I am not sure what you mean by blaming the president. Are you blaming the current president or all presidents who came before him and also did nothing or very little about the border security.

Also I question giving amnesty. I do see your point that America was established on immigrants, however, giving them amnesty? If we do that across the board we will have more hoards coming in than we already do. Where would we stop? We would have to stop somewhere or we will run out of room. Not only where would we stop, but how would we stop?

We already have our poor and homeless here, do we need more? We already have families that cannot afford health insurance but do not qualify for federal assistance, yet we give federal assistance to the people who immigrate here.

Should we not try and take care of what is wrong with the "system" and our current citizens before giving amnesty to new ones?

For whatever reason stopping illegals from crossing the border was not high on the things to worry about for any of the last 4 presidents. We already have 10 million and lets be real, do you think you can round up that many people and kick them out of the country? And from what I've seen of the government they don't care if your homeless nor do they care if you have health care or not, Sad to say there is nothing wrong with the system as long as the rich get richer.This president has just said he would send 6000 troops to help the border patrol so there the problems solved.! Now go back to buying gas for your SUV and leave me alone!! :cool: :eek:

Got to love sarcaism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

For whatever reason stopping illegals from crossing the border was not high on the things to worry about for any of the last 4 presidents. We already have 10 million and lets be real, do you think you can round up that many people and kick em out of the country? And from what I've seen of the government they don't care if your homeless nor do they care if you have health care or not, Sad to say there is nothing wrong with the system as long as the rich get richer.This president has just said he would send 6000 troops to help the border patrol so there the problems solved.!! Now go back to buying gas for your SUV and leave me alone!!!:cool: :eek:

---

A simple relocation of American factories operating overseas to the Mexican side of the USA Mexican/American border would alleviate the situation. Strangely, they prefer to travel to the other side of the world to benefit from cheap labor rather than to hire the cheap labor right across the border.

What Do We Do About All Those Illegals? Remember the Alamo! by Warner
Todd Huston - The New Media Journal.us

The Mexican government must be to corrupt for the greedy american businessman.:cool: :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

The Mexican government must be to corrupt for the greedy american businessman.:cool: :eek:

---

They don't need to set up shop in Mexico. The workers cross the border and come to them.

Nice one

Yeah but that defeats the purpose of trying to stop them from coming into the country

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wizzkid89

yeah but that defeats the purpose of trying to stop them from coming into the country

---

If you place a carrot in front of a rabbit, the rabbit will go for the carrot. Especially if there are no carrots or carrots are scarce where the rabbit is when he is being tempted. Remove the carrot and the rabbit having nothing to chase will stay put. The problem is that those offering the carrot found it profitable to do so and those able to stop them from offering the carrot turned their faces the other way.

Giant complexes of cement and glass stand where vast desert once was. The maquiladoras, American-owned factories in Mexico, are enormous, and their modern design creates a stark contrast with the run-down gas stations, homes and stores in their neighborhoods.
The maquiladoras are a sanitized version of doing business in Mexico that began in 1994 when the North American Free Trade Agreement took effect. NAFTA allows American businesses to go within 50 miles of the U.S. border in an area called the Free Trade Zone. In this area, businesses are not subject to U.S. taxes or many tariff restrictions. The signees of NAFTA—the United States, Mexico and Canada—have set a goal of 2008 for full implementation of the agreement's many objectives.
But the changes are already apparent. In 1990 there were 1,700 American factories in Mexico; in 2001 there were 3,600.
Currently, there are no health benefits and, for the most part, no unions in Juarez, according to Public Citizen, a non-profit public interest group. People interviewed for this story accused American companies of a number of abuses in Mexico:
• Improperly disposing waste, which has led to the contamination of drinking water and an elevated risk of Hepatitis A.
• Working people up to 12 hours a day.
• Showing a hiring preference toward women because they are more docile than men.
Since NAFTA took effect, the minimum wage has fallen 20 percent, according to Public Citizen. Half of the maquiladora workforce makes less than $8 a day.
The women who work in maquiladoras are often from rural parts of Mexico and have no family support system, says Tom Hanson, director of the Mexican Solidarity Network. That makes female maquiladora workers targets for killers.
The best-paid maquiladora workers are in the auto segment, Hanson says—they are paid $70 a week.
Tom Fullerton, an associate professor of business and finance at the University of Texas at El Paso, says NAFTA is not all bad, but some policies passed by the Mexican government have hampered reform.
“Maquiladoras have been in the area since the 1960s, but the Mexican government makes it hard for companies to lay off or terminate workers,” Fullerton says. “So when the economy goes into a decline, the wages the employees receive suffer since the companies cannot decrease their employees.
“A lot of people like to claim the maquiladoras don't pay fair wages, but look at the thousands at the border. Mexicans are voting with their feet—they leave behind their family and friends. Their situation could be much worse.”
Once, NAFTA was good for the border, says Richard Bath, a retired professor of political science at the University of Texas at El Paso.
“A lot has slipped behind,” he says. “A lot of the gains after NAFTA have been negated. The whole concept of NAFTA is anti-agricultural.”
Sales of corn, Mexico's staple crop, have been stunted by U.S. exports. When NAFTA began, nearly one quarter of Mexico's population—8 million people—was involved in agriculture. This number fell to 6.5 million people by 2003.
Global Trade Watch says the Mexican government recently estimated that more than half of its population doesn't earn enough money to cover the basics of food, clothing, health care, housing, education and public transportation.
“Unemployment in Juarez is only at about 2 percent, but if you sell cigarettes on the street, you are considered fully employed,” says Victor Muñoz, the co-director of the Coalition Against Violence for Women and Families on the Border.
I found this when I googled american factories in Mexico, just to enlighten those who didn't know!:cool: :eek:

