Immigration: Chances are good for sweeping immigration reform

Jan 25, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: New York Daily News

Senators Schumer, Rubio and Reid, and Congressmen Boehner, Ryan and Gutierrez will all have strong motivation to push the Obama Administration to enact sweeping immigration reform As expected, President Obama confirmed his support for immigration reform in his inaugural address.

Comments
61 - 80 of 132 Comments Last updated Apr 20, 2013

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#84 Feb 9, 2013
WhoKnows wrote:
<quoted text>I don't think to many people would mind them working in some jobs if those jobs were not desireable to an American, however, we don't want them in our communities it's that cut and dry.
I agree- that's why we need a rational guest worker program. One that will meet the needs of American employers while giving foreigners some reasonable hope that they can work here if they play by the rules.

However, as long as the "rules" give foreigners no chance of ever being able to come here, they will simply break the rules.
ima

El Paso, TX

#85 Feb 9, 2013
juan wrote:
<quoted text> no if u think about it you are the pipi less bi%& h youre just to stupid to realize
Of course I'm pipi-less I'm a woman, BUT YOU LOST YOUR PIPI WAY BACK IN THIS FORUM, didn't you? or Petro said so....this is hilarious, pipi-less juan...from Codi Ca. LOL ! LOL !
ima

El Paso, TX

#86 Feb 9, 2013
Lodi, Codi California WHATEVER! the fact remains that juan is pipi-less.
2 posts removed

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#89 Feb 12, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree- that's why we need a rational guest worker program. One that will meet the needs of American employers while giving foreigners some reasonable hope that they can work here if they play by the rules.

However, as long as the "rules" give foreigners no chance of ever being able to come here, they will simply break the rules.
We allow in over 900,000 legal immigrants a year. Our current population is around 315 Million (wag), how many more will make you happy?

Quality of Life in the US

United States of America

Population Change (1980-2008)

Each county on this map is colored based on the increase in population
between the years of 1980 and 2008.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/maps... \&lid=9&rid=1774&t id=483228\

United States Population Counter

http://www.superteachertools.com/classroom-to...

“Rico's Are Everywhere”

Since: Dec 09

Gangland, North America

#90 Feb 12, 2013
Cricket 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
We allow in over 900,000 legal immigrants a year. Our current population is around 315 Million (wag), how many more will make you happy?
Quality of Life in the US
United States of America
Population Change (1980-2008)
Each county on this map is colored based on the increase in population
between the years of 1980 and 2008.
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/maps... \&lid=9&rid=1774&t id=483228\
United States Population Counter
http://www.superteachertools.com/classroom-to...
But not a single Republican candidate has spoken up for the idea that America is an under-populated country. In terms of population density, it is, at 83 persons a square mile, an impoverished country, barely a quarter of the rich density of China, which is running way behind India. America just has enormous room for population growth.

via A GOP Default October 18, 2011 The New York Sun.

But we know what your real argument is all about..... you simply don't like the current immigrants entering the USA.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#91 Feb 12, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>
But not a single Republican candidate has spoken up for the idea that America is an under-populated country. In terms of population density, it is, at 83 persons a square mile, an impoverished country, barely a quarter of the rich density of China, which is running way behind India. America just has enormous room for population growth.
via A GOP Default October 18, 2011 The New York Sun.
But we know what your real argument is all about..... you simply don't like the current immigrants entering the USA.
rico.. have you been to india or china? I have. I've been around the world in my travels.

let me tell you what I saw in many of these places... extreme poverty.

mainland china is about the same size land wise as the usa. they have around 1.3 billion people. we have about 330 million.

did you know that only about 300 million of those 1.3 billion in mainland china are really experiencing any quality of life? those faces you see on tv, in pictures from china are the lucky 300 million.

the same holds true for india.

guess what is happening with the other billion chinese? the answer - nothing. they are in the exact state they were before china embarked on their economic growth since nixon went over there. poor and impoverished.

