Current Affairs: Mexico Threatens to Take the USA Before the UN

Print Page | Close Window

Mexico Threatens to Take the USA Before the UN

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Current Affairs
Forum Discription: Debates on topical, current World politics
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=15384
Printed Date: 29-Apr-2024 at 02:00
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Mexico Threatens to Take the USA Before the UN

Posted By: Genghis
Subject: Mexico Threatens to Take the USA Before the UN
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 01:32

Mexico may take fence dispute to U.N.

By JENNY BARCHFIELD, Associated Press WriterMon Oct 9, 4:59 PM ET

Mexico's foreign secretary said Monday the country may take a dispute over U.S. plans to build a fence on the Mexican border to the United Nations.

Luis Ernesto Derbez told reporters in Paris, his first stop on a European tour, that a legal investigation was under way to determine whether Mexico has a case.

The Mexican government last week sent a diplomatic note to Washington criticizing the plan for 700 miles of new fencing along the border. President-elect Felipe Calderon also denounced the plan, but said it was a bilateral issue that should not be put before the international community.

Derbez said Monday after meeting with French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy that it was a "shame" U.S. immigration policy had been used for what he claimed was a short-term political gain in the lead-up to midterm elections in the U.S. in November.

He said he discussed the issue with Douste-Blazy, and planned to bring it up in meetings with his Spanish and Italian counterparts during visits to Madrid and Rome. He vowed to work on the case until the "very last day" of President Vicente Fox's term, which ends Dec. 1.

The U.S. Senate approved the border fence bill last month and President Bush has said he will sign it into law � despite last-minute pleas from the Mexican government for a veto.

"What should be constructed is a bridge in relations between the two countries," Derbez said.

I find it outrageous that the Mexican government has the audacity to tell the American government what it can or cannot do on its own territory. America has the right to put a gigantic river of fire or millions of landmines on our southern border if we so desire. I'm sure however this will get nowhere in the UN, the wall's construction is pretty much inevitable now, and anything in the UN would be vetoed by the United States. Whether or not you agree with the construction of the wall, I'm sure most people would agree that any country should be allowed to construct such walls around its territory.

Any other opinions?

-------------
Member of IAEA

Replies:

Posted By: ArmenianSurvival
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 01:59

Originally posted by Genghis

Any other opinions?

I don't think walls particularly solve any problems, but I agree with what you're saying for the most part. If the Mexican government actually tried to control the flow of illegals into the U.S., they might have some credibility in telling the U.S. what to do with the whole border issue. Unfortunately for Mexico, this isn't the case.

Originally posted by Genghis

it was a "shame" U.S. immigration policy had been used for what he claimed was a short-term political gain in the lead-up to midterm elections in the U.S. in November

This is true. The government hasn't done squat to secure our borders. They are doing this for strictly political reasons. I heard that they do not even have the funds necessary to build the wall, but that they are going to pass it anyway (no doubt to show the people how much they care about our safety LOL

)

-------------
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 04:20

You guys could set up a proper paramilitary border forces. With proper weapons, you know Heavy MG's, choppers, the odd APC. Best benefit, you could give the military training and use them as auxillery miliraty troops in Iraq as well (they could guard convoys, and do other duties to free up soldiers)

-------------

Posted By: Vivek Sharma
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 06:02

& ground training for another round up in Iran gradually progressing to east & west.

-------------
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 07:27

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

If the Mexican government actually tried to control the flow of illegals into the U.S., they might have some credibility in telling the U.S. what to do with the whole border issue. Unfortunately for Mexico, this isn't the case.

In the eyes of both the American and Mexican government, more free trade will cause a decline in the number of immigrants, and introducing more free trade is exactly what they are doing. In fact, this was one of the arguments used for the introduction of NAFTA.

This wall is not going to work anyway. More than half the illegal immigrants just overstay their visa or enter the US on a different way. Also the immigrants who do make it into the US, will be less likely to return.

Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 08:11

I agree with you on this Genghis, Mexico has no business to tell us what to do with our borders.

-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao

Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 09:48

How ironic... Americans outraged by another country telling them how to run their internal affairs, whilst, at the same time, they invade other countries, fund terrorists, stage coup d'etas and destabilise whole regions simply because the internal policies of their victims have not been and are not compatible with their own interests!!!

The typical and brainless allusion to might being right will shortly follow, no doubt.

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 10:39

Originally posted by Zagros

The typical and brainless allusion to might being right will shortly follow, no doubt.

Zagros,

I feel that I just go around the threads agreeing with you :)

Again, I agree. Americans feel no restraints to tell people what to do, start revolutions, bring total chaos to nations and regions if they so desire.

But no one should ever tell the U.S. what to do.

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 10:50

The problem with the wall is that it is a symbol of racism towards Mexico and how the U.S. government will pander to these sentiments for political gain.

Since the wall is going to built anyway, international attention is warranted. The U.S. should be shamed even more for their actions.

The wall is a monument to racism and xenophobia.

It serves no practical purpose. Whole will be made. It will be jumped over or dig under.

Moreover, and this is the problem that Mexico has, Mexico provides the labor that feeds Americans, either in the fields or in restaurants. They clean after Americans, and they watch their children.

Mexico has been asking for a respectful and legal solution to normalize what is a fact. Washington failed to provide one.

Well, don't worry. The president elect of Mexico is an American hand-picked pushover, who will further destroy the Mexican economy via free-trade and send more illegal immigrants to do the grunt work for Americans.

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 11:35

Originally posted by Zagros

The typical and brainless allusion to might being right will shortly follow, no doubt.

So it's not okay when America tells other countries what to do, but when other countries tell America what to do, it's fine?

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 13:33

Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by Zagros

The typical and brainless allusion to might being right will shortly follow, no doubt.

So it's not okay when America tells other countries what to do, but when other countries tell America what to do, it's fine?

No, this is missing the point.

The U.S. will actually mingled in other countries. The U.S. will not only tell other countries what to do, but invade them, assasinate their leaders, organize coups, or guerrillas.

As far as I know, no country really does that to the U.S. So I must respectfully disagree in your claiming that both statements are the same.

What Mexico, and other countries do is to uphold the U.S. to its same ethical standard.

And the U.S. is strong enough to be morally held responsible for its acts, right?

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 16:06

It is not unethical to prevent people from violating the laws of a nation.

I also think you're missing the point of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that the US hasn't meddled in other countries' affairs, but that does not justify their meddling in our affairs unless you're advocating talionic meddling.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 16:13

Each state has the right to formulate immigration policy as it sees fit. If the USA wants to take extra measures to enforce their policy then they are free to do so. The nation state is the most effective form of organising communities at the global level and the USA must most definitely protect its sovereignty in determining who enters and leaves the nation.

-------------

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 16:17

I don't think anyone is snickering at US affairs as much as realizing a few double standards. With great strength comes increased responsibility. Choices that are beneficial to both parties (Mexico-US) involved.

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 16:28

Originally posted by Genghis

It is not unethical to prevent people from violating the laws of a nation.

Ghenghis, I understand what you are saying. And you are right: Mexico doesn't have a legal or moral right to stop the U.S.

But Mexico is not going to stop the U.S. It can't do that. And the UN can't do this either. There is no real meddling because it lacks the power to effectively meddle in the U.S.

This is more like diplomatic shaming. And just as the U.S. is in its right to do a wrong, Mexico has the right to point out the wrong to the rest of the world.

This would be the same if Iran erected an anti-American monument. The U.S. can't stop them, but the U.S. has in its right to point out the actions of Iran.

-------------

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 16:28

Governor Richardson has noticed a problem in his home state. Illegal tarfficking of people, smuggling, destruction of property. He had requested state funds (police) instead of relying on federal help in the form of a border patrol.

Mexico could help, how?

-------------

Posted By: jayeshks
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 18:21

Political issues aside (as a wall seems inevitable at this point), wasn't there an environmental concern that this artificial barrier will disrupt migratory species that live on both sides of the border at different times of the year? Or has that been resolved somehow?

-------------
Once you relinquish your freedom for the sake of "understood necessity,"...you cede your claim to the truth. - Heda Margolius Kovaly

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 18:41

Each state has the right to formulate immigration policy as it sees fit. If the USA wants to take extra measures to enforce their policy then they are free to do so.

Fully agreed, the US has shown what it's policies are and how it intends to enforce them. As to the whole double-standard thing. Yes the US applies a double standard against the world but so what. A nation is an amoral and selfish entity that seeks to progress it's own agendas and to retard anything that goes against their policies. Anyone's personal preferences to how a country should be run should effect the policies of their nation. Everyone has the right to complain about anything but you don't have a right to fault individuals for acts that are beyond their control. Even the leader of a nation never fully controls a nation because as an entity the nation is larger than any individual.

In this reply I made earlier I talked about the economic problems with america's current illegal immigration issue: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14195&PID=264001#264001 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14195&PID=264001#264001

Now as promised I'll go into the sociological issues.

The wall as it is WILL stand as a symbol of racism towards Mexicans in the eyes of Mexicans. However to Americans it will be a symbol of national pride and the protection of the traditional american. Throughout the US's history there has been a problem with immigration. When Irish, Germans, Italians, Poles and Jews arrived they faced stiff discrimination and were the targets of hate rally's and Nativist parties. However these immigrants quickly assimilated into american society. A point I would like to make too is that even though they assimilated they still retained their own cultural heritage but with an american twist such as St. Patrick's Day, Oktoberfest, etc. The reasoning behind this is that such immigrations had spurts and pauses which allowed everyone to "catch up."

What is going on in Mexico that is causing so much strife is that right now in the US there is and has been for the past thirty or so years a continuous immigration of people without a pause. These people have come seeking the same things as other immigrants but find that thanks to their location it is far easier for them to get into the US. Not that I'm belittling anyone's trials and pains to get to the US but a person who crosses a fence and walks for twenty miles is far different from a similar person who sits in a ship's cargo container for weeks without light and clean facilities.

