Jeb Bush: Crossing the Border Illegally an 'Act of Love'
Its one thing to be compassionate and another entirely to be an idiot. When will American politicians care more about the American people?
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
When illegal immigrants get here, however, I suspect that most of them go to work doing jobs that welfare-absorbing Americans will not 'dirty their hands' doing. One of the reasons that illegal immigration continues is that we have created a social ecological niche for it.
Jan
We are speaking in different terms, I think: you are postulating a non-existent reality (ie 'the free market fixes' - we do not, alas, have that society); I am commenting on an observed reality that is different than yours. I too live in a largely Latino neighborhood...at least some of whom are here legally. I have had interactions with some who I suspect are not here legally and they are hard working and pleasant folk. On the other hand, the company I work for has placed open positions with a local trade school but had only one response - who expected $20/hr for an entry level clerical job.
Jan
Now that the Elite have put Hillary in a bind over the Benghazi debacle, this means another Bush will be in. Oh, I won't be voting for the first time in my life on this one. The Venezuelan voting machines are pre-rigged, so it won't matter how many people vote for x, the elite will have their puppet in the WH, no matter what.
Buh-bye.
think of someone else.
If we were to remove ALL governmental incentives to sit on your rear and not provide for yourself and your family (Welfare in all of its many forms) then and only then would I support removing barriers to the current Illegals being here.
You do have to give him some credit though as I COMPLETELY agree with the last 30 seconds or so of that video.
1. The nation in question has a public welfare system, and the total wealth of the entire population would be depleted if just anyone were permitted to come in and partake of the public funds.
2. A particular group has a long history of violent behavior, and allowing them in would put the nation's citizens at risk of physical harm.
To deny entry to immigrants for any other reason besides these two is irrational, and could potentially border on tyrannical.
A country is private property. The owner is the people of that nation. The fence line is the border. Who comes on and off your private property is YOURS to decide. Simple.
So, you aren't for private property?
Maintaing a culture?
Maintaining health?
Maintaining resources?
Maintaining growing space for future descendants of current citizens?
Protecting the natural rights of their citizens?
Fear of other cultures is called xenophobia. Besides, culture is a constantly shifting and fluctuating organism, anyway. It never remains the same for long, regardless of what you do. Trying to maintain it is folly.
If there is an epidemic in a particular part of the world, limitations and screenings on immigrants from that region may be imposed until the epidemic has passed.
Not sure what you mean by resources. Do you mean natural resources like coal, iron, lumber, oil, and so forth? Or are you referring to more insubstantial resources, such as labor and education?
There's plenty of space for everybody. Concerns about limited amount of available real estate are unfounded.
If a foreigner has no intention of harming you or stealing from you, I don't see how his deciding to come and live next to you in any way violates your natural rights.
More useful, is why the legal barriers to entry should be so astronomical, and is it really moral, or even justifiable.
Immigration to the US has typically been a huge plus to the economy, while along the way always hated by those near where the recent group of immigrants generally grouped together.
As for whether it is moral or justifiable is another matter entirely. You start a rational argument in that immigration has in the past been beneficial. Just because it once was, does not mean that it still is or will be in the near future. If you can support your rationale logically, you will receive a better reception.
This is not fantasy land of what "should be", this is reality. I'm immersed in it and its dangerous as hell.
My guess is the label on the criminals will not change their actions significantly.
Put the criminals in jail or deport them.
I think there are many areas in the US, far away from the Mexico border, where people have exactly the same concerns and reality as yours - although the criminals have a different label (probably ethnic or economic or related to an addiction).
I think the initial point made was that because they are hear illegally, they should be "removed".
Just conjecture, but if immigration was easier, more "middle class" immigrants would be here, and a smaller percentage of those "with nothing to lose". This might provide a better and healthier support structure overall.
But, in the case of Mexico, the ongoing War on Drugs will probably corrupt any efforts with violence and other undesirable activity.
My sister was driving her car to the store at roughly 8PM on a side road in a residential area. She crossed an intersection and was broadsided by a large SUV going about 50 mph. Her sunbird spun around 4 times, smashed into 3 other vehicles and she was pinned inside her car. The police arrived. The jaws of life were used to cut my sister from her car. The woman in the SUV spoke no English. She had no drivers license or insurance. The Hispanic police officers talked to her in Spanish. They ticketed her for driving without a license and without insurance and let her go. My sister was in the hospital for a month, suffered through 5 surgeries on her back and legs. years later, she's due for another surgery in the next few weeks. When my sisters insurance company went to contact this women to recover payment they learned from her husband (illegal) that she fled the country back to mexico. The police, sympathetic Hispanics, gave her all the time she needed. Local authorities could do nothing. The local police wouldn't even reprimand the officers. My sister walks with pain for the rest of her life.
