Arizona to illegals: GTFO.

[Despain]

You guys do realize that a shit ton of illegals cross into Mexico from other central American countries. They face a problem similar to ours when it comes to illegal immigration, just not as severe.

Though to be honest idk what you guys are arguing about, I'm just throwing that out there.

Its sad that in this day and age people still put immigration so high on their priority list. WHERES THAT WALL THAT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE BUILT WTF LOL

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Mexico doesn't like our immigration laws, thus he might be saying they should stfu about ours considering its own laws are worse.

[Rhinox]

Yet they don't actively enforce those laws.

You do realize that people that cross the border aren't only Mexicans right?

This new law reminds me of the movie Born in east L.A.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOLJU6dbZRc

[Despain]

Wait? Cubans/Dominicans/Hondurans/Guatemalans/Panamanians/Nicaraguans/Peruvians/WTFEVER aren't Mexicans? Damn. And all this time...

[Yugl]

The issue of illegal immigration is complex in the sense that it incorporates a fair degree of racial, ethical, and political questions in a tight sphere of perspectives. Proponents of illegal immigrants tend to stress the benefits towards the economy, the arbitrariness of illegal status, America's brain drain, America's foreign affairs history, and their contributions to the state. Opponents of illegal immigrants tend to argue over the burdens shared by American labor, the effects on welfare, and the cultural divide created by illegal immigrants.

The economic benefits of having illegal immigrants is typically two fold. First, it's a cheap source of labor that allows for cheaper prices on domestic and even foreign goods and services. Typically, this helps those whose careers are not competed for with illegal immigrants (Lesser middle class). Second, illegal immigrants create new services within the US. Indeed, some daycare services and manual labor services would not be available without illegal immigrants. The reason it is feasible with them is because they can provide these services cheaply. Again, this means good news for a certain class of people that utilize these services.

The second matter tackles a philosophical question of illegal status. What is the difference between an illegal and legal immigrant? For many, it's simply one of arbitrary laws. The typical argument insinuates that one would not be able to tell the difference between an illegal and legal immigrant simply by looking at them. To a certain degree, this argument is surprisingly withstanding. Borders, culture, and nationalism are politically created entities. In fact, state literature often cites the difference between the early states and modern states. The former is characterized by personal ties to those in power, no taxes, no strict borders, and very little military power. The latter is characterized by feeble or non-existent ties to those in power, borders, taxes, and military power. The modern state's lack of ties to those in power is supplemented by this idea of nationality. That is, in order to legitimize and define the state, borders and nationalism are used. Taxes are often seen as the ultimate reach of government as it denotes extraction from the people to an entity they have no ties with. In this case, the military is seen as the justified cause (Remember that taxes were initiated for military rather than welfare purposes initially). There's more on this literature, but for the purposes of illegal immigration, this should suffice.

The question that arises then is whether we should condemn illegal immigrants when the idea of the nation state is a mere political tool for winning the cooperation of the people. Two arguments particular to the US stress that the US brought illegal immigration upon itself. First, the US very strongly emphasizes market mechanisms. We don't have strong welfare programs like our European counterparts and we have a fair degree of vertical mobility. This creates an attraction for foreigners on two levels. First, the ones that come to the US for educational purposes tend to stay beyond their legal limit. This acts as a source of brain drain from most countries. In other words, the best minds aggregate within the US. Second, immigrants without education, but a comparative advantage in labor (This is the typical illegal immigrant you guys refer to) benefit from the US's market structure by providing cheap labor. Overall, the argument can be made that the US's culture, which emphasizes a "clash" of powers left to their own devices (i.e. market culture), attracts these individuals.

Supplementing this argument is the idea that the US stimulates interest in immigration to the US. One example of this is the Mexican peso crisis in which the US bailed out the Mexican government in exchange for repaying US investors. As a result, Mexico's domestic economy collapsed, which perpetuated the need for immigrants to go to the US. Other accounts include the fact that parts of Mexican land were taken away historically, so many feel that they're entitled to accessing such lands. Hence, it's typically argued that the US perpetuated the problem.

