God Bless America....

[SuperChuck]

Good Lord! Gasoline and peaches can't be considered equal. Everything in our economy revolves around petroleum. ... If peaches go up to $2 each, I will stop buying them.

I was using peaches as a silly example for ALL foodstuffs. If peaches go up to $2 each, you can switch to apples. However, if the price of all crops harvested by illegal workers tripled, your food bill will triple.

As for illegal immigrants, the issue to me is about securing our borders, not cheap labor or anti-sematism. The United States has always welcomed immigrants entering this country legally. But we need to know who comes in, when. where and why. We are, after all, at war. And no matter what your position is on Iraq or Afghanistan, the problem of terrorism will not go away if we suddenly bring our troops home. In my opinion, it would get worse. So I would like to see our borders secured beforehand.

Um, the terrorists in question came into the country legally through Canada. I believe everyone involved (stateside) in the 9/11 attack was here on an expired student visa. They were not IN the country legally, but they arrived here legally and our own INS didn't bother to check if they left.

[Shelby07]

I was using peaches as a silly example for ALL foodstuffs. If peaches go up to $2 each, you can switch to apples. However, if the price of all crops harvested by illegal workers tripled, your food bill will triple.


Um, the terrorists in question came into the country legally through Canada. I believe everyone involved (stateside) in the 9/11 attack was here on an expired student visa. They were not IN the country legally, but they arrived here legally and our own INS didn't bother to check if they left.

Your theory is flawed. Your supposition stated that peaches were an example for ALL foodstuffs, then you offered an alternative to peaches that wouldn't be affected. Only items harvested by those getting paid $3/hr will be affected. That is a very small percentage of our overall food bill. And as I said before, the cost of harvesting is a small part of the overall cost of goods, so the percentage for these few items will not be 300%. It would be much less. Milk, beef, poultry, wheat, legumes, etc., would not be affected at all since they are either not harvested or they are harvested using methods that don't require field laborers. Another problem with your theory is that it implies that ALL field workers are getting $3/hr and that tightening up our immigration laws would resuld in a $10/hr wage. There is no proof of this. Even if it were to be true, the overall cost to our food bill would be minimal since it would only affect a small percentage of our food purchases. Those who threaten a 300% increase in our overall food bills are spouting scare tactics that you have apparantly bought into.

And, yes, the terrorists came in legally because our borders were/are wide open. Our processes need to change, and that include ALL methods of entry into the country. Doing nothing will not help the situation. It sounds as if you understand this. So what would you suggest?

[SuperChuck]

Only items harvested by those getting paid $3/hr will be affected. That is a very small percentage of our overall food bill.

You'd probably be surprised what percentage this is. Even the few farms up here in New England mostly hire immigrants (I don't know what percentage is legal or illegal) because they'll work for next to nothing.

And, yes, the terrorists came in legally because our borders were/are wide open. Our processes need to change, and that include ALL methods of entry into the country. Doing nothing will not help the situation. It sounds as if you understand this. So what would you suggest?

There are a lot of things that can be done, but we're not concerned with actual solutions, we're concerned with big displays.

Airport security is a good example.

I have to take my shoes off at the airport because some nutjob tried to blow up a plane with a "shoe bomb". Let's review. This guy was actually turned down by al Qaeda. If he was able to detonate it, the shoe contained almost enough explosive to burn his hand. Maybe.

When I was flying a lot, they used to have 3 questions they'd askat check-in. Yes-No-No. I don't even remember the questions, those are the answers.

All checked luggage is being x-rayed, which I agree is a good thing, but can't we do that in a back room?

When I was flying out of Amsterdam one time, they did something I thought was a great idea. They basically interrogated me before letting me on the plane. They didn't actually care what the answers were, they just wanted me to slip.

But it's all about show. Taking your shoes off gives a PERCEPTION of security. Heavily armed guards give the PERCEPTION of security.

Similarly, sending thousands of troops sounds really good, but it doesn't accomplish anything. Pedro is not a terrorist. And, really, Pedro is going to come over, anyway.

"Protecting the borders" may even be hurting the fight on terror a little. As of last week, we kind of look the other way with illegal immigration. As a result, the wetbacks have been helping protect that border from suspicious people. They didn't want us to start cracking down. We'll lose that non-civilian police force now.

Those Canucks, on the other hand, they let anyone through their borders...

------

God damn, that's a lot of words. :)

[Shelby07]

You'd probably be surprised what percentage this is. Even the few farms up here in New England mostly hire immigrants (I don't know what percentage is legal or illegal) because they'll work for next to nothing.


There are a lot of things that can be done, but we're not concerned with actual solutions, we're concerned with big displays.

Airport security is a good example.

I have to take my shoes off at the airport because some nutjob tried to blow up a plane with a "shoe bomb". Let's review. This guy was actually turned down by al Qaeda. If he was able to detonate it, the shoe contained almost enough explosive to burn his hand. Maybe.

When I was flying a lot, they used to have 3 questions they'd askat check-in. Yes-No-No. I don't even remember the questions, those are the answers.

All checked luggage is being x-rayed, which I agree is a good thing, but can't we do that in a back room?

When I was flying out of Amsterdam one time, they did something I thought was a great idea. They basically interrogated me before letting me on the plane. They didn't actually care what the answers were, they just wanted me to slip.

But it's all about show. Taking your shoes off gives a PERCEPTION of security. Heavily armed guards give the PERCEPTION of security.

