Post: #26

(01-28-2014 02:33 PM)MidWest Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:45 PM)dads Wrote:  Also, my entire family immigrated legally from Africa (Sierra Leone). My aunt waited almost three years to get her green card, and she couldn't even bring her son over here until pretty recently.

My illegal immigrant parents have been living here in America for over 25 years, still illegally. Theyve been in America far longer than many American high school students. My dad has lived in Chicago far longer than his life in Mexico.

You're a good example as to why amnesty may be a good idea. I don't know if you are old enough to sponsor your parents for immigration, but if you are you can't because they are currently unlawfully present in the US.

Amnesty would not grant them citizenship but would clear the way for you to sponsor them as you are a citizen (I'm assuming)

Post: #27

(01-28-2014 02:14 PM)scorpion Wrote:  I don't understand why people thinking about this in economic terms. The issue should not be whether illegal immigrants are a net economic benefit or cost. The issue is whether or not modern nations have sovereignty over their borders. If a country cannot dictate who its citizens are, then is it really even a country?

Imagine you joined a private country club ten years ago. You have access to nice facilities, golf courses, pools, restaurants, etc... The club is exclusive and does not allow more than a limited amount of new members to join every year. But then suddenly the rules change and anyone is allowed to join. The club is quickly swamped with hundreds of new members, most of whom do not respect the traditions of the club. Within a few years, the club is unrecognizable from what it used to be. This is basically what is happening to Western countries at the moment.

This matters because countries are not just arbitrary pieces of land. A country is a people and its traditions. If you replaced every Japanese person in Japan with Irishmen or Ugandans, then you don't have "Japan" as we know it anymore. That Japan is gone. You have something else entirely. The same is true for every country.

There's simply no reason to support large scale immigration if you have any interest in preserving the culture and traditions of your country.

The thing about this is that America is an immigrant nation. Every single American can trace back his or her roots to another country unless they are Native Americans. Our culture is influenced by many others and we have always pride ourselves in being an immigrant nation, but when it comes to brown people, that fuzzy feeling starts to sway away. We aren't a homogeneous people like the Japanese or Chinese. Im pretty sure you can trace back your roots to another country as well. You go to the SouthWest youll find a big Mexican influence there, you go to Florida and the Cuban influence is present, Massachusetts and the New England area youll see the Irish influence. New York and New Jersey, the Italian influence. Chicago and the Eastern European influence like Polish, Bosnians, Serbians, etc... Chinese in the Pacific Northwest, French influence in Louisiana.

Even the names of our cities and states have origins from different countries for example Los Angeles, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco all Spanish. New York, Rhode Island have Dutch origin. Chicago, Tucson, Oklahoma are all native American names.

Im not saying we should have open borders, but our history is unique in this aspect. But like I said, when it comes to brown people, all of a sudden people have a problem with it.

Post: #28

They are a huge left wing voting block. The republicans think they will become conservative as soon as they pass the amnesty. That's just not going to happen. So I'll get 20 million more people who will vote against my interests forever. Good times.

Post: #29

I think Pat Buchanan said it the best: "You can't have a first world country with a third world population"

Post: #30

(01-28-2014 05:08 PM)MidWest Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:14 PM)scorpion Wrote:  I don't understand why people thinking about this in economic terms. The issue should not be whether illegal immigrants are a net economic benefit or cost. The issue is whether or not modern nations have sovereignty over their borders. If a country cannot dictate who its citizens are, then is it really even a country?

Imagine you joined a private country club ten years ago. You have access to nice facilities, golf courses, pools, restaurants, etc... The club is exclusive and does not allow more than a limited amount of new members to join every year. But then suddenly the rules change and anyone is allowed to join. The club is quickly swamped with hundreds of new members, most of whom do not respect the traditions of the club. Within a few years, the club is unrecognizable from what it used to be. This is basically what is happening to Western countries at the moment.

This matters because countries are not just arbitrary pieces of land. A country is a people and its traditions. If you replaced every Japanese person in Japan with Irishmen or Ugandans, then you don't have "Japan" as we know it anymore. That Japan is gone. You have something else entirely. The same is true for every country.

