# Immigration Reform



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 14, 2016)

Figured instead of kicking a dead horse in the political thread's,  maybe we could discuss immigration reform at least what we think it should be moving forward. Not asking for the standard Republican/Democrat response. But personal opinion and thoughts. I'm going to spell out my opinions and thoughts, but I'm not exclusively tied to them. So I'd like to read everyones opinion and how they come to them.

Leave the Hillary said, Trump said bullshit out of it. Both of them can jump off a bridge for all I care.

My thoughts:

Border security needs to happen, not a wall (maybe in some areas) but true security. Put the assets and manpower on the border and lock it down. What should that mean, we should be grabing 85-90% of illegal border crossings at the actaul border.

Legally immigrating  or people seaking a work visa to our country should be bringing something to the table. Skilled labor to Scientists and Doctors. You don't just get to come here because it sucks at home, you need to bring something to the table.

Criminals, anyone here illegally who has committed a felony crime is immediately deported and barred from future entry. You commit a felony crime you are out for good.

Undocumented or illegals who are not felons, should be given a pathway to legal status. Not an automatic citizenship, but a way to get a visa or residency,  so that they can work towards citizenship like everyone else. They need to be afforded an opportunity to get right, kinda a one chance to get it right. Once afforded that opportunity, if they fail to maintain legal status, they are deported with a 3 year ban for first offence, 5 year ban for second, and lifetime ban for the third. If they get caught here illegally while on ban, mandatory 18 months in jail, and lifetime ban. Essentially make it easier to be here legally, but severely punish those who decide to not maintain legal status. 

Migrant workers, specifically agricultural workers. We need a databasewhere these people can register quickly and without significant red tape involved. Simply have a Farmer accountability system, where each worker and worker family member can be registered to each farm. When the migrate during seasons, allow a 30 day window to register at the next farm, if they're going home just tag them as inactive, if they fail to register at the next farm, or go inactive the right way, they get a warrant for deportation and 12 month ban from the program. If a farmer fails to comply, he gets a 12 month ban from use if migrant work force. Just make it easier for the farmers and the worker's, that way things can be tracked without issue. When people fuck up they get a penalty.

Medical benefits, simply put we require an immigrant to carry automotive insurance  to drive a car here, they should be required to maintain health insurance to have a visa or residency. They fail to maintain it or lap, they get a 30 day deportation notice. Get insurance or go home. Have a special program for migrant workers, that's dually cost shared between the farmer and the migrant worker. Something that is inexpensive, but allows for emergency and general health care. No preexisting conditions or major medical care, outside of work related injuries and illness, etc.

Anchor-baby, any child born here should have the right to apply for citizenship at the age of 18. However, until the 18th birthday, or a naturalized parent (legal guardian) the child remains with the family. Essentially, allow the child to remain, go to school receive benefits as long as the child is with the family here or a legal responsible gurdian. If the family heads home, the child goes as well, unless legal guardianship is established.  Once the child is an adult, the child chooses citizenship.

Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, you get what you pay in. If you choose to pay in as an immigrant,  you cannot draw benefits until naturalized as a citizen. Migrant workers would be excluded from paying in as well as from receiving benefits. 

Education for minor's, standard public education for 18 and under, with a special child education tax levied on immigrants and migrant workers. They can go to school, but the family needs to contribute to the educational costs.

Higher education, no government grants or programs for student visas, immigrants, or migrant workers. Either they pay out of pocket or seek private scholarships and grants. Excluding special government program's for individuals who commit to 10 years of specific service from educational training. Example, special grant to become a medical doctor, requires 10 years of service in that field to the American people. Not free service or government service, but a grantee they will use their new knowledge or skills to benefit the country before returning to their own.

