Readers’ Responses to Our Question (25)

Editors write about disruptive and I say the global immigration ruptures the basic yarn which produce the social fabric of our society.

I belong to a generation whose parents migrated from India. Living in a community where thousands of families and blood relations are seperated and therefore passed their lives keeeping the pain in their heart.

Why the first generation migrated. Indeed should be a dream of economic prosperity, but still i think the fear of biased treatment in a hostile society should be one reason. Then after a decade same restless people start moving to west where they thought their dreams will come true.

when ever i visited my freinds in west having Indo Pakistani origion deep inside I felt something is missing. They got economic prosperity but felt the pinch of the rupture of their family structure. Once one of my relative in Houston told me never think about migrating to US . this is like a marshy land you can go in but can not come out.

Why the people migrate. I think it is in their genes. some nationalities are restless people. watch britishers and spaniards. they are moving but not germans. Japanese do not leave their island but every major city you will find a china town.

Immigration legal or illegal will continue, untill the root causes are not eliminated. Europe when I used to go was a free continent where we used to get visa on arrival. They made the rules so strict that now this is just impossible for an illegal immigrant originating from Africa or Asia to pass through but still the people risking their lives to reach european shores.

Where I work now every person want to move out to arabian gulf. You will not believe that many times they are hired by agents and brokers on lesser wages than what they were getting here in our mills. this is ignorance and media projection which shows other countries like heaven with the river of gold and honey and trees full of dollars and dirhams

we have one saying in urdu that the drum beat from far off is beutiful

The spread of knowledge and education i think is the recipie of stopping the global immigration culture.

West unfortunately playing again double game here. On one side they discourage immigration and on other hand they launch visa lotteries. UK prime minister in his policy speach defends the controlled immigration declaring it essential for europe continous economic growth. I have seen in Japan thousands of illegal immigrants of asian origion freely moving on the road. They are hired by Japanese small industries in full knowledge of all government agencies. So once the market is there then the forces remained active. and the commodity will be traded as hundreds of years before but with slightly respectable name.

Legal immigraton = Good for America!

Illegal immigration = Unsustainable America!

WHY?

1. Because the money illegal immigrants send out of the country are $ billions annually that are no longer a part of our national economic engine.

2. Because if you are a professional drywall hanger citizen you haven't worked in your profession in years. Regardless of the MSM and politicians saying it isn't true - just ask a former drywall or plaster guy. There are many other labor professions where this is also the case.

3. Because people should pay whatever it takes to hire an american citizen for ANY job - that is called CAPITALISM. Let the rich pay $100 per hour for lawn services. So be it. Maybe they will plant natural native gardens and stop wasting water to save money while they're at it.

4. Because farmers are the LAST to adopt new technology like drip irrigation (which isn't new at all, actually) to preseve water, or invest in R&D to create more efficient harvesters for fruit and vegetables. Rather, they plant subsidized crops and water them with subsidized water in wasteful ways, and harvest them with ilegal labor - at the expense of all Americans.

5. Because 3rd world leaders need to create opportunity for their citizens instead of pocketing the money in a swiss bank account.

The answer is really simple:

Step 1: SEAL the borders.
Step 2: Charge a 50% tax for services rendered on remittances to foreign countries.
Step 3: Use the lack of opportunity in 3rd world countries as a lever in negotiations of all kinds. We're paying their citizens, raising their children, feeding and giving them healthcare... so they can pocket the money? Time to re-evaluate our negotiating stance on everything.
Step 4: Create a path to assimilated citizenship for those already here - AFTER the borders are SEALED.

Those already here can be given a path to citizenship AFTER the borders are SEALED.
If they are only here for our money, they'll go home of their own accord. If they stay and keep sending home the money out of our economy we'll have the 50% tax rate to defer their costs on our economy.

Shiveh - The German's are far more gentle in their treatment of illegal immigrants than other European countries. In Spain and Italy and Austria and most Scaninavian countries almost anywhere in Europe, if an illegal is picked up or identified for *any* reason they go straight to a prison camp and await deportation. No lawyers or appeals, they're gone on the next boat or plane. That was my point to AMVienna; we are far more gentle with them than anyone else in the world. As for Mexico, we simply cannot afford to be their dumping ground. We need to build a border fence, with all of the additional high tech equipment to detect tunnelling, etc, man it 24 hours a day and prevent amnyone from illegslly entering the country. Compared to the economic costs of illegal immigrants, this would be a bargain.

Also, I recall vividly, as a teenager, picking berries and cherries to pay for my school clothing. There is nothing in the world from preventing farmers from paying a decent wage to attract kids picking their fruit during the summer. If they aren't willing to do that, let them go under. Same for people wanting nannies, carpenters, painters, concret workers, etc. There is no such thing as a free lunch and the lie that American's cannot be found to take those sorts of jobs has run more than a bit thin. Recently, after all of the illegals were arrested and deported from one meat packing house, they raised the salary to $15 an hour (still $3 an hour less than they paid in 1998) and had over 2,000 applicants for 300 jobs!

