Per Request, the Immigration Catch-All

bandit0013:

I'm a physician from the Philippines. Close to 80% of my class went to the US on H1B visas. We correspond and talk about how it is. It's better in some places where everything is on the up and up, but generally, H1B's are second class employees, no question.

1. As I understand it, if a company decided to falsify duties and experience, or asked extraordinary unlisted duties or unpaid overtime, an H1B doesn't really have much recourse except to accept the situation. It's common for my H1B friends to have to work essentially unpaid hours. The reason, of course, is the poor bargaining position. If they complain, they get fired, and then they get deported. Base market rate with added work is usually the best they can hope for until (or if) they gain citizenship.

2. Yes, of course. Those costs are typically deducted from the salary of the H1B employee.

All these (including the quota) are barriers to immigration and entry. It's part of the reason why your country has an immigration problem. Protectionist policies that prevent immigrants from competing equally with locals creates conditions where immigrants are forced to accept less while working harder. This is equally true for H1Bs and illegal immigrants.

LarryC wrote:

All these (including the quota) are barriers to immigration and entry. It's part of the reason why your country has an immigration problem. Protectionist policies that prevent immigrants from competing equally with locals creates conditions where immigrants are forced to accept less while working harder. This is equally true for H1Bs and illegal immigrants.

It's ugly, but I don't see it working another way without a serious change in American attitudes. People seem to want things to be hard for immigrants out of a sense of fairness; either they have stories of how hard their grandparents/great-grandparents/whatever had to work to make it here and new folks should have to do the same, or they just see immigrants as cultural invaders anyway and let xenophobia justify the troubles.

Where I grew up the general standard of education was pretty uneven and a lot of people returned to school later in life, so this mostly played out as bitterness that as "real Americans" they weren't able to take advantage of the job opportunities that H1Bs could because they weren't able to get a college education early in life according to the American Dream Formula™.

I like the idea of the quotas coming down (or at least becoming realistic) and making the H1B system fair, because it's pretty abysmal right now. But I hope the US is smart enough to boost stateside education funding at the same time... I don't see how that kind of reform would pass without it, actually. Too much anger and jealousy from the US underclass.

bandit0013 wrote:

I think the "show us your papers" citizen reaction is due to the fact that illegal immigrants are able to work, live, vote, etc.

No, they can't.

Kurrelgyre wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:

I think the "show us your papers" citizen reaction is due to the fact that illegal immigrants are able to work, live, vote, etc.

No, they can't.

However they do. Plenty of cases like this

My position is that the thing stopping it is the ready availability of cheap illegal labor. Regulation and intervention in this particular case doesn't mess with the level playing field because the field is already not level by the presence of workers who are willing to work for far less benefits and wages than a citizen worker is entitled to. Regulation as to the minimum level of benefits, etc that workers are entitled to is sensible and reasonable.

It's not the immigrants driving the price of labor though - it's the employers. And I'm pretty sure that the Republicans have not proposed an overhaul of minimum wage, migrant worker's benefits or the like since Bush made his attempt to deal with the issue in 2004 or so. Worker's rights and wages and benefits have been a progressive issue for a century or more, and with the Republican dominance of Congress, it's hard to get the employers to sign up to change things. Even the US Chamber of Commerce is hard right these days...

Robear wrote:

It's not the immigrants driving the price of labor though - it's the employers.

Again, if you have readily available cheap labor, the employers have the power. If you cut that back, wages will increase. This is econ 101.

Robear wrote:

And I'm pretty sure that the Republicans have not proposed an overhaul of minimum wage, migrant worker's benefits or the like since Bush made his attempt to deal with the issue in 2004 or so. Worker's rights and wages and benefits have been a progressive issue for a century or more, and with the Republican dominance of Congress, it's hard to get the employers to sign up to change things. Even the US Chamber of Commerce is hard right these days...

Not sure how that's relevant unless you think I somehow represent the republican party. Immigration policy is something I often find myself in opposition to either party's viewpoint. My outlined plan above would be opposed by both parties, unfortunately.

This statement is an attitude I find astounding among otherwise educated people. We can't expect farmers to pay market wages for unskilled labor like everyone else?