Immigration from conflict zones, if they are from a country we are directly in conflict with. They are denied until significant reason is given (heavily vetted, worked with us, proven trust, etc) otherwise not until 5 years of post conflict. Conflict zones (i.e. Syrian refugees) not without significant reason given (extreme humanitarian reasons, asylum, etc). Otherwise heavily intensive vetting, restrictive and temporary immigration, with supervision the equivalent of standard probation used in our justice system.  Know where they are, what they are doing, drug test, etc. Give people a chance, but not blindly.  The firstand foremost importance should be the safety of the American people,  over the immigration from war torn countries. 

Just my thoughts and opinions, feel free to state your own and pick mine apart.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 14, 2016)

I think some of your points are great @Diamondback 2/2.

Some questions about parts though. How do change birthright citizenship? Again I don't think a constitutional amendment is likely. 

Enforcing many of these actions would lead to a much larger and active government. All these programs would cost a great deal of money. With a promise by Trump to reduce taxes, where does the money come from? i understand there are many programs that can be cut, but this would be a significant increase in local, state and federal law enforcement expense, as well as an additional level of government involvement in personal livelihood. 

Why would there need to be a special tax imposed on the families of immigrant workers for education outside of property tax, sales tax, and other local taxes that currently fund schools? I think that would face issues with legality, specifically if the people are here legally under a new system. 


As to the government grants to those on student visas , I just straight disagree. Contributions to science and technology advance human progress regardless of borders. In my wife's Ph.D cohort there were many foreign students, who made great contributions to science while here on visas, while studying under NSF, or NIH grants. They don't just take those contributions home with them, they publish their findings, and contribute to the human knowledge base. 

I am in total agreement on deporting those who have been convicted of a crime. There is no need to pay for incarceration of people who shouldn't be here in the first place. I do think that while in the criminal justice system they should receive all other protections granted under the constitution.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 14, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I think some of your points are great @Diamondback 2/2.
> 
> Some questions about parts though. How do change birthright citizenship? Again I don't think a constitutional amendment is likely.
> 
> ...



Replied in red in your post.

I also agree on wasting tax dollars on criminals, although there obviously needs to be a punishment for crimes committed.  We're not going to let a murder walk back across the border. I would say punishment for those type of convictions should fall under the penal system they were committed.  Example, if a state offense is committed,  allow the state to set the laws and how they will enforce them with regards to immigrants. Some states may say x number of years than deport, some may require full sentences,  some may just say get them the hell out of here, obviously depending on the severity of the crime. But I agree, outside of what is humane, don't waste money and get rid of them asap.

Good point's!


----------



## CDG (Nov 15, 2016)

I think this is a great conversation to have, and I wish I could contribute something more substantial to keep it going, but I agree with everything that has been said.  I really like your ideas, @Diamondback 2/2, and my initial concerns after reading the OP were addressed by @TLDR20 already.  I think the disconnect will be between what *should* be done and what *can* be done.  However, some change is better than no change, and an imperfect plan executed now is better than a perfect plan that never gets off the ground.  I would like to see the Trump Administration  begin addressing realistic goals and timelines for immigration issues.  If we can only afford one, my vote goes to the criminal class of the illegal immigrant.  We need to get them out, and keep them out.


----------



## Devildoc (Nov 15, 2016)

@Diamondback 2/2, great post.  I need to mull on this.  Some of your points are already law, just not enforced.  Some of it cannot happen without amending the Constitution.  And some of it needs to happen, and 'could' be easy fixes.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 15, 2016)

So where do the so-called Sanctuary Cities fall into this?

NY, LA, Seattle, Minneapolis, and I believe now Chicago mayors have come out saying that will not help the Feds deport illegals unless they commit a crime. 

Umm....isn't it a crime to be in the country illegally?  I get that it is not that simple, but it seems like a bit of a Catch-22 to me. Law enforcement does not want to go after illegals because they think it will keep them from talking to the police- which will cause the police to solve less crimes.  BUT....if the illegals were not here...my head is starting to spin. 