Simply saying the Immigration quotas, though in the past have shown to have been racist, do serve a major purpose. They allow people to assimilate into american culture which as has been shown in the past cultural homogeneity DOES increase national security. I'm not saying that mexican-immigrants are unable to assimilate into american culture, many have successfully especially those whose families have always lived in the territories now held by the US. The problem is with those that do not, and this is part of the societal problem that mexican-immigrants are caught in.

The current Mexican government of course doesn't want immigration to be halted, because one of the major sources of revunue for mexico come from workers living within the US. Also it is against Mexico's prerogatives to have these same workers assimilate because once they do so, they will no longer consider themselves Mexican and thus have no ties to the government.

Another issue is that the Mexican government is notoriously corrupt. And the immigration issue is used to steer peoples attentions away from internal problems. Also sending people who could become political dissidents (i.e. the poor) to the US relieves the Mexican government from having to take responsibility for its actions.

------------------------

All in all walls are meant to make people look inward rather than outward. And I think if a wall is built it should do just that. It should make americans look inward to see if such an action is motivated by racism or a desire to aid fellow human beings in their search for success. It should make mexicans look inward to see if they truly want to go to the US to become americans or whether they want to turn Mexico into a prosperous american nation.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 20:02

Originally posted by hugoestr

Originally posted by Genghis

It is not unethical to prevent people from violating the laws of a nation.

I would argue that Mexico has no right to even make judgements about our internal affairs, much less try to shame us about them.

Don't try to say I'm being inconsistent either, just because America makes moral judgements about other countries, such as with our idiotic meddling in the Darfur situation, doesn't mean I think that those actions are any less stupid.

Countries should just keep their mouths shut about other people's business unless those policies are threatening.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2006 at 22:39

Its very simple really and it happens today like it has happened throughout history. The US topples goverments, starts wars, starts revolutions because it can and tires to establish its influence in the world so in the future no one can stop her from pursuing her goals. I don't think US would start a war because another nation's immigration policies don't satisfy her so I insist that Mexico has no business to tell this administration what to do with our southern borders. Instead Mexico should be thankful US is doing this and not complain about it being racially motivated. This way people can actually help their own country prosper as Mexico is already a developing country instead of working jobs with horrible conditions in the US and joining rival criminal gangs.

-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 21:45

Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by hugoestr

Originally posted by Genghis

It is not unethical to prevent people from violating the laws of a nation.

Ghenghis, I understand what you are saying. And you are right: Mexico doesn't have a legal or moral right to stop the U.S. But Mexico is not going to stop the U.S. It can't do that. And the UN can't do this either. There is no real meddling because it lacks the power to effectively meddle in the U.S. This is more like diplomatic shaming. And just as the U.S. is in its right to do a wrong, Mexico has the right to point out the wrong to the rest of the world. This would be the same if Iran erected an anti-American monument. The U.S. can't stop them, but the U.S. has in its right to point out the actions of Iran.

I would argue that Mexico has no right to even make judgements about our internal affairs, much less try to shame us about them.

Countries should just keep their mouths shut about other people's business unless those policies are threatening.

Genghis,

First, all nations can make as many moral statements as they want. They have the right to do so, the same way as individuals have the right to free speech.

Second, since this wall is specificly meant for Mexicans, Mexicans do have the right to protest it and to point out the moral indignity of it since it affects them.

On the other hand, I see the resistance to have the U.S. even critcizing by its actions to be a tacit admission of wrongdoing. Otherwise, why so much defensiveness? When individuals do good, we welcome comment on their actions. We only become defensive when we are do wrong.

So, what is it? Do you think that the U.S. is comitting a mistake by building this wall, and that is why you don't anyone commenting on it?

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 21:51

Originally posted by vulkan02

Its very simple really and it happens today like it has happened throughout history. The US topples goverments, starts wars, starts revolutions because it can and tires to establish its influence in the world so in the future no one can stop her from pursuing her goals. I don't think US would start a war because another nation's immigration policies don't satisfy her so I insist that Mexico has no business to tell this administration what to do with our southern borders. Instead Mexico should be thankful US is doing this and not complain about it being racially motivated. This way people can actually help their own country prosper as Mexico is already a developing country instead of working jobs with horrible conditions in the US and joining rival criminal gangs.

Vulkan02,

Please share your ethnic background with all of us. After doing so, we may all begin going through the ethnic insults to that people, the way you just did against Mexicans in the last sentence of your piece.

It is exactly comments like yours which highlight the racial sentiments about the wall. And it is the guilt that people feel about this racially motivated wall which propels them to say that no one is in the right to morally judge the U.S.

I could go on and stress the racial prejudices that you have. But I rather will ask you to reconsider them, understanding that you wouldn't want to be subjected to the same treatment.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 22:01

Walls does not work.

The Berlin Wall did not stop communism from falling down.

The Chinese Wall didn't stop the mongols

And the Tortilla Wall is born death.

Better than isolating from Mexicans, Americans should learn to live with them. After all you are neighbours.

Have you forgotten, "Americans" that TWO millions of U.S. citizens live happily .... in MEXICO ?

Pinguin

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 22:07

Protesting another countries actions are an age old form of sharing discontent. The statement by Genghis, "Countries should just keep their mouths shut about other people's business unless those policies are threatening." are a reflection of how myopic we can be.

The problem with a wall is morally questionable and insulting but how else to stem the flow of illegal immigration? I heard from someone that an hourly GM wage for Mexican plants are around $1.50 (didn't verify). Those same workers also know that they could make a minimum wage about four times that amount in Texas or New Mexico.

The issues seems to revolve around placating Americans with a protectionist stance versus the ability to incorporate Mexican labour at reasonable rates.

Should Americans establish a protectionist stance towards unskilled labour while our middle class is eroding away? (In my opinion the immigration debate in congress is a smokescreen that ignores this bigger issue)

Lastly, does the Mexican government encourage emigration?

Questions I don't have answers to. No offence intended.

-------------

Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 22:26

Originally posted by hugoestr

For sure I will Hugoestr and I am fully aware that we Albanians don't receive the most positive feedback everywhere we immigrate either.
You probably misunderstood my comment about Mexicans and its not at all intended to be racist. However the truth is that most Mexicans in the US do work jobs with horrible conditions and pay way lower than the minimum wage. Some others who don't want to work these jobs or can't get jobs end up being part of the many gangs all across the US and especially California because they can't get adapted to the US way of life, language etc.

Im not attempting to say that the Mexicans are the only gangsters in the US as there many other groups, Albanians being one of them. But since Mexicans are one of the largest minorities in the US they sure do get noticed more than most in the media and jails .

Anyways the point of this thread is wether the US is right in constructing a fence across its southern border in Texas shared with Mexico. While I admit that it might be racist it might ultimately prove an effective way of diminishing illegal immigration which US has the right to implement.
BTW when Greece closes its borders or in extreme cases they even shoot Albanian immigrants going in and out a lot of people condemn it as being barbaric etc. For most of the cases its their right to do as they wish, especially since Albanian immigration there has reached almost 1 million.

-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2006 at 22:28

Originally posted by pinguin

Walls does not work.

�

The Berlin Wall did not stop communism from falling down.

�

The Chinese Wall didn't stop the mongols [IMG]height=17 alt=LOL src="http://www.allempires.com/forum/smileys/smiley36.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

�

And the Tortilla Wall is born death.

�

Better than isolating from Mexicans, Americans should learn to live with them. After all you are neighbours.

�

Have you forgotten, "Americans" that TWO millions of U.S. citizens live happily .... in MEXICO ?

�

Pinguin

�

And 12 million Mexicans live happily in the US.

I think we could carry this discussion with courtesy in mind. Hugoestr models the type of demeanor we should establish.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 06:34

Originally posted by Seko

The problem with a wall is morally questionable and insulting but how else to stem the flow of illegal immigration?

not
It's an illusion you can stop immigration. Once is has started, it is almost impossible to stop. This wall won't help either, it's just a symbolic measure.

The best thing you can do is channel immigration. Make sure Mexicans who immigrate to the US get a reasonable pay. Usually they go back to Mexico then after some years, and they can invest their money in Mexico. At the end this solution is better for both Mexico and the US.

Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 07:11

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

Originally posted by Seko

The problem with a wall is morally questionable and insulting but how else to stem the flow of illegal immigration?

I beg to differ about stopping immigration, especially the illegal type. Australia does a fine job of it (though America is not so fortunate to be an island like us). Even if you can't stop it, you can make the process so incredibly painful and gruelling as to dissuade all but a small fraction of the prospective illegal migrants.

-------------

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 09:04

The best thing you can do is channel immigration. Make sure Mexicans who immigrate to the US get a reasonable pay. Usually they go back to Mexico then after some years, and they can invest their money in Mexico. At the end this solution is better for both Mexico and the US.

How is this solution better for the US if Mexican citizens to take jobs from US citizens so that later on they can take that money to Mexico?

Walls does not work.

The Berlin Wall did not stop communism from falling down.

The Chinese Wall didn't stop the mongols

And the Tortilla Wall is born death.

So how many people leave North Korea to South Korea successfully every year?

Some others who don't want to work these jobs or can't get jobs end up being part of the many gangs all across the US and especially California because they can't get adapted to the US way of life, language etc.

Remember people poverty causes crime. Many new immigrants are poor, especially illegal immigrants. Therefore new immigrants engage in criminal activities in an attempt to better their own lives. Take the mafia of the 30's for instance.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 09:24

Originally posted by vulkan02

Originally posted by hugoestr

For sure I will Hugoestr and I am fully aware that we Albanians don't receive the most positive feedback everywhere we immigrate either.You probably misunderstood my comment about Mexicans and its not at all intended to be racist. However the truth is that most Mexicans in the US do work jobs with horrible conditions and pay way lower than the minimum wage. Some others who don't want to work these jobs or can't get jobs end up being part of the many gangs all across the US and especially California because they can't get adapted to the US way of life, language etc. Im not attempting to say that the Mexicans are the only gangsters in the US as there many other groups, Albanians being one of them. But since Mexicans are one of the largest minorities in the US they sure do get noticed more than most in the media and jails .Anyways the point of this thread is wether the US is right in constructing a fence across its southern border in Texas shared with Mexico. While I admit that it might be racist it might ultimately prove an effective way of diminishing illegal immigration which US has the right to implement. BTW when Greece closes its borders or in extreme cases they even shoot Albanian immigrants going in and out a lot of people condemn it as being barbaric etc. For most of the cases its their right to do as they wish, especially since Albanian immigration there has reached almost 1 million.