There's simply no reason to support large scale immigration if you have any interest in preserving the culture and traditions of your country.

The thing about this is that America is an immigrant nation. Every single American can trace back his or her roots to another country unless they are Native Americans. Our culture is influenced by many others and we have always pride ourselves in being an immigrant nation, but when it comes to brown people, that fuzzy feeling starts to sway away. We aren't a homogeneous people like the Japanese or Chinese. Im pretty sure you can trace back your roots to another country as well. You go to the SouthWest youll find a big Mexican influence there, you go to Florida and the Cuban influence is present, Massachusetts and the New England area youll see the Irish influence. New York and New Jersey, the Italian influence. Chicago and the Eastern European influence like Polish, Bosnians, Serbians, etc... Chinese in the Pacific Northwest, French influence in Louisiana.

Even the names of our cities and states have origins from different countries for example Los Angeles, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco all Spanish. New York, Rhode Island have Dutch origin. Chicago, Tucson, Oklahoma are all native American names.

Im not saying we should have open borders, but our history is unique in this aspect. But like I said, when it comes to brown people, all of a sudden people have a problem with it.

You're right about America being an "immigrant nation." What you might not know is that the flow of immigration was strictly controlled. This is why the Italian immigrants mostly came over circa 1900-1910. The gov't allowed it. You don't hear about a wave of Italians immigrating to the US circa 1960-70 because they turned the spigot off then -- and had opened it to Koreans.

The Irish, Germans, and Jews all got a window to come over in large numbers. Then it shut. This is also why these people assimilated. They were the minority and had to assimilate.

Nowadays, it's a non-stop flow and it's largely illegal. So this is an apples and oranges comparison to the immigration of old. The massive under-the-table, below-minimum-wage pay has dragged down working class wages and made the "teenage job" virtually a thing of the past. It's allowed big companies to skirt the minimum wage laws they once fought against.

To not see how this has affected our economy or our culture is to be willfully blind.

And for the record, I don't hear conservatives bemoaning anyone's "dark skin." I do hear complaints about language barriers and wages, though. And I think the people claiming anti-immigrant sentiments are due to "racism" are playing into the hands of the one percent. They're playing the race card with this -- as they do when it's convenient. I'd counter-argue the real racism is in paying people peasant's wages which is what they're doing.

Also, the government is being massively hypocritical "cracking down" on us all for alleged safety reasons while they're letting virtually anyone cross the border with no penalty! If "homeland security" is a real concern, that's where you'd start.

It's like leaving your front door unlocked, then monitoring your own wife and kids in case they want to do damage to the house. Gee, you think maybe the strangers entering illegally might be a bigger threat?

Post: #31

(01-28-2014 05:08 PM)MidWest Wrote:  Im not saying we should have open borders, but our history is unique in this aspect. But like I said, when it comes to brown people, all of a sudden people have a problem with it.

Right, because brown people (Central American Indians) are different culturally and biologically; the later waves of European immigrants were just different culturally. If we had 10 million illegal Belgians no one would give two shits.

Post: #32

(01-28-2014 01:30 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:25 PM)Wayout Wrote:  Illegal immigration is just a scape goat to avert attention from real problems like Military spending and the 1% holding the wealth. There is enough money for everyone in the US but the ones in power throw us scraps and then blame Mexicans!

It must suck living life as a victim. Anyone who can't make money in the US should be thankful for scraps because they are one lazy, dumb mafo.

^^^ 3 day suspension for gratuitous personal attack.

Post: #33

(01-28-2014 05:08 PM)MidWest Wrote:  Im not saying we should have open borders, but our history is unique in this aspect. But like I said, when it comes to brown people, all of a sudden people have a problem with it.

Note there are Black Americans, some have ancestors have been on this continent for longer than most white people. They're not immigrants in fact in many cases they are the most adversely affected by current trends. That said, ethnic differences between groups can be more or less dramatic depending on the groups. If there are conflicts between English Protestants and German Protestants what sort of tensions might there be between Irish Catholics and African Muslims?

For the first couple hundred years of US history (if you include the colonial period), the country was expanding west into new territory. When large numbers of Germans immigrated in the late 19th century, rather than displacing the largely English population in the East, they settled in the sparsely (and recently) populated midwest.

