Would you support immigration to the US even if it "hurt" you?

[Trek234]

Would you support immigration to the US if it effected you negatively - such as someone from another nation potentially taking a job from you?

Personally I feel anyone in this nation who is anti-immigrant, who is not a native american, but intends to stay in this nation is pretty hypocrtical considering your familys immigration no doubt benefited greatly off the blood, land, and life of the native people from 200+ years ago and continues today.

Furthermore I feel that by simple virtue of being born in the united states you are not entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness any more than any other human regardless of where they may come from.

If a persecuted person from another nation comes here and "takes your job" - say a female person from Afghanistan - well, so be it. Odds are you will never be suffering any where NEAR the level of that Afghani as a result, and there are *always* low level jobs.

If you think that is wrong then personally I can not see how you would not support throwing jews in camps so that you may benefit off of their suffering because you are essentially throwing that Afghani (or any other person trying to come here for a better life) in to a virtual Nazi camp - all be it with a somewhat different style of persecution - so that you can keep a high-mid paying job instead of facing the absolute horror of minimum wage. They may be dead now, but at least you still have your hummer and nice house. And to hell if thousands of native americans died for my familys right to immigrate so that I may have my hummer and land.

[tkmorris]

1. Good question.

For me the answer is an emphatic yes. What is right or wrong is not defined by what benefits me personally. For far too many people it is.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

2. Who decides who gets to immigrate? The corporations?

Do corporations get to import workers strictly to take my job, like H1B visas? I don't even think you should call H1B "immigration" - since they aren't allowed to stay, and they aren't allowed to bring their families. That's unfair to me, and unfair to them.

I'm all for immigration, after all, we are a nation of immigrants. I'd like to go back to the traditional immigration policies, where people who had family connections and education got the first slot.

I don't think that corporations should decide who gets to immigrate, that is a decision that should be left to the democratic process. The new temporary immigration policies that are stricly designed to put Americans out of work, I don't support.

[Trek234]

5. You contradict your self

"where people who had family connections and education got the first slot."

So basically the rich and powerfull, and screw the poor?

So anyone who doesn't have the ability to get an education in their home country (yea, look at the female people in the middle east get a college education in their home nations - and you just KNOW how many colleges are available in Africa for everyone), or do not have "contacts" take second priority?

First you are bashing the corporations, then you support the way they think/operate... It doesn't work out.

And corporations are not deciding who gets to come here. Unless they are taking people at gun point, and shooting anyone else who tries to come in you don't have a case.

"new temporary immigration policies that are stricly designed to put Americans out of work" Yea that's what the H1B visa is. I'm sure in congress it was called the "put americans out of work act". In europe they usually call them "highly skilled migrant" programmes.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

9. No I didn't, you are misrepresenting what I said

I know a lot of US citizens and residents that have family overseas, and I think their families should get the first shot to immigrate here. That reunites families and that's good for America and good for immigrants.

You can talk all you want about bringing the poor en masse to the US, but it isn't going to happen, and I'm sure you know that. Clinton sure as hell kept the poor Haitians out of the US, you think any Democrat is going to be different? Nice oh-so concerned for the poor pose you're striking there, but it ain't gonna happen. Are you going to put them up at your house?

"And corporations are not deciding who gets to come here. Unless they are taking people at gun point, and shooting anyone else who tries to come in you don't have a case."

Well, you are wrong, they are. The corporations get to apply for visas to bring the people they chose here. Gunpoint? That's BS, what are you talking about?

""new temporary immigration policies that are stricly designed to put Americans out of work" Yea that's what the H1B visa is. "

Yes, that's exactly what it is.

Nice try, but you'll have to do better than that.

[Trek234]

Hmmm

"I know a lot of US citizens and residents that have family overseas, and I think their families should get the first shot to immigrate here. That reunites families and that's good for America and good for immigrants."

Sounds good to me. Last I checked though - anyone here on just about any visa (no, not all but pretty close) have the RIGHT to bring any family under age 18 AND spouse. If you mean your distant cousin and other such family, then yes, that is different under law.

"You can talk all you want about bringing the poor en masse to the US, but it isn't going to happen, and I'm sure you know that. Clinton sure as hell kept the poor Haitians out of the US, you think any Democrat is going to be different? Nice oh-so concerned for the poor pose you're striking there, but it ain't gonna happen. Are you going to put them up at your house?"

I never said bring the poor in mass.

