Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »
Register | Login | Search | Help | New Boards | Harassment Policy | Rules of the JC | TOS | Markup Codes
Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic
« 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 - Previous | Next | Reload
Author Topic: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 5:45pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 5:51pm (3 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
Kimball_Kinnison posted:

My comments were meant to relate back to the actual topic of this thread. You know, immigration?


I was addressing a point regarding the poor in the U.S. that Lowbacca was trying to make, which actually had to do with comparing domestic government policy in different nations. It had more to do with immigration than a semantic discussion about what Lowbacca meant when he referred to America's "poor".

Kimball_Kinnison posted:
The fact is that the US has virtually eliminated poverty as compared to other nations. That makes it a magnet for immigration, both legal and illegal. Even during an economic downturn conditions in the US are far superior to most other countries.


No, actually, I'd say that developed nations as a group have much higher standards of living, but that wasn't the point that Lowbacca was making by referring to the poor in America. His point was in regards to government action (or inaction) in addressing domestic issues. I don't believe he was trying to make a direct comparison between the standard of living of poor people in developed countries and poor people in developing countries -- at least not in that particular post which I already brought to your attention. But I'm not going to try to speak for Lowbacca, so I'll let him address the point if he wants to.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Kimball_Kinnison 
Registered: Oct '01
6249_Veers
Date Posted: 3/12 5:52pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Tuna, forget about what Lowbacca said. That has nothing to do with my point. Discuss Lowbacca's comments with him. Don't try to limit my comments by what he said.

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 5:52pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
Tuna, forget about what Lowbacca said. That has nothing to do with my point. Discuss Lowbacca's comments with him. Don't try to limit my comments by what he said.

Kimball Kinnison


My name is not Tuna happy

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Lowbacca_1977 
Title: Senate Moderator
 Registered: Jun '06
Date Posted: 3/12 6:20pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
For clarity on my own position.... my original reference of poor was simply that while the U.S. gov't tries to improve conditions for the lower classes of Americans (a relative term), Mexican gov't treats the lower classes of Mexicans (also a relative term) as livestock and simply export them to benefit from the money sent back and that the gov't has no sense of obligation to the people.
In that sense, I was referring to domestic policy at that point.

I do think, though, that the economic disadvantages taht come with living in a third world country is still very relevant to the general topic of illegal immigration and plays a motivating factor. The concept of povery is extremely relevant to illegal immigration, and while we ended up on said topic through a rather backwards chain of events, its still a valid topic in how it effects illegal immigration.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 6:31pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 6:41pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
Lowbacca_1977 posted:
For clarity on my own position.... my original reference of poor was simply that while the U.S. gov't tries to improve conditions for the lower classes of Americans (a relative term), Mexican gov't treats the lower classes of Mexicans (also a relative term) as livestock and simply export them to benefit from the money sent back and that the gov't has no sense of obligation to the people.
In that sense, I was referring to domestic policy at that point.


OK, first off I'll say that suddenly switching from "poor" to "the lower classes" strikes me as a somewhat PC distinction (when we all know we're talking about the same people). But, just to avoid going off on a tangent, let's just call them whatever you want.

The point that I was trying to make earlier, in case you missed it, is that just because a government seeks to help the poor/lower classes/whatever you want to call them, it doesn't mean that the poor/lower classes/whatever you want to call them are just going to disappear quickly. That part is as true in Mexico as it is in the U.S. There have been any number of anti-poverty programs in Mexico, that have met with varying degrees of success, from Carlos Salinas' famous Solidaridad program to the "Paisano" initiatives of more recent presidents. You could argue that to some extent, anti-poverty programs in Mexico have been used for electioneering purposes, and it's hard to dispute that. But I don't think that this is the kind of thing that can be solved exclusively by government programs, because ultimately private investment plays a large part in the creation of jobs. Sure, the government can enact laws to promote investment, but even that isn't always as effective as we'd like because some of the largest investors are global investors that can move their factories elsewhere in pursuit of cheaper labor. It's interesting to note that even though Mexico has had pro-business, right-of-centre presidents since 2000, the situation doesn't seem to have changed dramatically for the better from the earlier era of centrist PRI governments.

Also, how much of the money remittances sent from Mexico actually do end up in the government's hands? I don't know if there are any recent figures, but it seems rather likely that some or much of the money will end up in the informal economy, because oftentimes the people it's sent to do not have bank accounts. Many of them also don't pay any taxes, except sales tax. I wouldn't dispute that it may still represent a valuable escape valve from politicians' perspective, but I also wouldn't be surprised if the remittance businesses ended up with a bigger take than the Mexican government.