If the jobs don't provide that much value, then they will not exist. Farmers will go out of business. What is so hard to understand about this?

And a VERY large fraction of the food you eat comes from other countries. Making immigration harder will just send more food production to those countries.

Make immigration legal, and the correct rate for farm help will sort itself out within a few years. If you keep cheap labor out of the country, then the jobs will go where the labor is. There's lots of arable land, and no particular reason the stuff that gets planted has to be ours.

I don't think you're racist, bandit, but I get the feeling you don't think of illegals as actual humans, or have no perspective about how they'd feel with your plans to "fix" immigration problems...

Malor wrote:
This statement is an attitude I find astounding among otherwise educated people. We can't expect farmers to pay market wages for unskilled labor like everyone else?

And a VERY large fraction of the food you eat comes from other countries.

The USDA says:

The aggregate import share of U.S. food consumption in 2005 was 7 percent when based on value, but 15 percent based on volume. Most of that is fish, shellfish, and nuts that aren't easily found in our climate.

IMAGE(http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/DataFeature/Charts/DataFeature_fig01.gif)

Mex wrote:

I don't think you're racist, bandit, but I get the feeling you don't think of illegals as actual humans, or have no perspective about how they'd feel with your plans to "fix" immigration problems...

Of course they're humans. But what does that have to do with having sensible immigration policies? Point me to any 1st world nation that doesn't keep records of its citizenship and have legal statutes which prevent non authorized people from voting, working, living, etc? I'm willing to discuss the pros and cons of an open border policy if you like, but you're going to have a hard time supporting open borders when confronted with real world problems.

Malor wrote:

Make immigration legal, and the correct rate for farm help will sort itself out within a few years. If you keep cheap labor out of the country, then the jobs will go where the labor is. There's lots of arable land, and no particular reason the stuff that gets planted has to be ours.

Immigration is legal. There's a process. It could stand to be improved upon, that is not in dispute.

How do you propose to get a Tomato freshly delivered from China? You do realize that the one thing America has in spades is large amounts of land that is available for planting.

Also you continue to ignore the multiple postings about how the per unit labor cost of planting and harvesting is nearly insignificant to the price you pay in the grocery store. Such that a 40% wage increase is a mere $8 / yr on the average American family's consumption. So you raise wages 40% and the average American family has to give up a big mac combo at McDonald's. That's hardly a recipe for massive outsourcing.

Mex wrote:

I don't think you're racist, bandit, but I get the feeling you don't think of illegals as actual humans, or have no perspective about how they'd feel with your plans to "fix" immigration problems...

Also Mex, I invite you to go back and read the link I posted about the average living conditions of migrant workers before you talk about how I regard them as human beings. If you really look into it, you'll see I'm not the bad guy for demanding regulations and market wages.

E-verify and H-2A. Those two programs pretty much match your description of the ideal immigration policy.

You know, I don't think your real concern is driving up farm wages. I think your real drive here is to keep people out. Your professed goal of increasing farm wages would be better-served by allowing easy, legal immigration.

Once they're legal, they can get the standard American worker protections by using the standard legal system to get them. All the necessary infrastructure and programs to do this properly are running already; make them able to actually use it without being fearful of being immediately deported, and everything will get fixed very quickly.

The strong anti-immigration laws are a primary driver for all that misery.

Malor wrote:

The strong anti-immigration laws are a primary driver for all that misery.

As seen right now in Alabama.

Malor, there's nothing wrong with wanting to keep people out. And it's not America's immigration policies that are driving any misery whatsoever. It's the reverse, its the fact that America is so much better than where these people came from that they are willing to duck the law to get there.

'Anti-Immigration' laws (I assume you speak of ones such as the Arizona laws) aren't anti-immigration at all, simply anti-illegal, which I can only see as reasonable. ANY solution that reduces the penalty for illegally entering the country simply encourages more people to illegally immigrate. Without a hard stance on anyone illegally in the country, you will never reduce the problem. Unless of course you're of the opinion that free immigration is a great idea and illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty and become citizens just by asking, thereby removing the problem entirely.

Malor, there's nothing wrong with wanting to keep people out.

