Sounds like you are saying that the solution to third world poverty is to move their population to the US. Hmmmm

No where near capacity, you say? I suggest you do a search for the recent study by David Pimentel of Cornell University titled "Food, Land, Population and the US economy."

Immigration is a romantic notion for many, but the reality of limits is catching up with us. Any thing in excess can be bad, and for the past 30 years, immigration has reached excessive porportions. As Ayn Rand said; We deny reality at our peril.

However, imported slaves will never be accepted in any form - it will be recognized as "Migrant Worker Legislation" reforms and must not happen... for we need a high wall with no gates between us and mexico - no more humans with guns or migrant workers of any kind! Permanent amnesty only! www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Future Economic Solutions 101

"This course examines how allowing 11 million or more illegal aliens to ignore American immigration quotas put America on the road to prosperity."

Prerquisite: Lots of gullibility.

You do not hate the Mexican worker ... you hate those that cling to its side - drug dealers, violence and thievery... For positive I.D. will weed the criminal from the law abiding... then we can give amnesty to the immigrant American who has never known crime... As we are obligated to the natives, born on the continent of America, unlike those with VISA violations... www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Bush wanted Amnesty. The Senate offers Amnesty.
It seems Al is the one playing with semantics.
We don't need millions of illegals with no high school diploma and no ability to converse in English.

Anon#1 and Anon#2 would rather quibble about semantics than address the topic directly-Is Immigration Essential? Next time explain your future economic solutions to the bigger problems facing our economy. You might also read the Senate Immigration bill regarding restrictions, requirements, and punishments. Even though the Senate bill has flaws and the Senate refused to fund the Wall this week, the basic premise is correct.

Probation usually has restrictions and supervision.
Al says, "The Bush plan calls for 11 years of probation for illegals, I do not call that amnesty."
I ask what are the restrictions and what is the supervision?
Sure at some point they may take a test for citizenship and have to know English.
I can see a verbal test.
What is the letter symbol for Potassium?
Que?
Well done.

A petty thief who gets probation does not have the right to go out and steal. Nor do illegals aliens have the right to stay here. All probation means is they won't get jail time. Lucky for them, but then it's time for them to run for the border, because if they stay here they are violating their probation. That COULD get them thrown in the clink. At minimum it should get them deported.

Don Thanks for the research. If the emotional hardliners and their compatriots, the treehuggers, have their way we will eliminate 11,000,000 workers and jobs from our economy and magnaminously allow 195,000 to return legally each year. Since I already receive Social Security I guess I will have to get a job as a busboy or landscaper and work untill I die as soon as Social Security runs out, not to mention Medicaid,. It an imperative that the U.S. GNP continues to grow 3-4%a year-How could we pay the interest on the national debt? Because of our Treasury's annual fixed obligations we have to move forward, not backward.

It is easy to say we are a country
of laws, but misdemeanor first
offenders usually get probation.
The Bush plan calls for 11 years of probation for illegals, I do not call that amnesty. It not a perfect world and if you want justice, read Plato.

I guess some people think all the illegal aliens pouring over the border were in charge of setting our immigration quotas. But no, we actually have legal control over that process, and if it needs to be raised or lowered that's our business, not for some alien smuggling ki-yo-tay to determine.

A nation of laws - what a concept.

I think immigration is both a critical and "hot" issue. The latter is obvious; the former is because immigration has been so integral to our success as a country.

The number of leaders, inventions, entrepreneurs, intellectuals, breakthroughs, and overall promoters of the American Dream that come from first- and second-generation immigrants has been staggering. Competition from truly driven immigrants and their offspring keeps our country moving forward. The technical graduate schools of our country are heavily dependent on the world's best and brightest coming to do their research here.

And yet we have a pretty bureucratic approach to managing this remarkable resource. I spent a few minutes trying to understand exactly how immigration is determined today. Perhaps I don't have it quite right, but here's the summary taken from the government pages:

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm

It looks like 480,000 family members of existing legal residents are able to immigrate per year

Add to that 140,000 "employment based" immigrants.

Add to that 55,000 "diversity immigrants."

It looks like these numbers were set in 1992, and they're subject to all sorts of hard-to-understand offsets and increases.

So if you don't have family already here legally, your odds of legal immigration fall off rapidly. If the U.S. economy is growing rapidly and unemployment is at historical low rates, employers are unable to open the tap legally. If you're a brilliant scientist with a Ph.D. from a top American university, expect many years of waiting.