Lastly, let's keep in mind that Mexicans who came to the U.S. due to economic hardship (regardless of present immigration status) are trying to a considerable extent to maintain the pressure on Mexican politicians, by continuing to participate in Mexican elections to the best of their ability.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Kimball_Kinnison 
Registered: Oct '01
6249_Veers
Date Posted: 3/12 6:35pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Princess_Tina posted:
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
Tuna, forget about what Lowbacca said. That has nothing to do with my point. Discuss Lowbacca's comments with him. Don't try to limit my comments by what he said.

Kimball Kinnison


My name is not Tuna happy
Like I said, I was posting from my iPhone. It's not the easiest thing to do a lot of typing on.

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 6:37pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 6:38pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
Like I said, I was posting from my iPhone. It's not the easiest thing to do a lot of typing on.
Kimball Kinnison


Yes, we know, you keep reminding us about your iPhone. happy

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Kimball_Kinnison 
Registered: Oct '01
6249_Veers
Date Posted: 3/12 6:44pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Princess_Tina posted:
Kimball_Kinnison posted:
Like I said, I was posting from my iPhone. It's not the easiest thing to do a lot of typing on.
Kimball Kinnison


Yes, we know, you keep reminding us about your iPhone. happy
I only mentioned it once to explain the typos. You're the one who made a deal of one of the typos (which was actually an automatic correction by the software, so evidently Steve Jobs thinks your name is Tuna), and forced me to bring it up again.

So you only have yourself to blame. tongue

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 6:48pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 6:53pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
Kimball_Kinnison posted:

You're the one who made a deal of one of the typos (which was actually an automatic correction by the software, so evidently Steve Jobs thinks your name is Tuna), and forced me to bring it up again.
Kimball Kinnison


I assure you, I only brought it up to give you the opportunity to be gentlemanly and say how sorry you were about your cell phone's evidently faulty software tongue

And getting back to the subject at hand, here is new evidence of some local authorities' eagerness to adopt the latest technology to improve border security:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080313/us_nm/usa_border_moat_dc

Arizona city seeks moat to secure Mexico border

By Tim Gaynor

YUMA, Arizona (Reuters) - Most plans to gain control of the porous U.S.-Mexico border focus on some combination of fence. But this city in far west Arizona is looking to build a moat.

Faced with high-levels of crime and illegal immigration, authorities in Yuma are reaching back to a technique as old as a medieval castle to dig out a "security channel" on a crime-ridden stretch of the border and fill it with water.

"The moats that I've seen circled the castle and allowed you to protect yourself, and that's kind of what we're looking at here," said Yuma County Sheriff Ralph Ogden, who is backing the project.

Curbing illegal immigration and securing the nearly 2,000 mile (3,200-kilometre) southwestern border are hot topics in this U.S. election year. Washington has pledged to complete 670 miles of new barriers by the close of 2008, despite resistance from landowners and environmentalists.

The proposal seeks to restore a stretch of the West's greatest waterway, the Colorado River, which has been largely sucked dry by demand from farms and sprawling subdivisions springing up across the parched southwest and in neighboring California.

The plan to revive the river, which drains from the Rocky Mountains through the Grand Canyon and runs for 23 miles (37 kilometers) along the border near Yuma, seeks to create a broad water barrier while also restoring a fragile wetland environment that once thrived in the area.

"What you are building is a moat, but it's bringing the life and the wildlife back," said Ogden, an Old West lawman with a handlebar mustache, explaining how the project differs from other plans to fix the border.

"It's innovative thinking. It doesn't take much brainpower to build a 12-foot high fence around something, but this is unique."

RECLAIMING NO-MAN'S-LAND

The project is starting with a desolate 450-acre patch of scrub and thickets known as Hunter's Hole, a once-thriving wetland on the border a few miles southwest of Yuma that has become a haven for drug smugglers and illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico and a headache for local law enforcement.

"It's in the United States, but it's become a no-man's-land, an area where bodies were dumped, where people and drugs were smuggled over the border," said Ogden, whose deputies share much of the responsibility for tackling border-related crime with federal police.

Engineers plan to dig a "security channel" up to 10-feet (3 meters) deep and 60 feet wide through the problem area, which lies a short way inside the border. The dirt removed would be used to create a levee along the outside to give U.S. Border Patrol agents an elevated patrol road overlooking the line.

The area would also be replanted with native sedges and rushes to provide habitat for threatened local species such as the Yuma Clapper Rail, a secretive marsh bird. Backers say it would also provide a space for residents of Yuma, a farming town popular with winter visitors, to walk and fish.

The organization behind the project would like to extend it the entire course of the Colorado River, which marks the U.S.-Mexico border, in what it sees as an environmental recovery program that complements the Border Patrol's task.

"It doesn't replace the Border Patrol's efforts, it supplements them. At the same time you are restoring habitat in a secure environment and creating a place to relax," said Charles Flynn, the executive director of the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Corporation.