I have more stories like this about things that happened to my mother and friends.
Regardless of other people concerns who are far away from the border the fact is illegal aliens can get away with anything if they can get away from the scene of the havoc they caused.
I have ZERO sympathy for illegal aliens and ZERO tolerance for compassionate Americans.
Corrupt law enforcement, by "legal authorities" is a serious crime. Whether illegals or compassionate people of any type are involved.
I would hate, especially after suffering such personal losses as you have, to live in a place where local police do not have better control of officers helping to let criminals flee.
Granted, we have to compete globally now for work and wages. That is why a minimum wage won't ever work.
However, I do recognize that immigration to welfare is not the same as immigration to jobs and opportunity. No people can ever maintain a prosperous society if they cannot keep the fruits of their own labor.
"A free nation has no fear of open borders. But a welfare state is frightened of every poor person who tries to get in, and every rich person who tries to get out."
~ Harry Browne
The current power elites thrive on a divide-and-conquer mentality, and want us to hate and fear anyone who is "alien" or "other." They want us to define ourselves as members of a certain nation, rather than as individuals. I can't forget that my ancestors came here from other nations over the past few centuries. What right do any of us -- citizens or politicians -- now have to slam the door in the faces of others who want to live here?
I agree with hattrup below, who said laws aren't based on morality. Restricting immigration is not moral, and stealing from some to give to others as welfare is not moral, either.
What right does the government have to take from the producers here and create an immigration magnet for looters? Did your ancestors come here legally? Mine did. Is there someone in particular on this thread suggesting that the legal immigration door to this nation be slammed in the immigrants faces? Revamp the immigration quota by legal means if you believe there is plenty of space and opportunity without depriving those of legal status already. "The law is a ass"- Dickens. But, so long as I must be obedient, why should we make exception and special privileges for those that do not hold citizenship. How cheaply will you sell your citizenship? Of what value is it, if you have open borders?
Respectfully,
O.A.
In my last sentence, I stated that the government has no right to steal from someone and give to anyone else -- citizens or immigrants. So I think we're on the same page here.
To be honest, I have no idea if all of my ancestors came here legally. Some immigrated so long ago, there probably weren't even laws at the time. Some came across the border from Canada to work in the U.S. daily in the early 1900s, which may well have been illegal. Were they moral, hardworking people? Yes, and that's all that matters to me.
From what I've read, it now takes nearly 10 years to get approval to immigrate legally, and also requires jumping through numerous hoops. If that's not a door slammed in would-be immigrants' faces, it's sure a very, very long time before the knock is answered. Recall the poem on the Statue of Liberty? "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..." Of course, all the freebies offered by our government at our expense certainly draw looters as well as freedom-lovers.
I don't have respect for our government or its laws anymore, and I have no realistic hope whatsoever of convincing the powers that be to change laws I believe are immoral; I lack the connections and money that would give me any kind of political clout.
Regarding obedience to law, do you believe it's an absolute duty? Would you have obeyed the laws in Nazi Germany, or would you have relied on your own sense of right and wrong? I believe we each need to rely on our own judgment, and the vast majority of us know right from wrong.
How cheaply will I sell my citizenship? How much are you offering? I'm mostly kidding, but I have looked into the possibility of leaving the country for somewhere that's currently more free. In my opinion, open borders are not a threat to this country. The government's insanity and theft are, but not immigrants per se.
Thanks for the comments!
Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I believe we are generally on the same page. I would not obey laws which forced me to do something immoral. That being said: I believe a nation has sovereignty and the right to set its immigration policy. I do not find that immoral. A lot has changed since the Statue of Liberty was erected. Perhaps if there were not 46% of all Mexicans (and who knows what the other nation's percentages are) wanting to come to America, terrorist elements trying to get in and a welfare magnet, more could be done to ease the access. But, that is the world we live in.
I want to see foreign nationals improve their own lot and their own nations. If that means they must have a revolution as we did, so be it. I believe it is not feasible to open the floodgates of the world. Some of my ancestors (paternal) came in so far back I cannot find records. Others (maternal) came in and were processed legally a century ago. They were happy to do so. The country was young and needed people to settle the land and build a nation.
Open borders and no control, means no security and a flood of foreign ideologies that would destroy the foundations of liberty and capitalism that elevated the masses like no other system devised. It is plain to me that many of today's illegal immigrants are not as interested in assimilating and joining in the melting pot as the legal immigrants. I am for legal immigration and in truth believe it necessary and profitable for our nation, but we must know who and how many or else we, the documented, will pay dearly in many ways. Perhaps if we didn't have so many who's first action in coming here was to break the law, we could redirect our resources, increase the number of legal immigrants and reduce the delays.... If our government had done its job in the first place...
