• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Obama to issue work permits to undocumented workers?

I had nothing to do with your conversation with Bake. thus you don't bring me into it. That's not difficult.

Why shouldn't i? People are certainly very free to mention me (and do so often) when they need an illustration for the crazy creationists or something similar. Don't take offense. Roll with it. Embrace your inner RJ.

I don't think PH takes offense of someone uses his name as a board 'know it all'. Everyone has a rep. No reason to fight it when everyone already knows it. It's all fun and games anyway. Loosen the collar, have a little fun. Don't take an internet message board so seriously.
 
Wrangor, grow a thicker skin my dear friend.

We have what is deemed a crisis now on our Southern border. A glut of opportunity awaits these people when they cross the border in the form of manual labor jobs that pay far more than they can make back home. In times of desperation, as a last resort, these people break immigration laws to advance their own survival and the survival of their children.

On the other side of the border waiting for these poor souls are people who are surviving quite well, comparatively, and enjoying the fruits of living in an advanced economy. They wish to increase profits and build wealth, and they are willing to break laws to edge out their competition and increase their profits.

This symbiotic relationship is the heart of the matter.

To punish the first group by incarcerating them or sending them back to life of despair while merely slapping the wrist of the profit-seeker is, IMO, morally repugnant. How do you not see that, and see it as name-calling?

The solution is not to let everybody in who wants to make a buck. There are zillions of folks who want to come here and we only have so much room. Nor is the solution to reward lawlessness by providing a path to citizenship because that only encourages the bad behavior. The solution, which will never be embraced, is to ban any and all future amnesties which reward this behavior with jobs and opportunities and citizenship.

You relax visa numbers on the seasonal jobs (H2 visas), educate as to the legal way to pursue these jobs and existing green cards through the governments of these countries, crack down big time at the border, and start sending a bill (which, granted, will never be paid) to the countries in question for the cost of returning their citizens. You allow them a way to register and utilize these increased visas without penalty. That is, they aren't subject to the usual multi-year bans for illegal entry and/or presence for those specific visas and those visas only (let's call them special visas). The trick is (1) they don't get some special path to citizenship, and (2) they are still subject to the multi-year bans when they pursue regular work visas. This isn't that big of a deal because the wait time on the visas they would be pursuing (unskilled labor) is currently 3 1/2 years and will increase as the demand goes up for them. But if they fuck up again, the clock starts fresh on their multi-year ban again, and they become ineligible for future special visas. I've outlined something like this plan several times on the boards over the years. I think it could actually work because you aren't getting people a place at the front of the line and they are still subject to having to wait 3 or 10 years (usually 10 for the types we're talking about) before they can even get a green card, and that green card is gained within the way the current system is set up and not by some special amnesty visa like it was with Reagan's amnesty. It is also different from Clinton's amnesty because his formally waived the 3/10 year bars, which meant all you needed was a job offer and $1000 and you were good to go.

I will say, however, that the longer the current debacle goes on, the more receptive I'm going to be for a plan to dig a fucking moat at the border, stock it with alligators, and add about 200 yards of minefields after that.

We also need to overhaul our family-based visas. Wives and unmarried children should be able to piggyback as they do now. Any other family should not be able to petition for a green card visa based on their relationship with a citizen or permanent resident. That would include siblings, married children, unmarried adult children (over 21) and parents. Some of those have to wait about 20+ years anyway, so getting rid of that isn't a big deal. Parents are a bigger deal, particularly with Asians who take care of their parents when they are elderly, but so be it. This allows the family-based system, which usually involves the most unskilled, to be narrowed and targeted.

Congress also needs to pass legislation to specifically outlaw actions such as DACA without Congressional consent. Cruz's proposal is too broad and just bans everything. He needs to specifically target things like TPS and other loopholes that the President feels he can exploit without Congress's go-ahead.
 
It is never morally repugnant to punish a crime. So I disagree completely. Should we punish both? Yes. You claimed we should punish neither which is silly.

Grow thicker skin? Not sure what you are talking about. Just responding to the discussion. You say that it is immoral to only punish one of the two wrongs and your solution is to let everyone off. That is a poor solution in my opinion.

Why is it silly and a poor solution to a problem to change a law?