When the pattern was different, such as Irish Catholics migrating during the early 20th century, there were major tensions and competition for low/unskilled labor (see: "No Irish Need Apply").

The US has no real frontier anymore. Immigrants are not coming to settle farmland or build railroads and factories, they're coming to take advantage of the country's existing wealth, social capital, and government benefits. When they settle, they settle alongside existing residents, vote in their elections and take over their politics. Kind of like the Irish did in parts of Boston or the Italians in NY City. Except with the Hispanic migration it's happening on a much larger scale.

(btw I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on immigration. I just think the immigrant mythology argument is not valid.)

Post: #34

If anyone is truly concerned about immigration, and by that I don't mean taking in part in some anonymous online circle jerk for likes and rep points.

I mean really, really concerned, then that time is better spent making your case towards people who can actually do something about it. No efficacy getting worked up to make your case on an anonymous game forum. You're either going to come across people that agree or disagree, but it's highly unlikely you'll change anyone's mind or do anything that will make a difference in the real world.

Just sayin'

Post: #35

(01-28-2014 05:08 PM)MidWest Wrote:  The thing about this is that America is an immigrant nation. Every single American can trace back his or her roots to another country unless they are Native Americans. Our culture is influenced by many others and we have always pride ourselves in being an immigrant nation, but when it comes to brown people, that fuzzy feeling starts to sway away.

I have to respectfully disagree. American culture is not influenced in any significant ways by "many others". America is basically a European nation located outside of Europe, just like Australia, Canada, New Zealand or Argentina. The cultural norms were handed down from Britain. The social norms of Africa, Asia or Latin America played no role in the organizational structure of America or the founding documents. Sure, we may have music and food influenced by a bit of this and a bit of that, but fundamentally, America is an Anglo country. Even the women's attitudes should tell you this as we speak of women from other countries coming here and becoming corrupted by the Anglosphere feminist values.

Quote:We aren't a homogeneous people like the Japanese or Chinese.

The racial homogeneity of America has been all over the place. Obviously at the founding there were huge numbers of Native Americans, huge numbers of Africans and whites. Maybe even in equal parts. Then by the 50s I think America was like 90% white IIRC. Now the trend is reversing since immigration patterns changed. Btw, it's a trip when I look at old vintage photos of downtown Los Angeles or Hollywood blvd or even Times Square and there's only white people walking around. It's like whoa...this is NYC??

Post: #36

Here's a simple exercise:
As an American, try to illegally immigrant to another country. See how far you get.

Post: #37

(01-28-2014 07:01 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 05:08 PM)MidWest Wrote:  The thing about this is that America is an immigrant nation. Every single American can trace back his or her roots to another country unless they are Native Americans. Our culture is influenced by many others and we have always pride ourselves in being an immigrant nation, but when it comes to brown people, that fuzzy feeling starts to sway away.

I have to respectfully disagree. American culture is not influenced in any significant ways by "many others". America is basically a European nation located outside of Europe, just like Australia, Canada, New Zealand or Argentina. The cultural norms were handed down from Britain. The social norms of Africa, Asia or Latin America played no role in the organizational structure of America or the founding documents. Sure, we may have music and food influenced by a bit of this and a bit of that, but fundamentally, America is an Anglo country. Even the women's attitudes should tell you this as we speak of women from other countries coming here and becoming corrupted by the Anglosphere feminist values.

Quote:We aren't a homogeneous people like the Japanese or Chinese.

The racial homogeneity of America has been all over the place. Obviously at the founding there were huge numbers of Native Americans, huge numbers of Africans and whites. Maybe even in equal parts. Then by the 50s I think America was like 90% white IIRC. Now the trend is reversing since immigration patterns changed. Btw, it's a trip when I look at old vintage photos of downtown Los Angeles or Hollywood blvd or even Times Square and there's only white people walking around. It's like whoa...this is NYC??

You think so? I don't think that's true, Speak. Even if you go up to Quebec (Montreal), the vibe and culture is latin not anglo at all.