FYI Clinton isn't god and he sure as hell isn't representative of all democrats. And yes - the Democrats I support - REAL Democrats - ARE different and DO support immigration. I don't know about your republican-lite democrats. Don't tell me "it ain't gonna happen". I support immigration law allowing for what I have previously stated. It "ain't" gonna happen if the opposition wins, but maybe I should crticize you for wanting Bush out of office. "So WhoCountsTheVotes, oh so concerned for the nation you wanting Bush out of office. Gore sure as hell kept Bush out of office. It ain't gonna happen. You gonna count the votes your self?" You realize how foolish you sound? Back to the matter at hand - Can I do anything to support the immigration law I support other than telling/lobbying my congress people? Not really. I can't force Trent Lott to vote for it anymore than you can force the vote counting to be fair in all 50 states - but I DO support it and THAT is the issue here. I also support impeaching Bush - can I make it happen? - hell no, but I support it.

"Well, you are wrong, they are. The corporations get to apply for visas to bring the people they chose here. "

So? This is can be done in EVERY nation in Europe! It is done this way in many more nations as well.

" Gunpoint? That's BS, what are you talking about?"

You stated corporations decide who comes here. I called BS on you. They can bring people to work for them but they are in NO WAY stopping or allowing people to come here for any other reason.

[Rainydaze]

6. I support immigration:

Some of our greatest and brightest came through Staten Island and changed America for the better. Even though the H1B people may take jobs away from birth citizens, they enrich us by far both culturally and economically as they become part of our system. I take real affront by those among our citizenry that believe in the democracy for us but not them. It's that "I've got mine so fark the new guy" mentality that allowed the conservative take over of the government. (I believe this explains both Colin Powell and Condi the Harpy) Combined with the big lie of unrestrained freemarket capitalism being good for the working class, we actually have people believing that Arch-conservatism is good for the economy.

I have a feeling the Bushco vibe isn't really Democrat V. Republican, or White V. Brown, or even Established moneyed interests V. new citizens; but more of a class warfare thing, along the lines of Progressives versus Landed interests.

Many of the Bush crowd are merely acting to preserve their special privilages of the plutarchy. This leads them to be anti-immigrant, anti-reform, and lastly anti-worker.
I believe that most if not all of the RNC do not believe in their own party platforms, rather they are in favor of the status quo; and will pay lip-service to non-issues in order to garner votes. (Prayer in schools, abortion, school vouchers)

Sorry if I ranted a bit.
Rainydaze.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

10. H1B visas don't even get to stay in the US

What a crock of BS! H1B visas get to stay here for a few months, can't bring their family, and when their company is through with them, they get deported. That's the "liberal" immigration policy you support?

Sounds to me like you support indentured servitude. No thanks.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

15. One can make things less convenient for business manipulation without

compromising freedom and open borders. The fact that business may bring labor over to undermine wages in the US should not punish the individual. By comparison, those coming to the US under h1B's will return to their own countries with a desire to improve their lifestyle..in the long run, multinationals might just end up having to play fair in those nations.

[Trek234]

23. WHO deports them?

The corporation or the government?

Sounds like the government screwed this one up - not the corporations who are acting under the law. (and I'm not one to easily defend corporations)

I support amending this visa to allow a stay.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. Welcome to DU Rainydaze! Great post!

[Friar]

17. welcome Rainy

:toast:

They are anti-worker, but not anti-immigrant. If a corporation can hire a guy for 50% less salary than a citizen born here, it will do everything it can to allow that. Our current fascist oligarchy has increased the number of foreign born worker's visas, especially in the high tech market, a real conundrum for the Office of Homeland Security. Remarkably, this does not include Canadians.

disclaimer: I haven't actually researched this but it came from a knowledgeable friend. Please debunk if not true.

[Trek234]

24. Good point

But don't punish the person who wants to come here because of the acts of a corporation. Instead ammend the law so that corporation can't get away with screwing people over. (and we need A LOT of laws to address those issues...)

[Rainydaze]

18. I should clarify a bit.

I think H1B immigrants should have a chance a citizenship. We don't need to import workers temporarily, we need productive and educated citizens. We also need to address the fact that we don't reimburse our own educated citizenry enough, instead saving the money for certain high profile glamour professions. As a college educated, and recently unemployed computer type person, the laundering of jobs to India has affected me directly. But if an Indian engineer wants to come to the U.S. with his family, GOOD! Wonderful! I'm pro-immigration, but anti-corporate flight.

I hope that clarify's my position a bit.


Rainydaze.

[LoneStarLiberal]

3. Lost Reason

A good God-fearing conservative would simply say this:

A) Afghans are godless heathens so screw'em;
B) Screw the Native Americans; we beat them and they lost

I know it's a foolish way of thinking, but that is how many of the suburbanites who vote Bush think. They see no problem in pulling the ladder up behind them because "we took what was ours" and any Afghani or Iraqi is simply trying to take it from us.