We have changed thousands of laws as our culture has changed. We are in the process of changing draconian drug laws to respond to the changing times.

You support changing abortion laws.

If the immigrants aren't following the laws, and the employers aren't following the laws, and the only way to stop it is to call in troops and put up billions of dollars to deal with the situation - why is changing the laws and having an orderly system to deal with the immigration silly and a poor solution?

It seems about as reasoned as anything I have heard, and has proven historically to be a sound solution.

I'm not following your logic. Please explain.
 
The solution is not to let everybody in who wants to make a buck. There are zillions of folks who want to come here and we only have so much room. Nor is the solution to reward lawlessness by providing a path to citizenship because that only encourages the bad behavior. The solution, which will never be embraced, is to ban any and all future amnesties which reward this behavior with jobs and opportunities and citizenship.

You relax visa numbers on the seasonal jobs (H2 visas), educate as to the legal way to pursue these jobs and existing green cards through the governments of these countries, crack down big time at the border, and start sending a bill (which, granted, will never be paid) to the countries in question for the cost of returning their citizens. You allow them a way to register and utilize these increased visas without penalty. That is, they aren't subject to the usual multi-year bans for illegal entry and/or presence for those specific visas and those visas only (let's call them special visas). The trick is (1) they don't get some special path to citizenship, and (2) they are still subject to the multi-year bans when they pursue regular work visas. This isn't that big of a deal because the wait time on the visas they would be pursuing (unskilled labor) is currently 3 1/2 years and will increase as the demand goes up for them. But if they fuck up again, the clock starts fresh on their multi-year ban again, and they become ineligible for future special visas. I've outlined something like this plan several times on the boards over the years. I think it could actually work because you aren't getting people a place at the front of the line and they are still subject to having to wait 3 or 10 years (usually 10 for the types we're talking about) before they can even get a green card, and that green card is gained within the way the current system is set up and not by some special amnesty visa like it was with Reagan's amnesty. It is also different from Clinton's amnesty because his formally waived the 3/10 year bars, which meant all you needed was a job offer and $1000 and you were good to go.

I will say, however, that the longer the current debacle goes on, the more receptive I'm going to be for a plan to dig a fucking moat at the border, stock it with alligators, and add about 200 yards of minefields after that.

We also need to overhaul our family-based visas. Wives and unmarried children should be able to piggyback as they do now. Any other family should not be able to petition for a green card visa based on their relationship with a citizen or permanent resident. That would include siblings, married children, unmarried adult children (over 21) and parents. Some of those have to wait about 20+ years anyway, so getting rid of that isn't a big deal. Parents are a bigger deal, particularly with Asians who take care of their parents when they are elderly, but so be it. This allows the family-based system, which usually involves the most unskilled, to be narrowed and targeted.

Congress also needs to pass legislation to specifically outlaw actions such as DACA without Congressional consent. Cruz's proposal is too broad and just bans everything. He needs to specifically target things like TPS and other loopholes that the President feels he can exploit without Congress's go-ahead.

We're out of room?

Oh, and how much does this cost?
 
Room is the least of our worries when it comes to immigration. America is really big.
 
What are our worries when it comes to immigration?

What do we stand to lose by letting in immigrants to work and live in large scale?

Please list the top 5 or 10
 
Why is it silly and a poor solution to a problem to change a law?

We have changed thousands of laws as our culture has changed. We are in the process of changing draconian drug laws to respond to the changing times.

You support changing abortion laws.

If the immigrants aren't following the laws, and the employers aren't following the laws, and the only way to stop it is to call in troops and put up billions of dollars to deal with the situation - why is changing the laws and having an orderly system to deal with the immigration silly and a poor solution?

It seems about as reasoned as anything I have heard, and has proven historically to be a sound solution.

I'm not following your logic. Please explain.

Open the borders is a silly solution for so many reasons. Security, unemployment, and just in general fairness. People who have done things the right way get pushed aside for people who are breaking the law. It is poor policy. I am all for a reasonable path to citizenship coupled with actually closing the border. I am not for deportation of current law abiding illegals. Straight amnesty would welcome a flood of illegals. Shut down the border first. It can be done. Then work on a realistic path for those here already. Anyone new comes and you ship them home and send Mexico the bill. Eventually Mexico will weigh the cost and start helping us stem the tide.
 
