The Government's Inhumane Immigration Policy

[howardroark]

LMFAO,

and the whats wrong is wrong part means what to you?

I completely agree with you the law isnt always right.

The fact is however comparing the two in the way you did is assinine and ignorant. The two situations are completely different.

You havent really given any support as to why them breaking the law in this case is ok...

I assume you will say something like they just wanted a better life. Well does that excuse homeless ppl from moving into the spare bedroom in your house?

see the same idiotic argument could be made from the reverse side...both equally IDIOTIC

Seems like you're worse at analogies than I am.

A homeless person moving into the spare bedroom in your house involves the violation of your property rights. An immigrant coming to America to find a job and climb the socioeconomic ladder through hard work does not violate anyone's rights. However, preventing that immigrant from coming to America does violate their rights, but it also violates the rights of American citizens. As Harry Browne pointed out: "if we do have programs to close the borders, once again it will affect you more than it will affect the immigrants. They will make you carry an identity card. You will be stopped by policemen and asked to prove that you are a citizen. Your employer will be sanctioned for inadvertently letting an illegal immigrant go to work in your company. It will not keep the immigrants out, but it will be one more nail in the coffin of freedom in the United States for American citizens." http://www.lewrockwell.com/kramer/kramer16.html

[tonymctones]

Seems like you're worse at analogies than I am.

A homeless person moving into the spare bedroom in your house involves the violation of your property rights. An immigrant coming to America to find a job and climb the socioeconomic ladder through hard work does not violate anyone's rights. However, preventing that immigrant from coming to America does violate their rights, but it also violates the rights of American citizens. As Harry Browne pointed out: "if we do have programs to close the borders, once again it will affect you more than it will affect the immigrants. They will make you carry an identity card. You will be stopped by policemen and asked to prove that you are a citizen. Your employer will be sanctioned for inadvertently letting an illegal immigrant go to work in your company. It will not keep the immigrants out, but it will be one more nail in the coffin of freedom in the United States for American citizens." http://www.lewrockwell.com/kramer/kramer16.html

ahhh the naivete of the academic with little to no life experience. Its a wonderous thing that will happen to your philosophy when reality hits it.

First off we were talking about legality and yes its the same parrellel as they are both breaking the law. You mean you want to draw differences with my analogy but you dont see the difference in comparing nazis to ice agents? FUCKING REALLY???

please do tell what rights of theirs we are violating, if they are taking away the ability US citizens to find jobs or causing them to pay more money in taxes is that not a violation of rights?

[howardroark]

First off we were talking about legality and yes its the same parrellel as they are both breaking the law.

No, they are not parallel. As I pointed out, going to another country to find a job does not violate anyone's rights. Breaking into someone's house does.

You mean you want to draw differences with my analogy but you dont see the difference in comparing nazis to ice agents? FUCKING REALLY???

Please, I know you're too intelligent to resort to stupid strawmen like that.

You know I wasn't comparing ICE agents to Nazis. I was simply pointing out that you can't say that it is wrong in every instance to do something that is "illegal."

please do tell what rights of theirs we are violating, if they are taking away the ability US citizens to find jobs or causing them to pay more money in taxes is that not a violation of rights?

First of all, getting a job does not violate anyone's rights. If that were the case, not only should it be illegal for immigrants to find jobs, it should be illegal for anyone to get a job. After all, if you were chosen for a job over me, wouldn't that violate my rights?

Regardless of the above fact, there is not a limited amount of jobs in the economy. The amount of jobs in the economy is determined by supply, demand, and the wage-rate. Having more people working means that more people are earning incomes with which they can buy goods. So more immigrants working in the US means higher demand for products sold in the US, which means more jobs.

Second of all, had you been reading this thread at all, you would have noticed two things:
1. This article is about a hard-working taxpayer, not a welfare leech, who was deported and whose kids were kidnapped from him by the US government and forcefully put into the welfare state. So, if anything, the government is now receiving less tax money while spending more because it deported this illegal immigrant.
2. I clearly stated that I believe that immigrants should not be given access to the welfare state. That is an important middle ground that bleeding-heart leftists and people who understand economics should be able to agree upon. Of course, it's a compromise that an economic ignoramus such as Lou Dobbs would not be expected to sign on to, but such people represent the minority of Americans. http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm

[tonymctones]

No, they are not parallel. As I pointed out, going to another country to find a job does not violate anyone's rights. Breaking into someone's house does.

First of all, getting a job does not violate anyone's rights. If that were the case, not only should it be illegal for immigrants to find jobs, it should be illegal for anyone to get a job. After all, if you were chosen for a job over me, wouldn't that violate my rights?

Regardless of the above fact, there is not a limited amount of jobs in the economy. The amount of jobs in the economy is determined by supply, demand, and the wage-rate. Having more people working means that more people are earning incomes with which they can buy goods. So more immigrants working in the US means higher demand for products sold in the US, which means more jobs.