the probability is that if we add another billion citizens to the rank and file, we will become like china. a country with large numbers of poor and impoverished.

is that what you want?

the statistics show that if we open up our borders, the numbers coming in from the south will pale from the numbers coming in from asia.

the statistics show that there are about 650 million people living in the americas south of the border. there are over 6 billion human beings on this planet. did you know that, rico?

let me ask you something, rico. since you think it's a racist thing for why the usa is not allowing more non-citizens in...how do you feel about rubbing shoulders with a majority of asians in the usa in the near future?

that is what will happen if we open the borders.

imagine a usa where 50+ percent of the citizens are asian? 500+ million "asian guys". could you deal with that, rico?

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#92 Feb 13, 2013
Cricket 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
We allow in over 900,000 legal immigrants a year. Our current population is around 315 Million (wag), how many more will make you happy?
Quality of Life in the US
United States of America
Population Change (1980-2008)
Each county on this map is colored based on the increase in population
between the years of 1980 and 2008.
It depends on the needs of employers. The need for workers rises and falls with the economy.

The USA is NOT "full." This is a huge nation, with a relatively low population density compared to most modern industrial nations.

Massive portions of the USA are damned near empty- you can drive for hours and see nothing but the occasional ranch house (take a drive through West Texas, Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, or many of the other areas in the midwest). Even some parts of populous states (e.g. upstate NY) are sparsely populated (the same is true with many other old industrial parts of the Northeast and Midwest).

We could double our population and not come close to being "full."

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#93 Feb 13, 2013
Asian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
rico.. have you been to india or china? I have. I've been around the world in my travels.
let me tell you what I saw in many of these places... extreme poverty.
mainland china is about the same size land wise as the usa. they have around 1.3 billion people. we have about 330 million.
did you know that only about 300 million of those 1.3 billion in mainland china are really experiencing any quality of life? those faces you see on tv, in pictures from china are the lucky 300 million.
the same holds true for india.
guess what is happening with the other billion chinese? the answer - nothing. they are in the exact state they were before china embarked on their economic growth since nixon went over there. poor and impoverished.
the probability is that if we add another billion citizens to the rank and file, we will become like china. a country with large numbers of poor and impoverished.
is that what you want?
I think you are looking at it backwards.

China is a nation with 300 million doing well and 1 Billion not doing well. 30 years ago, it was a nation where no one was doing well.

In other words, China was a nation of poor peasants that has managed to become partially industrialized.

That is NOT the situation here. The USA is already a modern industrial nation. We would be merely adding a relatively small number of people to supplement those currently here, doing the low wage jobs. Just as immigrants have done in this country since the colonial days. The "new" Americans always took the crap jobs until they became established- whether they were Irish in the 1840s-90s, Italians in the 1900s, Poles and other Eastern Europeans after WWI, Vietnamese in the '70s, and Hispanics today (well, actually, the Hispanics have been coming here forever).

My Irish and Ukrainian ancestors took back breaking labor jobs that paid very little. Your ancestors probably did, too. I'm NOT going to do those jobs (and neither will most other native born Americans), so someone has to do them. It doesn't really matter if those people are from Mexico, China, Ethiopia, or Bosnia.
serfs up

Kissimmee, FL

#94 Feb 13, 2013
You must add the true taxation,endless printing of fiat money, deficits till kingdom come to the mix. Basically, the massive spending since the "great society" inception. Groups came here in low taxes with a strong family setting in real terms. Today it is high taxation with a fragmented family setting in real terms. Of course these are percentages that have shifted. This is not minor. It is a major problem and will be part of our final solution in some way to survive as a nation, a culture and a way of life.
ASIA AFRO LATIN MID EAST

