable approach in North America would mean unimpeded movement of labour between Canada, the US, and Mexico.

I would oppose that.

Again, let's make sure the good guys are welcomed. It's to the benefit of the nation. Severely restricting immigration is the quickest way to kill US innovation as exemplified by Silicon Valley.

The children of these second-class citizens who have experienced nothing outside the US, do we categorize them as 3/5th of one?

 

Ironically, if we had severely restricted immigration in the 1950s....Marco Rubio might still be living in Havana and not be a Republican US Senator.

 

Lol...Dream on. If you want to grovel for scraps from the table of your rich employer, knock yourself out.
That sort of sycophancy is for timid people who have no personal initiative and are grateful to be bootlickers.
Immigrants are what has made America great. Their courage, drive and perseverance are infinitely more important to the future of America than the fear and pessimism that dominates right-wing ideology.

 

Rubio is a typical right-wing idiot.
Cubans have benefitted more than any other group from our open immigration policies.
The wet foot/dry foot policy that let any illegal cuban immigrant stay in this country if they managed to step foot on dry land and be lavished with government money and aid is unique to them.
No other group has lived off the government teat as lavishly as have the cubans.