Hi MikeB

Can we charge the Mexican government for the cost of providing social services to her citizens that come to US illegally?

What Germans are doing is exactly what needs to be done in America. If we do not educate their children, or mend their sick or give them jobs, they’ll go back home. This is not hard to figure out. So, if we are not doing it, it can only mean that we do not want them to go back home! Go figure!

Total GNP of the US is about 11.5 trillion (for 300 million people.) Spending over 2 trillion on 12+ million illegal immigrants at the bottom of the barrel sounds a little too much.

Hi Tom

I believe newspaper headlines should have read “Concerned Americans Stopped President Bush from Bombing Iran!.” That would have explained both the cause and the effect of this latest NIE.

Ali:

http://www.how2immigrate.net/usanews/visa-policies.html

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/304/5675/1278

What about the those links?
--------------------------------

Alright. You made your point and I kind of agree partially with it, though not completely. I too question the current concept of "brightness" of students, being one myself. Don't go into details, but I am perhaps the harshest critical of myself and I generally dont need anyone else to tell me where I am at fault. That is why I agree in part with your view point.

Yes, you are downright when you say that for many students from poorer backgrounds a PhD is the best opportunity of moving up the social ladder. It is many times. On the other hand, it is not helpful to put it that simplistically! These students dont pursue PhD abroad only because of opportunity costs! In most cases, their country origin doesn't have the right institutions, material, libraries, etc...So a scientist wants just that: the right equipment and work conditions to develop their work accordingly. There are rare cases of capitalists-scientists..they dont care about systems, they care about research and the conditions to carry it out the best way possible. If every John Doe was that capable so to pursue higher education so successfully, why to keep PhD programs? They should be open to all, or then them be cut off because they are costly depending on the area, very much. Let's leave it. It doesn't produce anything useful...just venting.

The US has for long dominated the world scenario as powerhouse in all fields and it was the nations that after WWII mot attracted scientists from beleaguered Europe to its universities. That resulted something, dont you think? US became what it is today thank to those scientists coming from Europe, or their descendants...in all fields virtually. Cut that off and then will get the result. the UK is most thankful since its one of most competitive in the field of higher education after US. No offense, this was just a post!

Tom Wonacott,

It's been a strange day. On one hand I have MikeB whose ready to forcibly remove 10-12 million people from this country without having a clue what the consequences will be and on the other hand I have you steadfastly buying into the spin that's being spewed out of the White House over the little gaff about Iran.

However, it is the Christmas season so if you want to believe the spin who am I to say you can't? Pardon me if I don't buy it, but I know spin when I hear it and this is spin that assualts the senses. Bush knew in the early spring from briefings there was a problem with selling Iran was currently seeking to make a bomb, but it didn't stop him from fear mongering anyway. Why let the facts get in the way of an agenda. After all, when it becomes public I can alwsys say, "see, it worked." Maybe if you're 6, 7 or a die hard republican you might even buy that logic. However, it's a hard sell on main street to just about everyone else.

I don't have the time or the space here to list all of the Bush failures as president. However, I'll list a few to make my final point.

1. Iraq has wmd's. It didn't
2. Brownie is doing a hell of a job. Fired
3. Don has my full support. Fired
4. I'll get Bin Laden. Hasn't
5. Harriet's the best person for the position. Withdrew under criticism from both parties for not even being close to the best person.
6. Gonzales has my full confidence. Gone under less then honorable circumstances.
7. Iran is currently pursuing building nuclear weapons. It wasn't.

Ah, that's enough. I don't want you to think I'm beating up on you during the holiday season. Anyway, these issues look an awful lot like flip flopping to me. I can't think of a more fitting Christmas present for Bush then a pair of flip flops.

Cristina wrote:"There is too much talk on immigrants stealing jobs, let me point out that most are not real jobs, but mere occupations that are refused or unwanted by the nationals of developed nations. Some others, a minor part, are real jobs in research and development areas. Just look into Silicon Valley, look at the most brilliant minds in the US at top universities. Are they North-American born only? No! "

As always, the issue of the "price of labor" is ignored. Immigrants, legal or illegal, add to the labor force thereby enabling employers to bargain down wages and salaries. Even highly skilled legal immigrants have this effect because the current programs, H1-B and L-1, under which most are entering have gaping loopholes through which employers may hire them even though Americans are available, hire them and get Americans to train them, and hire them at less than the "prevailing wage". In short, immigration and labor policy which should place Americans FIRST places them not at all. Even our universities are filled with foreign graduate students, not because they are the BEST in the world (not necessarily so) but because the opportunity cost of graduate school is too great for Americans who are saddled with student debt and who can earn more with a bachelor's or master's degree than they would with a doctorate.
Foreign students, meanwhile, will put up with low wages and assorted indignities because a Ph.D. may well be their only hope to get a green card and remain in this country.