United States

#95 Feb 13, 2013
Cricket 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
We allow in over 900,000 legal immigrants a year. Our current population is around 315 Million (wag), how many more will make you happy?
Quality of Life in the US
United States of America
Population Change (1980-2008)
Each county on this map is colored based on the increase in population
between the years of 1980 and 2008.
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/maps... \&lid=9&rid=1774&t id=483228\
United States Population Counter
http://www.superteachertools.com/classroom-to...
As to quality of life, your Own US corrupted in Power , the greedy and Corrupted In US power: US Lobbies, US Corporatism, US Military Industrail Complex, US politicians, US neocons, US white Supermarcist, US Right Wing Christain Caolitions ... JAJJAJAJAJAJAJa

he US Militaristic interventionist imperailism , as your obnoxious NAFTA, other FTA bills protecting your insidious greedy US corporations raped many American Jobs at home and in Mexico to move it Operations overseas , for competitive advantage , slave wages...and this had ruined our US economy and also ruined the Mexican Economy at borders and Ruined Chinas Economy that use to have an Agricultural base to support Mexican/China Livelihood, and as these greedy /corrupted US industries came in and polluted Mexican borders and China with industrial toxic waste , as these Agriculture land supported many farmers for millineum and can not be returned to former means Mexicans and chinese and other nations Laborers have no alternative as land is polluted by your greedy predatory US corporations, and once US Corporation moved overseas leaving the Mexicans and China and others looking for jobs northward into US they come, don't u just love US globalist Militaristic Imperialism agenda. It is endless cycle of greedy US corporations abuses and plunders of other nations raw resources and for land use and abuse other nations intellectual cpital to make US war machines... The Mexicans, Muslims, ASIANS.... or illegal would had stay home if our polluting US industries stay put at home and did not take advantage of other nations environment, raw resources and land for its own use , and to provide necessAry funds for cleanup of overseas land polluted by US industries , none of big mess would had happen and migration of immigrants (illegal and legal) into corrupted USA . And, you AND ME, and all THE Americans have to deal with it, Stop whining you Big bully BAD BOB the US War monger /predators /plunderers and cry AND WHINEY BABies ! bwhhqahhhahhhaaaa

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#96 Feb 13, 2013
Rico from East Los II wrote:
<quoted text>

But not a single Republican candidate has spoken up for the idea that America is an under-populated country.

In terms of population density, it is, at 83 persons a square mile, an impoverished country, barely a quarter of the rich density of China, which is running way behind India.

America just has enormous room for population growth.

via A GOP Default October 18, 2011 The New York Sun.
But we know what your real argument is all about..... you simply don't like the current immigrants entering the USA.
Well "RICO" if we build on the tillable farm land we have left now,how will we grow our own food??

Google it and tell me how much food we import now!

Quality of Life in the US

United States of America

Population Change (1980-2008)

Each county on this map is colored based on the increase in population
between the years of 1980 and 2008.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/maps... \&lid=9&rid=1774&t id=483228\

Tick,Tick,Tick

United States Population Counter

http://www.superteachertools.com/classroom-to...

How many more will make you happy "Rico"?

Send me a post when we reach that number!

LOL!!!

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#97 Feb 13, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>

It depends on the needs of employers. The need for workers rises and falls with the economy.

The USA is NOT "full." This is a huge nation, with a relatively low population density compared to most modern industrial nations.

Massive portions of the USA are damned near empty- you can drive for hours and see nothing but the occasional ranch house (take a drive through West Texas, Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, or many of the other areas in the midwest).

Even some parts of populous states (e.g. upstate NY) are sparsely populated (the same is true with many other old industrial parts of the Northeast and Midwest).

We could double our population and not come close to being "full."
Read post above, the land you're talking about is not tillable to grow food on or live in.

Its called the Desert!

Haven't you figured out why no one lives there now?