The last point refers to the type of characteristics of illegal immigrants and the statistics of the debate. Illegal immigrants, ironically, closely resemble the American dream image. They believe that the road to success is paved with poverty and their motivation is to work. If they're not there to work, they're wasting their time. At the same time, the numbers sometimes show that these illegal immigrants are contributing more to the state through economic development and property taxes than they receive in benefits. Of course, statistics can be skewed; especially in this case where we're dealing with an illegal entities. Consequently, proponents of illegal immigrants tend to have national interests in mind.

Opponents of illegal immigrants counter with personal claims. One is the competition generates within the work field. As mentioned, many Americans become unemployed because they don't have a comparative advantage in the market against these illegal immigrants. One counter to this point is to say "Hey, they're willing to work for longer hours and less wages". The counter to this argument typically relies on the nationalist notion of the state. "You should protect Americans because they're Americans" one might gesture. The problem then becomes one of buck passing. Can we say that national identity is an arbitrary political entity, so it holds no bearing in this discussion? Can we say that the US is cause of many of Mexico's domestic problems? Can we say that the law is the law? Within each of these ultimately underlies a fundamental irrationality that will skew your perspective of the subject.

Other arguments turn to the burdens placed on welfare. Again, much like with the proponent's statistics, it depends on how they're measured and whether they're even accounting for the entire population.

The most convincing argument against illegal immigrants, in my opinion, is one of cultural divide. It's clear that illegal immigrants tend to resist assimilation into US culture. This point is argued by Samuel Huntington in an article that addresses the social problem of illegal immigration. Florida, for example, is representative of a wealthy class of Cubans that fled when Castro took power. They invested in Florida and ultimately cultivated the region; thus, driving out many whites. Similarly, this is taking place along bordering states. However, the most enlightening aspect of this is the "why". Some argue that because they're illegal immigrants, they're not able to spread out as much as other immigrants within the US. This leads to clustering within certain communities. Clustering shapes the culture of the environment and changes it from an English speaking and protestant value culture to one of Spanish culture. This means that unlike other immigrants who tend to find their lack of assimilation (Broken English; knowledge of culture) embarrassing, these immigrants fully remain ignorant of American culture. They even go as far as to demand that the US change to accommodate Hispanic culture. Such efforts include the demand for bilingual education and attempts at making the US into a bilingual country. For many, including myself, this is a problem because it places unnecessary burdens on the remaining population. It's also hypocritical in the sense that they're essentially saying "We want American to incorporate both cultures, but we want you to be the one to change" since it's clear that some of these immigrants take no efforts towards learning English. Thus, the opponent's arguments are incorporate local economic concerns and national social concerns.

[Omniyoji]

Wow Yugl great read.
I'm pretty sure that was all you or did you copy pasta? Thanks again

[Yugl]

My work and thanks.

[Demosthenes11]

I'd love to see what removing all illegals from arizona would do to that state - economically and culturally. I think it's impossible to tell what would happen and could go in a number of directions.

[Olo401]

Oh man. I just want to say thank you to the GOP.

In the 30's you drove blacks from the Republican party and now your shedding Hispanics.

What they fail to understand is by 2040 its estimated that white people will no longer be the majority here and hispanics will more then likely become the new base for the Democratic party.

If this continues to happen the GOP will have essentially have signed their death warrant.

So again a big thank you to the Republican party.

They'll lose the mexicanos, but I guarantee you this isn't gonna drive the Cubanos away from the Republican Party. They have that same syndrome that Ahnuld has - the delusion that all dictators are liberals.

[Kuya]

We should also consider that job outsourcing or companies moving outside of the US to find cheaper labor incur more damage on the American lower and middle class than illegal immigrants, yet the latter seems to incite the most hostility.

[Churchill]

It would benefit people here and across the nation to actually read the bill.

Case in point, there is nothing inside of it that is any different than federal policy on the matter, all Arizona has done is make it a misdemeanor.

