We need more Immigrants - from anywhere

The reasoning is like this:

1. The US has more capital relative to any other nation.

A. This is in the commonly-thought sense of financial capital ($), and that trend is only likely to continue as more countries migrate their investments to dollars for safety.

B. This is also in the traditional sense of capital, namely the ability of a nation to access its resources, and the quantity of those resources that can be accessed.

2. The one thing the US is short in is labor capital.

A. Yes, we have unemployment problems currently, but this is most likely not long-term structural (unlike in Europe). As the boomers go into retirement, we will see more and more need for a supply of labor.

B. The US is hardly at full capacity - its population is the least dense among the major developed nations, by far.

3. The US is likely to be able to attract a good combination of both low-skilled and high-skilled labor from other countries.

A. As nations find their economies stagnant in the future years, while the US economy thrives, more and more high skilled labor will seek to flock to the US in search of opportunity/higher wages. Essentially we can pick from the best from China, India, and Europe.

B. Low-skilled labor will never be a problem thanks to Mexican immigration.


4. If you have a problem with Mexicans immigrating here, you are either a racist or are uninformed. The US is going to be short in labor in the future and we need young people to fill the gaps, thus Mexico and its neighbors.

Disclaimer: I don't care if you're a racist or not, I'm just saying if you have a problem with (4) above you may very well be one.

 

There you go again with the word "Racist". Enough already!

 

I don't regard being racist as an extremely negative thing, we all have stereotypes (lefties the most so)....so who cares? I'm not trying to play the race card here and shout you down with it, I'm just telling it like it is....

 

I have a HUGE problem with illegal immigration, no matter what country they come from. It's a national security risk and if someone condones it, then I consider them a traitor of the state.

Also, if someone condones illegal immigration specifically from Mexico, then they are probably a racist them self. They are either a benevolent racists or just looking for cheap labor to do their house work.

 

I'll ignore your first point because it's a bit ridiculous. But the second one is a valid concern (your second paragraph).

First, I'm not saying "come on Mexicans come in and do our laundry forever!"...they'll be low-skilled labor in the first generation, as most immigrants are from the third-world. But their children will be more likely, and their grandchildren even more so, more likely to get out of "cheap labor" status. So no, it's not about having a bunch of housekeepers.

Second, you can't close the border. It's 2k miles long, it's literally impossible. Accept that they're coming and deal with it.

3rd, like I said, we need more people in the US. There's NO way around this, we are underpopulated.

 

Not having any background and or security check for those crossing the boarder is ridiculous??

I got a better idea... instead of the south Americas sending all their unwanted population up here because they can't support them, how about we just invade all the southern countries and take them over? If these 'immigrants' are going to be so good for our country, why haven't they benefited their own?

 

You know, from a sociopath perspective invading them makes sense. Otherwise....no....lol....

edit: Okay I'll actually respond sorry about that.

The reason(s) those immigrants haven't done much for their own nation is because of a lack of resources and capital in their countries. It's not their personal fault, but that's just IMO.

 

Then it would make even more sense to invade and take them over, does it not? They have plenty of natural and labor resources... they just need a political system that is conducive to prosperity.

 

It might help a little, but they would never be okay with that.

But I say *a little* because i'm not just talking about us infusing financial capital/investment into their nations. I'm talking about their geography literally NOT being conducive to growing wealth/prosperity. It's just (*)(*)(*)(*)ty location and there's nothing that can be done about it, regardless of who controls the region.

If you want an example, look at Brazil. They by any measure have a huge population and even lots of resources. What they don't have is capital or the ability to grow it. Essentially Brazil has crappy natural ports, and it costs them bundles just to clear a small section of the rainforest to improve their economy. Their region of the world requires capital-intensive infusions where there is limited capital available. That's why they will never be able to compete with the US

edit: In sum, it's not about political systems, it's about geography

 

The USA has 'geography' too... but we also have infrastructure to over come it. IE, interstates and rail ways. So, let's take them over and start building a better future for all.

 

I can see where you're coming from, but I just disagree. The US geography is, like, indisputably the best geography in the world. Read up on our geopolitical situation and you'll see the consensus. The US doesn't do so well because its people are superior or something like that, it's just our location....

For example, it's a chicken/egg situation. I agree with you, our capitalism is a huge boon to us. But is it really capitalism, or the environment here that allows it to thrive? I'm as much a pro US capitalist as anyone (I think you are too?) but it might not work as well in other regions as we think it will.

 

Omnipotent has the right ideas about how we're going to resolve this crisis, and I made a post on it but it's a bit long but in essence this is how I view the End Game. Though, not by militaristic means(the more we use our military, the more the world is likely to respond.) Through the US Economic Capital, we can essentially incorporate these countries economically(see: Puerto Rico, among others).