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#98 Feb 13, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are looking at it backwards.
China is a nation with 300 million doing well and 1 Billion not doing well. 30 years ago, it was a nation where no one was doing well.
In other words, China was a nation of poor peasants that has managed to become partially industrialized.
That is NOT the situation here. The USA is already a modern industrial nation. We would be merely adding a relatively small number of people to supplement those currently here, doing the low wage jobs. Just as immigrants have done in this country since the colonial days. The "new" Americans always took the crap jobs until they became established- whether they were Irish in the 1840s-90s, Italians in the 1900s, Poles and other Eastern Europeans after WWI, Vietnamese in the '70s, and Hispanics today (well, actually, the Hispanics have been coming here forever).
My Irish and Ukrainian ancestors took back breaking labor jobs that paid very little. Your ancestors probably did, too. I'm NOT going to do those jobs (and neither will most other native born Americans), so someone has to do them. It doesn't really matter if those people are from Mexico, China, Ethiopia, or Bosnia.
How many relatives of illegal aliens came here under the "Chain Migration" act after 1986?
1 post removed

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#100 Feb 14, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are looking at it backwards.
China is a nation with 300 million doing well and 1 Billion not doing well. 30 years ago, it was a nation where no one was doing well.
In other words, China was a nation of poor peasants that has managed to become partially industrialized.
That is NOT the situation here. The USA is already a modern industrial nation. We would be merely adding a relatively small number of people to supplement those currently here, doing the low wage jobs. Just as immigrants have done in this country since the colonial days. The "new" Americans always took the crap jobs until they became established- whether they were Irish in the 1840s-90s, Italians in the 1900s, Poles and other Eastern Europeans after WWI, Vietnamese in the '70s, and Hispanics today (well, actually, the Hispanics have been coming here forever).
My Irish and Ukrainian ancestors took back breaking labor jobs that paid very little. Your ancestors probably did, too. I'm NOT going to do those jobs (and neither will most other native born Americans), so someone has to do them. It doesn't really matter if those people are from Mexico, China, Ethiopia, or Bosnia.
are you for real?

you make it sound like a cakewalk. no problems will occur with such a massive exodus of people coming in.

bullshit.

as for your story about how our ancestors were able to deal with a huge influx of immigrants... fact is, the usa has never remotely had the numbers that would come in with another amnesty.

study your history before you talk about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_t...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration

on china.. they have a one child per family policy. why do you think they have that?

guy, there are a lot of problems with having a lot of people in one place. like limited fresh water resources, food, and jobs, etc.

and frankly, I don't want that to happen to my country.

I want plenty of open spaces for future generations. and not have to burden them with having to share with so many others when it is not necessary.

these illegal aliens can go fix their own countries if they want to have the same standard of living that we do.

if they are as you say, so hard working and good faring people. what's stopping them?

on jobs... you keep talking about all these jobs that americans won't do. yeah, we have some. but from what I read, the numbers over equate to 2% of our total jobs. so, why do we need 20-50 millions of illegals to do these jobs?

fact is - these 20-50 million illegals are actually taking jobs away from americans. with double digit unemployment pretty much all over the usa, this is obviously the case.

how do I feel about jobs? american jobs?..in a nutshell, if there is even one usa citizen out of work, they should not have to compete with a non-citizen for those jobs. PERIOD.

that is the policy of many if not most countries in the world including mexico.

bottomline, we should not have another amnesty. it won't be good for us.
1 post removed

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#102 Feb 16, 2013
Cricket 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Read post above, the land you're talking about is not tillable to grow food on or live in.
Its called the Desert!
Haven't you figured out why no one lives there now?
Nonsense.

Much of the land I talk about is FEDERAL land- huge swaths of perfectly good land, especially in the Western USA, is Federally owned (and it is NOT park land)- perfectly good land for raising crops, timber, or whatever, that is just unused. As an example, almost FIFTY PERCENT of the land in California is Federal- much of that land could be used to grow food or timber. Roughly 20% of the land in the USA is Federal (and States own or control even more, with restrictions or prohibitions on growing crops- e.g. the huge Adirondack preserve in upstate NY).