BobL

Couldn’t you have just stopped writing after the first sentence? Let me draw some conclusions based on what I know today about Iran‘s nuclear program.

1. First, and most important, this represents extremely good news. Iran will not go nuclear on Bush’s watch. Personally, I don’t believe Bush would have risked what we have gained in Iraq lately (and other repercussions), but like you, I realize he was surely capable of bombing Iran, however, unlike you, I view that as a positive in foreign policy.

2. Libya and Iran abandoned their nuclear weapons programs in 2003 when the US invaded Iraq. Coincidence? Not likely. Terms like deterrent and emboldens are very applicable in the world today. People may refer to this as a victory for diplomacy, but it was not. A credible military threat was the prime motivator for these two rogue states. Intense diplomatic pressure since 2003 backed up the military threat. The Bush Doctrine worked. How important is this result? Extremely. The Arabs now (hopefully) will not need to develop their own nuclear weapons programs which would have led to an arms race.

3. As was shown by the NIE today, Iran had a nuclear weapons program in place until 2003 (which many people doubted - yourself?). That means that Rafsanjani, the MODERATE Iranian President in Iran in 2003, lied about the intentions of their program. No, their program did not have peaceful intentions. No, generating electricity was not their primary goal and therefore, why should anyone on earth believe that this is their primary goal today? Iran STILL is a major threat to resume their program.

4. Given the rhetoric of Achmadinejad, and their control of Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the US was right to pursue their course of actions against a potentially nuclear Iran. The US should continue their policy of sanctions against Iran until Iran alleviates any suspicions of developing nuclear weapons i.e., enriching uranium. Of course, China and Russia will abandon sanctions now, and I can’t predict what the Europeans will do.

“…Yes Tom, he was lying to us yet again and let's be thankful we found this out before he bombed Iran…NIE firmly believes Iran stopped their weapons program 4 years ago. This tidbit of information was convienently omitted from the national debate on Iran up until today. Kind of important, don't you think?…”

Bob, GW is a good Christian, you think he would lie? From the New York Times and the Jerusalum Post, respectively, this morning:

“…Mr. Hadley said the drastic reversal in the intelligence agencies’ knowledge about Iran’s weapons programs was based “on new intelligence, some of which has been received in the last few months.”…”

“…This national intelligence estimate was originally due in the spring of 2007 but was delayed because the agencies wanted more confidence their findings were accurate, given the problems with a 2002 intelligence estimate of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. They also got a late influx of new data that caused changes in their findings.

"There was a very rigorous scrub using all the trade craft available, using the lessons of 2002," a senior official said…”

He certainly did not know four years ago (at least I hope not). The 2005 NIE report concluded that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. Since when did you start believing our intelligence reports? Anyway, the information came out and I am just as thankful as you my friend.

“…What those against fail to take into account is the positive economic aspects illegals also provide. The ones with with false social security cards who are forced by employers to withhold tax never file a tax return to get a refund. All of that money stays within the State and Federal treasuries. MikeB is going to hate this, but undocumented workers have made the produce we eat cheaper, landscaping more affordable and lowered the costs of building and remodeling housing. (sorry, if the greedy builders didn't pass on the savings, but that's a different issue)…”

I’ve seen data that shows a positive economic benefit to unskilled workers and data that shows a net loss because of the cost of social programs and medical cost. At any rate, no economy can support an endless supply of low skill minimum wage workers, so we need to control the flow of people into the US. In addition, they displace American workers and, in general, work for lower wages, and therefore lower wages in general - at the low end.

Thanks for the post

MikeB,

Trust the govvernment? Where in my post did I refer to trusting the government? Quite the contrary. I specifically stated the government should fund studies through educational instituions.

Your analogy of rain is childish at best and borders on ignorant. There is no comparison between it raining outside and the illegal immigration issue. Just the thought that you would compare a simple natural occurance with a socio-ecomomical issue as complex as illegal immigration boggles my mind. We're talking about 10-12 million lives and how they impact another 300 million lives and you want to reduce it to rain?

We (the US) need to do some homework. We (the US) haven't researched the issue to the point where we (the US) can definitively say what the solutions should be. It may turn out if we (the US) do our homework we (the US) send all the illegals packing. It might also turn out that we (the US) encourage more of them. We (the US) don't know what we (the US) should do yet because we (the US) haven't done our homework. I really tried hard to make this paragraph as simply as rain and hopefully you'll be able to relate.