In the case of asking people to show proof of legal citizenship, police in Arizona already do this if they feel they need to.

I don't see any legitimate issues of racial profiling to come from this, Arizona knows it's under the microscope, and the Governor made it a point to put out to the state and the police in her speech today that none of that would be tolerated. What that actually means is there is most likely a memo/directive that went out to all the police agencies to exercise the law but not to get crazy with it.

Again, the only change this bill made was to make being illegal a misdemeanor. To say it's unconstitutional is pretty silly, and I'm a Constitution kind of guy.

[Cleverness]

Bout time someone cracked down on this shit. Hopefully other states will follow suit, and I can work again.

As the son of an immigrant I'd LOVE to see more people say this, so that they can see the low wage shitty jobs they have to deal with and stfu thinking the immigrants are coming over the border to steal office jobs or gunning for the new Manager position at some random company. Seriously, the majority of immigrants do work that noone wants to do. While I personally know a few who went on to do a few other things and get normal jobs, it's not normal and 9/10 you are doing a job that noone wants and if you don't have some nice fake papers you run the risk of getting fired/deported real fast. And yea you can't get a job as a teacher in a public school as an immigrant unless you live in some bitch state like Rhode Island or it's seriously corrupt. Even at a private school unless you're extremely fluent in English and have a lot of strong credentials your odds aren't anywhere near good. Although working as a tutor does work and I have a friend who did this for awhile until he became a legal resident since he has a degree back from DR.

I dunno about Arizona, but they crack down on that here in NY and we're nowhere near the border, if you as an employer are found hiring illegals then you can get fined. Even then most do it cause overtime the minimum wage you can get away paying these people makes you $$$. We're in a recession but I don't think 1/4 of the people looking for jobs are gonna want to do the jobs immigrants do everyday for what they get paid just cause Americans love unions and employers hate unions so the employer would rather slash those positions by half if he's gonna deal with union bullshit.

Maybe instead of partying like a douchebag looking at the immigrants playing with their bitches tits in the club you should be working on your resume and going to sleep to wake up early to look for work. Lol but wait, let's just blame it on immigrants that's easier.

[Beckwin]

Such efforts include the demand for bilingual education and attempts at making the US into a bilingual country. For many, including myself, this is a problem because it places unnecessary burdens on the remaining population. It's also hypocritical in the sense that they're essentially saying "We want American to incorporate both cultures, but we want you to be the one to change" since it's clear that some of these immigrants take no efforts towards learning English.

bilingual education isn't just for illegals, for one, and secondly it has numerous benefits that do not burden the country at all. first language competence allows for learning strategies and content knowledge to transfer to second language, enhancing English learning and progress in content areas instead of just essentially limiting students entire school experience based on their lack of English proficiency. bilingualism also has documented cognitive benefits and is a desirable trait in the workforce/business.

it's only the ignorant outlook on bilingualism which you offer that creates problems.

it gets especially ridiculous when we do all this comparing of our school system to other countries (in order to cut teachers, apparently, but that's another topic) when virtually all of our international competition emphasizes additional language learning more than we do. Japan, Korea, Singapore, Sweden- so many of the top ranks in education have major language requirements.

[Vajra]

Well basically, all the immigrants will leave Arizona, legal or illegal. The economy will tank there because they'll spend billions on extra law enforcement right off the bat, and then they'll be stuck with old retired people only. Come November, John McCain can join them and have old people party while eating applesauce and drinking prune juice. JOY ^_^d

BTW I'm Jamaican Nationality with German and East Indian background, and I learned Spanish easily by taking in High School and college for almost 10 years. I'm not fluent in it but at least I'm not all durr durr when I hear people talking Spanish. Maybe all those lazy white folk should stop acting so lame and embrace change. In 30 Years, minority will become majority while the majority becomes the minority. Hopefully China doesn't buy the USA by then, cause if they do then everyone including the Hispanic people will have to learn Mandarin...