My initial instinct has been to support the folks who say "keep us out of it", but I did not even know these Sanctuary Cities existed until a few weeks ago, so I could likely be pursuaded to see another point-of-view. 

To add - Trump has threatened to take federal funding away for those cities who won't play along.  I FUCKING hate that - they did it with seat belts, drinking age, and .08 alcohol limit. Now this?  that particular tactic continues to errode "states' rights" and takes us further away from the Republic we are supposed to be.


----------



## Kraut783 (Nov 15, 2016)

"Umm....isn't it a crime to be in the country illegally? I get that it is not that simple, but it seems like a bit of a Catch-22 to me. Law enforcement does not want to go after illegals because they think it will keep them from talking to the police- which will cause the police to solve less crimes. BUT....if the illegals were not here...my head is starting to spin."

We local/State don't enforce federal immigration law. But, once in custody for a crime, if status is questioned during booking....we just call the ICE number that is staffed 24/7 and a detainer is placed on them, happens 24/7/365.  While many cities might be "Sanctuary cities" most counties are not and usually book the cities felony suspects....


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 15, 2016)

Kraut783 said:


> we just call the ICE number that is staffed 24/7 and a detainer is placed on them, happens 24/7/365.



My understanding is that the Sanctuary Cities will not call ICE - never a problem for the current administration but looks like it could become a problem under the new.


----------



## 0699 (Nov 15, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> To add - Trump has threatened to take federal funding away for those cities who won't play along.  I FUCKING hate that - they did it with seat belts, drinking age, and .08 alcohol limit. Now this?  that particular tactic continues to errode "states' rights" and takes us further away from the Republic we are supposed to be.


As long as the states are nursing from the federal teat, the idea that they can make independent decisions is extremely eroded.  The states have chosen to take federal money for programs that are inherently the responsibility of the individual states, and have done so because it allows them to keep state taxes low.  But just like the child that lives under their parents roof, as long as the parent/fed is paying the bills, they will fully expect to have a say in how the child/state lives their life.

If the states ever want to be serious about their "independence" from the federal government, the first thing they need to do is quit taking federal money.  If the city of Chicago ever decides to stop taking federal money, I think they would be on higher moral ground when they tell it to fuck off.


----------



## AWP (Nov 15, 2016)

0699 said:


> As long as the states are nursing from the federal teat, the idea that they can make independent decisions is extremely eroded.  The states have chosen to take federal money for programs that are inherently the responsibility of the individual states, and have done so because it allows them to keep state taxes low.  But just like the child that lives under their parents roof, as long as the parent/fed is paying the bills, they will fully expect to have a say in how the child/state lives their life.
> 
> If the states ever want to be serious about their "independence" from the federal government, the first thing they need to do is quit taking federal money.  If the city of Chicago ever decides to stop taking federal money, I think they would be on higher moral ground when they tell it to fuck off.



It reminds me of how we'll give a country hundred of millions/ billions in foreign aid, and then the recipient nation tells us to bugger off where their country is concerned.

Ultimately, if you play pussy you're going to get fucked.


----------



## Kraut783 (Nov 15, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> My understanding is that the Sanctuary Cities will not call ICE - never a problem for the current administration but looks like it could become a problem under the new.



True, but once transferred to the county....county will call ICE.  For example...Austin, TX is a sanctuary city, but Travis county will hold the felony suspects...and call ICE for a immigration hold.  This is not true for everywhere, merely an example.


----------



## Totentanz (Nov 15, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> It reminds me of how we'll give a country hundred of millions/ billions in foreign aid, and then the recipient nation tells us to bugger off where their country is concerned.



You mean like our favorite "ally" that ends in -stan?

I'm down with having a path to being here legally.  A relatively easy, employer-supported 12-month migrant work visa would be fine by me.  If they want to jump the line to citizenship ahead of those who've put in the work, the time, the money, they can FOAD.