Applying even the most elementary lessons in reason and civic responsibility to these people is hopeless. They hit their ceiling a few rungs short of the rest of us on the evolutionary ladder and there's nothing you can do to convince them that their blighted ignorance is simply that and not a mandate from God.

[Kamika]

4. USA wouldnt be USA without immigration

Id never ever say no to true immigration. Its what makes this country great.

By true i mean people who actually wants a better life and prepared to do their best to get it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. If

a person can do my job better than me he is entitled to my job whether he came over on the Mayflower or a raft.

[Friar]

21. a person who can do my job better than me

needs to just go away! Nothing to see here. We're not hiring. You're over qualified.

[qandnotq]

7. let me guess

you've taken a vow of poverty. you live on unleaved bread and water and wear rags. you give every nickel you make to the downtrodden and poor of the world. otherwise, everything you have is essentially stolen from poor Afghani women so that you may benefit off their suffering.

[Trek234]

11. FYI

I have few dollars to my name right now and a few possessions.

It's so great being a rich and powerful student. Maybe today I'll buy Boardwalk if that damn spindle hasn't taken it up already...

How much money do you have?

Please spare me your republican style argument.

Answer me this: Are you against that Afghani coming to this nation? It certainly sounds like you are against it - and you're trying to cover it up by a seriously flawed accusation that *I* - being the one SUPPORTING giving jobs and immigrating people - am the one at fault because I am not giving them all that I have. (and make no mistake if I ever DO have money like the republicans I WILL be giving a hell of a lot if it to charity - I swear to god about that. Even though I'm an atheist.)

Get this straight - NO ONE said "let's give everyone who is less fortunate everything we have" (that sounds like republican bull sh** about democrats to me). But if you want to come to this country and get a job to make your life better YOU CAN DO THAT. At least I am willing to GIVE THEM THE OPPURTUNITY while you sit to the right talking about how superior you are to ME who will GIVE THEM THAT CHANCE but isn't also giving them a million dollars.

[qandnotq]

20. morally superior?

"At least I am willing to GIVE THEM THE OPPURTUNITY while you sit to the right talking about how superior you are to ME"

Where did I do that? If I recall, you're the one who thinks that I support "throwing jews in camps" to benefit off their suffering if I don't support unlimited immigration. You say "they may be dead now, but at least you still have your hummer and nice house." Well, dead is dead whether it's because of lack of immigration or because you ate a twinkie instead of donating that dollar to charity. I'm just pointing out that your hysterical rhetoric is perhaps a little inconsistent morally.

Oh, and I do support unlimited immigration.

[Trek234]

26. I see where you're coming from

"Where did I do that?"

Perhaps I read you wrong - but your previous post sounds to me like you are saying "Screw immigration because we are going to give them everything we have"

"If I recall, you're the one who thinks that I support "throwing jews in camps" to benefit off their suffering if I don't support unlimited immigration. You say "they may be dead now, but at least you still have your hummer and nice house." Well, dead is dead whether it's because of lack of immigration or because you ate a twinkie instead of donating that dollar to charity. I'm just pointing out that your hysterical rhetoric is perhaps a little inconsistent morally."

Yes, I believe that you are in many cases leaving people to death if you deny immigration to this nation. And there are different types of "death". Take again female people from middle eastern nations that don't allow you to go outside with male family, no work, little or no school, forced marriage, and then maybe spend your existance as a baby factory. You may be living, but do you really consider that a "life"? Not if you want to travel, have a job, or be treated as a human being. I support giving people the oppurtunity to change that. Can I do it my self? No. I can't give unlimited money to charities because it's not within my power to do. Nor can I feed and cloth everyone in the world. But you won't find me going republican on them and stealing what they have and trying to keep them down either.

[zoidberg]

12. Great topic - yes

I don't think I have any more of a right to a job than anybody else in this world. If somebody from India or Mexico or China wants to put everything on the line to come to this country - then they have every right to do so and 'take' whatever job they can.

[FloridaPat]

14. Gee, after being unemployed for 7 months and

not being able to find a job as a computer programmer because companies want to pay immigrants a lot less than me. And watching my computer friends look for jobs for up to two years now - well I can truly say I am anit-foreign worker. And what does that have to do with throwing Jews in Camps? That has nothing to do with jobs yet. There are big companies bringing in thousands from India to replace Americans because they are cheaper. Well, tough cookies. These CEOs make millions a year. So I should give up all my training and go be a greeter at Walmart so they can get bigger bonsues bring in foregin workers? What's going to happen when we are all working for Walmart? And it's the CEO's with the Hummers because the government picks up the tab on those things when a corporation buys them.

[acerbic]

16. So do you want to stop ALL immigration

...or only immigration by programmers?