PROMOTING SECURITY AND FRIENDSHIP

Curbing illegal immigration and securing the border are issues that frequently confront both presumptive Republican Party nominee Sen. John McCain and Democratic rivals Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who are campaigning to be their party's pick for the November election.

The U.S. government has sought remedies including boosting police numbers, adding surveillance technologies, and, controversially, constructing hundreds of miles of vehicle and pedestrian barriers along the international boundary, which has drawn fierce opposition from some quarters.

More than a hundred border landowners in south Texas have resisted a government bid for access to their lands to build new fencing, which they see as a meddlesome and unwelcome intrusion, while environmentalists say fences may sever key wildlife corridors for animals including the jaguar.

The planned revival of the Colorado River, where it carves through desert peppered with fertile farmland, is something of a standout.

It has won the backing of the federal Bureau of Land Management, which owns the land; the Bureau of Reclamation, which has provided a grant to drill wells and pump groundwater, and a letter of support from the Border Patrol. Also on board are Yuma City Council and local residents including the Cocopah Indian tribe, who have farmed the river's flood plains for centuries.

Perhaps more surprisingly, it has also won support across the boundary in Mexico, where plans to build border fences are eyed with suspicion. Local environmentalists there have embraced the project and plan to work in tandem to restore the wetlands on the Mexican side.

"Instead of putting up walls and promoting division, we can promote security and friendship," said Osvel Hinojosa, the director of Pro-Natura, an environmental group in northwest Mexico, of the proposal.

"Moreover, instead of damaging the environment, we can improve it."

(Additional reporting by Robin Emmott in Monterrey, Mexico)

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Lowbacca_1977 
Title: Senate Moderator
 Registered: Jun '06
Date Posted: 3/12 6:54pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 6:55pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Lowbacca_1977
Princess_Tina posted:
Lowbacca_1977 posted:
For clarity on my own position.... my original reference of poor was simply that while the U.S. gov't tries to improve conditions for the lower classes of Americans (a relative term), Mexican gov't treats the lower classes of Mexicans (also a relative term) as livestock and simply export them to benefit from the money sent back and that the gov't has no sense of obligation to the people.
In that sense, I was referring to domestic policy at that point.


OK, first off I'll say that suddenly switching from "poor" to "the lower classes" strikes me as a somewhat PC distinction (when we all know we're talking about the same people). But, just to avoid going off on a tangent, let's just call them whatever you want.

I said in the very section you quote there that the term lower classes was used so that it would be a relative term. Hense the parentheses indicating it was a "relative term" SPECIFICALLY for the concerns you already raised that had to deal with definitions of 'poor'

Princess_Tina posted:
Also, how much of the money remittances sent from Mexico actually do end up in the government's hands? I don't know if there are any recent figures, but it seems rather likely that some or much of the money will end up in the informal economy, because oftentimes the people it's sent to do not have bank accounts. Many of them also don't pay any taxes, except sales tax. I wouldn't dispute that it may still represent a valuable escape valve from politicians' perspective, but I also wouldn't be surprised if the remittance businesses ended up with a bigger take than the Mexican government.

Its still income into the economy that Mexico would not have otherwise. I never said that they're after what they get directly from those transactions, just that it is $24 billion coming into the country. Thats something like 10% of what they get for goods exported, and a large revenue source for the country. So my contention is that Mexican politicans have figured that they get a greater return by exporting Mexicans than they do by trying to improve the country of Mexico.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 7:07pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 7:15pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
Lowbacca_1977 posted:

Its still income into the economy that Mexico would not have otherwise. I never said that they're after what they get directly from those transactions, just that it is $24 billion coming into the country. Thats something like 10% of what they get for goods exported, and a large revenue source for the country. So my contention is that Mexican politicans have figured that they get a greater return by exporting Mexicans than they do by trying to improve the country of Mexico.


I disagree that this income is something Mexico would not have otherwise; for example, in a scenario where the U.S. passed a comprehensive immigration reform that included some kind of guest worker program and/or expanded the categories for TN visas. But, even more importantly, I think Mexico can do more to help its population by continuing to implement policies that will attract foreign investment, which in the long run result in more jobs for Mexicans (as opposed to handouts via gov't anti-poverty programs).

And I think it would be very hard to attract foreign investment if there was a lot of unrest in Mexico, something that would be very likely to happen if the Mexican government tried to keep its citizens from leaving the country. In the long run, the escape valve may also serve American interests, because if you have unrest, then you're less likely to see more foreign investment in Mexico, and there would be even more poverty, and more people trying to escape from it.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Kimball_Kinnison 
Registered: Oct '01
6249_Veers
Date Posted: 3/12 8:10pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Princess_Tina posted:
I disagree that this income is something Mexico would not have otherwise; for example, in a scenario where the U.S. passed a comprehensive immigration reform that included some kind of guest worker program and/or expanded the categories for TN visas. But, even more importantly, I think Mexico can do more to help its population by continuing to implement policies that will attract foreign investment, which in the long run result in more jobs for Mexicans (as opposed to handouts via gov't anti-poverty programs).
You seem obsessed with a guest worker program. Whether or not there is a guest worker program put in place is pure speculation, and as such has no real bearing on the matter here. You could similarly claim that just as much money would flow into Mexico if there was a completely open border there.

