• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Illigal immigration.

Whoa guys, i'm not saying we should be a totally socialist or communist country! No no nononononono, and when i was talking social programs, it was more like what 5-90 was saying, WPA, TVA, CCC, it's those types of social programs that help people. And believe me, there are lots of people in WV who use the welfare system, to the point of fault, and that is wrong. However it does help people, as does the public school system, but i would agree, certain programs should probably be scaled back some or at least brought under some sort of stipulations and control. Maybe if enough Mexicans come here and see the benefits of our system, we could start a sort of "velvet revolution", get them to better their own country so that it wouldn't be such a burden or problem for us.

LOL, 87manche', thats hilarious. But i think we're not the poorest state in the union, are we? Hell, this is the Saudi Arabia of coal!!!LOL
 
5-90 said:
Which countries? Just curious. Everytime I've been anywhere "Socialist," the people always seemed so unhappy & listless. Probably because of what you mention - no chance for personal advancement/improvement.

Citizenship and residency: Republic of Ireland (I refuse to identify with the EU except as a 'national', and that's even certainly not by choice). Residency-only: UK, France, Spain. I've also travelled to almost every country in the EU at one time or another, and have also been in a few countries from both the then- and ex-Eastern Bloc a bit: Czech Republic, Yugoslavia when it was still Yugoslavia, the former East Germany.

What's interesting is that they all developed the same basic problems regardless of cultural or political differences: the majority of the population were supporting the minority that felt they were owed a living. This taxed the hell out of anyone who dared hold a job and killed any opportunity for advancement: you did what you did until you died, because it's how you fed yourself and four people you've never met. "Listless" is a good description of the mentality it breeds - and, not knowing any different, people continue to think this is a good way to live.

I can still remember the exact moment in 1997 where I came to the realisation that I had to get out: in an interview for an extremely entry-level IT position (running ethernet cabling, basically), I was asked where I saw myself in ten years' time. After giving my answer, the interviewer had the arrogance to reply, 'well, I don't think that's realistic for you'. With a great deal of restraint, I calmly got up and walked out, ending up in the US a year later. Almost a decade after that, I've gone past where I wanted to be then. But that was the last straw with the sheer arrogance of the 'I know what's best for you' attitude that's become prevalent in Europe.

Granted, I'm no sociologist, and my last course in the subject was in 1986, but I've always wondered about that (and no, I have no intention whatever of getting a degree in "political science" either. Politics may be many things, but it is not science, and if you need a degree to understand politics, it's time to start over.)

Agreed. I can completely understand how the theories behind various political ideologies can require deep research, but to measure their effectiveness is something that should be blindingly obvious.
 
WVXJ said:
Government social programs shouldn't scare people because the government is Supposed to take care of the people. Social programs are where the tax dollars should be spent. What scares me is the uncontrolled growth of corporate rights over the past 100 years..........

There is the first BIG rub, Govt is NOT there to 'take care of the people' period. It is there to serve, provide security from external enemies and provide for free trade between the states, every thing else is an add on as govt started growing and has continued unabated since the stock market crash. As far as my tax dollars going to 'social programs' , thats plain BS right there. I resent the fact that my tax dollars go to unwed baby factorys on welfare that have more babies to get more money, that my tax dollars go to illegals medical care that when I was unemployed and had no coverage had to sell assets and pay over priced hospital charges to cover for the losses they incurred from those without coverage. I've always found it interesting how when you go to the ER with coverage the bill is $200 with a $20 copay, when you go without it's $800. Sentors and congressman who get 'lifetime' medical, screw that, they should have NO better coverage than any other govt employee and should have to revert to medicad when they hit 65, boy then you'd see medical reform in short order.
Do you also happen to belive that police are required by law to protect you ? better research that one a bit, police are only to enforce laws...
Interesting note here in PA, the voters kicked out 15 of17 incumbents on tuesday...boy wait till november....our illustrious state senators voted themselves a 65% pay raise at 11pm one nite last year, it was rescinded 8 months later.... most of them will be on unemployment by january 31'st...
 