Well, that's pretty debatable. It strikes me as kind of hypocritical in a nation of immigrants. But even if we grant that, let's be honest that this is the real motive for anti-immigration laws, not improving wages on farms. That would be far better served by liberalizing immigration and using the systems of worker protections we've already built (for all the OTHER immigrants.)

And it's not America's immigration policies that are driving any misery whatsoever.

Of COURSE it is. The only reason farmers can be so abusive of these workers is because the workers can't ask for help. If they could safely go to law enforcement about abusive employment practices, those practices would stop within a few years.

If you make an underclass that has no legal protection of any type, you shouldn't be surprised that others will take advantage. If you define 'people' and 'nonpeople', then the unpersons will be cruelly exploited.

aren't anti-immigration at all,

All-caps BULLsh*t. When they demand that even legal immigrants keep their papers with them at all times, produce them on demand, and then require police officers to check immigration status on everyone they stop, of COURSE it's anti-immigrant. Make life hell on immigrants, and the immigrants will leave.

Pawz wrote:

'Anti-Immigration' laws (I assume you speak of ones such as the Arizona laws) aren't anti-immigration at all, simply anti-illegal, which I can only see as reasonable. ANY solution that reduces the penalty for illegally entering the country simply encourages more people to illegally immigrate. Without a hard stance on anyone illegally in the country, you will never reduce the problem.

Isn't that a bit of a circular argument? These people immigrating is illegal because their immigration a problem. What's the problem with their immigration? They're doing it illegally. That's circular reasoning.

Unless of course you're of the opinion that free immigration is a great idea and illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty and become citizens just by asking, thereby removing the problem entirely

We're the country with the Statute of Liberty as a beacon to the world: why are we keeping people out in the first place? Shouldn't the burden be on those wanting to keep people out to show why its a bad idea rather than the reverse? Shouldn't our stance be that there is something wrong--something suspect--about wanting to keep people out in the absence of some articulated reason for keeping them out?

Malor wrote:
Malor, there's nothing wrong with wanting to keep people out.

Well, that's pretty debatable. It strikes me as kind of hypocritical in a nation of immigrants. But even if we grant that, let's be honest that this is the real motive for anti-immigration laws, not improving wages on farms. That would be far better served by liberalizing immigration and using the systems of worker protections we've already built (for all the OTHER immigrants.)

Well, it's good to be clear on some of the blanket statements being laid out here. Do you care if career criminals come in? Do you care if people come in with the specific intent of mooching off your social security net? Do you care if drug dealers come in to sell their stuff in your cities? Either you do, and it becomes a question of WHO you want to keep out, or you don't, and you'll have to accept the good with the bad. And it's pretty clear that other countries will ship you their undesirables as fast as possible if you were to open the border. So you'll have to be a bit clearer on what you mean by 'liberalizing' immigration.

Malor wrote:
And it's not America's immigration policies that are driving any misery whatsoever.

Of COURSE it is. The only reason farmers can be so abusive of these workers is because the workers can't ask for help. If they could safely go to law enforcement about abusive employment practices, those practices would stop within a few years.

If you make an underclass that has no legal protection of any type, you shouldn't be surprised that others will take advantage. If you define 'people' and 'nonpeople', then the unpersons will be cruelly exploited.

You can use exactly the same argument to say that people who are sell drugs and get exploited by mob bosses are the fault of the anti-drug laws. Neither is correct. The workers CAN ask for help, IF they were legal. Every legal system will have an 'underclass' of 'non people' called the criminal underground - should we abolish law?

aren't anti-immigration at all,

All-caps BULLsh*t. When they demand that even legal immigrants keep their papers with them at all times, produce them on demand, and then require police officers to check immigration status on everyone they stop, of COURSE it's anti-immigrant. Make life hell on immigrants, and the immigrants will leave.

Sorry, that's just melodramatic acting to try and get legal immigrants on the side of illegal immigrants somehow. How is showing an ID card 'making life hell' for a legitimate immigrant? What about non-immigrant citizens? Would it make life hell for Canadian hospitals to demand ID before giving treatment because of a rash of Americans coming across the border to enjoy the 'free' healthcare in Canada? Do they hate tourists? No.. they just want to make sure people are doing things legitimately. And I'm betting the first legit immigrant who gets pulled over and actually harrassed by a cop will be all over him (and the news). The sad thing is that the cops have to get involved at all, which is an indictment of the failure of the standard immigration enforcement in the first place. I doubt it would be necessary if, for example, employers were heavily penalized for hiring illegal immigrant workers.