There's plenty of anxiety these days about immigration. From where you sit how disruptive is it? Why? What should we do about it?

My belief about immigration is simple. I simply observe the dominant economic methods by which the most powerful nations have achieved ascendance and I simply imagine the continued spread of such methods over the entire world. Particularly do I superimpose the entire Jeffersonian/Hamiltonian process of American history over the entire world.

My belief as globalization grows in power, as the most powerful nations constitute orbits around which the world economy grows, we will have a process worldwide much like we see in corporate practices and great national economies. This means that for all talk of education, a place for every person if only he works hard enough, there will actually be a process of weeding out a great many human beings and an increased desire for the skilled and talented.

What we see in a typical great economy these days is a structure poised between oligarchic to monarchic tendencies on one hand, and on the other democracy to sheer mobocracy. In short we have republican methodology--capitalism with a political structure which allows just enough mobility and people in power to pass as democracy but in actuality we have a sifting force, a power which increasingly is capable of selecting desirable human beings from the undesirable with no adverse political consequences (what else is powerful system of education, national economy strongly federalized so that the economy can be inflated and depressed at will?).

In short to stave off political crises we will see processes of "opening" (borders, educational opportunities, etc.) followed by "closings" which will winnow the desirable humans from the undesirable. And more and more it will become apparent that the most powerful economies are sustained by particular talents and that we must select for such talents by every possible method (biological sciences to create the gifted, prisons in which to throw the undesirable, deliberate recessions of the economy to cast off the undesirable...).

Pretty grim picture. But honestly, what really did we expect from the religious view of the world which selects the good from evil not to mention the increasingly powerful evolutionary view (Darwin) which expects us to not even remain to be the human beings we are but to evolve into something as far from us as we are to apes? The world economy is overthrowing religions and throwing races together in a vast process of sifting talent and creating outposts by which a higher humanity is being born...

But of course the whole can be dashed to hell by constant mob uprisings, racism, nationalism, religious fanaticism...The human race in a world running out of resources and just not intelligent enough to put the negatives at bay...

On a personal note, I would just like to say I get along with immigrants of all types. In fact I find most immigrants to be much harder working than myself. I am quite lazy. Furthermore I like a variety of foods, music, etc. But I have noticed negative trends on the micro scale just as bad as the macro. One of the most horrifying trends is that it seems the races hate each others stink and conversation because more and more wherever a person goes we have music piped in whether a person wants to listen to it or not and worst of all a true stink of perfumes and cologne and this cleaner and that. It seems humans when not polluting the air by automobile try to fix it with this spray or that (make it smell better) but only end up increasing the problem. I have to literally hide to get a breath of fresh air. Do I need to spell out that I find it impossible to smell if a woman is desirable, whether I want to reproduce with her? But perhaps we should increase the stink so none of us reproduce at all...

And then we have people smoothing over differences by agreeing to become obese and destroyed in health and all existing in something of a hospital world...And then we have all consumed with sports and television...all these vastly imperfect ways of smoothing over differences...

I spend most of my time by myself. I try to bridge differences by listening to classical music, jazz, blues, hard rock (the greatest guitarists), Indian music. I also keep to a very healthy diet. And I read everything. And I have been meditating (I am only now learning how to breath). And I have been putting on hold everything I think about God. What God means to me is something I want to state toward the end of my life and not something I want to fix upon too rapidly. In general I take immigration in the widest sense: all that can compose human experience and the elusive search for that right composition which leads to the next and the next and the next...

I have very few illusions about immigration. A nation is as difficult to put together as a song, a book or anything else. And this will become more and more apparent to all. And supposing all difference and suffering can be reduced to a minimum, still so far as I can tell we have to be good rather than evil, and if the evolutionary view becomes ascendant we have to be willing to transform literally into something we now cannot understand...

Immigration according to the scientific view. It should be enough to write that sentence. Study that sentence and we can see the trend toward immigration in the century in front of us. Unless we prefer to know nothing about one another but the differences which divide us so far...

The differences divide us but the science looming promises...unity or more difference?

What a sad question to have to ask if science itself will increase difference.

I just try to get along with everyone.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/expert/infopress_page/018-10644-267-09-39-902-20070823IPR09787-24-09-2007-2007-false/default_en.htm

Parliament adopts priorities on legal and illegal immigration policies
Immigration - 26-09-2007 - 04:09

"supports the creation of an EU work permit" -Known as the blue card, similar idea to the current US green card- "to facilitate the free movement of 'brains' within Europe and the transfer of personnel within multinational companies"....

Europe needs economic migrants, stressed MEPs. "the reality of ageing and demographic changes necessitate rethinking immigration policies since the current and future situations of the EU labour markets can be broadly described as in demand of well-managed legal immigration". The text adopted supports the intention of the Commission to define the conditions of entry and stay for other selected categories of economic immigrants, including unskilled or low-skilled workers.