Last edited:
RichP said:
There is the first BIG rub, Govt is NOT there to 'take care of the people' period. It is there to serve, provide security from external enemies and provide for free trade between the states, every thing else is an add on as govt started growing and has continued unabated since the stock market crash. As far as my tax dollars going to 'social programs' , thats plain BS right there. I resent the fact that my tax dollars go to unwed baby factorys on welfare that have more babies to get more money, that my tax dollars go to illegals medical care that when I was unemployed and had no coverage had to sell assets and pay over priced hospital charges to cover for the losses they incurred from those without coverage. I've always found it interesting how when you go to the ER with coverage the bill is $200 with a $20 copay, when you go without it's $800. Sentors and congressman who get 'lifetime' medical, screw that, they should have NO better coverage than any other govt employee and should have to revert to medicad when they hit 65, boy then you'd see medical reform in short order.
Do you also happen to belive that police are required by law to protect you ? better research that one a bit, police are only to enforce laws...
Interesting note here in PA, the voters kicked out 15 of17 incumbents on tuesday...boy wait till november....our illustrious state senators voted themselves a 65% pay raise at 11pm one nite last year, it was rescinded 8 months later....

Didn't I say something to that effect? :loveu: Just kidding - I'm sure we're in agreement on social issues.

It is interesting to note that the police - ever since the office of "Sheriff" was created in middle England - have never RPT NEVER had a duty to any particular member of the body politic, except where it would intersect with the interests of the State (viz. "material witnesses" or "state's evidence.") You can't sue the PD for failing to protect you, nor can your family sue because you were killed while waiting for the police to show up. Period. This has been shot down many times in courts over the last several hundred years, and is a precept going way back into English Common Law (much of which formed the basis for early American law.)

The only anyone with a responsibility to protect you is YOU - likewise seeing to your livelihood and upkeep.

As far as the ER thing goes, I think it's something else that is symptomatic of the economic issues. I spend four days "under neurological observation" last November (brain trauma,) and the bill for that was something like $45K. Insurance "negotiated" that down to $13K, and we only paid $100 of it.

And you expect me to believe there's no markup in medicine? An ambulance ride for my mother-in-law (about once a year, dammit) gets billed at something like $4K - Medicare pays about $500 of it, no co-pay.

Seems to me that if we'd stop giving free care to illegals, you'd see prices come down some as well - and that wouldn't be a bad thing. Remember when we didn't really need medical insurance for maintenance and upkeep - just for when something major happened? I miss that...

5-90
 
5-90 said:
Economic slavery is quite real - it's simply come about under another moniker - I belive it's called "working poor" now, rather like a "functional alcoholic." The working poor make just enough to sustain themselves, and never quite get ahead. Nothing like working just to constantly tread water,


Its about choice – and living with your choices…

Working Poor - The working poor make just enough to sustain themselves, and never quite get ahead. Nothing like working just to constantly tread water…

Who’s fault is this?

Lets look at a family of 4 who’s head income winner is making minimum wage ---

How did the family get in that situation? Let’s see---

Could be the person didn’t pay attn in school and dropped out. That person has decided to make that choice himself. Now he isn’t really worth anything to an employer except to be a mule.

Who’s fault is that?

Then they decided to have sex and have children without being able to support them. I waited until I could afford to raise mine properly. Why didn’t they? Another choice they made.

Who’s fault is that?

They could go to school and learn a new trade but they aren’t. Another option they have to advance their position. They choose not to.

Who’s fault it that?

Why am I supposed to pay for other people’s bad choices?

You make your choices and you live with them… Why is it the government’s responsibility to pay for peoples bad choices?

If people make bad decisions and have to work the rest of their lives just to live, then that is on them…

Here is some advice to them – not that they will take it.

- Be angry with your partent(s) – they should have kicked you ass through school and made you study. Don’t this happen to your children. Explain how you failed and if they do the same they will be in the same situation.
- Take some responsibility for yourself and your family – instill some values and pride in themselves – begging isn’t cool
- Stop blaming others for your failings – Who is responsible for you? Your Parents cant take care of you forever and I don’t want to either
- Don’t complain that you don’t have money. Your choices put you where you are today. Improve yourself and people will offer you more money.
 