Cheese.. lol. Really? You want to know how FAST other countries will dump their undesirables on your shorelines if you say 'Hello, free access for all'? Australia would probably be the first :P.The people immigrating is NOT the problem. Immigration is not a problem. Immigration is great. ILLEGALLY immigrating is a problem. Stopping the illegal immigration is the solution. Why do people immigrate illegally? Because it's better here, regardless of low wages, poor working conditions or high crime rate. Why is it better here?

Pawz:

Small clarification. People immigrate to the US because the exchange rate disparity makes it more profitable. Other reasons are extreme abuse in their home countries, such as rule of drug lords, or religious persecution.

They immigrate illegally because your current system makes it impossible for them to immigrate legally. They really don't have much of a choice there. They either die at home, or maybe have some kind of life in the US, or die trying.

It is easier to immigrate to Canada, Australia, Belgium, France, the UK, any number of countries than it is to immigrate to the US, even as a skilled worker; and it's not like Canada has an open border policy.

You get primary Mexicans because those guys don't have the money to fly to better places.

Not sure how that's relevant unless you think I somehow represent the republican party. Immigration policy is something I often find myself in opposition to either party's viewpoint. My outlined plan above would be opposed by both parties, unfortunately.

Because both sides have to agree on policy changes like this, and one won't...

Malor wrote:

You know, I don't think your real concern is driving up farm wages. I think your real drive here is to keep people out. Your professed goal of increasing farm wages would be better-served by allowing easy, legal immigration.

Once they're legal, they can get the standard American worker protections by using the standard legal system to get them. All the necessary infrastructure and programs to do this properly are running already; make them able to actually use it without being fearful of being immediately deported, and everything will get fixed very quickly.

The strong anti-immigration laws are a primary driver for all that misery.

Ok, so first it was breathlessly exclaiming that most of our food is imported and it would cause outsourcing of even more food. I showed you hard numbers that prove that completely false. Now the argument falls back to, well you just don't like immigrants.

If you want to engage me on a rational level feel free to do so, but I'm no longer going to respond to hyperbole.

On the other hand, per our legal immigration system, which I would like streamlined. We should be enticing every skilled and educated person we can to come in, start businesses, and work. That's what I don't like about programs like H1-B. We have skilled worker shortages in medicine and technology, we should be heavily recruiting these types of people not only to bolster our own tax base, but to make sure innovation continues to happen here and not so much in China and India.

CheezePavilion wrote:

We're the country with the Statute of Liberty as a beacon to the world: why are we keeping people out in the first place? Shouldn't the burden be on those wanting to keep people out to show why its a bad idea rather than the reverse? Shouldn't our stance be that there is something wrong--something suspect--about wanting to keep people out in the absence of some articulated reason for keeping them out?

As a country with a ... what is it now, 13 trillion dollar deficit? As well as a 9.1% unemployment rate as well as the world in general moving towards more automation and productivity I would say we have a pretty compelling reason to not want an uncontrolled flow of unskilled labor over our borders. From a national security perspective you also don't want criminals and/or terrorists being able to waltz across your border either. I'm still waiting for someone to show me one first or second world nation that has millions of illegals that are able not only to work, but rent a home, use government services, and access medical care.

I wonder how mexico handles illegal immigration:

Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:

Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)
Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)

Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:

Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:

Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,

"A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:

A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

Pawz wrote:

Cheese.. lol. Really? You want to know how FAST other countries will dump their undesirables on your shorelines if you say 'Hello, free access for all'? Australia would probably be the first :P.The people immigrating is NOT the problem. Immigration is not a problem. Immigration is great. ILLEGALLY immigrating is a problem. Stopping the illegal immigration is the solution. Why do people immigrate illegally? Because it's better here, regardless of low wages, poor working conditions or high crime rate. Why is it better here?

Like I said, that's a circular argument: if immigration is great, but illegal immigration is a problem, then legalizing all immigration is just as much of a solution as stopping it.