The fact is that Mexico right now receives significant financial benefit as a result of illegal immigration into the US. The vast majority of that $24 billion comes from illegal immigrants, not the legal ones. It's billions of dollars in the Mexican economy that they wouldn't have if they actually lived up to their international obligations to help secure their borders.

Yes, foreign investment into Mexico might offset some of that were it to dry up, but the Mexican government doesn't have any incentive to slow it down. They are reaping the benefits of all of that money without having to spend any of their own money to generate that influx. Where is their incentive to help in securing the border?

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Princess_Tina 
Registered: May '01
14698_Padme
Date Posted: 3/12 8:30pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread - Date Edited: 3/12 8:33pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Princess_Tina
I don't disagree with you on that. But I'm trying to point out that, from all available evidence, this influx appears to serve (at best) as a palliative when it comes to fighting poverty and creating better economic opportunities for poor people in Mexico.

What might happen if you eliminate this escape valve and keep the discontented Mexicans from leaving? It's possible that things could get worse in Mexico, much worse. A leftist, protectionist and anti-American government, in the best of cases, and outright revolution in the worst-case scenario (and history has taught us that when things get violent in Mexico, they get very, very, very violent).

I don't think most Americans would like the idea of another Hugo Chavez just south of the border, and I don't think that kind of ruler in Mexico would have any more incentive than the pro-business presidents to keep Mexicans from leaving. Not to mention that increased instability would be easy for drug traffickers to take advantage of.

It seems to me the best-case scenario involves a combination of more foreign investment in Mexico and a comprehensive immigration reform in the United States. The two should go hand in hand and in the long run would make immigration enforcement much easier, and much less of a burden on U.S. taxpayers. Not only that, with a higher purchasing power for Mexicans, the U.S. could increase its exports there.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Kimball_Kinnison 
Registered: Oct '01
6249_Veers
Date Posted: 3/12 8:39pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Princess_Tina posted:
I don't disagree with you on that. But I'm trying to point out that, from all available evidence, this influx appears to serve (at best) as a palliative when it comes to fighting poverty and creating better economic opportunities for poor people in Mexico.

What might happen if you eliminate this escape valve and keep the discontented Mexicans from leaving? It's possible that things could get worse in Mexico, much worse. A leftist, protectionist and anti-American government, in the best of cases, and outright revolution in the worst-case scenario (and history has taught us that when things get violent in Mexico, they get very, very, very violent).

I don't think most Americans would like the idea of another Hugo Chavez just south of the border, and I don't think that kind of ruler in Mexico would have any more incentive than the pro-business presidents to keep Mexicans from leaving. Not to mention that increased instability would be easy for drug traffickers to take advantage of.

It seems to me the best-case scenario involves a combination of more foreign investment in Mexico and a comprehensive immigration reform in the United States. The two should go hand in hand and in the long run would make immigration enforcement much easier, and much less of a burden on U.S. taxpayers. Not only that, with a higher purchasing power for Mexicans, the U.S. could increase its exports there.
Except, what is to keep Mexico from wanting to have its cake and eating it, too?

All of your solutions seem to focus on what everyone else can do for Mexico. More foreign investment. The US needs to reform its immigration.

It's not the rest of the world's job to fix Mexico's problems. It's not the rest of the world's job to invest in Mexico. It's Mexico's job to convince others to invest there. It's Mexico's job to solve their internal problems.

Until Mexico starts to change its behavior, what does it benefit anyone else to do anything for Mexico? What is to stop Mexico from continuing to encourage illegal immigration while simultaneously reaping the benefits of your proposed foreign investment and immigration reform?

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Lowbacca_1977 
Title: Senate Moderator
 Registered: Jun '06
Date Posted: 3/12 8:42pm Subject: RE: The Comprehensive Illegal Immigrant Thread
Whats comprehensive supposed to mean? What do we do with illegal immigrants then? A large part of the issue is, there will always be people trying to enter the U.S. illegally unless there is no restrictions on immigration. Mexico clearly has no respect for American soverignty or law, so I do not see any reason why should we act pretending that it does.

I'd much rather just enforce the laws, let Mexico deal with its own problems, and undercut the drug runners with American-grown products. May take care of some of the rampant corruption Mexico has if we did that one, as well.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
« 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 - Previous | Next | Reload
Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »
© 2008 IGN Entertainment, Inc (6.08.17.2300, ASPNET3) 0.234