Illegal Hispanic Immigrant Population in the US

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Ah, but the Economic model presumes Americans would simply relocate elsewhere if need be, following the high paying jobs and better lifestyle.

There's somewhere that offers higher paying jobs and a better lifestyle than America? The quality of life in the US is fantastic if you're rich, asides from the French countryside or the South-West of England I can't think of anywhere I've personally been that compares.

Economics is so silly sometimes...

It's funny really, so many political parties seem to advocate free-market economics as the answer to everything, yet when you actually study economics, the majority of the applied topics are all about figuring out how to fix what the market gets wrong when you move away from the ideals of perfect competition. The jury is still well-out on both capitalism and the usage of economics in politics IMO

Let's face it, in a world of "have's" and "have-nots" you can't have an open border.

I quite agree.

Don't you just hate it when an otherwise excellent political party lets it down with crap economic policies? (in general I mean...)

[ 03-23-2005, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Azred]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: The quality of life in the US is fantastic if you're rich

Well, not exactly. Belle and I aren't rich, but we still have a wonderful quality of life. Yes, having more money is a plus, but what you make of what you have means more than simply having a lot. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[ 03-23-2005, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: Azred ]

[johnny]

I'd like to hear the Lord of Alcohol's point of view on this topic.

[shamrock_uk]

Maybe so Azred, but from what your posts I would probably say you were middle-class. I saw some really desparate poverty when I was over in the States, with no particular public will to do anything about it.

[Timber Loftis]

I think we already have heard LoA's point of view.

[johnny]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I think we already have heard LoA's point of view.

And ? Does he make a point ?

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by johnny: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I think we already have heard LoA's point of view.

And ? Does he make a point ? [/QUOTE]You mean that it sucks to have a buncha scab illegals undercut the hell outta your business and drive you under? Yeah, that's a point.

[johnny]

mmmmmkay... just checking.

I still would like to hear a story though, rough and uncut. Could be to anyone's benefits in the future.

[Azred]

That would be correct, shamrock_uk. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

Yes, there are some places that suffer from abject poverty, and that is a shame. However, there doesn't need to be a "public will" to correct that situation. Some safety nets should be in place, yes, but personally I don't want to pay taxes to support some deadbeat from lounging at home instead of working. No, that happens in only a minority of cases, but if it happens even once I don't like it; it is a shame that there will be people who abuse the system.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: I agree with Azred on the whole here. The LP seem to be confusing (deliberately?) the issue of refugees and economic migrants - they cannot and should not be treated the same. A two-pronged approach is needed: Refugees fleeing persecution is quite one thing - they should never be denied (a legal) entry if their case is genuine and they pose no security threat. If they enter the country illegally and are discovered, their case should be reviewed and they should be deported unless the risk of persecution/torture etc is dire. People entering the United States must understand that the rule of law prevails. But simply moving to America in search of better economic prospects is not a right. If they're not fleeing persecution, there is no moral duty upon America to take them in. Illegal migrants should be deported upon capture, those that care to abide by the rule of law are free to apply officially to become migrants. Their case will be assessed and they will be let in if they can contribute something to the American economy and society. It seems perfectly fair to me. If you allow people into the country illegally, for whatever reason, they are 'outside the system' and in grave danger of exploitation, getting involved in crime and living a life of miserable poverty. For their own protection, as well as the interests of American society, the legal way should be the only way.

Getting rid of (most) immigration restrictions and your not allowing people into the country illegally anymore so the point becomes moot. My views of individual self determination and right to labor don't just stop at my nations borders.

The LP veiws right to labor and freedom of movement as basic human rights. Denying either for most reasons is equally and perceptually immoral. I more or less agree, So I believe allowing them in is a "moral" duty for at least these two reasons. This is why the the issues of refugees and economic migrants are lumped together.