Vulkan02,

I was irked more about the statement about Mexicans being in gangs than for the description that Mexicans do poor paying jobs. Most Mexicans are not in gangs or join gangs for the simple reason that they are busy working on those poor paying jobs

I will not deny that there is a gang problem, especially among the children of immigrants. But stating that there is a gang problem from saying that most Mexicans choose either a poor-paying job or a gang is a bit misleading.

From what you said in your last statement, I think that it is clear that it was an honest mistake when you were trying to present the problems of the community, instead of being a statement that most Mexicans are criminals.

I am sure that Albanian immigrants in Greece are mostly honest people. And I am sure that there is probably a criminal element that migrates with the rest as well. So you must be familiar with the feeling that it is not fair to judge the whole of the Albanian population by its criminal minority.

Now, what I personally find insulting about the wall is that it is purely symbolic, and it is a symbolism of Mexican prejudice. The border is too long for a wall to be of any help. And the U.S. border patrol lacks the people to actually watch the boder in an effective manner, with a wall or without it.

I doubt that the Mexican government would be protesting the U.S. increasing their border patrol numbers. The U.S. is within its right to do so. And personally, I would prefer that the money that is going to be wasted on this wall is spent on jobs for American families.

It is the insult of the wall that they are protesting.

One final thing note: the Greek are within their rights to protect their border, but shooting people is uncalled for. They can capture them, detain them, but crossing a border is not a reason to kill or threaten to a kill a person.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 11:46

Originally posted by JanusRook

How is this solution better for the US if Mexican citizens to take jobs from US citizens so that later on they can take that money to Mexico?

Because after a while those immigrants return to Mexico (because they've earned enough money). If there are many illegal immigrants with low paid jobs, those will not only take the jobs away from Americans, but also won't earn enough money to get back to Mexico. So in the end there will be more Mexican immigrants in the US.

25 years ago 50% of the Mexicans who moved to the US returned to Mexico within 5 years. Nowadays moving to the US is much more difficuly, costly and dangerous, and less than 10% returns within 5 years.

Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 12:33

Originally posted by hugoestr

[QUOTE=vulkan02]

Vulkan02,

I was irked more about the statement about Mexicans being in gangs than for the description that Mexicans do poor paying jobs. Most Mexicans are not in gangs or join gangs for the simple reason that they are busy working on those poor paying jobs

Maybe I didn't verbalise this in the right way but I also agree that few are criminals and gangsters...

I am sure that Albanian immigrants in Greece are mostly honest people. And I am sure that there is probably a criminal element that migrates with the rest as well. So you must be familiar with the feeling that it is not fair to judge the whole of the Albanian population by its criminal minority.

Oh yes I am, even though Albanian criminal activities are not as prevalent here in the US as they are in Europe.

Now, what I personally find insulting about the wall is that it is purely symbolic, and it is a symbolism of Mexican prejudice. The border is too long for a wall to be of any help. And the U.S. border patrol lacks the people to actually watch the boder in an effective manner, with a wall or without it.

I doubt that the Mexican government would be protesting the U.S. increasing their border patrol numbers. The U.S. is within its right to do so. And personally, I would prefer that the money that is going to be wasted on this wall is spent on jobs for American families.

It is the insult of the wall that they are protesting.

I somewhat agree with that, the cost to built the wall must be assesed wether it is more wasteful instead of helpful to the situation.

One final thing note: the Greek are within their rights to protect their border, but shooting people is uncalled for. They can capture them, detain them, but crossing a border is not a reason to kill or threaten to a kill a person.

Very uncalled for but it has happened in isolated incidents. The Greek government can't stand that Albanians work there and then send their hard earned money to their families, or go to Albania for vacations etc.
Very similar to what Mexicans do in the US.
I remember last time I visited, the border was closed for 4 days and a whole convoy of cars were trapped while trying to go back to Greece. A couple of women miscarriaged and thousands fell ill because of the dehydration, unsanitary conditions etc.

-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 12:47

And personally, I would prefer that the money that is going to be wasted on this wall is spent on jobs for American families.

Perhaps a huge building project could give jobs to poor american families. Like the Tennessee Valley Authority in the 30's. Of course even if this was the case it wouldn't be like that, illegal mexican labor would be the backbone to building the wall (ironically enough).

Now, what I personally find insulting about the wall is that it is purely symbolic, and it is a symbolism of Mexican prejudice. The border is too long for a wall to be of any help. And the U.S. border patrol lacks the people to actually watch the boder in an effective manner, with a wall or without it.

I do not believe that the border is too long to moniter, it's just that the US government is so mismanaged that they have conflicting responsibilities. If border security was governed by ONE federal agency then it would be feasible, personally I'd like to see it in the hands of the military. Rather than being a mish-mash of Border Patrol, Customs, FBI, CIA, National Guard, Army and Local Police.

Also I don't necesarily believe that a Korean type wall will be feasible but I do believe a "moving wall" would work. The border between Mexico and the US is 2000 miles long. If you paid 2000 people to guard one mile of the border full time, heck even if you split it into three 8 hour shifts its only 6000 people, and these people could then report to the proper authorities (again I say the military) and the illegals could then be rounded up for processing.

Again I'm glad I don't have to make these kinds of decisions, and good thing too I'm more of a cleansing fire kind of problem-solver. However what I suggested is feasible for the current direction the US populace seems to want to go in.

I agree that wages should be increased but corporations should be held accountable for illegals, if they couldn't get work here then they wouldn't come here. Mixcoatl the US has nothing against legal mexican immigration but to just say, "It's all right that you think you can make a better life in america so just come over without being processed and screw over a poor vietnamese family that's been waiting ten years to get here." Is just plain wrong, those that actually research immigration aren't upset with illegal mexicans because they are mexican but because of the perceived disregard for their other people who are in the same situation.

25 years ago 50% of the Mexicans who moved to the US returned to Mexico within 5 years. Nowadays moving to the US is much more difficuly, costly and dangerous, and less than 10% returns within 5 years.

Yes and far less mexicans arrived 25 years ago. 25 years ago the southwest was in need of workers and many of those mexicans immigrated legally on work visas. Nowadays the southwest is one of the fastest growing regions of the US thanks to americans moving from the east and mexicans moving from the south, so this change is caused by the shifting demographics.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 13:12

How about this solution. Get yourselves a proper border force.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 14:43

Originally posted by JanusRook

...agree that wages should be increased but corporations should be held accountable for illegals, if they couldn't get work here then they wouldn't come here. Mixcoatl the US has nothing against legal mexican immigration but to just say, "It's all right that you think you can make a better life in america so just come over without being processed and screw over a poor vietnamese family that's been waiting ten years to get here." Is just plain wrong, those that actually research immigration aren't upset with illegal mexicans because they are mexican but because of the perceived disregard for their other people who are in the same situation.

I see you feel sincerily pitty for the "poor Vietnamese family", but don't want to feel the same about the "poor Mexican family"

That's precisely what Mexican percive: (1) Racism agains Mexicans. (2)Favoritism for Asians.

But "Americans" (I put in quotes because any person of the Western Hemisphere is an American and not only U.S. people)... but "Americans" I said forget that Hispanics are more than 45 millions in the U.S. already, and they are the younger and faster growing group in the U.S. Even if Hispanic immigration stop TODAY, they will be 25% of the "American" people by 2050.

So "Americans" better get acustummed to Hispanics, because now is to late to close the fence.

And not all hispanics work picking oranges. Some give work to Anglo-"Americans".

Pinguin

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 15:02

Sparten,

Yes, a proper border force is the solution here. Janus is on to a plan. Personally I believe that it will take more people because you need more than one lone person to stop an individual, but let's say you need five times what Janus calculated. That would be 30,000 stable American jobs there. And from what I understand, the Border Patrol seems to have enough power on patrol the borders. Our government refuses to give them enough people and enough budget to do this correctly.

And a border patrol would bring stable jobs, unlike the very temporary ones brought from building a wall.

Janus,

Unfortunately, it is not corporations who benefit from illegal immigration. It is practical the whole society. Many illegal immigrants work for private families, not corporations.

One of the problems is that American wages have been stagnant for so long by now. The less money people have, the more likely they are from hiring illegal immigrants that will work for less money.

Because of low wages for American families, food producers must keep prices low--thus they hire illegal immigrants.

For the same reason, restaurants hire illegal immigrants. Even Walmart itself hired illegal immigrants in its quest for keeping prices low.

My personal belief is that the U.S. cannot create a meaningful immigration policy with Mexico because it wants it both ways: it wants the illegal labor because it is cheaper, but feels uneasy about having these Mexicans in the U.S., especially certain groups of Americans.

So, the U.S. wants cheap labor, but don't want them lingering in the country.

Mexicans, on the other hand, don't really want to stay in the U.S.

Temporary work visas would be the best solution, allowing Mexicans to come to the U.S. and leave when the job season is over. Mexicans get dollars and the U.S. gets the cheap labor that it wants.

Furthermore, a Marshall Plan-like program for development in Mexico can help to keep people employed in Mexico, provided that it is based on proven policies instead of radical free-market theories.

-------------

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 15:22

I do agree with everything here:

Originally posted by HUGOESTR

My personal belief is that the U.S. cannot create a meaningful immigration policy with Mexico because it wants it both ways: it wants the illegal labor because it is cheaper, but feels uneasy about having these Mexicans in the U.S., especially certain groups of Americans.