Now, if immigration of undesirables is the problem, then it's the immigration of undesirables that is the problem, legal or not.

I mean, it's not like immigrants exist in a quantum state: that if they cross legally they become good citizens and if they cross illegally they're undesirables. I'd rather have an illegal-but-desirable immigrant than a legal-but-undesirable immigrant, wouldn't you?

The first step to getting this discussion going is getting out of the circular logic of calling illegal immigration a problem. It's not that illegal immigration is a problem: it's that problematic immigration should be illegal.

bandit0013 wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

We're the country with the Statute of Liberty as a beacon to the world: why are we keeping people out in the first place? Shouldn't the burden be on those wanting to keep people out to show why its a bad idea rather than the reverse? Shouldn't our stance be that there is something wrong--something suspect--about wanting to keep people out in the absence of some articulated reason for keeping them out?

As a country with a ... what is it now, 13 trillion dollar deficit? As well as a 9.1% unemployment rate as well as the world in general moving towards more automation and productivity I would say we have a pretty compelling reason to not want an uncontrolled flow of unskilled labor over our borders.

You know, is it really that the immigrants are taking our jobs? Or is it that we've been borking our own economy? Immigrants didn't come here and sell us CDOs and crash our economy. I mean, we're a ridiculously large country with a heck of a lot of our land mass inhabitable. We've got territory so extensive and valuable we can produce anything from king crab to oranges to oil to wine to rare metals and minerals. How the heck is there not a shortage of labor in a country as rich as ours? If this was a game of Civilization our opponents would be saying "hax on your start position d00d!"

So maybe we're scapegoating immigrants for us not having our act together?

From a national security perspective you also don't want criminals and/or terrorists being able to waltz across your border either.

So the problem isn't illegal immigration, it's immigration of criminals and/or terrorists. That changes the whole conversation; I mean, is there really a problem of criminals and terrorists being attracted to California's college tuition aid and in-state rates?

I'm still waiting for someone to show me one first or second world nation that has millions of illegals that are able not only to work, but rent a home, use government services, and access medical care.

We're America--we're supposed to be exceptional.

In all seriousness, you first need to show a first or second world nation similarly situated to America as far as its neighbor. None come to mind for me.

Why should I care how Mexico handles immigration? edit: are Mexican legislators trying to cross the border? My guess is the people who are trying to immigrate to America don't have a lot to do with getting laws passed in Mexico, so what's the point here?

LarryC wrote:

Pawz:

Small clarification. People immigrate to the US because the exchange rate disparity makes it more profitable. Other reasons are extreme abuse in their home countries, such as rule of drug lords, or religious persecution.

They immigrate illegally because your current system makes it impossible for them to immigrate legally. They really don't have much of a choice there. They either die at home, or maybe have some kind of life in the US, or die trying.

It is easier to immigrate to Canada, Australia, Belgium, France, the UK, any number of countries than it is to immigrate to the US, even as a skilled worker; and it's not like Canada has an open border policy.

You get primary Mexicans because those guys don't have the money to fly to better places.

I think that this is a good post, and Larry makes good points.

CheezePavilion wrote:

Like I said, that's a circular argument: if immigration is great, but illegal immigration is a problem, then legalizing all immigration is just as much of a solution as stopping it.

For someone who is trying to use logical fallacy to circumvent and argument...

Immigration is great (false premise, not in all circumstances is this true)
Illegal immigration is a problem (true statement)
therefore getting as much of Immigration (based on first false premise) as possible is surely good.

CheezePavilion wrote:

I mean, it's not like immigrants exist in a quantum state: that if they cross legally they become good citizens and if they cross illegally they're undesirables. I'd rather have an illegal-but-desirable immigrant than a legal-but-undesirable immigrant, wouldn't you?

Relativist fallacy. Just because legals or illegals have desirable or undesirable qualities as individuals doesn't do anything to invalidate the premise that having immigration controls is necessarily bad.

CheezePavilion wrote:

You know, is it really that the immigrants are taking our jobs? Or is it that we've been borking our own economy? Immigrants didn't come here and sell us CDOs and crash our economy. I mean, we're a ridiculously large country with a heck of a lot of our land mass inhabitable. We've got territory so extensive and valuable we can produce anything from king crab to oranges to oil to wine to rare metals and minerals. How the heck is there not a shortage of labor in a country as rich as ours? If this was a game of Civilization our opponents would be saying "hax on your start position d00d!"

