On 12/18/2018 2:40 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/18/2018 12:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 1:56:23 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
I wonder why the U.S. doesn't follow Thailand in matter of illegal
immigrants. Here the only individuals that qualify for government
assistance of any sort are citizens , or, in some cases, legal workers
who pay taxes. Illegal immigrants are liable to jail terms but are
usually just extradited to their home country. AND, those who employ
illegal workers are liable to a 1 year jail term and a large fine. I'm
not sure about it but Thai law usually assigns one penalty per crime
committed, i.e., two illegal workers equals two years and double fine,
etc.
While finding that one willÂ* be hanged in a fortnight is said to
concentrates the mind wonderfully I also find that "no food unless you
earn it" tends to ensure that most people will be gainfully employed.
Well, I think this issue is extremely complex. Some salient points:
First, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants. During most of its history
it needed to actively import people to make use of the huge amount
of virgin land, to do farm work, to build railroads, to keep the
factories running. That's how and why my grandparents came here.
It's still true that lots of businesses - agriculture and everything
else, from lawn care to manufacturing - want cheap labor. There must
be thousands of businesses owned by people all across the political
spectrum who depend on people with questionable papers who are
willing to work for less.
And I think for most of those people, it's not a question of "no work
so no food" policies chasing them home. They work and work hard.
I read a couple articles last year about tomatoes rotting in fields
because the people who used to pick them were now too afraid to work.
The farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the
work. They wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.
There's also the bit about asylum. I once helped a foreign guy get
asylum, albeit unwittingly. (He asked me to write him a letter
inviting him to visit. When he landed, he applied for and received
asylum.) Because of its history, the US has laws allowing people to
seek asylum. I suppose some might want to go back in time and stop
those laws from being written. But odds are they were logical when
written, and are probably fairly logical now.
The big influx from Central America certainly contains many people
who are literally fleeing for their lives. From what I've read, some
of that is precipitated by past U.S. policies in Central America.
And I'll note that one relative of mine works for an agency that
supports refugees in some ways. There are horrible stories to hear.
Also, I think there's little comparison between U.S. and Thailand.
This is a huge country with an enormous economy and lots of
prosperity. There's a long, long land border with Mexico, a much
poorer country. That means there's a lot of motivation to sneak
across that border and serious difficulty preventing the crossings.
Which is not to say Trump's wall would really work. It would stop
those walking across, probably a small percentage. Until, perhaps,
the ladder was invented.
Overall, it's a complicated problem. America is filled with know-
nothings who think every problem is easy. But this problem would
be tricky even if millions of people didn't make millions of dollars
by hiring illegal immigrants. Those people - many of whom are well
connected politically - will stand in the way of any fierce
enforcement against firms that employ these people.
And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.
Wall- necessary but not sufficient. Won't solve all problems, or even
most, but necessary.
"Wall" as in what Trump promised? Necessary? Sorry, impossible. It will
never happen. It's got less chance than finding Saddam's ready-to-fire
WMDs. (And yes, I know someone's going to pop up and claim Saddam _did_
have ready-to-fire WMDs. That's how Trump voters' minds work.)
Immigrants- Yes we children of immigrants love immigrants. Illegal
invaders are not the same as immigrants. Conflating terms is not helpful.
Invaders? Like, rolling in the way Germany rolled into Poland in 1939?
Like Russia rolled into Crimea a few years ago? What percentage of
people sneaking across the border from Mexico are in tanks or carrying
military weapons? Conflating terms is _not_ helpful.
Public charge- Logically, immigrants are proscribed from being a public
charge with good reason.
Fine. But those pinko liberals at the Cato Institute seem to think that
problem is greatly exaggerated.
https://www.cato.org/publications/co...-welfare-state
Laws unenforced or ignored altogether-
https://ktla.com/2018/12/17/man-dies...entral-valley/
Yeah, I know. And Willie Horton, right? But as might be expected,
illegal immigrants tend to mind their Ps and Qs, more than most
citizens. They really don't want attention.
--
- Frank Krygowski