So, the U.S. wants cheap labor, but don't want them lingering in the country.

Mexicans, on the other hand, don't really want to stay in the U.S.

Temporary work visas would be the best solution, allowing Mexicans to come to the U.S. and leave when the job season is over. Mexicans get dollars and the U.S. gets the cheap labor that it wants.

Furthermore, a Marshall Plan-like program for development in Mexico can help to keep people employed in Mexico, provided that it is based on proven policies instead of radical free-market theories.

The wall idea is filled with prejudism. No wall.

However, the issue about food producers keeping low prices by hiring illegal immigrants is not difficult to overcome. Americans who currently don't work such jobs would be given a minimum wage according to the state they are employed in. This may be more costly for business. The extra cost could be passed onto the consumer. A few cents to a dollar in order to make and keep jobs is not a big price to pay.

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 17:27

Originally posted by hugoestr

Genghis,

First, all nations can make as many moral statements as they want. They have the right to do so, the same way as individuals have the right to free speech.

Second, since this wall is specificly meant for Mexicans, Mexicans do have the right to protest it and to point out the moral indignity of it since it affects them.

On the other hand, I see the resistance to have the U.S. even critcizing by its actions to be a tacit admission of wrongdoing. Otherwise, why so much defensiveness? When individuals do good, we welcome comment on their actions. We only become defensive when we are do wrong.

So, what is it? Do you think that the U.S. is comitting a mistake by building this wall, and that is why you don't anyone commenting on it?

To address point one, of course nations have that right, but they shouldn't use it, it just entangles them into a bunch of nonsense they need not be involved in.

With point two, no, I do not feel ashamed that the US is doing this. I am just sick of certain people acting like Mexicans have the right to break American laws and come into this country uninvited, or that they have a right to come into this country at all. American citizens have absolute control of the USA and if we wanted to wall ourselves in like Tokugawa Japan, that would be our right.

And of course this wall is meant for Mexicans, they're mostly the ones breaking our laws!

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 18:03

Genghis,

What is the point of having a right if you cannot use it

? I am not trying to put you in a hard place, but it is normal that if one is punched, one will scream as a reaction.

And your second point, I must disagree again. If you really don't feel ashame, why do you insist that Mexico shouldn't talk about it? If there is no reason to be ashame, why being upset about this to begin with?

And I thank you for sharing your true reason why feel upset about this: you dislike Mexicans because you believe that they are breaking the law when they enter illegally in the U.S.

Now, I understand why this bother you, and I support those who want something done about this issue. But I want something that will actually work and isn't offensive to Mexicans, mainly because I am one

Janus made an excellent point in his contribution to this discussion: get the border well guarded. I have no problem with this solution. This will actually work, and the interactions between the Border Patrol and illegal immigrants are very respectful.

But more than anything else, this will work.

Don't you agree that a fully funded and manned Border Patrol is a better use of money than a useless wall?

And why wouldn't you rather have the money spent in a way that will actually prevent Mexicans from entering the country illegally than building a monument to anti-Mexican sentiments?

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 18:21

I believe there is a choice for Americans that don't want Mexicans in the U.S. They can go back to Mother Europe

Demographics show Hispanics will be 25% of the Americans by 2050, so you better hurry up.

Otherwise, I don't see the problem. Most Mexicans are regular, civilized fellows. The idea that everyone of them is a bandit, it's just another myth.

Pinguin

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 18:53

Originally posted by pinguin

The idea that everyone of them is a bandit, it's just another myth.

Thanks for telling us that, it was obvious that many people were under this impression. On behalf of them, I thank you for the clarification.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 19:09

You're welcome

Pinguin

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 20:06

I see you feel sincerily pitty for the "poor Vietnamese family", but don't want to feel the same about the "poor Mexican family"

You miss my point, I could have used any ethnicity, replace Vietnamese with Chilean or Zambian or Swiss if you'd like. My point was that there exist channels for Mexican immigrants to come to the US legally and they choose not to do it, because it's too expensive. Well a poor (economically) african has to pay the same amount as a mexican who wants to emigrate, it's just the mexican can leap across the border whenever they want.

As a final note, you are right I don't know how it is in Mexico, I was born in america and have lived here my entire life. But if their nation is so inferior to the US market-wise (because if it isn't why would they leave) why don't mexican citizens change this themselves, they have similar raw materials and natural resources at their disposal.

But "Americans" (I put in quotes because any person of the Western Hemisphere is an American and not only U.S. people)...

Now that's just a politically charged statement, and meant to bring out emotions in people. The UN and other major world organizations refer to the citizens of the US as Americans and it's the term people from the united states refer to themselves as so that's the term I use.

...."Americans" I said forget that Hispanics are more than 45 millions in the U.S. already, and they are the younger and faster growing group in the U.S. Even if Hispanic immigration stop TODAY, they will be 25% of the "American" people by 2050.

And that's just what the US needs is poor young workers. Isn't poor unemployed young workers what historically causes revolts and fanatical politics? The US isn't like "Old" Europe we don't need more immigration to solve our worker crisis.

And not all hispanics work picking oranges. Some give work to Anglo-"Americans".

Where did I ever say all hispanics did was pick oranges. Anyway I wasn't talking about hispanics as a group (since I don't see them in that way) but rather Mexicans, and not even all mexican immigrants just the illegal ones. Anyway I understand that many hispanics are americans (in the sense of belonging to the US) and have accepted the US and their laws and values and traditions but some have not and those are the ones I refer to.

Yes, a proper border force is the solution here. Janus is on to a plan. Personally I believe that it will take more people because you need more than one lone person to stop an individual, but let's say you need five times what Janus calculated. That would be 30,000 stable American jobs there. And from what I understand, the Border Patrol seems to have enough power on patrol the borders. Our government refuses to give them enough people and enough budget to do this correctly.

And a border patrol would bring stable jobs, unlike the very temporary ones brought from building a wall.

Now all I need to do is run for office, of course my disgust of the current political situation means all I can hope for is a coup de tat.

Many illegal immigrants work for private families, not corporations.

But the ones who facilitate illegal immigration are the corporations, if american corporations determined that illegal immigration would cost them profits you can be sure there'd be a field of land mines a mile wide in between the US and Mexico.

One of the problems is that American wages have been stagnant for so long by now.

Which is why minimum wage must be raised and illegal workers must not be allowed to work.

Because of low wages for American families, food producers must keep prices low--thus they hire illegal immigrants.

Half of my family being farmers, I do know of some farmers using mexican labor to harvest crops, but I don't have a problem with this since they are on temporary work visas (i.e. following the laws and restrictions of the US) and return to mexico when the season is over.

Unfortunately, it is not corporations who benefit from illegal immigration. It is practical the whole society.

No one benefits from illegal immigration in the long term, such a situation only makes it more difficult for both nations to solve their own problems.

I am just sick of certain people acting like Mexicans have the right to break American laws and come into this country uninvited, or that they have a right to come into this country at all.

Actually Genghis, the sad truth is the illegals have been invited to the US, by politics that want to keep the american economy in stagnation.

And of course this wall is meant for Mexicans, they're mostly the ones breaking our laws!

Don't forget that the wall will also keep out many central american immigrants who risk their lives everyday crossing through mexico's train networks, where they are (as of right now I still believe) felons.

Also don't forget it will keep out drug-runners and coyotes who abuse and exploit innocent people for their own gain.

And it will uh...erm...keep out terrorists as well...erk...cough...

Ok that last one was a joke.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2006 at 21:38

Whatever the diverse reasons Americans have about the influx of foreigners onto American (US) soil there is enough debate to foster research for the problems and come up with a solution.

The main issue still stands and that is the illegal entry of foreigners. Since the focus is on Mexico a debate on how to improve and regulate passage is being considered within immigration laws. With this perspective in mind we need not be offended. Every alien is supposed to be subjected to the law. Ignore ethnicity and cheap labor for a second and think about this issue.

That being said the next question should be, "What is the most effective way to manage the borders?" I think that either military troops or an effective and paid border patrol is sufficient. Over time this system could be perfected. Both countires could place troops on each side of the border to implement the plan. A wall, on the other hand, would probably foster animosity and not necessarily maintain security unless it is built with costly safeguards.

If tight security is the main reason for stringent entry into the US then it seems imperative to stay focused on this goal. Certainly there are arguements pro and con as there are arguements over rationale. Eventually a decision needs to be clarified.

On a different note, I still think the attention this issue is gathering is not as dire as the need to safeguard the US middle class. The main source of taxation. Corporate America and the power of their lobbies have too much influence on business (in)security. Selling the middle class down the river will have severe ramifications that are nearly irreversible as they currently stand. Yes, border security is important, but generalizing and blaming Mexican migrants or illegals for our business problems is tragically wrong.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 00:59

Originally posted by JanusRook

... Anyway I understand that many hispanics are americans (in the sense of belonging to the US) and have accepted the US and their laws and values and traditions but some have not and those are the ones I refer to.

Well, then your concern is on Mexican criminals and not Mexican people.

Now criminals are criminals, no matter they are British, Chineses, Russians or Mexicans. The only thing you have to do with them is sent them to jail, fry them in the electric chair, or deport them. I am sure, most Mexicans in the U.S. will agree with you on that.

All populations of the world has some criminals on them. What one could do. That's the way the human species is.

Now, for the topics of VALUES, the matter is different. Mexicas have almost the same SET OF VALUES than the Americans. Just find it out.

For the matter of TRADITIONS, how do you expect a FIRST GENERATION immigrant has ANY IDEA of what an U.S. tradition is? Don't you know Chineses, Vietnameses or Poles keep their traditions at least one generation before assimilate.

If you ask me, as a Latin American, what do I think of the SECOND generation Hispanic in the U.S. I will say they are Americans that speak VERY POOR Spanish (with toons of english on it) and who have its loyalty in the U.S. intead of us. That's the truth.