To be sure, there are strong arguments to be made against unrestricted immigration: terrorist penetration of our borders, criminal immigration, the strain on the safety net by those unable or unwilling to be self-sufficient. However, I think our current set of laws don't do a good job in balancing the pluses and minuses of immigration, and post-9/11 our fears have made it worse.

We need a continuing flow of hard-working, driven immigrants to keep the American Dream moving forward. Who else is going to pay for my Social Security when I retire? :-)

What comes as a surprise it seems to so many people is that illegal immigration has just started in the 21st century. All four of my grandparents were immigrants from Italy in the early 1900's. Even back then and before their trip to the Land of Streets paved with Gold there were human smugglers. The Italians that came her illegally were called W.O.P.S. or WithOut Papers. Many othet nationalities had words for their countryman here illegally. So why the shock that we have so many illegals. To come up with some half-baked ideas like the members of Senate and the House. One person, i'll be nice, had the half baked idea to send the illegals to jail. Yes it got him/her some votes. In reality it was a purely stupid idea. Punish these people who have been here for years. Never ever being in trouble. His/her children born here and are American citizens. Who worked for less than min.wage. Hard working people that did their new country honor. Or the other simply stupid idea. Make them pay a fine of $5,000.00. Is that sum a hat trick? Where on this earth has these elected officials come up with this amount? Why not make it $50.00 or $00.25? Never has these so called elected officials raised the idea of going after their employers. I understood if an employer didn't pay his taxes or knowingly failed to pay the government taxes owed. That by naot claiming a person and thereby not paying that person's portion, that it was called "Tax Fraud" and punishable by jail?
Its time to get back to the basics. A person that volunteers to serve his/her country in the military and recieves an honorable discharge should be given citizenship. A person marries an American citizen and stays marries for 5 or 10 years should be given citizenship. People that have American children children should be given the chance to given the chance to be a citizen.
Other changes have to be made to. ! and first of all, ONE language. English. All signs or anything that the government pays for shall be in English only. Meaning bus stops or directions. When my grandparents came here there was just one language and it was the language of the land/America. "English". As for social services. Someone that does not have the proper paperwork would have to have someway to pay for their hospital bills. Giving birth. There should be more neighborhood clinics. Lets face it. Doctors milk the insurance companies to pay the other insurance companies for lawsuit coverage. The few lawyers that bring frivilious lawsuits and end up making millions only hurt the people that need or in need of true doctor cares. I wonder how many people that brought a legal suit against a doctor for clipping his/her toenails to short. How many are complaining now that insurance rates are to high or blaming the financial position of the local medical services on illegals. Yes, illegal count for a portion. so the employer who commits tax fraud by not paying taxes on his undocumented workers. There are solutions. We have to keep the elected officials out of finding the solutions, if we expect one that is going to be for the good of the country and its people. Instead of political. Unity08 is the first step in finding a solution not just for this problem but the more serious one's facing our country.
I am a firm believer that the Immigrationissuer is to side track the American people away from the more deadly topics that our leaders got us involved in without a way out.

Immigration
Mark on July 19, 2024 - 4:24pm

Immigration a Unity08 issue. No way. Why are you wasting your time even considering. Just examine any of the founders, their purpose, their background, or their issues. Trust me, a rational immigration policy is not an issue they want to endorse. It's not by accident that immigration is not one of the orginal themes of Unity08.. and even after numerous protests it still isn't.

Mark, real quick in the context of my comments

Immigration does matter:

1) To the environment
2) Economy
3) Growth rates

It is valid to include environmental impact in determining optimal immigration policy.

Mark,

1. Relative Footprint: Look again, I do not dismiss the relative footprint of the same person. I am the one that introduced the idea to the discussion. What I DID do was say that the alternative is (1) they stay with a smaller foot print by living in squalor (2) the possibility that if they are in a developing country that does move forward they would be better in a country with environmental regulation (3) as they become prosperous their birth rate declines, perhaps hight than non-immigrants but lower than the alternative in their country, ok this is a new item in the discussion but still valid to add.

2. Safety Valve, true that we have served that function which is why so much pressur for us to continue in that role. I find it interesting that you dismiss the importance of that. The cost of achieving your removal of that safety outlet according to your theory has to be big enough to force them to change must be a crisis nothing less than that would have that affect. So we protect habitat for squirrels so millions can live in squalor and expeirience catostrophic social unrest. Interesting trade-off.