Go to page 4 of this document to see a state by state listing of the amount of land owned by the Feds (and even more is controlled/restricted by the Feds or by state/local government).

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf

The USA is nowhere near it's potential farm capacity even on the land it currently farms, to say nothing of all that land that is just sitting unused.

I won't even get into the whole "corn for ethanol" issue, where huge amounts of our best farm land is now being foolishly wasted growing corn to be turned into fuel rather than for food.

Yes, we import a lot of food (we also export a lot of food, btw). NOT because "we don't have the capacity" but because that foreign food is either something that doesn't grow well here (coffee/tea, bananas, etc) or where the foreign produced stuff is preferred by US consumers (French wine, English Cheese, German beer/sausage, Asian soy sauce, or whatever), or where the foreigners just produce it cheaper and more efficiently (e.g. farm raised fish from asia). We live in a global market now, so we will continue to import (and export) a lot of food.

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#103 Feb 16, 2013
Asian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
are you for real?
you make it sound like a cakewalk. no problems will occur with such a massive exodus of people coming in.
bullshit.
I'll answer your "intellectual" argument, even though it's probably not worthy of an answer.

I never said anything about "cake walks." However, I do believe we have the capacity AND the need for more workers. We need a rational program to allow workers to come here- something along the lines of work permits. We also need welfare reform so that those who come here do so to WORK, not lay around and collect benefits (like so many Americans do).

"as for your story about how our ancestors were able to deal with a huge influx of immigrants... fact is, the usa has never remotely had the numbers that would come in with another amnesty.
study your history before you talk about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_t...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration" ;

Don't take this the wrong way, but I suspect I am vastly superior to you both educationally and intellectually, so I hardly need your instruction to "study" a Wikipedia page.

"on china.. they have a one child per family policy. why do you think they have that?"

The Chinese government, historically, has done a lot of stupid things, and that includes it's days as an empire and a Republic. People have speculated many reasons why the Chinese dictatorship passed this particular law beyond the purported reason. We could have a long discussion about it, but I don't think that is what you really had in mind.

Interesting that we are discussing China, though. A nation with roughly the same land mass as the USA, but with roughly 5 times the population of the USA, a much poorer infrastructure than the USA, a poorer government than the USA, nowhere near as effective an economic system as the USA, but which still seems to be doing pretty well. How can a nation with all those disadvantages still be succeeding?

It can make one wonder if the arguments about the USA being "filled to capacity" might not be a bit specious.

"guy, there are a lot of problems with having a lot of people in one place. like limited fresh water resources, food, and jobs, etc.
and frankly, I don't want that to happen to my country."

This sort of argument was being used by "real 'Murricans" even in the 1840's to keep the "filthy, lazy, decadent, uneducated Irish heathens" out.

And, of course, that sort of thought led to the Chinese Exclusion Act that kept the filthy, lazy, decadent, uneducated, violent Chinese heathens out.

Clearly, I don't agree that this nation is anywhere near "full."

"these illegal aliens can go fix their own countries if they want to have the same standard of living that we do."

This is my favorite RIDICULOUS anti-immigration argument.

People sitting there saying "why don't they stay and fix their own country" when THEIR ANCESTORS CLEARLY DID NOT. You are in the USA, which means YOUR ANCESTORS chose to NOT FIX "THEIR COUNTRY" and chose to come here instead.

But you tell them to "fix" their country?

Hypocritical, to say the least.

"bottomline, we should not have another amnesty. it won't be good for us."

I don't support amnesty, I support a rational system to allow people to come here to work when needed and maybe allowing some of them to eventually become citizens. But it has to be a system that gives people hope- if Mexicans (and others) feel that they have no chance of being able to come here to work by "playing by the rules," they will simply not follow the rules.

With our current system, a Mexican worker has about as much chance of entering the USA legally as I do of winning the power ball lottery. Our current system is, effectively, a BAN on Mexicans coming here legally.