Anyone who thinks this is all about illegals coming to the US should give pause to what it is so many people are running from! Would you run too? (Its not just Mexico either,so forget about this being a mexican thang!):cool: :(

That information should put everything in quite a new perspective and I'm sure that for many it does. Unfortunately, some college professors are as much susceptible to irrationality as those they feel intellectually superior to. Here is a case in point. There was a guest professor on the Lou Dobbs program yesterday which accused the Mexican immigrants of deserving to be in the situation they are in because their government fails to take advantage of the nation's natural resources. After hearing this accusation, I began to wonder whether any other group of immigrants have ever been subjected to this type of drivel. For example, were the Irish described as deserving to be in trouble because of their government's policies. Or were the Italians, and the Russian Jews, or the South Vietnamese? Furthermore, blaming the poor for the policies instituted by an uncaring rich upper class is not a morally justifiable reason to join in and get in a few kicks of our own. Actually, I can't recall when Americans have ever felt justified in adding their own kicks to the bloodied broken ribs of immigrants who are forced from their home country by the unbearable conditions existing there. In any case, the suggestion, which this good professor made with the full approval of Lou Dobbs, makes a mockery of the words written at the base of the statue of liberty. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Dobbs and his supporters next begin a concerted campaign to have those formerly appreciated words chiseled from the statue.

But the part that irked me the most was how this professor, used a hypothetical wherein Taiwanese were the people in Mexican land. His conclusion was that Mexico would be rich. On the surface this might seem self evident. But upon closer scrutiny, or under the light of cogent reasoning it proves otherwise. The sad truth is that the good professor's hypothetical is seriously flawed. Why? Because it cunningly ignores the political and social disadvantages under which the poor in Mexico are required to struggle and refers only to Mexico's natural resources without taking the present governments policies into account. What the professors hypothetical does, is to transport the Taiwanese onto Mexican soil with their former cooperative government and all.

If this hypothetical is to remain true to justice, it must place the Taiwanese poor under the identical government situation in which the Mexican poor are in. If so, you will get the same result--a large downtrodden poor class, a small but comfortable middle class, and a very small rich class hoarding the nation's wealth. So this supposedly rational fellow's denigrating attack on the Mexican character as opposed to the Taiwanese is ill founded and unjustified.

I agree, I think the large part of the blame should be on the Mexican Government, and I believe that if their government could start helping the poor and making a stable economy where it will support a large majority of it's people you will see a decline, obviously, in immigrants coming to the states. But what is interesting to think about is if the Mexican government could actually ever achieve these goals, do you think it's possible that the U.S. government might ship the aliens back, now consider that the government doesn't do it right now of course, but maybe 50 years in the future, could it be justifiable to send them back if the conditions in Mexico proved suitable?

I talk from a mdediterrean point of view.

And what's happening in europe is out of control. Where I live everything is sky high, pay exteremly high taxes.

From my point of view and not maybe everyone will agree, but my governments priority is illegal aliens.. and its sucks, to me the citizens should come first then the tourist industry.

I pay high taxes and 70% or more of those taxes are used - so that open centres are built for the these illegals, which have weekly FREE barbq's, get FREE phone cards to contact home, get FREE internet access, get FREE food, FREE lodging.

Then you hear traggic stories about these illegals who rape and abuse tourists who to come on holiday here. Its just beyond control, and from a country that 17 miles wide by 5 miles long with a population of 400,000 citizens, we do not need hundreds and hundreds coming in each week, its not possible anymore. We are over crowded.

I get cross as I believe I pay taxes for my government to me support me as a citizien.

Some of these aliens have been her for over 2 years... a great nice long holiday that is.