[Yugl]

Well basically, all the immigrants will leave Arizona, legal or illegal. The economy will tank there because they'll spend billions on extra law enforcement right off the bat, and then they'll be stuck with old retired people only. Come November, John McCain can join them and have old people party while eating applesauce and drinking prune juice. JOY ^_^d

BTW I'm Jamaican Nationality with German and East Indian background, and I learned Spanish easily by taking in High School and college for almost 10 years. I'm not fluent in it but at least I'm not all durr durr when I hear people talking Spanish. Maybe all those lazy white folk should stop acting so lame and embrace change. In 30 Years, minority will become majority while the majority becomes the minority. Hopefully China doesn't buy the USA by then, cause if they do then everyone including the Hispanic people will have to learn Mandarin...

I'm Jamaican too (Half)! I also took Spanish, but then abandoned it for another language. However, I'll address the language issue in the following responses.

bilingual education isn't just for illegals, for one, and secondly it has numerous benefits that do not burden the country at all. first language competence allows for learning strategies and content knowledge to transfer to second language, enhancing English learning and progress in content areas instead of just essentially limiting students entire school experience based on their lack of English proficiency. bilingualism also has documented cognitive benefits and is a desirable trait in the workforce/business.

Indeed it isn't, but the common argument posed is that it has strong support within the Hispanic community because of illegal immigrants. Don't forget that some of the legal immigrants today may have had illegal background (i.e. they were born in the US, but their parents were here illegally).

Opponents of bilingual education would tackle your argument by resounding the side effects of a forced bilingual system and the importance of English as an international asset while posing the question of self-selection bias as a threat to the results of studies. First, by establishing a bilingual system, you're reducing the efficiency of education. Note that efficiency in this usage refers to the idea that you cannot improve on one aspect without reductions in another. Specifically, if you include Spanish in education, you're going to give up time, utility, and dedication towards other subjects (Math, English, Science, Social science, and so forth). For many, this is bad for two reasons. One reasoning is that it's simply unnecessary damage to the system. Another reason is that it may lead to higher costs as the generation in transition will have to hire teachers capable of providing lessons in both English and Spanish. Consider the impact on science and social science where special terms (Atoms, Legitimacy, and so forth) would require teachers with the ability to teach both English and Spanish terms. It also impacts students that have to learn the material in both languages; thus, reducing overall learning.

Second, it's a political problem for policymakers. Underlying a bilingual state idea is the rejection of other languages. For many individuals, acceptance of a system is offensive to the degree that their language is not incorporated at the national level. English is profoundly used, so it faces little political constraints, but inclusion of other languages may prove difficult.

Third, the impacts of a bilingual state would have implications for careers as well. By mandating dual language, it places a burden on those in society without access to that second language. Indeed, it is already the case that bilinguals tend to earn more money than non-bilinguals (Though this is subject to self-selection bias), but by mandating it, the gap is expected to increase further as people will soon find themselves out of work. In short, generational gaps make instant acceptance difficult.

Fourth, the English language has importance for the international community. It is seen as a necessary asset and often times mastery is necessary. This also bring up the point that if so many people are having difficulty in a system with only one language, the effects of a second one seem near devastating. For these reasons, a single language is important for both mastery purposes.

Finally, and this addresses your final points, opponents of a bilingual system argue that data on bilingual systems are subject to bias. For example, the cognitive benefits tend to show correlation rather than causation. Does this mean that cognitively strong individuals take up a second language or does taking up a second language benefit cognitive activity? The argument works either way since it could be that people prone to strong cognitive development realize the future benefits of a second language (As you mentioned, there are business purposes for it) and thus, learn a second language. It could also be, as you mentioned, that the second language improves cognitive development. Current psychology has difficult accounting for self-selection bias mechanisms (Which may also take the form of "People that participate in these studies are certain type of individuals, so certain features are exhibited because of that rather than the study outcomes").

