Obama's Amnesty Move!!

ononewheel wrote: [ Or jobs we can't afford to take... Wages that have stagnated and rising costs is part of the basics you speak of. I'm not really sure how anyone but teenagers can survive on what these "illegals" make. These guys are doing the work we would do, if it paid a living wage. Americans used to clean motels, milk cows, bus tables, and labor but those jobs paid enough to survive, even if it required some overtime or was really hard work. Some places around here would not hire you unless you are Mexican.

Seth, Any mediocre economist can tell you about supply and demand if supply outpaces demand it drives down prices. You say Americans used to make a living working hotels and farms, a few decades ago, so what happened in those industries.

Lets look at the big picture. We failed to secure our borders , in the 70's we had large groups coming here from Mexico who found footholds for illegal employment in farming and hospitality industries. In the 80's Regan got duped. He traded policy with the democrats, Amnesty now for those that were here (They are already here we cant kick them out), for securing our borders later which the Dems of course never intended to deliver. This "reward" for behavior encouraged another massive northward migration. Supply of workers increasing over the demand for them drove the pay scales down in their industries to the point where and American who has to pay taxes and expects a higher standard of living cannot afford to do the job. Bringing us to today where again we are saying "What can we do they are already here", and again we are, this time through policy decision not to enforce our laws or secure our borders, giving amnesty and again rewarding behavior. What do you expect will be the result? Which industries are next to not pay a living wage? If we don't learn from history we are destined to repeat it. You do not encourage wrong behavior, and let illegal aliens determine your immigration policies.

OverMyHead wrote: Eric, I have missed you here. I know your a big buy American guy right down to your shoes because Americans need the jobs, and you will not buy a Japanese car made in America because the profits go back to Japan. It is well documented that Hispanic workers here who, working under the table undercut Americans wage earning ability, then send large amounts of their earnings (profits) back to their families in Mexico. This stops the US trickle down effect. It seems like you (and a few others) have a significant disconnect here. What is the difference between our jobs going "offshore" or "offshore" walking across our border and doing our jobs here?

We are off topic, I know, but while we are here, maybe you can explain to me the difference between "outsourcing" and "off shoring".   

Still using "trickle down"? How right you are with out even knowing it. It sure does trickle, seep, or drip. My point is, what can be done to make it more of a nice steady stream, a nice place we can all drink from?    





In your above example, working under table is wrong wherever you come from, and it isn't just illegal immigrants doing it.

If I am hungry and the only option I have is to work under the table to feed my family, wrong or not, I'm doing it. Really hard to stop it if you do not go right to the source, the employer.

We probably disagree on the source though, your stance is probably the taxes are too high and employers have to cut the labor cost.


I see many farms in this area that are completely run by immigrants, well except the fat farmer, whose job is accounting for the cash and rolling around in a new truck slave driving.   He doesn't work.   

I gotta friend and this seems to be the norm, he got his 43 hours for the week by Wednesday and told me he got his 850.00 for the week and smiled, (im salary and he laughs) he called in sick thurs and friday.
I told him why dont you get you 1200.00 for the week and work those 2 days...not isolated

I can really see the philosophy now, moreso than 6 months ago on why we use outside help (non americans) they have a piece of carrot hanging in front of the cart, from a standpoint of profitability...well i dont want to be anti American here...we got a little fat and lazy over the years

JoeinNY wrote: There is no doubt that this was a politically expedient move on Obama’s part. The reason it works as a politically expedient move is that it is a no brainer… there are no moral or economic reasons reasons to be violently against it and against these kids unless you happen to make a lot of money employing illegal immigrants at slave wages. To get people to be against it you have to either draw in other hot button issues (like border enforcement) or be willing to lie about what it really is. The right wing noise machine instantly moved to do both, whether their motivations are money from the real criminals that hire illegals, a knee jerk reaction to anything from the other side, or profit from increased view ship that seems to follow a good fight the end result is the same a divided electorate that is easier for the monied interests to control to their own ends. If we can’t agree on this part, the no brainer part then you can see why it is so hard to attack the actual meat of the issue. The other no brainer part of the immigration debate is as Roger brought up earlier, is prosecution of employers of illegal immigrants. Kill the demand and you won’t have a supply problem (it’s a simple fact- look at the current immigration numbers). It however is not as politically expedient because you will generate tens of millions of dollars in attack ads funded by the chamber of commerce and the farmers groups the second you move to increase enforcement against the employers. These calls for nothing unless we have a full and permanent solution always strike me as silly. In the business world successful companies always pick off the low hanging fruit (the no brainers) to provide the resources to attack the larger issues... in a world of finite resources there will always need to be prioritization.

That is some real logical thought, and pretty hard to refute. Only thing you forgot was it was Obama's move, that there is enough to consider it a radical move in the anti-Obama crowd.

