Unauthorized Immigration and International Problem

All Western Societies are having a major problem with Unauthorized immigration. The nations around some of the more preferred Nations are responsible in facilitating the increase of unauthorized immigration into counties like Germany, UK and the US.

The problem is you see no unauthorized immigration into Middle eastern countries, African countries and South American countries. The nations that are part of the problem in the EU are Italy, France and Spain as they allow millions to pass through their borders and proceed to more desirable nations beyond them. Mexico is the chiefest for North America namely the US.

A strange phenomena has yet to occur and that is there is very little unauthorized immigration into China, now the largest and wealthiest economy in the world, yet we see very little unauthorized immigration into their borders.

That is because China aggressively protects it's borders and prosecutes unauthorized immigrants. Those placed in Chinese prisons find it worse than in their own countries and would rather try and immigrate unauthorized into those countries that don't like EU, US and Canada.

Time we take up an aggressive approach to protecting our borders or there will be a take over of our cultures and countries without even a shot being fired.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
Who the hell says .
"You know I think I will move to china"

a reply to: ChesterJohn

A poor Mexican risks their life to cross the border in hopes of finding work and they're demonized as a social cancer.

Rich Chinese snap up North American real estate in an unprecedented land grab and they are welcomed as free market heroes.

Sadly, as is so often the case these days, we are so busy being told to hate the weak that we are ignoring all else, even as the powerful empty our pockets and rob our progeny of opportunity.

a reply to: Hefficide

I've considered Mexico in the context of "War torn nations create refugees, not illegal immigrants".

We made the cesspool that they are fleeing.

Authorised, unauthorised, legal, illegal...who cares?

Mass immigration is the problem because it's a cockamamy idea...to invite whole masses of people from somewhere to go and live somewhere else, no discriminatory processes involved whatsoever.

"Hey, you people in Ethiopia...want to come and live over here? There's houses and benefits and stuff and, who knows, maybe some of you will find work too."

Once you start to implement cockamamy ideas, there's fallout.

a reply to: CJCrawley

Migration is not a modern "idea". It's a natural process that has been part of human history since the beginning.

a reply to: Hefficide

True, but it wasn't done because it was such a fantastic plan; invariably, it was done to avoid two things - starvation and being slaughtered. In a more orderly world, such a phenomenon wouldn't be necessary.

What do we do now, carry on doing what we've always done because we've always done it? Or - in this more orderly world - do we impose some semblance of rules?

a reply to: Hefficide

A poor Mexican risks their life to cross the border in hopes of finding work and they're demonized as a social cancer.

Poor legal citizens who need to feed their families also hope for work and are demonized as racist or heartless because an illegal who isn't any more qualified gets a job instead.

My heart goes out to anyone in need, but when an illegal is placed above a citizen, there is a problem. With so many years of unenforced immigration laws, we now have companies all across the USA where a person is now required to speak a foreign language. It is not because the job requires it, but because most of the employees are speaking it. Legal immigrants learn and speak English.

In the past when ICE did raids on companies and deported illegals, every single position was easily and quickly taken by a legal citizen. Having worked with illegals for many years, I can tell you that many have no intentions of becoming legal. Many stay long enough to reap all the benefits and return back home. Many, of these so called poor and desperate people pay big bucks to get here, for false documents and stolen identities. They are not refugees either and just say things like they came here because they could get so much. Many receive welfare through deceit and lying and saying they are a one income family when they are not and their combined incomes are well above the poverty rate.

Sorry, but there is always another side to a story.

originally posted by: CJCrawley
a reply to: Hefficide

True, but it wasn't done because it was such a fantastic plan; invariably, it was done to avoid two things - starvation and being slaughtered. In a more orderly world, such a phenomenon wouldn't be necessary.

What do we do now, carry on doing what we've always done because we've always done it? Or - in this more orderly world - do we impose some semblance of rules?

The first problem is the hubris in thinking that the humans have made a "more orderly world". Its anything but more orderly, mostly because we have 8bil of us running around screwing things up.

a reply to: Hefficide

So really your issue is that you wish for international conventions on asylum seekers and refugees to be changed yeah?

We have migrants who have fled oppression and currently in a safe nation (France) camped at the channel tunnel border trying to gain entry into the UK by threatening drivers, slashing truck side curtains, breaking fences and ignoring all manner of other French criminal law, all because they refuse to claim asylum in France.