Pinguin

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 08:10

Oh I know all about values and culture and how difficult they are to learn. The process through which a citizen of another country becomes a US citizen is supposed to integrate them into society, remember it can take a decade for someone to become a US citizen. The process is meant to discourage people who just want to take advantage of the system.

And after living in Phoenix (and a rather poor part of it at that). I know all about how second generation immigrants assimilate into society. I know that many mexican people want a better life. I personally don't have a problem with people as individuals but I have a problem when my government mismanages entire groups of people to the detriment of society.

Well, then your concern is on Mexican criminals and not Mexican people.

Well there seems to be a problem with the definition of criminal. When the May 1st boycott's were held many protestors held up signs, one of the more popular being "I am not a criminal".

Now I'm not going to say that sign was false, seeing how many of the protestors were legal citizens and second- or third-generation immigrants who were born in the country. Which by the way I find the protestors actions as creating a mexican solidarity inherently racist, since they exclude all other immigrant groups. The name of the campaign was a "Day without a Mexican" for God's sake. However if we get past what they were pretending to be (illegal immigrants so these college students could feel like they did something.) And assume that some of them were illegal immigrants, then quite simply yes they are criminals.

The US law as in stands says that anyone entering the nation illegally is violating US law, which makes them a criminal. And if you take someone else, like your child, you are guilty of human smuggling and in Arizona you can be held guilty for human smuggling even if you are the only one crossing. Therefore any illegal mexican-immigrant is a criminal (except I guess the children as technically the law would view them as victims).

So when you say my concern is with mexican criminals and not the mexican people you are correct.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 09:43

Janus,

Between yesterday and today, something went horribly wrong, and the tone of our conversation dramatically changed. So let�s go back to the original tone of the conversation, and let�s strive to reach understanding.

I know that a popular belief is that corporations benefit a lot from illegal aliens. And maybe they do. But my experience has been that most illegal aliens that I know work for private families, either taking care of their children or mowing their lawns, or cleaning their offices. Many also work for small restaurant, which are often family owned affairs. And then there is the agricultural work. Many work on the fields. I don�t know from what state you come from, but in California most of the work is done by illegal immigrants. And since your family does farming, you are well of the financial strains that farms find themselves in that pushes them to use illegal labor.

And all of these employers tend to me families or small businesses.

I did like that you mention that some neighboring farmers use legal immigrants with visas. They work during the working season, and then they go back home.

And that would be the best solution. The current problem with the system is that it is too complex and difficult to get these visas. If there were some reform that streamlined it, the U.S. could get the labor that it needs and these Mexicans would go back to Mexico, which is their desire in any case. If they know that they can come legally and return legally, then there is no incentive to stay in the U.S. or to bring their families here. In fact, illegal immigrants moving with the whole family is a recent phenomenon that began to happen when crossing the border became a lot harder.

Now, when it comes to the new poverty of the American middle class, this has more to do with our taxation system and our government than with illegal immigrants. Most Americans don�t compete for jobs with illegal immigrants. Unless you cut lawns, pick fruit, do cleaning, watch children, or work in construction, your wages are not being affected by illegal immigrants. And I am in favor of protecting the wages of American workers in the fields where they are affected.

Our new national poverty stems for having a government that has given huge tax cuts to the rich and saddle with most of the financial burdens of the nation on the middle class. It stems from not raising the minimum salary since 1997. And it stems from having weakened unions that cannot negotiate raises against employers; instead, they are fighting with all of their might just to keep the benefits and salaries that they already have.

Obviously there is wealth being generated in America. The Forbes list of the 400 richest people in the world only has billionaires, and many live in the U.S. It is that most of the wealth created by American workers is hogged by the richest people. And the best thing is that the struggling family in the heartland is the one subsidizing the wealth of these billionaires. For even though billionaires are the ones who have benefited the most from the Bush administration, they contribute the less of their income as a percentage to the nation.

In other words, the government of the last six years benefit billionaires, but the middle class pays the bills.

This is another topic of course 

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 10:12

Originally posted by JanusRook

Well there seems to be a problem with the definition of criminal. When the May 1st boycott's were held many protestors held up signs, one of the more popular being "I am not a criminal".

So when you say my concern is with mexican criminals and not the mexican people you are correct.

Don't be silly, please. I was talking of criminals: people that kills, robb or that traffic drugs. (Criminals should be judge like that, regarless of ethnic or racial background, period).

"Illegal" immigrants broke the laws, of course, but that is not a "crime of blood" or anything like that. Is just people that want to escape poverty.

Now, for the point of "US law" you should know that the U.S. state MORALS (or of any state of the Americas, anyways) are grounded on mud.

All people know most U.S. citizens are descendent of "illigal immigrants". Nobody invited European or Africans to settle into the Americas in the first place. Nobody asked American Indians. So, of what morals are you talking about?

And if you are "white", you should know your ancestors, the "barbarians", were illegal immigrants into the Roman Empire, too. Yes, many people has been "illegal" immigrant in one period of time or another. But that does not convert them in criminals.

Or you are one of those than think Gypsies are criminals, because they move from country to country?

Yes, the rules of your country should be respected, but also the will of the U.S. people. And you should not forget Hispanics are part of the U.S. people by now, and they are more numerous than you think. There are more Hispanics than Blacks in the U.S., and Spanish is the second language spoken in the U.S., like many TV networks show. Most Hispanics belong to the "invisible" minorities you won't notice at least they open theirs mounth.

And most of those people are feed up with the discrimination of professor Huntington, VDARE and many other "Americans" that spread hate all over the U.S. You should pick up C.N.N. in Spanish and you'll find out the reality of your own country.

By the way, there are also Mexican college students as well. And Mexicans nobel prize winner in sciece. After all, the first University in the New World was build by the Spaniards in Dominican Republic, very shortly after the discovery of America.

Curious, isn't?

Pinguin

Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 10:20

You appear to be well grounded in your accurate observations of Americas media portrayal of immigrants. CNN, and the like, are just a political mouthpiece for the powers in charge. The debate over the flow of illegal immigration is still viable though. There seems to be two issues hovering around this issue. One, regarding the status of current immigrants. Two, the method for stemming the flow of future illegal immigrants.

As I'm re-reading this I wonder how come the US government doen't process immigrants quickly and make a seasonal visa applicable. Is there such a thing in existence? Over the course of time those who pay their taxes would be offered full alien rights (green card).

Then I think about the opposition to this. Those corporations, or small businesses that have a stake in low cost employement. Their game would be over. Unfortunatly, the immigrants get used and abused and don't even get a fair chance at citizenship.

So I remind myself of this bigger picture. Let's not be so quick to accuse the Mexican immigrants for our insecurity and hypocrasy. Patrol the borders efficiently towards stemming large amounts of illegal immigration. Face our own commercial dilemmas by accepting ownership for and correcting such double (illegal) standards.







-------------

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 16:51

Between yesterday and today, something went horribly wrong, and the tone of our conversation dramatically changed. So let�s go back to the original tone of the conversation, and let�s strive to reach understanding.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, my tone hasn't changed at all, perhaps the perception of it has but my opinion on the whole matter is the US sucks we're stuck in a horrible situation and there is no right answer to the problem, but I'd rather have a wrong answer than no answer at all.\

Many work on the fields. I don�t know from what state you come from, but in California most of the work is done by illegal immigrants. And since your family does farming, you are well of the financial strains that farms find themselves in that pushes them to use illegal labor.

I'm from Ohio hugo, surprised you didn't pick that up as I'm a buckeye patriot. Also, I know that it is difficult for individual farmers to make ends meet, but in the US these days individual farms are getting fewer and fewer, they are being bought out by mega-farm interests that operate just like businesses and follow the same amoral capitalist model that any other business operate under. My family is lucky enough though to escape that thanks to careful land management.

The current problem with the system is that it is too complex and difficult to get these visas.

Just because a system needs to change doesn't mean that people have the right to circumvent the existing system. It just means they need to work harder to achieve their goals. Also it means that the mexican people need to lobby their government and force it to deal with the US government to arrange these work visas. Not the ideal solution for sure but an agreement is a proper way for two nations to settle differences with their citizens.

Now, when it comes to the new poverty of the American middle class, this has more to do with our taxation system and our government than with illegal immigrants.

Agreed illegal immigration is just a smokescreen the government uses to further its own agenda.

Most Americans don�t compete for jobs with illegal immigrants. Unless you cut lawns, pick fruit, do cleaning, watch children, or work in construction, your wages are not being affected by illegal immigrants.

Which surprisingly outside of the southwest this work isn't being done by illegal mexican-immigrants. Yardwork in my neighborhood is done by a mostly american(not the best term but I'll use it to describe assimilated 2nd+ generation citizens) lawn company. My aunt has a maid that comes by who is an older "american" lady and my friend's dad works in construction(roofing) with a mostly "american" work force. I guess some would say I live in a "racist narrow-minded neighborhood" but that is so far from the truth I'll let them keep their little fantasy worldview. What I think that does show though, is that if there was an influx of illegal-immigrants into my neck of the woods that the entire community structure would unravel and unemployment among the "middle-class" would hit an all time high. So illegal-immigration isn't a problem in areas that are all ready established but if they enter new areas it would cause a massive destabilization effect.

And it stems from having weakened unions that cannot negotiate raises against employers; instead, they are fighting with all of their might just to keep the benefits and salaries that they already have.

Actually I've noticed that since the 70's unions have become more and more like the corporations they are supposed to oppose. The time for unions to help out their workers is long past since they have become corrupt.

This is another topic of course

A related topic though.

"Illegal" immigrants broke the laws, of course, but that is not a "crime of blood" or anything like that. Is just people that want to escape poverty.

According to US law a crime is a crime regardless of the reasons. If I steal a loaf of bread to feed a starving child I'm still a criminal according to the US. As are all illegal immigrants, I don't think that they are any less human or any more evil for this fact nor do I believe that their crime is any more damning than jaywalking, I was just speaking in the eyes of the US government.