Second of all, had you been reading this thread at all, you would have noticed two things:
1. This article is about a hard-working taxpayer, not a welfare leech, who was deported and whose kids were kidnapped from him by the US government and forcefully put into the welfare state. So, if anything, the government is now receiving less tax money while spending more because it deported this illegal immigrant.
2. I clearly stated that I believe that immigrants should not be given access to the welfare state. That is an important middle ground that bleeding-heart leftists and people who understand economics should be able to agree upon. Of course, it's a compromise that an economic ignoramus such as Lou Dobbs would not be expected to sign on to, but such people represent the minority of Americans. http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm

lets leave the horrible analogies alone...you still didint tell us what rights we were violating of theirs by not letting them in the country?

Everything is relative my friend this is something you will learn as life slaps those high level philosophies around a little bit. Production capacity is limited which means jobs are limited. Demand is not some ever increasing variable, yes population will increase demand but if that money is sent back to mexico(which a lot of illegals do), or they keep cash instead of having a bank account(again which alot of illegals do).

Whos demand are we stimulating?

Yes creating stricter employment laws does decrease the unemployment rate of citizens. I refer you to I believe it was alabama that recently did this and their drop in unemployment.\

I can agree with you on the situation in question but your theories themselves are off if you ask me.

[howardroark]

1. Kidnapping someone from their home and separating them from their family and their job does not violate anyone's rights?  

2. The fact that there are practically an unlimited amount of jobs is a matter of basic economics. Supply and demand is equilibriated by the price.

3. Practically every economic analysis of immigration shows a positive correlation between immigration and economic growth. Furthermore, practically every economic analysis of Alabama's immigration laws show a negative correlation between the law and economic performance. Migrant workers have fled the state, and now the construction industry and the agricultural industry has taken huge hits and will be forced to reduce production as a result.

4. Even if every immigrant spent all of their money overseas (which obviously is not the case), then that would still add to the US economy since the balance of payments must always equal zero. Take, for example, the US's huge trade deficits (and current account deficit) that are made up for in large capital account surpluses.

[howardroark]

[kcballer]

1. Kidnapping someone from their home and separating them from their family and their job does not violate anyone's rights?  

2. The fact that there are practically an unlimited amount of jobs is a matter of basic economics. Supply and demand is equilibriated by the price.

3. Practically every economic analysis of immigration shows a positive correlation between immigration and economic growth. Furthermore, practically every economic analysis of Alabama's immigration laws show a negative correlation between the law and economic performance. Migrant workers have fled the state, and now the construction industry and the agricultural industry has taken huge hits and will be forced to reduce production as a result.

4. Even if every immigrant spent all of their money overseas (which obviously is not the case), then that would still add to the US economy since the balance of payments must always equal zero. Take, for example, the US's huge trade deficits (and current account deficit) that are made up for in large capital account surpluses.

I would just like to add to this that what i have read and understand around 50% of illegal workers pay income tax as it's easy to get an IRS number.  The others do send money home, but they still have to live so pay taxes on things they buy etc.  The fact they send money home is not a bad thing, that's like blaming someone for saving money rather than spending it.

[headhuntersix]

They're breaking our laws.....what the fuck don't you understand. I don't care about their kids...their families...their jobs...anything. Get the fuck out. We have rules, follow the rules and you can come back.

[howardroark]

They're breaking our laws.....what the fuck don't you understand. I don't care about their kids...their families...their jobs...anything. Get the fuck out. We have rules, follow the rules and you can come back.

Back to this retarded argument... So you think it is always wrong to break laws? So it was wrong for Germans to hide Jews from the Nazis?

[headhuntersix]

I'm neither a German, nor a Jew. I live in 21st Century America....and when u cross my border, a border I have defended for 19 of my 37 years.......I have every right to shoot you, deport you....break up ur family, imprison you etc etc  etc. I don't care.

[tonymctones]

1. Kidnapping someone from their home and separating them from their family and their job does not violate anyone's rights? 

2. The fact that there are practically an unlimited amount of jobs is a matter of basic economics. Supply and demand is equilibriated by the price.

3. Practically every economic analysis of immigration shows a positive correlation between immigration and economic growth. Furthermore, practically every economic analysis of Alabama's immigration laws show a negative correlation between the law and economic performance. Migrant workers have fled the state, and now the construction industry and the agricultural industry has taken huge hits and will be forced to reduce production as a result.

4. Even if every immigrant spent all of their money overseas (which obviously is not the case), then that would still add to the US economy since the balance of payments must always equal zero. Take, for example, the US's huge trade deficits (and current account deficit) that are made up for in large capital account surpluses.

LOL so basically you have not grounds to say were violating their rights but “feel” like we are? That’s very progressive of you…

 

Yes sir I know how supply and demand equilibrium are found. Its also basic economics that there are constraints on both supply and demand and elasticity of demand. Its also basic economics that different types of markets have basic constraints that they must deal with. You try to paint such a broad brush its ridiculous again very high level stuff, very randian of you also

 

Im not denying that immigrants don’t help the economy, you see in science proving one theory doesn’t disprove the other. That doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be a bigger impact if we had them come here legally does it?