I say bring in MORE illegals! The more there are, the more I can exploit them! Why pay $10.00 an hour for a crew when I can pay $5.00? The last guy left at the muster zone in the morning may get only $2.00! WOOHOO!!! More money in my pocket. Insurance? What are you kidding me? Drag them out of the hole and off the job before the cops get there! Prove it happened here! Paperwork? Tax forms? Tax accountants? Legal advice? Nonsense. Just lie about everything. After all, it's my word against his. Illegals are not going to run to the cops if something happens.

As far as the complaints about someone making more money or having more benefits, etc., why complain? If you are not happy with your own financial situation, change it. After all, this is the land of opportunity, isn't it? Jealous of government officials having such great benefits? Run for office! Tired of the guy down the street with a bigger house/car/boat/plane than you? Outwork him! Start a business! Make millions!

Not picking on anyone, but if you want to be rich, work for it. I don't begrudge anyone that becomes rich anyway they can. I personally won't break laws or step on anyone else to move ahead, but there are people that will. At some point, I will be happy with what I have achieved. If you think there are no honest millionaires out there, you are mistaken.

Sucking on the public teat? You have to live with yourself. Ripping off little old ladies? Karma is a beotch. Tired of paying taxes? Hire a lawyer and beat the system. Quit whining. It's all about money. Want more? Make your own way in this world kids. If you are not smart enough, or if you don't have enough ambition, if you are satisfied making 30K a year, or if you think someone is holding you back, you should blame yourself. Get smarter, work harder, save more, grow some balls and take responsibility for yourself. There are millions of examples of people doing just that every day.
 
Zuki-Ron said:
I had to search aroud for where I read it. Here it is:http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/03/hidden_cost_of_.html

very good read...

does anyone have a friend at a car dealer that can run a report and show more than one name to a SSN?

I would like to see that get out to a local news station... and to see if they would run the story...
 
IMORTL said:
Its about choice – and living with your choices…

Working Poor - The working poor make just enough to sustain themselves, and never quite get ahead. Nothing like working just to constantly tread water…

Who’s fault is this?

Lets look at a family of 4 who’s head income winner is making minimum wage ---

How did the family get in that situation? Let’s see---

Could be the person didn’t pay attn in school and dropped out. That person has decided to make that choice himself. Now he isn’t really worth anything to an employer except to be a mule.

Who’s fault is that?

Then they decided to have sex and have children without being able to support them. I waited until I could afford to raise mine properly. Why didn’t they? Another choice they made.

Who’s fault is that?

They could go to school and learn a new trade but they aren’t. Another option they have to advance their position. They choose not to.

Who’s fault it that?

Why am I supposed to pay for other people’s bad choices?

You make your choices and you live with them… Why is it the government’s responsibility to pay for peoples bad choices?

If people make bad decisions and have to work the rest of their lives just to live, then that is on them…

Here is some advice to them – not that they will take it.

- Be angry with your partent(s) – they should have kicked you ass through school and made you study. Don’t this happen to your children. Explain how you failed and if they do the same they will be in the same situation.
- Take some responsibility for yourself and your family – instill some values and pride in themselves – begging isn’t cool
- Stop blaming others for your failings – Who is responsible for you? Your Parents cant take care of you forever and I don’t want to either
- Don’t complain that you don’t have money. Your choices put you where you are today. Improve yourself and people will offer you more money.


OK. I did well in school, think I did fairly well raising my two boys (OK, putting the finish on them - I didn't sire them, and I had to fix them when I got them,) and the highest paying job I've had has been the Air Force. Enlisted man.

Why? Because I'm "overqualified and undereducated" - I'm one of those people who can learn pretty much anything if you just set him in front of it - but that's not good enough anymore.

I'm working my way through higher education now, and I plan on getting a minimum of two degrees - one of which I could use (Mechanical Engineering.) The others would mainly be to either fill in the gaps in my experience - which are fairly few - or to prove that I know how to do what I say I know how to do.

That is also a contributing factor to the "working poor" - if I told you what we made last year, you'd wonder why we're living in quiet desperation. The dumbing down of American education means that now, a two- or four-year degree in "Liberal Arts" (please!) or "General Education" (how's that work again?) is roughly equivalent to my high school education. Worse - I've been able to hold my own against LA and GE majors - and even outperform them - telling me that those degrees have become about as useless as political science (yeah, right.)