What's your plan?
Let every migrant in safe countries choose which safe country they wish to claim asylum in?
Well as English is a major second language for most of the world that is a lot of folk wishing to come here. So how about it then, shall we change international conventions at the UN so anyone fleeing oppression can choose their safe country when they get to a safe one?

If the Ireland, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand also agree to take English speaking migrants from non English speaking safe countries in a tariff based system them maybe I will be drawn to the idea, but right now, the majority from Africa and the ME want to come to the UK. We don't have the room for all of them.

The UK is complying with everything it is obligated to right now, including lawfully defending its border, so yeah, I'm with you on the human compassion thing, but unless every other English speaking country is willing to take its share of migrants from safe nations then nope, I support the UK government defending our border.

Remember, once someone flees oppression and makes it to a safe nation yet refuses to claim asylum there they are no longer asylum seekers, they are migrants.
If you want that change it can only be at a UN level because the first nation to unilaterally open its border to all safe migrants will be swamped, and you must see that?

a reply to: grainofsand

Comparing the US situation to the European one isn't exactly apples to apples. In the case of the US we have a lot of mitigating circumstances regarding Central and South American aliens. The US has deliberately destabilized our southern neighbors time and time again. Our intelligence agencies have toppled governments, installed dictators into power, and engaged in the drug trafficking trade that has caused most of those nations to fall into severe disarray.

In fact, one could argue that the current situation in Europe is also directly a product of US action. After all, the US did start dropping bombs, turning a fairly stable region into a hotbed of extremism and chaos.

As for answers? It's a very complex problem - so simple solutions would likely be ineffective at best.

One approach, I might offer, could be to understand why a peoples might be migrating and then study whether or not it is a prudent idea to enable those people to solve the problems that led them to migrate in the first place. I cannot fault a person who simply wants access to drinking water for seeking it. I cannot fault a person from wanting to leave a country where their religion, gender, or personal beliefs might get them killed or tortured.

If we can find ways of educating and helping people to fix their own countries? That seems worthwhile to me. It seems like an investment worth making as it creates a long term solution.

People tend to stay where they are safe and have basic comforts. They tend to flee when home is no longer meeting those basic needs.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

But it IS a more orderly world now. We are undergoing the painful process of globalisation. It's quite possible there will be a world government in my lifetime. What do you want to do, go back to the Stone Age?

Sure, mass migration benefits third world migrants and large corporations; but what about the chaos it causes to the people it displaces? We never hear about that.

a reply to: Hefficide

I agree completely, and apologies, I didn't realise you were focusing on the US situation in this thread.
My mention of the UK/EU situation was really to highlight the international conventions on refugees and that it requires folk fleeing oppression to claim it in their first safe nation, not be picking and choosing which safe nation they wish to seek asylum in.

The former British empire screwed it for us as so many people speak English as a second language. There are calls by many EU folk on ATS for the UK to just stop defending our border, but when you do the maths it would just ruin our country if we acted unilaterally on taking migrants from safe nations.

The EU has had leaky borders for years, and they all fell in love with the idea of free travel without showing passes at border crossings. The UK did not, it is the only country in Europe to retain border control, indeed a member from the Netherlands was only last week criticising us because our border requires him to present his Dutch passport for entry.

I am glad the UK never signed up for a free for all walk anywhere without restrictions Europe. It has come back to bite the EU on the arse, and I thank the government of the day (and now) for recognising that restricted and controlled entry to a country is an important part of immigration control.

As far as Europe is concerned though, all the people fleeing oppression who make it to a safe EU nation have the right to claim asylum in that safe nation, not to pick and choose which safe nation they wish to live in.
I support the defence of the UK border while the UK complies with all international obligations.
I am in the majority of the UK populace who also support that.

Any change can only come through the UN, and as long as the UK is acting lawfully I support its adherence to the conventions on refugees.
The rest of the EU is only bleating because we are an island and still close to capable of defending our border, unlike them who have derelict border posts when they joined the Schengen Agreement - the UK did not, and I'm glad we didn't.

originally posted by: CJCrawley
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

But it IS a more orderly world now. We are undergoing the painful process of globalisation. It's quite possible there will be a world government in my lifetime. What do you want to do, go back to the Stone Age?

Sure, mass migration benefits third world migrants and large corporations; but what about the chaos it causes to the people it displaces? We never hear about that.

By "more orderly' you mean 'more lawful". That is true. But the more you force humans to behave in nonhuman ways, the less natural order there will be. And natural order is the only order that will ever make for peace. The only problem with terms like "natural order" is that it was misused by racists who sought to define it, rather than identify it.