That is not a rational system- it's not good for the Mexicans, and it's not good for the USA.

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#104 Feb 16, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't take this the wrong way, but I suspect I am vastly superior to you both educationally and intellectually, so I hardly need your instruction to "study" a Wikipedia page.
"on china.. they have a one child per family policy. why do you think they have that?"
The Chinese government, historically, has done a lot of stupid things, and that includes it's days as an empire and a Republic. People have speculated many reasons why the Chinese dictatorship passed this particular law beyond the purported reason. We could have a long discussion about it, but I don't think that is what you really had in mind.
Interesting that we are discussing China, though. A nation with roughly the same land mass as the USA, but with roughly 5 times the population of the USA, a much poorer infrastructure than the USA, a poorer government than the USA, nowhere near as effective an economic system as the USA, but which still seems to be doing pretty well. How can a nation with all those disadvantages still be succeeding?
It can make one wonder if the arguments about the USA being "filled to capacity" might not be a bit specious.
"guy, there are a lot of problems with having a lot of people in one place. like limited fresh water resources, food, and jobs, etc.
and frankly, I don't want that to happen to my country."
This sort of argument was being used by "real 'Murricans" even in the 1840's to keep the "filthy, lazy, decadent, uneducated Irish heathens" out.
And, of course, that sort of thought led to the Chinese Exclusion Act that kept the filthy, lazy, decadent, uneducated, violent Chinese heathens out.
Clearly, I don't agree that this nation is anywhere near "full."
"these illegal aliens can go fix their own countries if they want to have the same standard of living that we do."
This is my favorite RIDICULOUS anti-immigration argument.
People sitting there saying "why don't they stay and fix their own country" when THEIR ANCESTORS CLEARLY DID NOT. You are in the USA, which means YOUR ANCESTORS chose to NOT FIX "THEIR COUNTRY" and chose to come here instead.
But you tell them to "fix" their country?
Hypocritical, to say the least.
"bottomline, we should not have another amnesty. it won't be good for us."
I don't support amnesty, I support a rational system to allow people to come here to work when needed and maybe allowing some of them to eventually become citizens. But it has to be a system that gives people hope- if Mexicans (and others) feel that they have no chance of being able to come here to work by "playing by the rules," they will simply not follow the rules.
With our current system, a Mexican worker has about as much chance of entering the USA legally as I do of winning the power ball lottery. Our current system is, effectively, a BAN on Mexicans coming here legally.
That is not a rational system- it's not good for the Mexicans, and it's not good for the USA.
our system as you call it is allows more immigrants than any other system in the world.

the usa allows over a million to become citizens each year. good enough.

as for your comment that it is not a rational system, that it is effectively a ban on mexicans.. our system does not discriminate on who gets to come over. it limits the numbers allowed in each year to ensure that those already here and future generations will continue to experience a quality of life that they deserve.

that's the way it should be.

you say you don't want amnesty. but your suggestion that we should allow anybody who wants to come the chance seems to suggest you want open borders.

what's the difference?

last but not least... guy, it is my experience that those who brag about how smart they are... are usually the most stupid.
5 posts removed

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#110 Feb 18, 2013
libertarian4321 wrote:
<quoted text>

I'll answer your "intellectual" argument, even though it's probably not worthy of an answer.

I never said anything about "cake walks." However, I do believe we have the capacity AND the need for more workers.

We need a rational program to allow workers to come here- something along the lines of work permits.

We also need welfare reform so that those who come here do so to WORK, not lay around and collect benefits (like so many Americans do).
Tell your story to the 14 Million unemployed Americans!

As for a "BAN" on Mexicans, there should be seeing as how over half of the 11 Million illegal aliens are "MEXICANS!"

Illegals by Race or Country

Mexico continued to be the leading source country of unauthorized
immigration to the United States (see Table 3).