Same with South Florida. Miami is completely latin. Try getting ahead without knowing Spanish and you'll find life more difficult than it needs to be.

Also, American culture was a melting pot from the very beginning. There were many languages spoken in the colonies (French, English, Spanish, Native languages) which is one reason why the founders didn't establish English as an official language. The US actually has no official language, unlike most countries.

If you look at a lot of the original documents from the founders you'll see how broad-minded those guys were (maybe not in practice but in how they shaped the country). They were painstakingly careful not to show preference to any nationality, religion, etc. Way ahead of their time.

Culture is local. The culture of New Orleans is different from Denver than from New York. That's what Midwest is getting at.

Sure, we imported British Common Law (except for Louisiana which has Civil Law), but beyond that, every wave of immigration challenged the facts on the ground and people had to forge a way to live together.

Every succeeding generation had to "take their lickings" when coming over to America (Germans, Irish, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, etc). The first time these groups encountered a racial hierarchy was when they came here. The first arrivals suffered, but their children were able to assimilate and have it better off. Germans used to have their own schools and teach their kids the language until the government banned it.

There's mountains of literature on this. If you go to most cities in the American south, the African-American and British farmer influence is undeniable. Even in linguistics, they've determined that African-American vernacular is heavily influenced by British "redneck farmers" who settled in the South and both cultures influencing each other in turn. Keep in mind some of these cities, like Richmond, VA, had slave populations that made up the majority of the city's population.

If you go to Texas, the Southwest, California, the Mexican influence is undeniable. Go around the country and you'll see how different the regions are. We really are a bunch of states that are bound together by federal authority (remember the south wanted out of this shit altogether), but our cultures are uniquely different.

For example, this white girl I smashed from Vermont was talking to me on Skype the other day. She moved to a southern state to attend some prestigious med school. She feels she has more in common with me - as far as my values and outlook on the world - than white southerners she goes to school with. The culture there is utterly weird to her (i.e. people going to church on Sundays, etc).

Man, I had to laugh reading your post because it reminded me of this video someone sent me the other day.

Post: #38

(01-28-2014 02:41 PM)Ryre Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:14 PM)scorpion Wrote:  ...The issue is whether or not modern nations have sovereignty over their borders. If a country cannot dictate who its citizens are, then is it really even a country?

Imagine you joined a private country club ten years ago. You have access to nice facilities, golf courses, pools, restaurants, etc... The club is exclusive and does not allow more than a limited amount of new members to join every year. But then suddenly the rules change and anyone is allowed to join. The club is quickly swamped with hundreds of new members, most of whom do not respect the traditions of the club. Within a few years, the club is unrecognizable from what it used to be. This is basically what is happening to Western countries at the moment.

This matters because countries are not just arbitrary pieces of land. A country is a people and its traditions. If you replaced every Japanese person in Japan with Irishmen or Ugandans, then you don't have "Japan" as we know it anymore. That Japan is gone. You have something else entirely. The same is true for every country.

There's simply no reason to support large scale immigration if you have any interest in preserving the culture and traditions of your country.

I am very sympathetic to this view. But I think we--or at least certain classes of us--are complicit in the current situation, with 20 million or whatever illegals here, many for a long time with families and whatnot. Companies, farmers, etc. wanted cheap labor, so we never effectively cracked down. To suddenly decide to fix the situation on the backs of mostly a bunch of hardworking ordinary people--at huge human cost--would be inhumane.

We helped create the situation. Given that, I think the principle of sovereignty is not worth the pain of mass deportations. Let's enact a reasonable solution for those already here, and fix the problem going forward.

The main problems is that this is what they promised in the 80s. Reagan gave a blanket amnesty to those here with the promise of fixing the broken borders going forward. Well, we see how that turned out. So you can't blame Americans for being skeptical of another "comprehensive immigration reform".

I also don't buy any of this shit about how we need people doing jobs nobody else will do. How does every other country do it? How many poor immigrants live in Iceland? How is Iceland getting its floors mopped and toilets cleaned? Probably by local Icelanders that are getting paid a living wage when they don't have to compete with people willing to work for peanuts. Yet we are told in America that if we close the borders we are going to starve to death and nothing will ever get cleaned again.