US investment in foreign countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Afghanistan, ETC will enable us to build businesses and law-abiding communities in these areas. To build bridges and roads for them. It might indeed seem like a huge investment at first, but it's really an investment in US security as well as the security of the world.

To accomplish the feat, we may need admittedly some form of defensive deployment to accompany teachers, government leaders, etc. What the US failed to do in Iraq, etc is to take a more hands on-approach to the situation. These countries and people do not have experience with first world knowledge or politics. We on the other hand have extensive knowledge in the field.

The End Game is this:
-Expanding Markets and getting more goods Imported into the US
-Increasing our own production here as we focus on an Economic Strategy
-Eliminating the warlords, terrorists by economically blackmailing them and hence limiting their operations as well as capabilities.
-Increasing Education, improving the health of other Nations. Hence improving the health of the world
-Above all: They won't have to immigrate to the US for first world things, their countries will JOIN the first world.

 

Just from a geological point of view, I cannot see where the US has any advantage over Mexico, or the south American countries. I agree there is nothing special about the US population that makes us superior, it is our political system that has allowed us to prosper. However, I do think it needs some serious tweaking, but that would make for a whole other thread.

Well, I'm hard core capitalist for sure, but I am also a firm believer in socialism(but not to be confused with communism). Neither can be sustained without the other, imo.

 

Eww gross a socialist.....didn't know that about you....

Kidding aside, look up the geopolitics of Mexico vs. the US....we're not in the same league. Mexico is pretty much doomed to be a manufacturing satellite for us because that's all that they can offer to the world.

 

I like that idea. Invading militarialy is a quite unsettling. Those south of the border states could be offered US statehood also. I can see a US flag with a hundred stars in the future.

 

That is an oxymoron. You either support capitalism or you do not. There is no middle ground.

 

Lol I like that guy's ideas too. I feel like direct invasion of SA would backfire, badly. But we can definitely do what we do best, turn it into a satellite and eventually get a few to come on board (Mexico first).

 

You're probably a socialist too, and don't know it. If you ever utilized public schools, then you benefited from socialism. Or if you ever called the police or fire department, you benefited from socialism.

My idea is this... let socialism take care of our basic needs, and capitism take care of our wants. Generally speaking that is. Socialism can provide basic education, health care, and national/local defense. Capitalism can provide us with our new TVs, phones, cars, etc.

Note: with respect to socialized health care, Obamacare is NOT socialized health care. It is communistic health insurance, which I have the utmost disdain for.

 

That is false dichotomous binary logic. See post #18

 

Alright.

Socialism - "a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

 

If the supply of Visa's kept better pace with the demand for them, then this problem would be resolved. "Securing our borders first" will never happen.

 

I agree the Visa process needs to be improved, but resolving the 'problem' it will not. The criminal element are not going to be applying for Visa's regardless. Securing the border is a gigantic task, soooo... going back to my 'invade' idea.... Why do we not have the same problem with illegal immigration from our northern neighbor? Probably because Canada isn't the huge dung hole that most of the southern countries are?

Invade them... socially, politically, economically....

Before ya know it, we'll have the United States of the Americas. Then the borders can be just as open as they are with our current US states.

 

You need more skilled immigrants, but not unskilled ones. They arent helping the economy much. In fact they may even harm it because they steal jobs - the saying about stealing jobs is usually false but it has merit when it comes to low skilled jobs. And the need for unskilled labor will only tend to diminish in the future.

No, it has little to do with geography. The US does well because it was 80% colonized by Europeans, which were already an economic and technological superpower at the time. So yes it is because its people are at least culturally superior in many ways.

 

Aren't democrats supposed to be for population controls, controlled growth, conserving our resources, reducing the impact of humans on our environment? Wouldn't that put more demands on our infrastructure, our roads, our water supplies, and add to pollution and our CO2 footprint to bring in millions more immigrants? Doesn't the increase in the supply of labor put downward pressure on wages? I thought democrats want to increase wages? Won't importing more people into the US lower the overall standard of living for all Americans? Don't democrats always call for smaller class sizes? How is bringing in millions of immigrants and packing our schools full of their children helping American children learn and get a decent education? Doesn't it cost the taxpayers more money for infrastructure, medical care, education, policing, and incarceration? Doesn't the increase in population raise the cost of housing and food because it creates shortages in supply and the demand goes up? What are the benefits again?

 

Invade all the way to Panama. Then you only have to beef up the security on a canal and you have one of the worlds shortest borders.