----------



## Grunt (Nov 15, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> It reminds me of how we'll give a country hundred of millions/ billions in foreign aid, and then the recipient nation tells us to bugger off where their country is concerned.
> 
> Ultimately, if you play pussy you're going to get fucked.



That's one of the main reasons why I am becoming more of an isolationist the older I get. I am getting more and more, "What can you do for me?"

You take my money, you answer when I call and do what I ask!


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 18, 2016)




----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 18, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> View attachment 17219



I think if you stop federal funding to cities, inhabitants of those cities should pay a reduced rate of income tax.


----------



## 0699 (Nov 19, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I think if you stop federal funding to cities, inhabitants of those cities should pay a reduced rate of income tax.


If we stopped all federal funds going to the states and cities, we could reduce the income tax for everyone.  The states and cities should quit suckling on the federal teat, raise those funds they need to operate, and quit using federal monies to keep their taxes low.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 19, 2016)

0699 said:


> If we stopped all federal funds going to the states and cities, we could reduce the income tax for everyone.  The states and cities should quit suckling on the federal teat, raise those funds they need to operate, and quit using federal monies to keep their taxes low.



Right. 

Then we could effectively be a republic of city states.


----------



## 0699 (Nov 19, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> Right.
> 
> Then we could effectively be a republic of city states.


How so?

The states and cities complain when the federal government expects them to enforce federal law, but they happily stick their hand out for federal money.  If the federal government didn't hold the power of the purse over the cities and states, the local governments would be in a much more legitimate ethical position when they tell the Fed that they aren't going to enforce federal law.

The federal government shouldn't be in the wealth distribution business, especially when they collect money from the people, then give it to the local governments.  The Fed should only be collecting money for and spending money on those things that are inherent functions of a national government  (defense, foreign policy, monetary policy, interstate commerce ala the interstate highway system, etc) and the local governments should be collecting taxes for and spending money on local items such as welfare, local infrastructure, schools, local law enforcement, etc.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 19, 2016)

I think when it comes to the topic of immigration, former President Bill Clinton really says it best.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 19, 2016)

0699 said:


> How so?
> 
> The states and cities complain when the federal government expects them to enforce federal law, but they happily stick their hand out for federal money.  If the federal government didn't hold the power of the purse over the cities and states, the local governments would be in a much more legitimate ethical position when they tell the Fed that they aren't going to enforce federal law.
> 
> The federal government shouldn't be in the wealth distribution business, especially when they collect money from the people, then give it to the local governments.  The Fed should only be collecting money for and spending money on those things that are inherent functions of a national government  (defense, foreign policy, monetary policy, interstate commerce ala the interstate highway system, etc) and the local governments should be collecting taxes for and spending money on local items such as welfare, local infrastructure, schools, local law enforcement, etc.



I was basically agreeing with you.

I just see cities being able to in some cases wield much more power than states. In many states the major cities population is much higher than the rest of the population, and as the cities go so do the states.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 19, 2016)

I'm a big fan of the concept of big local/state government and small federal government. States and cities should run their own house as they see fit, funding and outside influence shouldn't happen.  The greatest thing about it, is that when shit is fucked up, you can change it and it actually matters, when big issues come up, you can vote on the issue, and when corrupt assholes fuck people over, it's easier to see and deal with.


----------



## 0699 (Nov 19, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I was basically agreeing with you.
> 
> I just see cities being able to in some cases wield much more power than states. In many states the major cities population is much higher than the rest of the population, and as the cities go so do the states.


Ahh, okay.