So maybe we're scapegoating immigrants for us not having our act together?

Here you're making a string of dubious assertions. Let's break it down:

You know, is it really that the immigrants are taking our jobs?

Evidence has shown that unskilled labor on farms is paid wages at almost half of what unskilled labor in other areas are. Economics shows us that the law of supply and demand effects labor markets. Additional evidence shows us that the labor and benefit rate for this work remains below acceptable standards for the majority of Americans. I welcome evidence that the low pay that is nearly exclusive to unskilled agricultural labor is caused by another variable.

Or is it that we've been borking our own economy? Immigrants didn't come here and sell us CDOs and crash our economy.

The statistical data on illegal immigration and work/living conditions of agricultural workers is available for decades. The responsible party for the current economic crisis has little to do with immigration policy. However more jobs available at a higher wage would certainly be a boon at a time of high unemployment. Unless you reject Keynesian economics.

I mean, we're a ridiculously large country with a heck of a lot of our land mass inhabitable. We've got territory so extensive and valuable we can produce anything from king crab to oranges to oil to wine to rare metals and minerals.

Again, this has nothing to do with our ability to take on vast amounts of unskilled labor. Unless you are claiming that our government infrastructure resources that are required to support a functioning first world society are limitless.

CheezePavilion wrote:

So the problem isn't illegal immigration, it's immigration of criminals and/or terrorists. That changes the whole conversation; I mean, is there really a problem of criminals and terrorists being attracted to California's college tuition aid and in-state rates?

Some illegals may be criminals, some illegals may be college students, therefore there is no issue with criminal activity? I'm not really sure what kind of argument you're making here? Here's a handy list of "undesirables" as you call them when a nation is considering immigration:

1. People with contagious and/or dangerous diseases
2. People who intend to commit crimes
3. People who do not have the means to support themselves
4. People who are unable to integrate with society

CheezePavilion wrote:

We're America--we're supposed to be exceptional.

So an appeal to patriotism is supposed to be a convincing argument for removing immigration restrictions?

CheezePavilion wrote:

In all seriousness, you first need to show a first or second world nation similarly situated to America as far as its neighbor. None come to mind for me.

Italy comes immediately to mind.
Albanians illegally go into Greece to do farm work, much like our illegals
Germany has historically had issue with Turkish illegals

I'm sorry none came to mind for you, I guess you don't pay much attention to the topic in general.

CheezePavilion wrote:

Why should I care how Mexico handles immigration? edit: are Mexican legislators trying to cross the border? My guess is the people who are trying to immigrate to America don't have a lot to do with getting laws passed in Mexico, so what's the point here?

Mostly since Mexico has a policy of encouraging illegal immigration to America because their #1 import is American dollars that immigrants send home. Lou Dobbs (CNN) reported that nearly $17 billion in cash remittances crossed the border in 2005. It is a common pro-illegal argument that they spend money and pay sales taxes here... surely they do, less the $17 billion a year they send out of places like California. No one likes to account for that though.

bandit0013 wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

In all seriousness, you first need to show a first or second world nation similarly situated to America as far as its neighbor. None come to mind for me.

Italy comes immediately to mind.
Albanians illegally go into Greece to do farm work, much like our illegals
Germany has historically had issue with Turkish illegals

I'm sorry none came to mind for you, I guess you don't pay much attention to the topic in general. ;)

I guess it didn't come to mind because I did not know Germany bordered Turkey.

CheezePavilion wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

In all seriousness, you first need to show a first or second world nation similarly situated to America as far as its neighbor. None come to mind for me.

Italy comes immediately to mind.
Albanians illegally go into Greece to do farm work, much like our illegals
Germany has historically had issue with Turkish illegals

I'm sorry none came to mind for you, I guess you don't pay much attention to the topic in general. ;)

I guess it didn't come to mind because I did not know Germany bordered Turkey.

Once you are inside the EU you can move relatively freely. Germany has the strongest economy, much like the US.