However, I get passed over by the hideously unqualified in the job market, because they've got a scrap of paper that I don't. All that usually means is that the four years they spent in school, I spent living and working - and I'm likely more highly skilled, more motivated, and have a better sense of perspective - but I don't have that scrap of paper.

Entirely too much value is placed upon higher education these days, because primary education is failing. Honestly, I should have finished my two with home-schooling - they sure didn't learn anything in the public school system. They're too focussed on bilingual education and "self-esteem" (honestly - when did it become a good thing to "pass" someone who does "failing" grade work? I don't care if it harms their feelings - you'll do better next time, won't you?)

I've also done tutoring, and taught more in a month than most schools can in a semester - simply because I engage the mind of the tutee, and kick them into actually thinking. I don't "teach to the test," and I wasn't "taught to the test" - in most cases, the test was written about 72 hours before we took it anyhow. And, the most common question was "Why?" or "Defend your answer." To not do so with the current students is a disservice at best.

So, where else do you find the working poor - the people who are unable to improve their situation? Working full-time while going to school is a pain, worse because some employers are all hung up about WHICH hours you work, as opposed to just HOW MANY, and that can make it difficult to take some necessary classes.

As far as the "dumbing down" thing, I've seen college maths courses covering stuff I did in fifth or sixth grade. If you need that course (MATH200, usually, or "Bonehead Math,") then you should be sent back to the public school that released you untaught - intro algebra isn't the job of the college. Maybe useful as a refresher for "olde pharts" like me going back after a number of years, but if you've just come out of high school, there's no reason you should have to start with MATH200 (or EWRT200, or HIST200, or anything else that you should have already learned. If colleges stopped offering "Bonehead" courses in general, you'd probably see an improvement in secondary education as a result.)

Given the cost of going to college as well, if you're just making enough to eke by, how are you supposed to pay for school? Student loans? A good idea - but suppose it takes you a while afterward to find a better job. Meanwhile, the loans just pile up...

I'm quite sure there are working poor who deserve to be such, but there are those who are stuck there because the game is set up with a "house advantage" - and it gets difficult to escape. This is typically not aided by the local economy (California, for instance. My wife an I can qualify for $1700/mo rent, but not for $1300-1400/mo in mortgage. How's that work again?)

5-90
 
5-90 said:
OK. I did well in school, think I did fairly well raising my two boys (OK, putting the finish on them - I didn't sire them, and I had to fix them when I got them,) and the highest paying job I've had has been the Air Force. Enlisted man.

5-90

Please forgive me. this was not an attack or question of you or your situation... it was a statement of self accountability...

I dont have a Degree either. I joined the military (enlisted) and served my 4 years. My training was in Computers. I now work in the marketing field. I am in this position becuase of hard work. I have 2 people in in the same position, different divisions, that have masters degrees that still come ask my recommendation because I have been doing it for 10+ years... No degree... and I get paid more than they do... Granted in 10 years they may be making more...

But I made the choice to Join the Military and not go to college. In the military I was accepted to Annapolis and virtually guaranteed flight school. I choose not to commit 10 more years of my life to the military. My Choice (Sometimes I regret it - but if I had I would not have the family I have now - and I don't regret that)

My point is that People are a result of their choices... Good or Bad...

but I think we have gotten off the topic...


Today I emailed everyone of my representatives and asked them why Current laws are not being enforced. and what the planned to do about it. then pasted this article below.

AP: Many immigrant smugglers not prosecuted

By ELLIOT SPAGAT
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER



SAN DIEGO -- The vast majority of people caught smuggling immigrants across the border near San Diego are never prosecuted for the offense, demoralizing the agents making the arrests, according to an internal Border Patrol document obtained by The Associated Press.

"It is very difficult to keep agents' morale up when the laws they were told to uphold are being watered-down or not prosecuted," the report says.

The report offers a stark assessment of the situation at a Border Patrol station responsible for guarding 13 miles of mountainous border east of the city. Federal officials say it reflects a reality along the entire 2,000-mile border: Judges and federal attorneys are so swamped that only the most egregious smuggling cases are prosecuted.

Only 6 percent of 289 suspected immigrant smugglers were prosecuted by the federal government for that offense in the year ending in September 2004, according to the report. Some were instead prosecuted for another crime. Other cases were declined by federal prosecutors, or the suspect was released by the Border Patrol.