The effect of population centers is manifesting itself around the nation, not just in the traditional locations of California and the north east (NY, MA, etc).  Colorado is dragged around by Denver, western Washington state is bullied by the Puget Sound region, and Virginians are abused by the liberals in NoVa and the Tidewater.  Geographically, Virginia is mostly a conservative state, but because so many people live in NoVa and the Tidewater, they can drive a lot of issues and elections.  Our carpetbagger governor is a great example.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 19, 2016)

0699 said:


> Ahh, okay.
> 
> The effect of population centers is manifesting itself around the nation, not just in the traditional locations of California and the north east (NY, MA, etc).  Colorado is dragged around by Denver, western Washington state is bullied by the Puget Sound region, and Virginians are abused by the liberals in NoVa and the Tidewater.  Geographically, Virginia is mostly a conservative state, but because so many people live in NoVa and the Tidewater, they can drive a lot of issues and elections.  Our carpetbagger governor is a great example.



Yeah. That is what I was saying. I think the federal government has the ability to even some of that out, in both directions.


----------



## Dienekes (Nov 20, 2016)

What if the states had some form of electoral college based on state legislature representation similar to the national one? That would prevent major cities from overriding the majority of the state without abdicating too much power to the rural counties that have much lower population. I think gubernatorial elections work pretty well as they are, however, I'm not well versed in state politics anyway.

It would be extremely interesting to see how a true republic of states would function. What would encourage economies and labor markets other than taxes (personal preferences notwithstanding)? Competing for population wrt who has the most liberal personal liberty laws aka concealed carry type stuff, etc? It would make for a truly interesting political situation that I think would ultimately benefit the country greatly


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 20, 2016)

The biggest problem I see is people want to tell others how to live. What works in California, doesn't work in Texas. What works in North Texas doesn'twork in South Texas, etc. 

There is a place in Big Bend called Terlingua  (ghost town) that people moved back into. It's pretty much with out law enforcement except for the occasional deputy or trooper.  But they pretty much do what they want, and have somewhat developed their own system to deal with things. No that would never work in a place like San Antonio, but it work for the people out in Terlingua. I don't like Austin telling people what to do or how we should think. I sure as hell don't like Washington DC telling me how to live or think. Hell I fucking hate home owners association.  But I do understand the purpose and need for them. But it's when people are stupid and stop being concerned with property values and start fucking with people that shit gets fucked up.

I grew up in Texas, working and living with Mexican nationals. My wife's family is from Mexico, I spent my childhood running around in Mexico. Never needed a passport, just a few bucks and my ID. I fucking hate how things have gotten fucked up now, and if wasn't for the stupid drug laws aND fucking terrorist, I would be for open borders with Mexico and Canada. But at this point in time we can't have that. I just wish there was away to put some of that responsibility back to the local governments that have to interact cross border. 

The people that scream about Mexicans taking jobs are full of shit. They do the work 99% of America won't do. They get paid shit, and they live here in poverty, normally send money home to support their impoverished family.  Make it easier for them to do that legally and quit bitchin about it. If they break laws punish them, like anyone else.  Send them packing, etc. But for fuck sake, stop with the crybaby bullshit about Mexicans. I don't know if it's truly racism, or ignorance of the people, fear of what you don't know, or just people bitchin to bitch. But whatever it is, people need to stop and think before running their opinionated mouths about shit they have no true understanding of or any business discussing.

I hate the wall idea, I hate the mass deportation ideas, I hate the idea of families being torn apart over stupidity coming out of Washington DC. Yes we need border security right now, yes we need to deport the criminals and yes we need vetting and need to know who is here and why. But it ain't that damn hard, and we need to use a little common sense and less "fuck it burn it down" rhetoric.

My $.02


----------



## 0699 (Nov 20, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> _Your post_
> 
> My $.02


I don't know what (if any) of your post I agree with; I'll have to digest it some.  But it's a very well written and heartfelt post.

