I found this over at GuyK's place, and as a legal immigrant/naturalized citizen myself, I find it particularly poignant:
I think Guy has it right when he opines that one effective way of stemming such immigration is to stop it from the emplyers side by instituting LARGE fines on those that employ illegals. No jobs, no illegals. Simple cause and effect.
It might not stop it totally, there are always those that believe that they will "get away with it", but it would be a large step forward in the border war, not to mention, providing some extra checks preventing terrorists such easy access into the country as they now have.
Excepting for some of us who have Native Americans as ancestors, we all come from immigrants. Immigration is not the problem. It is the illegal immigration and the immigrants who are bankrupting the social welfare system. If there are not enough Americans to do the jobs then work with other countries including Mexico to import guest workers. But the public should keep one thing in mind-no cuntry has ever survived very long by depending on a sub culture of cheap labor. Labor must be paid enough to buy a part of what they produce. I am probably one of the most rabid anti-union people around but I also understand a bit about macro economics.
Posted by: GUYK at January 9, 2006 07:49 PMGuy,
Unions have nothing to do with this. Unions are a business, just like the businesses they work agai...er...with. Unions just produce unhappy workers. That's their job. The fact that unions may have, at one point in their history, gotten pay raises for those workers is purely by accident. Unhappy workers is the goal.
I'm all for immigration, LEGAL immigration. (and, sorry, Guy, the 'Native Americans' aren't 'native', nor are they 'American'. They're immigrants, just like everyone else. Unless you are a Creationist, like me.) A country's wealth is SOLELY determined by the number of inhabitants it possesses, since 100% of the cost of EVERYTHING in the world is labor cost. So, the more workers a country has, the more it can produce. The more it can produce, the more wealth it has. Communism is just a severe retardant on that equation, but, it's still applicable.
Posted by: the Humble Devildog at January 9, 2006 08:46 PM