There were 6.6 million
unauthorized immigrants from Mexico in 2010, representing 62 percent of the unauthorized population.

The next leading source countries for unauthorized immigrants in 2010 were El Salvador (620,000), Guatemala (520,000), Honduras (330,000), and the Philippines (280,000).

The ten leading countries of origin represented 86 percent
of the unauthorized immigrant population in 2010.

The number of Mexican-born unauthorized immigrants increased by 2.3 million between 2000 and 2007 and decreased by 340,000 between 2007 and 2010.

Changes in the unauthorized population were much smaller
during either period for other leading source countries.

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics...

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#111 Feb 18, 2013
Definitions:
Alien, Immigrant, Illegal Alien, Undocumented Immigrant

These related terms are often used in deliberately confusing and conflicting
ways. Here is a set of definitions that will help you sort out the
difference.
IMMIGRANT: In popular usage, an "immigrant" is generally understood to be a
person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.
Under this definition, therefore, an "immigrant" is an alien admitted to the
U.S. as a lawful permanent resident. The emphasis in this definition is
upon the presumptions that (1) the immigrant followed U.S. laws and
procedures in establishing residence in our country; (2) he or she wishes to
reside here permanently; and (3) he or she swears allegiance to our country
or at least solemnly affirms that he/she will observe and respect our laws
and our Constitution.

ALIEN: By contrast, an "alien" is generally understood to be a foreigner --
a person who comes from a foreign country -- who does not owe allegiance to
our country.

ILLEGAL ALIEN: An "illegal alien" is a foreigner who (1) does not owe
allegiance to our country; and (2) who has violated our laws and customs in
establishing residence in our country. He or she is therefore a criminal
under applicable U.S. laws.

The term "illegal alien" is used by U.S. citizens who believe that
non-citizens entering our country must comply with our immigration laws.

The term "illegal alien" is predicated upon U.S. immigration law
which requires foreigners entering the U.S. to comply with our country's
rules and laws regarding entry into, and residence within, our country.

UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT: The term "undocumented immigrant" is an oxymoron
(the parts conflict). An immigrant is synonymous with "permanent legal
resident." The old term for the document authorizing a permanent legal
resident is "green card." The term "undocumented" is derived from the
accurate term "undocumented aliens" who are often called "border crossers."
Proper terms are "illegal alien" or "undocumented alien" but not
"undocumented immigrant." Although not commonly used, the term "documented
alien" accurately refers to foreign nationals who have an unexpired
non-immigrant visa such as H-1B.

Most U.S. citizens do not use the term "undocumented immigrant"
and prefer, instead, the more descriptive and accurate term "illegal alien".

The term "undocumented immigrant" is used by those who believe in
"open borders", i.e., non-regulation of foreigners entering into and
assuming residence in the U.S., including even those foreigners who owe
allegiance to a foreign government and/or who may intend harm to the U.S.

http://www.adversity.net/Terms_Definitions/TE ...
1 post removed

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#113 Feb 21, 2013
Hey, where did "libertarian4321" go?

"libertarian4321" Quote:

"Don't take this the wrong way, but I suspect I am vastly superior to you both educationally and intellectually, so I hardly need your instruction to "study" a Wikipedia page."

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 7 min Quirky 256,473
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 10 min Pietro Armando 54,992
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 16 min Limbertwig 151,299
Barbara Bush: Sarah Palin should stay in Alaska (Nov '10) 33 min Swedenforever 4,753
Nuns begin 2-week bus tour protesting Republica... (Jun '12) 34 min Swedenforever 2
Romney's Mass. Health Plan has $50 Co-pay for A... (Nov '07) 40 min Swedenforever 3
Pope Francis acknowledges State of Palestine 1 hr Swedenforever 118
Teen's Shooting Highlights Racial Tension 1 hr Responsibility 1,492
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr Yeah 1,100,625
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

US Politics People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••