IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New IMO
1. If I were living in Mexico, and saw that I could provide better for my family by sneaking into the U.S., I'd probably do it.

2. Everyone knows that they come here because people hire them. If people didn't hire them, they wouldn't be here.

3. Just as it's illegal to be here without permission, it's illegal to hire someone who is here without permission.


Given those three premises, I don't think it's fair to target enforcement exclusively on the immigrants. I think it's unconscionable to conflate this issue with terrorism, as I keep hearing.[1]

There is a perfectly reasonable compromise, that no one should be able to agrue with: Do enforcement sweeps at businesses suspected to be employeeing illegal immigrants. If any are found, deport the immigrants and arrest the employer. I say this is a compromise only because it throws a bone to the "kick them out" crowd. If you only arrested the employers, the immigration would stop on its own once the jobs dried up.


[1] Heard on the radio today: "Either we're engaged in a worldwide war on terror or we're not. If we are, then we must secure our borders. That is the only question here."
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New I remember seeing the Wall in Berlin
and around the DDR (a.k.a. East Germany). Maybe we should hire that construction company.

[image|/forums/images/warning.png|0|This is sarcasm...]


worked well, we could re-employ all the laid off workers as guards. Wall off Mexico, Canada, and seacoast.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. (Herm Albright)
Expand Edited by jbrabeck May 2, 2006, 03:41:26 PM EDT
New Businesses are concerned . . .
. . that the falling birthrate in Mexico may impact the availability of workers (recent article in LA Times) - so clearly somebody doesn't want them thrown out.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
New Businesses should be *more* concerned...
...that when we have a slave labor guest-worker law, that these slave laborers guest workers will have to be paid at least minimum wage....
jb4
"So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't."
Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
New They don't need to be
After all, with their ownership of the legislature, they will get to choose what said minimum wage will be for the guest workers...

And it's not even remotely close to slave labour; with slaves, you have to house 'em and feed 'em and generally look after their health care if you want to keep 'em productive. With a large surplus quasi legal labour pool you don't need to do any of those things.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
     for another side of the immegration debate - (boxley) - (6)
         Having been an illegal "guest worker" - (tuberculosis) - (5)
             IMO - (drewk) - (4)
                 I remember seeing the Wall in Berlin - (jbrabeck)
                 Businesses are concerned . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                     Businesses should be *more* concerned... - (jb4) - (1)
                         They don't need to be - (jake123)

Now, would I trow dis lit match in if my friend Muggsy were in dere?
119 ms