Let's all pray to Allah that Mittens is elected. So many "Christians" were so concerned that they may have a non-Christian in the White House when they ignorantly professed that Obama was a Muslim. Now they CAN put a non-Christian there with Mittens.! He's not Muslim, so I assume that's OK with most of you who choose which religions to be intolerant of. I know, yours is the only right one. It's uncomfortable to wear that right shoe on both feet isn't it? I would have thought that if religion was an issue all Christians would support the good solid Christian family you have there now.
I AM pleased that Mittens supports abortion, gay rights, Obama Care, outsourcing, and locating his Bain Capitol in the Caymens to avoid paying US taxes. But alas, he is in the same > 15% tax bracket as me so we are like brothers.

Great no brainer, Now if someone in government had a brain they might include the people from Europe that get an application, a sponsor and then wait 12-15 years to come here legally. These people also want the American dream or at least come visit their American born granchildren without having to wait for and be limited by a visa. These are not people that are going to come here to reap the freebie benefits, but maybe buy a condo in Florida, or use their better edjucation to get a good job and live here and pay taxes. Why are they so different?

Why can't thier pathway be made easier as well?

Joe. Growing up next to Wisconsin there was a clear difference in law enforcement . Wisconsin ticketed at 3 mph over the posted. So while on or two in Wisconsin might dive 65 most every drove 56-57 in a 55 zone. Minnesota had an amnesty program. Tickets do not go on your record until 10 mph over. So one or two would drive 70 and everyone else drove 64-65. Amnesty without border control is a free pass to illegal immigrants.

Eric, I have missed you here. I know your a big buy American guy right down to your shoes because Americans need the jobs, and you will not buy a Japanese car made in America because the profits go back to Japan. It is well documented that Hispanic workers here who, working under the table undercut Americans wage earning ability, then send large amounts of their earnings (profits) back to their families in Mexico. This stops the US trickle down effect. It seems like you (and a few others) have a significant disconnect here. What is the difference between our jobs going "offshore" or "offshore" walking across our border and doing our jobs here?

we all know its a election year, no different than any other election year

many times i find myself picking the mexican crew for the jobs at hand, no whinen and cryin, no disappearing acts, thats me though, and many times they will tell me you got (him) today, which him is a white lazy kid and it makes my day miserable

My friends on the border patrol in new mexico would be happy to dispute that air conditioned shuttle nonsense. Enforcement activities are way up over the previous administrations and all the people effected by this decision came in on someone elses watch... those are facts.

We have a system, it is basically a lottery system with limited quotas relatively arbitrarily defined, unless you can buy your way in or a company buys your way in. It has a number of problems chief of which at the moment revolves around family issues. Even if you win the lottery you can't bring your family legally. Then there are those that win the lottery but overstay thier welcome. In my experience as a hiring manager I can attest that getting a green card for a mexican or canadian employee costs tens of thousands of dollars and considerable time and travel, and those were just transfers from to the us from subsidiaries.

You apparently can step up enforcement and maybe you can create a magic fence, but the real problem that needs to be dealt with is the inherited 8-20 million in the country now. You can and should deport some of them but reality is we cant possibly catch or detain them all. Resources spend on those working productively take away from resources needed to deal with actual criminals.

This decision is still about 700000 people between the ages of 18 to 30 either educated in america or whom have served in the american military, mexico would love to have them back. They have the vast majority of thier most productive tax paying years ahead of them, and the educational investment is already paid.    A country facing the retirement of the baby boomer generation would be pretty freaking short sighted to not embrace them and allow them to be productive. Calling them (the 700000 possibly effected by this decision) criminals when not one of you would have done anything differently if you were in thier place is pretty silly.

Dave I dont see a parallel but assuming you can produce a bill of sale with the same HIN on it you don't get to keep the boat but you are also not guilty of a crime. You would likely find that you cant register it without a complete chain of ownership and the previous transferable registration or title further that it will come up stolen when you go to register unless you commit fraud by not using the correct HID. Thanks for taking good care of the boat though, next time make sure you dont get taken.

Hansel wrote: davidg wrote: Surely not Mexico. We went on vacation there last June. It was unbelieveable the process to get in and get out that country. I wonder why that was? They seemed to be VERY concerned about who was there and why. Wouldn't one think that as fond as they are of open borders we could just waltz in and waltz out. Not a chance! Based on what my foreign friends say, part of the reason this might be is payback; i.e. you don't want to let me in to your country? Well fine, I don't want to let you in to my country either! Stupid? Sure. Understandable? Definitely.

Say what?? My gosh, we are practically running an air-conditioned shuttle service into the U.S. from Mexico. Not sure what your friends mean when they say we are keeping the Mexican's (or god knows who else that may be coming in on the southern border). It's an open border!!

Our President isn't even trying to enforce immigration laws. How do you feel about that? Is that acceptable?

davidg wrote: Surely not Mexico. We went on vacation there last June. It was unbelieveable the process to get in and get out that country. I wonder why that was? They seemed to be VERY concerned about who was there and why. Wouldn't one think that as fond as they are of open borders we could just waltz in and waltz out. Not a chance!

Based on what my foreign friends say, part of the reason this might be is payback; i.e. you don't want to let me in to your country? Well fine, I don't want to let you in to my country either!

Stupid? Sure. Understandable? Definitely.