MEPs also emphasise the particular responsibility of the media (in particular European public radio and television broadcasters) in the dissemination of an accurate image of immigration and in countering stereotypes. "Spreading the belief that immigration is uncontrolled is wrong", said MEPs and Europe should avoid the danger of exploiting the debate on migration "for demagogic and populist purposes".

Here's a 2006 article from Deutsche Welle on how illegal immigrants are handled in Germany. Remember, Germany is considered liberal in it's treatment of illegals, too -
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1987607,00.html

Note, children of illegals cannot attend public schools because the schools are required to report them and their families, illegals cannot obtain legal medical care and have no access whatsoever to social sevices, no one can obtain a job without proper identification (and it's tamper proof and nearly impossible to forge).

AMviennaVA - The problem with people like you is that they trot out the same tired garbage, substituting insults for facts.

For poll data, go check the Polling Report, an overview of all of the main polls. Their most recent results are easily looked up on-line (and, no I wont post a link for you, use a search engine and look it up).
In answer to the question: “Would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country increased, decreased, or remain the same?”, 69% answered decreased. In answer to the question “Should states issue drivers licenses to illegals?” 76% answered “No”. In a similar vein, respondents want all or most illegals deported – 72%.

Most of the food grown in this country is mechanically harvested. Fewer than 500,000 of the millions of illegals in this country work in any business even remotely associated with agriculture...and that includes tree farming, nursery work, etc.

The $2 trillion dollar estimate is actually very conservative and is based on summing the costs, or best estimated costs, published in the various states agency budgets. If you can add, multiply, and divide, and can use the internet and a search engine, you can pretty easily exceed that amount in short order.

As for your information about Europe, I lived there, still have friends and relatives living here, visit every year, and am quite familiar with European laws and public opinion. Scandinavian countries, Spain, Italy, and elsewhere literally look up illegal immigrants in barbed wire enclosed camps and deport them ASAP. No trial, no warm and fuzzy protests, they're gone. Same with Germany and Austria, now. Germany experienced a flood of illegals from North Africa and Turkey. Around tewo years back they held a series of violent protests about building mosques, especially in Cologne, which ended their "welcome" (sort of like the protests we saw in California by Mexican illegals) and they now round 'em up and ship 'em back as fast as they can catch them. Only the U.K. has anything remotely like our policy and they are simply flooded with illegals. Public opinion AND POLITICAL action is for rigid regulations of all immigrants and deportation of illegal immigrants. Finally, no European country has anything like our twisted interpretation of the 14th Amendment granting automatic citizenship to the children of illegals. If a child is born to illegal parents, it is illegal too...and deported.

MikeB @December 4, 2007 10:19 AM: Frankly the post has too many inaccuracies to address. Firstly, however, I hope you have not eaten anything the past 10-15 years; if it was US grown, chances are it was picked by illegals.

Europe, by the way, has policies that are in no way what you describe. The EU does have a serious problem with illegal immigration (actually more serious than ours) and somehow manage to sound downright civilized when they discuss it. The key is to secure the borders, of course, but more than that, it is to improve the conditions where the illegals originate. The latter is the effective tactic.

As for "2 **TRILLION** dollars a year"? This is fiction. Or "most of the polls show that the vast majority of **voters** want all or most illegals deported and want work visas ended, too"? That is also fiction. The majority of Americans recognize that there is an issue, but we can be rational beings, as well. It is only a very vocal and obssessed minority that is getting the attention. Sadly they have prevented any rational resolution (ps: the secret is to accept what has happened, and try to prevent a recurrence).

As for the stiff penalties, etc., forget it. They are ineffective; they have always been ineffective. Illegal immigration exists because the border is not closed (nor can it be - in some places the border goes down the middle of a street!) and there is too much discrepancy in the economic conditions.

BobL-VA - If you want to know if its raining, stick your head out the door. By now you should know better than to trust any government study, or much of anything else the government says or does. The federal government has been "cooking the books" on employment numbers and job growth since 2001. The same Wall Street goons that fund awful candidates like Clinton and Guliani and Romney, foisted Bush off on us, are the same insiders that run the various government departments that will publish your studies. Depending on their "bent", which are more than likely to be pro-business, the stats will be cooked to make immigration and outsourcing look just wonderful. Various private groups will cook them to suit their audiance. A better bet is to start looking up costs for prison, police, gangs, identity theft, schools, social services, unrecovered debt (especially medical), etc. That's what I did and 2 trillion dollars is pretty much what it costs. As ofr the impact of just Inidan guest workers, go check out the statistics from the COmmerce Department and the Programmers Guild. Eight million jobs lost is on the very conservative side.