The report raises doubts about the value of tightening security along the Mexican border. President Bush wants to hire 6,000 more Border Patrol agents and dispatch up to 6,000 National Guardsmen. He did not mention overburdened courts in his Oval Office address Monday on immigration.

The report was provided to the AP by the office of Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who has accused the chief federal prosecutor in San Diego of being lax on smuggling cases. Issa's office said it was an internal Border Patrol report written last August. It was unclear who wrote it.

The lack of prosecutions is "demoralizing the agents and making a joke out of our system of justice," said T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents agents. "It is certainly a weak link in our immigration-enforcement chain."

The 41-page report says federal prosecutors in San Diego typically prosecute smugglers who commit "dangerous/violent activity" or guide at least 12 illegal immigrants across the border. But other smugglers know they are only going to get "slapped on the wrist," according to the report.


The report cites a 19-year-old U.S. citizen caught three times in a two-week period in 2004 trying to sneak people from Tijuana, Mexico, to San Diego in his car trunk, two at a time.

"This is an example of a kid who knows the system," the report says. "What is true is that he will probably never be prosecuted if he only smuggles only one or two bodies at a time."

The report also cites a Mexican citizen who was caught in Arizona and California driving with illegal immigrants and was released each time to Mexico. He was prosecuted the fourth time, when two illegal immigrants in his van died in a crash, and sentenced to five years in prison.

U.S. Attorney Carol Lam in San Diego said about half her 110 attorneys work on border cases in an area where the Border Patrol made nearly 140,000 arrests last year. She said she gives highest priority to the most serious cases, including suspects with long histories of violent crime or offenders who endanger others' lives.

"We figure out how many cases our office can handle, start from the worst and work our way down," she said.

Lam said many suspected migrant smugglers are prosecuted instead for re-entering the country after being deported, a crime that can be proved with documents. Smuggling cases are more difficult to prosecute because they require witnesses to testify.

The Border Patrol, which would neither confirm nor deny the document's authenticity, said prosecutors in San Diego recently agreed to prosecute a Top 20 list of smugglers if they are caught.

The Justice Department in Washington declined to comment. However, at a congressional hearing last month, Rep. Ric Keller, R-Fla., told Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that Lam's record on migrant smuggling was "a pathetic failure." Gonzales replied that he was urging U.S. attorneys to more actively enforce laws but noted that immigration cases were "a tremendous strain and burden" along the border.

Peter Nunez, a former U.S. attorney in San Diego, said prosecutors along the border struggle with limited resources and a huge caseload of immigration cases.

"This is not an indictment of the U.S. Attorney's Office, because you have to deal with the realities of the caseload, but it is an indictment of how badly Congress and presidents have handled the immigration system," he said.

The report says immigrants in the area paid an average of $1,398 to be guided across the border in 2004.
 
5-90 said:
So, where else do you find the working poor - the people who are unable to improve their situation? Working full-time while going to school is a pain, worse because some employers are all hung up about WHICH hours you work, as opposed to just HOW MANY, and that can make it difficult to take some necessary classes.


Given the cost of going to college as well, if you're just making enough to eke by, how are you supposed to pay for school? Student loans? A good idea - but suppose it takes you a while afterward to find a better job. Meanwhile, the loans just pile up...

5-90

My original comments still apply to this situation...

working full time and going to school is a pain... Who's fault is that? How Long would you have to do it? 4? 6 years? How long is that in your life time if it could mean you would increase your worth or pay 4x? Notthing worth having is easy. If you dont have the time because of family? back to the choice question... why did you have kids? who's fault was that?

Given the cost of going to college? well in Cali, it's pretty cheap to go to CC and earn enough to transfer to a UC... no one said it was easy... he should have thought about that when he was younger... bad choices are hard to correct...

and you know, i think most people that are REALLY trying to better themselves could find people who would help them out.

Not the Government... What ever happend to the family? You bet your ass if someone was REALLY going to school to improve himself, someone in the family or a friend would help... Unless they were a thief and a lair... Again... Choices...

Hell, I remember a time when I was little, when both parents worked and mom actually worked 2 jobs... they were too proud to ask for help from anyone... that struck with me... the question was always... Could I be doing more to help the family?