In addition to self-selection bias, the countries you mentioned (Going off the "Opponent's reasoning" and giving you my personal statement now) have external factors that better explain educational outcomes. First, the state emphasizes education within these countries through selection mechanisms. By that I refer to entrance exams at very young ages (particularly in Japan). Students learn very quickly that they must study and pass exams in order to enter educational facilities. In the US, we have don't have these mechanisms until the college level. Even then, community colleges mean the education is only limited by money. Overall, the sorting effect of the education system in these countries tends may better explain their top ranks in education.

Another issue, aside from that fact that the reason they emphasize an additional language is because English is seen as important in the international sphere, is the varieties of capitalism. Soskice illustrates this best in his "Varieties of Capitalism" argument, but essentially it breaks down to the fact that skills needed in countries with varying welfare and government systems vary. The US and Britain, in particular, require general skills. The reason is because there's less cooperation between firms and government, career security is less stable. This means skills should be easily transferable between careers when within the US or Britain. Other countries such as Sweden (Business-Labor-Government meetings) and Japan (Zaibatsu relations) allow for better security; and thus, more investment into specific skills. This too may better explain the relative difference in education systems.

[archibaldcrane]

There are a lot more undocumented people than most are probably aware. I do think it's wrong to assume that all undocumented people are bad or out to steal other's jobs or something.... Then again, I have something against using the term 'illegal', rather than 'undocumented'. Evokes really negative connotations.

To be fair, "undocumented" implies that they could've been documented (and therefore legal) but weren't - when that really isn't the case.

[Ryukus]

I'm drunk right now but going to post my opinion. I had a job as a carpet mechanic for 3-4 years, and I watched as the industry got taken over. My employer went from paying good money for me busting my ass everyday, to "uhh I'll call you if I get any work." Never heard from him again. It went from people doing good jobs the first time to hiring anyone for the lowest wage, doing a shit job, and hiring a 30 year vet for one day to clean up the mess.

I prob shouldn't spend 12 bucks on beer but when my family is on the verge of losing the house I grew up in, but it kinda takes the edge off. I have been looking for a job for awhile and I'm far from lazy. The classifieds today had about one column of jobs on one page. One column.

I am not against legal immigration in anyway, nor am I for racial profiling. But when a problem is so out of control that 30 year vets of their trade are without work because it's cheaper to hire others for a half wage and fix it later, I have a problem. My stepfather worked 30 years for a roofing company. He was given a 30 year party and all that jazz. Two months later he was laid off.

Honestly, if I was lucky enough to have the money for a college education I'd probably be saying that no one wants to do the jobs illegals do. But I've been deal a shit hand and trust me, there are a ton of people out there who are legal citizens who pay taxes who want to work labor jobs. Labor doesn't imply minimum wage btw, there are alot of labor jobs that pay at least 50k/yr.
I will admit that if the economy wasn't so fucked up right now this would be alot less of an issue. But it doesn't change the fact that if you want to work in America, you should at least get a work visa, a greencard, or citizenship.

[archibaldcrane]

As the son of an immigrant I'd LOVE to see more people say this, so that they can see the low wage shitty jobs

>Implying that the wages would remain so low and the working conditions would be as shitty if they had to compete in the legal labor market.

[Lexa]

But it doesn't change the fact that if you want to work in America, you should at least get a work visa, a greencard, or citizenship.

...oh man, I wish I could just "get a work visa, a greencard, or citizenship."

I'm neither defending nor condemning illegal immigrants (mainly because I am not educated enough on the topic of America's immigration politics, and especially not the individual state's politics, to feel that I can make a sound argument in either direction), but speaking as someone currently trying to get into your country - legally and everything - getting into your country legally, and getting a work visa, is SHIT FUCKBALLS HARD.

(The "easiest way" being marrying into a greencard, which only costs a few thousand bucks, but they're not very happy about people who scam their way into that shit, and they DO check that shit.)

[archibaldcrane]

speaking as someone currently trying to get into your country - legally and everything - getting into your country legally, and getting a work visa, is SHIT FUCKBALLS HARD.

Location: Pennsylvania?