That is a separate issue, I am merely speaking on the legal aspect of illegal immigration not on the moral aspect, which is highly subjective and debateable based on your interpretation. Manhattan island was sold to the Dutch by indians. William Penn founded Pennsylvania by purchasing it from tribes. The Miami Confederation, the Great Plains indians and the Apaches all lost their territories in wars and signed treaties (in exchange for the reservations) relinquishing claim to the land so the US has just as much right to the land as the indians do.

Also many european settlers were turned down for immigration and subsequently deported back to their nations of origin once the US decided to formulate a proper immigration policy. After the Mexican-American war many mexican citizens then were allowed to become US citizens thanks to the then written laws of the US so america's immigration policy has just evolved due to what the government perceives is needed in society.

...You are a criminal in the US if you break US laws, period. Criminal is a neutral term that just means one who has commited a crime. If you break a law (commited a crime), you are a criminal no matter the severity of it. I am not speaking on the moral character of the illegals but of their status.

I am fully aware of the demographical make-up of the hispanic community in the US, I have nothing against my fellow americans who are cuban, argentine, venezuelan, salvadoran or even mexican. I only have a problem with illegal immigrants who refuse to acknowledge the fact that they did something wrong in coming to america by unlawful means.

Pinguin you are turning an logical debate into an emotional one. I am subscribing to following how the laws of the US and the workings of the economy affect the citizenship as a whole, irregardless of extraneous details like culture, language and beliefs. What I hear from you is that if I am against mexicans crossing the border without restrictions then I must be against hispanic culture as a whole. Which I am not.

And you should not forget Hispanics are part of the U.S. people by now

Do hispanics want to be americans or do they want americans to be hispanic?

As I'm re-reading this I wonder how come the US government doen't process immigrants quickly and make a seasonal visa applicable. Is there such a thing in existence?

Yes there is like I said earlier farmers "lease out" workers for the harvesting season, usually no longer than 2 months and then send them back to nation of origin.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 17:20

Janus,

Nothing wrong with being a buckeye Patriot

Unfortunately I am not as familiar with Ohio than I am with California or Virginia.

I do know that the situation over there is different from that of California. I know that there was been competition for labor with illegal immigrants there.

Now, I am sure that you will agree that to a large part illegaly crossing the border is illegal by law, not really by action, unlike, say, robbery of murder. The only reason why people crossing the border illegally is a crime is because it is written that way. When it wasn't a crime, plenty of immigrants in the past just hopped on the boat and came to America, and they were not criminals. Change the law, and the suddenly if you do the same action, you are a criminal.

And to be honest, it is silly to criminalize something that so many people are doing. Since many people benefit from the flow of immigrants, maybe it would easier and cheaper to legalize some flow, and that way have a better control over immigration.

And please, understand that I am not morally justifying people crossing illegaly. I am not. Currently it is against the law, and they shouldn't do it. My statements attempt to explain the situation, not justify it.

I find it very similar to the situation with booze during prohibition. People wanted it so much, that they broke the law. Or the case with contraband in closed markets. No matter how much those Soviets disliked American culture, those Levis managed to get to the USSR.

What I am saying is that economic forces in the U.S. encourage people to hire illegal aliens, and this labor demand encourages people to come illegaly. And what I am saying is that there is no reason why we should make criminals out of otherwise honest people. When the system makes it hard for people to follow the rules, people break them.

If a seasonal work permit can be arranged, niether the employer or the immigrant will be a criminal. All sides win: Mexicans get dollars that will improve the countries economy(which in turn will keep people happy in their country) and Americans get cheap labor for agricultural work.

A streamlined system will allow honest Mexicans to go and get work, and then go back to Mexico. A fully funded and staffed Border Patrol will keep drugs and criminals out of the country. Everyone wins :)

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 17:43

Originally posted by JanusRook

...

Do hispanics want to be americans or do they want americans to be hispanic?

Hispanics are Americans. Even if they never enter the U.S.

Well, if you ask me, I believe "American" families would work a lot better if you learn something from our "primitive" culture. That's just an oppinion though.

Pinguin

Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 23:07

Very controversial topic....

Let me first start off by saying that I myself am a Hispanic that lives in the Southwest US(Arizona). The earliest I can trace my family coming over from Mexico is the late 1800's, other than that as far as I know my family has been residing in this general area as far back as it was before it was US soil.

My father is a captain for ICE(Immigration & Customs Enforcement) and has shed a lot of light on the issue that I for one never really thought of. He just returned from Nogales AZ which is a border port to Nogales MX from a 90 day detail. Apparently the US govt. has ordered a certain amount of ICE personnel to the border to "round up" what they can of these illegals and put them on a plane to get this, WHATEVER DESTINATION THEY CHOOSE WITHIN MEXICO, on you guessed it......the American tax payers check!!! You wouldnt belive how many illegal aliens are caught that arent even Mexican citizens.

I believe that the "big wigs" are thinkin more in the long-run. Kinda like a fall of Rome type situation. America was created and always has been for "We The People", but what happens when "The People" dont hold their real allegiance to America? What happens when the majority of these people dont speak english? Thats a main reason I personally believe we should start making english more of a stricter code of law, so to speak.

I believe it is not only Americas right to defend its borders but it is its responsibility. All in all, the govt doesnt see it as illegal aliens coming north into our borders it sees it as "Mexico" spreading north.

-------------
Be a servant to all, that is a quality of a King.

Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2006 at 23:13

quick interesting fact: Did you know that in the Southern parts of the SW states there are water stations? Too many illegal immigrants were found dead so the Fed. Govt. had to step in and build these stations due to heat strokes and dehydration?

Who says the US only looks out for its interests?

-------------
Be a servant to all, that is a quality of a King.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2006 at 12:53

Arch Buff,

As one of us, you know that people do integrate, especially Mexicans. And you must be familiar with how illegal immigrants encourage their children to learn English, even if they themselves can't learn it. When they can, they work very hard on learning English.

And if enforcement is the issue, then we need more people like your dad. They can actually make a real difference, instead of an unguarded wall. And if we have the people, why bother building the wall then?

And having people like your dad enforcing guarding the border is the best solution. They are trained in how to handle immigrants in a respectful manner, looking after their well being.

So, do you still speak Spanish at home?

-------------

Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2006 at 14:52

I wanted to post a page saying that where towns had fences along the border, crime droppedalmost 50%. Most of the crime called in though is from people complaining that illegals are crossing in their backyard and dropping trash on their land.

Though if there is on continuous fence, I think the problem will arise again since they won't be looking for a easy path in but trying to get over the nearest part quickly.

I think the fence would be effective if there is is more manpower on the border along with top technology. The fence will definitly slow them down and with top technology the proper authorities could get their in time to stop them.

The only reason the Mexican government is upset is that they get millions of dollars injected into their economy from the illegal crossings. There's even reports of the Mexican Military helping immigrants get across.

To end my rambling, I agree with the fence if other measures are done with it. It's one step in stopping one of the biggest pieces of the pie contributing to the illegal immigration, there's alot more to be done elsewhere too.

-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey

Posted By: arch.buff
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2006 at 18:06

No hugoestr I dont speak fluent spanish but rather know "broken" spanglish if you will. My fathers dad(my Tata) didnt want to grow his kids up with anything other than english being their first language. He rather learned this well, seeing as he was whipped in class at times growing up because he didnt know english that well and sometimes had to resort to talking in spanish for the words he didnt know how to articulate in english, thus the caucasian teachers took this as him being disrespectful him saying words in spanish that he might get in trouble for had he spoken them in english. He was born in 1906 so these were the olden days but he got the message rather well -If youre gonna live here youre gonna have to learn the language-. But being bilingual is a very good thing where I live, definately an advantage especially career-wise.

I do strongly agree with you that we need more man power at the border. Heck, it would create more jobs. You really wouldnt believe how many people sneak in from the Mexico/US border that arent Mexican at all. Apparently its seen as an easy way in for most that want in, I would sure like that image to change.

-------------
Be a servant to all, that is a quality of a King.

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2006 at 22:34

Well, that's producing a problem for Mexico, too.

Many people from Central America, and even Asia or Africa, are trying to get into the U.S. through Mexico!

It is curious but here in South America we also perceive underground organizations smuggling people, particularly from East Asia. There is also a traffic of prostitutes from Dominican Republic.

Not long time ago in Chile, a Chinese young men that worked as a cook in a china food restaurant was killed by his chinese boss to get the money of the insurance. The victim was illegaly in the country and only by chance the crime was discovered. The criminal escaped to Paraguay and dissapeared in the obscure network that protect chinese illegal immigrants.

Perhaps it should be taken as a common problem that affect lots of parts of the hemisphere.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 11:56

Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

I wanted to post a page saying that where towns had fences along the border, crime droppedalmost 50%. Most of the crime called in though is from people complaining that illegals are crossing in their backyard and dropping trash on their land.

Though if there is on continuous fence, I think the problem will arise again since they won't be looking for a easy path in but trying to get over the nearest part quickly.

Hi, there. I know that if the wall would be guarded well, then it would work. But if you are guarding the border well to begin with, there is no need for a wall.

Furthermore, the desert is the wall. Walking through that is hard.

So, instead of wasting money building a wall, why can't our leaders strengthen border guarding instead?

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 12:06

Originally posted by arch.buff

No hugoestr I dont speak fluent spanish but rather know "broken" spanglish if you will. My fathers dad(my Tata) didnt want to grow his kids up with anything other than english being their first language. He rather learned this well, seeing as he was whipped in class at times growing up because he didnt know english that well and sometimes had to resort to talking in spanish for the words he didnt know how to articulate in english, thus the caucasian teachers took this as him being disrespectful him saying words in spanish that he might get in trouble for had he spoken them in english. He was born in 1906 so these were the olden days but he got the message rather well -If youre gonna live here youre gonna have to learn the language-. But being bilingual is a very good thing where I live, definately an advantage especially career-wise.