You also have to factor in that you are paying for those cheap vegetables and nannies in other ways. They are going to have kids at the county hospital at $9,000 per birth billed to the taxpayer. When those kids go to school, they will cost $10,000 a year to educate from the taxpayer. This comes from property taxes. Are these illegals working slave wages paying $10,000 a year in property taxes? There's a reason California went from once having the best education system in the country to now being almost dead last. Some schools in L.A. have a student body made of almost entire kids who are undocumented. Just look at how dysfunctional California is if you want to see what the results of this are. Now that I left that state and see how much better other places function it's so much more clear. You start seeing how parents of meager incomes aren't forced to put their kids in private schools because the public schools suck so bad. You see how roads are not full of potholes everywhere and the infrastructure is good. California is becoming a third world economy with a few wealthy at the top and masses of uneducated working poor.

I get annoyed when people make glib statements like, "why are you worried about it, what's stopping you from making money?" As if that's all that matters. As if none of this has any consequences aside from my own personal paycheck. I look back at friends in California who have kids and can't take a family vacation because they need the money for private school due to the public schools being ruined. That's where shit gets real. Many have plans of getting out of CA as its just too dysfunctional, especially given how high taxes are out there and what you get for your money.

Post: #39

(01-28-2014 07:27 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  You think so? I don't think that's true, Speak. Even if you go up to Quebec (Montreal), the vibe and culture is latin not anglo at all.

Same with South Florida. Miami is completely latin. Try getting ahead without knowing Spanish and you'll find life more difficult than it needs to be.

Yeah, Miami is like that NOW. It wasn't always. The Cuban dominance of south Florida started after the exodus from Castro. I didn't say America is homogenous in 2013. I'm saying that its homogeneity has varied widely through history. And of course Miami isn't quite representative of the USA's demographics at large. I took road trip across America recently and it's surprising how different much of the country is once you leave the main coastal cities.

Quote:Also, American culture was a melting pot from the very beginning. There were many languages spoken in the colonies (French, English, Spanish, Native languages) which is one reason why the founders didn't establish English as an official language. The US actually has no official language, unlike most countries.

But it is the de facto official language given that almost no Americans speak a language fluently other than English unless they are recent immigrants or children of.

Quote:If you go to Texas, the Southwest, California, the Mexican influence is undeniable. Go around the country and you'll see how different the regions are. We really are a bunch of states that are bound together by federal authority (remember the south wanted out of this shit altogether), but our cultures are uniquely different.

The existence of regional variety doesn't contradict anything I said. This is a factor of being a large country. You'll find similar regional variety in China even though China is mostly homogenous. This is because China is such a vast nation. There's even lots of regional variation within Mexico.

Post: #40

Historians will look back on this time and chuckle.

It's harder for a qualified Brit to get a green card to do a professional job in the USA than it is for an illiterate Mexican to get US citizenship. Going the other way, an American who wants to work in the UK will have far more problems with paperwork than an Islamic extremist who has nothing to contribute to British society. How did things get this way?

Post: #41

Speak - I had no idea you left CA. Where are you based now?

Also, I used to live in CA (Bay Area) and from what I understood the school system began to decline in quality ever since the 1971 court case in which the state - as opposed to local governments - decided to collect all property taxes and then distribute the money to schools proportionally based on daily attendance. The low-performing districts where dropout rates were high got the least funding, and more schools began deteriorating in increasing numbers.

http://news.yahoo.com/california-failed-...00077.html

The truth is illegal immigration has the greatest benefit to those at the top, the 1% in particular. They see greater returns when they can employ hardworking individuals who are more productive and less likely to challenge their power structure or policies. This same class of people also pay most of the taxes and have disproportionate influence on our political system.

Money talks. The unfettered illegal immigration issue is a prime example of that.

These same wealthy people have the freedom to move or live anywhere. They can park their money overseas or buy economic citizenship in other countries.

Los Angeles is one of the most expensive and desirable places to live in the world. It's only natural that it becomes increasingly harder for "average" Americans to make it out there, especially in a globalized economy. If folks can't keep their bank up in accordance with those changes, they'll get priced out quick. Laws of capitalism. Supply and demand. Illegal immigrants have no shame in living with a bunch of strangers in a 1br or 2br apartment just to get a shot at a paycheck.