Similarly, sending thousands of troops sounds really good, but it doesn't accomplish anything. Pedro is not a terrorist. And, really, Pedro is going to come over, anyway.

"Protecting the borders" may even be hurting the fight on terror a little. As of last week, we kind of look the other way with illegal immigration. As a result, the wetbacks have been helping protect that border from suspicious people. They didn't want us to start cracking down. We'll lose that non-civilian police force now.

Those Canucks, on the other hand, they let anyone through their borders...

------

God damn, that's a lot of words. :)

Well, you started up by saying that people were complaining, I ranted a bit because it was a hot button (nothing personal, many hold your views.) We discussed some opinions and I asked you what you suggested. Instead of offering opinions on solutions, you are back to complaining about the stupidity of our efforts. So, what do you suggest? Interrogation on aircraft? With all due respect, that hardly touches on the issue you first introduced. Honestly, I have heard lots of complaining from those who want to keep the borders open, but no suggestions other than leaving things as they are or granting amnesty to those who have broken our laws. I am assuming that we agree we have a problem (if that's a wrong assumption let me know.) I am curious as to what your opinion on a solution would be. I'm not sure how beefing up airport security would affect illegals crossing either one of our borders.

By the way, there is a big difference between securing our borders and closing them. And actually, perception is a big part of achieving any goal.

Anybody else want to jump in???

[thepyrofish]

Anybody else want to jump in???

I'd love to, but you guys took off to the deep end and I can't swim... I'mma go smoke and come back to read in a bit, this is entertaining and informative.

[Shelby07]

I'd love to, but you guys took off to the deep end and I can't swim... I'mma go smoke and come back to read in a bit, this is entertaining and informative.

The best way to learn to swim is to jump in. I don't mind differing opinions, I welcome them. The best thing our founding fathers did was to build gridlock into our political system. Some think it's a hinderance to getting things done, but I think it's the best way to keep one group from getting too much too fast. I grew up discussing current events and politics with my family. I always had the flaws in my thinking exposed. The trick is not to get blindly committed to one side or the other. By keeping an open mind you can either educate or learn.

So, c'mon... tell us what you really think!

[SuperChuck]

Honestly, I have heard lots of complaining from those who want to keep the borders open, but no suggestions other than leaving things as they are or granting amnesty to those who have broken our laws.

That's a nasty, nasty problem.

Part of me says "Illegal immigrants are living the American Dream". They want to come here so they can work hard and earn a "fair wage" to support their families. How different is that than when MY family came over?

I'm kind of impartial on the whole "breaking the law" thing. It can fall into that grey area of stealing bread.

But... There are a lot of people waiting to get into the country legally. What do you do about them? You really don't want a guest worker program that keeps the illegals in and keeps those seeking legal immigration out. That would penalize the people that are trying to do it the right way.

So I get caught in this little Catch-22.

[Shelby07]

Getting caught in the middle of doing what's best for others and doing what's best for you is always a major dillema because of the guilt factor. Both alternatives need to be weighed. I think if it wasn't for the fact that we were attacked on our own soil this whole thing would have stayed down in the noise, regardless of the cost associated with it. But the reality for me is that we do need to protect ourselves, and that means more restrictions to try to prevent others from hurting us.

The fact of the matter is that illegals are a tremendous drain on our economy. We do, in fact, pay a huge bill to maintain and care for them that would disappear or be substantially reduced if they paid into the system. The solution has to include having everyone pay in, and that's what the guest worker program would accomplish. Not only that, but anyone who has been working here would have to pony up penalties and taxes and declare themselves and their reason for being here. If they are unwilling to do so, they will be deported. Seems fair to me.

The current tax base is adjusted to take into account the cost associated with the 12 million or so illegals in this country. Legitimate employers currently carry the brunt of the cost, and taxes that you and I pay take up the slack. In fact, thoes who use illegals and pay them under the table are not paying anything into the system for these workers. Having guest workers pay into the system would relieve some of the burdon on employers and allow them to put that money into higher salaries.

I personally don't feel guilty about what I have. Many people do, but in reality we all pay more than our fair share. By the time you add up Federal, State city, and county tax, along with the taxes built into the cost of goods and additional excise and "sin" tax, many of us are paying over 50% of our income into the tax base. In addition. most of us contribute to various charities and organizations. Just because we have grown our economy when others haven't, we shouldn't feel guilty for not giving most of it away. God knows our government does that for us. We give enough of it back through taxes that fund foreign aid as well as supplement the poor of this country. There just isn't enough guilt to justify not securing our borders and our security. We can no longer afford to be nice guys and look the other way unless we are willing to pay with more American lives. And I strongly believe that we are at a high risk of that happening until we get this issue of knowing who is here somewhat under control.

[SuperChuck]

The current tax base is adjusted to take into account the cost associated with the 12 million or so illegals in this country. Legitimate employers currently carry the brunt of the cost, and taxes that you and I pay take up the slack. In fact, thoes who use illegals and pay them under the table are not paying anything into the system for these workers. Having guest workers pay into the system would relieve some of the burdon on employers and allow them to put that money into higher salaries.

Unfortunately, I think that's kind of a pipe dream.

Most transient laborer jobs are paid under the table, whether you're a Mexican or a white guy. I dont think I've ever met anyone in construction that gets taxes taken out of their paycheck, and I know fewer that actually declare the money.