Too bad what happened your Tata. That must have been a horrible experience. I asked you because I have met many people from New Mexico who speak both languages fluently. In fact, most of the New Mexicans of hispanic background that I know behave the most like Mexicans, to the point that I even ask them from where in Mexico they are

And of course, it has always been better to learn English if you are living here. When the school fail to teach English well, they are hurting these children.

And really, I rather that they had more border guarding jobs than a wall. These jobs will last a long, long time, instead of just giving temporary jobs with a wall. And most people who guard the border are especially trained to deal with illegal aliens, and they do it in a very humane, respectful way.

-------------

Posted By: Peter III
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2006 at 14:19

This whole fence/wall idea is really ridiculous. This is kind of reminding me of We, how the Utopian government builds a wall to keep out nature. We are just blinding ourselves from reality when we build this wall and are becoming more isolated, which in history always turns out to be the downfall of any civilization or country. Its beginning to become reminiscent of some Orwellian nightmare.

Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 10:04

So, instead of wasting money building a wall, why can't our leaders strengthen border guarding instead?

Because that would solve a problem, and a corrupt government works best when it's "solving" problems not when things get done.

Too bad what happened your Tata. That must have been a horrible experience.

Remember that didn't just happen to hispanic immigrants, italians, germans and poles also were forced to learn english in the early part of the twentieth century.

-------------
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 11:57

Originally posted by JanusRook

So, instead of wasting money building a wall, why can't our leaders strengthen border guarding instead?

Because that would solve a problem, and a corrupt government works best when it's "solving" problems not when things get done.

Too bad what happened your Tata. That must have been a horrible experience.

Remember that didn't just happen to hispanic immigrants, italians, germans and poles also were forced to learn english in the early part of the twentieth century.

Hi, Janus,

My point was that a well-funded border would be cheaper and more effective. I know that yours is that our government wouldn't do that, but it is a good idea to ask for the right thing from our politicians. Many less informed Americans would be happy with the wall, which doesn't solve anything, so the pressure on politicians will go down, possibly for years.

And my comment about Arch.Buff's Tata was a personal comment towards him. Yes, this experienced happened to other people, and it was horrible as well. This experience has happened in Mexico against Native languages, and it is horrible too. And such was the fate of the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish and their native national tongues.

Understanding that many in our family have gone through this, together with the fact that many third-generation Americans mourn the loss of the mother-country language as part of their lives should help us be more compassionate towards others, more or less in the way this conversation has been conducted in.

-------------

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 15:19

Originally posted by Genghis

I find it outrageous that the Mexican government has the audacity to tell the American government what it can or cannot do on its own territory. America has the right to put a gigantic river of fire or millions of landmines on our southern border if we so desire. I'm sure however this will get nowhere in the UN, the wall's construction is pretty much inevitable now, and anything in the UN would be vetoed by the United States. Whether or not you agree with the construction of the wall, I'm sure most people would agree that any country should be allowed to construct such walls around its territory.

Any other opinions?

I've read reports that the Mexican government sponsors the publication of several million pamphlets on how to cross the U.S. border and freely distributes them. What's happening in the U.S. is a defacto invasion by Mexico and a not altogether peaceful one.

-------------

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 15:24

Originally posted by DukeC

I've read reports that the Mexican government sponsors the publication of several million pamphlets on how to cross the U.S. border and freely distributes them. What's happening in the U.S. is a defacto invasion by Mexico and a not altogether peaceful one.

Those folders clearly say that people'd better not cross the border, but that if they do it, they should take safety precautions and the folder explains which. To present this as an endorsment of the Mexican government for an 'invasion' into the United States is a strong distortion of the facts.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 15:47

DukeC,

There is no invasion. People don't flee to another country to bring the same conditions that forced them out in the first place.

Again, a well-funded guard should keep people out. Now let's see if Republicans have the courage to spend the money for it.

-------------

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 16:43

Originally posted by hugoestr

DukeC,

There is no invasion. People don't flee to another country to bring the same conditions that forced them out in the first place.

Again, a well-funded guard should keep people out. Now let's see if Republicans have the courage to spend the money for it.

Not sure they're really fleeing anything Hugo. My mom lives in the apple growing region of Washington state where there's a lot of Mexican illegals. Many of them come up to work for a few years then turn themselves in for a free trip back home at U.S. government expense. After their vacation at home, they again cross the border to repeat the cycle. She's also run into people who speak no English and come to the U.S. in the expectation of functioning entirely in Spanish which they do. I have nothing against legal immigration, but if America doesn't enforce it's borders, it won't exist in it's present form for very long.

edit- America does have some responsibilty for the disruptions it caused in Central and South America during the Cold War. Should this come at the lose of Americas' identity though?

If the current trend continues large areas of the U.S. Southwest will return to Mexican control due to the overwhelming immigrant population there. This is a question of sovereignty not humanitarianism.

-------------

Posted By: Peter III
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 18:42

but if America doesn't enforce it's borders, it won't exist in it's present form for very long.

Could you explain what America's "present form" is?

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 21:06

Originally posted by Peter III

but if America doesn't enforce it's borders, it won't exist in it's present form for very long.

Could you explain what America's "present form" is?

It's present geographical form, including the Southwest states whos' popualtions are being made up by an increasing number of illegal immigrants each year. If, as it appears, the Mexican government is actively encouraging the illegal immigration of it's citizens to the U.S., how can they justify criticizing the U.S. reaction to that immigration.

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 22:32

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

Those folders clearly say that people'd better not cross the border, but that if they do it, they should take safety precautions and the folder explains which. To present this as an endorsment of the Mexican government for an 'invasion' into the United States is a strong distortion of the facts.

Even that is basically aiding people crossing into this country. The Mexican government should tell their citizens to not cross into the United States, and that is it.

I also hate how the Mexicans are acting so offended at the principle of the wall when in the end this is nothing more than them fearing the loss of remittances home that are a great aid to their economy.

I appreciate your understaning on this DukeC.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 22:34

DukeC,

Mexicans who leave Mexico are fleeing a terrible economy, one that was brought in part from radical free-market ideologues. The economy has barely grown at all in the last 20 years. Why would any person who is forced to leave the country under these circumstances bring the same rulers to the place where there are jobs?

Also, I doubt that to many of them are going on vacation and crossing over again. Since crossing the border is ver y difficult, they now tend to cross and stay. The coming back and forth is something of the past now.

And please read my posts again. It clearly states that the U.S., if it wants to enforce the border, should hire enough people to do so. At no moment do I say that it shouldn't. I just want the money well spent and not wasted in some political monument to xenophobia that will not prevent people from coming into the U.S.

Finally, I find your assumptions of what Mexican will do funny. "Invading" the U.S. never really comes across the mind of most Mexicans; if anything, a few say that the U.S. should futher invade Mexico, maybe then things will get better.

So, now that we put these silly ideas of an invasion to rest, we can say that, if anyone insults you, you have the right to protest and defend yourself. That is what Mexico is doing when it critizes this wall, especially when it is a testament to politicians pandering to racial hatred yet not doing anything significant to stop the problem.

So, what ethnicity are you, DukeC? How did your people got to the U.S.?

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 22:41

Originally posted by Genghis

Even that is basically aiding people crossing into this country. The Mexican government should tell their citizens to not cross into the United States, and that is it.

I appreciate your understaning on this DukeC.

Genghis, your back! I thought that you were gone for good from this thread. I never heard back from my comments on this thread, so please inform me now.

First, please tell me why do you insist on a wall instead of a fully funded border patrol. A fully funded border patrol does the job. A wall doesn't. A wall is a waste of money in this regard if you still need the patroling. If you can get the job done with the patrol, why not choose the cheaper, more respectful way of securing the border?

Also, there seems to be that you have a problem with Mexicans. Please explain why. I am sure that you may hold some misunderstandings that I would be glad to clarify.

Finally, share your ethinic background with all of us. That way it will be easier for us to see how similar our people are.

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 22:51

Originally posted by Genghis

Even that is basically aiding people crossing into this country. The Mexican government should tell their citizens to not cross into the United States, and that is it.

I appreciate your understaning on this DukeC.

Hi, Genghis, I just noticed that you already shared a misunderstanding up here. You see, I don't fear the loss of remittances to Mexico. I dislike the disrespectful gesture that this is; the same way you would dislike people burning images of Bush in Iran.

Also, empty symbolic acts like this encourage people to racial violence. People will begin to dehumanize Mexicans, and racial hatred can grow as a result, since it is endorsed by the government.

The wall is useless, and you know this, Genghis. Why insist on an expensive insult when a fully funded border patrol will defend the border in a dignified manner?

Yes, Genghis, why do you insist on the insulting symbol, and not on the pragmatic policy?

Also, I noticed that you misread the post of Mixcoalt. He said that the pamphlets say that Mexicans SHOULD NOT CROSS THE BORDER yet you insisted in reading the opposite, since this seems to be the idea that you want to believe. Read it again.

Finally, please tell us what ethnic background you have. Maybe I am wrong, but I feel that your people may have been demonized in the past as you seem to be demonizing Mexicans now

Hope to hear from you soon

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 00:35

Genghis, your back! I thought that you were gone for good from this thread

No, I've just had some midterms and couldn't hang around here as much as I'd like.

First, please tell me why do you insist on a wall instead of a fully funded border patrol. A fully funded border patrol does the job. A wall doesn't. A wall is a waste of money in this regard if you still need the patroling. If you can get the job done with the patrol, why not choose the cheaper, more respectful way of securing the border?

I'm not insisting on a wall, I'm insisting that if America wants to, it has every right to build a wall. I'm also saying that a wall, if it is intended to enforce American law, is not an insult to Mexicans. It is insulting however, that Mexico has the nerve to tell the American government what it can or cannot build on American soil.

Also, there seems to be that you have a problem with Mexicans. Please explain why. I am sure that you may hold some misunderstandings that I would be glad to clarify.

I have no problem with Mexicans, you merely like to think so.

Finally, share your ethinic background with all of us. That way it will be easier for us to see how similar our people are.