Thanks.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 20, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> The people that scream about Mexicans taking jobs are full of shit. They do the work 99% of America won't do. They get paid shit, and they live here in poverty, normally send money home to support their impoverished family.  Make it easier for them to do that legally and quit bitchin about it. If they break laws punish them, like anyone else.  Send them packing, etc. But for fuck sake, stop with the crybaby bullshit about Mexicans. I don't know if it's truly racism, or ignorance of the people, fear of what you don't know, or just people bitchin to bitch. But whatever it is, people need to stop and think before running their opinionated mouths about shit they have no true understanding of or any business discussing.
> 
> I hate the wall idea, I hate the mass deportation ideas, I hate the idea of families being torn apart over stupidity coming out of Washington DC. Yes we need border security right now, yes we need to deport the criminals and yes we need vetting and need to know who is here and why. But it ain't that damn hard, and we need to use a little common sense and less "fuck it burn it down" rhetoric.
> 
> My $.02



The fact that there are jobs "99% of America won't do" while there are so many on welfare is part of the problem.  If you don't have a job, there shouldn't be many (any?) legit jobs that you "won't do."  But we've made welfare too comfortable; you can get most of the trappings of the lower middle class through government handouts, so where's the incentive to do better?  Additionally, a cheap labor force depresses wages and discourages innovation.  Why make tech improvements if you're guaranteed a stream of cheap and expendable labor?

The "jobs Americans won't do" argument is only useful if immigrants would do those jobs for a while and then go home.  They don't.  They stay here, and I don't blame them.  But any children they have here are citizens, and being Americans, they WON'T do "the jobs Americans won't do."  So now you have to bring in even more immigrants to do more jobs for an ever-expanding US population.  Those children aren't grateful to be in the US, they look around and say "why don't *I* have that?" just like anyone else would.  Illegal immigrants are breaking the law by illegally immigrating to the US.  That alone is a good enough reason to deport them.  And it is "that damn hard" to come up with something that works, which is one of the reasons there hasn't been a solid solution implemented.  

Concern over immigration is not "bullshit."  Many rational, thoughtful people who are not racist, ignorant, fearful, or "bitchin" are justifiably concerned.  Anywhere uncontrolled mass immigration has occurred in the world, it was a disaster for the people who were already there.  The Roman Empire... Australia... the early days of the US... and now.  If we're smart we'll get a handle on this now.  There are already 11 million people living illegally in the US.  That's a huge problem, for any number of reasons.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 20, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> The fact that there are jobs "99% of America won't do" while there are so many on welfare is part of the problem.
> 
> I don't disagree.
> 
> ...



I agree it's a problem and there is reason for concern. That's why I started this thread and why I've posted what I have. I will admit my post that you qouted had a bit more personal feeling attached to it. I've been debating this with friends and family as well as now on here. I'm personally disgusted with the possibility of a wall being built and some sort of mass deportation.  I'm also not foolish enough to state we don't need to do something.  I'm just hoping for some balance as we approach the issue. I'm pretty right leaning on most issues, but I do not support the way the GOP has been approaching this particular issue.


----------



## Lefty375 (Nov 20, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> The fact that there are jobs "99% of America won't do" while there are so many on welfare is part of the problem.  If you don't have a job, there shouldn't be many (any?) legit jobs that you "won't do."  But we've made welfare too comfortable; you can get most of the trappings of the lower middle class through government handouts, so where's the incentive to do better?  Additionally, a cheap labor force depresses wages and discourages innovation.  Why make tech improvements if you're guaranteed a stream of cheap and expendable labor?
> 
> The "jobs Americans won't do" argument is only useful if immigrants would do those jobs for a while and then go home.  They don't.  They stay here, and I don't blame them.  But any children they have here are citizens, and being Americans, they WON'T do "the jobs Americans won't do."  So now you have to bring in even more immigrants to do more jobs for an ever-expanding US population.  Those children aren't grateful to be in the US, they look around and say "why don't *I* have that?" just like anyone else would.  Illegal immigrants are breaking the law by illegally immigrating to the US.  That alone is a good enough reason to deport them.  And it is "that damn hard" to come up with something that works, which is one of the reasons there hasn't been a solid solution implemented.
> 
> Concern over immigration is not "bullshit."  Many rational, thoughtful people who are not racist, ignorant, fearful, or "bitchin" are justifiably concerned.  Anywhere uncontrolled mass immigration has occurred in the world, it was a disaster for the people who were already there.  The Roman Empire... Australia... the early days of the US... and now.  If we're smart we'll get a handle on this now.  There are already 11 million people living illegally in the US.  That's a huge problem, for any number of reasons.