C: Capacity: "A" No where near capacity. Evidence Europe and other areas easily sustains much denser population than we do. Short term turbulance on growth in various cities continues to move to new sustainable equilibriums.

Jackie, you seem to be saying that immigration to the US doesn't matter, because a would-be immigrant would have an environmental impact regardless of where they live. As you point out, the footprint of a person in the US is much larger than in other countries, but you seem to dismiss this as not significant. In fact it is hugely significant. Its been shown that immigrants coming to the US rapidly adopt our high consumption profile.

Secondly, US immigration policy has provided a safety valve for some nations so they have not had to deal with their own high fertility rates.

Third, what kind of example do we set? How can we extol the virtues of sustainable population to poor countries if we can’t control our own population? Keep in mind that the US is the only developed nation with a rapidly growing population. The US rate of growth is faster than China’s.

Fourth, the census bureau reports that fertility for native-born US citizens is at about replacement level of 2.1, while fertility for immigrants is significantly above replacement.

Fifth, while CO2 is a global environmental issue (and as you demonstrate, a controversial one). But what about environmental issues within the US that are affected by our population alone regardless of what happens elsewhere. Water shortages, loss of open space and ag land, habitat loss are examples of environmental issues that are directly affected by increased population.

Let me ask you a question. What is the maximum sustainable population for the united states? Its a tough question because of assumptions on how much we consume or conserve (do we get better or worse over time). However, at a very high level it should be possible to say whether we are:

A) Nowhere near capacity
B) About at capacity
C) Way beyond long-term sustainable capacity?

What evidence can you provide to support your answer?

Yes I am being tongue in check though I am an moderate envronmentalist. I really think government policy is needed to protect our 'village green'. I believe the policy has to be thoughtful.

More seriously lets consider immigration:

1. If they don't move to the US they still have a environmental footprint. OK their footprint is larger in the US as the achieve economic success but should people have to live like &*(^ in a developing country for the environment?

2. I am offended by the idea that development in the developing world 'doesn't count' but the same person in the US building a house does.

3. Perhaps (lets brainstorm here) a person moving to the US helps moves from high polluting home heating (the burn essentially coal in much of Seoul and other places directly in the homes) etc to US with more green options, wind power etc.

4. The carbon credits schemes are essentially a crock and might infact increase CO2 emissions at least over the short and medium term.

5. Of all the environmental issues CO2 is among the least important inspite of the current buzz, once reserved for global cooling, swine flu, killer bees (remember when they were going to devastate our lives) and of course Eugenics which was OVERWHELMINGLY accepted by the scientific community as a threat to the very existence of humanity.

I do agree with you that an OPTIMAL immigration policy can be developed and not at all offended by including growth impact in that but not hoaky cooked book numbers.

I'm 'listening' and I'm not thinking of anyone as 'racist'; however, I do not think the case is well made for immigration failures as a distinguishing impact beyond home grown population growth on the environment. Nor do I consider that aspect as significant as border security and process correction in the relevant political debate.

Perhaps you have thoughts that can pull us more together on achievable political objectives?

Bill"for what we are together"

Jackie, I can't tell if you are tongue-in-cheek agreeing or disagreeing, but I suspect it is the later. I sometimes encounter the reaction that anyone who is opposed to our government’s current massive immigration policy must somehow be anti-Mexican. In debate, a rebuttal that uses insults and personal attacks (e.g. calling someone a racist) to counter facts and statistics does not make for strong position.

Moreover, taking a position that population growth has no environmental impact seems very difficult to support. Let's move beyond the charges of racism and talk about the real environmental challenges facing our world. Ethnicity doesn't mater, its the numbers.

Consider the following:
· 11 lanes – width of the traffic jam between Los Angles and New York if the net number of cars added to US roads since 2024 were lined up. That’s only 6 years of growth.
· 19 years – approximate time until population growth and conversion of farmland to development at present rates results in the US no longer being able to feed itself. The US will then need to import more food than we export and will compete with poorer countries for food in addition to energy and other resources.
· 122,000 acres – California farmland lost each year - California is the nation’s leading agricultural state and the source of most of our fruits and vegetables . . . for now.
· 10 million acres – forest area converted to housing since 1980 -- an area twice as large as Yellowstone, Everglades, Shenandoah, and Yosemite National Parks combined.
· 2 million – the approximate number of new houses needed every year to keep up with US population growth. How many trees need to be cut down each year to build 2 million houses?