I find that question insulting and will not give you the fodder for whatever logic you were planning to create out of it. If the reasons you think a wall is insulting are valid, you should be able to convince me whether I'm white, black, or purple.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 01:19

Originally posted by hugoestr

DukeC,

Mexicans who leave Mexico are fleeing a terrible economy, one that was brought in part from radical free-market ideologues. The economy has barely grown at all in the last 20 years. Why would any person who is forced to leave the country under these circumstances bring the same rulers to the place where there are jobs?

Also, I doubt that to many of them are going on vacation and crossing over again. Since crossing the border is ver y difficult, they now tend to cross and stay. The coming back and forth is something of the past now.

And please read my posts again. It clearly states that the U.S., if it wants to enforce the border, should hire enough people to do so. At no moment do I say that it shouldn't. I just want the money well spent and not wasted in some political monument to xenophobia that will not prevent people from coming into the U.S.

Finally, I find your assumptions of what Mexican will do funny. "Invading" the U.S. never really comes across the mind of most Mexicans; if anything, a few say that the U.S. should futher invade Mexico, maybe then things will get better.

I didn't mean an invasion in the military sense Hugo, but culturaly. Given enough time and a large enough Mexican popualtion there would be intense pressure to join with thier homeland to the south. There are already large area of the American south where Spanish is the first language. It's not a bad thing but it's an indication of things to come.

As for illegal immigration, what about Mexicos' responsiblity to help prevent the flow of people north? The Mexicans need to fix their own political and social problems so there isn't such an incentive to leave. It would make more sense to spend the money to help them do so I guess. It still comes down to sovereignty, if the U.S. can't control the flow of people over it's borders better, it's going to have serious problems in the future.

My first ancestors to reach the states got kicked out of Scotland in the early 1700s. They went to France for a while then eventually settled in western Pennsylvania around 1745. And like many north Americans I have some native blood too.

-------------

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 01:48

Originally posted by Genghis

Even that is basically aiding people crossing into this country. The Mexican government should tell their citizens to not cross into the United States, and that is it.

I appreciate your understaning on this DukeC.

I hope they find a better solution than a wall, but in the end it is up to American politicians not Mexican to determine U.S. immigration policy. The Mexican government barely represents it's own people, it would be foolish to expect them to be concerned about the rights of Americans.

-------------

Posted By: DukeC
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 02:04

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

From what I've read they're "How to" manuals for getting safely across the border. Including a don't cross message is pointless if they already know that thousands are going to try each month.

-------------

Posted By: Aelfgifu
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 05:29

Originally posted by Genghis

Even that is basically aiding people crossing into this country. The Mexican government should tell their citizens to not cross into the United States, and that is it.

Didn't the pope say something like 'giving people education on safe sex is still encouraging them to have sex, they should just abstain, and that is it'.

Doesn't seem to have had much effect on children being born in poverty or nasty uncurable diseases being spread though, does it. It also does not stop people from having sex, so it pretty much has no effect at all exept making peoples lives miserable.

Just saying 'it should not happen' is not really solving anything is it? People will have extra-marital sex and people from poor countries will try to get into richer countries. These are facts. Looking for a solution needs to be a bit more constructive than 'it should not happen'.

-------------

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.

Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 06:49

Originally posted by DukeC

From what I've read they're "How to" manuals for getting safely across the border. Including a don't cross message is pointless if they already know that thousands are going to try each month.

But then the same could be said about those folders themselves. They'll only get read by people who want to cross the border, it isn't distributed amongst people who don't have plans to emigrate in order to incite them to cross the border.

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 08:04

Originally posted by Genghis

Genghis, your back! I thought that you were gone for good from this thread

No, I've just had some midterms and couldn't hang around here as much as I'd like.

Also, there seems to be that you have a problem with Mexicans. Please explain why. I am sure that you may hold some misunderstandings that I would be glad to clarify. [IMG]http://www.allempires.com/forum/smileys/smiley1.gif" align=middle>

I have no problem with Mexicans, you merely like to think so.

Finally, share your ethinic background with all of us. That way it will be easier for us to see how similar our people are. [IMG]http://www.allempires.com/forum/smileys/smiley1.gif" align=middle>

Genghis,

We agree that the U.S. can do anything it wants. And no one can stop it from doing a wrong such as raising this wall. I also believe that the wall is a waste of money when it won't work. And if there are cheaper, more effective, and more respectful ways to solve the problem--this is, a well funded patrol of the border--we should use that. Do you agree on this or not?

Second, I sense that you understand the insulting nature of the wall, since you have been consistently defensive about being the U.S. being judge by its actions. Yet you yourself spare no country your own moral judgements, followed by request to invade or bomb other countries. So you obviously do believe that it is fine for people in other parts of the world to criticize the actions of other countries.

It seem to me that you don't want to be criticized on the wall because you sense that it is an insult, and people will judge the U.S. as making a wrong, and you don't want to hear that. So why don't you ahead with your moral intuition and recognize the wall as a moral mistake, and openly support a well-funded border patrol instead?

You seem to have a tendency for wanting an enemy to hate. And to hate them, you must dehumanize people first. You see enemies all over the world. For some reason, you decided to pick on Mexicans as your current enemies.

If you are not aware of your prejudice against Mexicans, I am letting you know that you are prejudiced. You want to believe the worst from Mexico and Mexicans. You already stated how you "hated" how Mexicans don't want to inforce immigration laws so that the country can receive money.

Even more, you misinterpreted a quote from Mixcoatl where he clearly said that the Mexican government encourages people not to cross the border to say that their material encourages people to cross the border.

You seem inclined to believe that there is some kind of "invasion" from Mexicans to the U.S.

And more importantly, there seems to be an unwillingness to change your mind about these ideas even after many people show them to be false.

You seem like a nice, good person, so I appeal to that side of you to reject these prejudices about Mexicans. Prejudices tend to creep up on all of us, so once in a while we must flush incorrect assumptions out

Why do I ask about your ethnic background? Because it matters in terms of empathy. You seem to sense that this is the direction that I want to take. You are right. From what I know about you, I would say that you are either Scots Irish or German. I will proceed with this assumption until you correct me.

The Scots Irish have suffered discrimination in the U.S. since their arrival. Up to this day, they are commonly refered as "trash." They came to this country, just like the Mexicans today, to search for a better life. Not only that, but they pushed into the west as pioneers. Even in the 1930 many left Eastern states to go to California, where they were again greeted with ethinc hatred.

Did they did this for fun? No. They did it for necessity. They would never have left Scotland to begin with if they didn't need to. They wouldn't have left Ireland either. Nor would they have left the East Coast.

Now, today Mexicans come here propelled by the same force that pushed the Scots Irish across the continent: economic need.

If you are in fact Scots Irish, ponder on how our people are similar in this manner, ponder how painful it has been to be butt of jokes, and live through social rejection, yet having to put up with it because of economic need.

Use this example to understand how Mexicans immigrants and Scots Irish are very similar in their history and experience, and that this common history unites us.

You can still seek border enforcement, but strive to do it in a respectful way, the way one would have wished they had treated our ancestors. And a fully funded border enforcement corps is what the respectful solution to this is.

-------------

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 08:17

DukeC,

Thanks for your kind response.

I already wrote about Scots Irish, and some of it may apply to your background too. As such, and as I was saying to Genghis, we are very similar culturally, thanks to our history being shaped by the same economic forces.

Mexico can't stop people from leaving the country the same way Americans can't do that either. But please understand that Mexico would much rather have everyone stay than leave.

For example, the illegal immigration rate is used in Mexico as an example of the failure of the current administration. And people in Mexico are very bitter about how people must still leave to the U.S. to make a living. And Mexico has tried to recover economically, earnestly making free-market reforms which haven't worked at all.

And I am for enforcement of the border through patrolling, the cheapest and most effective way of doing so. As I said before, the wall must be patroled in any case. So why not use the money to hire border guards instead?

And really border guards are trained to deal respectfully with people attempting to cross. These guys are great.

Finaly, please understand that there won't be a great cultural shift. Mexicans assimilate just as other immigrants have done. Most young Mexicans learn the language quickly once they get here. Moreover, there are many common traits between the Scots and Mexicans which facilitate assimilation: we have a similar background, we tend to be very generous, we like music, and if needed, we are willing to move across the world to survive

Hope to hear from you soon.

-------------

Posted By: Genghis
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 11:48

Originally posted by hugoestr

And if there are cheaper, more effective, and more respectful ways to solve the problem--this is, a well funded patrol of the border--we should use that. Do you agree on this or not?

I don't think America should or needs to be respectful to people who break its laws and come into this nation unwelcomed. You only say this because you're letting your affinity for Mexico get the better of you, and you're not putting the interests of the USA first, which is what a good American does.

Originally posted by hugoestr

Yet you yourself spare no country your own moral judgements, followed by request to invade or bomb other countries.

Yes, countries like Iran or North Korea who are getting nuclear weapons which threaten this country, not countries trying to shore up porous borders.

Originally posted by hugoestr

You seem to have a tendency for wanting an enemy to hate. And to hate them, you must dehumanize people first. You see enemies all over the world.

Cease your amateur psychoanalysis. It's patronizing and draws us away from the issues at hand.

Originally posted by hugoestr

If you are not aware of your prejudice against Mexicans, I am letting you know that you are prejudiced.

That is extremely insulting and I demand an apology for you calling me a bigot.

Originally posted by hugoestr

Even more, you misinterpreted a quote from Mixcoatl where he clearly said that the Mexican government encourages people not to cross the border to say that their material encourages people to cross the border.

I've already addressed that, and you've chosen not to listen and accuse me of psychological disorders.

Originally posted by hugoestr

And more importantly, there seems to be an unwillingness to change your mind about these ideas even after many people show them to be false.

You all have done nothing but spew the same tired "a wall is insulting" nonsense and then acuse me of being a racist. Forgive me if I find that less than convincing.

-------------
Member of IAEA

Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2006 at 12:30