Maybe people should get their priorities straight... Until you can support yourself and your responsibilities, What's more important? Putting in more time to improve youself or drinking beer, and buying bling bling? (sorry - it seems the crappiest cars aways have 22"s) Sadly many people dont see it that way... Well, Wecome to Minumum Wageville... Population you and the other lazy SOB's...
 
Lazy? Hardly - the only reason I'm not still doing 20+ units per quarter is because I'm recovering (last quarter - 9. This quarter - 13. I'm ramping back up - brain injuries are such a pain to recover from...)

My root complaint was that education has actually become worth less, because it is less. If primary education was still doing its job, there wouldn't be a stigma attached to NOT having any sort of degree, because primary schools used to give a decent education, unless you were a specialist of some sort. Whether it was in basic academe or in trades, you used to be able to get a job right out of high school.

So, while everyone else was going to college, I enlisted and did six years in the Air Force (closer to ten now, with recalls.)

I go to school full time - even more now. I'm still trying to get a job - hopefully at school, since I'm there all day anyhow. I'm also running my own small business here. AND, school isn't as easy as it was a few months ago, but it's getting easier again.

I've worked two full jobs, I've done the school full-time/work full-time thing, and I refuse to be lectured about "overcoming adversity" - considering I was once homeless for four months and I've been dead twice - but I'm still kicking.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are people who work the system, and people who are trapped by the system. Granted, it's possible to overcome nearly anything, but you can and do get tired of trying after a while. And, what if family is not in a position to help? Not everyone has a rich relative, you know... I just can't figure out if I was born 100 years too late, or 100 years to early. I certainly don't belong in NOW - although here I am, and here I remain. I'm just trying to make the best of it, and it's quite tiring.

5-90
 
mexicos government has the same income per year as canadas. And you dont see the canadians walking miles to get here or even driving here in search of a better life.......or work.....the real problem lies south of the border .....we need to set up a new regime in mexico like we feel the need to do everywhere else............no Juan left behind....lmfao
 
Last edited:
They are redesigning the paper money again :D
bill.jpg
 
I lke this one, pretty much sums up the situation

Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he, too, is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking-in part). If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for ... well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything? Does this sound reasonable to you? If it does, grab a sign and go picket something. If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."
 
Fullsizexj said:
I lke this one, pretty much sums up the situation

Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he, too, is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking-in part). If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest ... um, except for ... well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything? Does this sound reasonable to you? If it does, grab a sign and go picket something. If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."

First question I have to ask is what makes it your house? It likely used to belong to someone else from the Mexicans, through the Spanish (French, English, Dutch whomever) to the Indians and likely various Indians at that. Now it's happening to you and you don't like it a bit. I don't imagine the people that settled the land earlier liked it much, when the great migration from the east was gaining steam. And when the immigrants finally outnumbered the natives and changed the system to benefit themselves.
Next thing is, the immigrants from the south manage to work the system to benefit themselves and it upsets everybody. Reminds me of an old joke as to why the (enter minority of your choice here) hate Seagulls? (I seem to hear what seems to be constant jealously and envy about people that work the system better than you/generic you/ do because) they beat them to the dumps. Do you really exspect them not to work and use the system? Ignoring the rules that they don't like and using the rules that benefit them, doesn't sound to dumb to me. It may not be right, but right is relative. The people that make the rules, often aren't right either, but they usually do have the might (or muscle) to make the rules.
At least they aren't trying to burn down the city (yet) and make demands that they be treated equally (or better than equally).
This may sound a little obtuse, but is actually more relavent than it sounds. The California natives in the mid 70's pretty much got run out of the So. Cal area (property taxes, inflation, legislation,zoning etc.). The new immigrants from the East, legislated the place into a distastfull existance, for the people that grew up knowning the old Californio life style (rather laid back). I know very darned few great grandchildren of the settlers to California in the early to mid 1800`s that didn't leave the area to all points of the compass. When the process was happening, I kept asking myself, when they get done running all the natives off, what will they have left for neighbors? I guess the answer to that is turning out to be Mexicans.
I was run out of town or maybe better put, the come latelies turned the town into a place I sure didin't want to raise my children in and now it is happening to them, excuse me if I'm a little short on sympathy.
 
