Question About Illegal Immigration

There are already work visas available. Legal immigration already exists. Illegal immigration will continue.

Try again.

 

Repeat post, again.

 

Why should foreign countries need to abide by our laws, if we don't reciprocate?

 

I only repeat my posts which have not been sufficiently rebutted. You are welcome to present an argument that does not resort to fallacies.

Why do you believe we would be worse off by actually solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce?

 

You may be resorting to fallacy of false cause, if you believe our current regime conforms to the laws of supply and demand in a market friendly manner.

We would not have an illegal problem now and would be generating revenue to defray the cost of government, if it was as market friendly as you suggest.

That is the whole point about solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce.

 

And this is what the USSC said and I think it is time for a reaffirmation of this.

I decided to post this again because our resident psycho missed it.

 

Our original Constitution and Bill of Rights was intelligently designed to be both gender and race neutral, and it implies that citizenship is acquired at birth on US soil.

The case you present could be considered a form of special pleading due to the legacy, States' rights involved; however, it should not have been an issue after 1808.

 

Did you ever consider the possibility that you may be wrong.

And they are the United States not the many states. God it must be ASD.

 

You have not given me any cause to confide in your sincerity regarding our discussion. So, no; I don't think I am wrong about immigration no longer being a States' right since 1808 in our federal republic.

The several and sovereign and United States is what I am referring to.

 

Well you are wrong

 

I would like to confide in your sincerity, but you refuse to come up with a good argument.

 

I don't think we have citizens crossing illegally into Mexico.

 

It won't work without securing the border.

 

We have millions of citizens without jobs. Tell me about supply and demand again.

 

The libs just do not see this.

 

Your appeal to ignorance is not very convincing. Are you claiming Los Angeles really is a City of Angels?

 

Ensuring market participants have no incentive to be illegal is better at securing our borders.

 

Why not be moral enough to bear true witness to our own laws, and let supply and demand determine market participation by labor, through recourse to unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed.

 

That isn't my argument, but you missed it due to your propaganda and rhetoric. By basis for that issue arises from Article 4, Section 2 of our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land.

 

Did you read what I said? U.S. Citizens are not crossing into Mexico.

 

Life in Mexico is enough to ensure the flow of illegals.

 

Being true to our laws is keeping illegals out and employing U.S. citizens.

 

Maybe you missed it when I stated that your appeal to ignorance is not very convincing. Are you claiming Los Angeles really is a City of Angels?

 

Even Mexico has open markets and not only illegal markets.

 

You are referring to two different issues; there is no reason why commerce would not to a better job a "keeping illegals out" than any form of Prohibition, while raising tax revenue to defray the cost of government.

Employing US citizens could always be done merely through public works with can improve the efficiency of our economy in the process.

Why do you have a problem solving the social problems of our republic on a permanent basis which Commerce that can be well Regulated among the several States, instead of merely insisting on another boondoggle and generational form of theft that won't have solved our problem even after thirty years, like any of our other wars on abstractions?