MikeB,

I thought I made it clear the only thing I wanted was the issue to be independently studied so we could have a national debate based on reliable information. I've seen so many numbers that are contradicate each other over this issue I don't know who to believe anymore.

I'm reserving my judgments until the day comes I have some faith in what the numbers really are. Until then I'm neither pro or anti on this issue.

The only fact that seems not to be in dispute is he vast majority of illegal immigration came into this country legally. Hence, building and manning a 2,300 mile southern wall and maintaining it for any period of time 24 hours a day to me seems ludicrous as it's a lot of money to address only a small fraction of the problem. Not a good use of resources.

There already are laws on the books making it illegal to knowningly employ undocumented workers. We simply aren't enforcing them. This is and issue that needs to be looked into.

Add to this the problem with families. Children born in the United States are residents even if their parents were illegal immigrants. Since there is no legal principle I know of that makes it acceptable to change the law after the fact all of these children will remain US citizens.

The immigration/undocumented issue is a mess. There are so many problems to it and so much misinformation about it that spending a few shekels to have some indepth independent analysis done seems like a good start. I'm simply not willing to grant them citizenship or kick them out of the country until I have more information.

BobL-VA, Tom Wonacott - First, a very big NO to any sort of amnesty. Both of you are dead wrong that we cannot find, round up, and deport every illegal immigrant in this country and do it at a far smaller cost than the social services, identity fraud and other crimes, unrecoverable debt, and other costs the illegals bring. The current estimate of costs for the illegals in this country is 2 **TRILLION** dollars a year. No one with an ounce of common sense thinks that we cannot be rid of every illegal for a fraction of that. We could simply use and require passports for all U.S. citizens. Legal residents could be required to have a passport from their country with a U.S. work permit affixed to the last page. Now, passport controls are so rigid that it is difficult to see very many people being able to forge them and, with the current embedded information, they are nearly impossible to alter. That wpould allow us to control who works here, who gets a job. Add to this, a fine of say $10,000 a day for hiring any illegal (proven by someone NOT having a passport and work permit) and make it apply to anyone, even homeowner hiring a nanny or a day worker, and you would eliminate the economic disaster of these hordes of workers. Go a bit farther, and cut them off from any and all social services, and simply force the bulk of them to leave. All of this would not only work, it could be achieved at a very reasonable cost.

Now, if sounds too harse to you, remember that this is precisely what most European countries do (and Mexico and South and Central American countries, too) and they have eliminated most of their illegal immigrant problems. (England hasn't and they are drowning in them like us, but they are enacting just those sorts of laws I propose above.) The fact is, a government that cannot provide jobs and security for its own citizens has no excuse for its existance. We cannot afford most legal immigrants, much less illegal immigrants - there simply isn't enough money and jobs to support them.

Lastly, most of the polls show that the vast majority of **voters** want all or most illegals deported and want work visas ended, too. As this current economic downturn takes effect, I suspect that the voting public will become increasingly angry about this issue, too. Immigration, especially illegals and "guest workers" are the new third rail of political life. By the time the next election rolls around, you'd be delussional to not expect us to be in the midst of a very bad economic downturn that will shove this issue, along with outsourcing, onto the front burner and an approach just like I advocate will likely decide the election outcome.

Tom Wonacott,

"Grant amnesty to (current) illegal immigrants in the US."

How very unrepublican of you. I'm shocked. You might be in jeporady of losing your membership to the party for this stance.

Eugene Robinson wrote an interesting opinion piece this morning on fear in the United States. How pervasive it has become in our society. If the terrorists aren't going to get us the illegals are. If the illegals aren't going to be our ruin then non existant diseases and crime are. Enemies to our saftey and health are everywhere and they need to supposedly be met head on at every turn. This would be acceptable if it wasn't so untrue.

Instead of sitting down and looking at issues and having a public debate over them to work out viable solutions we tend to sensationalize the issues and become reactionary in our responses. Obviously, the latest instance of what I'm talking about is Bush/Cheney on Iran. He was in the process of trying to make the American public concerned over a country that was "seeking" weapons of mass destruction while knowing full well his own intelligence community was saying something very different. Yes Tom, he was lying to us yet again and let's be thankful we found this out before he bombed Iran. Bush/Cheney may simply hate the Muslims. From every indication I've witnessed it seems to be that way, but as our president he has the duty and obligation to give us the pertinent facts. Facts like the NIE firmly believes Iran stopped their weapons program 4 years ago. This tidbit of information was convienently omitted from the national debate on Iran up until today. Kind of important, don't you think?

