Originally posted by Destinyone

Fluff...mindless fluff. That seems to be all you can bring to the table. JMOHO.

But, what do you bring to the table?

You want to create jobs by writing laws, but jobs are created by introducing more hungry people who are willing to work.

Since you can't find Americans who are hungry enough or willing enough to work the jobs on offer, you're trying to raise the price paid for that job to "entice" the citizens to get off their butt.

You're trying to starve some of the people who are working for you already, deny them food and water, to force them to go elsewhere, to leave a vacuum back in your neighborhood so that you can charge more for your work.

That's your plan.

It will seem to work at first, since the crops have been planted already and still have to be picked. But, the next crop, it's the next planting season, the next cycle of economic activity that you'll really see the long term effects. Those farms are going to Mexico too. They are going to plant the next crop in Mexico, and pick the harvest with those same workers who move back, and then they will hire Mexican truck drivers to truck that crop back over the border, under NAFTA, to sell you back the same goods, with the same workers working the fields.

All that will happen by that law, is that the businesses will move out of Alabama. And Alabama will become a poor state, deserted like a ghost town in the mid-west.

Originally posted by DRAZIW

Originally posted by Destinyone

Fluff...mindless fluff. That seems to be all you can bring to the table. JMOHO.

But, what do you bring to the table?

You want to create jobs by writing laws, but jobs are created by introducing more hungry people who are willing to work.

Since you can't find Americans who are hungry enough or willing enough to work the jobs on offer, you're trying to raise the price paid for that job to "entice" the citizens to get off their butt.

You're trying to starve some of the people who are working for you already, deny them food and water, to force them to go elsewhere, to leave a vacuum back in your neighborhood so that you can charge more for your work.

That's your plan.

It will seem to work at first, since the crops have been planted already and still have to be picked. But, the next crop, it's the next planting season, the next cycle of economic activity that you'll really see the long term effects. Those farms are going to Mexico too. They are going to plant the next crop in Mexico, and pick the harvest with those same workers who move back, and then they will hire Mexican truck drivers to truck that crop back over the border, under NAFTA, to sell you back the same goods, with the same workers working the fields.

All that will happen by that law, is that the businesses will move out of Alabama. And Alabama will become a poor state, deserted like a ghost town in the mid-west.

Oh good hell all ready.

More Progressive Spin on Alinsky style arguing points.

Look, the concept is very easy to grasp and understand.

The people who are here illegally need to return to their country of origin. Period!!
If the Federal Govt would actually enforce the law, then the State would not have to intervene.

Very simple. Obey the law.

Why is this so hard to grasp?

My god what the hell is wrong with this lack of understanding?

Originally posted by macman

The people who are here illegally need to return to their country of origin. Period!!

But, if all the illegals return to their lands, only Native American Indians would be left ! Period!

If the Federal Govt would actually enforce the law, then the State would not have to intervene.

Very simple. Obey the law.

The Federal Govt is enforcing the law, as far as reasonably possible.

Why is this so hard to grasp?

My god what the hell is wrong with this lack of understanding?

The problem is that you only want "certain laws" enforced. You only want people to obey "certain laws".

The Federal Govt is concerned with "all law."

It is possible to use technology to ensure that every individual obeys all laws.

But, you have to understand that the concept of "LIBERTY" which is written into the US constitution, requires that every law written can be broken. So there has to be some "moderation" in the application of enforcement. Otherwise, the society will become oppressive to all, and there will be LIBERTY FOR NONE.

Since the Fed officials are sworn to uphold the US Constitution, they cannot take away the individual's LIBERTY.

I know it may seem complicated to you, but if and when the constitution is violated, and the microchip is implanted to track everyone and make them follow all law, then you'll remember these words....

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

And I've just met my quota. I'm done here. You figure out the rest.

Originally posted by DRAZIW

But, you have to understand that the concept of "LIBERTY" which is written into the US constitution, requires that every law written can be broken. So there has to be some "moderation" in the application of enforcement. Otherwise, the society will become oppressive to all, and there will be LIBERTY FOR NONE.

Since the Fed officials are sworn to uphold the US Constitution, they cannot take away the individual's LIBERTY.

I know it may seem complicated to you, but if and when the constitution is violated, and the microchip is implanted to track everyone and make them follow all law, then you'll remember these words....

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

You need to read a bit farther in the Constitution

Section. 8. (4th line down) To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Section. 9. The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Congress has established a uniform Rule of Naturalization, this is the LAW and those not adhering to that Rule are breaking that law.

I have to say though it costs a lot more than ten dollars per person legally immigrating, it's more like a couple of thousand.

See DRAZIW there is one thing you aren't taking into consideration in your arguments. There are many legal US Citizens with foreign born spouses, or relatives that have gone through and are going through the legal immigration process and adhering to the law to be able to live in the US with their loved ones. This is a very expensive, and long, stressful, emotional process. And that process is not always successful, some US Citizens have been left with no alternative but to leave the US to be allowed to live with their spouses and loved ones.

For someone adhering to the US immigration laws, undocumented entry by their foreign born loved one is grounds for a ban of up to 10 years, and fairly hefty fee's to request a waiver of that ban which is by no means guaranteed. If their foreign born loved one has worked in the US without a work permit that is grounds for a permanent ban from the US, and again fairly hefty fee's to request a waiver of that ban, which is by no means again guaranteed.

What you are proposing, is that those who are not US Citizens, who are not attempting to adhere to law, be rewarded and elevated above those US Citizens and their foreign born spouses who are attempting to adhere to the law. Where is that right in any way shape or form.

Interesting that DRAZIW has suddenly gone quiet.

I'm not American I'm Australian but ffs who gives a # about their human rights. They are in your country illegally and this is a great deterrant to keeping the filth where it belongs.

I just wish that our government in Australia would do something about the thousands of boats that arrive here every year.