Id rather pay out an amount monthly and send it to there country to help re-build what they lost, but its impossible for more to come but yet the government lets them in with open arms...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krs

I talk from a mdediterrean point of view.

And whats happening in europe is out of control. Where i live everything is sky high, pay exteremly high taxes.

From my point of view and not maybe everyone will agree, but my governments priority is illegal aliens.. and its sucks, to me the citizens should come first then the tourist industry.

I pay high taxes and 70% or more of those taxes are used - so that open centres are built for the these illegals, which have weekly FREE barbq's, get FREE phone cards to contact home, get FREE internet access, get FREE food, FREE lodging.

Then you hear traggic stories about these illegals who rape and abuse tourists who to come on holiday here. Its just beyond control, and from a country that 17 miles wide by 5 miles long with a population of 400,000 citizens, we do not need hundreds and hundreds comin in each week, its not possible anymore. We are over crowded.

I get cross as i believe i pay taxes for my government to me support me as a citizien.

Some of these aliens have been her for over 2 years... a great nice long holiday that is.

Id rather pay out an amount monthly and send it to there country to help re-build what they lost, but its impossible for more to come but yet the government lets them in with open arms...

---

You seem sincerely baffled by what's supposedly going on in your country.
What explanation does your government give you as a reason for its policies?
Don't you think you have a right to ask and that it owes you an explanation?

Im not baffled I'm annoyed.
I get the fact that these aliens need help but when our help is abused it doesn't go down well.

I believe an explanation is owed, but obviously the government I guess does not see it as a problem, otherwise it wouldn't do it.

All I know is that us citizens of this small island are getting very very annoyed and next elections we will prove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wizzkid89

I agree, I think the large part of the blame should be on the Mexican Government, and I believe that if their government could start helping the poor and making a stable economy where it will support a large majority of it's people you will see a decline, obviously, in immigrants coming to the states. But what is interesting to think about is if the Mexican government could actually ever achieve these goals, do you think it's possible that the U.S. government might ship the aliens back, now consider that the government doesn't do it right now of course, but maybe 50 years in the future, could it be justifiable to send them back if the conditions in Mexico proved suitable?

---

If they were illegal aliens I suppose it would be lawful to deport them and it would not be ethically wrong if Mexico could receive them and provide for their reentry into Mexican society. Of course other factors apart from legality would need consideration. But barring any other possible relevant factor which should be given precedence, the deportation would not be as inhumane it would be now.

As you said, what makes the deportation cruel right now is that sending them back is tantamount to sending them back into a meat grinder.

Simply put, just because the Mexican ruling class shows inadequate concern for human suffering doesn't justify that we imitate its bad example.

BTW
It's important to keep in mind also that the lawful is not always morally justifiable. Many things considered lawful by governments have been subsequently condemned as crimes against humanity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krs

Im not baffled im annoyed.
I get the fact that these aliens need help but when our help is abused it doesnt go down well.

I believe an explanation is owed, but obviously the government i guess does not see it as a problem, otherwise it wouldnt do it.

All i know is that us citizens of this small island are getting very very annoyed and next elections we will prove it.

---

I understand your annoyance. What I can't understand is that you seem not to know the reasons your government is permitting this to happen. Hasn't the issue been brought into public discussion? Haven't there been protests by concerned citizens? If the problem is as severe as you describe, then one would expect these things to have taken place. You mention elections so I assume you live in a democracy. That means that you have the right to hold your elected representatives accountable for their actions after they are elected. Which makes your description of citizen ignorance of elected representative motives and silence in the face of frustration baffling to me.

BTW

The reason for the successful and increasing illegal immigrant presence here in the USA is not because the government feels that the immigrants need help. It is because our employers find it profitable to take advantage of the cheap labor which the illegal immigrants represent. Could that be the reason why your government is permitting the immigration to continue??

Well actually there is going to be a protest to be held at the beginning of June, which include citizens and ANR ( A New Right ) party, who seems to be aware of the problem more than our actual government.

Yes I do live in a democratic country, which to me is all capitalism.

[QUOTE=Starman]I know this isn't a religious discussion but it does touch on certain principles of behavior which are relevant. Also I don't know whether you are a Christian or not or what your opinion of the scriptures is. In any case, your last statement reminded me of what Jesus said.


Luke 10 (King James Version)

25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.
29But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?
30And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
33But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
34And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
35And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

I quote very well a famous parable as told by Christ himself. In fact, when Jesus made the comparisons, he did not compare such Samaritan with another guy who took the victim home. On the contrary, the Samaritan was the best compared with the other two.

We are not against helping ANY type of race, but by giving them the fishing rod and teach them fishing and breeding fish, not by imposing multiculturalism AND at the expense of the citizen, when at the end of the day it's proving obvious that the Maltese is becoming the real victim of the situation.