We can’t go on like this. Eventually those who consider immigration to be a ‘pure good’ with no negative consequences are going to have to accept that immigration, as with all things, require moderation. Too much of a good thing can be bad.

I recommend reading Jared Diamond's new book "Collapse - How Societies Choose to Succeed or Fail" for an in depth discussion of how endless population growth and environmental destruction ultimately leads to disaster.

Mark, your position creates an endless supply of possibilites.

Declaring immigration an environmental issue means we can shift the resources of the EPA to securing the Border BRILLIANT!

Of course it is all immigrants but cutting off illegal immigration combined with the CO2 credits will have a massive impact.

Think of the reduction in late model low riders, taxi traffic will drop due to no drivers, lawn mowers beaten into plowshares - no maintenance ground cover is much better, ugly but we'll get used to it.

and on and on...

Mark, good point but no problem we just make all the immigrants buy 'verifiable carbon credits' as part of the immigration process, heck lets make 'em but 110% credits and then we'll actually have negative CO2 immigration.

While we are at it, to be fair we need a tax in maternity wards sufficient to buy verifiable CO2 reduction for the baby.

Brilliant!

Immigration, especially illegal immigration, has become a very hot topic. It’s a complicated issue with many aspects and even more opinions. For some, the issues are economic such as workers for ‘jobs American’s won’t do’ or wage depression depending on your perspective. For others it’s human interests such as, depending on your perspective, human rights for migrants or quality of life for citizens. Still others see it as an issue of racism. Some feel that anyone opposed to immigration must be a xenophobe or white supremacist. Others point to speeches by Latino supremacists calling for ‘reconquista’ or re-conquering the Southwestern US using immigration to achieve numerical superiority for ‘la Raza’ (‘the [Latino] Race’). Sadly, there are racists on both sides.

But the debate is missing the biggest issue of all - Massive Population Growth. It is rarely mentioned in the media, in Washington or, most bizarre, even by mainstream environmental groups like the Sierra Club. Immigration affects our environment because it is now the main cause by far of US population growth.

Are you aware how fast the US is growing? Most people aren’t, although they frequently complain about the consequences. Consider the following:

· 200,000,000 – Approximate US population during the first Earth Day in 1970.
· 300,000,000 – Projected US population by October 2024 – That’s a hundred million or 50% increase in just 36 years.
· 420,000,000 – Projected US population in 2024 assuming current immigration policy. The Senate's immigration bill would push it well past that. US population could reach 1 billion by the end of the century.
· New York City + Los Angeles + Chicago + Houston: equivalent US growth since the 2024 census (281,421,906).
· Building a new Sacramento every 12 months: construction required for population growth in California.

The United States has the highest growth rates of any industrialized country in the world. We can not begin to deal with greenhouse gases and other enviromental issues, until we recognize that massive growth is a critical part of any solution.

Of immigration has been important to America's past, but we must look to the future and ask if our current policies are enviormentally sustainable. They are not.

I hearby call on the United States to declare a final solution to the immigration mess! Those people have crossed our borders and ruined our nation! All of the problems in America today are the result of those people crossing our borders. I want them gone!

Praise God! Praise the Lord. Get them off our land!

I have been reading that people think sending 11,000,000 illegal immigrants back to Mexico is a bad idea because of Mexico's economy. What is the alternative? Grant them amnesty? If we do that we will have more illegal immigrants coming to the US. Maybe by sending them back Mexico will have to make some decisions about how to improve its own economy instead of relying on the income from people who are here illegally.

Right now illegal immigration is hurting the US economy in the form of extra health care cost, police, education and many other expenses. This can not continue. We need to use our tax money for people who are here legally. Maybe we should adopt the same standard that Mexico uses on it's southern border.