Of all that that I posted, and you're going to pick out "room" to critique? You can look at it however you like, I suppose. I was speaking of job opportunities. You can't let everybody in willy-nilly that wants a better job. Eventually, the jobs either dry up or the cost for their labor becomes so depressed it isn't worth it, and the US wages suffer in return.

I have no idea how much it would cost. Any immigration reform seems to have an increased cost in employees to take on the increased workload, but increased revenues through application fees. Same would apply here I guess.

Not sure why you need 5 or 10 things. Is one not enough? Wrangor already mentioned 3...

Security. We have very little of that at the moment. Our policies make it worse, and talk of amnesty really makes it worse.

Wages. We give lip service to the Dept. of Labor with our immigration policies. It's not perfect, but it serves as a check against exploiting foreign workers and driving down wages for US workers. And of course if we allow too many foreign workers in, it affects it anyway because they are paid the minimum acceptable wage as it is. If you disregard it completely, it leads to...

Unemployment for US workers.

Fairness. Self explanatory.

Sorry, that is only 4, but I could probably think of another if you give me a while. Maybe I'll throw in the cultural thing since that's nice and ambiguous. However, with your immigration anarchy scenario, it's not such an ambiguous argument anymore. Let in everybody who wants to come here from a 3rd world country, and we will eventually start to resemble one.
 
I don't know - all that sounds really scary but I see no evidence that Honduran and Mexican immigrants are causing security, wage, or employment problems at all.

The illegal immigrants are what is fucking up our wage situation, really? US wages have problems, but they are directly tied to immigration? link?

We're going to make the money back off application fees? huh?
 
Open the borders is a silly solution for so many reasons. Security, unemployment, and just in general fairness. People who have done things the right way get pushed aside for people who are breaking the law. It is poor policy. I am all for a reasonable path to citizenship coupled with actually closing the border. I am not for deportation of current law abiding illegals. Straight amnesty would welcome a flood of illegals. Shut down the border first. It can be done. Then work on a realistic path for those here already. Anyone new comes and you ship them home and send Mexico the bill. Eventually Mexico will weigh the cost and start helping us stem the tide.

Evidence for spending billions to stop these issues please. Thanks.

Sounds like your fear has been trumped up, but I am ready to join your side please gimme something with some teeth.

Last I checks wages were being kept artificially low by job creators' pleas to keep labor cheap to satisfy boards of directors
 
Last edited:
I don't know - all that sounds really scary but I see no evidence that Honduran and Mexican immigrants are causing security, wage, or employment problems at all.

The illegal immigrants are what is fucking up our wage situation, really? US wages have problems, but they are directly tied to immigration? link?

We're going to make the money back off application fees? huh?

Mexican drug cartels do seem like nice people.
 
I don't know - all that sounds really scary but I see no evidence that Honduran and Mexican immigrants are causing security, wage, or employment problems at all.

The illegal immigrants are what is fucking up our wage situation, really? US wages have problems, but they are directly tied to immigration? link?

We're going to make the money back off application fees? huh?

Well we could go into the street gangs like MS13 and drug cartels, but I won't. The porous border is an advantage for individuals with Latin American ethnicities, but it is a security hole for anybody wishing to sneak in, including those who would wish us harm. Granted, I think that any long-term plot to do harm in the US would be similar to 9/11, where all the folks entered legally and the worst thing you had was a visa overstay, but that's not a reason to disregard security.

I didn't say illegal immigrants fuck up wages. I said that in your immigration anarchy scenario, they most certainly would. An abundance of legal immigrants would too because employers are only obligated to (and often times still don't) pay them the local prevailing wage for the occupation, aka the minimum amount for somebody with their skills. This is why we have quotas and wage restrictions in place.

USCIS takes in tons of bank on application fees. For a long time, the filing fees are what paid for its employees. That may still be the case, but some of that has been deferred in recent years to help hire more Border Patrol agents.
 
Evidence for spending billions to stop these issues please. Thanks.

Sounds like your fear has been trumped up, but I am ready to join your side please gimme something with some teeth.