But being a social anarchist, i am not really fond of the way our lawful world is turning out. Its less about personal protection, and more about soft enslavement. Free range slavery is what government specializes in. And it recieves popular support from a populace that operates under the misguided mob mentality of "its for the public good". Im not particularly a fan of collectivist thinking. No, i am not looking for the stone age. But i sure don't want Orwellian dystopia, either.

originally posted by: CJCrawley
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Sure, mass migration benefits third world migrants and large corporations; but what about the chaos it causes to the people it displaces? We never hear about that.

you have a valid point. what about the middle class job loss to lower waged workers in the US? You never here anything about that. From age 18-26 I worked the construction field. I told my Nephew get a job in construction if your not going to college right away he tried but they are all filled with Unauthorized Migrant workers/Illegal Immigrant workers. so he tries for a clerk job at a grocery store again a high number of mirgrants are taking those jobs away. It is that way in fast food. Even legal immigrants are taking Jobs away from the middle class my other nep[hew had to train a Indian from India to replace him and ever since he has been out of work. 90% of the workers at the company he worked for have been replaced with legal migrants and the other 10% are management. The company has no local work force they brought them all over and killed thousands if not tens of thousands of good jobs for born and bred Americans citizens.

Where are our kids going to get jobs they are training for it they keep hiring legal Immigrants in place of them?

Many of the lower paid jobs that many blacks had are now being taken by the Unauthorized immigrants/illegal Immigrants it is no wonder they are hurting and angry but it is not the middle class folks fault it is Intl multinational corporations that are doing this. They are the 1% that kill it for the rest.

a reply to: grainofsand

It is unrestricted access into the US that is Turing our nation into a unauthorized migrant haven and killing jobs for the citizen.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: grainofsand

It is unrestricted access into the US that is Turing our nation into a unauthorized migrant haven and killing jobs for the citizen.

I have seen this with my own eyes, qualified citizens being turned away while someone barely speaking a word of English comes in and gets hired. In my last place of employment, they paid well over the minimum wage but would still pay the illegals less than any citizen. These citizens needed a job, were more than willing to work, were qualified for the job, had a family to feed and were turned away.

When we have legal people immigrating here, they learn and speak English. Because of so many years of illegal immigration, we now have some places all across the USA where citizens are required to speak a foreign language in order to get hired. It is not because the job itself requires it but because so many of their employees speak it. I asked a company why it was required and that was what I was told. So there are even more job opportunities lost because of illegals. Unless you are applying to be an interpreter or dealing with International businesses, no one should be forced to speak a foreign language in their own Country. I wouldn't dream of moving to another Country illegally and expecting them to speak MY language in order for them to get a job where I was employed.

Us European descendants are a real interesting lot. We came to North America, started calling all the indians in the southwest "Mexicans", and want to whine about them doing what they have done for millenia while living in this hemisphere.

If we want to stop the immigration problem, it seems pretty simple

Step 1: stop funding the drug wars (not the War on Drugs...although we fund that too) in central America. The violence since 2002....that was us using Sinaloa as a proxy. All those headless bodies piled at the border? Your tax dollars at work.

Thats it. One simple step. Doesn't really seem too hard. And it seems reasonable that if we don't put a stop to it...then we only have ourselves to blame.

Funny that....we keep pissing and moaning about our craptastic government, and keep doing absolutely nothing about it. We are watching the house burn down.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

There's no doubt that it's a deliberate, planned scheme by Western governments, who seem to have the ear of Marxists, as well as constant lobbying from bigwig corporations who would like all immigration controls relaxed.

Now that third world migrants realise that it was never about skills in the first place (I mean, what skills do they have, exactly?), there will always be the problem of economic migrants trying to get into our countries, by fair means or foul.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
All Western Societies are having a major problem with Unauthorized immigration. The nations around some of the more preferred Nations are responsible in facilitating the increase of unauthorized immigration into counties like Germany, UK and the US.

The purpose of mass immigration of people from the 2nd and 3 rd world is firstly because its part of Agenda 21 and secondly because it reduces national pride and national identity. A nation that has no national pride or identify is much easier to take over than a national with a strong sense of who and what they are with a strong national identify, is much more likly to resist and resist stoutly. An example here is Japan which has both a strong national identity and a strong sense of national pride in who they are.

There is one very small but very powerful country in the mid east that advocates multiculturalism for everyone else but they will have nothing to do with it themselves.