Illegal immigration isn't much different. Those against legalization and services for the undocumented workers fear monger that the 11-13 million illegals will bankrupt our system. I'm not accusing Bush of doing this as personally while I detest him I don't feel his approach to the illegal problem is reactionary. This could be the only issue I've ever not been in opposition on. What those against fail to take into account is the positive economic aspects illegals also provide. The ones with with false social security cards who are forced by employers to withhold tax never file a tax return to get a refund. All of that money stays within the State and Federal treasuries. MikeB is going to hate this, but undocumented workers have made the produce we eat cheaper, landscaping more affordable and lowered the costs of building and remodeling housing. (sorry, if the greedy builders didn't pass on the savings, but that's a different issue) Many single mothers have been able to pursue careers as they could find affordable child care and many married women have been able to do the same thing. There have been tons of economic benefits to the illegal issue as well as drawbacks. I have seen figures in the range of 5-30 Billion a year funnels out of the US and back into Latin America to help support impoverished families. Name me one other foreign aid program where the recipent country actally works for their foreign aid.

As for securing the borders good luck. It would cost a ridiculous amount of money and would bankrupt us faster then the problem of illegals would. Add to this the vast majority of illegals come into this country legally and we'd be spending trillions of dollars to stop a small percentage of the issue.

I sincerely hope both the republicans and the democrats can get away from the selling of fear to attempt to get elected. Immigration would be a perfect issue to start with. Forget about building useless walls along our southern border. Let's take a small fraction of that money and spread it around to Harvard, Columbia, Purdue, Stanford, Princeton, etc to have an indepth analysis socially and economically on the issue. Let's find out what is really going on before we start throwing money at an issue that is currently simply partisan politics.

Susenjit Guha, Kolkata:
"These are some of the vital posers which may have to be addressed more frequently in proper fora to shed some light on a concern which an emerging nation like India is not free from."

I agree with you. We should discuss this issue inserted in a bigger picture. Right now, by the way it is talked about it does look like an exclusive "problem" of developed nations, particularly the US. It will be a mistake if this issue goes on being discussed within such a narrow perspective. It is like the fish that cannot see the ocean.

The immigration issue must be set and addressed on a broader frame, must involve other political and social actors. My opinion is that this discussion on such a broader basis has not taken place yet. I give as an example the IPCC report on climate change. It was serious, long term discussion and studies based on facts. Why not discuss immigration on this basis too?

Or is there anybody out there hoping that with fences and stricter laws the problem will be tamed? I guess that is a quite naive though for this day world...and I am not speaking of the mas migrations cause that may occur as the climate conditions make life unbearable in certain areas.

The issue is serious and it is not confined to this or that country. Not any more. And there is no way back.

The world is indeed a small globe designed to provide for the needs of it's inhabitants.As such human beings should be allowed to move and settle wherever they wish as long as they are prepared to subject themselves to the laws of the countries into which the world has been transformed and as long as long as they are prepared to give their undivided loyalty to the country they have chosen to adopt as their own.In this way the wealth and miseries of this world can be shared as intended by its maker if you accept there is one.Limiting immigration to the skilled and well to do is the peak of selfishness and a mockery of the noble call to 'GIVE US YOUR WRETCHED AND YOUR POOR'.Remember our ancestors walked freely from the interior of Africa thousands of years ago to Europe,Asia and beyond to people and enrich these lands.

This is an interesting question...

I would like to ask...aside from our Native Americans...who isnt an immigrant or the descendant of an immigrant?

What is an American? Can someone define that for me?

Is it someone who celebrates Thanksgiving? Christmas? Hanukkah? New Year? Valentine's Day? Eid? Ramandan?

PG

Today, immigration is dominated by mostly unskilled and uneducated people arriving from Mexico. Many enter the US illegally and speak little English. A country cannot sustain an unlimited amount of unskilled and uneducated immigrants (illegal and legal) that are ultimately subsidized by taxpayers. In addition, the US needs to secure the border from the movement of Islamic terrorist.

Most Americans support securing the border first, and then providing a solution for the illegal immigrants living in the US. Securing the border with a fence will allow us to control the amount of immigrants as well as the education of the immigrants (criminals, disease and drug smugglers as well). A fence will also provide at least some difficulty for the entrance of sleeper cells into the US. Once that has been accomplished, I support amnesty for illegal immigrants. Full and complete, no strings attached amnesty for the 12,000,000(+) illegal immigrants. No fines, and certainly no requirement to return to their country of origin to apply for legal immigration.

Summary:

1. Secure border with a fence

2. Control immigration (encourage skilled and educated immigrants)

3. Grant amnesty to (current) illegal immigrants in the US.

Certainly there is much anxiety about this issue and I do relate such angst to the fact that the world has become more unstable in recent years.

Currently, we are facing new facts and realities that were barely predictable (if at all) some 20 years ago perhaps. Hence, it sounds to me that is now very much simple to come forward and blame this and that for immigration concerns (real or not) without a thorough analysis on how the world has evolved over the last decade or so. i wonder and I doubt that we would be discussing immigration at this level of discussion, that is, freakish, mostly emotional, politically manipulated, passionate, and based on fears and phobias of all sorts.