Last edited:
8Mud said:
First question I have to ask is what makes it your house? It likely used to belong to someone else from the Mexicans, through the Spanish (French, English, Dutch whomever) to the Indians and likely various Indians at that.

Note the emphasis above on the past tense. What makes it ours is that we went to war over parts of it, bought some of it, and otherwise acquired or annexed other regions. If what you're proposing is taken to its logical conclusion, then we should return most of Europe to Scandinavia, geographically obliterate Israel, and hand the US back over, in its entirety, to the Indian tribes. I should also be able to go back to the guy I sold my car to last March and take it back because, rightfully, it's mine, yes?

Now it's happening to you and you don't like it a bit.

You're right. We don't. Go figure.

I don't imagine the people that settled the land earlier liked it much, when the great migration from the east was gaining steam. And when the immigrants finally outnumbered the natives and changed the system to benefit themselves.

Probably not, but given that we're talking about two entirely different legal paradigms here, it's comparing apples and oranges. Does that mean we should not defend against illegal immigration? Absolutely not.

Ignoring the rules that they don't like and using the rules that benefit them, doesn't sound to dumb to me. It may not be right, but right is relative. The people that make the rules, often aren't right either, but they usually do have the might (or muscle) to make the rules.

So are you proposing that we should ignore laws because we don't like them, or that we should allow illegal immigrants to be a specially-protected subset of the population that's allowed to? Doesn't sound very equitable to me in either case.

At least they aren't trying to burn down the city (yet) and make demands that they be treated equally (or better than equally).

Uh, you should've heard some of what was being spewed at the demonstrations; some (by no means all) of it was exactly that.

This may sound a little obtuse, but is actually more relavent than it sounds. The California natives in the mid 70's pretty much got run out of the So. Cal area (property taxes, inflation, legislation,zoning etc.).

Yah, we're a very underpopulated state.

The new immigrants from the East, legislated the place into a distastfull existance, for the people that grew up knowning the old Californio life style (rather laid back). I know very darned few great grandchildren of the settlers to California in the early to mid 1800`s that didn't leave the area to all points of the compass. When the process was happening, I kept asking myself, when they get done running all the natives off, what will they have left for neighbors? I guess the answer to that is turning out to be Mexicans.

Is it Mexicans? No. Is it illegal immigrants of all nationalities? Yes. Are the majority of our illegal immigrants from Mexico? Yes, because they have the nearest border. Are all of our illegal immigrants from Mexico? No, there are others. Should all illegal immigrants be subject to prosecution? Yes, because they're breaking the law by being here. Giving one group amnesty is serious disservice to all those who have come here legally.

I was run out of town or maybe better put, the come latelies turned the town into a place I sure didin't want to raise my children in and now it is happening to them, excuse me if I'm a little short on sympathy.

No, you chose to leave inasmuch as I choose to live here. We have laws detailing the process by which one can legally come here to reside. Why should we allow any group to behave as though those laws don't apply to them?
 
The whole flavor of my rant, was that the grey is a whole lot bigger than the right and wrong (black and white) part of the whole process. Lawfull and unlawfull are also relative, there has been an awfull lot of very wrong lawfull policies in the past and present, in various countries throughout the world (the US encluded). The government of the moment desides what is lawfull, no matter how immoral.
What recourse does a person have to resist a law they can't seem to tolerate. Ignoring it, is just about the most passive thing a person can do. When enough people ignore it, it becomes irrelevant.
IMO the whole immigrant thing isn't going to be decided anytime soon. Any workable solution, I can think of, is going to require a very long time and concerted effort, perhaps generations.
In my mind, it is more of a migration, than illegal immigration and may just get worse, if the climate changes much more and the lands to the south dry out significantly. Or the population pressures from the south grow too large or a combination of both.
With the right technologies and a little help, the lands to the south could be made much more hospitable and fruitfull, for while anyway. I doubt anybody will expend the funds, the perserverance and the effort to do anything meaningfull until way past too late. Like just about every other major problem.
In the mean time, they will pass more laws that are rarley enforced (lack of funding or personel) and try bubble gum fixes that actually don't solve anything. The establishment will harass and poke at the immigrants and the immigrants will become more obnoxious, adapt to the changes and illegaly immigrate anyway.
 
Back
Top