Do you have any recommendations for books or published papers on this topic?


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 21, 2016)

The jobs American's won't do is a bullshit argument; maybe 20 years ago, but not today.
Illegals are getting STEM jobs all over the place, good paying jobs in the Meat Packing Industry where bi-lingual Americans are the only ones getting looked at.
Construction use to be a good summer gig for college students (got me through school) not anymore as illegals own those jobs.

They also need to come up with a restitution plan for ID Theft Victims, those illegals are costing people their tax refunds, Lawyers won't help unless the refund is in excess of $3K, as anything lower won't cover fees.

Legal Immigrants spend $40-$50K on legal fees but illegals pay $1k?  Justify that.

I also want a quid-pro-quo (and SOFA) with Mexico regarding our ability to own property or run a business south of the border, and accidental crossing by armed individuals.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 21, 2016)

Illegals are getting STEM jobs? Where? Do you have examples of large scale illegal immigrants working STEM jobs? Or do you mean legal immigrants and holders of Visa's are taking STEM jobs?


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 21, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> Illegals are getting STEM jobs? Where? Do you have examples of large scale illegal immigrants working STEM jobs? Or do you mean legal immigrants and holders of Visa's are taking STEM jobs?


Both, we've had issues here with illegals from China and India.
I'll see if I can find the newspaper story.


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 21, 2016)

It is pretty hard to get jobs in things like engineering, medicine and chemistry without a background check, those tend to check your name and social security number at a minimum. Pretty hard to have a whole lot of people getting passed that.


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 21, 2016)

San Antonio is becoming a Tech Center.
Rackspace is here and they are working to get companies out of Austin.


----------



## CQB (Nov 21, 2016)

Anyone looked at what we have done here? We have a good immigration program but it restricts illegal entry. The only real thing our previous PM Tony Abbott got right. My personal opinion is that the refugee convention should be repealed as it was just for the time it was legislated but that time had passed but it would be political suicide for any government to walk away from it. I'm centre left but just scratch my head at Obamas' immigration policy...sovereignty seems to be eroded more & more.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 21, 2016)

Lefty375 said:


> Do you have any recommendations for books or published papers on this topic?


No, not really.  Not my area of interest or study.  I think it's an important subject, but I don't have any specific references in mind.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 21, 2016)

I've personally never heard or read anything about illegals taking STEM jobs. I have no doubt it has happened, but not in any form of mass. 

I've personally helped 3 younger guys get jobs at my old plumbing company.  Apprenticeship that leads to $80+K job a year. They all quit, said it was too hard, didn't like the heat of working outside. 

I've got a close friend who runs a remodeling company, he can't keep younger help, they just won't work. Always on the phone's, have to be supervised to sweep a floor. His employees are all in the late 40's and 50's. He has to turn down bigger jobs, because he can't get the younger generation to come to work. The sad part is he is supper GOP "get them all out of here, they are stealing our jobs". He isn't being under-bid, he won't bid jobs he can't do. I sit and listen to him contradict himself all the time. One minute he is telling me how he couldn't bid a job becausehe can't get the manpower, next he is telling how illegals are going to put him out of business. If he get hire people that are skilled, legal and bid those bigger jobs, he would.

The mass majority of illegals in Texas are working in services, janitorial, food service,  yard maintenance, etc. You even mention a job like that to Americans, at $8 an hour  and they turn their nose up at you. @Marauder06 was spot on with his post, that people not wanting to get up and work because of welfare programs. I disagree with the notion of wage suppression, as people want cheap foods and services. That requires low wages for those positions.  If you raise wages, the consumer pays more for the food or service, the consumer uses less, the company profit margin falls, the positions and hours get cut, people refuse to work shit job's, the cycle continues. 