There has been already a prediction on the end of the jobs (Jeremy Rifkin)I think this author could never anticipate the outsourcing event for instance, which is already changing fast its dynamics and even its concept may already be challenged today (for those who follow the news attentively). My point is that there is too much noisy and too little thinking, too little reasoning on immigration. There is too much talk on immigrants stealing jobs, let me point out that most are not real jobs, but mere occupations that are refused or unwanted by the nationals of developed nations. Some others, a minor part, are real jobs in research and development areas. Just look into Silicon Valley, look at the most brilliant minds in the US at top universities. Are they North-American born only? No!

I admit that this is not an easy question, better say, it is a wicked problem. All progress attract mass mobilisation in smaller or larger scale, but all comes at a price and the price today is coming coupled with an instability, a widespread sense of insecurity, personal insecurity, and ultimately the lack of trust on the stability of our political and social structures. So the issue becomes a wicked one. However, it does not help to discuss it with our hearts on our sleeves.

The ones moving in have plenty of hope and expectations, generally positive. The ones who watch them arriving get nervous, insecure. It is normal, it is natural.

I too go through these stages of affliction when I see newcomers in my area, especially foreigners. It is an uneasy feeling. Would they learn my mother-tongue? Would they know the past of my place, how it was built, how it came to be what is today and which in the end attracted them so powerfully to my place? Would they grow to learn and respect the traditions, culture of my people? Would they embrace it or just come for the money, for the job, to form their separate social and cultural ghettos, sometimes even religious ghettos? The idea of those kins of ghettos is very disturbing for me.

My guess is that much of the noisy goes around the motivations I just exposed above. No more than that. Had the world been free of wars, had our political and social structures been sound a a rock, had the greed been contained by solid, reliable and independent political forces we most likely would be experiencing this phenomenon of immigration on other lenses.

The best we can do about these issues I raised is to calm down, reflect instead of becoming hysterical about it. It will only make the problem worst and give tones that it does not have yet, but can have if we lose our nerve.

The first step perhaps is to stop playing politics. Stop playing with political institutions and gambling with dreams of eternal power. That step can provide a ground for most of us who, in one or another experience the immigration by being the immigrant ourselves or by receiving them. Let us not pretend that only the other is the one moving in.

So, who claims to be only the roof can become also the stone breaking into it.

let us trying to bring the world to its sound grounds and y that I mean an end of war-mongering, fear manipulation, unrealistic dreams of delivering any divine mission on earth, stop gambling o our destiny and get serious on the business of living responsibly by becoming mutually responsible for one another such is the interdependence, interlinkage already established and that will be hardly undone. It is irreversible.

We had better come to terms with the fact taht we are responsible for one another, that we must respect and treat with dignity one another, that we are not and we should not play god.

We need one another. So why is that the terrorism is a global issue, but all immigrants should be send back home. Please, decide, the clock is ticking.

People are misusing the vocabulary here. H1-B and L-1 visa'd guest workers from China and Indian aren't immigrants. They are here for a limited period of time, they displace/replace American workers, usually older workers or workers who have families with sick children or spouses and higher medical claims (most high tech companies are self insured and comb medical records). The actual estmates for H1-B and L-1 "guest workers" is around 8 million, every one of them taking a job from a fully qualified Amercian.

Likewise, the 38 million illegal workers (newest estimate) take jobs from American workers and drive down wages and benefits for millions of other American workers. Wages for non-union manufacturing jobs, for meat cutters and meat packers, for carpenters, concret workers, painters, have all fallen by at least 50% as a direct result of illegal "immigrants".

Likewise, colleges and universities refer to foreign students as "immigrants" - here on scholarships from *their* governments, taking up more than 50% of the enrollment spaces in our university engineering and computer science programs.

These "immigrants", all of them, are more properly called "tax payer subdized national suicide". No other country on the face of the earth does this. We need to cease this insanity right now. Of course, if we don't wish to survive for even ten more years, this is a dandy way of destroying the U.S.

Immigration is a casualty of globalisation which we all have to come to terms with.

It is perceived as a threat in the backdrop of terrorism and terrorist attacks. Unless we go to the root causes of terrorism without clubbing them together as a menace, rise in immigration will continue to haunt us.

Again, the pressure on the host nation's economy and housing is of great concern. Why do people migrate from their homes and choose to move to places alien to them? Why do their economic needs are left unfulfilled when the very essence of globalisation is at least a semblance of parity? Is globalisation then one-sided and the benefits elude many while favouring a select few? What makes the select few nations appear greener to immigrants? These are some of the vital posers which may have to be addressed more frequently in proper foras to shed some light on a concern which an emerging nation like India is not free from.