Last I checks wages were being kept artificially low by job creators' pleas to keep labor cheap to satisfy boards of directors

Wages are being kept artificially low? You think raising the minimum wage would help this situation? Come on bake. You are better than that.

Raising the minimum wage and opening the border. Should be great for our economy. We will import the poverty of any country within reach. Anyone doing decently well isn't going to leave and so we will have a huge influx of minimum skill workers without means.

Then we are going to have to pay them more according to you. This is going to mean more jobs overseas, consolidation of jobs etc. so we have less jobs, way more people, and less money being made by us citizens. That is a great two step plan. Open the borders and raise the minimum wage.
 
Man, if we suddenly got rid of 40% of the brickmasons, it would cost WAAAAAY too much for me to build that water feature on my estate.

 
Wages are being kept artificially low? You think raising the minimum wage would help this situation? Come on bake. You are better than that.

Raising the minimum wage and opening the border. Should be great for our economy. We will import the poverty of any country within reach. Anyone doing decently well isn't going to leave and so we will have a huge influx of minimum skill workers without means.

Then we are going to have to pay them more according to you. This is going to mean more jobs overseas, consolidation of jobs etc. so we have less jobs, way more people, and less money being made by us citizens. That is a great two step plan. Open the borders and raise the minimum wage.

Did you just make all that up or is it based on some research or facts? Has our country ever experienced large immigration influxes in the past? What happened then? You're just throwing out negative sounding stuff to make an argument. I know that works in the right wing echo chamber but Im not sure it is here.

Th alternative to opening the border and having an orderly documentation of all immigrant workers and their status is to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to fortify the southern border and still fail to stop illegal immigrants from coming in and being employed under the table by corporations and farms acting in a criminal manner, requiring even more money to prosecute and punish. As the Republican leadership has proven in Congress, they cannot even pass a bill to do 1 10th of that. So we stall for decades. My approach is the only reasonable one, because it documents everyone and eliminates the criminal aspect, much like legalizing booze during prohibition and with weed now.

These highly productive people will find employment and merge into the system and pay in.
 
Well we could go into the street gangs like MS13 and drug cartels, but I won't. The porous border is an advantage for individuals with Latin American ethnicities, but it is a security hole for anybody wishing to sneak in, including those who would wish us harm. Granted, I think that any long-term plot to do harm in the US would be similar to 9/11, where all the folks entered legally and the worst thing you had was a visa overstay, but that's not a reason to disregard security.

I didn't say illegal immigrants fuck up wages. I said that in your immigration anarchy scenario, they most certainly would. An abundance of legal immigrants would too because employers are only obligated to (and often times still don't) pay them the local prevailing wage for the occupation, aka the minimum amount for somebody with their skills. This is why we have quotas and wage restrictions in place.

USCIS takes in tons of bank on application fees. For a long time, the filing fees are what paid for its employees. That may still be the case, but some of that has been deferred in recent years to help hire more Border Patrol agents.

I didn't say anarchy, i said orderly documentation of all workers.

You talked yourself right out of the security point you were trying to make a few posts ago.

I don;t understand your point about wages at all. Employers do that no matter what.
 
Can you imagine how crazy the far right would be about immigration if we had black people from Africa and Middle Eastern Muslims coming here on boats like they do in Europe? They'd be demanding drone strikes and destroyers off the coast to exterminate those threats to security before they could contaminate our coast line. Our immigration issues are a joke compared to what Italy and Spain have to deal with, and we still can't get our act together enough to take care of a few thousand desperate kids fleeing the violence that our drug habit and drug war have caused.
 
These highly productive people will find employment and merge into the system and pay in.

What jobs? If the jobs aren't there now they will be replacing people and thus putting more people out of work. You act like just because we have never had an open border that the results aren't predictable. I have never lot my hair (what little I have) on fire but I am pretty certain I can deduce what will happen.

We already don't have enough jobs. You are suggesting we raise wages (which will reduce jobs) and bring in more job seekers. This doesn't take a case study to predict the result. Simple economics works just fine. Less demand (increased wage will reduce jobs) and more supply. The increase supply of labor will have to be provided for by an outside force, the government. Perhaps that is what you are aiming for. I am not sure, but the outcome of your proposal is very predictable.
 
Back
Top