There's plenty of other great places to live in America (hell, LA has many faults). Many young people dream of living in NYC but simply can't afford to. Tough shit. No one is entitled to live anywhere at their comfort level. Adapt or get out of dodge is what I say.

Again, the rich could give a fuck because they see the disproportionate benefit to illegal immigration and the demand for it comes from them. Unless you can join that class of people, the cards are stacked against you.

Good thing you bounced. You learned this faster than most.

Post: #42

(01-28-2014 07:32 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:41 PM)Ryre Wrote:  [quote='scorpion' pid='640104' dateline='1390936491']
...The issue is whether or not modern nations have sovereignty over their borders. If a country cannot dictate who its citizens are, then is it really even a country?

Imagine you joined a private country club ten years ago. You have access to nice facilities, golf courses, pools, restaurants, etc... The club is exclusive and does not allow more than a limited amount of new members

The main problems is that this is what they promised in the 80s. Reagan gave a blanket amnesty to those here with the promise of fixing the broken borders going forward. Well, we see how that turned out. So you can't blame Americans for being skeptical of another "comprehensive immigration reform".

I did not know this happened once already, and it was the real deal. Penalty+back taxes+no criminal history and you could start on a legal path.

This forum is, as usual, enlightening and I have changed my opinion. I don't support amnesty, again. The hit the reset button not even 20 years ago and nothing changed. Don't do it again.

I can also see now why older politicians are not a fan of this because they are having flashbacks to 1986.

Post: #43

Midwest have you personally ever lived in Mexico? Because when you make statements about the US being racist to brown people for imigration reform you should compare that to Mexico and how it treats its own brown/black darker skinned people. The racist jokes and cruel insults I heard directed at dark skinned mexicans especially blacks and indians in my time living there would make most KKK members blush. You literally have job adds that look for people with light skin. The televison shows/pop stars/media/ politiicans are almost 100% european(europeans only make up 10-15% of the population).

Aditionally the Mexican economy (especially small towns) is reliant on mexicans sending money back to family in Mexico. These remittances are a signifcant part of the mexican economy. So the propoganda from spanish media sources from mexico and mexican politiicans is that the US is racist for making restrictions on its immigrations. Meanwhile the elite in Mexico are happy to have the poorest/darkest skin of its countrymen leave and through remittances make large vital contributions to the economy in Mexico. They have an interest in repeating/spreading progopanda the the US being racist for tightening the immigration laws.

Additionally Mexico is very hypocritical in giving the US a hard time on its immigration issues considering the reports about how it abuses central Americans living in the mexico undocumented or traveling undocumented through Mexico to reach the US.

So before undocumented Mexicans try to paint the US as unfair for wanting stricker immigration laws or that the US is racist for wanting to deport Mexicans for their skin color one needs to address Mexico´s own racist culture and reports of abuse its own undocumented immigrants.

My personal thoughts are if I was a poor/uneducated young guy living in Mexico I would make the hard journey to the US for the possibility of improving my life. The US is in a unique position because the vast wealth differences between the two borders make it very tempting for poor Mexicans to want to improve their life by coming to the US. I think we need some type of reform to our immigration system since Mexicans want to come here for work, we need fruit pickers etc/ they dont want to pay coyotes or live illegal. Many just want to work for 6 mthns and come back to mexico their home with some money. But the hard process of crossing the border illegally makes them just say fuck it and stay in the US leaving their family.wife kids brother sisters parents for years often decades. For those reasons a reform to immigration would benefit future Mexicans wanting to work here.

Post: #44

(01-28-2014 08:43 PM)dreambig Wrote:  Historians will look back on this time and chuckle.

It's harder for a qualified Brit to get a green card to do a professional job in the USA than it is for an illiterate Mexican to get US citizenship. Going the other way, an American who wants to work in the UK will have far more problems with paperwork than an Islamic extremist who has nothing to contribute to British society. How did things get this way?