Respectfully,
O.A.
O.A.
The State makes all sorts of laws that Gulch folks mock or disagree with, and rightly so.
If the individual was not born to a US citizen, or under our current laws on US soil, then they are not a citizen (there might be some other very specialized circumstances, but those two cover most). Thus they are an alien, but definition.
And if they are in the US without acceptable reason, in most cases either on a day pass visa, visitors visa, a work visa, a student visa, or a claim of asylum (again, there are some other specialized circumstances, but those cover most) then they are in the US illegally.
ipso facto, they are illegal aliens. You might disagree that they shouldn't be illegal or that anyone should be able to be in the US for any reason at any time, but your wishes are not the current law.
all I mean by arbitrary, is the "acceptable reasons" change over time - and are not typically based much on any direct moral values.
Currently it is impractically complex to immigrate to the US legally.
The most common thing you seem to hear/read is that people want to restrict immigration because they live in a welfare state where looters dominate.
I have no problem whatsoever restricting welfare handouts to immigrants - for a period of time, or forever. They can school, feed, and care for themselves, through charity, or their friends/culture/religious groups - or leave.
And I am not arguing what the law is, but more on how immigration should work (to anywhere).
Nor am I arguing on how the law is enforced - but basically I think we all know the enforcement is political and arbitrary and varies by state and administration, and K street lobbiests.
Until we have a stable situation, many of our issues will not be solvable.
I think the rationale of having laws, going back to Hammarabi's code, was to assign an official consequence for harming another person, so people wouldn't take matters into their own hands and try to exact revenge. Back then, it was "an eye for an eye." By "morality," I don't really mean laws trying to dictate personal choices about pornography, drugs, prostitution or the like. I mean morality under natural law, with the bottom line rule that we each own ourselves and should be free to do as we wish, as long as we don't initiate force against another person.
My point is that if you expect laws to be derived morally, what is moral for one may not be for another. Plus whose morality are you going to rely on? The morality of an ultra-orthodox Muslim is going to be radically different from a Soho libertine.
Regarding different standards of morality, I addressed this above, where I said, "By "morality," I don't really mean laws trying to dictate personal choices about pornography, drugs, prostitution or the like. I mean morality under natural law, with the bottom line rule that we each own ourselves and should be free to do as we wish, as long as we don't initiate force against another person."
In my view, people are free to believe whatever they like, but if they harm another person, they are immoral. (Of course, guilt is a bit more complicated than that: was the action intended or accidental; could the actor reasonably foresee it would cause harm, etc.) And I'd like to see laws that go no further than forbidding the initiation of force against others.
I was in fact rear-ended by a ditzy blond sorority girl several decades ago while I was stopped at a stop sign. Actually, she hit my car not once but twice, after I pulled forward to check the damage. I still have neck pain and headaches as a result. If I were to adopt your logic, I'd be insisting on a ban on Swedish or blond immigrants, or perhaps on sororities. Instead, I realize that there are plenty of intelligent blonds and sorority girls who are careful and have never hurt anyone, and I would not want to punish them for the "sins" of another person.
I don't believe at this point that you're racist, sexist, or xenophopic, but I do think there's a flaw in your reasoning on this particular topic. (My two cent's worth...)
You should see my other post in the NEW area...then tell me how little harm these people do. if you'd like I can post 1-5 a day from Arizona alone to support my position.
http://allenbwest.com/2014/04/5000-legal...
In this area (immigration) the US feds should be the controlling authority is you "adhere to the laws " of the State.
Regardless, not arguing what the law is, just that the laws of the State are not necessarily moral, and do not deserve universal support.
In fact, there are many, many laws that I would say are not needed, especially those the create non-violent crime, and those that take from producers and create more looters.
If you cross onto a military base you get shot. You cross onto my property and I detain you, you get my house. I've volunteer to be the militia that monitors the border.. provided I have lethal authority to defend myself. That said, ,there are places here in Arizona, state parks not 60 miles from my home, where signs are placed in English telling Americans not to go there - too dangerous. In Tucson the speed signs are in Kilometers not miles per hours like everywhere else. There are entire neighborhoods here in phoenix where all signage is in Spanish and English is spoken very little.
Welcome to the reality of life on the edge of the country.
Laws are necessary to define acceptable vs. unacceptable. Boundaries are necessary to define citizen vs. non-citizen. Without either there is chaos.
And I said nothing about doing away with law, so I don't know where you're getting that from. I'm not an anarchist.
Oddly, Mexico's southern borders is armed heavily. Their northern border is also armed. Yet, we cannot do the same?
My ancestors all came in legally with my dad having a green card until he passed. I guess it helps that my mom was a born here but was brought up in Spain.
Who would have thunk it?!