The Correct Amount of Illegal Immigration?

Do you agree that going after illegal employers is a good step to halting illegal immigration?
Some will still come, but the numbers will be way more manageable.

 

While I do not believe ZERO can be achieved, it is the right number.

 

I have already stated so in this thread and have been consistent in my position since I've been posting on this board - 2009. That said, no previous administration has gone out of its way to welcome illegal border crossers as the current one.

 

All we need to do is shut off the magnet and invite the current bunch of unlawfully present persons to self-deport. We do this by actually enforcing the laws and making it extremely unconfortable for people to remain.

 

If a law is constantly broken, then the law is broken.

If our amount of legal immigration is not sufficient, then we will have illegal immigration.

The immigration system has to be rebuilt to account for the situation in our neighborhood. We need to import less engineers and more refugees. Otherwise, we ill continue to have illegal immigration.

If we can't make our own engineers from the people we have, we need to fix that problem.

 

Some interesting points. Does not answer the question, however.

 

It's not the right question.

If most of our immigrants are illegal, maybe the law needs to be updated.

 

Of course it's the right question. This is my thread. You want a different question, start your own thread.

Fixed it for you.

 

If our immigration laws were enforcable, Trump would have been able to enforce them. They aren't.

Your question is dumb and naive. This isn't your thread, i can say whatever i want about how you question is silly.

 

Off topic, but I'll play...

Fallacy. Straw man: One politician's failure or lack of will to enforce a law =/= that law being unenforceable.

You assume Trump wanted to enforce immigration laws.

Fallacy. Red Herring: Your opinion of the question is not the topic. If you don't like the question, don't answer. The only valid reply to the question would be something like a number, a percentage, a ratio, or some other measure of quantity. [/quote]

Please see the OP and state the screen name of that poster.

AKA, "trolling."

 

Please see the OP and state the screen name of that poster.


AKA, "trolling."[/QUOTE]

No politician has been able to enforce our immigration laws in the past 30 years. That is evidence that they are unenforcable.

The topic of this thread was created without good intentions.

Asking how much illegal immigration is the correct amount is a loaded question intended as bait. The answer is 0.

It is a useless question. You do not own this thread.

 

Fallacy. Straw man: No politician has tried. Not in any meaningful way. Ex: The enforcement provisions of Reagan's 1986 IRCA which gave amnesty to the then ~3m unlawfully present persons (aka "Simpson-Mazzoli") were forgotten about before the ink was even dry on Reagan's signature. Since then every successive administration has ignored the issue - including Trump.

And now Biden? My god it's practically rolled out the red carpet. We've got homeless veterans sleeping under cardboard behind luxury hotels in which we taxpayers are housing unlawfully present persons. Untested for COVID, I should add. Why this favorable treatment of people who are not even supposed to be here?

Fallacy. Red herring: Not only do you have ZERO evidence to substantiate this preposterous claim, it is irrelevant to the topic.

Oh? Please explain. Be specific.

Well, finally you've actually decided to participate in the actual topic. And here you grudgingly agree with me. But there are plenty of people -- including the current occupant of the White House and its minions -- who disagree with we reasonable objective observers and advocates of the rule of law.

There are plenty of people who not only defend unlawful border crossing and unlawful presence in the country, but would argue we don't have enough. And they will call you a racist for your rational comment above as reflexively as flushing last night's gluten-free lobster salad.

Is it though? Seems it did a pretty good job of exposing the corruption on both sides of the aisle - folks who might look you in the eye and tell you the correct answer is "zero" while doing ****all about it.

And that's one to grow on!

 

Sorry, it's hard to take you seriously. You seem to me like a bot that keeps score for a game of debate that doesn't care about anything but the point system it's coded to obey.

 

Fallacy argumentum ad hominem. I am not the topic of this thread. A factual rebuttal addressing the topic would better support your argument.

Noted you have no argument. Your multiple fallacies have gone from tiresome to irritating. Concession accepted.

 

Predictable.

 

I already accepted your concession. You can go away now.

 

Yes, it is.

I would be more impressed if you understood the difference between migration and immigration.

The US is not a nation. It is a country. I would be more impressed if you understood the differences between nation, nation-State and country.

Once you understand those differences, I'll be able to explain how centripetal and centrifugal forces affect them.

In the meantime, you can explain the process of immigration to the Chickasaw Nation.

That's the right answer.

I'm a believer of ATS. You know, Ask/Tell/Show.

If I were dictator-in-chief, I would ask illegals to leave the US and give them 30 days to do so without penalty.

30 days later, although I'm not morally, ethically or legally obligated to do so, I would ask illegals nicely to leave the US, except now there is a penalty of 10 year interdiction, meaning they cannot re-enter the US for 10 years.