I went through this bullshit myself -I came to the US myself as an immigrant from UK - I put myself through grad school in the US here paying six figures out of my own pocket. I managed to get a job and I've now got a green card.

There's a reverse "brain drain" of smart people from Asia going back to their countries because they can't be bothered with the amount of bullshit that they have to deal with to stay in the US. If these guys stayed in the US they could have contributed something to America - instead their home countries benefit.

Personally I would seal the border and shoot anybody who tries to cross. That's what most countries with unfriendly neighbours do. All the illegals that are here are not going anywhere, might as well make them legal!

Post: #45

I'm in favor of open immigration, sorry. That is how it was for most of United States history--indeed had it not, then my poor-ass, unskilled great-grandparents would not have been let off the boats from Ireland and Germany.

The great majority of immigrants, both lawful and illicit, are hard-working human beings. They improve this country with their presence.

Post: #46

(01-28-2014 07:25 PM)Double Salad Wrote:  Here's a simple exercise:
As an American, try to illegally immigrant to another country. See how far you get.

I have an American friend who immigrated illegally to China and he is doing very well, the authorities have been very understanding and helpful and his ability to work has not been restricted in any way.

He'll be promoted to principal at the school were he works in March.

Post: #47

Do you guys simply not realize that me and you won't be working those minimum wage jobs. Is anyone here really interested in those here let's have some common sense shall we? Let them have their citizenship and let them work at fast food joints that I'll probably never go to unless out of necessity, or as the lawn mowers that I don't want to be, or as that ports potty cleaner that I probably never ever will be. So on realistic economic terms you guys should care less and benefit more. America is a nation of immigrants so stop worrying about foreign culture sweeping. Not like the "culture" here is much better. At the same time I personally want limited immigration. As was stated above if it was done en made it could cause serious problems.

Post: #48

(01-28-2014 07:27 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  You think so? I don't think that's true, Speak. Even if you go up to Quebec (Montreal), the vibe and culture is latin not anglo at all.

HC, surely you mean French, not Latin. Quebec is notoriously French and very protective of the French language and culture. Canada has always suffered from tensions between Quebec (French) and rest of Canada (British/Anglo) including two referendums on Quebec separating from Canada.

Even Montreal which is more diverse than the rest of Quebec is still pretty French in its culture and vibe.

I have no intention of getting involved in this messy thread and I am not arguing for or against your post, simply pointing out that in Quebec the culture is French, not Latin.

Post: #49

(01-28-2014 04:05 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:33 PM)MidWest Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:45 PM)dads Wrote:  Also, my entire family immigrated legally from Africa (Sierra Leone). My aunt waited almost three years to get her green card, and she couldn't even bring her son over here until pretty recently.

My illegal immigrant parents have been living here in America for over 25 years, still illegally. Theyve been in America far longer than many American high school students. My dad has lived in Chicago far longer than his life in Mexico.

You're a good example as to why amnesty may be a good idea. I don't know if you are old enough to sponsor your parents for immigration, but if you are you can't because they are currently unlawfully present in the US.

Amnesty would not grant them citizenship but would clear the way for you to sponsor them as you are a citizen (I'm assuming)

Remember that there has not been an amnesty since Reagan, and it looks like we will not see one any time soon.

Post: #50

(01-28-2014 11:24 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 07:27 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  You think so? I don't think that's true, Speak. Even if you go up to Quebec (Montreal), the vibe and culture is latin not anglo at all.

HC, surely you mean French, not Latin. Quebec is notoriously French and very protective of the French language and culture. Canada has always suffered from tensions between Quebec (French) and rest of Canada (British/Anglo) including two referendums on Quebec separating from Canada.

Even Montreal which is more diverse than the rest of Quebec is still pretty French in its culture and vibe.

I have no intention of getting involved in this messy thread and I am not arguing for or against your post, simply pointing out that in Quebec the culture is French, not Latin.

No, what I mean is that French is a latin culture (Latin Europe). French is also a latin language. One of Montreal's nicknames is "Latin capital of the north."

I've talked about this with people I know from Quebec. It has more in common culturally with latin countries than anglo ones. Just the way they celebrate culture and life. But being in North America dilutes things a bit because they are influenced by the US economy.