Although I do think the act of illegally entering the country is a crime, I think it could be handled with some fines and a pathway to legal status.  People who stole identity, broke other laws, etc, should obviously be punished for those crimes. Keep in mind, the Obama administration pretty much put the word out that it was a free for all the last 8 years. There are alot of people here because laws weren't enforced, etc.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 21, 2016)

I don't know how accurate these are, so take them as you will.

Jobs Americans Won’t Do? A Detailed Look at Immigrant Employment by Occupation

Most Common Jobs Held by Immigrants in each US State «  All About America

Illegal Immigrants Don't Lower Our Wages Or Take Our Jobs

Jobs Americans Won't Do?


----------



## ThunderHorse (Nov 21, 2016)

Americans today lack work ethic, that much is clear.  Part of it has to do with the everyone needs to go to college mentality which is completely untrue.  The other part is we've lost so many manufacturing jobs a generation will grow up seeing their parents not working and having given up

I still don't get how you can go into a place and buy beer with your lonestar card and jump into a brand new escalade, makes me think I'm doing it wrong.


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 21, 2016)

2nd paragraph.
Illegal immigrants from India are fastest growing


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 21, 2016)

Potential cabinet pick accidentally shows photographers homeland security plan that redefines arrested illegals as 'criminals' and deputizes cops to help deport them | Daily Mail Online

Note to self...those camera's reporters use are not toys...


----------



## policemedic (Nov 21, 2016)

Kraut783 said:


> "Umm....isn't it a crime to be in the country illegally? I get that it is not that simple, but it seems like a bit of a Catch-22 to me. Law enforcement does not want to go after illegals because they think it will keep them from talking to the police- which will cause the police to solve less crimes. BUT....if the illegals were not here...my head is starting to spin."
> 
> We local/State don't enforce federal immigration law. But, once in custody for a crime, if status is questioned during booking....we just call the ICE number that is staffed 24/7 and a detainer is placed on them, happens 24/7/365.  While many cities might be "Sanctuary cities" most counties are not and usually book the cities felony suspects....



Unfortunately, that's not the case everywhere.  Philadelphia is both a city and county; we house our own prisoners (with some exceptions due to space).


----------



## Dame (Nov 21, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Potential cabinet pick accidentally shows photographers homeland security plan that redefines arrested illegals as 'criminals' and deputizes cops to help deport them | Daily Mail Online
> 
> Note to self...those camera's reporters use are not toys...



:wall::wall::wall::wall::-"


----------



## ThunderHorse (Nov 24, 2016)

Being here illegally is a crime...or did we forget that?


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 25, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Potential cabinet pick accidentally shows photographers homeland security plan that redefines arrested illegals as 'criminals' and deputizes cops to help deport them | Daily Mail Online
> 
> Note to self...those camera's reporters use are not toys...
> 
> ...



My first instinct was that it was deliberate.  People are making fun of the guy while simultaneously spreading his message and giving his policy coverage in a way it wouldn't have otherwise gotten.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 25, 2016)

Marauder06 said:


> My first instinct was that it was deliberate.



Yep, was thinking the same thing. There is no reason you would have that paper, facing out,  and outside of the portfolio.


----------



## Gunz (Nov 25, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Yep, was thinking the same thing. There is no reason you would have that paper, facing out,  and outside of the portfolio.





Right, this is not exactly classified information, these are policy proposals that Trump talked about all during the campaign: deport illegals with criminal records, bar entry of potential terrorists, and upgrade the vetting process.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 25, 2016)

"Oh look at how stupid the Trump people are, let's broadcast their policy proposals to the whole world!!!  We're the wittiest journalists and bloggers EVAR!!"

Meanwhile in the Trump administration...


----------