And, 30 days after that, we come to the "Tell" part. As chief law enforcement officer/agent of the US, I would order all illegals to unass the US within 30 days. The penalty here is life-time interdiction.

Finally, we come to the "Show" part. I would declare martial law and allow any natural born or naturalized citizen age 21 or older not convicted of a felony, nor have felony charges pending to voluntary be deputized as US Marshals, who out-rank all State law enforcement agents.

They would be paid a $20,000 bounty for any illegal they apprehend that is deported.

They would also have the authority to seize any structure where illegals are, whether that is a church, city hall, police headquarters, some celebrity's home, an apartment complex/building or a place of employment, anything except a federal reservation or federal building.

That all becomes property of the US Government and gets auctioned off to the highest bidder, with 50% of the proceeds going to the deputies and the government keeping the rest.

I would, of course, allow city residents to bid first on their city hall to buy it back.

The penalty for illegals would be life-time interdiction, plus DNA. Why DNA? Because their descendants for 7 generations would also be barred from entering the US.

The deputies would have to pay a penalty of $100,000 per occurrence should they wrongfully apprehend a natural born or naturalized citizen, or a lawful permanent resident.

Why martial law? Military tribunals in each county because the penalty for interfering in any way, shape or form with a deputy is minimum mandatory 5 years plus total asset forfeiture with no innocent spouse provision.

That should make Liberals think twice.

Then I would federalize National Guard units and place them at the border until the Big Ditch is completed.

Walls are stupid and don't work, but a ditch, well, make it 100 feet wide and 100 feet deep and then at the bottom put an ecosystem with crocodiles and alligators and poisonous snakes and scorpions and, well, you get the idea.

As a safety net, you can put border patrol agents in towers appropriately spaced with intrusion detection systems and sniper rifles with night vision.

What about the Dreamers?

We'll issue federal ID cards, which you're gonna need if you wanna vote, or get any federal aid of any kind, meaning public housing, SSI, SSDI (not the same thing as SSI), food stamps, student loans, educational grants, or get a federal tax refund, etc.

In order to get the federal ID, you'll need your birth certificate plus the birth certificates of your parents.

Why? Let's look at what the US Supreme Court says.

In order to do anything, you have to be lawfully situated.

And, the Court also says no one can benefit, profit, gain or obtain an advantage from an illegal act.

Since their parents were not lawfully situated, they cannot be citizens. End of Story Part I.

And, since their parents were here illegally, they cannot benefit, profit, gain or obtain an advantage from an illegal act, so they aren't citizens. End of Story Part II.

I'd also change all the immigration and visa laws.

Fiance visas? Fine. They'll have to go to that country, get married, register it with the proper authorities, come back to the US, register the marriage documents with the county offices in which they reside, and then they can apply for a visa.

Student visas? Okay, but instead of coming to the US and never actually setting foot on a campus, they'll have to apply, be accepted, register for classes and pay the tuition. After they do that, they can apply for their student visa.

Diplomatic visas? Sure, but only the ambassador, ambassador's spouse and minor children, one administrative assistant, the Charge d'Affaires and the military attache get diplomatic immunity. Everyone else is subject to the laws of this country. I'd let a consul general, spouse and minor children, plus one assistant who is actually at a consulate have diplomatic immunity.

Work visas? Well, let's face it. If you want Americans to work in the crop fields or crack crab or gut fish, you should wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first. There's no way to get by without immigrant labor for that.

For immigration in general, it needs to be fair and balanced.

The way you do that is divide States into groups based on population size.

So you have the 15 States with populations over 100 Million in tier 1, 50 to 100 Million in tier 2, 10 to 50 Million in tier 3, and less than 10 Million in tier 4.

Then you ask the Census Bureau how many people we need to offset the negative birth-rate for a given year.

Suppose they say 1 Million. That's 250,000 immigrant families per tier.

The slots are allocated by the number of States in a tier.

Liberals will hate that, because that means lots of immigrants from Western and Eastern Europe get to come, but that's the only fair way to allocate immigration.

 

You started a thread intended to inflame your political enemies.

You are caught in an extremist feedback loop.

You will rationalize being a tool of the feedback loop no matter what I say. I feel sorry for you and at time like this I almost wish I prayed because at least I could bless your heart and promise to pray for you.

 

Your pallid argumentum ad hominem invalidates the privilege of discussing this topic with me. Your pedantics are beyond tiresome. Not wasting my time reading the rest of your pablum.

 

Fallacy. Argumentum ad hominem. I am not the topic of this thread. This is a habit you really need to break.

 

Which is a crime by the way.

 

How about zero.....

 

So now it's racist to enforce id's to be shown for banking? Really?

 

Unlawful crossing of the border or unlawful presence?

 

Unlawful is unlawful.