 

Nobody is saying not to allow immigrants, yet another strawman argument…

 

Youre assuming that the money sent back somehow finds its way back to the US in investments. It equals zero b/c funds/assets etc are swept in and out of the account(I cant remember the name, it’s the last line item in the BOP) for the difference and statistical discrepancies not b/c there is an exact balancing act between the capital and current.

 

[tonymctones]

Back to this retarded argument... So you think it is always wrong to break laws? So it was wrong for Germans to hide Jews from the Nazis?

LOL roark, not all laws are just but you havent given any reasoning to justify your stance that rights have been violeted by the laws being enforced here.

What rights of the deported person were violated, specifically what rights?

not just i feel its wrong...

[Roger Bacon]

However, preventing that immigrant from coming to America does violate their rights,

I usually agree with you, but I think you're wrong here.

[howardroark]

I'm neither a German, nor a Jew. I live in 21st Century America....and when u cross my border, a border I have defended for 19 of my 37 years.......I have every right to shoot you, deport you....break up ur family, imprison you etc etc  etc. I don't care.

YOUR border? You own all of America? 

[Soul Crusher]

YOUR border? You own all of America? 

Every nation has a right to determine who enters and leaves.   

[howardroark]

LOL roark, not all laws are just but you havent given any reasoning to justify your stance that rights have been violeted by the laws being enforced here.

What rights of the deported person were violated, specifically what rights?

not just i feel its wrong...

What rights? No rights of yours would be violated if some government thugs kidnapped you and sent you hundreds of miles away, while kidnapping your kids and putting them into an abusive "welfare" system?

I don't intend to launch into a treatise on what does and does not constitute individual rights, if you want to know I suggest you read this.

[howardroark]

Every nation has a right to determine who enters and leaves.   

So 51% can prevent the other 49% from leaving? Can anyone say Cuba?

[Soul Crusher]

So 51% can prevent the other 49% from leaving? Can anyone say Cuba?

No - you are taking it to. Extremes.  Every nation jas a interest in preventing criminals , terrorists, pedos, etc from coming in.

[howardroark]

LOL so basically you have not grounds to say were violating their rights but “feel” like we are? That’s very progressive of you…

Not at all. Another strawman argument.

 

Yes sir I know how supply and demand equilibrium are found. Its also basic economics that there are constraints on both supply and demand and elasticity of demand.

Elasticity of demand has literally nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Its also basic economics that different types of markets have basic constraints that they must deal with.

You're clearly not getting the argument here. More labor supply = lower nominal wage rate = equilibrium (no unemployment).

You try to paint such a broad brush its ridiculous again very high level stuff very randian of you also

 

Please, tell me ONE thing you know about Ayn Rand. That's right... you can't.

Im not denying that immigrants don’t help the economy, you see in science proving one theory doesn’t disprove the other. That doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be a bigger impact if we had them come here legally does it?

Another point that has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Nobody is saying not to allow immigrants, yet another strawman argument…

I never claimed that that's what you claimed.

Youre assuming that the money sent back somehow finds its way back to the US in investments. It equals zero b/c funds/assets etc are swept in and out of the account(I cant remember the name, it’s the last line item in the BOP) for the difference and statistical discrepancies not b/c there is an exact balancing act between the capital and current.

Yes, basic international economics. Balance of payments must equal zero. So even if every penny immigrants earned was sent overseas, it would be make it back to the US.

[howardroark]

No - you are taking it to. Extremes.  Every nation jas a interest in preventing criminals , terrorists, pedos, etc from coming in.

If a criminal or terrorist enters the country, then you arrest them either way. This has nothing to do with immigration laws. You're making a non-argument.

[Soul Crusher]

If a criminal or terrorist enters the country, then you arrest them either way. This has nothing to do with immigration laws. You're making a non-argument.

We should not have to wait till another crime is committed by a immigrant pedo. 

[howardroark]

We should not have to wait till another crime is committed by a immigrant pedo. 

I don't get what you're saying. If a criminal enters the country, then you arrest them. This isn't an issue of immigration, but of (rational) law enforcement.

[Soul Crusher]

I don't get what you're saying. If a criminal enters the country, then you arrest them. This isn't an issue of immigration, but of (rational) law enforcement.

The opens border crowd largely is against rational LE. 

[howardroark]

The opens border crowd largely is against rational LE. 

And that has to do with what I'm arguing how exactly?

[tonymctones]

What rights? No rights of yours would be violated if some government thugs kidnapped you and sent you hundreds of miles away, while kidnapping your kids and putting them into an abusive "welfare" system?

I don't intend to launch into a treatise on what does and does not constitute individual rights, if you want to know I suggest you read this.

I suggest you come forward with the rights of their we are violating...

As of now you just seem to "feel" its wrong.