I have read all the comments. There are no jobs Americans won't do many have lost their jobs to illegal immigrants, in New Orleans Americans like the electrical unions were fired in favor of lower cost labor. Same for construction. Just remember when you say Americans won't work it filters upward, and if the Senate bill passes people with HB-1 visas might just take your job.
We can document that the majority of these illegals will always take more from the system than they give back, in taxes. That is why business wants them here, so that we can supply their benefits.
If I hear the noble immigrant speech one more time I will scream. Most people in the world work hard and don't commit crimes, so what is the magic number a broke government like ours can afford 10, 20 100 million? I think we should find out how many people are here and what they can contribute bfore we give amnesty.
I have two suggestion, first, anyone that wants guest workers I say fine as long as the company provides their benefits. Then we will see what the real labor shortage is.
No two, let's open up American citizenship to the highest bidder, if you can bring a million into the US you go to the top of the line. Then we can raise some money.
In CA we are broke, our schools and our hospitals are overwhelmed.
This issue encompasses the environment, health care, crime, welfare, etc. sound bites and rhetoric just don't cut it.

SMH- If the Bush plan passed by the Senate became law-the illegals would become conditionally documented and probably be eligible for unemployment comp, although that is a State's rights issue. You sure are doom and gloom about the economy.You must read Paul Krugman.
Immigrant's Grandchild (Gee aren't we all): Since my example of paid votes pertained to legal immigration and you don't want to go there; your arguments lose relevance.
Personally I would build a complete border fence and require national ID cards for all employment. For some reason the paid politicians don't want that approach either.

We need to heed our laws and get tougher on illegal immigration. I am not even going to touch the legal immigration part except to say "some of my best friends are immigrants."
Chicago Al says, "The Democrats are paid by the AFL/CIO to limit immigration and the Republicans are paid by the cultural xenophobic idealogues to limit immigration. I am not a union member and not a xenophobe. Nor am I affiliated with a political party (and no one is paying me for my position on issues.) I am opposed to illegal immigration.
Al also said " most illegals are employed by very small businesses, restaurants, landscapers, gas stations, small construction companies, etc." I don't know if that is true but it sure seems like the restaurants and gas stations are owned by immigrants. I have no clue as to the status of the employees. I tip well for good service and I enjoy good food. I still think they should be here legally and should speak conversational English.

Fil's rant
Chicago Al on July 12, 2024 - 4:20pm

We have been on an accelerated economic expansion for 4 years. Unemployment is at a 45 year low. BUT, economics are cyclical, boom and bust. In the very near future, the economy will slow, perhaps even a recession. What do you propose that we should do with 11 million illegal immigrants when unemployment reaches normal downturn levels of 8-9%. Keep in mind, they do not have unemployment stipends, or any other social benefit.

Fil claims we have the most generous immigration policy in the world. How come we needed 11,000,000 illegals to Fil jobs? Because we chose not to let them in legally. We indirectly forced them to come in illegally. I believe our quota for unskilled labor is 50,000 a year. How generous or realistic is that? Also most illegals are employed by very small businesses, restaurants, landscapers, gas stations, small construction companies, etc. not GE or GM or IBM.
Unfortunately our immigration policy is dominated by partisan politics, The Democrats are paid by the AFL/CIO to limit immigration and the Republicans are paid by the cultural xenophobic idealogues to limit immigration. If we don't expand our employee base in the next decade dramatically who is going to contribute to social security and medicare when the Boomers retire.

I thought Unity 08 was a good idea until I realized no one is approaching the issues objectively, searching for solutions to our various plights. I can see that it's just the same old rhetoric from partisan politicians who take a stance only to tow the party line. It's upsetting and depressing to realize we, American citizens, have lost every forum for true debate and compromise that played a role in creating our great nation. Illegal aliens are a problem for our country and it has nothing to do with global economy or racism, and everything to do with powerful people exploiting poor people, at the expense of the American People. We are a nation of Immigrants and that is the reason we have the most liberal legal immigration policies, which we should be proud of, and shut the door on Illegal Immigration and Illegal Aliens here now. The more this debate becomes skewed by the extremists, the more we are unable to come up with a workable solution. Do Americans want to deport all of the Illegal Aliens here now? No! But, to think it is beyond our possibilities is a fallacy of pro-Illegal Alien groups, because believe we can remove twelve million people who feel entitled to our way of life, simply because they were able to swim a river or cross a dessert. Thing is, Most wouldn't feel comfortable with such drastic measures, but we are more uncomfortable with the idea of drastically changing the demographics of our country because of pressure from non-citizens. Moreover, most American citizens believe that is a great thing to be an American and it takes more than simply breaking the law to become a member of an exclusive world-club (American Citizenship). It truly is time we take our country back away from special interests, lobbyists, and big-business alike, and return it back to the people, American Citizens. Never before has our nation needed a leader who will fight for middle-class citizens, the real majority of our citizenry.