[Rainydaze]

22. A question FloridaPat?

Perhaps you aren't anti-immigrant. But anti-corporate policy. I'm in much the same situation. Perhaps identical, it seems we are in a new guilded age. Where the C.E.O's play with the lives of their employees only to increase stock margins, then bail before the company tanks. I've worked for MCIWORLDCOM, INACOM, and a few others, and have been burnt a few times by just those behaviors.

The immigrant worker really isn't the problem from where I see it. It's the paymaster who will avoid paying the fieldhand using whatever means necessary. If it's the immigrants today, it will be something else tomorrow. The system is flawed, and that's why I'm a progressive.

[Friar]

25. Don't be anti-immigrant,

be pro-wage control. I know that sounds socialistic or whatever but since the VRWC has decimated the unions something needs to be done to protect our rights as workers to livable wages. I don't have a solution (I am not a socialist).

[ulysses]

19. yup.

What kills me are all the folks who rant against immigrants for taking jobs in America because they're poor, yet who have no problem at all with companies sending the jobs to other countries because they want to be more wealthy.

:crazy:

[Isome]

29. Let's be realistic...

No one can "take" your job from you because you don't have the power to keep it indefinitely. You keep your job as long as the powers that be within your company find it's cost efficient to retain you.

If immigrants come here and fill positions that citizens previously filled, rest assured they gave your job away because it fattens their bottom line.

[acerbic]

27. Some VERY basic logic about immigration and unemployment

Thingy "A" doesn't change over time period "x".
Thingy "B" changes radically and suddenly over time period "x".
Thingy "C" changes at about the same time as "B".

Who would dare claim with great certainty that thingy "A" is the one that caused the change in thingy "C"? Huh?

Now, just replace "A" with "immigration", "B" with "economic policy of Clinton vs. Dumbya" and "C" with "unemployment" and please, please try really hard to :think:

[QC]

28. Two very tough issues

that have to be addressed if we are to have open immigration.

One is the impact on wages. As things stand now, the minimum wage is worth less than it was in the 1950s and there's not a snowball's chance in hell of raising it with this bunch in power. Unemployment is the highest it's been in 20 years.

Big Business Inc. has traditionally loved immigration because it pushes down wages by creating a surplus of workers. (Take a look back to the 19th and early 20th centuries--immigrant laborers were favored as strike-breakers by folks like Frick and Carnegie.) How can we solve the problem of immigration's impact on wages? Not in an ideal world, but in the one in which we actually live, where the law of supply and demand applies and the corporations control the political, economic, and media establishments.

The second issue to consider is the potential environmental impact of a much larger population. Can the U.S. support 500,000,000 people adequately? 1,000,000,000? Is there enough food? Enough living space? Housing? What would the pollution be like?

I am troubled by restrictions on immigration, but I am also troubled by the thought of living in an overpopulated country with the wage structure of Bangladesh.

Any ideas for how to deal with mass immigration's impact on wages and the environment?

[Rainydaze]

30. I stand corrected on the anti-immigrant comment:

They are pro-immigrant. But would they prefer H1B style tidal employment, or permanent immigrants? I suppose it depends on the bottom line.

[Trek234]

31. Hmmm

"One is the impact on wages. As things stand now, the minimum wage is worth less than it was in the 1950s and there's not a snowball's chance in hell of raising it with this bunch in power. Unemployment is the highest it's been in 20 years.

Big Business Inc. has traditionally loved immigration because it pushes down wages by creating a surplus of workers. (Take a look back to the 19th and early 20th centuries--immigrant laborers were favored as strike-breakers by folks like Frick and Carnegie.) How can we solve the problem of immigration's impact on wages? Not in an ideal world, but in the one in which we actually live, where the law of supply and demand applies and the corporations control the political, economic, and media establishments."

As long as republicans are in office and to a lesser degree irresponsible democrats this will be a problem. I see no reason a congress controlled by democrats could not work something out though. Hopefully after Bush crashes and burns in the 04 election the congress will shift to democrats in the coming terms if everything goes ok.

"The second issue to consider is the potential environmental impact of a much larger population. Can the U.S. support 500,000,000 people adequately? 1,000,000,000? Is there enough food? Enough living space? Housing? What would the pollution be like? "

This is an issue for the world more than the United States alone. This is why I feel a MAJOR emphasis should be put on colonization of space. There is no reason we should not have a colony on the moon today. We have the technology and we should be spending it on such useful measures for all humans rather than bombs.

Think about it though - when the US population reaches a billion people the earth will likely be going on MAJOR population overload mode... This could lead to all hell breaking loose if we don't start working on solutions now. (see above for one)